Those that used one, what is your opinion ?

(one at my American Legion Post said the one He was issued was a piece of **** ?)

Are you talking about the M14 in 7.62 NATO? A Springfield Armory M1A in .308? Something else?

-----

Assuming you are talking about the M14 and/or M1A

The M14 was manufactured under contract by the old Springfield Armory, Winchester, H&R, and TRW. I don't think there was any significant difference between them in their service issue form.

The older M1As were made by the new civilian Springfield Armory, but used mostly government parts. They are more highly sought after than the newer Springfield Armory M1As, especially in the Match and Super Match variants and will sell for around $1000 more than a new one.

I shot a Match grade M14 on a team, and later shot my own M1A Match in service rifle competition for years. The match grade M14 doesn't make all that great a comparison to the issue M14, but I had no issues with it. Similarly, the older Springfield Armory M1A Match probably isn't a great comparison to a current production M1A National Match.

That said I liked them. The M14 and M1A are very naturally pointing rifles. Try covering the rear sight with duct tape and snap shoot with it at short range. You'll be surprised by the accuracy.

As a precision rifle, the match grade M14 and M1A Match rifles were generally 3/4 MOA to 1 MOA capable rifles with a decent lot of M852 ammo (using the 168gr SMK). If you were issued M118 back in the 1980s or 1990s however, it was a **** shoot. Some of those lots were not capable of any more than 2 or 3 MOA, and the best of them were only around 1.5 MOA accurate. Given that you needed around 1.25 MOA accuracy to be competitive, that was a problem. If everyone shot the issued ammo, the lack of ammo prevented any meaningful separation of shooters based on ability.

Consequently, that ****** ammo was often dropped in your range bag and replaced with "mexican match" ammo. With Mexican match you took issued M118 ammo, pulled the 173 gr FMJBT bullets and replaced them with 168 gr Sierra Match Kings. The Mexican match ammo would normally shoot around 1 MOA in a match grade M14 or M1A.

The accuracy problems with M118 and the later M118SB were largely due to the worn tooling Lake City used to make the 173 gr FMJBT bullets. Bullet weight by the late 1980s varied from 172 to 175 grains. I'd use the pulled bullets for practice but sorted them by weight. I could also get boxes of new bullets as reloading components for $5 per hundred (about 1/3 to 1/4 the cost of 168 gr SMKs at the time) and again they were ok if you sorted them by weight.

The other issue was inconsistent powder charges, but that had a lot less effect than the bullets on accuracy.

I'd also load handloads (not legal for competition at the time) for personal use with 168 gr SMKs and my M1A would normally shoot 3/4 MOA or a bit less with match grade iron sights. However that reflected my limit with the sights, as I'd get 1/2 MOA accuracy with a scope attached.

I'm not sure the current Springfield Armory M1A Match will do that. By report, I suspect not.

----

The old Springfield Armory Super Match was basically the Match but with a heavier under the handguard barrel. It was a departure from the service rifle concept, but only moderately so.

I'm not a fan of the current Super Match with it's over sized stock. Then again I'm not a fan of the current trend (and tolerance for) AR-15s with stock weights and handguard weights that make them significantly heavier than any service rifle ever carried. It gets away from the spirit of what a "service rifle" match should be - as does the M1A Super Match.

----

Eventually I switched to an AR-15, and that was partly because I could use handloads in competition, and that let me tune loads specifically to my rifle. I lost some points at 600 yards with the bullets at the time, but gained them back at the 200 and 300 yard lines. Also, by that time and without any team support, it was costing me about $0.75 per round for decent hand loaded match ammo for my M1A, where I could produce comparable loads in .223 for $0.25 per round.

It probably also says a lot that I own several AR-15s now, but don't own an M1A, although I wish I'd kept my SA M1A Match rifle.

I went through Basic Training in 69 with an M-14 and was very impressed by it. I don't think I fired one in MP school, so have not fired one since.

I just aquired a Springfield Armory M1A (serial number 145xxx) built with a G.I. H&R chrome lined barrel and trigger group. It's a fine weapon that shoots 2 moa with Hornady 168 grain AMAX.

I think the opinion of issued military rifles in in the eye of the beholder, so to speak. My issued M16A2 in basic was externally well worn and just looking at it at close range it might appeared to be a piece of ****.....but on the 300 meter range it was a good looker!



Now if I had qualified "Marksman" I would probably thought it was a piece of ****, lol.

The two old guys at work (now retired) who did time with the M-14 didn't rate it very highly. Both said that the full auto facility was a waste of time and a perfect testament to the stupidity of Col. Studler forcing 7.62 NATO on the world. They also complained about the weight.

__________________
Release the Kraken

As an old Hi Power shooter, your response is spot on and brought back fond memories. I used a State Association rifle on loan from the Army to leg out in three matches and be awarded distinguished Rifleman!!

Great rifle, finally got my own Super Match built up using an Obermeyer 5R barrel. My oh my does it shoot!!

Randy