Opinions on the Springfield M1A Scout? Range Report!

A10 said:

I picked my Scout up tonight, I'll try to get some pics up soon. It has the green fiberglass stock and a fairly nice recoil pad. I plan on breaking it in before I make a decision on a scope, but if I do scope it that Leupold looks like the way to go. Now for more mags!

Thanks for all your help!

Click to expand...

Photos Dammit!!!!

My first M1a was a Scout squad with wood stocks , Leupold fwd scope and QR mounts but prefer the full length version so traded it for a pre ban Springfield.

If I need a shorter .308 I prefer the HK G3 with 18" barrel and telescoping stock or FN FAL Paratrooper.

Triathloncoach said:

Photos Dammit!!!!

Click to expand...

Crappy cell phone pic attached. Handling it reminds me of an updated Tanker Garand.

A10 said:

Crappy cell phone pic attached. Handling it reminds me of an updated Tanker Garand.

Click to expand...

Looks nice!

Where're going to need a range report of course...

Late to the party but I'm going to be the only nay sayer here. The SA M1A is not the same as it was in the 60s or even the early 90s. The current Springfield Armory, which has no connection to the original, used to use surplus forged parts to build their M1As. When parts ran out they switched to MIM and cast. (I might be off on the MIM but the receiver is definitely cast) Has been that way for years. Sometimes, more often than they should, the castings suck and instead of BANG they go BOOM!

I'm on their website now and it seems they changed the layout. The old site had a section of all the ammo you should NOT use in their rifles

The match models are tuned differently than the standard guns, and most semi autos have some ammunition that should be avoided.

That the current guns should be regarded as grenades is silly.

The walnut stocked scout version is my favorite but they're just a bit too bulky for my tastes.

Arik said:

I'm on their website now and it seems they changed the layout. The old site had a section of all the ammo you should NOT use in their rifles

Click to expand...

Ammunition with bullet weights over about 180 grains and ammunition loaded with slower powders, such as IMR 4350 and others like it, should never be used in an M1A/M14 or in a Garand for that matter. This has nothing to do with cast receivers or MIM parts. It's because such ammo causes excessive port pressures. This overworks the operating rod and may result in excessive bolt speed, bent or broken op rods, and other issues. As far as cast receivers are concerned, Springfield has always used cast receivers. I've never heard of a catastrophic failure of such a receiver when using appropriate ammunition. I've seen a couple of case head failures in ammo that was overly hot and the rifles handled those loads just fine. Cast receivers are just not a problem.

The went to cast a while ago but for a long time they did use surplus parts where they could including receivers.

It wasn't a specific type of ammo they listed. It was flat out named. ..like
DO NOT USE
American Eagle
Hot Shot
PMC

This is just an example, I don't remember the actual names.

This is just two of the many images I found a long with a host of threads

Arik said:

The went to cast a while ago but for a long time they did use surplus parts where they could including receivers.

Click to expand...

I've only been using these rifles for about 30 years so I can't say Springfield NEVER used milled receivers though I know they have used cast receivers for many years. I do know, though, that Springfield has NEVER sold rifles built on surplus GI receivers as ATF would never permit that. All M14 GI receivers were capable of full auto fire and, thus, classified as machine guns by ATF. As far as ATF is concerned, once a machine gun, always a machine gun, no matter how the receiver might be modified to allow only semi-automatic operation. That's one of the reasons, among many, why M14 rifles will never be released to the public through CMP as the Garands were. If Springfield ever sold rifles on milled receivers, they got them from a commercial source, not as GI surplus.

It's not the original springfield armory company, it was sold years ago. The quality has been questionable. There has been some posts in the past about owners having problems with functioning and the accuracy being way off. Some have sent there new m1a's back a few times before there problems were repaired. Plus the cast receiver turns me off.

I had the cash to purchase a new SA M1a and almost bought one but my LGS had a rack full of the brand new, newly imported, Russian Izmash Saiga in 308win. with a 16" chromed lined bore and chamber. The cost was just $289? My first one benchrested at 100yds using the surplus south African 308 ball ammo. She shot 1 1/2" groups constantly with the two of us shooting it with iron sites.(no scope) the Russians @ izmash did say they focused on making the saiga more accurate than its ak brothers. And the American calibers are a tad more accurate over the Russian calibers.
Here's a very affordable, very accurate, brand new Russian ak/akm rifle that has the battle field proven dependability and reliability in any weather or climate in a sporting rifle. Now I'm not sure how far the 16" barrel can shoot accurately and how far the 21" barrel saiga can shoot accurately also. I'm thinking when the accuracy of the 16" barrel drops off the 21" barrel should take over and shine. The 1 1/2" groups @ 100yds using surplus ammo is impressive with the 16" barrel. Plus it's light. It will serve us as a plinker, a hunting rifle and preform well at the range.

Now my choices for a m1a/m14 I narrowed down to purchasing a Chinese norinco m14s because of its 5100 steel forged receiver/bolt and it's forged chrome lined bore. I did install the national match op rod spring guide and the heavy duty wolf op rod spring. I haven't benchrested it yet. The norinco m14 is one of the best platforms to do a build from. The used like new norinco cost me under $400.

My only other choice for a M14 would do a complete new build with a forged receiver and top shelf parts. Which would be my next move.

It's recommended to not shoot the heavier bullets. The 168gr is the limit on the m1a/m14 do to the semi auto cycling I been told. Plus on reloading I use the IMR 4895 gun powder and the cci-34 NATO primers in all my semi auto rifle. The burn rate is perfect for the cycle timing of the semi auto functioning. The NATO primers are for the floating firing pins. There a tad hotter and harder.

Arik said:

This is just an example, I don't remember the actual names.

This is just two of the many images I found a long with a host of threads

Click to expand...

Top picture is of an M1 Garand receiver (read the upside down heel stamp) Cal .30 M1, etc. Since the serial is blurred, we can't tell if its one of the later 7 million range serial numbered, Australian made, cast commercial receivers. So, it's likely a forged USGI receiver, and not relevant to this topic. Even the forged Garand receivers sometimes cracked when firing rifle grenades before corrective measures were enacted.

And as someone else said, SA Inc. never used surplus receivers for the M1A. They've always been cast. And in all honesty, the cast receivers themselves have a pretty good record for durability in the 40-45 years M1As have been around.

I will certainly post a range report when I get the opportunity. I have heard and read ofsome of the accuracy issues, but the fixes are straight forward and inexpensive. I'm not too worried about the cast/forged debate. I really prefer milled parts, but try to fi d that in a factory gun that is even close to affordable!

Overall I'm very pleased with the little feller. It should suit my uses perfectly.

Simple rules to go by with the m1a/m14.

Don't shoot heavier bullets. Stay to 168gr upper limit. I load the military surplus bullets from 145gr to 147gr mostly. Use the correct burn rate gun powder the IMR 4895 is the only one I use for all my semi autos.

I hope you get a good one and you take care of it. Lube it with moly.
If you change anything use the national match stuff. Enjoy it.

That broken cracked receiver looks like over travel from the bolt. Caused by the hotter maybe heavier weight bullets. The heavier bullets cause a lag time before the bullet starts to move out of the case when it's fired this causes a higher peak time in the chamber pressure.
There's more gas pressure operating the bolt. It slams the bolt stop with more force than it can handle.

I installed the NM op rod spring guide and the stronger heavy duty wolf op rod spring. Just to play it safe.

A10,
Congrats on your new Scout. I like them but must admit I prefer the walnut to plastic. I'm old school I guess.
Having owned several M1A's, including a Devine, Norinco, Fed. Ord. Fulton Armory and various SA, Inc. models, the only one I currently have is an early SA receiver with all GI parts (TRW mostly) and GI stock with selector cut out. I had an E2 stock and M2 bipod but sold them.
Anyway, the one I'd like to try is the LRB forged model... maybe someday if my "uncle" pays me.

I like walnut and steel as well Jack, but I also like having a stock on a field gun that I won't worry about getting scratched up or wet. Wet is a big deal here on the rainy side of the state. If the finish gets worn, I'll just sand and paint it.

I've had them in all sizes from SOCOM to Supermatch and the Scout is my all-time favorite. I currently have both a SOCOM and a Scout and the SOCOM will be leaving soon. The Scout just feels "right" to me. The SOCOM is too short and chunky, the full-size is a little long and unwieldy, and the Scout is just darned handy. Both my SOCOM and Scout wear Leupold 2.5 Scout scopes which are suitable for my intended 0-400 yard shooting. Accuracy is as described above by others, but mine have never been worse than about 1-3/4" at 100 yards, ammo dependent of course. I'm currently a fan of the synthetic stocks for anything I drag thru the woods, and my Scout lives happily in Mossy Oak.
They're all good and it probably just boils down to preference.

There is a m14 site with tons of info.

Your going to get hooked I'm sure. The bigger ones are heavier but consider how steady they are and how far they can shoot.
Just look up some camp perry stats.

I use the Bushnell banner scopes with the mechanical vertical turret. The BDC option gives me out to 500yds with no error. The bullet drop compisation allows me to dope the scope for the distance. I have used the older Bushnell scopes with the BDC option since the mid 90's.
I purchased the Bushnell banner for my m14 and 21" barreled saiga. You just install the vertical marked turret for the bullet weight your using. It comes with the extra turret rings.

I have the BDC option scopes on my 338wm and my 30-06 hunting rifles.

Mtwoodson said:

I've had them in all sizes from SOCOM to Supermatch and the Scout is my all-time favorite. I currently have both a SOCOM and a Scout and the SOCOM will be leaving soon. The Scout just feels "right" to me. The SOCOM is too short and chunky, the full-size is a little long and unwieldy, and the Scout is just darned handy. Both my SOCOM and Scout wear Leupold 2.5 Scout scopes which are suitable for my intended 0-400 yard shooting. Accuracy is as described above by others, but mine have never been worse than about 1-3/4" at 100 yards, ammo dependent of course. I'm currently a fan of the synthetic stocks for anything I drag thru the woods, and my Scout lives happily in Mossy Oak.
They're all good and it probably just boils down to preference.

Click to expand...

That Mossy Oak looks good but I'd be afraid I'd lean it against a tree and never see it again!

Normally I prefer a nice wood stock, but.........
When I bought my Fed Ord M14A (used), it had a Boyd black & gray laminate Target stock on it. It looked great, I loved it. The problem was that the older I got, the heavier it got. I finally decided I'd had enough and about two years ago I replaced it with a Springfield black composite stock. That alone shaved about a pound and a half off the gun. It still shoots great, feels better in my hands and I don't have to worry about dinging it. With guns like these, practical beats pretty every time.

Greyfox, I looked in the mirror and realized that needed to be my motto, too. Practical beats pretty.