PDA

View Full Version : So how bad are Springfield M1As?


Slugger
April 30, 2008, 16:11
I've always lusted after the M1A. Always ended up building another FAL. I am in the process of aquiring a M1A bush rifle. I'm excited and starting to read up on some of the history of this weapon. The more I read the worse feeling I get about Springfield using non USGI specs. Also, I hear that the CMI mags are the way to go at this point. I see them at 44mag with a satisfaction warranty that takes the fear out of it. I will never shoot NM with it but guess I should still be getting a rifle that will outlast me and shoot 5.6" groups with surplus ammo. Am I on the right track here?

Slugger

gunshack
April 30, 2008, 17:27
I'm kinda down on SAI using non spec parts, but a lot of that is me being anal. I consider the M14 platform my go-to gun, so I want to have the highest quality parts on mine as possible.

Don't fret about the cast parts and whatnot, you'll have plenty of time to fret as your addiction evolves. To help alleviate your worries, if you decide to upgrade at some point SAI rifles have a pretty darn good re-sale value. Even if you decide to upgrade to USGI parts as time goes on, you can usually sell the SAI parts for about 2/3 to 3/4 of what USGI parts are selling for.

Enjoy the rifle, and welcome to the afflicted! :whiskey:

LFOD1776
April 30, 2008, 19:04
SAI M1As are great, and they come with a great warranty. I would be very surprised to hear if you had a real problem with one. If you shoot 5K rounds/year, you'll probably wear out and replace all the non-USGI parts before you die.

Anyway, a Springfield bush rifle is a great way to get started on your M14 addiction.

Ssarge
May 01, 2008, 01:25
Love my two. Just wish I had more range time and a 600m range to really use my standard more to it's capabilities.
If you have lot's of cash, get the LRB. If not, get a standard or Scout SAI and don't sweat it. The main spare parts to have are USGI extractors and extractor springs. The rest of the parts are good to go. (I have USGI parts in storage and use the "inferior" commercial parts all the time without a hitch.
Get a USGI cleaning kit with combo tool as well. You'll need it to properly clean the rifle's gas system.
Other than that, CMI mags, plenty of grease and ammo is all you'll need.

Groucho
May 01, 2008, 08:26
Don't worry. Once you get the rifle, any parts that you think should be G.I. spec. , you'll find for sale all over the place. The worst thing about the M1A is the fact that it's addicting. If I had the bucks, I'd pick up an LRB, but I've had my Springer since I bought it new back when they were under $1000.00. I'm on my third barrel. Shot the throat out of the first one, had a TRW barrel for the second, and just recently put a Wilson back on. I've promised myself to go slower on the trigger and go for tight groups now. The next barrel I'll put on (due to the fact that I probably lied to myself) will probably be a Criterion.

See? It's an addiction. I love it.

Remember that the bolt and op rod like a bit of grease. You're getting a rifleman's rifle and will have to work with her. You'll have to learn her ways. She's a true lady. Treat her as such.

Groucho

Slugger
May 01, 2008, 23:06
Thanks for all the feedback, I've been chomping at the bit to pick it up. I bit the bullet today and bought half a dozen CMI 20s from 44mag along with one 5rnder. After searching the web and swapping some email with 44mag it seemed like pretty safe way to go. They are guaranteed for life to the original purchaser from 44mag. That is as long as they are still in business. Thanks for all the info that has been put forth by so many knowledgable guys here on the files. I've been reading till my eyes hurt.

From what I've read the SAI bush rifle has an 18" barrel. This seems right to me as I've built FALs for some time now and always thought that most/all of the charge in 7.62x51 is burnt up in 18" of barrel. Makes it light and handy. At least that's the way I built my para.

I'm looking forward to wringing her out but still have a lot to learn about using grease etc. Can't wait to check out those sights, I've always heard they are the best design ever.

Thanks again,
Slugger

Jimi X.
May 02, 2008, 09:34
Go to M14/M1A specific sites. Use Google. Use the search function to search "spare parts", and note how many spares, and of what, people say you should have.

Search "M1A problems."

Too many complain about the Springfield product. Educating yourself before purchasing will protect you. Don't do it my way, just going out and buying, you might have regrets.

I have seen a posting of a guy's gun, he provided a photo, where the word "Armory" on the receiver's heel was misspelled! THAT would stare any QC inspector in the face....but it left the factory!

One man was pissed that there was a space between the receiver's heel area, and forward of that by a couple inches, and the stock, providing a path for dirt to easily enter the internals! He had a photo posted.....It caused me to look at MY rifle. And sure enough, I have one of these "ventilation paths".

When I bought the gun I didn't look closely enough! The gap on mine is about 3/16" high, by about 3 1/2" in
length on both sides of the reciever. I believe that this stock should have been rejected!

Again, it is that less than valued Springfield Quality Control final inspection!

A lifetime warranty does not match the needless frustration of shipping the gun back for something that a proper QC Inspection should have easily uncovered!

Silver Fox
May 02, 2008, 10:36
Hey Slugger-

.44mag.com are good guys to do buisness with.

SF-

EricCartmanR1
May 02, 2008, 11:49
I bought into the hype of USGI spec Springfields too, but all this USGI stuff is way over hyped. It really depends on what you want to do with your rifle. Springfield receivers are sometimes not in spec so if you plan on swapping barrels, and interchanging parts often, then the Springfield is not for you. USGI Scope mounts are also hit and miss. However, scope mounting is not an issue if you don't plan to scope an M14 ;) I myself am beginning to think M14's should ever be scoped. There is something about an irons only USGI stock M14 set up.

If you want a great irons only shooter, with the same feel as the original M14, and one that comes with a lifetime warranty, then the Springfield M1A is for you. Have confidence if you do get a dud, Springfield customer service will take care of you.

Slugger
May 02, 2008, 12:18
With today's prices I don't know that I could afford to shoot the barrel out. As long as it's reliable, puts holes where I want em (within reason) and doesn't blow up in my face . . . I'll be a happy camper.

Slugger

Cava3r4
May 02, 2008, 12:23
I bought my m1a way back in 1980 with an E-2 wood pistol grip stock for the then tidy sum of $600 new. It is 18XXXX.
I shot it for about 17 years and the operating rod finally started to develop a small hole in the tube part where they had "rewelded" an op rod.
I sent it to SA (figuring I'd pay for it) to have them give me a new rod. At that time I also ordered match sights. They GAVE me everything for FREE!!
I did have to send it back to them to have them "register" the sights (mill the front sight) so it would be dead on at 250 yards at 11 or 12 clicks. (this is battlesight zero where you hit at 1.812 inches or 46 mm high at 25yards and you are dead on at 250 yards.)
Love this rifle.
HTH
Bob

Slugger
May 02, 2008, 18:49
I can live with service like that!! That's why I love old S&W revos and my XD45.

Slugger

CWizard
May 04, 2008, 08:00
I bought my loaded M1a in March. I really, really, like it. I haven't shot as much as I would like because I'm buying magazines and stockpiling some ammo. .44 mag is great to do business with. I feel like I'm racing the the calendar to get lots of items before January 2009.

1911NM
May 04, 2008, 17:17
Commercial rifles using commercial parts have created fit problems that we as gunsmiths never experienced 20 years ago when we were building rifles on Springfield receivers with G.I. parts. LRB receivers are not without their own problems. Springfields are generally solid guns with the occasional glitch that can be repaired under warranty.

Personally, I will always have an M14 on hand even if I no longer own a FAL or HK. They are simply the most shootable battle rifle ever built. A basic tune-up incorporating bedding, trigger work and gas system mods turns a modeately accurate rifle into a tack driver. The M1 Garand is also another must have rifle.

jrkoller
May 04, 2008, 18:34
When the Marine Corps handed me a M-14 In boot Camp I fell in love , This is my Rifle!! In 67 in Vietnam I had to give it up for the matey mattel M-16 , so while on patrol one night one of the enemy captures tried to run and a Sgt. was gong to shoot the enemy but his rifle jammed so he grabbed the barrel and hit the the guy upside the head with the stock and broke the stock off the rifle butt that dazed him but he never went down and was recaptured, now if that would have been a M-14 Lights out.!!! I bought one and shoot it it is my rifle and my son in law gets it when I am gone, SAI stands behind their arms , I was shooting SA ammo of it and the bolt came apart , the extractor and spring were gone so I called SAI and told them , they said send it in it is guaranteed for life, when i got it back it was great and great service shoots like a top weapon like the one I had in Nam.

garandguy10
May 06, 2008, 14:40
My advice would be to look for a M1A below serial number 100k,it will more than likely have mostly USGI parts in it and will not have the scope mounting issues of some later serial numbered receivers.

ma96782
May 06, 2008, 15:48
You might want to read a little history.............free download..........

http://www.imageseek.com/m1a/

Also, download the magazine report on how to spot fakes.

Aloha, Mark

Ssarge
May 06, 2008, 16:40
I have owned M1A's since the mid '80's, and just because it's an older rifle does not mean it will have any more USGI parts than one built in what I consider the best of times, the early '90's. During that time, the standard M1A tended to have more USGI parts than at any time. I have bought a couple of all TRW (except the receiver of course) M1A's on auctionarms for $1200 that were NIB.
I had a rifle from the mid '80's that only had USGI rear sight's, and they were the old lock bar Garand sights!
I have two M1A's now, just sold my Scout. Both have USGI parts in the trigger group, but that's it. Both shoot great. My SOCOM has eaten the nastiest ammo I can safely put through it. I have fired over 1k of what I call "Falklands" pickup ammo. It's a mixture of Argy and Radway Green I bought from Paragon years ago for $25 a can. Other than a couple of dud's, and the primer was hit hard, even the stuff with grunge and dirt on it feeds. I have not done a good cleaning on the SOCOM either, just greasing it with Tetra Grease and shooting until it stops. I'll then do a through cleaning on it.
My standard M1A eat's Aussie and Port with gusto. I have a stock of USGI parts for both rifles, but have not had to replace anything. Those "inferior" SA cast parts are holding up just as well as the much more expensive USGI parts I had on my other rifles. As for the gap, Jimi X is talking about, some of the earlier M1A receivers had a ridge along the bottom of the receiver. All you have to do is a little bit of wood work on the stock inletting it and it'll seat fine. The selector hole can be filled any number of ways. I use Hawks ECO kit on mine. It looks more authentic than filling the selector notch with wood filler or bondo.
Here are some links you need as an M1A/M14 owner:
http://www.m14firinglineforum.com/upload/forumdisplay.php?f=21
http://www.sparrowhawkm14.com/
http://www.eotacforum.com/viewforum.php?f=108&sid=5a314948336b45a13782f6253eeccb32
From here you can find parts, stocks and other items you'll want/need.
IMO the complaints about SAI M1A's are from a vocal few. Most people have good luck and enjoy the rifle. Othewise why would they be selling them as fast as they can produce them at the price they are going for?

salty
May 07, 2008, 08:11
You should enjoy your Bush rifle - they are not often seen for sale as the SOCOMand Scout have more volume. I would not give one minutes thought to it being a SAI - all rifles can have some issues and SAI stands behind their products. The shorter barrel is handy. Great choice on mags.

Slugger
May 07, 2008, 09:06
Thanks all for your time and intel. I look forward to picking up my new friend in early June and keep coming back to this thread for all the info I can get . . . keep it coming!

I've read through the entire M14 Rifle history and development. Thanks for the post Ssarge! My eyes got blurry but there is a TON of info in that paper.

Thanks again,
Slugger

pakmc
May 08, 2008, 20:12
I picked up an springfield M1A just like I carried in the Marines about 44 years ago. I love the gun(yea, I have CEtME's, century HK 91, and scout squad with 16" barrel and I'm up to 6 FALs'(ok, I did boot camp with the M1 garand)
I picked up the scout squad from an old marine was getting to old to shoot it.(he's 81) that SS with the 16" barrel really shoots. I have a scope on it and it will shoot a 1" group at fifty yards.
I shoot and reload .308 and the FALs can be set for any powder charge.(that's a very nice point) the CETME and HK 91 just throws brass every where(and you really dont want to find it). But when you shoot the M1A that's the gun you want with you at the pointy end of the stick. And after shooting the one with the 16" barrel I don't have a problem with it. (ok, it doesn't really look right, but its a shooter.)
Pat

Slugger
June 01, 2008, 15:51
Well, I finally got a hold of the rifle. Can someone give me some info based on the heel marks "US Rifle 7.62mm M1A Springfield Armory 0515xx". I believe this to be a factory bush rifle. It has NM front sight, vented aluminum hg, and a bolt marked 7790186 TRW ZB. What other parts should I look at? Are all the USGI parts marked with and identifier? It appears to be unfired.
http://inlinethumb59.webshots.com/40506/2021299180028352761S425x425Q85.jpg

I'm pretty happy with it. Will find out how she shoots in the next few weeks. Any info that you can point me to or share would be great.
Thanks,
Slugger

LFOD1776
June 01, 2008, 18:46
Buy:

[list=1]
The M14 Owner's Guide and Match Conditioning Instructions by Scott A. Duff and CWO John M. Miller
The M14 Complete Assembly Guide by Walt Kuleck and Clint McKee
[/list=1]

Read them both. Everything you need to know.

pakmc
June 01, 2008, 19:00
My 16" barreled M1a can with a acope . teh mount had one bolt holding it on the gun. The gun shot good with the mount.
I took the mount off the 16" barreled springfield and put it on my standard M1A. It needed very little fine tunning to be on target with some factory ball ammo.
I like both guns, a bunch andswitching scopes without losing Zero is very interesting.
Pat

Ssarge
June 01, 2008, 19:54
Originally posted by Slugger
Well, I finally got a hold of the rifle. Can someone give me some info based on the heel marks "US Rifle 7.62mm M1A Springfield Armory 0515xx". I believe this to be a factory bush rifle. It has NM front sight, vented aluminum hg, and a bolt marked 7790186 TRW ZB. What other parts should I look at? Are all the USGI parts marked with and identifier? It appears to be unfired.
http://inlinethumb59.webshots.com/40506/2021299180028352761S425x425Q85.jpg

I'm pretty happy with it. Will find out how she shoots in the next few weeks. Any info that you can point me to or share would be great.
Thanks,
Slugger

You can send the SN to SAI by e-mail and they'll tell you the production date and how the rifle was configured at the factory.
The receiver is one of the older, very desirable marked receivers. You have at least a TRW bolt. (very good juju)
Check the op rod, it's marked on the inside right where the tube begins on the inside.
The trigger group should be marked as well. Most bush rifles used commercial barrels, but there were some that were cut down USGI, so check the side of the barrel where the op rod covers it.
Enjoy a great looking, fun carbine!
BTW from differents data base your rifle look's like an April or May of 1990 build.
http://www.eotacforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=10483

Slugger
June 02, 2008, 13:26
Excellent! Thanks for all the info. I'll be ordering books and emailing SA tonight.

Slugger

Norton1
June 02, 2008, 16:13
I have a SA NM rifle. I shot a .335 3 shot group with it today at 100 yds. My only caution for you is remember that the M1A action is so fast that it kills brass. Never reload any casing more than 4 times. And if you buy once fired brass that means only 3 reloadings.

Others may tell you different but if you reload more than four times with this rifle you run the risk of killing the man on the range next to you.

It's a fine rifle and in the right hands is wickedly deadly at up to 800 meters. Yours is a shorter barrel than mine so it may not do as well.

Good luck and enjoy your rifle.

voortrekker
June 02, 2008, 19:51
Originally posted by LFOD1776
Buy:

[list=1]
The M14 Owner's Guide and Match Conditioning Instructions by Scott A. Duff and CWO John M. Miller
The M14 Complete Assembly Guide by Walt Kuleck and Clint McKee
[/list=1]

Read them both. Everything you need to know.


Good books.

I own both. They are not really expensive, thus, worth buying.

Regarding newer Springfield M1A's.

I own a 134XXX "Loaded".

The only problem I had with it was the safety broke in two parts, rendering it unfirable. That's after about 1500 rounds through its barrel.

I ordered another safety through Fulton. Cheap easy to install.

No problems since. It's a really good shooter and has a great trigger believe it or not.

Even though it's a good shooter, I would not trust it as my "to go" rifle.

I've got an early Springfield M1A 015XXX with all USGI guts, narry one problem. This one is my to go rifle. Plus, it's barrel is chrome lined.

They both shoot equally well, infact the later Springfield has a better trigger.


Have fun with your new "to you" M1A!!!!


Learn how to shoot it like a rifle should be shot, in the field.

The bench will do you no good. It'll only give you artificial confidence.

Take it to the field and EARN IT!

Slugger
June 03, 2008, 00:08
My feelings exactly. For me bench shooting is only for zero and patterning a new rifle.

Broke her down a little tonight and found:
Trigger group 7267030-HR-N
Oprod 7267064 TRW
Barrel GENESEO IL 308 (not 7.62?)
Bolt already mentioned 7790186 TRW ZB

So I'm assuming the trigger group, Oprod and Bolt are USGI. Barrel is non GI SA. Is this barrel chrome lined? I haven't cleaned it up yet so I can't see if it shines. From the looks of the rest of the rifle though I'd be supprised if my Uncle fired more than 100rnds. I'm a happy camper . . . although I'd give it back in a heartbeat to have my favorite Uncle back.

Slugger

Ssarge
June 03, 2008, 00:55
You did good! H&R trigger group and TRW op rod!
The barrel will be chambered for 7.62x51, but they head space them so you can shoot commercial .308 ammo. Personally I only shoot a small amount of .308 because it's peak pressure can be a good bit higher than NATO ammo. (and I have lot's of surplus ammo on hand.)
Like I said before, only a few Bush rifles had chrome lined, cut down USGI barrels. The commercial barrel is just fine, and with care will out last most peoples pocket books.

gunplumber
June 03, 2008, 10:44
Originally posted by Jimi X.
One man was pissed that there was a space between the receiver's heel area, and forward of that by a couple inches, and the stock, providing a path for dirt to easily enter the internals! He had a photo posted.....It caused me to look at MY rifle. And sure enough, I have one of these "ventilation paths".

If we're referring to the same thing - its supposed to be there. The receiver should not touch the stock for about a 3rd of the width or the rear .

Jimi X.
June 03, 2008, 11:32
Originally posted by gunplumber


If we're referring to the same thing - its supposed to be there. The receiver should not touch the stock for about a 3rd of the width or the rear .

Thanks for the reply, G.P.

The length of the area in question is about 3 1/2" along both sides of the receiver, and the greatest part of it is about 3/16" high.

My stock is the "Mossy Oak" pattern synthetic. And it does not have a selector cut out.

As you get closer to the heel, the gap shrinks. But whenever I go to a gun show, I look at the Springfield rifles with synthetic stocks....none, as of yet, have I found with this gap.

Rifleman 7.62 NATO
June 13, 2008, 16:18
Glad I bought an Armscorp with all USGI parts.

panzertruppe
June 25, 2008, 17:18
Good buy slugger and Wow,

Just saw this forum... GREAT STUFF!!!! I love the Fal file, ak file, etc etc environment... Really ez going and much easier to converse non w/o hurting someone's feelings, boo hoo, or insulting some soft hearted pansy......

I own 4 and haven't done a lot of anything to any of them, except keep'em clean... And aside from what previous owners had done to 2 of them... I guess you'd call me addicted but I have had nothing but total success with all my machines. 1st grunt grade my Dad uses, 2nd Supermatch shoots like a scalded cat, 3rd loaded NM w/ factory trigger work, Fulton Armory parts, bedded, and syntheyic stocks drives tacks w/ iron sites, AND 4th, loaded NM, outta the box w/ a SADLAK mount shoots like a champ too.... Good guns, prob why I own 4... Man I'm glad I waited till 34 to get married or all these children of mine mite never have been...

Slugger, you have found the path. My guess is you will never stray again...

panzertruppe

StoneyCreekMrMauser
June 27, 2008, 14:55
How do SA triggers compare? I'm interested in either a Loaded or Standard M1A and would like to know if the tuned trigger is worth the $$$. The NM sights are neat but not totally necessary for what I do but a good trigger is a must.

Trust me, I have way too much experience with crappy triggers to not want a good one. You can thank Anschutz and Colt for that!

STGThndr
June 28, 2008, 21:49
I got my SA M1A sometime in the early 80's. Have always loved it as a shootin rifle, but it has had a couple issues dealing with bolt and extractor. Other than shipping SA fixed the problems for free. Its my favorite shooting rifle and I have scoped it, tho the iron sights are as good or better than any other, IMO. As my eyes age the scopes become more useful...... As far as "go to" or battle rifle my choice would be a good AK or an H&K or even a FAL. These days my M1A is sorta relegated to "Too good and irreplaceable to shoot".

gauraprema
June 29, 2008, 01:27
My condolence's for your loss slugger.Now you have a legacy that you also can pass on and in these thing's we remember.

Azrial
June 29, 2008, 02:14
Most of the negative crap that you see written about the Springfield M1A are opted by people without one. I suggest that you assign that opinion what you feel that it is worth. I have had mine since 1978 and have been well pleased with it.

Falcon
June 29, 2008, 18:01
I guess you'd call me addicted but I have had nothing but total success with all my machines.

panzertruppe, so which one shoots best?

B Wood
June 29, 2008, 21:40
Originally posted by Azrial
Most of the negative crap that you see written about the Springfield M1A are opted by people without one. I suggest that you assign that opinion what you feel that it is worth. I have had mine since 1978 and have been well pleased with it.

I had the misfortune of having a factory Springfield Armory M1A Standard that sucked ass. The op rod could not be removed. It went back to Springfield Armory where they could also NOT remove it.

Quality at Springfield went down from about 2000 on. You mentioned you have had yours since 1978.....those rifles were great...the old Devine TX Springfields are waaaaaaaaaaay different than the Illinois / aftermarket parts M1A's they build now.

I would like to give SA another shot...and most likely will do so...but I am wary

EBRfan
June 29, 2008, 22:51
I have 2 Springfield M1As, both built in 2007. Both have been flawless.

panzertruppe
June 30, 2008, 00:17
Falcon,

The Super match is the real deal... But the 2 NMs are near-tack drivers too compared to SM... The SM just has that long term shooting accuracy and tools for accuracy built in... But the 2 NMs are more my spped.

To be perfectly honest, the SM is a comp gun and I'm not a Comp shooter. It is more gun than I actually need. BUT! for 1600, in Excellant condition, who could say no... I immediately made it my zombie go to field weapon/gun regardless of the weight and class... Yeah, it's a cadillac/porsche, but it's still an M1A.. You can take the M14 outthe field but you can't take the filed outta the M14...

But it is an item to barter if I choose... It's being well maintained. I have some contacts and this forum wuld be a good one too... I would have no problem trading it for a Scout varient, SOCOM 16, or Bush gun like yours plus some cash... If the Scout or SOCOM 16(Bush gun too) had a scout scope on them, less cash or straight trade, depending on the condition, type of scope, etc etc etc......

Met a Perry shooter sponsored by Berger bullets this weekend. He understands my issue too. He was still very helpful and he also understood why I love it so and it's my Zombie gun... He owns nothing but SMs cuz that's what he shoots at Perry, and successfully so... He instructs monthly at Designated Squad marksman school at Ft Benning...

There you have it! The M14/M1A is Moljnar(Donner's/Thor's hammer)... It will split open and crush any giant whom confronts it...

panzertruppe

panzertruppe
June 30, 2008, 00:19
Pardon typos,

It's late and I'm getting tired...

panzertruppe

SWOHFAL
June 30, 2008, 00:49
Originally posted by EBRfan
I have 2 Springfield M1As, both built in 2007. Both have been flawless.

Like a lot of places, I'm sure quality comes and goes, mostly goes.

EBRfan
July 03, 2008, 20:53
Originally posted by SWOHFAL


Like a lot of places, I'm sure quality comes and goes, mostly goes.

Maybe so. I'll just consider myself lucky then. The broader point, I suppose, is that they DO produce quality rifles. If you do manage to get one that is off-spec, I understand their warranty service is quite strong and they will make it right. Yes, one should not "need" this assurance with a $1400-$1900 rifle, but it is there if you do.

Ssarge
July 03, 2008, 22:28
I have two recent production rifles, a SOCOM II and a standard M1A. Both have been flawless. I have enough spare parts to build another M1A, less receiver, but I don't see any reason. The cast parts are just fine, and when I have replaced a part with USGI, I always go back to the cast. (yep, I know the bolts a forging. Done by CZ for SAI) It's just not economically feasable or sane to use those expensive USGI parts if you don't have to!
If the M1A was such a turd, would so many people be shelling out an average $1500 + for them at a pace that SAI can barely keep up with demand? :?

Rivitman
July 04, 2008, 13:46
Look. I'm gonna make an effort to put an end to this.

This post started out with a title that bespeaks quite a bit of presumtive "fact".

If the actual text of the question were not an earnest, and honest request for information, I'd have called it a troll.

It's a bad thread title. It simply tries to establish something with no reference to reality. Iv'e had to look at it in this forum for quite some time, and I'm a little tired of it. It's now turned into obfuscation of the fact via nitpicking.


Do you REALLY think that if there were any real, difinitive problem with these rifles that the owners of these pieces who paid some pretty stout prices for them would not be all over SA like a cheap suit?

Do your REALLY think that complaints would not be profligate in every related forum on the net?

Do you REALLY think we would not hear from any of the thousands of shooter who use these rifle in match competitions?

Do you REALLY think the the "USGI" tag applied to a part ALWAYS means it's superior? (I can tell you by experience with many a busted M-16's and M-60's it ain't so).

Do you REALLY expect a hundred thousand rounds downrange before something breaks?

Are you so facinated with the metalurgical differences between cast and forged parts that you cannot see that in many, many applications, castings have functioned well in all sorts of high stress applications without difficulty, while saving cost to the end user?

There is nothing wrong with the M-1A. Get it?

DYNOMIKE
July 04, 2008, 14:58
O.K. soooo what's your opinion??
Do you like them or NOT?? :rolleyes:

I've followed the thread and not seen anyone slinging mud just sharing opinion and info with the OP.. Which BTW is what he ASKED for..

Although OPINONS often vary I have seen no "obfuscation"...

Do you REALLY think think there has been "obfuscation"??
Cause I don't see any...

Do you REALLY think this " obfuscation" would not be "profligate" in ALL the Other Forums??

Is there anything wrong with the M1A, NAW I think the ROCK... :shades: :beer:

Slugger~
I think ya done GOOD... "IF" you have any probs there is a TON of info out there and lots of help as well... :whiskey:

B Wood
July 04, 2008, 15:12
Wow....

My dealings with Springfield Armory were NOT good. It took a letter to the Better Business Bureau to get them off of their butts after 3-4 months of having my new M1A and not being able to fix it. After 3-4 months.....the sent a new Loaded model to my dealer.

Yeah it got hot and heavy, and yeah Springfield RELUCTANTLY stood behind their defective rifle that I purchased new. It was like pulling teeth.

SA is not immune to issues. In my case, their customer service stunk. They resolved it.....but after much delay and cost to me calling them, mailing them, not to mention time.

Fact is that on my M1A, it was a lemon.
Fact is that the could not fix it......it was never fired by me.
Fact is that they delayed replacing it for months.
Fact is that eventually....they did replace it with an upgraded rifle.

Rivitman
July 04, 2008, 15:51
The problem is that some people want to assert that the M-1a is no good based on what? A non usgi part?

Big deal. If it works it works.

Stock gap? Meh.

Those sorts of things meant to diminish the piece do nothing to establish facts, just mask them.

I'm leary of the op-rod story. That which can be installed can usually be removed, unless some peening occured due to bad heat treat etc.

The latest story of tha "bad M-1A".

A "Lemon" that presumtivly passed visual on purchase and was determined to be such without ever having been fired?

Fact is that on my M1A, it was a lemon. Fact is that the could not fix it......it was never fired by me.

If I were SA I'd be a little suspicious anyways, but the poster can feel free to elaborate and try to convince me further.

Jimi X.
July 04, 2008, 20:03
Originally posted by Rivitman


Those sorts of things meant to diminish the piece do nothing to establish facts, just mask them.

That statement reeks of ignorance!

I'm leary of the op-rod story.

You're calling B.Wood a liar?

It's a bad thread title. Iv'e had to look at it in this forum for quite some time, and I'm a little tired of it.

We don't care what your background is, no one asked for, nor cares, what your bloviated opinion is.

A "Lemon" that presumtivly passed visual on purchase and was determined to be such without ever having been fired?

The man gave you his opinion, based on what he personally experienced. You are completely IGNORANT of B. Wood's background, as a noob, you should read and perhaps, learning will occur!



If I were SA I'd be a little suspicious anyways, but the poster can feel free to elaborate and try to convince me further.

Look. I'm gonna make an effort to put an end to this.

Noob, you have a grandiose opinion of yourself, and your writings imply that WE should thank you for being here to correct our personal observations.

There is not one person, on the Fal Files, and that includes B.Wood, who needs your permission "to elaborate", and NONE of us feels that we have ANY need to "convince you further".

I call you a TROLL.

Rivitman
July 04, 2008, 21:09
There isn't a single fact in your entire post.

Some statements are made:

An unremovable op rod. No background. No pics. No narrative.

NOTHING.

An assertion that a rifle is a lemon without ever having been fired.
Just obtuse complaints about springfield Armory, who based on what the poster actually said, was probably more than justified in being suspicious.

There isn't any evidence, hard or anecdotal to back up either assertion.

Am I callin em liars?

Nope.
What i'm saying is they haven't made their case against a pretty good rifle and the company that makes it. Maybe the stories are true and they are just too lazy or inarticulate to substantiate them, I dunno.

Anyway, the subject is the M-1A as manufacutured by SA, not me. Anybody wanting to tear down the company or the rifle need only be convincing. But neither post is. Neither assetetion as they were posted, lacking in backstory as they are, are fair either. What is abundantly fair however, is my skepticim of those posts.

I'm also skeptical of those who may claim that post count has anything to do with the quality of insight of the poster.

B Wood
July 04, 2008, 22:06
Wow rivitman

You have a way of demonstrating your ignorance

No pics were taken of the rifle due to it happening about 5 years ago. I am retired military and qualified on M14's, M16's, Mp-5's, etc. I used every trick I knew to remove the op rod, and none worked. the gunsmith at the Bullet Hole (authorized Springfield Armory dealer - long time M1A shooter also used every trick he knew.....none worked. http://www.thebullethole.com/portal/ We then called Springfield Armory who advised shooting it first......I refused since shooting it would make it non-returnable......so they dilly dallied along for 3+ months. Eventually after complaints were made to the BBB in Kansas City, Springfield Armory relented and asked the rifle be sent back.

The rifle was in Springfield Armory's possession for some time after that. They also were UNABLE to remove the op rod without destroying the op rod. At that point they upgraded the rifle to a loaded model.

No pics were taken since it is hard to take a pic of an op rod on a gun........that cannot be removed......it simply looks like any op rod on a M1A.

Serial number of the defective rifle was 151539. It was replaced with serial number 154631.

I have the file with the correspondance from the Bullet Hole, Springfield Armory, and the Better Business Bureau. I will find the file, scan the letters, and post them. It may give people insight as to how Springfield Armory had to be forced to deal with a defective rifle. As I stated in my first post.....Springfield did eventually resolve the issue.

As for the attitude displayed here by rivet....I find it condescending, rude, and not FAL Files worthy. He strikes me as one who assumes he knows the background of people when in reality he is simply ignorant. I would put my long military career (which included numerous weapons quals - inlcuding M-14's) against rivets any day.

Rivitman
July 04, 2008, 23:55
Ignorance has nothing to do with it. You made a statement idicting a manufacturer. You gave little in the way of information. This is the internet. Anyone with a beef can say anything for virtually any reason. If you are going to tar and feather SA I'd say it's better to post the entire story.

Then you need to be prepared to get grilled on the facts. If you don't like it, thats unfortunate. Because I will question you if I feel like it. Nobody here has any way really of vetting your story or credentials, so I'm going to question until I'm reasonably sure of what happend. I think me questioning your statements is fair. Some don't. But I'm not likely to accept every post here or anywhere else as gospel truth.

You aren't by the way, obligated to respond.

And there are STILL things about your story that disturb me.

First of which is a gun dealer you seem to hold in high regard appears to have refused you a return. On an unfired rifle with a defect you can easily prove.

Then there is no technical explanation of why the op rod was unremovable. You have to admit that this is an improbable defect.

Re the turnaround time, three months is not out of line for warranty service from a major manufacturer these days. Some are shorter, some longer. It sucks but there you are.

As to my conduct being unfalfileslike, I havent called anyone a liar, a troll, ignorant, or arrogant, which is the static I'm getting for trying to find out what the facts are.

B Wood
July 05, 2008, 06:00
As a matter of fact Rivitman.....the complaints I made with the Kansas City BBB were made on the BulletHole and Springfield Armory both.

That is one reason why the situation was resolved. The owner of the BulletHole put a lot of pressure on Springfield to deal with the issue. He was ticked that he had a negative on his local BBB record. Only after I wrote the BBB and the dealer got ticked...did Springfield even react.

Many dealers....(including the Bullet Hole shop I bought the M1A at) will refuse returns with signs posted in shops such as "All Gun sales are final" being common. Obviously you don't get out much. Even the gun shop in the Base Exchange on Parris Island MCRD has the same signs....dealers want the manufacturers to deal with issues, and manufacturers either want dealers to handle issues or not deal with them at all.

The problem was discovered the day I bought the rifle, and took it home. Attempted to disassemble it to clean the rifle of any grease typically found....that was when the the non-removable op rod was discovered. Contacted the dealer the next day, as well as SA. Is a M1A op rod difficult to remove? Sometimes they can be. Is it the norm? Not at all. I am use to M14's coming apart with ease.....even the "pry trick" did not work. The problem SHOULD have been discovered when SA assembled the rifle. If the op rod was that tight...which it was.......it would have been forced on....which there were signs on the receiver as well.

You lashed out with derogatory comments instead of simply asking for more details. I do not right books on the internet.....but I do post facts. I even stated in my first post after describing the problem I encountered that I was looking into another SA...so much for me blistering SA as you imply.

Originally posted by B Wood
I would like to give SA another shot...and most likely will do so...but I am wary

FAL Files is a tight knit crew......there is a lot of knowledge here...a lot of experience. IF you want to be part of that......there are some common courtesies here that are expected of people. All you had to do was ask for more details.

I doubt you will be here long...unless the attitude and chip on the shoulder go away.

DYNOMIKE
July 05, 2008, 07:19
Rivitman~
Your comments although to YOU seem QUITE acceptable to me have been rude and disrespectful and quite frankly border on calling someone a liar without using the words......

Although POST count DOES NOT make one immune or beyond reproach is DOES show that a member has spent some time here and is probably a reg poster..
Does this fact mean that everyone who posts is HONEST you may ask? NO It does not (ask me how I know) however IMO it would at least warrant a certain amount of respect until proven to the contrary..

WHY do you seem so bent on needing PROOF when the Man has explained his situation and what it took to resolve it? WHY would he post info that is NOT factual and WHY do you think that you deserve a Full disclosure of said events to believe him? Just because this is the INTRANET automatically means everyone LIES??

Do you have STOCK in SA or are you so accustomed to hanging out on forums full of Whiney ASS LYING Little MALL NINZA Bitches that you automatically expect the FILES to be the same?? Trust me it's NOT, no not everyone here is of STELLER Character but "IF" you decide to hang around long enough to glean some personalities and regular posters at least then you would be making a a FAIR Judgement of character..

Maybe BEFORE you jump in attacking members who have proven themselves long ago to be Honest and have earned the respect of many other Posters "YOU SHOULD" hang out long enough to EARN THE SAME... :shades:

rhino444
July 05, 2008, 09:22
Hey B Wood,

It's not worth your time. Rivit will just keep nit picking ad nauseam. There are hundreds of complaints on the net about SA M1A's. And "no" rivit, I'm not going to look them up and characterize them for you. (there are hundreds of praises too :)

StoneyCreekMrMauser
July 05, 2008, 11:02
Wow! Anymosity scale is off the chart!

The only SAs been fired here up the Creek until recently have been the 1911s but given that those were basically board-with-a-nail-through-it reliable I have no doubts as to the quality of SA's M1As. One other used purchase I made was an SA M1 from 1944 and aside from the clip latch spring needing replacement I've had no problems with it. If a 60-odd year old rifle will perform then SA must be doing something right.

Personally, I wouldn't kick one outta my safe and damn sure wouldn't feel undergunned.

Just my .02

B Wood
July 05, 2008, 11:09
Stony

the 60 year old M1's....are not made by the same company. Springfield Armory was originally a government arsenal / factory located in Springfield Massachusetts.....(great museum now.....well worth it).

The Springfield Armory of today is a knock off located in Illinois with the same name. Most of the Springfield frames and receivers are made in Brazil by Imbel actually...inlcuding their pistols.

Not the same animal

gearlogo
July 05, 2008, 11:41
I just handled a SOCOM at my friends shop, The scope rail and front sight were at least 7-10 degrees off from each other. I can not believe this left the factory in this condition. This was off the paper sight alignment on a top end rifle. I own a super match and an Armscorp so I am a fan of the rifle type but.. how do you allow something like this to leave the factory? It went back to SA so a customer did not get it but still, it was bad

ftierson
July 05, 2008, 12:19
Originally posted by Rivitman
Look. I'm gonna make an effort to put an end to this.

This post started out with a title that bespeaks quite a bit of presumtive "fact".

If the actual text of the question were not an earnest, and honest request for information, I'd have called it a troll.

It's a bad thread title. It simply tries to establish something with no reference to reality. Iv'e had to look at it in this forum for quite some time, and I'm a little tired of it. It's now turned into obfuscation of the fact via nitpicking.


Do you REALLY think that if there were any real, difinitive problem with these rifles that the owners of these pieces who paid some pretty stout prices for them would not be all over SA like a cheap suit?

Do your REALLY think that complaints would not be profligate in every related forum on the net?

Do you REALLY think we would not hear from any of the thousands of shooter who use these rifle in match competitions?

Do you REALLY think the the "USGI" tag applied to a part ALWAYS means it's superior? (I can tell you by experience with many a busted M-16's and M-60's it ain't so).

Do you REALLY expect a hundred thousand rounds downrange before something breaks?

Are you so facinated with the metalurgical differences between cast and forged parts that you cannot see that in many, many applications, castings have functioned well in all sorts of high stress applications without difficulty, while saving cost to the end user?

There is nothing wrong with the M-1A. Get it?

Sorry, guys, but I'm suddenly struck with the 'need' to preserve a few posts...

Forrest

ftierson
July 05, 2008, 12:20
Originally posted by Rivitman
The problem is that some people want to assert that the M-1a is no good based on what? A non usgi part?

Big deal. If it works it works.

Stock gap? Meh.

Those sorts of things meant to diminish the piece do nothing to establish facts, just mask them.

I'm leary of the op-rod story. That which can be installed can usually be removed, unless some peening occured due to bad heat treat etc.

The latest story of tha "bad M-1A".

A "Lemon" that presumtivly passed visual on purchase and was determined to be such without ever having been fired?



If I were SA I'd be a little suspicious anyways, but the poster can feel free to elaborate and try to convince me further.

And...

ftierson
July 05, 2008, 12:21
Originally posted by Rivitman
There isn't a single fact in your entire post.

Some statements are made:

An unremovable op rod. No background. No pics. No narrative.

NOTHING.

An assertion that a rifle is a lemon without ever having been fired.
Just obtuse complaints about springfield Armory, who based on what the poster actually said, was probably more than justified in being suspicious.

There isn't any evidence, hard or anecdotal to back up either assertion.

Am I callin em liars?

Nope.
What i'm saying is they haven't made their case against a pretty good rifle and the company that makes it. Maybe the stories are true and they are just too lazy or inarticulate to substantiate them, I dunno.

Anyway, the subject is the M-1A as manufacutured by SA, not me. Anybody wanting to tear down the company or the rifle need only be convincing. But neither post is. Neither assetetion as they were posted, lacking in backstory as they are, are fair either. What is abundantly fair however, is my skepticim of those posts.

I'm also skeptical of those who may claim that post count has anything to do with the quality of insight of the poster.

And...

ftierson
July 05, 2008, 12:22
Originally posted by Rivitman
Ignorance has nothing to do with it. You made a statement idicting a manufacturer. You gave little in the way of information. This is the internet. Anyone with a beef can say anything for virtually any reason. If you are going to tar and feather SA I'd say it's better to post the entire story.

Then you need to be prepared to get grilled on the facts. If you don't like it, thats unfortunate. Because I will question you if I feel like it. Nobody here has any way really of vetting your story or credentials, so I'm going to question until I'm reasonably sure of what happend. I think me questioning your statements is fair. Some don't. But I'm not likely to accept every post here or anywhere else as gospel truth.

You aren't by the way, obligated to respond.

And there are STILL things about your story that disturb me.

First of which is a gun dealer you seem to hold in high regard appears to have refused you a return. On an unfired rifle with a defect you can easily prove.

Then there is no technical explanation of why the op rod was unremovable. You have to admit that this is an improbable defect.

Re the turnaround time, three months is not out of line for warranty service from a major manufacturer these days. Some are shorter, some longer. It sucks but there you are.

As to my conduct being unfalfileslike, I havent called anyone a liar, a troll, ignorant, or arrogant, which is the static I'm getting for trying to find out what the facts are.

And...

ftierson
July 05, 2008, 12:32
Originally posted by Rivitman
Look. I'm gonna make an effort to put an end to this.

Originally posted by Rivitman
As to my conduct being unfalfileslike, I havent called anyone a liar, a troll, ignorant, or arrogant, which is the static I'm getting for trying to find out what the facts are.

Rivitman, many of us here have been exposed to each other for a long time. B Wood has demonstrated his knowledge and honesty to us over the years and, when he says something, we don't don't doubt it's truth.

As a noobie, it would stand you well to figure this all out before you call someone a liar. Just because you didn't use the word 'liar' doesn't mean that you didn't call him one. I guess that saying that you don't believe what someone has clearly stated means something different in your world.

B Wood has always come across as knowledgeable, believable, honest and self-effacing here.

You, on the other hand, come across as an arrogant little prick...

Just out of curiosity, do you work for Springfield Armory, Inc., or any of the suppliers and sales conduits for SA Inc.?

Just wondering...

Forrest

Rivitman
July 05, 2008, 13:48
I really don't care what kind of street cred he has here. His story was full of holes. Any reasonable person could have asked question, and should have, as any reader coming in here looking for advice. If you want to make these board for old timers, the ask the management to cut off new registrations.


Every single person here is anonymous. You can make up any sort of story you wish. Again, post count doesn't matter. If you want to make the giant leap of trusting everything you read on the internet without any scrutiny, that's fine. For you. Not me.

As to me calling bwood a liar? Nope. Never did it.

Did I call him out on his story? Yep, you bet. I'd do it again to anyone.

Have I been convinced of his story? After several posts he now comments that there were signs that the op rod was forced. Up to that point it was basically SA this or SA that. Even though SA made good, and made him more than whole, it appears he still has intense hatred for them.


Now his bleat it that the M-1A is a mearly a cheap knock off, and makes it sound as if it may as well be stamped Norinco as SA.

I sincerly doubt that the hundreds of thousands of owners happy with their SA products would agree.

All I did was state my skepticism of a post that had big complaints but no story. The poster in question, in return for being made whole by SA choses to slander them, degegrate their product, imply that it is catagorically inferior in some way.

If he is such an expert, then he knew who SA is, It's history, it's manner of production, and the materials used.

He also knows there is nothing wrong with any of it. But he chose to use those things against SA because he has a beef. How does thtt represent the person?

As to "post preservation" that isn't necessary. I'm not deleting a word. I stand by every one.

Am I injured at the implication that I am somehow connect to SA or are shilling for them? No, I don't care. It isn't true, but who's to say? I could be and you would never know. Could Bwood be a hack for Armscorp or Fulton? I doubt it but he could be. Whos to say? I don't care.

What I care about is this:

the FAL Files does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity or quality of these messages and opinions, and does not perform an independent investigation to verify their truth or accuracy. All posted messages are the sole responsibility of the person from which such post originated.

What that means is that if you post something that doesn't make sense, I'm gonna question it. I'm going to try and get the facts until I'm satisfied. I don't care what your post count is. I don't care what your forum rep is. I don't care what sort of credentials you have, if genuine.

If what you have said, to my mind, is unfair, I'm going to say so. In spite of bwoods experience which while a hassle, got him a new rifle and a better package, he's still beating up SA. He says it was his pressure and the BBB. Maybe his pressure had something to do with it but the BBB probably had little to none, as non members dont answer to the BBB.

B Wood
July 05, 2008, 14:03
Forced op rod.....during the installation at Springfield Armory - Yes

Poor quality control with a rifle that had a force installed op rod leave the factory? Absolutely.

Intense hatred for Springfield? Nope - see my comments about giving them another shot. Apparently reading comprehension is not a strength for you rivet.

Disappointed in how Springfield handled the affair? Yes

Disappointed in how the Bullet Hole handled the affair? Yes

If you are going to quote me rivet...at least do it right. Here is what I said about the current Springfield Armory in relation to the US Govt run Springfield Armory

"
the 60 year old M1's....are not made by the same company. Springfield Armory was originally a government arsenal / factory located in Springfield Massachusetts.....(great museum now.....well worth it).

The Springfield Armory of today is a knock off located in Illinois with the same name. Most of the Springfield frames and receivers are made in Brazil by Imbel actually...inlcuding their pistols.

Not the same animal"

You still come across as an arrogant ass with little to no knowledge and a whiny ass attitude.

Other than thay welcome to the FAL Files Noobie

;)

Rivitman
July 05, 2008, 14:18
Things get a little hazier when you look at some more of Bwoods badmouthing of SA:

Well......I had two that went back to the Springfield factory.,.......and even the Springfield factory could NOT pop the op rod...and disassemble the rifles...they were literally forced on.....they relaced them with upgraded loaded models...which were sold. I doubt if Springfield would do that if they were built right to begin with.

Well, in that post, it's TWO rifles.

Both sold. I wish I could buy em 2 at a time. With all his knoweldge of the M-1A he bought 2? had em both replaced with loadeds and sold em both?

Wait, is it 2? or just one? Either way, did you give your opinions to the buyer when you sold?:

ps...........comments about Springfield Armory recent models being a crap shoot are correct. I had one that could not even be disassembled even by Springfield.....they replaced it with an upgrade version.......which was then sold quickly.

B Wood
July 05, 2008, 14:24
Springfield kept the first one idiot. It was defective according to Springfield. What they did with it who knows.

the 2nd one was sold.

As for you....you are digging yourself deeper, and deeper. I doubt too many at FAL files will be helpful.

Reading comprehension and intelligent thought processing are not your strong suits.

my advice? leave while you are ahead.

Rivitman
July 05, 2008, 14:53
Bwood.

Your words are a direct cut and paste from an earlier post in which you indicate you had two defective rifles. Don't try to tell me you didn't say it. You may not have meant it, but grammatically, that's what you said. You said:

B Wood New and Improved FALaholic # 5579 July 14, 2007 19:50 Post #9 I had numerous problems with 2 new Springfield Armory M1A's. QC at Springfield went down hill for some time. Switched to FAL's and never looked back. PS...enjoy paying $$$ for M1A mags. I prefer FAL Metrics any day.


You insist on slagging SA but care little it would seem in being fair and accurate in doing so.


Then you jump the gun in a failed attempt to skewer SA:

beerme:

Hello All! Was doing a general inspection and light oiling of my rifles the other weekend, and noticed on one of my springfield armory M1's the rear of the reciever has a hairline crack. If you are looking from the top, the crack is on the right side of the reciever running from bottom to top in line with the serial #. It is an early made reciever (s/n 2055x). Mixmaster parts...Arlington ordnance import i believe.. Is this kind of crack very common? Can it be repaired? Does it need to be repaired? Who does competent m1 service.? Should i just throw it in the garbage? Any input is Greatly appriciated! Thanks in advance!

bwood:

get it to Fulton Armory if you want the best care for it. I am confused.....is it or is it not a factory Springfield Armory? If it is a factory SA....call them tomorrow.....either way....do not shoot it. There are more than a few M1A catostrophic failures out there.

Note that bwood had to get in the "catastrophic failures" dig. Without evidence, without data, without study. Just an off the cuff attack.

beerme:

Sorry, It is a USGI pre WW2 made reciever. Nov. 1939 I believe.


bwood:

Forget part of what I said...I thought it was an M1A - Fulton Armory is still your number one bet.


You thought it was an M1-A. You thought it was springfield armory.

Don't even try to raise the issue of the Comer rifle. Irt was customized. It had a barrel of an unknown origin, and it was the barrel that failed first.

B Wood
July 05, 2008, 16:34
riivet....you really need to lay off the drugs

for some reason when I read your posts, I keep thinking of the "this is your brain of drugs" commercial.

So much for first impressions with this crowd......you pissed off a lot of old timers here.

moderators please close this thread. It is getting old seeing lies from rivetman the noob

Rivitman
July 05, 2008, 16:57
Where am I lying? The word are yours and they seem to change a lot.

Empirical conclusions:

Springfield Armory makes a very decent and servicable rifle in the M-1A. Like all weapons, mass produced or not, the end user shold be constantly aware of it's mechanical status, and take appropriate action. The M-1A being a mass produced rifle, and like any mass produced item, flaws may occur from time to time. This is not to say that anyone need give the seller, or manufacturer a free ride. But anyone spending any time searching for commentary on this rifle will find that overall satisfaction with it is very high.

There is also evidence to suggest that Fulton Armory's rifles are better. At a price. Who wouldn't like a Rolex better than a Casio? The easiest cop out in the world is to always tell someone to spend money they haven't got. Sure, who wouldn't like a custom built Fulton on an LRB reciever? I would. Ain't got the dough, sorry. If you can afford the best, buy it. If you can't, buy what works.

But there is an anecdote to pass on that I belive in most probability is not representantive of the entirtey of Fulton's customers:

http://www.gunthing.com/index.php/forum/viewthread/9080/
I got a Fulton M14, with a scope mount they installed. It was impossible to sight it it, so i sent it back. i was told that it took several hours to get it right, that I was lucky I only got charged 70 bucks plus shipping. Seems like they’d pay the shipping and not charge anything to fix their mistakes, but i let it go. Got it back, and the fun started. It would double, or it wouldnt fire at all. Very light dent in Port milsurp primer. Fulton said its my ammo. I send it back, they say there is nothing wrong. I try other ammo, I get doubles and misfires. Then, ka-zing. Ejector and ejector spring are on the bench, I never saw the extractor again. Fulton says to send the bolt back. We cant get the bolt out. Nobody can get it out. People who know how to take out an M14 bolt cant get it out. fulton is kinda snotty about it that we dont know what we are doing. I send the whole rifle back. They did at least repark to match the new bolt to the rest of the gun. that was nice. Got a new bolt for ‘free”, I paid the shipping. They said that they didnt do anything other than replace the bolt, and maybe they didnt alter the receiver. Cant tell since its reparked. But now anyone can get the bolt in and out. Now it works at least. its good for 3 or 3.5 inch groups. That Port will shoot 1.5 inches in my M70 winchester. Lotta dang money for a rifle that wont shoot as well as a Russian capture mauser. Well, maybe I’m uniquely unlucky. I’d say tho, if you are ordering from Fulton, good luck.

Just as I view that remark about a Fulton rifle being unrepresentative, I hold that Bwood's remarks about the Springfield version, even if entirely accurate, isn't either. I post it as a reference of what CAN happen to anybody, and if you are determined to be unfair, you could broad-brush Fulton for this incident in the same way.

Iv'e seen sufficient evidence here that B wood very much has a case of the ass for springfield armory, in which case he may feel totally justified. But it isn't fair on his part to attack SA in many threads in which the M-1A in mentioned. It's not useful for him to try to undermine M-1A owner's confidence in their weapon of choice when there isn't sufficient evidence for doing so. Mind you, had B wood stated what happend to him in a complete and detailed fashion and been done with it, that could be taken into account. But he's taken matter beyond that step into trying to lay a quick hit on Springfield armory every chance he gets, doing everything from complaining of the price of magazines to foretelling rifle detonations (regardless of cause). It's readily apparant that he extends this to making a statement about serial catastrophic failures, and changing his story as to the number of rifles involved. At very least we know he never even gave rifle #2 a chance to perform. His choice. There is apparantly nothing SA has done since or could do in the future to have him cease tarring and feathering SA and the M-1A at every opportunity.

Lessons?

Do your homework. Do some research.

Personally, if a gun dealer has a sign up that says no return for any reason, I'm doing business elsewhere.

Do a solid visual before you fill out the 4473.

If you are going to use internet forums as reference, read up on the past comments of posters that make claims about guns or gear to try to understand any underlying motivations they may have.

Never give in to a snob. If you like 1911's, you like em and that's that. If Glock is your fave don't let a crusty Cooper disciple tell you otherwise. And if you decide the SA M-1A is what you want, after having done your homework, buy it without a second thought.

StoneyCreekMrMauser
July 05, 2008, 21:58
Ooops. My own historical brainfart there! Dammit, I talk to ONE woman for three days and this is what happens to me.

Nothing even romantic, I'm just that big a dumbass! :confused:

ftierson
July 05, 2008, 22:31
Originally posted by StoneyCreekMrMauser
Ooops. My own historical brainfart there! Dammit, I talk to ONE woman for three days and this is what happens to me.

Nothing even romantic, I'm just that big a dumbass! :confused:

:)

Don't feel alone...

I know exactly what you mean...

Forrest

mace2364
July 09, 2008, 06:59
I bought mine off gunbroker a while ago and it is the best $1300 I ever spent. Mine was made in 2003 and it is one of the "GI" models they marketed at one point. Mine was very slightly used when I got it, the owner stated he put like 40 rds through it(I think it was closer to 20 after looking at the rifle) and I got like 12 or 13 mags for it all either the type 57s or GI. I have only had one problem with the rifle since I have had it, and that was because I didn't tighten the gas lock properly after I cleaned the piston. It shoots great. I carry an M14 at work(Uncle Sam issued me a Winchster made one), and my M1A shoots every bit as well as my issued 14. If you don't have one get a copy of FM 23-8( one of the military manuals for the M14). It has a troubleshooting section in it, that works pretty well. As for the mil-spec issue with these, none of the recievers made for civilian use are mil-spec. They all omit things found on the military rifles( I am looking at my M14 right now as I sit here in the middle east). They had to modify the civie receivers so that they wouldn't take the full-auto parts the military rifles had once upon a time. They even field strip differently. Yeah, I know the whole forged thing. I have yet to test that concept, but the M1A I have at home is definately one of my favorites, if not my absolute favorite( I am partial to my L1A1 though). And if things ever go to crap at home, it will be my primary weapon. I have absolute confidence in it. I also have a high cap 1911 from Springfield, and I sent it in for some warranty work some time ago. The problem was probably from operator headspace, but they fixed it anyway free of charge. And they also did the custom work on it I asked for and got it back to me promptly. So I wouldn't worry too much about that side of things. All in all, I think you will be very happy with your M1A. Now if only 7.62x51 surplus would go back down to where it was a few years ago!!

Ssarge
July 09, 2008, 10:48
c'est la merde :rolleyes:

Red Gander
July 09, 2008, 15:18
Bought new "Loaded" model in 2006, love that gun. Shoots more accurately than I do, fit and finish is great. Excellent trigger. 800 rounds down the pipe, failed to feed a couple times when the gas plug worked itself loose, just needed tightened back down. No other issues at all.

LFOD1776
July 09, 2008, 15:59
Originally posted by B Wood
The op rod could not be removed.

You know, I had the EXACT same problem. It's funny to think of all the blood, sweat and tears (not to mention loud, angry cursing) that I suffered through trying to get that thing off.

Finally I managed to smash it off using brute force and a rubber mallet.

Then one day I read Scott Duff & John Miller's book (M14 Owner's Guide) and there was a photo in there that was a revelation. I'd been trying to pry that stupid thing off the wrong way. It's not at all obvious until you see how you're supposed to pry it off.

Anyway, there you have it. Whatever was going on with B Wood's rifle, removing the operating rod is something that is known to be ... non-obvious, at least until the tab has worn down a bit. I bet SA gets a lot of calls on removing the op-rod.

Norton1
July 09, 2008, 20:49
http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/M1A_122.jpg

I humped one in Vietnam and always loved the rifle. This one is too heavy for my "go-to" gun. But it's a tack driver.

I guess I'd be cautious of any rifle I wanted. My M1A took me several months to get. I looked at it, shot it several times (bennies of a private sale), and finally decided it was the one I wanted.

Only thing SA about it is the receiver. It's a custom built rifle from one of our local smiths. Kreiger barrels rule!!

Anyway - it's an awesome weapon.

Slugger
July 18, 2008, 11:48
Wow, this thread has been informative to me but has taken a turn for the worst now it seems. I've been around this forum for a good long time as my member number and join date show. I've learned a LOAD from a good number of you and appreciate Jen and all her work in creating this space for us. I've seen the "good old days", alumabombs and the passing of some great folks that have been members here. I've bought and sold many goods from this forum and have contributed when possible. My post count is low as I don't consider myself an expert but I help where I can and consider the Files my home. The FALfiles is the first site I go to every day.

The biggest thing I've learned here is that there are a lot of people here with a ton more experience than I have. If I'm smart . . . I can leverage this experience to my advantage. I take it all in and my mileage may vary, but I've had more good input than bad to be sure. There has always been someone willing to give me some of their time and wisdom to assist with what ever issues I'm dealing with.

There have been more honest straight shooters here than the immature mall ninja type found in abundance on other sites. Many here have done deep research and know their stuff. For all this I am eternally grateful!

If some one on this site doesn’t like someone’s statement, price, etc, they can respectfully inquire or simply move on. If they want to turn it into a personal thrashing they can create their own thread on the subject.

Rivitman, you may have some real experience to share but you are not gaining any respect in the way you are carrying on in this thread . . . please move on.

Thanks to all who have again helped me out by sharing their experience and info.
Slugger

pjpjr
July 19, 2008, 09:57
Originally posted by Rivitman
Ignorance has nothing to do with it. You made a statement idicting a manufacturer. You gave little in the way of information. This is the internet. Anyone with a beef can say anything for virtually any reason. If you are going to tar and feather SA I'd say it's better to post the entire story.

Then you need to be prepared to get grilled on the facts. If you don't like it, thats unfortunate. Because I will question you if I feel like it. Nobody here has any way really of vetting your story or credentials, so I'm going to question until I'm reasonably sure of what happend. I think me questioning your statements is fair. Some don't. But I'm not likely to accept every post here or anywhere else as gospel truth.

You aren't by the way, obligated to respond.

And there are STILL things about your story that disturb me.

First of which is a gun dealer you seem to hold in high regard appears to have refused you a return. On an unfired rifle with a defect you can easily prove.

Then there is no technical explanation of why the op rod was unremovable. You have to admit that this is an improbable defect.

Re the turnaround time, three months is not out of line for warranty service from a major manufacturer these days. Some are shorter, some longer. It sucks but there you are.

As to my conduct being unfalfileslike, I havent called anyone a liar, a troll, ignorant, or arrogant, which is the static I'm getting for trying to find out what the facts are.

Rivitman....you are an idiot!
Take your internet dribble and go somewhere else

Rivitman
July 19, 2008, 12:38
Rivitman, you may have some real experience to share but you are not gaining any respect in the way you are carrying on in this thread . . . please move on.

Rivitman....you are an idiot! Take your internet dribble and go somewhere else

Well, it's been over two weeks since I last posted in this thread, so I had moved on. You brought the subject back up.

The facts have not changed. Niether has my thinking on the matter. My comments stand. Exactly as stated.

indy_Muaddib
July 19, 2008, 13:56
http://www.librodearena.com/myfiles/beatrizatxa/Do-not-feed-the-troll.PNG