PDA

View Full Version : WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE???


TACTHEAD
February 10, 2009, 18:43
What is the main difference in M14's between Springfield Amory & "the real expensive place"? I called today, the owner builds the guns himself, by the time I got off the phone, he said "your lookin in the area of 4k". Does anyone think that a $4k rifle is worth it that is more ammo sensitive that a FAL, mags cost in upwards of $40, just to shoot an 1.5' better?

by the way, "the expensive place's" owner seems like a great guy, I'm not bashing just thought the prices were insane. Just wanted another perspective.

Thanks.

ByronF
February 10, 2009, 20:26
Get a SA M1A and spend the other $2500 on ammo and mags. Not bashing the dude. Some people insist on having the uber-finest of things. I'm not that people. Are you that people?

Canberra
February 10, 2009, 21:37
It just depends on what you like, where you been and where you're going.

tiblow
February 10, 2009, 21:59
Originally posted by ByronF
Get a SA M1A and spend the other $2500 on ammo and mags. Not bashing the dude. Some people insist on having the uber-finest of things. I'm not that people. Are you that people?

WELL SAID!!! :wink:

I have a SA and an Armscorp made from a kit build, the SA was a broken down not even complete when I got it and the Armscorp was an H&R kit...a good build, some TLC and they are tack drivers...1/2" groups at 100+ yrds!! :)

I've had so many people tell me to buy one of those "expensive" recv. when I was building the last one from a $400 HR kit, and now I'm getting match quailty shots from the $380 Armscorp recv. It has an H&R GI barrel and the only aftermarket item on it is the solid recoil spring guide.

Buy the SA, and spend the rest of the $ on ammo!!

Fn/form
February 16, 2009, 22:16
There is a difference, and only you can decide if its worth it. If it has to be an M14 type, if you want duty/mil quality you can reasonably believe is the best you can get, you pay the bucks. If you want an affordability compromise you go with mass production of known "lesser" quality. If you're familiar with AR-15s, I can draw a parallel.

If you're plinking, go for the SA. If you think it might be a life tool, pay the money.

BTW, 4k sounds high... what are your specs?

pjpjr
February 17, 2009, 00:12
Originally posted by Fn/form
There is a difference, and only you can decide if its worth it. If it has to be an M14 type, if you want duty/mil quality you can reasonably believe is the best you can get, you pay the bucks. If you want an affordability compromise you go with mass production of known "lesser" quality. If you're familiar with AR-15s, I can draw a parallel.

If you're plinking, go for the SA. If you think it might be a life tool, pay the money.

BTW, 4k sounds high... what are your specs?

Buy the Springfield....mine is my life tool and will shoot as well as any if I do my part. Utterly reliable and as accurate as it should be for a military style battle rifle.

Jailguard
February 17, 2009, 01:01
remember Mil spec is really just good enough spec. But that has kept US Soldiers alive for a long time. My AR could have been built real tight and it would have been picky about ammo but it is mil-spec and will eat any thing and go bang when i need it to. I would say just get a standard SA and leave the high dollar guns to the camp perry guys.

JeffJ
February 17, 2009, 10:16
Supply and demand, I bought an LRB m14 receiver and had a match gun built with all usgi match parts and it still didn't reach 4k.

I used to have a springfield that was all usgi sans receiver and it was 100% reliable and I paid $900 for that so who knows.

If you can get a springfield inc with usgi parts you really can't go wrong.

Who thought a colt 6920 would go for almost 2k ??? but its happening.

Supply and demand....