PDA

View Full Version : Mini-G, or M1a Scout?


mitchellh
December 19, 2015, 15:59
I’m trying to decide which direction I should proceed, with the purchase of a new rifle. I’m looking at several different rifles, which are; M1a Scout rifle from Fulton Armory, Springfield Armory, or the purchase of a Mini-G, or Magazine fed Garand from Shuff’s Parkerizing.

I’ve been out of the gun buying business for 4-5 years now, and really haven’t had any interest, but something is drawing me to one of these rifles. I plan on using the rifle for plinking, or target shooting, not fighting the great Zombie horde.

I already have an unmolested CMP M1 Garand and M1 Carbine, so these two are out.

I looking for pros and cons to these manufactures and rifles.

Thanks for any the input, and this thread would be useless without pictures, lifted from various websites.

SA M1a Scout
http://i63.tinypic.com/2dgp0th.jpg

FA M1a Scout
http://i65.tinypic.com/35li4w0.jpg

Shuff’s Mini G and Magazine Fed Garand
http://i64.tinypic.com/34z124o.jpg

http://i63.tinypic.com/oppyjp.jpg

Tuhlmann
December 19, 2015, 17:20
Yes.:devil:

L Haney
December 19, 2015, 17:29
Oh hell! That bottom picture. WHAT is that?

John Crusher
December 19, 2015, 18:39
Oh hell! That bottom picture. WHAT is that?

Looks like a BM-62 ?

SAFN49
December 19, 2015, 20:29
Oh hell! That bottom picture. WHAT is that?

Looks like some BM59 parts on the front end, gas cylinder and muzzle device. No clue what the original rifle started out life as.

AZ Deuce
December 19, 2015, 20:44
I believe that is a Shuff rifle also, looks like a magazine fed Shuff G with Beretta parts up front. Started out as a Garand, note the magazine is an M14 Type and not the Berreta BM-59/62 Type

L Haney
December 19, 2015, 21:35
I believe that is a Shuff rifle also, looks like a magazine fed Shuff G with Beretta parts up front. Started out as a Garand, note the magazine is an M14 Type and not the Berreta BM-59/62 Type

Can you buy these?

Olaf
December 19, 2015, 22:11
yes, or you can send in a Garand and they'll do the conversion.

yellowhand
December 19, 2015, 22:41
Can you buy these?

Take a deep breath, check your pulse rate, and run around the house six times!:)

SAFN49
December 19, 2015, 23:32
Can you buy these?

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=529613910

Now just add the folder and you are GTG!. This one has a Tri comp on it.

AliYahu
December 20, 2015, 01:16
The source of that picture - Shuff's Parkerizing! (http://shuffsparkerizing.com/services/mag-fed-garand/)

Eli

AliYahu
December 20, 2015, 01:19
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=529613910

Now just add the folder and you are GTG!. This one has a Tri comp on it.

Except that's a cobbled-together 'parts gun' with some sort of reweld/ fabricated receiver - no guns are marked Beretta and Springfield on the heel! That's why it's been popping up for 'under market value' - those of us that know what the real guns are know it's a fake - and not a good one!

Eli

Frenchkat
December 20, 2015, 01:26
Shuff does a mod he calls the BM14. M14 mag fed Garand using BM59 drop down gas cylinder.

Very similar to a BM59/62. Primary difference is the mag and mag catch.

SAFN49
December 20, 2015, 01:56
Except that's a cobbled-together 'parts gun' with some sort of reweld/ fabricated receiver - no guns are marked Beretta and Springfield on the heel! That's why it's been popping up for 'under market value' - those of us that know what the real guns are know it's a fake - and not a good one!

Eli

All rifles, unless marked PB marked, are cobbled together parts guns, including Springfield and Shuff. Just sayin.

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s30/djm540idjm540i/PB_zpsgdebvcmc.jpg (http://s148.photobucket.com/user/djm540idjm540i/media/PB_zpsgdebvcmc.jpg.html)

ByronF
December 20, 2015, 08:20
A Garand modified to take M14 makes sense like the next generation Predator drone: now with a pilots seat!

W.E.G.
December 20, 2015, 08:29
The M1 and M14 with a scope rail have never appealed to me.

I notice yo do not mention the 1903 Springfield.
May I suggest the Mark I model.
There are matches held just for the 03'.

I'm not sure what the scoped Garand or M14 get used for.

J. Armstrong
December 20, 2015, 08:30
Except that's a cobbled-together 'parts gun' with some sort of reweld/ fabricated receiver - no guns are marked Beretta and Springfield on the heel! That's why it's been popping up for 'under market value' - those of us that know what the real guns are know it's a fake - and not a good one!

Eli

Tell that to a BM62 ;)

Timber Wolf
December 20, 2015, 08:56
Mini-G in .308 with muzzle brake.:). It is unique enough to warrant springing some coin on but still makes sense as a shooter (.308 availability). Unless you don't already have a mag fed battle rifle in the stable.:eek:

AliYahu
December 20, 2015, 10:30
All rifles, unless marked PB marked, are cobbled together parts guns, including Springfield and Shuff. Just sayin.

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s30/djm540idjm540i/PB_zpsgdebvcmc.jpg (http://s148.photobucket.com/user/djm540idjm540i/media/PB_zpsgdebvcmc.jpg.html)

Yes, but that one most likely has a rewelded - and possibly illegally re-marked - receiver, and who knows what else is questionable. It looks like somebody ordered a bunch of parts from Reese Surplus and put it together on an old rewelded 'M59' receiver.

Tell that to a BM62 ;)

Most BM62 rifles were imported by Berben in NY, with Springfield/Reese assembling very few - and none had both markings on the heel.

Springfield BM-series guns were marked one of two ways:
Receivers that had finish machining done by Beretta were marked 'Beretta' on the heel, with SAInc markings on the left side of the receiver.
Receivers that had final machining done by SAInc were marked SAInc on the heel, and lack any Beretta markings on the receiver.

Eli

Democrat1
December 25, 2015, 17:32
I bought a National Match prepped M1A in 1978, and shot it a lot, with very few problems. You do need to do some regular maintenance on the gas system, and for that you need special tooling.

My experience with shorter barrels is that noise levels increase dramatically, you have a greater chance of reliability issues, and they are harder on brass.

historicfirearms
January 13, 2016, 16:49
Ive got a mini G and love it. Forged receiver, all usgi parts, whats not to love?

Orlando8
January 13, 2016, 18:08
How about a Shuffs BM59 clone
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f197/Garandlover/BM59/Picture677.jpg (http://s47.photobucket.com/user/Garandlover/media/BM59/Picture677.jpg.html)

SteelGreyML
January 13, 2016, 23:57
I have 2 Shuff's Mini G's. They are nice.

mitchellh
January 14, 2016, 06:20
I leaning towards the Mini-G in the .308 caliber, instead of the other rifles, main reason is I won't have to stockpile a bunch M1a Magazines.

djfin
January 14, 2016, 14:08
Yes, but that one most likely has a rewelded - and possibly illegally re-marked - receiver, and who knows what else is questionable. It looks like somebody ordered a bunch of parts from Reese Surplus and put it together on an old rewelded 'M59' receiver.



Most BM62 rifles were imported by Berben in NY, with Springfield/Reese assembling very few - and none had both markings on the heel.

Springfield BM-series guns were marked one of two ways:
Receivers that had finish machining done by Beretta were marked 'Beretta' on the heel, with SAInc markings on the left side of the receiver.
Receivers that had final machining done by SAInc were marked SAInc on the heel, and lack any Beretta markings on the receiver.

Eli

I don't have a lot of experience with these rifles so can you please explain how and why you decided that the receiver was rewelded. I have looked at the pictures and I cannot detect any signs that it was welded (color differences in the park from the weld / filler rod etc.)and am always open to learn. Also why do you state that the added stamping is illegal. I have never heard that adding to the marking stamped into a receiver was illegal just removing or altering the original serial number/ manufacture marks was a no no. Any info would be great.

AliYahu
January 14, 2016, 17:23
I don't have a lot of experience with these rifles so can you please explain how and why you decided that the receiver was rewelded. I have looked at the pictures and I cannot detect any signs that it was welded (color differences in the park from the weld / filler rod etc.)and am always open to learn. Also why do you state that the added stamping is illegal. I have never heard that adding to the marking stamped into a receiver was illegal just removing or altering the original serial number/ manufacture marks was a no no. Any info would be great.

http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/532696000/532696268/pix010831021.jpg

The heel was partially scrubbed (common on rewelds by certain vendors) and re-marked with a different model name and manufacturer.
ETA: The description now says it's a Shuff's build, and the receiver was re-marked.

Eli

djfin
January 15, 2016, 12:36
So why is that illegal? It is my understanding that a cut up receiver is legally considered scrap. If I use scrap to make a functioning receiver why can't I mark it any way I wish. I would think that if that man is manufacturing and selling rifles that he has the required FFL to do so. Would that not require him to mark his information on the finished receiver?

warsteiner_1970
January 16, 2016, 10:08
You can remove manufacturers markings, import marks etc, what you can't do , is alter the serial number....At least that is my understanding :whistling:.

djfin
January 16, 2016, 20:29
It is my understanding that if you are welding pieces of scrap together to make a working receiver any old markings have no meaning as the old parts are scrap metal . Removing numbers from scrap metal is not illegal to the best of my knowledge .

AliYahu
January 17, 2016, 13:31
If it's a Shufflin build, it is NOT a reweld. Tim wouldn't even take a reactivated drill rifle with slight scarring from removing a tack weld, and will not work on questionable receivers except for in-house experiments that aren't sold.
As for as the legalities of re-marking, the serial must remain not on the same but cannot be re-marked in most circumstances - remember the T1 and T2 lightening of Imbel receivers back in the day? Re-marking the manufacturer - and falsifying the Beretta - might be problematic.
A 're-weld' is required to have NEW manufacturer's markings as it is a 'new' firearm!

Eli

AZ Dave
January 28, 2016, 19:43
Just couldn't bring myself to shell out $1700 for the Mini G although it's out the roof cool. If I had a Garand laying around I could go for the conversion in 308 at $750. I found a Springfield Socom cheap so I went that route.

mitchellh
January 29, 2016, 06:13
Just couldn't bring myself to shell out $1700 for the Mini G although it's out the roof cool. If I had a Garand laying around I could go for the conversion in 308 at $750. I found a Springfield Socom cheap so I went that route.

I hear ya, I just happen to have stashed some $$ away, after reducing a few safe queens. Turning 4 in to 1 :biggrin: