Funny I was just looking at one yesterday $1200 but on the accuracy part I'm kind of interested too. I have had trouble with over the counter bought ammo on some guns that it just didn't like, my '06 Mossberg(remington ammo) I had to reload to get her to group tight like 5/25 cents(quarter to nickel diameter 3 shots) so good accuracy can be achieved with most guns in good condition. This also wasn't a problem with my 338 remimgton it didn't like remington ammo I switched to winchester 338 and she put two bullets thru the same hole at 100yds. What I'm saying is that ammo is a very big part of accuracy sometimes we can get very upset with a high priced shooter and out of the box having poor accuracy not like we expected. Now considering the gun we are talking about I would expect it to be very good again with the right ammo and its very confusing to me now with all this ammo that is priced $9 a box to $25 dollars a box is there any difference I'm not sure but it does get costly to test them all I have been there. I hope now that someone who has one will post results how they shoot and what they are using for ammo. BigBill
when I had a H&R chrome lined barrel on mine it would shoot an inch to an inch and a half at a hundred yards with the best hand load I could come up with. I put on a douglass heavy barrel a while back and did all the rest of the national match mods alond with an ARMS 18 mount and a scope. It weighs 18 pounds now loaded but it is a tack driver. groups at 100 yards are barely over bullet diameter. I just tried a barnes 165 grain handload at ranges out to 1000 yards and I got minute of angle or better. The wind sucked that day. 4-5 inches at 500 yards 7-8 inches at 800 yards and about 10 inches at 900 yards. after that I went subsonic and the bullet got weird. realy opened up. My rifle is realy all out match and I built it myself so I can't say anything about SA. I never owned one. I built mine on a norinco preban receiver. I have heard a lot of negative things lately about SA and their quality control. It's pretty bad when there are a bunch of companies out there offering services to make them realy shoot good. Like fulton armory. They do awsome work. I personaly would recommend buying a receiver from SA and sending it to fulton or smith enterprise to be built. I will do it before too long but I need to work out a bunch of new buisiness details first. Like insurance. Insurance companies sure don't like gunsops/gunsmiths.
oh I should add I don't get the same results off the bench as I do in the different field positions. I get best results prone supported, on the bipod, and using the sling. M-14's and M-1's are different from most in that poi changes slightly shooting from the bench or slinging up tight on the ground. The proper use of a sling makes a world of difference. This is just my personal experience. I never use the bench anymore and don't allow my son to either. You won't have one in the woods when you are hunting so why use it?
M1A accuracy (lack thereof) and customer non-service
About a year ago I bought a Springfield M1A standard with synthetic stock. It has been a profound disappointment. After wasting about 200 rounds of American Eagle ball and still not getting a zero, I discovered the sights had not been properly tightened and the elevation knob was rotating under recoil. When I called the factory, the young lady said "Oh yeah, the factory doesn't always get them tight." She then explained how to properly tighten the rear sight assembly. I was so infuriated that I wrote them a letter of complaint about their shoddy assembly. Never got a response. After I got the sights squared away I resumed trying to get a zero. But the thing only shoots 4 to 5 inches at 100 yards. I tried some Federal Match 168 grain Sierras and got it down to 3 3/4 inches. In my humble opinion, the rifle is an over-priced, inaccurate piece of junk!
My buddy Ike bought a DSA FAL carbine at about the same time. I shot 2 1/2 inches with it using South African surplus.
I had a $400 CETME that shot 2 1/2 inches with surplus.
I like to benchrest a rifle when sighting it in and to make sure the gun can do what I want it to. Then its up to us to hand hold it and if its bad its us for sure. If we don't benchrest it first it leaves us with the whats wrong the gun or ammo or us? It can get real confusing if we don't elimate one problem at a time to see what the real problem is. Like I said in a prevoius post my '06 was a bear to get it right. I bedded the stock and then finally by reloading it finally became accurate. I came pretty close to selling it many times. But I'm happy I stayed with it and got it right. While its not a top shelf brand she can shoot as good as one. With some of the accuracy posted here with the m1A's my used $200 chinese paratrooper sks can shoot under 2 1/2" groups @ 100yds using chinese norinco ammo too. I would expect an M1A to be much better than that.
Buddy has one and it shoots eyeballs at 200 yds. His is a stock mil-spec, not the Nat'l Match. It shoots as well as some of the sniper versions and match rifles I've used and shot but, it likes some brands of ammo but not others. It does not like foreign made 7.62s but sure does like the Lake City stuff. We found a couple of boxes of Lake City National Match ammo that carried the 177 gn bullet at 2550'/sec and we covered the 100 yd groups with a nickle.
However, some guys don't have that kind of luck, as I understand. Mikey.
"Standard vs Fully Loaded models: Is there any significant difference in the accuracy of the standard M-1A vs the Fully Loaded Model (match barrel & trigger). How accurate is the standard M-1A off the bench? Is it capable of MOA or sub MOA? :wink:[/quote]"
I have been shooting SA M1As since the mid '70s and have a Master level classification in HP, both regular and long range. My accuracy testing consists of a minimum 10 shot strings (most often 20 shot strings) from a prone supported (tight sling and forehand rest) using the issue sights not a scope. I have shot quite a few rack grades and numerous match grades over the years. Bear in mind that these rack grade rifles are not bench rest rifles and many will shoot better when hand held in a tight sling prone position than off a bench rest. The really tricked out 15 lb+ rifles are another story.
Also keep in mind that acceptable accuracy specifications for a rack grade shooting M80 ( US - much of the foriegn stuff is pretty poor) is 4-6 MOA. All of the SA M1As I have shot average 2.5 to 3 MOA. With M118 or Special Ball the acceptable accuracy of M21s (Match rifles) is 2 MOA. All of the rack grades I have shot have met this accuracy criteria which is pretty good and remember; these are 10 or 20 shot groups at a minimum of 200 yards. With Fed Match or equivelent reloads the rack grades averaged 1.5 to 2 MOA equalling the acceptable match rifle accuracy. Occasionally one would do better but not consistantly better. The match rifles from SA (depending on grade - "loaded" adds many gizmos that do not enhance the inherant accuracy) with Fed Match or equivelent handloads would all shoot around MOA, some better but only one that I recall was worse.
The ability to shoot MOA or better is not a matter of just buying the rifle. You must have the marksmanship skills to do it also. Bald Barry gives a scathing review but if you read his post you will find the problem was "pilot error". He did not bother to find out about his rifle before he used it. Most rifleman will check their sights to be sure they are tight and secure, regardless of the rifle they are using. Also if I shot 200 rounds before I figured out the sights were loose I'd go beat my own head against the wall instead of complain about the product. SA puts out a good rifle for what it is made for. Those who buy them and expect "sub MOA" accuracy (unless it is a very tricked out one) will be disappointed. However if you buy it for its intended purpose you will be quite pleased.
LMG your right about the shooter being accurate too my older brother(god rest his soul) he could shoot a few rounds to see where the gun hit and adjust for it and shoot bullseyes all day long with it then switch guns and go right back to it again. Its a matter of how each gun shoots too. But once its sighted in then its the ammo being consisant is the key to accuracy too. Now with all these modern fancy steels does anyone think the barrels may take longer to break in? While some say 200rds will break in a barrel but it can vary I'm sure. If its better quality steel it may take more rounds. It may also be the quality of the broaching/rifling too. There are so many factors to consider that could be the result of bad accuracy too.
I guess with the higher price($1,200) we still have to play with it to see what bought ammo works the best and maybe we have to reload for it to make it accurate no matter what rifle we buy. I guess we just get more lucky with the old warhorses because most I have shot still shoot good and most cost under $100. BigBill
These old guns sure make me look like a good shooter at the range too. I'm not the best but the bullet goes where I want it too. I think its all the years of shooting the 338win mag and the '06 bolt actions that makes these other guns seem so easy to shoot.
A forum community dedicated to the great outdoors and hunting enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about hunting, fishing, survival, archery gunsmithing, optics, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!