M14 Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Smith Enterprise finally called me back today. The owner stayed on the phone with me for about a half an hour. He seemed very skeptical about how the quality of Fulton's brookfield style scope mounts would compare to his. I was always under the impression Fulton was widely regarded as having top rate stuff? He suggested I tell Fulton to forgo the scope mount and just have them install one when I have them glass bed and sight it in.

He also suggested I steer clear of the Nightforce scope I was looking at because the click value is .25 MOA, and instead look at the Leupold Mark IV. I haven't really used a scope before, but the argument that you'd need to go 4 clicks for one inch seems like a legitimate beef. Any thoughts on that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,501 Posts
both scopes are great but you could look into a burris xtr2. ill be getting one for my new build...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,363 Posts
Oh dear...

So first, let me respectfully ask what your previous exposure is to the M14 is. You can easily step into a hornet's nest on this one.

For a new person, the two worst people to talk to without any previous exposure and research is Fulton and Smith. Fulton makes pretty good stuff but there are other quality makers of M14 parts. Fulton will have good customer service but their prices for services can be quite steep.

Smith thinks that they are the ONLY makers of quality M14 parts and they will use many strong words and expletives convincing you so; maybe even a lawyer if you disagree with them. Dealing with them can be like dealing with the Sopranos. You will also pay a heavy price to have them do work for you.

My top recommendations for scope mounts are Sadlak and Bassett. If you can find an ARMS or a Brookfield, they are excellent too but they are pretty much collector's items now.

What is the purpose of your build? Do you want to remove the scope frequently? Will it be in the field? Is it for a police department? The Sadlak is what I recommend for people who want to semi-permanently install the scope. The Bassett is what I recommend for people who will regularly remove the scope and maybe mount it to different rifles.

What other work do you need done? We can help point you in the right direction. Call Jon Wolfe and get his opinion. He will be very pleasant to talk to and he builds top end rifles. Who has your rifle now? By the way, Smith will tell you that all the people on this forum are morons. Let's just say that SEI and this forum...."have history," to put it lightly.

Night Force and Leupold scopes will work just fine.

Tony.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
Oh dear...

So first, let me respectfully ask what your previous exposure is to the M14 is. You can easily step into a hornet's nest on this one.

For a new person, the two worst people to talk to without any previous exposure and research is Fulton and Smith. Fulton makes pretty good stuff but there are other quality makers of M14 parts. Fulton will have good customer service but their prices for services can be quite steep.

Smith thinks that they are the ONLY makers of quality M14 parts and they will use many strong words and expletives convincing you so; maybe even a lawyer if you disagree with them. Dealing with them can be like dealing with the Sopranos. You will also pay a heavy price to have them do work for you.

My top recommendations for scope mounts are Sadlak and Bassett. If you can find an ARMS or a Brookfield, they are excellent too but they are pretty much collector's items now.

What is the purpose of your build? Do you want to remove the scope frequently? Will it be in the field? Is it for a police department? The Sadlak is what I recommend for people who want to semi-permanently install the scope. The Bassett is what I recommend for people who will regularly remove the scope and maybe mount it to different rifles.

What other work do you need done? We can help point you in the right direction. Call Jon Wolfe and get his opinion. He will be very pleasant to talk to and he build top end rifles. Who has your rifle now? By the way, Smith will tell you that all the people on this forum are morons.

Night Force and Leupold scopes will work just fine.

Tony.
This is my first M1A, I have no previous experience. This rifle is for personal use, nothing too serious like 800-1000 yard match shooting, it's really going to be a hunting, SHTF and range gun for me.

While I don't doubt Smith does great work, he really did seem to drive home the point they're the only company producing battle worthy rifles and parts. And yes he did say everyone on the forum has no idea what they're talking about. The Smith brookfield type scope mount seems better made though, with anti-corrosion coatings and whatnot.

I took a look at the Sadlak mount, it appears to be the same brookfield style mount as the Smith and Fulton, but they claim it can be removed and reinstalled without losing zero. Couldn't the same be true for the other two manufacturers' mounts since they're the same style??? Honestly all 3 look almost identical to me, but then again I'm a total noob...

Also, any input on the 1/4 MOA vs 1/2 MOA click value debacle?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,501 Posts
do you want mildot style reticle in your scope? or are you going with a typical duplex reticle? reason being is if you go with a mil based reticle or an moa based reticle you want the turrets to match. so mil/mil or moa/moa. it makes for an easier follow up shot with adjustment. for example, you have a mil/mil scope and you take a shot and you see the splash and your low 1.5 mils on your reticle you know you can rotate the turret up 1.5 mils or just hold over 1.5.
there are some scopes out there that have moa turrets and mil reticle. its slower. much slower because you do the math in your head.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,363 Posts
The click value is really personal preference. Perhaps go with more bang for buck. If you aren't shooting for score, 1/4 clicks may not benefit you. Most shooters can't exploit that kind of fine tune accuracy.

Sadlak, SEI and Fulton all copied and modified the Brookfield mount. Brookfield, I believe, worked with and helped Sadlak develop their scope mount. At least I seem to recall that being said by one of the Sadlak reps that frequents this board.

All the mounts, with the exception of maybe the Fulton, in this topic have been tested by the military, even the Bassett. All performed well. You might want to call a neutral, unbiased, gunsmith and get their opinion. We can direct you to quite a few.

Tony.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
The click value is really personal preference. Perhaps go with more bang for buck. If you aren't shooting for score, 1/4 clicks may not benefit you. Most shooters can't exploit that kind of fine tune accuracy.

Sadlak, SEI and Fulton all copied and modified the Brookfield mount. Brookfield, I believe, worked with and helped Sadlak develop their scope mount. At least I seem to recall that being said by one of the Sadlak reps that frequents this board.

All the mounts, with the exception of maybe the Fulton, in this topic have been tested by the military, even the Bassett. All performed well. You might want to call a neutral, unbiased, gunsmith and get their opinion. We can direct you to quite a few.

Tony.
Click value doesn't really matter to me, the only reason I ask is because Smith told me 1/4 MOA click values are a significant hindrance. My main criteria for a scope are: ruggedness, holding of zero even after sustaining trauma, and having a low enough power to work close up yet enough magnification to work out to 400-500 yards.

Sure! If you know of anyone I could talk to, I certainly would appreciate that kind of direction! I am pretty keen on having Smith glass bed my receiver and install and sight in my scope, it's just a matter of what mount I want them to use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,912 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: tonyben

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
MOA vs. MIL is a long fought battle.

There is no real disadvantage or advantage to either one, I happen to like using MILs better, it's mostly a matter of which one you feel works best for you.

Good explanation on the differences between the two
http://precisionrifleblog.com/2013/07/20/mil-vs-moa-an-objective-comparison/
It's not a question of units, it's click value. The owner at Smith told me 1/4 MOA was too small of a click value for rapid scope adjustment. Honestly I don't know any better myself. I just really like the Nightforce because it's rugged as hell, goes down to 2.5x and has a zero stop. Smith really tried to push Leupold but they just don't appeal to me since the Mark IV has a minimum power of 4x.

I told Fulton to forget about the mount. I've heard the best things about the Sadlak. Makes sense though, Fulton's game is building rifles, and Sadlak's is mounts.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,363 Posts
Click value doesn't really matter to me, the only reason I ask is because Smith told me 1/4 MOA click values are a significant hindrance. My main criteria for a scope are: ruggedness, holding of zero even after sustaining trauma, and having a low enough power to work close up yet enough magnification to work out to 400-500 yards.

Sure! If you know of anyone I could talk to, I certainly would appreciate that kind of direction! I am pretty keen on having Smith glass bed my receiver and install and sight in my scope, it's just a matter of what mount I want them to use.

Well, I recommend talking to Jon Wolfe, Ted Brown, Derrick Martin, Phil Arrington, Charlie Maloney, Hook Boutin or sending a PM to Art Luppino and they may be able to clear things up. Here's also a list of credible, reputable M-14 specific gunsmiths all over the US and their contact info.

http://m14forum.com/reference/54366-gunsmiths-armorers-who-work-m-14-type-rifles.html

So my understanding is that you are having a rifle built by Fulton right now, but want to send it to SEI to have it glass bedded and have a scope installed? And you live in IL?

Tony.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,119 Posts
Realistically there's not a dimes different in ANY of the Brookfield style scope mounts (Fulton, SEI, Sadlak)...... Unless brand name is a bigger concern than function buy the least expensive of the three
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,964 Posts
Is this Fulton build hypothetical or have you already given them money? Before you go headfirst down the rabbit hole let's get that cleared up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
So my understanding is that you are having a rifle built by Fulton right now, but want to send it to SEI to have it glass bedded and have a scope installed? And you live in IL?
Yes, spot on description! :)

I would have Fulton do the bedding, but they and everyone else except Smith has 6 month turnover times. Smith said they could get it all done in a week or two. I'm stuck between the Vortex PST 2.5x-10x and Nightforce NXS Compact 2.5x-10x scopes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,875 Posts
I am not sure why anyone would say that a 1/4moa Elev. and Wind. adjustment has little value UNLESS you are engaging targets at various ranges and required to get on target quickly. Approximate elevation required to go from 100yds. to 600yds. is 15 MOA for 308 and that would require 60 clicks w/ 1/4moa adjustment as opposed to 15 clicks with 1moa value elevation drum. It is most unlikely that the majority of M1A/M14 users are going to find themselves in a situation requiring such rapid sight adjustments and 1/4moa adjustments will serve you quite nicely in normal shooting situations. Just me but I don't care for optics on the M1A/M14 rifle due to mounting methods and bulky weight added to the rifle, but if going to go that route would give strong consideration to the very moderately priced SWFA fixed 10X optic. Assuming you can still purchase a Bassett, they have an excellent reputation. Be it scope or issue sights the first requirement is the shooter needs to know well his elevation "come ups" and how to read the wind for whatever sight system used is a "dumb" one and the operator has to add the "smarts" in order to hit the target. JMO
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top