Haven't been on here much for a while and am looking for some info from the guys in the know. How does the quality of a new Springfield M1A compare with one built from the 1990's,and are they on par in the reliability category as well? Thanks, Sam
New Springfield M1A quality
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Joined
·
363 Posts
You should search this on the forum..Lots of posts.
Joined
·
17,237 Posts
SAI makes about 10K rifles a year, in addition to 1911's, XD's and now AR's. Sometimes a bad one slips thru the cracks. Not all of the parts today are made in the US. Some are made in the ROK or Taiwan.
Since 2005, SAI has been sourcing their products from the same manufactures. Fit and form consistency is very good. Prior to that, they sourced their parts from wherever they could get them. They used USGI parts when available, but such parts came from dozens of different manufactures and fit and form were not always consistent.
Most 1990's rifles are exceptional, but there are also those that were made on a Monday morning or Friday afternoon. Each of these has to be judged on it's own merit.
Since 2005, SAI has been sourcing their products from the same manufactures. Fit and form consistency is very good. Prior to that, they sourced their parts from wherever they could get them. They used USGI parts when available, but such parts came from dozens of different manufactures and fit and form were not always consistent.
Most 1990's rifles are exceptional, but there are also those that were made on a Monday morning or Friday afternoon. Each of these has to be judged on it's own merit.
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
That is a highly subjective question, and if you ask that question to 3 different people you are going to get at least 4 different opinions. Some folks will always pooh-pooh SAI rifles, some will always praise them as a good value. The only difference is that typically the older rifles have more USGI parts, as the supply of affordable USGI parts became sporadic in the early 2000s and sort-of dried up about 10 or more years ago, and SAI has sourced various newly produced parts over time. (As noted in the above post).
Regardless, SAI offers a lifetime warranty on their M1As, so from an ownership perspective, you don't have any financial risk either way...(regardless of whether the "quality" has gone up, gone down, or simply stayed the same).
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
Like Basenjishunt said you'll find a mountain of posts on this. Don't own a SA for no reason other than just don't have one as my first was and remains a rock solid, and accurate, FA complete build (my first) with the rest off LRB receivers using all USGI parts (except for Sadlack guides, pistons, mag releases) I got mostly from guys here in the PX where the integrity of our members is second to NONE and carefully through GB off a few vendors I've gotten to know picking/haggling over the past several years. KEEP in mind as you read reviews here the larger quantities SA has and does manufacture vs. others so you can probably take it that the mean or avg. paints the an accurate assessment. And the SA warranty can't be beat. Past this there is at least 1 nice SA in the PX right now. Often these are early builds S/N's. I'd like one eventually when I have the bone for one here out of the PX.
Wags just put up a Glen Nelson at a double take price I never saw for a GN let alone this condition. You can look high/low and not find a GN in this cond. priced like it is.
Wags just put up a Glen Nelson at a double take price I never saw for a GN let alone this condition. You can look high/low and not find a GN in this cond. priced like it is.
Joined
·
1,712 Posts
Also remember that people don't post when they're satisfied with a product, but they do when they're not. And then it gets reposted and retold and soon people are questioning the overall quality of the product.
Thanks for all your advice and input. I have been reading a lot of different posts and threads already and had pretty much came to realize the same things you fellas said. My reason for the question is I have a Springfield M1A Supermatch that I've had since about 1995. It sits in the safe and does not get shot,it is I guess as one would say,a safe queen.Last time I had it out of the safe for some range time was at least ten years ago,therefore, I have been giving serious thought to selling it and just getting me a standard grade M1A as I think that would be better suited for my needs,just something to plink and play with.My first M1A was a standard grade built in the late 1980's it shot just fine for my tastes but it was stolen along with a lot of my other guns years ago before I had a safe. Again though,I appreciate the advice you fellas gave. Thanks, Sam
I have not been around older M1A's, so I can't really address your question directly. I will say I recently got a new M1A loaded walnut. I couldn't be happier with it. It beat my expectations, far and away. Everything fits great and it works beautifully.
I've had the same experience with a Standard M1A. No complaints at all. I'm very pleased with it.
Recent SAI rifles have really really outstanding accuracy, even in short barreled versions. They achieve results with their production line grade rifles that the USArmy Marksmanshlp Unit, of years ago, could barely reach with unlimited resources. Who can argue with that level of quality.
Joined
·
99 Posts
In my limited experiences with two older 90's M1A's and now my three newer M1A's, the current-production guns DO have the capacity for excellent accuracy. The barrels are outstanding, but who knows for how long? I have shot several very consistent three- and five- shot groups at 50 yards that are less than 0.4", and 100-yard groups that are well under 1", out of both my new National Match AND shockingly, my 2016-production Socom!!! Using a good scope, of course! The Socom was such a hopeless mess out of the box with 7+" groups at 100 yards in its plastic stock, and a very sloppy op rod, and I nearly freaked out and sold it. But after I took a big gamble with a heavy Boyds walnut stock and proper fitment and shimming I learned off this website (thanks Tony Ben and others!!!!), the Socom's barrel is now really able to show its stuff, at least at these shorter ranges. It isn't even bedded into the wood stock! So the accuracy is there to be had from the newer barrels/actions.
HOWEVER, what I didn't like about these three newer guns is the sloppier op rod fitment, the softer trigger and bolt parts, and I have no way of knowing how DURABLE any of the primary contact parts are or how LONG they will last, or how strong and hard the metal is, such as the bolt, op rod, barrel, etc. Because of that, I have remedied most of these things in all three of my newer guns, with USGI NOS parts just for the critical stuff (bolt guts, trigger group parts, op rods). The newer SAI guns also respond really well to aftermarket "upgrades" such as Sadlak spring guides and gas pistons, and their gas systems seem to work well. I shoot my guns, plenty, and they will not ride the safe, so I needed to know I had at least standard minimum acceptable durability in these key components.
I wish someone with years of M1A smithing experience on USGI and now newer commercial guns, would post some empirical, quantifiable data on the comparative longevity of USGI vs current-production SAI op rods, barrels, bolts, hammers.....
I liken the USGI vs commercial SAI M1A debate, to some degree, to the Remington "take-over" of the Marlin leverguns, somewhere around 2009.
The newer leverguns made by Remington (haters call them "Remlins") do NOT have the same properly-hardened parts such as the receivers and the actuating levers, and are not properly fitted/assembled like the Marlins were in their golden years. So these softer, cheaper parts have short lives, problematic function and bad wear....but on the other hand, Remington has almost always used great, accurate barrels in their bolt guns, and frankly, the new "fake Remlin clone" leverguns now boast barrels that have better spec'ed chambers, and are often much more accurate-shooting barrels, than many of the real Marlins from their last 10 years of production, before Remington/Cerberus Group took Marlin over. As such, you now get a typically more accurate rifle/barrel/chamber, but at the cost of cheap metal finishes that corrode, cheap wood stocks that are stamped instead of cut-checkered, poor component fitment that has to be remedied for smooth cycling, and totally unknown LONGEVITY of all the above cheapness such as the receiver and cocking lever.....
This same thing has happened throughout the ENTIRE firearms industry, with Glock, Kimber, Sig Sauer, Smith & Wesson, on and on, as each company has slowly over the years ditched ALL the properly hardened tool steel USA- or European-made components (extractors, ejectors, triggers, hammers, safeties, falling/locking blocks, sears, etc etc etc) in favor of now using outsourced, cheaper, mass-produced third-world MIM cast drop-in parts, from places like India, Taiwan and China. This has happened in part because gun manufacturers, in a quest to cut corners and improve profitability, have finally realized that most folks will put less than 200 rounds a year through most guns, often much, much less, and often less than 2000 rounds in a gun's entire life. So the much cheaper, softer "designed-to-wear-out-and-fail-fast" knockoff parts are often not noticed by most "typical gun owners" that buy and collect but don't shoot......
Until someone posts their empirical knowledge, we will not know the answers to the burning questions that new SAI buyers have.....such as....
1) is a vintage TRW op rod good for 6,000 rounds before needing a re-tab, whereas a commercial SAI is good for about 2,000 before it is a peen'ed out, sloppy, out-of-spec mess? Hmmmm.....
2) is a vintage SAG or Win barrel good for 8,000 rounds of reasonable accuracy out to 600 yds, whereas a commercial SAI barrel is good for about 3,000 rounds before it starts to give up on grouping......?
3) is a vintage H&R or Winchester bolt good for 10,000 rounds, whereas a commercial SAI bolt is looking sorry after about 3,000 rounds of punishment....?
4) how fast do the hammer hooks and surfaces wear on a vintage SA, HRA or WRA hammer, versus the hammer hook wear patterns on a commercial new SAI hammer? Is it 10,000 rounds USGI vs 5,000 rounds SAI?
Inquiring minds want to know...although I suspect such info, if published on the web repeatedly, can only serve to drive the cost and scarcity of the already-dwindling USGI parts up even more and more......
HOWEVER, what I didn't like about these three newer guns is the sloppier op rod fitment, the softer trigger and bolt parts, and I have no way of knowing how DURABLE any of the primary contact parts are or how LONG they will last, or how strong and hard the metal is, such as the bolt, op rod, barrel, etc. Because of that, I have remedied most of these things in all three of my newer guns, with USGI NOS parts just for the critical stuff (bolt guts, trigger group parts, op rods). The newer SAI guns also respond really well to aftermarket "upgrades" such as Sadlak spring guides and gas pistons, and their gas systems seem to work well. I shoot my guns, plenty, and they will not ride the safe, so I needed to know I had at least standard minimum acceptable durability in these key components.
I wish someone with years of M1A smithing experience on USGI and now newer commercial guns, would post some empirical, quantifiable data on the comparative longevity of USGI vs current-production SAI op rods, barrels, bolts, hammers.....
I liken the USGI vs commercial SAI M1A debate, to some degree, to the Remington "take-over" of the Marlin leverguns, somewhere around 2009.
The newer leverguns made by Remington (haters call them "Remlins") do NOT have the same properly-hardened parts such as the receivers and the actuating levers, and are not properly fitted/assembled like the Marlins were in their golden years. So these softer, cheaper parts have short lives, problematic function and bad wear....but on the other hand, Remington has almost always used great, accurate barrels in their bolt guns, and frankly, the new "fake Remlin clone" leverguns now boast barrels that have better spec'ed chambers, and are often much more accurate-shooting barrels, than many of the real Marlins from their last 10 years of production, before Remington/Cerberus Group took Marlin over. As such, you now get a typically more accurate rifle/barrel/chamber, but at the cost of cheap metal finishes that corrode, cheap wood stocks that are stamped instead of cut-checkered, poor component fitment that has to be remedied for smooth cycling, and totally unknown LONGEVITY of all the above cheapness such as the receiver and cocking lever.....
This same thing has happened throughout the ENTIRE firearms industry, with Glock, Kimber, Sig Sauer, Smith & Wesson, on and on, as each company has slowly over the years ditched ALL the properly hardened tool steel USA- or European-made components (extractors, ejectors, triggers, hammers, safeties, falling/locking blocks, sears, etc etc etc) in favor of now using outsourced, cheaper, mass-produced third-world MIM cast drop-in parts, from places like India, Taiwan and China. This has happened in part because gun manufacturers, in a quest to cut corners and improve profitability, have finally realized that most folks will put less than 200 rounds a year through most guns, often much, much less, and often less than 2000 rounds in a gun's entire life. So the much cheaper, softer "designed-to-wear-out-and-fail-fast" knockoff parts are often not noticed by most "typical gun owners" that buy and collect but don't shoot......
Until someone posts their empirical knowledge, we will not know the answers to the burning questions that new SAI buyers have.....such as....
1) is a vintage TRW op rod good for 6,000 rounds before needing a re-tab, whereas a commercial SAI is good for about 2,000 before it is a peen'ed out, sloppy, out-of-spec mess? Hmmmm.....
2) is a vintage SAG or Win barrel good for 8,000 rounds of reasonable accuracy out to 600 yds, whereas a commercial SAI barrel is good for about 3,000 rounds before it starts to give up on grouping......?
3) is a vintage H&R or Winchester bolt good for 10,000 rounds, whereas a commercial SAI bolt is looking sorry after about 3,000 rounds of punishment....?
4) how fast do the hammer hooks and surfaces wear on a vintage SA, HRA or WRA hammer, versus the hammer hook wear patterns on a commercial new SAI hammer? Is it 10,000 rounds USGI vs 5,000 rounds SAI?
Inquiring minds want to know...although I suspect such info, if published on the web repeatedly, can only serve to drive the cost and scarcity of the already-dwindling USGI parts up even more and more......
Well said. Many just rely on the fact of a SAI Lifetime Warranty. Not knocking the warranty but if your gun sits most of its life in a safe you will never need it. GI parts were made to function in full auto mode in combat conditions and as such were designed, manufactured and tested to meet those demands. Today's SAI parts are not manufactured to meet those specs and should not be expected to meet those demands.
That's why SAI uses min, cast and off shore parts. If SAI used all new US manufactured forged parts that meet milspec we could not afford a SAI M1A.
That's why SAI uses min, cast and off shore parts. If SAI used all new US manufactured forged parts that meet milspec we could not afford a SAI M1A.
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
In theory yes, in reality, well, its a much more mixed picture...I posted the following two pics in another thread, but folks need to understand that USGI parts were not all perfect, and some critical parts made b/t 1959-1960 did not have the robust quality control of later parts after mid-1961 (over a 100,000 rifles had been produced by then...so it was kid-of too late to do anything except focus on the H&R M14s that might have suspect steel). The fact is prior to 1961, many M14 parts were made with improper heat treatment, and some critical H&R-produced parts were made of the wrong type of steel altogether.
So historically speaking, their were some catastrophic quality control issues with the original M14 program in 1959-1960, with potentially thousands of rifles made with unsuitable steel in the receiver and the bolts - and some of those bolts are likely still floating around.... For example, see page 97 of the The Last Steel Warrior:
H&R M14 receiver 73293, after testing at Fort Hood, December 1960:
..Two other H&R rifles in that testing also failed catastrophically, one where the right bolt lug sheared off, and another with a cracked lug. I will note that these were most likely being shot in the select-fire/automatic mode...but my point is the same - poor Q/C issues is one of the key reasons why the Sec of Defense McNamara pre-maturely canceled the M14 program in Jan 1963, with less than 1/3 of anticipated M14 rifle production completed. (Note: Total M14 production was 1.3M rifles out of planned production of "up to 5 million rifles." The goal was basically a one-for-one replacement of the approx 5 million M1 Garands that had been made circa 1938-1957...but the M16 rifle came along and in conjunction with all the documented M14 issues and Congressional hearings about all these problems, things changed in 1963 with McNamara's surprise announcement, but I digress...)
One correction, as noted on page 375 of The Last Steel Warrior:
Because the US gov't provided millions of dollars worth of H&R M14 manufacturing equipment to Taiwan in the late 1960s (all the necessary technical drawings/production procedures/complex milling machines/jigs/gauges, etc, etc), and I understand that some "Type 57" parts are still made by a Taiwanese state controlled entity, presumably for Springfield Inc as well as other unstated "militaries"- one could argue that if SAI obtains M1A parts from this source, they might be the equivalent of what was made here in the USA 55 years ago. However, no one knows enough about their testing and quality control program to really make an informed opinion. My guess is the US gave the state arsenal everything they needed to have a successful M14/M57 rifle production program...and thus today SAI continues to leverage this Taiwan-based production capability as the supply of US-made M14 parts became sporadic and ultimately dried up over a decade ago or so. Just an interesting fyi.
Anyhow, as I don't recall SAI ever having these type of Q/C issues that were seen in the original M14 program in the late 1950s/1960 time period. (They did have a bolt recall back in 1987 due to some improperly cast bolts, but that was almost 30 years ago). Just an little historical factoid for the inner historian in me...
On this forum there has been posted photos of two different SIA M1A rifles were the receivers split into two length wise. Also a post of a SAI bolt with sheared lugs and it was not one of there cast bolts. Things happen. As far as HRA and wrong steel used in receivers and bolts that has been well documented. 'US RIFLE M14" by R.Blake Stevens page 201 & 202. First printing 1983. As far as M14 parts made in Taiwan. Do an internet search on Wayne Machine in Taipe Taiwan. waynemachine.com.tw or do a forum search here on Wayne Machine. Wayne Machine is not the national armory of Taiwan. As far as McNamara his goal was to close Springfield Armory. McNamara came from Ford Motor Co. were he served as president before becoming Sec. of Defense.
HRA was the only manufacturer who made M1 Garands, T48s(FAL), M14s and M16s all for the US government.
HRA was the only manufacturer who made M1 Garands, T48s(FAL), M14s and M16s all for the US government.
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
Yes, I am aware of Wayne Machines and their production of parts for SAI. Here's the link for anyone interested http://waynemachine.com.tw/home.htm
Wayne Machine was apparently founded in 1979. I guess they formed a niche business to make spare parts for the Taiwanese military, and as noted above, SAI has since relied on them for several of their M1A parts after all the inexpensive M14 parts kits dried up many years ago...I read somewhere, possibly Internet speculation, that Wayne Machine likely got some M14/Type 57 production equipment from the Taiwanese state arsenal when the arsenal stopped making the Type 57 rifle in 1980. Wayne Machines website suggests 90% of their sales are now exports, and 10% is for the Taiwanese military.
Joined
·
4,390 Posts
Or maybe a SEI Receiver so I could play the Video (again).
Wayne Machine has and is making repro 1911, 03, 03A3, M16, M14, M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, 1919, and a whole host of other repro commercial and military gun parts. They have been supplying the major US gun parts sellers for over 35 years with both repro military and repro commercial parts. They made the repro M14 bipods Sarco sold the US Navy.
Joined
·
299 Posts
My standard came with a Boyds walnut stock. I saw recently some one else received a rifle without the stock liner screws.
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
