M14 Forum banner

21 - 31 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,867 Posts
I have a 1X7?, maybe 1X8? pistol scope on a scout mount on my "shooter" M1 Garand. Love it. Pretty much stays on 4X though. Works great out to at least 400 yds. with HXP or my 150 grain reloads. I like the scout scope mount with the M1 so I can reload it and it can eject clips when it's hungry again. It is a regular barrel length M1.

If I lived in a place where I could take shots past a couple hundred yards I can see the need for a more powerful scope. I don't feel the need for a big scope up close. Just my opinion/likes.

I've had a scope on my regular M1A since 1978. My eyes were really good back then. Really good. But the idea/purpose of the scope is not just to engage small targets at long range. You can see a target through the scope you can't see with your eyes alone. Not just see the target, but see details about the target. You don't just shoot it because it moves. You make sure it's something that needs to be shot.

You can see stuff with a scope in low light conditions you won't see with your eyes alone. Gotta have good optics to do that. Some scopes are worthless for that and some are amazing. One of my gripes about scope makers are only a few show light transmission values in their specs. for the scopes they sell.

Uh, wife just got up. Gotta go turn on the coffee (she's up early and one of my jobs is turning on the coffee and putting her blanket in the dryer to warm up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #22
I have a 1X7?, maybe 1X8? pistol scope on a scout mount on my "shooter" M1 Garand. Love it. Pretty much stays on 4X though. Works great out to at least 400 yds. with HXP or my 150 grain reloads. I like the scout scope mount with the M1 so I can reload it and it can eject clips when it's hungry again. It is a regular barrel length M1.

If I lived in a place where I could take shots past a couple hundred yards I can see the need for a more powerful scope. I don't feel the need for a big scope up close. Just my opinion/likes.

I've had a scope on my regular M1A since 1978. My eyes were really good back then. Really good. But the idea/purpose of the scope is not just to engage small targets at long range. You can see a target through the scope you can't see with your eyes alone. Not just see the target, but see details about the target. You don't just shoot it because it moves. You make sure it's something that needs to be shot.

You can see stuff with a scope in low light conditions you won't see with your eyes alone. Gotta have good optics to do that. Some scopes are worthless for that and some are amazing. One of my gripes about scope makers are only a few show light transmission values in their specs. for the scopes they sell.

Uh, wife just got up. Gotta go turn on the coffee (she's up early and one of my jobs is turning on the coffee and putting her blanket in the dryer to warm up.
Chivalry isn’t dead. Good man.

I too agree that they’s value in good optics. I understand that the M1 and M14 sights are excellent battle sights, and that one should train with them to develop strong fundamentals as a marksman. But let’s be real; it seems like sticking to open sights is intentionally making it harder (let’s call it avoiding enablers) for the sake of training. That’s a noble goal and a good practice, but in practical terms I don’t think I’m losing much capability in a “battle sight” when using a true 1x optic, and I gain target ID on the upper end of the zoom range (as M1As R BEST noted). On the other hand I also agree that a big ol’ moon scope is silly on an M1A. It’s usually still a 1.5moa weapon on a good day, and even on my precision rifles I don’t need that much magnification. I shoot at 1k+ quite a bit and I’m almost never using anything over 15x. That’s what’s got me thinking that 1-8 or 1-10 might be the perfect optic for the system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
attractive, it sounds like a project you might want to have TonyBen perhaps put together. He's a Bula dealer, and seems to put together a wide variety of options. Man, you got me wondering.... that get expensive
Man... that does sound attractive... and expensive. After all the trouble my M1A gave me getting it to shoot right I swore I would never get another one, but I’m feeling a funny itch like I might.

I wonder what an XM21 with an 18 standard weight barrel (maybe even in 6.5CM???) bedded into a good synthetic stock would cost to get slapped together. I’m into turnbolts, but I have no idea why to expect from a “custom” M1A.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,419 Posts
You have a point there, GarandThumb, but for a lot of us, 600 yards is a long poke especially for a Scout or SOCOM. Hunting, that's more of a "Hail Mary" shot than a sure thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,562 Posts
Sorry, I just realized i was oblivious to what you were asking...

Yes, I like the scope, very handy, relatively light for a variable power. It's not a 'True' 1x, though at 1.25x it's pretty darn close as far as it relates to getting on target quickly. A 'real' 1x magnification would be better if you're wanting to emulate a red dot operation, terms of vision similar to both eyes open viewing and integrating the scope into 'regular vision' if you're really pushing the speed gunning, though I've realized that even with 'real' 1x magnification, the actual magnification will depend on how you set the 'fast focus' eye piece, as the image will shrink as you turn it in. The particular reticle I have doesn't have particular holdover marks, but the 'Firedot SPR' is based on milliradians, such that the hash marks are at 2.5 mil increments at full power, and the circle spans 10 mils, which makes distance estimation less of a mathematical burden (estimate the distance of that span, and multiply it by 100). It is second focal plane, so if you're relying on the reticle to measure anything, make sure it's dialed all the way up.


There was a closeout when I finally decided to try one. Art had endorsed it for a lower power handy scope. I got one from Midway, it had a problem with a seal, and I sent it back for exchange, and then they ran out, and I had to find one and ended up paying more than the closeout price, but I'm still happy I bought it.

If you can still find them, I think it's worth grabbing (IMO) or at least consideration. Leupold doesn't make this particular model anymore, unfortunately, but they have some other offers with lots of overlap. Made in USA with a lifetime warranty, glass looks nice, and once I got one that wasn't defective, seems to be fine in terms of build quality. I don't think it's hands down better than anything else in the price range that everybody should want, but I'm happy with it, and it's a keeper for me.

Man... that does sound attractive... and expensive. After all the trouble my M1A gave me getting it to shoot right I swore I would never get another one, but I’m feeling a funny itch like I might.

I wonder what an XM21 with an 18 standard weight barrel (maybe even in 6.5CM???) bedded into a good synthetic stock would cost to get slapped together. I’m into turnbolts, but I have no idea why to expect from a “custom” M1A.
Sorry again, I misinterpreted what you were asking. But, the answer to that is really a TonyBen question, and he could give you the best answer if you guys have a conversation with details of priorities. A custom rifle doesn't have to be outrageously expensive.

In terms of bang for the buck for what you want, it's hard to beat an SAI standard cofiguration, either with a walnut stock, or get the cheapie synthetic and toss it into a surplus decent condition USGI walnut, birch, or fiberglass. Put a scope mount on it, have somebody do a trigger job, and done. The cost of the completed rifle will be less than the cost of parts.

On the other hand, for what they're doing, the cost of assembly by an experience builder like TonyBen or Ted Brown (who may also have access to Bula receivers, or you can send him one) or the Wolfe Crew, is actually pretty reasonable, and the up side is you're paying for what you want, not for most of what you want with the task of modifying it later down the road. I sure like the idea of a lightweight-oriented XM-21, lean and mean, though you can also just remove the sights on a more standard configuration if you're not going to use them, and use a Sadlak aluminum scope mount which they claim only weighs 4 ounces, and has proven itself for at least a couple forum members who don't regularly drop their rifles on their scopes as reliable, so, would that be practical and cost effective? I don't know. If you do reach out to TonyBen to discuss, let us know. I would suggest making the effort, because he has proven himself creative, and between deals you might find on the PX, and items that show up on sale time to time, you might be able to pull together something pretty tricked out for a price you can live with. Plus, the process is fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #26 (Edited)
You have a point there, GarandThumb, but for a lot of us, 600 yards is a long poke especially for a Scout or SOCOM. Hunting, that's more of a "Hail Mary" shot than a sure thing.
Yes it is, especially with a .308. I should state that I don’t actually HUNT at those distances. I shoot long range because it’s fun to, and to work on my marksmanship. If I’m hunting, I prefer to actually hunt. If a fella sees an animal at 600-1000 yards and can’t close at least half of that distance somehow, then they must be wearing bells on their shoes (at least in Northern CA).

At least if I practice to 600-800, then by the time I’ve closed the gap down to 250 it feels like a chip shot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
Sorry, I just realized i was oblivious to what you were asking...

Yes, I like the scope, very handy, relatively light for a variable power.
Haha. Sorry. I wasn’t clear; I WAS actually asking about the rifle. Actually I was asking what you thought about the combo of short(er) M1a and LPVO. Nice write up on the scope though😉

In fact, I too had a Leupold 1.25-4 Vx-R patrol. I ran it on a AR308 and then an AR15 for a few years before I sold it. Not a bad optic, especially for what you pay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #28
If you do reach out to TonyBen to discuss, let us know. I would suggest making the effort, because he has proven himself creative,
Absolutely I will. In fact, based on what I’ve learned from my last M1A, I probably wouldn’t make any move on a new one without asking an expert (like TonyBen), if not the whole forum. I’m not above some Bubba gunsmithing here and there, but for the M1A I’d rather just punt to a professional.

My rifle wants change quickly, and only my most persistent ideas get any follow through. Good thing too, because otherwise I’d be broke 😂. If I’m still kicking this idea around in a month or two I’ll make a move.
 

·
Registered
Extensive M1 Carbine and Rifle collections with current focus on standardized Army rifled arms
Joined
·
61 Posts
I have a Bula carbine with the scope base on the receiver. It allows a Swarovski 1.5 just above the iron sights, which remain useable. Accuracy is entirely acceptable for a carbine... surprisingly so, but it's no match rifle. About 2 MOA which is fine for most uses.

I have another Bula to which I've attached a slightly modified SA rail and handguard and a low-power Leupold. It's much better than an M1C or D because the optic is over the center of the rifle and cheek weld isn't a problem. The scope is low magnification but extremely fast and great light transmission. It's entirely satisfactory as a hunting rifle.

Neither rifle needs a cheekpiece added. They're much more convenient than sticking a big variable power scope on the rifle. I've got a couple of good scope mounts for larger scopes and suppose I'll fix one to a rifle someday but it's low priority. I'm not trying to make the rifles target guns and am entirely content with good hits on tin cans and the 10 ring at 200 yards.

Haven't weighed em but don't notice any inconvenience... probably an added 1 to 1.5 lb per rifle. Getting in and out of a car or rifle case is easy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,562 Posts
Oh man, always the big issues in life... red dot or LPVO..." to be or not to be, that's the question..."
I myself into the dillemma right now.
I think it really comes down to a question of, taking into consideration how well your eyes work by themselves, how well do you want to be able to shoot at distance with any precision, versus how quickly do you want to get on target and bang at close distance. For busting pop cans or whatever else in the yard ASAP at distances I can throw a rock, a red dot is great. Beyond effective arrow slinging distance, I can't even see the can without some kind of focusing/magnification help, so a scope it is.

I think I only keep a red dot on my lightest rifles, one m14 type, and a bastardized sks, and I love it for what it is, and for any practical use within dense woods, it's probably more than accurate enough, and quick and easy, and works well when it's dim.

OTOH, even a low-powered scope gathers enough light into my eyeball so that when it gets dark, I can see better through the scope.
 
21 - 31 of 31 Posts
Top