I feel I already have the rifles I need, but there's the want factor. I have an SLR-95, Rem 700 ADL in .30-06 and recently an M1 Garand. But I've always had my eye on the M1A, but the price has been and still is, to a lesser degree, prohibitive.
I'm just debating, since I prefer to keep as few calibers on hand as possible, if I really "need" an M1A. I feel the scoped Remmy will do fine for hunting at range and the Garand for medium to medium-long range and the SLR-95 for short to medium ranges. However, since qualifying Expert with the M-14 in the Navy in 1992 I have been coveting one since. I'm just trying to justify the expense since I already have all the proverbial bases covered.
If I were to go with the M1A, should I scope it? I have been thinking about the long-eye relief scope for it, maybe a fixed 4X if it's possible with the Standard M1A. What do you guys and gals think?
I'm just debating, since I prefer to keep as few calibers on hand as possible, if I really "need" an M1A. I feel the scoped Remmy will do fine for hunting at range and the Garand for medium to medium-long range and the SLR-95 for short to medium ranges. However, since qualifying Expert with the M-14 in the Navy in 1992 I have been coveting one since. I'm just trying to justify the expense since I already have all the proverbial bases covered.
If I were to go with the M1A, should I scope it? I have been thinking about the long-eye relief scope for it, maybe a fixed 4X if it's possible with the Standard M1A. What do you guys and gals think?