M1A SOCOM: need to replace rail? what type of scope?

[breakingcontact]

I've read that the rail isn't picatinny? What is it then? Does it need replaced for decent mounting options?

The other question I have is what type of optic to put on it?

This is my longest range gun (I know it's not a long range gun, yes I know the M1A Scout is a better "all around gun"). So I really don't want to do the easiest and cheapest thing and toss a red dot on and call it good. So basically I'm looking at scout scopes vs traditional scopes.

The downside I can see to the scout scope is that I'm not used to using that type of scope.

The downside to traditional scope is I'm going to have to buy a relatively expensive mount to mount it and get a cheek riser as well.

I don't need huge magnification. I'm really looking at 1-4x or 1-6x scopes.

What's been your experience?

thanks!

 

[desidog]

The rail should be 1913 spec if it isn't out of spec.... the issue with them is they are made of aluminum, and the barrel they clamp on is steel.

M1A's weren't designed for a scope; and from your statement i'd say you don't need one.... Try out the irons first, and then if you're unsatisfied maybe take a look at a good red dot..

 

[breakingcontact]

The rail should be 1913 spec if it isn't out of spec.... the issue with them is they are made of aluminum, and the barrel they clamp on is steel.

M1A's weren't designed for a scope; and from your statement i'd say you don't need one.... Try out the irons first, and then if you're unsatisfied maybe take a look at a good red dot..

I am considering doing that. I am a decent iron sights shooter. I know this has a big fat front sight and I really don't want to switch that out.

I have considered just going with the red dot as I consider a red dot a 200 not 100 yard optic.

Thanks for the info on the rail. So are the aftermarket rails I see steal?

 

[henschman]

Sounds like a scout scope would be pretty close to what you're looking for. The only ones I would recommend are the Burris 2.5x, and the Leupold 2.25x. No, that's not much magnification, but they have good clear glass (which is a lot better than having higher magnification with crappy Chinese glass) and they match the capabilities of the rifle well. You really don't want much more magnification than that to use a scout scope the way it was meant to be used. They don't have too bad of a learning curve -- the trick is getting used to using them with both eyes open, which allows for very quick target acquisition and tracking once you get it down. Don't sweat the accuracy either... some people knock the SOCOM and say it is the least accurate of the M-14 variants, but I bet it's more accurate than most of the people who say that if they would get off the bench and shoot like a man. I've never seen one that couldn't at least do 4 MOA, which is good enough for hits on a dude's torso out to 500 yards if you know what you're doing. Did I mention you should take that rifle to an Appleseed shoot? www.appleseedinfo.org

 

[breakingcontact]

Sounds like a scout scope would be pretty close to what you're looking for. The only ones I would recommend are the Burris 2.5x, and the Leupold 2.25x. No, that's not much magnification, but they have good clear glass (which is a lot better than having higher magnification with crappy Chinese glass) and they match the capabilities of the rifle well. You really don't want much more magnification than that to use a scout scope the way it was meant to be used. They don't have too bad of a learning curve -- the trick is getting used to using them with both eyes open, which allows for very quick target acquisition and tracking once you get it down. Don't sweat the accuracy either... some people knock the SOCOM and say it is the least accurate of the M-14 variants, but I bet it's more accurate than most of the people who say that if they would get off the bench and shoot like a man. I've never seen one that couldn't at least do 4 MOA, which is good enough for hits on a dude's torso out to 500 yards if you know what you're doing. Did I mention you should take that rifle to an Appleseed shoot? www.appleseedinfo.org

I shoot enough to know not to believe much of what I read on the internet. I know it's not a wildly accurate gun and that is OK. I'm not sure at what range I'd be unable to make good hits consistently with iron sights or a red dot, but I figure the gun should be good out to somewhere between 300-500 yards.

This is going to be my main rifle. I've got all of my short range stuff covered but the more I read and consider real world uses and real world civilian tactics (not being supported by a fire team), I'm moving to 30 cal rifles with shorter barrels. I really don't have any interest in shooting at 600/700/800 yards. Not going to be hunting at those distances and if a "threat" is that far away, I'm certainly not going to have a shooting match with them. I'll keep the Nike's tied tight and beat feet!

I like the Burris suggestion. I see they make both a fixed and a variable. Funny you mentioned Burris as that's the 1-4x I'm considering as well, the Burris MTAC, mounted traditionally.

 

[desidog]

I know this has a big fat front sight and I really don't want to switch that out.

For +/-35 bucks, I'd certainly start there before buying more expensive rails, scopes, or dots.

FWIW, getting the shortest barrel for longer range shooting doesn't add up; especially for using irons, and the noise increase will make shooting less enjoyable. If you havent bought one yet, i'd recommend the Scout over the SOCOM for your intended use. If not, i'd recommend plugs and muffs...

I've never seen one that couldn't at least do 4 MOA,

IMHO, 4MOA is a bar so low you can trip over it. Unless you're using a shot-out M91/30 with surplus ammo that was stored in a well...

 

[breakingcontact]

For +/-35 bucks, I'd certainly start there before buying more expensive rails, scopes, or dots.

FWIW, getting the shortest barrel for longer range shooting doesn't add up; especially for using irons, and the noise increase will make shooting less enjoyable. If you havent bought one yet, i'd recommend the Scout over the SOCOM for your intended use. If not, i'd recommend plugs and muffs...



IMHO, 4MOA is a bar so low you can trip over it. Unless you're using a shot-out M91/30 with surplus ammo that was stored in a well...

Hilarious. I knew I would get these comments. "Buy a Scout instead". Unreal.

Yes the Scout is very cool and all but that's not what im talking about here. Im not asking for advice on turning this into a 1000 yard gun.

 

[Welding Rod]

IMO the scope scope really fouls up the balance of the SOCOM 16. I put the Leupold one on mine and didn't like it at all. I also tried an Aimpoint T-1 which I liked a lot better... it was lighter and lower so the cheek weld wasn't as badly affected. I don't like a scope on an M1A or M1 as they put the line of sight way beyond what the stock was designed for.

I spent a fair bit of money trying to come up with a combo that I liked and finally gave, sold the gun, and resigned myself to using irons on a Standard model, which I like very much.

4 MOA was about what my SOCOM shot.... Gold Medal Match, handloads with match bullets, shimming the gas cylinder, didn't seem to matter. Before I sold the gun I noticed the crown was cut well off center... probably had something to do with it.

 

[breakingcontact]

IMO the scope scope really fouls up the balance of the SOCOM 16. I put the Leupold one on mine and didn't like it at all. I also tried an Aimpoint T-1 which I liked a lot better... it was lighter and lower so the cheek weld wasn't as badly affected. I don't like a scope on an M1A or M1 as they put the line of sight way beyond what the stock was designed for.

I spent a fair bit of money trying to come up with a combo that I liked and finally gave, sold the gun, and resigned myself to using irons on a Standard model, which I like very much.

4 MOA was about what my SOCOM shot.... Gold Medal Match, handloads with match bullets, shimming the gas cylinder, didn't seem to matter. Before I sold the gun I noticed the crown was cut well off center... probably had something to do with it.

Certainly valid points. I do understand this is why so many are warming up to the AR platform. It just makes life easier.

4" grouping? That isn't great. I know a guy who calls his a 1-2" gun. Exaggerating or perhaps the accuracy varies widely.

Since I am wanting to get out to 300/400 yards (and be able to see the target) im going to need some sort of glass although I get that the red dot suites this gun well. I haven't handled the gun with any optic mounted (fore or aft) but do like the balance of the gun bare.

 

[Welding Rod]

Yes 4 MOA is pretty dismal with glass and match ammo. My Standard and Loaded both will shoot less than half that. I tried other stocks too... 2 or 3 walnut stocks, the stock bed liner'd GI fiberglass stock, a very nice second GI fiberglass stock, and even a current production plastic stock. No luck.

I would recommend checking the crown right off if your accuracy is poor. That is likely what I should have done.

 

[henschman]

Yeah, I have the Burris TAC30 (same glass as the MTAC), and it is a great scope. Good enough for me to buy two of them. It's glass is as good as the Vortex Viper 1-4s IMO. Not bad for a sub $300 scope. The reticle matches 147 grain 7.62x51 almost perfectly out of my 18" barreled .308 AR. I used to have one on a Standard M1A on an ARMS #18 mount, and it was pretty nice too. Like I said, their 2.5x Scout scopes are good to go as well.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Regarding the Springfield Socom/Scout rail not meeting the 1913 spec: this issue is the slot spacing. Picatinny rails have the slots at regular intervals. The Springfield rail has the slots at irregular intervals. Otherwise, the rail meets the 1913 spec and Picatinny rings will fit it just fine.

 

[AK103K]

I had a SOCOM back when they first showed up. The rail on mine was definetly not Picatinny/milspec, even though Springfield swore it was when I called them. I would say its more like a Weaver rail.

None of my lever mounts or lever rings fit it properly. My LaRue mounts woudnt go on at all, as they have two recoil blocks, and the spacing wasnt right. The other mounts have one recoil block, and would go on (sort of) but would never get/stay tight.

If you want a scope on the factory rail, if you use something like ARMS individual lever rings, you can set it up so they wont move under recoil, and it works reasonably well, when removed and replaced. You just need to mount the rings on the rail, so they are against the recoil blocks, fore and aft, "then" mount the scope on the rings. That way, there is no play.

I've used both Leupold and Burris Scout scopes on a couple of rifles, and preferred the Leupold. The scope works OK on the SOCOM, but I didnt find it worked as well as a good red dot, which is what would be my choice. The problem with the SOCOM's rail is, it sits to high, and while the red dot is still within the usable height range, it is higher than I liked, and I couldnt get a good cheek weld on the stock when shooting with it. It was more like a chin weld. You also wont get any cowitness with the irons.

I found the SOCOM's irons pretty much sucked. That front sight is way to big, for anything beyond 50-75 yards. All it does, is limit the guns useful range. I would replace the irons with a set of standard sights for the Bush/Scout. At least that way, you can use it at longer ranges.

One thing to keep in mind with the irons too, as the barrel gets shorter, the "click" settings change considerably. My standard M1A's 100 yard setting was around 8 clicks. My Bush rifles was 14 clicks, and my SOCOM's was 22.

The rail should be 1913 spec if it isn't out of spec.... the issue with them is they are made of aluminum, and the barrel they clamp on is steel.

Mine was steel. Which I always felt was a poor choice, as it got VERY hot, VERY fast, and stayed hot a long time. Aluminium is the way to go, as it quickly sheds the heat.

Personally, if I were to buy another M1A, I would would get an Ultimak rail for it. I have had them on a couple of AK's for over a decade, and they have been great. They are built to correct specs too, and any of the better mounts Ive tried on them, worked flawlessly.

 

[breakingcontact]

I had a SOCOM back when they first showed up. The rail on mine was definetly not Picatinny/milspec, even though Springfield swore it was when I called them. I would say its more like a Weaver rail.

None of my lever mounts or lever rings fit it properly. My LaRue mounts woudnt go on at all, as they have two recoil blocks, and the spacing wasnt right. The other mounts have one recoil block, and would go on (sort of) but would never get/stay tight.

If you want a scope on the factory rail, if you use something like ARMS individual lever rings, you can set it up so they wont move under recoil, and it works reasonably well, when removed and replaced. You just need to mount the rings on the rail, so they are against the recoil blocks, fore and aft, "then" mount the scope on the rings. That way, there is no play.

I've used both Leupold and Burris Scout scopes on a couple of rifles, and preferred the Leupold. The scope works OK on the SOCOM, but I didnt find it worked as well as a good red dot, which is what would be my choice. The problem with the SOCOM's rail is, it sits to high, and while the red dot is still within the usable height range, it is higher than I liked, and I couldnt get a good cheek weld on the stock when shooting with it. It was more like a chin weld. You also wont get any cowitness with the irons.

I found the SOCOM's irons pretty much sucked. That front sight is way to big, for anything beyond 50-75 yards. All it does, is limit the guns useful range. I would replace the irons with a set of standard sights for the Bush/Scout. At least that way, you can use it at longer ranges.

One thing to keep in mind with the irons too, as the barrel gets shorter, the "click" settings change considerably. My standard M1A's 100 yard setting was around 8 clicks. My Bush rifles was 14 clicks, and my SOCOM's was 22.



Mine was steel. Which I always felt was a poor choice, as it got VERY hot, VERY fast, and stayed hot a long time. Aluminium is the way to go, as it quickly sheds the heat.

Personally, if I were to buy another M1A, I would would get an Ultimak rail for it. I have had them on a couple of AK's for over a decade, and they have been great. They are built to correct specs too, and any of the better mounts Ive tried on them, worked flawlessly.

Im getting this gun on trade soon. I wont back out of the deal but I see why some dont like the SOCOM.

Looks like ill need to replace the brake with a flash hider and either replace the stock rail or get a scope mount for the receiver.

I really hate to spend $500 plus optic to set up the gun properly. Ridiculous. Im coming out on this trade surprisingly well so I should be able to sell/trade if I decide I dont want to do all of these mods.

I might just trade it for an AK plus some cash!

 

[AK103K]

I might just trade it for an AK plus some cash!

Personally, Id take that deal.

Over the years, Springfield really started to slip, and these days, I wouldnt buy anything of theirs, unless I could shoot and play with it first, rifle or pistol. Their late 80's, early 90's guns are totally different critters to what they offer today.

Ive had M1A's in all three sizes, and the last (and worst) being the SOCOM. If for some reason I were to get another, it would be an "early" standard rifle. The shorter guns just give up, more than they give, and about all they do offer, is just a slightly shorter gun. They all weigh and handle about the same.

 

[breakingcontact]

Personally, Id take that deal.

Over the years, Springfield really started to slip, and these days, I wouldnt buy anything of theirs, unless I could shoot and play with it first, rifle or pistol. Their late 80's, early 90's guns are totally different critters to what they offer today.

Ive had M1A's in all three sizes, and the last (and worst) being the SOCOM. If for some reason I were to get another, it would be an "early" standard rifle. The shorter guns just give up, more than they give, and about all they do offer, is just a slightly shorter gun. They all weigh and handle about the same.

Well I do like how the SOCOM handles and I dont mind giving up range. I suppose I could add a red dot, flash hider and riser if necessary and call it good. I just hate having to put so much money into guns. But I did the same with my M&P pistols. I feel like guns are made for the average buyer to just blast away with then they put it in the closet for years. Its like they are built for people who want to really use them. My M&Ps all have Apex parts so maybe I just need to accept ill have to put $ into each gun. Sort of like add-in a Tapco G2 trigger to an AK.

 

[AK103K]

Well I do like how the SOCOM handles and I dont mind giving up range.

If youre willing to give up the range (and really, how many "realistically" shoot past 300 yards anyway?), the AK's or AR's, just make more sense to me. Lighter, better handling, easier shooting, more easily adapted to alternative sighting systems, and offer a higher capacity. Whats not to like.



Except usually for sights, I try to leave them all as close to stock as I can. Much, if not most, of the aftermarket stuff is gimmicky, questionable in quality, and of little benefit. I guess the only way to figure that out though, is to live and learn. We've all been there at some point.

I sure do wish I had back some of that money I spent on some of that stuff before I realized what was up.

 

[breakingcontact]

If youre willing to give up the range (and really, how many "realistically" shoot past 300 yards anyway?), the AK's or AR's, just make more sense to me. Lighter, better handling, easier shooting, more easily adapted to alternative sighting systems, and offer a higher capacity. Whats not to like.



Except usually for sights, I try to leave them all as close to stock as I can. Much, if not most, of the aftermarket stuff is gimmicky, questionable in quality, and of little benefit. I guess the only way to figure that out though, is to live and learn. We've all been there at some point.

I sure do wish I had back some of that money I spent on some of that stuff before I realized what was up.

Well I have learned what makes a gun easy to shoot well. It is the fundamentals first but better triggers and sights do help make it easier.

I can shoot out to 1000 yards at my range but im not interested in the long range game.

So to me the SOCOM is very heavy hitting inside of 500 yards and has much more energy than the 556/762x39 out of a short barrel and still has good energy past 200 yards.

I know what it is. I just need to make sure i dont try to make it into something it isn't.

 

[desidog]

What's been your experience?

Hilarious. I knew I would get these comments. "Buy a Scout instead". Unreal.

Hilarious? You asked.

 

[breakingcontact]

Hilarious? You asked.

I asked regarding the SOCOM. You answered a question I didn't ask. Enjoy your Scout.

 

[AK103K]

I know what it is. I just need to make sure i dont try to make it into something it isn't.

That can often be the problem with many things.

As with any of them, I think thats where the simplistic and quality mentality comes in, although simple doesnt always equate to cheap.

The only way to know whats what, is take it out and shoot the snot out of it the way you expect to use it, and see what you think.

 

[johnnydollar]

I bought my SOCOM knowing what it did well. It is a compact battle rifle that packs a serious punch at close range. The sights it comes with are fine for my purposes. I didn't buy it to shoot poodles with, nor did I buy it to shoot teeny groups at long range. I bought it to make big holes, quickly, at close range. Within those parameters, I can't imagine a better rifle.

 

[LemmyCaution]

I bought it to make big holes, quickly, at close range.

There it is.

 

[Welding Rod]

i bought my socom knowing what it did well. It is a compact battle rifle that packs a serious punch at close range. The sights it comes with are fine for my purposes. I didn't buy it to shoot poodles with, nor did i buy it to shoot teeny groups at long range. I bought it to make big holes, quickly, at close range. Within those parameters, i can't imagine a better rifle.

m&p 10?

 

[breakingcontact]

Just watched Nutnfancy and Hickok45 shoot the SOCOM. Im back on board! Down to ride!