What Scope Mount For M1a

[norbs007]

Trying to justify purchasing a new mount for my M1A. I want to install a Simmons Pro Diamond on my rifle and tried it on a Springfield Armory 3rd Generation mount. I find it too high and requires more of a chin weld. I'm looking at a Sadlak or a Smith Enterprise rail but want to get information before hurting my pocket. For those who had first hand experience with these mounts, which one is low enough to allow a cheek weld? Is it worth the money, or is there an alternative? I don't know if a cheek piece on the buttstock is a good idea, but will consider if its the only way.

Thanks in advance.

[Scooter]

All the mounts will be too high for a cheek weld. The problem is you can only go as low as the height of the rear iron sight unless you remove it. I'm using an ARMS mount with extra high rings and that barely clears the rear sight. I have a custom stock with an adjustable cheek piece that is raised about 1" to get a good cheek weld.

You will need a raised comb if you want to use a scope on a M1A.

[Airedale]

Scooter's right on the money. The ARMS 18 is the ticket. I believe about the best deal is from Frank Sottle. You can find him on Warrifles forum. You can also leave the ARMS in place for iron sights matches.

You can buy used USGI fiberglass stocks from Numrich for ~$20. Then you buy the Bondo and the ultra flat rattle can camo Krylon paint from Walmart. Build the comb up to the height you want and viola! custom stock!

You can buy a thing that straps on to raise the comb, it's no trouble and works fine so, therefore, no fun.

Have fun,

Dave

[Huck]

Ditto on the arms 18, I use Leo medium QD rings, Easiest good cheek weld is Electric tape and some 3/4 inch flexible tubing, like hose pipe. Looks kinda cool in a wartime sort of way.

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

Ditto on the arms 18,  I use Leo medium QD rings,  Easiest good cheek weld is Electric tape and some 3/4 inch flexible tubing, like hose pipe.  Looks kinda cool in a wartime sort of way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would really like to see a pic of that rig

Regards,

[Huck]

I don't know how to post pics, send me an e-mail or tell me how to post a pic and you can see it.

[norbs007]

Thank you much for your replies, I will be checking out your suggestions. Especially Airedale's tip on the stock.

Scooter, what custom stock did you use? So, I guess everyone agrees that the 3rd Generation mount has to go.

Yeah Huck, show us some pics. Thanks

[Scooter]

Here's my gun.

Simmons 1.5-5x20 scope, ARMS #18 mount, Burris Signature rings. The rings are extra high, but the scope only clears the rear sight by about 1/16".

Personally if I was to do it again, I would go with a Smith mount. The ARMS mount really doesn't work with newer SA receivers. I had to remove metal from the mount in two places just to get it centered. The scope mount is also angled down about 30 moa which is why I use the Burris rings. The Smith mount is more adjustable to accomodate the non-mil spec SA receivers.

The stock is custom made by me to my own design. It's the closest thing to a pistol grip stock that I can have in California. It is fabricated from the ground up with fiberglass, carbon fiber, kevlar, and aluminum. The hand guard is all carbon fiber which serves no purpose what so ever. It looks kind of funny in the picture because the gel coat is tinted blue. Most people just take a GI synthetic stock and modify it. Much easier than building it from the ground up.

[Huck]

SA M1a, arms 18 (old style), Leo Med QD rings, IOR 1.1x4, Field expedient cheekpeice. We were shooting 600 yard steel with scope on and off and I can honestly say it was no challenge, what a gun! I had to re-tape her for the pic because we finished out with the irons. The great thing about this setup is all you need is a pocket knife and tape to raise and lower the comb.

[Huck]

Nothing makes a gun look tough like strawberry shortcake laying in utter defeat under it.

[norbs007]

Very nice pictures guys, I can't wait to finish mine. Learning a lot just by looking at your setup. So, since I have a SA receiver, am I better off with a Smith mount? Already got a quote from Frank Sottile for an ARMS #18 and was going to order standard height rings, good thing you guys mentioned that it should be medium.

Does it require a lot of modification on the ARMS mount to fit my SA? It's a lot cheaper than the Smith mount.

Lastly, how do you guys do in 3-gun matches with your M1As? Especially in hoser stages.

[Huck]

The arms 18 will fit with no mods. It is truly the standard by which all others are judged. The Leo medium rings fit well with a Super sniper and the IOR. I can't tell you much about other scopes. I have yet to use my M1A in a 3 gun match but it will happen soon. I personally can't see much difference between the ar and the M1a in my hands except at the "non aiming" distance, just because of the ar's faster splits. If both are iron sighted I feel that M1a has the advantage because of the stock design and the superior sights and sight radius, except at the "no aim" ranges.

[Scooter]

A lot of people are having problems with the Arms mount and Springfield recievers. It's not Arms fault. Arms makes the mount to fit a USGI milspec receiver. Springfield receivers are not milspec.

So far there's a couple common problems a lot of people have been having. The new mounts have a full rail while the old ones have 2 short rails. Some people are having jams because of the full rail. On the front of the mount, there is a rib that will hit the side of the receiver preventing you from fully installing it. The rib will have to be ground off. The slot on the receiver is sometimes too wide to prevent the mount from seating all the way. The stripper clip guide can also be a little off causing the mount to cant downward. Do a search at http://www.battlerifles.com and http://www.m-14forum.com You should find quite a discussion on Arms mount and SA receivers.

I have the older 2 piece rail. I did have to grind the front to fit the receiver. I also ground part of the rear. Originally the mount was angle off to the side, about 3 feet at 100 yards. It's also has about 30 moa of cant. It took a while to get it to point straight ahead, but it still has the 30 moa of cant that I've corrected with the Burris rings.

Like I said, I would go with the Smith mount if I was to do it again. While the Arms sits the lowest, it is so low that you have to use pretty high rings to get the scope to clear the rear sight. Smith rail is higher, but you just have to use shorter rings. Smith does allow you to use the iron sights. The Arms require the scope/rings to be removed in order to use the iron sights.

My gun is really heavy, it's a loaded model and my stock is on the heavier side. I also shoot mexican match with Sierra 110 gr. HP. I don't lose much time close up. Long distance works well too since you will knock down the plates or poppers with authority. 223 tends to just nudge the plate and require spotters to call out the hits for you. What hurts is when you shoot paper from about 30 yards and out. You can't shoot as fast as an AR.