Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Scoping an M1A

I've recently been working on one of those "long running"
projects, the ones that should be simple, but just keep
on dragging along.

My goal had been to scope my Springfield M1A. I picked
up an ARMS 18 mount and ARMS #5 rings. Mounted it
with my Leupold M3 scope, had a friend boresight, and took it
out to the range. At 25 yards, using all the scope's travel,
I was able to get the groups so they were "only" 1 inch
above point of aim. At 100 yards, it was more like 6 inches high.

Took it home, picked up a laser boresight. (Neat toy) Spent
an evening removing and replacing the mount multiple times.
Tried shimming the front of the mount, and even the front ring.
Results were pretty consistently as slightly high at the end of
all scope travel.

Seems to me that the problem could be whether the receiver is
true, whether the mount is true and correctly placed, the scope
and, of course, operator head spacing error.

If I conclude its the operator in error, that's easily remedied
with a trip to a professional gunsmith. But first I would like to
check the other elements.

The scope seems fine although I have not verified it on another
rifle. The mount and rings seem okay. It seems to me that the
combination of mount and reciever may be the most likely
culprit. A friend suggested checking out Sadlak Industries.

Any suggestions or thoughts on either the problem or Sadlak?

Thanks,

Chuck

Shim the rear mount, not the front one.
This should bring it down.
Good Luck, Rob

Might try loosening the M3's BDC,reaffixing it the otherside of the zero stop and try again.

Some folks remove the zero stop feature altogether.

I'm kinda of the opinion,that a scoped '14 is largely an excersize in frustration......................

Check out these guys- www.m-14forum.com They maybe can help. I no longer scope my M1A. Have to keep something for practicing with irons.

Reguards, Rob

Bob,

Thanks for the forum info. I'll definitely check them out.

On the shimming. What you say sounds logical to me. But
everything I've read seems to say shim front to drop. But
as Yogi Berra said; "In theory, theory and practice are the
same. In practice, they aren't".

The mount itself is a single piece mount and is fixed to the
receiver by the cartridge clip guide in the back. It is also
attached in the middle to the receiver. Only the front end
can be raised or lowered. And even that is a challenge.

But no reason not to try anything I can regarding the mount
before spending more money.

The blade sights are dead on at 100 meters. Certainly the
rifle is more accurate than I am.

What did you scope your rifle with?


Chuck

Big Stick,

I should have expected you to think outside the box. I had
been in the mindset of not messing with the scope if it was
proven broken. As you point out, there's still some work that
can be done with the scope.

On not scoping, well, I would agree with you, but they seem
to be making those 200 meter targets a lot smaller now,
than the did 30 years ago.

Chuck

I'm not cussing optics,my eyes are too poor to sing that tune.

Just that the '14 was designed for irons and a robust/reliable scope mounting system is a tall order upon that platform.

The Smith stuff is typically consider the "best" mounting platform.....................

If your mount will take weaver type rings (looks like it would), you might try Burris Signature Zee (weaver compatible) rings and Pos-Align offset inserts for them.

So it's the singer, not the song, Stick?

I think the name used to be Basset Machine Works in Dripping Springs TX. Made a mount for the M1A platform that both would attach to the guide or not, and had hardened inserts for the rails. The hardened part is very important.

Without those hard rails things wear.

I've had one of these mounts for many years. Have more than your run of the mill M1As. Though still not my dream 4K dollar gun. But good ones, ones good enough to win with.

This basset mount has held up unbelievably. took a beating when I decided that a mag full of 165 BTS would make deer medicine. Prior to that they have held groups of under 3 inches at 600 yards and under 8 inches at 1000 yards which is probably the extent of the accuracy of the gun in real life considering 10 to 20 shot groups are the norm when testing.

Have not perused the Smith stuff recently. Cannot recall if they were good or not. Will take Sticks word for it. But I can say they won't be better than a basset if there are any to be found.

Jeff

Smith definitely does not have hardened inserts, but without looking closer in detail, the whole mount might be hardened steel. If not its gonna take a beating here and there. Have seen mounts like this not hold up all that long.

Note that its CM steel so could well be hard enough as is. Though round inserts always seemed to hold up best, vs the intricacies of differing reciever rail dimensions. Self centering at the same time.

Jeff

The zero stop is a feature that not all are familiar with,or giddy about.

A zero stop,that stopped at my predetermined zero,wouldn't make me mad.

I'd no love for one that worked otherwise.

Today,if I wished for a scoped semi 308,it'd be aboard the AR platform,via integral 1913 rail.

Your mileage,may vary....................

Hello Chuck, I think if you shim the rear mount you will depress the front of the scope. That should gain you some play with elevation clicks, maybe not much, but it should help.

Try to get the lowest possible rings you can, that have at least 4 screws holding down the top of the ring to the bottom. My current rings were bought about 12 years ago and have no name on them, and I can not for the life of me remember what they are. But they are steel and have 4 screws for each. My mount is U.S. Army surplus Brookfield Precision Tool Mount. with the U.S. Property Mark. A collectors piece I am told. Some guys where I used to shoot many years ago would of loved to pry it out from me even back then. They were made for M-21 Sniper rifles I believe. The A.R.M.S. is a good mount and if it and or your rings are giving you trouble, I am sure the guys over at M-14 Forum can help get you straightened out. I have not really kept up with this aspect of the shooting sports in a few years, so am a bit cobb webbed in my memory.
But, you did make me brake out the M1A from the back of the safe tonight!
Mine was originally a standard model made around 1993. I bought it used and sent it in to Springfield Inc. for the loaded upgrade with SS barrel around 1995. Many of the parts are H&R USGI. Although I have not shot any competition in years, I still think the M1A/M14 is a great rifle. Probably the ultimate "Plinking Machine". They work best when tuned up by a dedicated M1A/M14 smith. So if you need work done to get it right, please get reccomendations from the guys over at M-14 Forum. I know they can help, kinda like the 24hourcampfire of M-14 shooters.

BTW whats the specs on your M1A?

Reguards, Rob

Almost forgot, first scope I put on was a cheap busnell banner of all things? And actually it held up well for about five years, then everything just started sliding around one day. Went without scope until about 4 years ago, put on a Leupold 3-9x40 Mark 4 PR. Held up fine on the M1A for about three years (probably about 3500 rounds), but now resides on my 25-06.

Rob

If I had to have a scoped M14 (type) rifle, I believe I'd opt for an [color:"blue"][u]LRB Arms[/u][/color] M25. It's a civilian copy of the M14 with a notable difference: it's got an M1913 scope mount forged/machined as an integral part of the receiver. They are back ordered and not cheap, but there you have it.

Managing your cheek weld is another problem.

"I'm not cussing optics,my eyes are too poor to sing that tune".

You do realize this might follow ya...... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Thus the reason there's glass on all of my rifles,an HK-91 and a Garand excepted. Also one nekked Marlin 39,in the herd.

Will weld a steel 1913 rail aboard the '91 and accept the Garand for what it is. The '39 sets largely idle,as my other two wear glass.

Sidemounts(Garand),ain't my gig....................

I had no problem getting a zero on my older M1A with the ARMS-18 base.

But, I have heard that some of the newer M1A receivers do not have the mounting groove built to the original specification, and specifically, the ARMS-18 base (probably others) does not fit properly, without modification.

BTW, after getting the M1A up and running with optics, I couldn't warm up to it. An ergonomics nightmare.

On the other hand, doing optics on the AR10/15 platforms is easier than a self-licking ice cream cone.....

No flies on an integral Picatinny rail and an integral cheekweld...........................

fwiw,
My elder sibling and I have two custom 14s built with USGI small parts and two Brookfield Precision Mounts. We supplied the SA receivers and six months laters the finished rifles were delivered. Along with the two previously mentioned Brookfield Precision Mounts. One property marked and tack welded at the rear and the other was not... I don't claim to be an expert on mounting scopes though I can generally hold my own and look quazi competent in the process... I'll only say there is more voodoo in mounting a 14 than it is a science. In the end I had to put everything down take a blue pill and shoot a cat to avoid breaking something...(grin) We have two identical rifles, BP mounts, and period Mark 4 10xs waiting on THE man. He is one of the few who set them up for their original purpose and is said to be the best still in the game... That said they are going to be safe queens. A piece of history as it were. I will say a custom NM 14 nestled in a Woodland McMillan with a 10x Mark 4 mounted on a Brookfield Precision is one sexy looking bitch...

Pictures to follow next month...

Regards, Matt.