Sign in to follow this  
nightslayer78

M1A/M14 as a SHTF/TEOTWAWKI Rifle

Recommended Posts

I just bought a M1A Scout Squad a few weeks ago. I intend to use it as my main rifle in the event of a SHTF scenario. I wanted to make this post to create an awareness and a debate about the M1A.

 

My main points for the rifle as a good SHTF/TEOTWAWKI rifle are that:

 

1. Was a military rifle for many years

2. Very durable

3. .308 round is a very abundant and common round

4. The .308 can tear through most walls and items in the way of your target

5. Is a very capable rifle for engaging targets further than 500 yards.

6. Will drop most targets in one center-mass hit.

 

The bad:

 

1. Rifle is heavier than modern rifles.

2. Rounds are heavier than the .556 and the 7.62 x 39

3. Long

 

For me the trade offs were worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bought a M1A Scout Squad a few weeks ago. I intend to use it as my main rifle in the event of a SHTF scenario. I wanted to make this post to create an awareness and a debate about the M1A.

 

My main points for the rifle as a good SHTF/TEOTWAWKI rifle are that:

 

1. Was a military rifle for many years

2. Very durable

3. .308 round is a very abundant and common round

4. The .308 can tear through most walls and items in the way of your target

5. Is a very capable rifle for engaging targets further than 500 yards.

6. Will drop most targets in one center-mass hit.

 

The bad:

 

1. Rifle is heavier than modern rifles.

2. Rounds are heavier than the .556 and the 7.62 x 39

3. Long

 

For me the trade offs were worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice I have a full match M1A, and had a SOCOM for a while. also have a Garand. great rifles, very heavy compared to the lighter AR rifles though. Id love to get a scout squad.. I think for a .308 an 18" barrel is the sweet spot when trading off length.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great choice

 

as long as you can feed the bulldog and as long as you can hump ammo it is the number 1 choice.

 

Remember BEWARE using heavy bullets with hot loads they will bend the OP ROD use bullet weights and loads

 

that approximate ball or commercial loadings.

 

I recall 137 grain to 165 grain bullets with standard military spec loading it is not a bolt rifle it cannot fire what a bolt can

 

they are very accurate within their range of ammo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nightslayer,

I have a PTR 91 (American made HK-91) for many of the same reasons. I really think the "heavier rounds" thing is a red herring. I knew grunts in RVN that carried a thousand rounds, not because the wanted to but because they felt they needed the rounds to make up for the deficiencies of the 5.56. I don't want to start the raging argument about it, there are enough of those in other threads but the 5.56 was designed to be used in a jungle environment with heavy weapons and artillery support. It was pressed into service in the rest of the military theaters as a matter of standardization and economics but it NEVER was intended to do all the jobs the M14 did. It was meant to be used full auto in the attack. While I disagree with the selection boards on their choices, they did keep the M60, the M2, even the M14 for various needs. Full auto is "spray and pray"; it let the army turn out weapons pointers instead of riflemen; less training required. Whether or not that worked I'll leave to history but it does NOT make a good survival weapon.

 

The .308 or .30-06 round will do everything that is needed in a survival situation. It will defend you at range or up close AND it will feed you for the 99% of the time when you are NOT in combat. If you get cornered by a hoard of MZB nothing will save you except full auto, belt fed like a Ma Deuce or M60 and even then it is iffy. If combat is a large part of your after TSHTF experience your chances of survival are poor at best, abysmal to non-existant at worse.

 

I think your choice is an excellent one. Apparently so do many others, I have the PTR because all of the M1As were sold when I went to my local purveyors of ammo and lead launchers. All that was left was ONE PTR; a special ops type had just bought the other 5 my guy had ... I figured it couldn't be too bad if special ops likes them sooooo, I got the last one. Last time I checked the price was about $500 higher than what I paid so I'm happy. I've also found it to be an excellent rifle. I really liked my M14 in the Army but I've found I like the PTR even better. I don't know if the M1A has the caution about some of the higher pressure civilian rounds (the M14 had some recoil issues, similar to the issues the old M1's had with the civilian .30-06) but the PTR does not so I am doubly pleased.

 

Just my not so humble opinion.

Edited by Capt Bart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great choice

 

as long as you can feed the bulldog and as long as you can hump ammo it is the number 1 choice.

 

Remember BEWARE using heavy bullets with hot loads they will bend the OP ROD use bullet weights and loads

 

that approximate ball or commercial loadings.

 

I recall 137 grain to 165 grain bullets with standard military spec loading it is not a bolt rifle it cannot fire what a bolt can

 

they are very accurate within their range of ammo.

 

Are you saying that the larger round that is the .308 tends to bend the operating rod?

 

I intend to start with lesser grain rounds to start with. To find a good medium range.

@Capt Bart,

 

I don't know how I posted twice, you can remove the duplicate if you wish.

 

If anyone has experience with the M1A I am trying to decide on optics.

 

1. The red dot/halo sights route (but they use batteries)

 

2. Glass sights (but I can't engage well at medium to close range)

 

3. Iron sights (Being able to engage accurately at longer ranges is tougher)

 

I would want to be prepared for MOUT and for long range engagements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never mounted this on an M1A, but Ive used it on an AR-15 that was issued to me. Its called a Millett DMS, a 1-4x variable zoom illuminated scope. The center red ring is illuminated when you choose to turn it on, but the ring is still there when the scope is off, so even if the batteries run dead it is still functional. You can leave it in 1x for close-range use, and then run the zoom out to 4x for 200 to 300 yard shots. I'd want stronger optics for any shot farther than that, but this might fill your needs of a good all-around optic. Another option is to mount a small red-dot scope on a 45 degree mount off to the side if you wish to put a stronger magnified scope on it.

 

bk81002.jpg

 

dms-reticle.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. The red dot/halo sights route (but they use batteries)

Nightslayer,

Have you seen http://www.militarywarfighter.com/Trijicon_TA31RMR_p/trijicon-ta31rmr.htm ?

They are not cheap but Trijicon does good stuff AND this is dual illuminated. Light tube when there is enough light, tritium for when it is darker. No batteries needed. I think, don't know, that others have a battery/light pipe set up as well.

Again not cheap but a solution for no batteries or EMP concerns.

 

Just my not so humble opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I think I should save up and get an ACOG. I was in the army for a short while so I do know how to use one. I just could of sworn the one I used needed batteries. But, that is exactly what I need, something that can get to about 3 to 4 times zoom with good close range target acquisition. The price is a little steep but probably well worth it.

 

Thanks again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went with a Vortex 2-7x diamondback scope for my AR. It has a heck of a field of view for it's power range, over 64ft at 100yds on the lowest setting if I remember right. I think a Leupold 1-4x only has around 10ft more I think. I mounted it with a Burris PEPR mount and put a small red dot sight on the rail build into the front ring. I can use it for quick and close, plus have the scope with a ballistic reticle for longer shots. The whole set-up was under $500, and the Vortex is comparable in quality to a VariX-II Leupold scope from all reviews I've read and my own experience. Vortex will increase their prices as their reputation builds just like Sightron and others have, but as of now they are a bargain.

 

I also have a Leupold 1x14 Prismatic scope I want to install on a second AR when I get one. I picked one up with a circle plex reticle that can be illuminated but is always there in black for good lighting. I want to put it on a full length rail with flip up sights as a back-up method. It offers a small precise reticle with a larger circle for faster shooting. Still limited by magnification for distance though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what I am sayng is you can buy bullet weights above 165 grains and if they are heavy enough and powerful enough they

 

can and will break sh*t it is a very durable rifle but it has limits and some length shells {due to the length / bullet weight}

 

wont fit in the mag correctly if at all.

 

This is not bad it is an engineering factor {it is what it is} If you were being supported by the establishment you need not care or

consider it but here in civilian world there are 308's in 55 grain w/ sabots to 220 grain moose killers on the shelf and some companies load maximum to +P versions of ammo.

 

As a example I give you Buffalo bore ammo 45-70 for NEW rifles if you were to load it in a old springfield have a will.

 

the Ammo today was not available during the era of the original rifles so a consideration of if or how it will function need to be factored in.

 

Will it happen the first shot probably not will it ever happen who knows but you don't need to fire 200 or heavier bullets in a

M-14 you gain little as in it's normal 147 grain loading it will take elephant with a full mag of AP and you would not need all

of the shells. it will hit targets way beyond the limits of 95% of all shooters.

 

I put it out there because there have been some instances of damage to these rifles using heavy bullets if the loader or company

had a warning or knew or were experimenting I have no clue and don't care as I do not go outside of mil spec for the intended arm.

as in reloading there are many things I can do if I have to and I know the drawbacks it is a calculated risk with some previous

testing by an authority other than myself who has tested or done it with data.

 

as firearms have evolved the original weapons have not many pistol and rifles have been victims of new higher pressure ammo.

some it was not the steel but the old stock could not handle the recoil of a new load even though the pressure was well within

limits using new powders.

The drive to build a better faster more powerful round is common as grass pick up any gun rag and you will see some ammo

maker touting higher speed more expansion and longer range etc etc. some have like buffalo bore have warnings on the box

as to the weapons that can fire them some are within spec but I have had some ammo / brass in M-14 split necks with regularity

in fact on my desk I have a 308 NEW factory loaded case split neck and other ammo fired through the same rifle shows no problem.

but this one brand has had a few brittle cases out of a case not a deal breaker but i will not buy a case of that ammo for mine

and it may work just fine in others.

 

Like the newer 9MM in 147 grain I don't use it much as I know the original loading for mine was 115 to a max of 130 grain

and they make 200 grain lead 38 specials but in a model 10 I would forgo using them IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this