M1A and 6.5 CM fans ...

I guess your definition of objectivity is different than mine. Sorry but there is a very clear distinction and definitive difference between my opinion and yours; I remain objective, open, and free of bias about a new product. Primarily because I do not have the rifle in question or a real world experience (not pure speculations and unwarranted claims) otherwise I lack credibility and validity to the claim. If I do have the rifle and real world experience, I would gladly share them as-is for others to decipher.
Nice thinly-veiled insults. I give you props for those. You worked them in there pretty well.

How about we move along from personal insults back to the original point of this thread? My apologies to the OP.
 
Nice thinly-veiled insults. I give you props for those. You worked them in there pretty well.

How about we move along from personal insults back to the original point of this thread? My apologies to the OP.

If I want to insult you, I will flat out tell you or simply put you in my ignore list, that is obviously not the case.

As the OP, I accept your apology.
 
Last edited:
If I want to insult you, I will flat out tell you or simply put you in my ignore list, that is obviously the case.

As the OP, I accept your apology.
I respect that, because I'm the same way. I don't use the ignore button, but I will flat-out ignore someone I don't like, and will deliberately choose to no longer interact with that person. Obviously, I have not done that with you, so I do not dislike you, and I respect your opinion. I also like the fact you aren't scared to have a healthy debate, even with controversial gun subjects that others might find taboo.
 
I'm going to come at this from a bit different angle...

Though I snicker at all the folks proclaiming the 6.5 Creedmoor to be the greatest ever, it is the perfect fit for AR's, other semi-autos, and mag fed rifles generally. I am glad to see the 6.5's finally catching on in the USA.

Provided the M1A's can live up to the accuracy potential of the cartridge, chambering them for the Creed makes sense and could give new life to a fine old rifle that many people view as badly outdated, for reasons other than being chambered in .308 Win/7.62x51. Aside from a quality barrel, proper bedding is THE most critical factor in achieving accuracy in Garands and M1A's, and it has to be re-done periodically to maintain peak accuracy. It will be interesting to see if the Creedmoor chambering results in a soft enough recoil impulse to extend the time between bedding jobs.

I am rooting for the popularity of the M1A in 6.5 Creedmoor for several reasons:

I am hoping it will become popular enough that CMP will eventually loosen Service Rifle rules enough to allow more modern rifle configurations in competition, or create a separate class. Being a southpaw, I found myself at a terrible disadvantage in manipulating a Garand during the rapid-fire stages. I have ZERO interest in shooting an AR in competition. I was recently gifted an M1A that needs some accuracy work done and would like to shoot it in Service Rifle. The trouble is that I really want more of a DMR style rifle. Following the CMP rules would make my M1A pretty much useless for anything else. I am uninterested in spending the money for a build that is ONLY good for CMP matches. I am hoping for a surge in M1A popularity that might move the CMP from the 1950's to the 21st century.

I am also hoping Springfield Armory's move will prompt companies like Krieger and Criterion to begin offering M1A barrels in 6.5 Creedmoor (and maybe other chamberings, as well). I have always loved the M14 style rifles and would like to see them become popular enough to ensure they continue to be made, shot, and enjoyed.

USGI parts for the M1A are mostly dried up and quality aftermarket parts are becoming increasingly scarce and expensive. Increased interest in M14 style rifles could help change that and end up being a positive for everyone interested in the type.

For those bitching about the price, take a step back and look at the big picture. There are plenty of upscale AR's that sell for at least as much. Some AR's even command prices upward of $3k. People are willing to pay that much for something viewed as state-of-the-art. In that context, an updated M1A is not unreasonably priced. However, for an obsolete warhorse (that isn't even the original or real thing), that most see only as a curiosity, $2k is a pretty steep price. M1 Garand prices are creeping steadily toward the $2k mark, but the Garand has a historical mystique that the M14 style rifles will never possess, and there is a fixed supply of them. If the M1A is to be kept alive, it has to evolve to stay relevant.
 
Last edited:
10 years ago I got a urge to get an M1A. I got a hold of a product catalogue, the Supermatch models wore Krieger barrels. I couldn't afford one so I saved for a while and eventually bought a Gen 1 Savage 10BA instead for several hundred less .
I just looked at the Supermatch on SA website and all have Douglas barrels:(.

I dont know what happend.
 
10 years ago I got a urge to get an M1A. I got a hold of a product catalogue, the Supermatch models wore Krieger barrels. I just looked at the Supermatch on SA website and all have Douglas barrels:(.

I dont know what happend.
Same thing Weatherby tried to pull over a decade ago with their Mark-V rifles... Cheaper components without announcement, and still jacked the prices up year after year for "inflation adjustment". :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top