SOCOM 16

>>31817938
wannabe operator nonsense. less mil-spec than a standard Garand

seems like a bad trade for you

>>31817938
Buy Fulton armory or nothing OP

My pal has one. It seems like a good gun but I wouldn't trade for it.

My concern is accuracy. M1As, while very sexy, are not known to be the most accurate battle rifles. I would imagine the shorter barrel doesn't make it any better.

File: rotatedforyourviewingpleasure.jpg (835KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

835KB, 1500x1000px

>>31817938
My friend went all out when he got a bonus check from the Army and bought one. He then got a Scope mount and an ACOG for it. Pic related. And then one day, without consulting me at all, I came to find that he sold it to a Cabela's. The whole package. For about 2/3 the price it was worth. He now owns a SCAR. Take that as you will.

>>31818133
because long barrels mean accuracy..Get off vidya.
They're worth the price because they're worth it.
If you want one, you're better off just scouring gunbroker for a norinco m14. They can be had for under 1000 if you look and wait.
Keep in mind, anything under 20 inches is a waste in a .308

>>31818171
That looks fucking retarded. The rifle and scope are good, but no together. What the fuck was he thinking?

>>31817938
Get the longer barrel fuckstick....

Giving up an ar would be a bad enough trade as it is.

>>31818206
I know. Keep in mind that he did this all on a whim and then "surprised" me and my other gun knowledgeable friend with it. When he randomly sold it to Cabela's I shit a brick. He hated the fucking thing, but at least he could have gotten his money back by selling it to some retard on GunBroker. After my other friend and I sat him down and had a long talk with him, he decided to get a SCAR. But even then, he wouldn't listen to reason and got a black one instead of FDE.

>>31818133
>>31818133
>>31818186
This is the problem with just taking a statement like "M1A's are not very accurate" and applying it across the board without any deeper understanding of what it means. The M1A is said to be inaccurate at distance because of the arrangement of it's locking lugs in comparison to an AR style bolt. It doesn't lock as tight, and as such there's very minor shifts between shots that affect accuracy... at like 600m+.

File: little-girl-and-gun.png (439KB, 585x400px) Image search: [Google]

439KB, 585x400px

What role does this rifle fill? It isn;t a scout rifle because it is heavy as a bag of dicks.

Is it a combat rifle? If so does it out perform an AK, AR or FAL?

What is the point of this rifle besides "SpecOps Tacticool"?

>>31817938
If you can't afford to buy it outright you can't shoot it enough to justify the price.

>>31818248
Bullshit. The platform is known for shaking around in its stock which negatively affects performance at 50 yards let alone at
>600m+

>>31818346
I'm talking about a free floated and glass bed M1A that's been built to National Match specifications. The inaccuracy inherent to the design isn't in the stuff that's fixable, you dunce, it's in the design of the bolt which can't be changed.

>>31818272
I don't really enjoy long guns at all but I've managed to collect an AR and an AR pistol. The SOCOM just seems cool and it's primary purpose would be to go shoot it at the 25 to 100 yard range.
It's secondary purpose would be a SHTF protect the neighborhood gun, as if that will ever actually happen. I just think it's neat and Hickok seems to really like it a lot.

>>31818304
Well, I kind of feel that way about the AR already. I mostly shoot 9mm strictly because it's cheaper.

>>31818248
>>31818346
>>31818371
Wow you why does everyone think the m14 accuracy meme. Like the fuds. Wtf

>>31817938
Don't do it.
I'm sure it's a good weapon (I own a Norc M14S) but for calibre, the AR15 is better in every way.

SA M1As use cast receivers, fuck 'em

>>31817938
Let's see, you would need to trade your AR and a Glock, two perfectly fucking fine weapons that individually out-do this half-assed attempt at an SBR that chickened out at the last minute. It's neither a long-range nor close quarters weapon, which the AR and Glock are respectively, so what the fuck are you thinking exactly?

It's barrel is too short to properly burn the .308 powder so it's underpowered and it's on a platform notorious for inaccuracy unless you soup it up, so it's short-range at best. AR still does that job and does it better, with more optional accessories, and you actually own that.

Oh and let's see it's not even better than other battle rifles because it has none of the features of those rifles besides caliber, which it pisses away with a gimped barrel. So really it's just a mutant hobbit version of one.

PASS.

>thoughts on this gun
Bait for the wannabe-operator who thinks "SOCOM" being in a product's name makes it better and is too stupid to understand the benefits of the M1A Scout.
> trade stuff in on it, probably both my AR-15's and maybe a Glock
Two practical gats for the least practical version of the least practical battle rifle. Seems like a win.

>>31818346
Nice meme, friend. Have a (You).

>>31822147
Thanks, this is the post I was hoping for to talk me out of it.

File: 1477361347326.gif (3MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 480x270px

>>31819549
>better
>intermediate cartridge

File: IMAG0028.jpg (1MB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2688x1520px

Everyone Shits on m1as. Iv had one for 8 years and never had any issue what so ever. It was plenty accurate in the standard stock but it's been in a ebr chassis for the past 6 years. And it is even more accurate then it was. I consistently get 3/4 inch groups at 100 yards with 168gr smk. And even with junk 147gr ball rounds 2 inch is pretty consistent with the occasional outlier. I do not clean mine near as often as I should and never had any issue. Not 1 malfunction. Maybe I got lucky with mine but I love it and I would never get rid of it. Just my 2 cents.

>>31823348
Forgot to mention mine is not a socom. It's the standard length barrel

One of the few semi autos available to those in commie states

>>31818272
It's less useful than the rifle this is modified from

>>31823130
You're welcome, I'm just calling it as I see it. Frankly I don't like the M1A or other M14 derivatives but they're not inherently bad rifles, but this thing actually kind of is. Everything it tries to do it does bad, and honestly it doesn't even really look that cool in my opinion so it's an across the board failure except for reliability. Again, the AR is perfectly fine as far as reliability is concerned.

If you truly, truly want a battle rifle go for a full-sized M1A and get the lugs lapped, bed it or float the barrel, and then invest in a reloading press. Not everyone needs a DMR but I shit you not the rifle will do the job despite not being a fancy M21 that was built to be an actual precision rifle.

Again, I'm setting my bias aside to tell you this. People like >>31823348 own these things and they work just fine. Personally I'd stick with the AR, if you need a bigger caliber for whatever reason (fill in the blank, whatever suits your life/shooting style) then swap the upper and your mags. Going varmint hunting in black bear country? Take a .300BLK upper with a full magazine or even better one in .458 SOCOM with ten rounds ready to go. Yeah the AR is boring and isn't particularly sexy in my opinion, but it is without a doubt the most versatile rifle system out there.

I'd just hate to see you downgrade in effectiveness just because you like how something looks.

>>31826338
>bed it or float the barrel
Do both. You shouldn't need to re-lap the lugs from the factory unless they really fucked up. In my opinion, bringing the rifle up to NM spec is more important for accuracy. I'm not going to address the parts where you suggest .300BLK as a replacement for 7.62NATO.

>>31826483
>>bed it or float the barrel
>Do both.
Literally what. Fuck the rest of your post because you simply cannot float a barrel AND bed it. You can do one or the other, not both.

>>31826797
You bed the action and float the barrel. Are you trying to be stupid right now?

>>31826810
>You bed the action and float the barrel.
Uh? >>31826797
>float a barrel AND bed it
I wasn't talking about actions, I was talking about barrels. Most of the gain you'll get is in that barrel, floating it for DMR purposes will be just fine. If you want a real precision rifle, one that can touch a thousand yards with .308 handloads for that rifle and for that barrel then yes bedding the action would almost certainly be a necessity.

>>31817938
Get it.
I have a SOCOM II with all the bells and whistles. It's an insanely accurate and powerful rifle. I wouldn't trade it for anything.