Thinking of buying an M1A for casual shooting

Got a socom 16 and it runs fine, expensive gun and expensive to shoot are main drawbacks

If you have the money, sure why not

File: Savage 10 FPC and M1a NM.jpg (34KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x480px

>>33204447
They are nice, and fun to work on if you enjoy tinkering, but are expensive and yield low returns on performance at the cost point.

Get one because you want an m1a, no other reason, if you want a precision rifle or battle rifle look else where , better $$$ value.

I love mine tho.

File: BMP-Rifle-1-600x200.jpg (8KB, 600x200px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 600x200px

Been also considering buying a Bergara B14 BMP. Thoughts on this as well? Pic Related.

>>33204569
Performance is quite considerable to me as well. Are there any other alternatives in the precision / battle rifle dept you would suggest?

>>33204648
If you have money and time, the M14 platform can be made very accurate.

>>33204569
Is right on the money.

I dropped 1500 on a "loaded" M1A, another grand on glass bedding, trigger work, gas cylinder unitization, receiver machining, over another grand on a sadlak mount and optic.

Result: gorgeous heavy rifle that shoots beautifully.

I love it, but I could have gotten something lighter and much cheaper.

>>33204648
Ar-10's are the most cost effective Precision/ battle rifle hybrid imo,

If you want a precision gun, you can built a great center fire bolt gun for around 1500$,
If you want a battle rifle, well you've seen the threads, personally I don't plink with .308 and have fallen into the 17hmr and .22 lr builds.

I can't really suggest more , mainly because I don't know what your expectations for your weapon are.

>>33204694
Ah Thanks for the advice!

>>33204635
I have the bpr-17. It's an extremely solid rifle. Bergara makes excellent barrels, and my experience with the receiver has been good. The accuracy claims are accurate at least for my rifle. Anyway, it's a pretty classic example of you get what you pay for.

>>33204447
buy a Sig 716

>>33205058
3k for an ar10? I dont get it

Here is leaf land our laws have cucked the AR platform so it is actually cheaper and more convenient to buy a cheap chink knock off M305/M1A/M14 for like 500-600$. However I would not pay the high price tag to get a Springfield armoury one.

File: 2955.png (515KB, 2234x1103px) Image search: [Google]

515KB, 2234x1103px

>>33204447
I like mine. If you buy guns because they're a value then get a highpoint.

>>33204447
I didn't like the one I shot. It was a stainless model and didn't really seem like it wanted to group well. The lanky pencil barrel got hot quick and felt floppy to me.

I personally believe there's better options in 5.56 out there for the same price or cheaper.

>>33205755
It's less about value than getting what you pay for. You pay top dollar for a rifle that doesn't reflect the amount you spent where it counts. That doesn't really change the fact that you should just get the rifle you want though.

>>33205893
Oh, now it's not about value anymore but about "getting what you pay for"? I paid top dollar, got exactly what I wanted, and it works great. Keep moving those goalposts.

>>33205934
I didn't move goal posts, I just stated my opinion. I never said anything about value.

And in my opinion, when you buy a rifle for 2k and get a rifle with mediocre accuracy, a trigger that could use some work and a poorly bedded reciever, I am not getting what I paid for. I'm getting a pricey roll mark on a decent but not great rifle

>>33204447
why not a 300 win mag or 338 lapua bolt gun for the same price or less?

>>33206084
OP wanted it for casual shooting. A rifle in either of those cartridges wouldn't be suitable for casual shooting. I think .308 is pretty good for plinking as far as full sized rifle cartridges go

>>33205994
>It's less about value than getting what you pay for.

You're going to piss on my leg and tell it's raining?

>>33204447
>Insert opinions here
I think it looks stupid...really really stupid.

>>33206164
It has a certain aesthetic. Either you like it or you hate it. I like it

>>33206156
That doesn't apply here. You presumably misattributed a previous post made by someone else talking about value. I never said anything about value, except when I mentioned that the term value didn't read apply because it had a different connotation.

>>33204447
Mine is my go-to casual shooter.
Thing is mine is chinese so if you're a burger chances are you'd have better options for Springfield-tier pricing.

>>33206226
Bullshit

>>33206338
Bullshit what?