Should I go with an m1a Scout squad or a scar 17s. I'm considering

File: 1502847140781.jpg (42KB, 686x1024px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 686x1024px

>zombies

>>35012661
get a dsa fal

>springfield
>current year

Really?

>>35012661
SCAR definitely.

File: 1503761742160.jpg (233KB, 719x1080px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 719x1080px

>>35012661
God these rifles are so sexy

>>35012693
What does the fal have over either of my picks?

>>35012715
muh Rhodesia meme gun

But the FAL is actually better than the M1A. The FAL is actually a "modern" rifle, while the M1A is just the M1 Garand retrofitted to accept a detachable box magazine.

>>35012715
>>35012752
Get a FAL, but NOT a DSA FAL. Ever since DSA started making and using their own parts and receivers in house, quality has shit the bed. I looked into getting a DSA Voyager but everything mentioned on /k/ and FAL files give the impression that QC has gone to absolute shit and to get a rifle that actually functions and/or seats magazines is to build.

>>35012661
Don't listen to the poorfags. The FAL is an older generation of technology and is an inferior rifle. Consider the SCAR or an AR10, preferably with a 20" barrel. You gain a lot of velocity in 20" compared to 16" with 7.62x51. Either choice will be lighter, more ergonomic, more accurate, and allow more optics and accessories than a dinosaur gun like the FAL, M14, or HK91.

File: IMG_0495_low_q.jpg (3MB, 3456x5184px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3456x5184px

>>35012661
I got drunk one day and bought a Springfield Scout Squad M1A, and it sucks. Here's what I had to do to get it to reliably shoot 1.5 MOA:
>replace gas piston
>shim gas cylinder
>replace factory synthetic stock
>NM clearance new stock front ferule area
>glass bed new stock
>replace spring guide rod
>fire 20 rounds of final finish bore lapping bullets

To add an optic I had to:
>get optic, rings, as usual
but then
>buy optic mount ($150-500)
>replace ejector and spring with GI parts

The brass was ejecting up and into the mount instead of to the right like it was supposed to until I replaced the factory ejector.

If you love the M1A, spend the extra $1000 and get one from Fulton Armory, otherwise dont waste your time like I did. All that extra money and work resulted in a mediocre rifle that I'm not sure I can trust in a pinch.

If I could only have one semi auto .308, I'd go with an AR10.

File: 20170730_152436.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

>>35013230
After all that, I took it to a 50 yard range and did this.
>pic related

Note that I only shot 3 round groups (except my last group, because it was the last one and I just happened to grab 4 rounds) because the bitch strings easily. I fired 1 shot every 30 seconds to prevent stringing.

This is bullshit that I shouldn't have to worry about after putting in that much extra work to get the fucker accurate.

File: IMG_20170528_150724399_HDR.jpg (3MB, 2340x4160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2340x4160px

>>35013270
Savage

LMT MWS 16" chrome lined at 100

>>35013388
Yeah, I'd way rather have a rifle that does that every fucking time.

>>35012700
>>35013230
can i get a solid rundown on why springfield is so hated? or is it simply as you said, their quality is just trash? my friend is dead set on an m1a and i wanted specific reasons on why theyre bad

>>35013270
Thank you for the feedback. I'm not keen on getting an aftermarket m1a so I may start looking more closely at the scar or an ar10 is the same range.

File: IMG_20170429_104015896_TOP.jpg (4MB, 3744x2106px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3744x2106px

>>35013417
Sell it off?

>>35012661
>springfield
>zombies
>home defense with a .308

>>35013417
Your rifle really seems to like PPU. Try that.

>>35013475
I want them to be blind and deaf In case I miss. What's the problem?

>>35013531
you'll be deaf regardless of where you hit, your bullet will also travel through the drywall into your neighbor's forehead

>>35013563
Or you realise he said homestead some of us don't have neighbors for miles

>>35013526
Yeah, strange bonus since it's about half the cost of the match ammo that doesn't perform as well.

>>35013432
Springfield's M1As are no longer mil spec, they're machined poorly, their quality control is bad. You have to spend $400 on replacement parts to get them to shoot well. The fore-end of the factory synthetic stocks are not rigid enough to allow the rifle to shoot accurately. M14s or M1As require 7 pounds of downward draw pressure on the front band to maintain a repeatable zero and
a flexible stock makes this impossible.

Springfield's brand new $1600 rifles can shoot as bad as 6-8 MOA out of the box. That's really bad, especially for a rifle in that price range. Their higher end models are usually fine, but I wouldn't risk it. If you're going to pay $2400 for their high end rifle, you might as well just buy a known good brand like Fulton Armory.

On poor machining:

The tool marks in my receiver's legs were so deep that I had to file them down to prevent them from causing the action to stick in the glass bedding job. How do I know this? Because they ruined my first bedding job. I had to bed the rifle TWICE. After the first time I had to beat the action out of the stock with a large dowel and hammer.

>>35012661
Neither. As youve seen in the thread, getting a stock m1a is a money pit if you are new to the rifle. Scars have issues as well, also ugg boot stock.

I suggest getting some kind of ar10 like a colt 901 if you can find it, armalite or s&w and upgrade the accessories, or build one using aero precision parts.

>>35013017
Really don't gain much between 16" and 20" and OP clearly wouldn't know the difference between any of that shit. If any of that were a real concern you would be telling him to get an intermediate carbine like a sane person

>>35013230
>>35013270
Why did you bother buying a stock M1A for accuracy? It's a battle rifle and 3moa should be expected with the pencil barrel.

If you were truly going for accuracy Bedding on the M14 platform is dated fudd shit compared to the modern carbon fiber or aluminum stocks and pillar reinforcements.

Medium-heavy weight Kreiger M14 barrels don't string like this just like how the PSG1 barrel is tapered and many high end AR10 barrels like the m110 are.

>>35012752
That's wrong, the M1A is a civilian variant M14, not an M1 Garand.

>>35012661
Buy FN, Springfield is anti-gun shills.

>>35015107
In 7.62x51 you gain about ~200 fps in those 4 inches of barrel.

>>35013563
So you automatically prevent him from potentially joining the zombie hoard then?

File: 20170830_001525-1-01.jpg (946KB, 965x2518px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 965x2518px

>>35016650
I got an 18" midlength and it seems pretty long for a carbine.

>>35012661
AR10 is the best affordable battle rifle, M1A is complete shit I can't believe people even still consider it.

SCAR is the highest performing battle rifle but it's costly. Costs as much as the MDR which is the most hype rifle right now, probably won't even be sold for much longer so you'll have panic prices plus rarity price.

>>35017122
What's the reliability like on the AR10's? I was considering picking up a dpms but wasn't sure how well they run.

>>35012661

Go out and rent both of them to see which one you like.

Then go out and buy the SCAR. If you like it great. If you don't then someone else will get it for a discount when you sell it.

>>35014224
>Springfield's brand new $1600 rifles can shoot as bad as 6-8 MOA out of the box.
Goddammit Springfield.

>>35016898
18" you should be using intermediate or rifle length gas.