M1A or AR.308?

[carver952]

Based on the original question and most scenarios, there may be a 3rd choice, the M4 carbine, accurate out to 500 yards.
Some people say the 223 has low stopping power, but that applies to FMJ/Nato not fragmenting at longer distances.
I've seen the damage from TAP/A-max / ballistic tip, enough to take them out of the game. V-max has less penetration.

[tacticalninja32]

for general home defense I have a ar.223 or a .45. I"ll probably use the .45 to fight my way to a rifle if I'm able. I dont think a .223 is much of a defense against body armour though.

Masked and armored gangs of gunmen kicking in your door?!? Sounds like a tough neighborhood! Are you sure a .308 will be enough?

couple pounds of c4 will take care of it

[cobb]

I do own an AR-10, have not had any issues with it, but then it only has 300 rounds or so through it. The only negative I know of, if it is a negative, is in a carbine class that I attended a few years back one of the guys was shooting an AR-10 chambered in .308 Winchester jammed when shot in a certain way . During some of the drills we had to shoot with the butt stock laying flat on top of our shoulder, which pointed the ejection port to 12 o'clock for a right handed shooter. This AR-10 would stove pipe when shot like this, a classic picture perfect stove pipe. Evidently when this rifle was shot with nothing behind the butt plate for a platform to recoil against, it short stroke the action causing the stove pipe. Now besides this, that AR-10 ran just fine for the whole class, not any other problems that I can remember. So I don't know if this case is really a negative for an AR-10, but none of the AR-15 in .223/5.56's had this same problem in class. But I would call it a limiting factor that should be considered, but then maybe this issue was just with this particular rifle, I have never tried to shoot my AR-10 in this fashion.

Would a M1A do the same thing when shot this way, that I don't know.

[farmerj]

I have tuned my M14 to the point I have a pile of brass at arms lengths to my front right 1 o'clock position. The only time I have feed issues is if it gets dry. The hardest thing is to keep the bolt roller properly lubed. And with an old piece of brass drilled (IRC 21/64) you can use it to lube the roller.

[Cadet]

if this is for tacticool home defense combat why not go all Navy Seal style and go out and buy an M1A matchgrade and a 600 sage EBR battle rifle stock? xD

[flemingpo]

Well, I am just looking for the guns and different types of weapons that are having good legal flexibility at low costs. I have heard a lot about the 308 ar. The ar guns are having more good flexibility. The other thing want to know about 308 ar manufacturers. Please do share some more information about it.
spam.......link removed

[UnaStamus]

.308 rifles are considered "Battle Rifles", and the better option is by far an AR platform from a top-tier manufacturer like LaRue, HK, LWRCi, Armalite or custom shops like GA Precision or Les Baer.
They're more accurate than M1As, and more reliable. Numerous top level trainers who host carbine and battle rifle courses, like Pat Rogers of EAG Tactical, have made mention that M1As rarely make it all the way through a high round count, multi-day course without having catastrophic failure.
The best overall option across the board in my opinion is actually the FNH SCAR-17S. Best of both worlds or AR-like operation with piston operation, sub-MOA accuracy with match ammo, and high reliability.

for general home defense I have a ar.223 or a .45. I"ll probably use the .45 to fight my way to a rifle if I'm able. I dont think a .223 is much of a defense against body armour though.

You'd be wrong. Many people actually make the same mistake in believing that the .223/5.56 is inadequate. .223/5.56 loads are exceptionally effective at dropping 2-legged creatures. They are also very much capable of penetrating soft armor, as well as some types of NIJ Level III hard plate armor made of polyethylene. Steel and composite/ceramic plates will typically stop .223/5.56, but they'll also stop all 7.62/.308 short of M61 or M993 AP rounds, which most people can't get anyways. NIJ Level IV armor will stop those. Most rifle rounds are capable of defeating soft armor very easily, for that matter. The caveat to this issue is that you need to use a proper barrier blind load like a TSX or other copper solid, or a bonded JSP like the Speer Gold Dot or Federal TBBC, and if you do, you have an extremely effective load. FBI ballistic studies support the use of .223 and 5.56 loads as being extremely effective for urban defense.

Which one will be more accurate? M1a or AR .308?

The .308 AR will be far more accurate than the M1A. Top level factory M1As will pull around 1.5-2MOA on a good day with match ammo before heating up. The Super Match and National Match versions will pull up to 1MOA before heating up. M1As are not consistent with accuracy. The US military used to use Mk14 EBR rifles accurized by SEI, and those rifles were not sub-MOA capable either. I spent close to $3500 on my M1A Loaded to make it as accurate as possible, and 1.5MOA on a cool barrel was the best that I could develop.
Contrast that with .308 ARs like the LaRue OBR which can easily pull 0.5MOA consistently all day, or other top level rifles like the GAP-10 or Les Baer Monolith .308 which are also pulling the same groups.

Based on the original question and most scenarios, there may be a 3rd choice, the M4 carbine, accurate out to 500 yards.
Some people say the 223 has low stopping power, but that applies to FMJ/Nato not fragmenting at longer distances.
I've seen the damage from TAP/A-max / ballistic tip, enough to take them out of the game. V-max has less penetration.

.223/5.56 are very good cartridges to use for defense. However, the "urban" or RRLP loads (Reduced-Ricochet Limited Penetration) like the Hornady TAP V-Max, or Federal TRU loads are sub-optimal for two-legged creatures. Those rounds are designed to penetrate around 5" of flesh, and that is not considered to be anywhere near lethal. There are numerous incidents of these RLLP loads failing in the field due to poor penetration. One such incidence was last year in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin during and officer-involved shooting (Hornady TAP V-Max was used there). Barrier-blind loads like the copper solids (Barnes TSX or TTSX), or bonded JSPs (Speer Gold Dot, Federal TBBC) perform much better and get pass the prerequisite 12" of ballistic gelatin through multiple barrier mediums like heavy clothing. These .223 or 5.56 defense loads have a lower propensity for over-penetration than pistol rounds do according to research done by the FBI's Ballistics Lab. That same lab has determined that V-Max should be left to Varmint hunting, because they don't reliably work on anything else.

if this is for tacticool home defense combat why not go all Navy Seal style and go out and buy an M1A matchgrade and a 600 sage EBR battle rifle stock? xD

SEALs don't use the Mk14 anymore. They haven't for a while. When the Knights Armament Mk11 Mod 0 was released, that became their primary SASS (semi-auto sniper system)/SSR (sniper-support rifle). That rifle is currently being phased out in lieu of the new FN Mk20 SSR, which is an accurized SCAR Mk17 with a longer heavy barrel and fixed sniper stock and longer front rail.


If this is a home defense gun, and you have concerns about wanted more power than a .223/5.56, you should be looking at a 6.8 SPC or .300BLK. Both of those are exceptional cartridges and are far more appropriate for conventional in-home and urban use outside of a sniper/precision tactical rifle role.

[yuppiejr]

How much accuracy do you need? At 500 yards a 20" man size target requires 4 MOA accuracy which pretty much any grade of AR15, M1A or AR10 will be capable of with ball ammo & iron sights if the shooter is properly trained and practices regularly. If I were looking for a true battle rifle it would have to be something highly reliable with acceptable accuracy using a broad range of ammunition (includling crappy milsurp/ball ammo, not just handloads) so I could afford to practice, a lot. A tight match chamber shooting handloads and other refinements that may be great under ideal circuimstances from a bench would NOT be my first choice in a "battle" rifle which must function reliably under non-ideal circuimstances. I'd probably limit the scope of comparison to the sub $1,500 offerings in either platform to remain in the boundries of what most shooters would be willing/able to invest.

The M1A has the advantage of common parts (many can swap with the M1 Garand as well as other SAI M1A's) and magazines with a deep supply of milsurp parts available. It also comes with one of the best iron sight configurations available out of the box. The AR10 types are hit and miss as far as cross platform compatibility as it has not been widely adopted in a standardized military configuration so replacement/spare parts are both less widely available and likely more expensive. The AR10 design benefits from the more modern manufacturing techniques using lighter materials and experiences gained from the AR15/M16/M4 platform to refine the design. It's easier to scope an AR10 and there seem to be a far wider array of configurations to pick from (vs the "standard" 22", Scout 18" or SOCOM 16" M1A) out of the box.

If you are familiar with the AR15 platform there's probably an ergonomic/training advantage in going with an AR10... if you want a battlefield proven design with a ton of surplus parts available I'd also look at the M1A or FN-FAL.

The "best" battle rifle is the one you can shoot competently and keep running under non ideal circuimstances.

[UnaStamus]

How much accuracy do you need? At 500 yards a 20" man size target requires 4 MOA accuracy ...

The lethal vital zone on the high chest mass of a human is approximately 8" in diameter on average. At 500yds, that 8" target requires ~1.52 MOA accuracy. The average width of a human's shoulders is 18", which is ~3.4 MOA. If all you're doing is shooting steel, and all you need to do is hit the steel, then 3.4MOA capability is all you need for predictable hits on target. If it's actually for shooting real 2-legged creatures, it's not acceptable. Making a hit on someone at 500yds means nothing if you just put a bullet through their arm since a person can still fight with an injured arm. It's the same thing with a gut shot on a deer, or shooting a deer in the leg. They can still run for a long ways, and you'll wind up tracking it for a long time. Make an accurate vitals shot and it's typically going to be a much cleaner and faster kill. The standard for precision rifles is 1MOA or better (aka sub-MOA). If you have the option of getting a sub-MOA gun that is reliable, for close to the same amount of money as a 1.5-2.5MOA gun, it seems like a no-brainer to me.
Not to mention that M1As are very heavy, long and awkward to handle when compared to an AR, SCAR, FAL or similar weapon system.

[yuppiejr]

How much accuracy do you need? At 500 yards a 20" man size target requires 4 MOA accuracy ...

The lethal vital zone on the high chest mass of a human is approximately 8" in diameter on average. At 500yds, that 8" target requires ~1.52 MOA accuracy. The average width of a human's shoulders is 18", which is ~3.4 MOA. If all you're doing is shooting steel, and all you need to do is hit the steel, then 3.4MOA capability is all you need for predictable hits on target. If it's actually for shooting real 2-legged creatures, it's not acceptable. Making a hit on someone at 500yds means nothing if you just put a bullet through their arm since a person can still fight with an injured arm. It's the same thing with a gut shot on a deer, or shooting a deer in the leg. They can still run for a long ways, and you'll wind up tracking it for a long time. Make an accurate vitals shot and it's typically going to be a much cleaner and faster kill. The standard for precision rifles is 1MOA or better (aka sub-MOA). If you have the option of getting a sub-MOA gun that is reliable, for close to the same amount of money as a 1.5-2.5MOA gun, it seems like a no-brainer to me.
Not to mention that M1As are very heavy, long and awkward to handle when compared to an AR, SCAR, FAL or similar weapon system.

Doesn't the US military use 4 MOA as a basic standard of accuracy in battle rifles, 1 MOA on sniper rifles? Keep in mind you have another 8" "kill zone" (head) above your 8" chest kill zone.. and that someone taking a 1200 foot pound 30 caliber hit to the shoulder/arm is likely not going to be shooting back in a big hurry particularly with a likely shattered collar bone, shoulder, etc...

Seems like your argument is specifically against the M1A platform based purely on a theoretical maximum MOA capability that exceeds what a majority of shooters are capable of producing without a bench rest & hand loaded ammo using a handpicked 3 shot group. Ball ammo, which most people practice with and may be all that's widely available should a battle rifle have practical use in modern society and is a pretty big equalizer along with the general lack of field marksmanship skill even among a lot of "gun guys"... With due respect, the/weight & length argument is hogwash as all 4 platforms mentioned are available in a variety of stock and barrel length configurations that alter the ergonomics and weight of the rifle to suit the owner... The 20" Armalite AR10A2 actually weighs more than the 22" Springfield M1A standard (synthetic stock), for example...

If you're talking about price, an M1A Standard (9.3 pounds, 44.3" OAL , 22" barrel), Armalite AR-10 (9.8 pounds, 41" OAL, 20" barrel) or decent FAL (Aussie, etc... 9-10 pounds) are all going to run $1250-$1500, the minimum prices I've found for a FN-SCAR in .308 is $2600+...

So comparing two "rack grade" platforms of similar price (Armalite AR10a2 vs Springfield M1A Standard) you're basically talking about the difference in a pistol grip + DI gas system versus a traditional rifle stock profile and a piston gas system... pick one from a reputable manufacturer with ergonomics you like and it will serve you well.

To quote Walt from Fulton Armory (they make both M1A and AR10 pattern rifles)

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=291877



"I personally have both (and have written a book on the M14 and two on the AR-15), and we (Fulton ARmory) offer both. Thus, I have a little background in the subject.

First, one must acknowledge that neither platform is available in original USGI battle rifle form*. That is, any M14-type-rifle one might consider is actually a commercial semi-auto version. While the XM110 has been standardized, and one can actually purchase the Knight SR-25 on which the XM-110 is based, it's not a battle rifle; it's a sniper rifle. Further, the "ARs" that are winning matches are AR-15-types in .223 rather than AR-10-types in 7.62x51mm.

So, what is the relevance of the previous paragraph? Simply this. To generalize "reliability" is not possible as it might be with USGI-receiver- and component-based rifles; the quality and function of each vendor's offering must be considered separately. A Fed Ord M14SA with Chinese parts is not likely to be as "reliable" as just about anyone's AR-10-type rifle. For our (Futlon Armory's) part, we do not see a difference in "reliability" between our Fulton Armory M14 rifles and Fulton Armory Titan FAR.308 (AR-10-type) rifles. But then, we work really hard to build the best of each world, one rifle at a time.

So, your decision needs to be based on (1) the quality of the individual rifles you are considering, and (2) the intangibles of what appeals to you. The M14 is the last lock, stock 'n barrel rifle issued by an army; in this, it is unique, and represents the culmination of a US military tradition that goes back to the Revolutionary War and beyond. The AR-10-type is representative of the future, based on the first US rifle (AR-15/M16) to be built with aerospace technology (it was the Fairchild Aircraft and Engine Company, after all).

Whichever you choose, if you choose well you'll be happy with either. Choose poorly, and you will be happy with neither. Your vendor is going to make that difference."

[farmerj]

Milspec is pretty standard considered 4MOA.

Guess I'd like to see how badly he got ripped off if he spent $3500on and didn't feel he got what he paid for.

I paid a third of that and had a mn amu smith do my work. If you miss, don't blame the gun rambo.

[UnaStamus]

Doesn't the US military use 4 MOA as a basic standard of accuracy in battle rifles, 1 MOA on sniper rifles? Keep in mind you have another 8" "kill zone" (head) above your 8" chest kill zone.. and that someone taking a 1200 foot pound 30 caliber hit to the shoulder/arm is likely not going to be shooting back in a big hurry particularly with a likely shattered collar bone, shoulder, etc...

Seems like your argument is specifically against the M1A platform based purely on a theoretical maximum MOA capability that exceeds what a majority of shooters are capable of producing without a bench rest & hand loaded ammo using a handpicked 3 shot group. Ball ammo, which most people practice with and may be all that's widely available should a battle rifle have practical use in modern society and is a pretty big equalizer along with the general lack of field marksmanship skill even among a lot of "gun guys"... With due respect, the/weight & length argument is hogwash as all 4 platforms mentioned are available in a variety of stock and barrel length configurations that alter the ergonomics and weight of the rifle to suit the owner... The 20" Armalite AR10A2 actually weighs more than the 22" Springfield M1A standard (synthetic stock), for example...

If you're talking about price, an M1A Standard (9.3 pounds, 44.3" OAL , 22" barrel), Armalite AR-10 (9.8 pounds, 41" OAL, 20" barrel) or decent FAL (Aussie, etc... 9-10 pounds) are all going to run $1250-$1500, the minimum prices I've found for a FN-SCAR in .308 is $2600+...

So comparing two "rack grade" platforms of similar price (Armalite AR10a2 vs Springfield M1A Standard) you're basically talking about the difference in a pistol grip + DI gas system versus a traditional rifle stock profile and a piston gas system... pick one from a reputable manufacturer with ergonomics you like and it will serve you well.

To quote Walt from Fulton Armory (they make both M1A and AR10 pattern rifles)

...

The only time I've seen 4MOA used as a standard was for the minimum accuracy needed by the M855 cartridge, not for the rifle. Winchester lost their Lake City contract to Alliant because they were pushing 8MOA, and Alliant was able to pull 4MOA or better consistently to match the test. That's for the 5.56, which is an assault rifle and not a battle rifle.
I have not seen published standards for battle rifles, but most battle rifles in use in the military are used in a DMR or SASS capacity, so accuracy is very much a consideration. The unit from the 504th/82nd Airborne that was attached to my group carried M14s with ACOGs and M80 ammunition, and they generally ran off the concept of "minute of man". They used them as a unit, and were not issued them as a whole by Big Army. As such, it was up to the unit to determine the needed accuracy, and any needed modifications that would need to be done out of the checkbooks of that unit.
When you go to more reliable and accurate platforms like the newer Mk17, you see a much better system being implemented and replacing all the previous battle rifle configurations. If the Mk17 becomes more standardized beyond SOCOM use, it will likely replace every last issued M14/Mk14 in the services. As it stands, all semi-automatic sniper rifles being used by the top level units are the Mk11, Mk12, M110, Mk17, Mk20, LaRue OBR and some custom ARs. I don't know of any units (conventional, specops or other) still using M14s if they have the option of a .308 AR platform. If you know of any, let me know.

The kill zone on the head is not 8". The lethal zone in the head is the areas containing the CNS, which is at around nose bridge/brow level. Snipers refer to this as the "apricot", because it's the size of an apricot, and then the lethal zone descends down the spinal column into the high chest mass. Granted, a 7.62 will do massive damage to the head, however a shot to the cheek, jaw or upper portion of the skull is not considered to be reliably lethal. The problem is that rounds like the M118LR and other long range loads, as well as FMJ/BALL rounds do not reliably expand. Attack angle will determine bullet yaw, so variables are in place to basically punch a hole through the mass before the bullet can start to yaw or deform and cause more damage. Mk319 is a different story, as are hunting and duty loads, since they are all designed to expand or fragment.

You don't need a benchrest and hand loaded ammo to shoot sub-MOA. If we're talking about 7.62/.308, there are numerous match and hunting loads commercially available for use that are sub-MOA accurate, as well as M118LR and Mk319 130gr SOST milspec loads. All are readily available for purchase. If a buyer cheaps out and buys Lithuanian surplus M80 or steel Wolfsh*t, it's not the fault of the rifle for poor accuracy, it's the fault of the shooter for cheaping out, regardless of the rifle used. Still, if you have non-match ammunition, higher quality rifles will still give better results.

As far as Fulton Armory, I recognize that they know what they're doing. Still, those rifles are not cheap. The battle rifle grade models start at $2400 and are guaranteed to shoot better than 2.5MOA. I call that unacceptable for a modern .308/7.62. The match grade ones are $2500+ and are better with under 1.5MOA accuracy. I still consider that unacceptable, and I also question the consistency of that grouping once the system heats up. Compare these to say, a LaRue OBR, PredatAR, PredatOBR, KAC SR25, SCAR 17S, Colt 901, etc, which are all in the same price ranges, and are all sub-MOA capable. The National Match and M25 are sub-MOA, which is admirable, but they're $3100-$4k. Compare that to the LaRue OBR, GAP-10, Les Baer Monolith, and the lot, which are all in the low to mid $3k range and all 0.5MOA or better capable. Hell, numerous DPMS LR308 models are available for under $1500 and are capable of sub-MOA accuracy (and I hate to admit that since I hate DPMS).

The M1A was a great platform in its time, but it was a time when the only other option was a $15,000 HK PSG-1. Now we have so many AR and similar variant options, and the M1A is old technology that isn't going to get updated. It's a hobby system at this point.

Guess I'd like to see how badly he got ripped off if he spent $3500on and didn't feel he got what he paid for.

I paid a third of that and had a mn amu smith do my work. If you miss, don't blame the gun rambo.

CONSISTENT accuracy is the key. Most people think that simply shooting a rifle 3 or 5 times into one group determines the rifles accuracy. It does for a one-group volley. This is why custom builders like Les Baer insist on 10 shot groups for best results and predictability. A single 3rd or 5rd group does very little for establishing consistent repeatable accuracy under tactical precision match or combat conditions. M1As do okay when they're slow-fired. M1As do poorly when they're run hard. Mine ran fine for the first group, but the groups always opened up as the barrel got hotter. On my ARs, they don't open up. On my bolt guns, they don't.
I have talked ad-nauseum with other shooters on places like SnipersHide, and everyone that I talk to with accurized M1As has had very poor dollar to accuracy payoffs. The accuracy has been less than stellar, rarely repeatable, and very expensive. Feel free to take a trip over there and start reading. To date, the only Mk14/M14 rifles the military has had high accuracy with (outside of Camp Perry and AMU) are the SEI Crazy Horse upgrades, which I do believe are somewhere around $5k-$6k (not including the rifle). Some I'm sure went to other places to get their rifles tuned, and I'm sure it was ridiculously expensive there too.
A good friend of mine (former USMC) used to shoot National Match and was at Camp Perry numerous times. He ran 3 custom M1As. One was for the competition, one was his backup, and one was always in the shop getting work done to repair, modify or replace something. He rotated his rifles as they went into and out of service. He also noted that his accuracy was good, but no matter what he did to the M1As, they were never equal to what people are producing today with precision .308 ARs.

By the way, using "rambo" as a pejorative makes you sound like a liberal.

[farmerj]

Sure thing rambo,


My m14 and my m1 did just fine for me and i would trust them explicitly for any task I needed them for.

If i REALLY want the reliability and accuracy, I'd turn to a bolt gun.

You experience is your experience.