Springfield M1A Standard 308 Review

[jim Glass]

Not very often I get a chance to review a gun. Took a gun class Saturday that was all about AR-15s. In the afternoon we went to a shooting range and went through several excersizes that the police routinely do. I learned a lot and the instructor noticed my hammer spring was upside down in the receiver. Strange because I checked my 300 Blackout and my 9MM AR and the hammer springs were properly installed on those ARs.

After the shooting part of the class was over one of the participants broke out some 223 tracers and fired off 5 or 6 of those. Then he got out this huge rifle, huge compare to an AR-15. It had large gun sights on the receiver and some tubing under the barrel. Looked a little like one of those SKS rifles. Guy had a hard time inserting the magazine. First time he fired it, it fired but 2 or 3 rounds came flying out of the receiver. I kinda thought, hope this guy didn't spend a lot of money on this rifle. They loaded it up again and the semi-automatic worked perfectly. Next, the guy said, "anyone else want to shoot it"? I respond, "sure, I will." He hands me the rifle and a loaded magazine with these huge bullets inside. The rifle felt my old Marlin 10 gage super goose. I tried and tried to load the magazine into the rifle and couldn't. Someone stepped up and inserted it for me. There was a small square pin or dog in the receiver. The magazine was tilted then kinda rotated somewhat to get it to insert. I'm sure it would be easy once you have done it a dozen or so times. I looked on the receiver and it was stamped "Springfield Armory". I have a 1911 45 ACP made by the same company. I fired 4 shots and thought the rifle felt real good and I hit the target.

I had to search the web to determine what this rifle was. Turns out this was the cheaper version with the cammo graphics, priced at $1295. Other versions can sell for $1800. I wouldn't care to carry this rifle very far, must have been 10lb or better. My old Marlin 10 gage weighed over 12lb and it was always stransported by boat not carried.

I have come to the conclusion these AR-15's are well suited for us senior citizens.

[kyratshooter]

Back in the day we used to hump that rifle, 6-8 magazines and a 70 pound load out, through the boonies day in and day out. I have carried one more miles than I care to remember.

There were still a lot of them in service into the early 1970s.

[crashdive123]

Didn't have to hump it very far, but many, many round through them. I like them a lot.

[jim Glass]

There were still a lot of them in service into the early 1970s.

I would think by now the magazine would insert easier, or is that a new problem? What was this rifle called back in the 70's?

[kyratshooter]

The magazine issue is unique to your rifle or the Springfield series I am sure. The ones we used had no problems with magazine use.

Fact is many of the rifles made today use that magazine due to availability.

The rifle was designated as the M14 and came in two versions. That was because the goal was to have every man in the U.S. forces carrying the same weapon. After all, we are a nation of riflemen, right!

It did not work out. Sad to say that the rifle was obsolete when it was adopted, better rifles were already available, and the project/concept died while in service.

1. The early models were select fire with a switch to change from semi-auto for full-auto.

We were still stuck in the BAR or squad automatic rifle tactical phase that was left over from WW1 and WW2 where the squad base of fire was a box magazine full auto select fire or such a low cycle rate that singe shots could be fired. The squad automatic weapon was also used as the designated marksman.

It was soon discovered, as if there had been no testing done before adaption that the M14 was uncontrollable in full auto fire. At that point they made a heavy barrel version with several adaptations for the squad automatic rifle role. None were really successful.

The British tactical system was slowly superseded by a modified German system where the M60 became the squad automatic weapon, the M14 was used as the designated marksman (if you could find one) and all other squad members carried an M16 or a grenade launcher. (no one liked that arrangement so the 203 was born)

2. As time went on, during the 1960s, the select fire M14 option was dropped and the issue rifle was semi-auto only.

The M60 became the squad base of fire even though it was supposed to be part of a "weapons squad" and allocated to position by the Platoon leader or platoon Sgt 3 to a platoon. That did not work for long either.

We were really confused for about 25 years after WW2. It was much like the situation of our Civil War, and WW1, where weapons had outrun tactical doctrine.

High up planners realized that even though we had won WW2 there were many things wrong with out tactics and equipment. For every 3 Germans killed 5 Americans had died. Besides that we had a serious leadership problem in the small units due to high fatality rates of PL, PS and squad leaders. (at one point Pattons 3rd Army was so short of small unit leaders that orders were given to NOT engage in any tactics other than line assault under "walking fire" lower than battalion level)

The German organization allowed the units to operate without putting the leaders in danger and even when the leaders were casualties the unit organization survived due to a solid chain of command inside each squad.

The Germans used the belt fed machinegun squad as their base of organization. 2 MG units to a squad. Riflemen existed to protect the MG unit and provide final assault firepower. The leaders remained with the base of fire and directed the fire of the MG, squad leader with one gun and assistant SL on the second gun. The ammo carrier was also the designated marksman and was supposed to be equipped with a ZF42 rifle. He fired as the team leader instructed.

That was exactly opposite the U.S. philosophy or leading from the front with the leadership moving with the assault unit and making themselves the primary target of any designated fire.

Life expectancy of a U.S. PL in combat was 15 seconds.

I digress, but the point is that often weapons dictate tactics and tactics control the view of weapons use.

The Russians had learned from their experiences during WW2 and immediately adopted the AK47 as standard issue, calling it an assault weapon, developed the RPD and RPK MG systems, and the SVD as designated marksman rifle, all by 1950-60. They had completely embraced the German philosophy with the added touch of Soviet mass frontal bayonet charge as an option.

All through this time the goal of the U.S. forces was to have everyone charging the enemy with the same rifle and a Browning .30 machine gun somewhere off to the side and not directly under command of the squad leader, providing cover.

The U.S. lagged behind for two more wars and 25 years and still lack some of the primary training needed not only for efficiency in combat but also for survival in combat.

The motto of the Infantry is still "Follow Me!" and not "Shoot that guy!"

[jim Glass]

Interesting, I didn't know about any of this, thanks.