New M1A from Spingfield

[Gyrene]

The Instruction does not cover the point of the hammer, which should be greased, at least lightly. It does not address the Operating Rod, the Operating Rod Spring, the Operating Rod Spring Guide, or the bottom of the barrel where the Operating Rod rubs.

If you have the M1A rifle disassembled to the extent shown in the photos, you will need to remove the Operating Rod Spring and Operating Rod Spring Guide from the Operating Rod. Do this by gripping the Operating Rod Spring and Operating Rod Spring Guide where they emerge from the rear of the hollow part of the Operating Rod, tightly with your strong hand. CAUTION!!! YOU ARE ABOUT TO GET THE PRESSURE FROM THE OPERATING ROD SPRING PRESSING AGAINST YOUR GRIP Use a small screw driver, or other (non-marking sharp edged tool) to press the pin holding the Operating Rod Spring Guide out to the side. BE VERY CAREFUL, THE OPERATING ROD SPRING IS STRONG! Ease the spring out of the Operating Rod, until it is all the way out, and lay it on the table.

To properly lube the Operating Rod, move the Operating Rod toward the muzzle of the M1A, place a very small amount of grease just in front of the Operating Rod Guide, and smear it all the way around the tube of the Operating Rod. Work the Operating Rod forward and rearward several times and check to see if the grease is passing through the Operating Rod Guide (it should, at least some of it). Wipe off any large amounts that will drop off later. With the Operating Rod toward the muzzle of the M1A, place a small amount of grease on the barrel just in front of where it screws into the receiver (the bottom of the barrel when the M1A is upright), and smear this grease forward and rearward to be sure the whole area (the bottom of the large diameter of the barrel) is covered, then work the Operating Rod forward and rearward several times to be sure the Operating Rod is lubed in the area where it will contact the bottom of the barrel.

Now to lube the Operating Rod Spring, and the Operating Rod Guide, I just grab a handfull (not quite, just some on your finger) of gun grease, and run my hand over the Operating Rod Spring, from one end to the other (a terrible mess if you are not careful). Then insert the Operating Rod Spring into the Operating Rod tube, Lube the Operating Rod Spring Guide with some gun grease, a little all over is good. When you reinstall the Operating Rod Spring Guide, you will see there is a point on the wide end, that can be put back in rightside up, or wrong side up. With the M1A in the upright position (ready to fire), the point is what holds the front of the magazine in the M1A, so place it accordingly.

Now the toughest part! Take the greasy Operating Rod Spring and Operating Rod Spring Guide between your fingers and guide it back into the Operating Rod tube, it gets tougher the further it goes (do not kink the spring!), until you can put the Operating Rod Spring Guide back into the receiver where you can push the pin back into place to hold it.

Move the Operating Rod forward and rearward several times to make sure everything works as it should. Reassemble the M1A to its stock, and it is ready to take to the range to fire.

ANYTIME YOU WORK ON A SEMI-AUTO RIFLE, NEVER NEVER LOAD A FULL MAGAZINE AND START FIRING! NEVER LOAD MORE THAN 2 ROUNDS, IN CASE IT DOUBLES! IF YOU HAVE A FULL MAGAZINE AND IT DOUBLES, IT MIGHT NOT STOP UNTIL YOU HAVE AN EMPTY MAGAZINE!!! THAT CAN BE VERY DANGEROUS!!!

After you have fired a couple of rounds that fire semi-automatically, then it should be OK to load a full magazine.

You should get a copy of the Government Technical Manual FM23-5, I believe is the correct one for the M14/M1A.

Also get the North Cape Publications Book on the M14 and its Clones, it has a lot of handy tips and is about $19.95 (NO, I DO NOT WORK FOR OR RECEIVE ANY COMPENSATION FROM NORTH CAPE PUBLICATIONS, NEVER HAVE.)

If you are flush with money, or can afford it, Jerry Kuhnhausen has an excellent book available, "The U. S. .30 Caliber Gas Operated Service Rifles", it is an excellent book to have if you have an M1 Garand, M14, or M1A.

I hope that this helps.

[7mmag6]

Thanks gyrene, I think the very first thing Ill do is call springfield, and try to get some answers about some of what Ive been reading here and other sources, it seems to me that springfield could do a bit better job of informing potential owners of the quirks and potential problems that could exist, Ill feel better when I get it in my hands and try to remember what I learned eons ago, i think that mil spec ammo should (I say should be ok, after all Ive read Im not sure about that even, there is some real horror stories about springfield m1as out there) well at any rate, Im not going to rush into anything until im dam sure I know what the hell im doing and what to expect. thanks gyrene, you will be hearing from me Ill bet, I live quite aways away from any one who owns one of these, so Im going to take it slow and careful

[Gyrene]

7mmag6 - I wouldn't worry too much about that happening. I read the report from the good Dr. William J. Bruchey, and from what he deduced after his analysis, the barrel was the problem and it was made of material that should have been scraped off with the slag when they were preparing the steel.

The fact is, when you are generating pressures that reach the high 50,000 ranges, there is always the possibility of failure. Most of us can't afford to buy a rifle that has been made with steel that is near perfect.

When steel is manufactured it is alloyed in the furnace, by adding percentages of various materials that create certain desireable qualities that provide results we want. The real alloy is not homogenous, rather it is a collection of pockets of various alloying materials, and iron, that is partially mixed, and as a result it is imperfect. Samples of the steel are tested and analyzed, telling the manufacturer of the steel that the steel meets specific standards, or doesn't. If it doesn't meet the standards it is downgraded to lesser standard (quality), or scrapped depending upon what standards it meets or doesn't.

This is the importance of the "Heat Lots", of which the manufacturer records and keeps the data. It is usually available by request (and for a fee). The more testing that is done, the higher the cost. Testing just like inspection does not build quality into the material, but testing and inspection can reveal inferior quality.

The process of heat treating is done to enhance the strength or other qualities of the steel. In the case of the barrel, it appears that it needs to meet a Rockwell C-30 to C-36 or so, with the receiver meeting various Rockwell C hardnesses, depending upon where on the receiver, varying from about Rockwell C-32 to as high as Rockwell C-49 in different locations. A file is about Rockwell C-65, for comparison. The higher the Rockwell C number, the more brittle the steel becomes, and the higher carbon content it must have to reach that hardness. Case hardening does help for certain applications where you need a hard dent and wear resistant surface and a malleable interior. The good Dr. explained some of these things, and I suppose you would need a rudimentary understanding of material sciences to really pick up everything he said.

I will add, that we don't know if "Chris" had ever been shooting the extra "HOT LOADS" for shooting to 1,000 yards. Many of these loads reach over 60,000 CUP (something like PSI), in order to keep the 7.62 x 51 (.308) bullet stable out to 1,000 yards. A normal 7.62 x 51 (.308) loading will result in a bullet tumbling at somewhere around 850 yards. As an aside, a .30-06 with normal loading will begin tumbling between 1,100 and 1,150 yards. If he had ever shot those hot loads, then he did add to the imminent failure (made it occur sooner), which would have happened anyhow with that barrel.

[Gyrene]

I did want to make the comment comparing the investment casting with a forging, for any who might be interested.

An investment casting is that, a casting, which by its very nature not as strong or versatile as a forging.

Before anyone runs out screaming that Investment cast receivers are going to blow up and hurt people, I want to add that Investment castings have been used successfully for receivers for a long long time, and will continue to be. The process is very good at making parts that are very hard to make without a lot of machining. The castings can offer surfaces that are within a thousandth of an inch of any dimension, thus eliminating many machining operations, making the guns that all of us can afford.

Now forgings on the other hand are fairly expensive, but strong in all respects. When price is no object, a forging is the only choice for strength and service life. This is the main reason the .30 caliber U. S. rifles had forged receivers.

My personal belief is that the M1A that was the subject of the previous inputs, would not have failed with that much destruction, with a forged receiver, if it had failed at all with that barrel. The analysis said the barrel failed, the receiver failed because the barrel failed, and the receiver is an Investment casting, which is not as strong as a forging would have been. My personal feeling about that.

Oh, you ask, who makes the M14 or M1a with forged receivers? Smith Enterprises did make their early ones with forged receivers, I understand that some of the early ARMSCOR receivers were forgings if not all of them. Federal Ordinance made some with forged receivers. All of the Chinese M14's, NORINCO and Poly Tech, are forged receivers made with the same forging dies that the USGI M14's were made with, and machined with the same machine tools the USGI M14's were made with.

Some of the commercial M14's/M1A's are made with a machined billet (more expensive, but stronger than an Investment casting, and not quite as expensive or as strong as a forging).

Just some thoughts.

[gdphelps]

7.62 X 51 nato and the 308 winchester are the same case wize, from what I can determine. The nato does head space just a little bit more. Any way if it is chamber for the 7.62 X 51 nato, a standard 308 winchester will fit and work just fine.

[Gyrene]

gdphelps - The 7.62 x 51mm and the .308 are different, and this point has been cussed and discussed many times on many forums. I do not remember the exact differences, at the moment, but if you have a reloading manual, it should define the differences.

I have seen M1A's with .308 chambers, and some with 7.62 x 51mm chambers (at least that is how the barrels were marked. If a 7.62 x 51mm case has been fired in a 7.62 x 51mm chamber it should not fit into a .308 chamber without doing a full length case resizing, and some won't even then.

Also .308 brass is not as heavy as 7.62 x 51mm military brass, and will not take as much abuse as 7.62 x 51mm military brass. The .308 cases will separate about 1/2" from the base anytime after the 3rd reload You do not want this to happen in a rapid fire string!. The 7.62 x 51mm military brass will separate about 1/2" from the base sometime after 5 reloads, and I have seen some that went to 10 reloads before the case separated NOT RECOMMENDED!

`

[MAX7.62]

7.62 NATO is a couple of thousandths looser than .308 simply for more reliable feeding through belt feds. At the ammo plant the 7.62 spits out of a machine - as far as standard battle and range fodder, some gets linked, some goes in boxes so it's simpler to have "shorter" specs because, again, it actually lends itself to more reliable feeding, especially in belt machine guns.

You guys know that I'm and FAL nut, but I do appreciate the artwork of Springfield. My M1A was made at Sprinfield ARMORY without the "inc.". The first number in the serial number is a zero! I ran the history on my serial number and found out that my rifle spent most of it's military service at Ft. Rucker as a training rifle. It had a full arsenal re-build, then went back to the shop about 6 months later for it's re-fit into the "new" fiberglass stock, where upon it was returned to the rack in position #25 and never re-issued before being retired. I bought it out of a collection at a ridiculous price - under a grand !! in arsenal fresh, unfired condition with the brown plastic stock - - - with the number "25" stenciled under the front of the handgrip part of the stock! I have the rifle in wood furniture right now just because I like the wood, but the original glass stock is carfully wrapped and in the vault. I guess it labels me as a philistine, but I have shot it, many times, in fact I've beat the guts out of it on the range, that's what it was made for! It always works, it always shoots a nice group, it always makes me smile!

I hear it a lot - "you've killed the value on that weapon by shooting it!" Uhh? killed the value to who? In my book if you can't use it, it has no value!

[Thrawn]

I'd shoot the heck outta it too. That's what they were made for! :nod:

[TULAver]

To add to what Gyrene was saying about Rc hardness affecting the toughness of the metal, good steel(meaning steel that has been processed to homogenous state, showing no carbon inclusions or alloy banding) displays certain crystalline paterns when it is properly tempered and annealed.

Martensite, Bainite, and Pearlite are your main formations, with Pearlite consisting of larger grain crystals, making for a more maleable, softer tougher material; Martensite is found in the higher 50s-into the 60s Rc hardness, and is a much smaller and denser grain pattern, very hard but not usually brittle unless it was baddly tempered; and annealing martensite should yield Bainite, which is between the other two in grain density, toughness, and hardness. With the correct process, you can yield good bainite structured steel which can be both extremely hard and tough at the same time. Bainite blades are routinely put through torture tests where they are flexed at radical angles, sometimes tip to tang, and they show memory characteristics much like that of titanium, only in a MUCH harder substance. The grain type of the steel is affected by the speed of quench, the liquid used to quench, various coatings on the metal to retard the process, and of course the annealing/stress relieving processes applied after tempering.

In so far as making working implements, such as tools and knives, pieces that are subject to repetive stress, Bainite is the most desireable grain structure for steel. I do not know, but I assume the same is true in reference to parts on the gun, especially the receiver and barrel.

[Rex Kramer]

Originally Posted by Thrawn

I wanna get a M1A but cant afford Fulton armory so I'm thinking of a service grade from Spingfield. The only real question I have is if the 7.62 nato is different from the 308 win then why does Springfield list both chamberings? Are the rifles chambered in EITHER caliber or is the difference in cartridge size neglible for these rifles? I don't have much experience in these rifles, but have always wanted one. Also, are they making them with bayonet lugs and flashhiders now that the ban is gone? Thanks :right:

Visit Different's M1A site and then visit my web site.
Make sure you visit all of the M1A - M14 FORUMS I link to.

IMHO, for what you get FA is overpriced. A complete LRB is a better rifle for about the same money.
SA is a little less $$ and fine as long as you clean and grease it first and be prepared to install a GI extractor and spring. A used SA can be a great deal.

I invested in a new SA Scout Squad back in 2001 and shoot only select NATO surplus ammo.

I see you are also in the great state of Georgia - bayo lugs and bayonets are allowed here.
They only work on the 22" barrel and not on the 16" or my favorite... the 18" barrel.

Good luck.

[Thrawn]

Thanks Rex. :right: