Which ring height should I use for my M1A scope?

[7N6Wolf 61]

I am planning on mounting a scope on my Springfield M1A. I settled for a Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14x44mm scope (one inch tube). I am planning on using a steel 4th Generation mount from Springfield Armory, and I have also ordered a cheek piece so I can get a decent cheek weld while using the scope. I am still not sure what to get regarding the rings, though. What height do I want (I am leaning toward high) with this scope and rifle. The Springfield mounts already seem to be fairly high, so I doubt I would need to get any extra high variant of rings.

 

I am leaning toward some one inch Zeiss rings at http://www.tactical-store.com/ts-zs-mt-vrings1in.html I don't know much about ring types, but I am assuming that permanent rings would (at least in theory) be more stable when it comes to holding the scope, so I am leaning toward that type. Is my initial idea of going high for the height a good idea, or should I go lower or even higher?

 

Should I be set once I have the scope (already have that), the rings, and the mount, or is there anything additional I need to get this thing mounted (I already know that I will have to remove the stripper clip guide to mount the scope)?

 

Sorry if my inquiries seem rather simplistic; this is going to be the first time I mount a scope on a rifle.

[Kliegl 304]

The M1A, being an improved Garand, throws the brass in a decidedly

odd, and awesome, way. As such, your normal scope mount concepts won't work.

 

I personally don't think an M1A is particularly suited, either physically,

or culturally, to a scope, but whatever works for you.

 

The first thing I would do, if I were you, is to decide whether or not

I want to be able to use the iron sights with the scope mounted. I am thinking,

based on the look of the mount, that the mount itself might interfere with the sights.

 

Second thing you need to consider is the aperture, not the tube size, of the scope.

44mm is almost two inches big. You want a ring height that will allow the scope to

actually clear the rifle's barrel, i.e., the scope's front end must have clearance

above the barrel. A 28mm aperture needs less height than a 44mm (8mm, to be precise).

 

Third thing you need to consider is the path of the brass. That scope mount rail is

in two pieces for a reason, the brass flies in between. The lower the scope tube, the more

of a chance you will throw brass into the scope.

 

Fourth thing is cheek weld. The lower the scope, the better your bond to the rifle will be

and the better your shots will be.

 

Short version: Assuming the iron sights don't work, put the scope as low as you can that the

front will physically clear, but cycle brass by hand with something wrapped around the scope for

ding protection to see if the spent cases will clear. Then, if the hand cycled rounds clear, keeping

the scope's middle wrapped (with like saran wrap), go test it out. If it dings, you need higher rings.

[YARP 300]

Stay away from high rings, your going to have a hard enough time getting proper cheek weld if your used to irons (ie. you've been shooting one way for years, it takes time to re adjust)

[7N6Wolf 61]

The M1A, being an improved Garand, throws the brass in a decidedly

odd, and awesome, way. As such, your normal scope mount concepts won't work.

 

I personally don't think an M1A is particularly suited, either physically,

or culturally, to a scope, but whatever works for you.

 

I already have enough Soviet bloc weapons and I am trying to get off the beaten path. Sure, a scope on these things is odd (I already know that, as you need a cheek piece just to use a scope), but the existence of the M21 rifle proves that it can work. Not to mention I won't have to deal with the PSL's pencil barrel of Century's out-of-spec M76's this way.

 

And it could be worse. I mean, I am not trying to put a scope on an AK or an SKS.

 

The first thing I would do, if I were you, is to decide whether or not

I want to be able to use the iron sights with the scope mounted. I am thinking,

based on the look of the mount, that the mount itself might interfere with the sights.

 

I could probably just remove the cheek piece if it became an issue; some M14 mounts don't seem to be low enough by themselves to interfere with iron sights.

 

Second thing you need to consider is the aperture, not the tube size, of the scope.

44mm is almost two inches big. You want a ring height that will allow the scope to

actually clear the rifle's barrel, i.e., the scope's front end must have clearance

above the barrel. A 28mm aperture needs less height than a 44mm (8mm, to be precise).

 

I will probably have to sniff this out in further detail once I get my hands on an actual mount so I can make a comparison.

 

Third thing you need to consider is the path of the brass. That scope mount rail is

in two pieces for a reason, the brass flies in between. The lower the scope tube, the more

of a chance you will throw brass into the scope.

 

I will have to keep a close eye on this. The guy who sold me the scope said I would not have to worry about a shell deflector, given that M14 scope mounts are generally pretty high, but then again, I do not know just how knowledgeable that guy was.

 

Fourth thing is cheek weld. The lower the scope, the better your bond to the rifle will be

and the better your shots will be.

 

Hm. Perhaps I should go with low rings if possible.

 

Short version: Assuming the iron sights don't work, put the scope as low as you can that the

front will physically clear, but cycle brass by hand with something wrapped around the scope for

ding protection to see if the spent cases will clear. Then, if the hand cycled rounds clear, keeping

the scope's middle wrapped (with like saran wrap), go test it out. If it dings, you need higher rings.

 

 

Stay away from Springfield mounts, they just dont hold a zero that well. M14s are excellent scoped weapons, they were desighned from the begining for optics unlike a FAL. Heres a good place to start for M14 acesories hes THE TROMIX of M14s, Ron Smith. Also the M14 fireing lines is a great forum to ask experts M14 related questions.

 

http://www.smithente...products09.html

 

How would those accessories and such work? The Springfield M1A is not built to military specifications (it uses parts made from castings instead of being forged) and I have heard this can cause an issue with a fair deal of M14 scope mounts. Sure, a mil-spec M14 would be interesting, but I was not going to spend a fortune on a Fulton Armory rifle.

 

I have heard the issues were with the third generation Springfield mounts. I haven't heard of the Fourth Generation mounts getting so much flak.

 

Stay away from high rings, your going to have a hard enough time getting proper cheek weld if your used to irons (ie. you've been shooting one way for years, it takes time to re adjust)

 

I will have to keep this in mind. I am used to using the iron sights on this rifle.

[Razorback 72]

I have a Springfield National Match with the Springfield Government Model Scope 3rd Gen mount and Springfield rings. Sunday I swapped out the Springfield scope for my others with Leopold QRW high rings. They work great. Using the 44mm and 1 inch tube you might be able to use the low rings. From the pictures, I am using from 50 to 56 MM objective scopes and there is plenty of room to spare. Using a 44mm objective, I think the low rings will work, and aid in getting a better cheek weld. The 3rd gen mount is trick to install, not sure about the 4th gen. The stripper guide is removed, and replaced with a new guide with rollpin, be careful not to drive the roll pin in too far as it will hit the top of the bolt as the action comes back. I had to tighten and mallet the mount, alternating as you go to install. This is included in the directions because the mount goes in to a cuttout in the receiver and is formed to the receiver as you tighten it up. It is supposed to be able to be removed and reinstalled without changing the point of impact, but only on the rifle it was formed/ installed on. The thumb screws will break if you overtighten them, so don't overdo it. I removed the mount and scope at the range and verified that the point of impact doesn't change, works very well IMHO!

[7N6Wolf 61]

I have a Springfield National Match with the Springfield Government Model Scope 3rd Gen mount and Springfield rings. Sunday I swapped out the Springfield scope for my others with Leopold QRW high rings. They work great. Using the 44mm and 1 inch tube you might be able to use the low rings. From the pictures, I am using from 50 to 56 MM objective scopes and there is plenty of room to spare. Using a 44mm objective, I think the low rings will work, and aid in getting a better cheek weld. The 3rd gen mount is trick to install, not sure about the 4th gen. The stripper guide is removed, and replaced with a new guide with rollpin, be careful not to drive the roll pin in too far as it will hit the top of the bolt as the action comes back. I had to tighten and mallet the mount, alternating as you go to install. This is included in the directions because the mount goes in to a cuttout in the receiver and is formed to the receiver as you tighten it up. It is supposed to be able to be removed and reinstalled without changing the point of impact, but only on the rifle it was formed/ installed on. The thumb screws will break if you overtighten them, so don't overdo it. I removed the mount and scope at the range and verified that the point of impact doesn't change, works very well IMHO!

 

I have not gotten around to putting the mount on the rifle (I still need to get my hands on some basic tools like a punch), but I would assume that the mount would sit at around the same height as that older third generation mount of yours.

 

I am going to try low rings and see how things work. Unfortunately, what I ordered is out of stock and will take a bit longer to arrive. Ah well, I guess there is no huge hurry, as I still have other things to do in the meantime (get my hands on a Saiga 5.45, pick up my Gen 4 G19 on layaway when my CCW permit shows up, etc.).

[GREYLUPO 358]

Stay away from Springfield mounts, they just dont hold a zero that well. M14s are excellent scoped weapons, they were desighned from the begining for optics unlike a FAL. Heres a good place to start for M14 acesories hes THE TROMIX of M14s, Ron Smith. Also the M14 fireing lines is a great forum to ask experts M14 related questions.

 

http://www.smithente...products09.html

 

 

My dsa FAL will hold 1 1/2 -2 moa at 100 yards with match ammo, specifically black hills 168g bthp, and 3-31/2 with surplus. Its scoped with a dsa extreme duty scope mount. AWESOME. The same groups or better as a standard M1A

 

I know the fal is easier to scope than a M1A. I love the M1A but I think the FAL is a better all around weapon.

[7N6Wolf 61]

Stay away from Springfield mounts, they just dont hold a zero that well. M14s are excellent scoped weapons, they were desighned from the begining for optics unlike a FAL. Heres a good place to start for M14 acesories hes THE TROMIX of M14s, Ron Smith. Also the M14 fireing lines is a great forum to ask experts M14 related questions.

 

http://www.smithente...products09.html

 

 

My dsa FAL will hold 1 1/2 -2 moa at 100 yards with match ammo, specifically black hills 168g bthp, and 3-31/2 with surplus. Its scoped with a dsa extreme duty scope mount. AWESOME. The same groups or better as a standard M1A

 

I know the fal is easier to scope than a M1A. I love the M1A but I think the FAL is a better all around weapon.

 

I have not tired a FAL before, but this M1A is proving to be a bit irritating when it comes to scoping the gun (I am using the Springfield Armory 4th Generation steel mount). The low rings work just fine, but the bullets keep striking a bit to the right, and I cannot adjust my scope further to the left to compensate for this. I have tried removing the mount and adjusting a few things (including the crown screw and rear set apparatus that mounts in the place where the stripper clip guide used to be), but I am still having issues with the aim being a bit off to the right. Maybe I mounted something in a slightly crooked manner, but I cannot seem to get to the bottom of it right now. My gun is holding a zero, but it is in the wrong place.

 

Maybe I will ask a gunsmith about this issue, as I cannot seem to remedy it as of yet. At least I should be able to find out what I am doing wrong here.

 

I once thought of eventually getting a match grade M14 style rifle once I got good with shooting. As annoying as this thing is proving to mount, I will probably forget about that idea and get something else when I want a more accurate gun (perhaps a DPMS LR308).

Edited February 7, 2011 by 7N6Wolf

[jjvgnslngr 3]

With the issues you're having, I would suggest checking out Sadlak mounts. They will match the mount to your receiver if it is out of spec.

[Tokageko 8]

You could also try going to Millet angle-loc rings. They attach to weaver/picatiny rails, and they allow for windage adjustment.

[7N6Wolf 61]

With the issues you're having, I would suggest checking out Sadlak mounts. They will match the mount to your receiver if it is out of spec.

 

I will see what the gunsmith says about this. I would think that the mount would not be an issue, as it is a newer one (4th Generation) from Springfield Armory (one would think they would make stuff to match their out-of-spec rifles). If it is the mount, I will try to get it refunded and perhaps try to go with Sadlak.

 

You could also try going to Millet angle-loc rings. They attach to weaver/picatiny rails, and they allow for windage adjustment.

 

Interesting. I never knew that there were rings that did such a thing.

 

[7N6Wolf 61]

I finally heard back from the gunsmith, and it turns out that the Springfield 4th Generation steel mount is a bit out-of-spec (it must be made to the specifications of a mil-spec M14, not an M1A made from castings...why Springfield would sell something more suited for a Fulton Armory gun is beyond me). The gunsmith managed to shim it somehow and it is holding a zero now. Hopefully it will stay that way (otherwise I will have to take it to the gunsmith for more work).

 

So, if any of you are actually planning on scoping an M1A, get the Sadlak mount and get it matched to your receiver. Steer clear of Springfield Armory's 4th Generation mount (I may complain to them about this).