JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
I have the option to own an M1A Tanker with walnut stock OR an M1A SOCOM 16 CQB. Which would you choose?
I would definitely take the tanker over the socom. More personality, better looking, classic wood and metal.

If going the tactical route I would much rather have the g3 in 12.5" length for less $. 12.5" Only loses 5% energy over 16", super handy size much smaller than m1a, low recoil (about like 300 BLK) means you can fire it accurately closer to an AR15 rate of fire. Can be shot folded if needed.
Example of recoil during rapid fire. This is the 8.5" version which has more recoil than the 12.5"
 
With the SOCOM, I was left with the impression that it was a very specialised tool for a very specific set of conditions and in that roll it would be the perfect solution. Outside of those conditions it had a bunch of stuff that just kind of felt bolted on

But to be fair, my experience was limited to a couple 3 or 4 magazines out in the forests
 
Also I ain't a fan of the the dumbazz Bill board proclaiming "SOCOM" on the other rifle....:D
That's the biggest sticking point for me. I don't need my rifle to tell people it's "tactical" or something
Another vote against BILLBOARD BRANDING <---- obnoxious. It would be interesting to know how many firearms are not purchased due to that style of branding (OH and WARNING: READ MANUAL).

ui_sterile.jpeg
This SOCOM 16 has identity issues...has a sterile op-rod. :confused: (I know it isn't currently greased) Initially...I purchased it for the Sage chassis it was sitting in and had not planned to keep the barreled action.
 
I've never shot either of those examples.
But I think if I wanted another non turnbolt chambered in .308, it would look something like this.

Not among the choices, I know, but ?? 20221120_111644.jpg
 

Upcoming Events

New Classified Ads

Back Top