Springfield Armory 3rd & 4th Gen scope mount problems. - Page 3 - M14 Forum
M14 Forum Keeping the M14 tradition alive!  

Springfield Armory 3rd & 4th Gen scope mount problems.

This is a discussion on Springfield Armory 3rd & 4th Gen scope mount problems. within the The M14 forums, part of the M14 M1A Forum category; I have a Steel 4th gen Springfield mount on my SAI NM rifle that was installed by Springfield when the rifle was sent back to ...


Go Back   M14 Forum > M14 M1A Forum > The M14

315Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Moderator Tools Display Modes

Old June 12th, 2017, 08:46 AM   #31
Platoon Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SE Louisiana
Posts: 369
I have a Steel 4th gen Springfield mount on my SAI NM rifle that was installed by Springfield when the rifle was sent back to have the barrel timing corrected... it's been on for a couple of years now, and I have had O problems with it.... if I were in the market for a scope mount now, I'd go with the Sadlak or the CASM mount....

usmce8s is offline  
Remove Ads
Old June 12th, 2017, 12:53 PM   #32
Lifer
 
Redneck Yankee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: In my house
Posts: 3,017

Awards Showcase

Quote:
Originally Posted by usmce8s View Post
the rifle was sent back to have the barrel timing corrected...
Did it come from Springfield like that?

Redneck Yankee is offline  
Old June 12th, 2017, 02:27 PM   #33
Lifer
 
MuppetMeat4Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Arizona Bay
Posts: 3,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle View Post
Let me get this straight. A Springfield accessory made for a Springfield rifle has a bad reputation? Am I missing something here? How do they screw that up?
I haven't had a Springfield mount, in fact have avoided them simply because of feedback here and other places, but it seems that SAI products in general are kind of hit and miss in terms of quality or tolerances. My M1A loaded seems to like the Fulton Armory supplied 'Brookfield type' mount just fine, as far as fit and alignment, which would imply that they may meet some kind of standard from time to time, but the fact that this doesn't seem to be all that consistent of an occurrence implies that they may have unintentional variations in either the mounts or the receivers themselves.

As a whole, if you happen to luck into a good build, they seem a pretty decent value, with a good warranty to boot. Down side, part of that generally lower price is that you're dice rolling, in that you may have to deal with the inconvenience of using that warranty, or working around build/tolerance idiosyncrasies to get things right.

I'm happy with my SAI rifle, though knowing what I know now, both in learning about the rifle, examining the details of my rifle more closely, and learning about other builders, if I were to buy a complete rifle again of the m14 type, I'd probably spend just a little more and go with an alternative route, simply so that I get a controlled outcome.

I don't mean it as a slam on SAI. They're a company involved in mass production selling an inherently expensive design, trying to promote a niche market to a population that largely loves commodities with a marketing story. They've got more overhead, have to do volume, and it's difficult to retain dedicated, careful workers in numbers, at wages that can keep them from wandering elsewhere. While I would always want them to turn out the best product possible, I'm glad that they're keeping the platform viable, even if only for a relatively small group of enthusiasts. After all, if it wasn't for the SAI and the M1a, I wouldn't know there was such a thing as the M14, let alone the M14 forum right here.

In a way, they break ground in the marketplace for Fulton Armory, LRB, Bula, etc., to have an opportunity to upsell. If it weren't for the lower quality control and related lower ticket price, I might have never discovered the platform at all. I knew about Fulton Armory, but for the uninformed, you see price tag, accuracy guarantee, and then compare that to an AR platform, and just scratch your head. Just swallowing the pill of over a grand for a rifle was a big hurdle for me.

But, when I got that M1a loaded home, and got to shoot it, that was the foot in the door, and I got a big fat grin with it, and so it begins...

I reserve my right to complain, should the need arise, but I'm glad they're there.

Thanks from SRA and charliefrye
MuppetMeat4Me is offline  
 
Old June 12th, 2017, 03:03 PM   #34
Lifer
 
conditionone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,074
I have a Gen 1, single point, very much like a Bassett and it is rock solid.

I think where a lot of people have problems with them is proper installation. The instructions have to be followed to a T.

I think the problem lies with an out of spec receiver, a common problem for SAI, more often than not.

Thanks from hoghunt and MuppetMeat4Me
conditionone is offline  
Old June 12th, 2017, 03:28 PM   #35
Dodgin' The Reaper
 
ray55classic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: east of Eden in the land of Nod on the boulevard of broken dreams
Posts: 8,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Throttle View Post
Let me get this straight. A Springfield accessory made for a Springfield rifle has a bad reputation? Am I missing something here? How do they screw that up?
It's their 4th generation , something tells me they've been building half azzed mounts for a long time.
I had a 3rd a long time ago ,
It'd hold a group today , and tomorrow , the only problem was they often weren't in the same place.
They'll announce the 5th generation shortly.

Basset , Sadlak , or ARMS are the mounts I'd recommend.

ray55classic is offline  
Old June 12th, 2017, 04:23 PM   #36
Dodgin' The Reaper
 
Capona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Illinois
Posts: 7,037
Can anyone clarify what the actual improvements made in the various 1-4 generations of this mount?
It's only a mount for Petes sakes. Is it documented anywhere what they've done to it other than putting a higher number on it?

Thanks from MuppetMeat4Me
Capona is offline  
Old June 12th, 2017, 06:10 PM   #37
Lifer
 
Redneck Yankee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: In my house
Posts: 3,017

Awards Showcase

Gen 1 - single point attachment (one thumbscrew); lugs to align; weaver rails.
Gen 2 - I don't think ever sold on the market (?)
Gen 3 - Two point attachment, (two thumbscrews, one in the side of a replacement stripper clip guide); lugs to align; weaver rails.
Gen 4 aluminum - two point attachment, (cam bolt, screws on top of replacement stripper clip guide); lugs to align, set screws to contact top of receiver for "steadiness"; picatinney rails.
Gen 4 steel - two point attachment, (cam bolt, screws on top of replacement stripper clip guide); no alignment lugs; set screws to contact top of receiver for "steadiness" and alignment; picatinney rails.
I don't consider the set screws an attachment point since they have no securing benefit.
Did I get that right?
It's well known that the grooves on the SAI receiver have a good chance of being out of spec, however, the lugs on my Gen 3 are too tall to allow the mount to set flat, even against an in spec receiver. My Gen 3 wasn't reliable.

Thanks from ray55classic
Redneck Yankee is offline  
Old June 12th, 2017, 06:26 PM   #38
Lifer
 
hytekrednek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northport, AL, USA
Posts: 4,258
SAI having lots of out of spec key ways "slotts" is probably why they made the gen 4 without keys "luggs". That is my guess anyway.

Thanks from conditionone
hytekrednek is offline  
Old June 12th, 2017, 06:37 PM   #39
Lifer
 
conditionone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,074
Not sure. I cut off at mid 80's tech with the single point. Enough for me.

I actually got the art 4 scope and mount outta the px. It's the only scope/mount I use. I've tried others but I am lazy and it works.

conditionone is offline  
Old June 13th, 2017, 09:11 AM   #40
Platoon Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: SE Louisiana
Posts: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redneck Yankee View Post
Did it come from Springfield like that?
Yep...

usmce8s is offline  
Old July 16th, 2017, 02:59 PM   #41
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: FL
Posts: 2
springfield armory m1a 4th generation aluminum scope mount question

anyone have one?
This is for the M1A1 chambered in 308. anybody have any experience using one of these mounts? I bought one today.

4th GENERATION ALUMINUM SCOPE MOUNT

I have a 1-6 x 24 vortex strike eagle that I am going to put on it. The strike eagle manual says the reticle in this optic is calibrated for 308. I am trying to figure out what rings I need to make this work. I am not sure about cheek weld, eye relief, and height of the rings needed.


Does anyone know what height rings would work and will I need a cantilever mount?

maxmayhem is offline  
Old July 16th, 2017, 05:31 PM   #42
Lifer
 
Redneck Yankee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: In my house
Posts: 3,017

Awards Showcase

The Gen 4 sits high so you will need a cheek piece. It won't be easy to use the irons though. Low rings if you can find them, otherwise medium. Fit the scope to where it works for you. Make sure the lugs fit the grooves when tightening, if yours has lugs.

Redneck Yankee is offline  
Old July 16th, 2017, 06:58 PM   #43
Platoon Sergeant
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Behind The Iron Curtain
Posts: 321
I had one and it was a solid mount and never lost zero on me, (Torqued both mounting bolts to 45 inch pounds) but I put it up here for sale because I just don't like how high they sit and I want to get something that sits lower.

If you don't mind your scope sitting kind of high in which you'll need a cheek riser anyways with just about any mount ,you will like this mount.

Contrary to popular belief that it is a piece of crap, mine stayed rock solid , and like I said I am just getting rid of it because I just don't like how high it sits in the way you have to co-witness the irons with it by looking under it.

Plus I shot my irons the other day and really enjoyed it and I think I'm just going to use those for a while.

You should be able to get away with medium rings, maybe even low rings because of how high that mount sits.

You are definitely going to need a cheek riser with any kind of mount an optic on an M1 A.

I don't think you're going to be able to use any kind of cantilever mount because that is going to sit the scope even higher and it will look ridiculous, plus being that mount is split, a cantilever mount is not going to work.

Now if you're talking about some kind of extended rings in order to bring the scope back toward you to bring it closer for better eye relief there are a few companies that make those but I can't remember them off the top of my head. I know Weaver is one of them but I can never find them in stock.

gman556 is offline  
Old July 17th, 2017, 07:03 AM   #44
Designated Marksman
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 687
Nikon makes a set of rings that resemble a PPER mount cut in half. That can allow maximum adjustment for eye relief if the height is correct for your application. All of my existing mounts are on built in rails on Bula receivers so take what I say with a grain of salt.

Nelson

Quote:
Originally Posted by gman556 View Post
I had one and it was a solid mount and never lost zero on me, (Torqued both mounting bolts to 45 inch pounds) but I put it up here for sale because I just don't like how high they sit and I want to get something that sits lower.

If you don't mind your scope sitting kind of high in which you'll need a cheek riser anyways with just about any mount ,you will like this mount.

Contrary to popular belief that it is a piece of crap, mine stayed rock solid , and like I said I am just getting rid of it because I just don't like how high it sits in the way you have to co-witness the irons with it by looking under it.

Plus I shot my irons the other day and really enjoyed it and I think I'm just going to use those for a while.

You should be able to get away with medium rings, maybe even low rings because of how high that mount sits.

You are definitely going to need a cheek riser with any kind of mount an optic on an M1 A.

I don't think you're going to be able to use any kind of cantilever mount because that is going to sit the scope even higher and it will look ridiculous, plus being that mount is split, a cantilever mount is not going to work.

Now if you're talking about some kind of extended rings in order to bring the scope back toward you to bring it closer for better eye relief there are a few companies that make those but I can't remember them off the top of my head. I know Weaver is one of them but I can never find them in stock.

hnthomps is offline  
Old July 17th, 2017, 07:22 AM   #45
Squad Leader
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 269
Here is mine.
It has the 4th Gen Springfield Aluminum mount on it. I have not fired it yet and if I keep it will add a bipod to it. I purchased it and then something else caught my eye.

Finestkind
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSC00271.jpg (573.7 KB, 10 views)
File Type: jpg DSC00275.jpg (683.7 KB, 6 views)

Finestkind is offline  
Reply

  M14 Forum > M14 M1A Forum > The M14


Search tags for this page
gen 1 scope mount for m1a springfield
,
m1a scope mount adjustment
,

mount problems

,
springfield gen 4 scope mount
Click on a term to search for related topics.

Moderator Tools
Display Modes




Top Gun Sites Top Sites List