"I love the M1A, I've had several, but today I think the AR10 platform is a better choice. More options for add ons like NV, thermal, lights etc. With a good custom barrel more accurate at distance."
Howard, Selection of a firearm is a personal preference, and from what I can gather I can quite understand, appreciate, and fully agree why you chose an AR-10 platform as a superior choice for your selection and requirements for all the reasons that you gave. The AR-10 has been around since 1956, been the basis for the AR-15/M-16 actions, and has survived the test of time. The type of shooting in which a person engages is an important consideration. My reasons for the choosing the Springfield M1A for my requirements as superior over all other platforms are as follows:
1.) I put considerable time on the sporting clays/5 stand ranges; however, my rifle shooting activities do not involve much range/target time. When I use a rifle range it is usually for cartridge development or sighting-in purposes. Most of my rifle activities involve shooting at live targets and much of that is done on a bushy, dusty and./or windy high desert or river bed in rugged terrain. Should I use a semiauto one of my main considerations is proven reliable and consistent functioning in field conditions (especially for feral hog hunting at night), and for me the M-14/M1A platform has proven superior qualities.
2.) The M-14/M1A platforms use a very strong, combat proven and reliable action. One of the main reasons for that is because it employs the Short Cycle Piston Driven System to transfer the gas energy to the bolt carrier group via a metal follower rod attached directly to the bolt to cycle the action which is cleaner and more reliable than the systems used for most AR platforms. The AR-10 & AR-15 platforms use the Direct Impingement System that channels hot gas directly from the barrel via a long gas tube directly to the bolt carrier group thereby coating the inside gas tube surface with carbon fouling and dumping hot gas and carbon fouling into the receiver area onto the bolt, ejector, and extractor; that system is dirty which has the proclivity to cause malfunction plus it is maintenance intensive. I have personal experience/reasons not to trust it even with the change to ball powder, chrome lined barrels, and a bolt assist for AR types.
3.) I have had a great deal of experience with the M-14/M1A, and know well its capabilities and limitations.
4.) Parts and ammunition are in plentiful supply and easily available.
5.) With regard to accuracy; I purposely did not consider competition match/target/range shooting as a factor for my selection, because those activities are not in my scope of interest. However, keep in mind, the M-14 and Match Springfield M1As dominated the Camp Perry 1000 yard Military Rifle Iron Sight Match and other semiauto scoped matches for many years producing over 275 recorded perfect scores. From a front rest my M1A (if I do my part) produces 3-1/4” groups at 300 yards well within a 4” kill zone, and that is enough acceptable accuracy for my needs since, these days I rarely shoot past 400 yards. Depending upon the shooting activity, a rifle that shoots tiny groups is a wonderful thing to have...as well as a rifle that has proven reliability, and consistently puts rounds accurately into a designated kill zone with lethal terminal performance.
6.) Add-ons can be useful and can be quite helpful, but with the exception of a compact day/night thermal scope on my M1A Scout Squad I really don’t need them.
We older shooters have developed and formed our opinions through years of experience, and although they may not be the same I cheerfully respect yours.
