TexasCHLforum.com

bpet wrote:Sounds like it may be good news for the hogs. Not because I don't think SA will come through with a replacement part but the timing is really pretty tight.

Hope I'm wrong and you get your chance to "bring home the bacon".

Good luck but were I you, I'd get my back-up rifle ready while looking for a replacement part locally. Always good to have a spare. If SA can't make your schedule and you can't find a local replacement part, you can still use the butt of that fine looking rifle to tenderize some pork chops to celebrate the new year.

Well, I have a pretty nice Remington 700 in .308 I can bring. It will do just fine absent the M1A. But...

...what my son doesn't know yet but is about to find out in an hour or so is that there is an M1A shaped box under the Christmas tree with his name on it.

Maybe there's something in that box that he might let me borrow.

You'd think for that kind of money, the M1 A would come with a bayonet lug in the event of situations such as this?

Oldgringo wrote:You'd think for that kind of money, the M1 A would come with a bayonet lug in the event of situations such as this?

You'd think for that kind of money, the M1A would come with forged or machined parts instead of MIM.

You're in luck! Lowes carries a special repair tool for MIM parts:

Guaranteed stronger than the original part

As for hog hunting, just get a cheap boar spear from a country with a lot of experience in that sort of thing:

The Annoyed Man,

I know absolutely nothing about this rifle or what MIM technology means.

That said, the rifle looks very much like an M14 to me, that is to say, very appealing.

The various M-14's I carried were robust, but not ah, bullet proof. I've had more than one come apart or malfunction due to parts failure. Of course, these were G.I. issue and no doubt had enormous use before I had my hands on them.

If your model is a civilian variant I too am interested in acquiring one, but if your recent negative experience is common, that creates some pause in my consideration...

Have you at this point determined your problem with the rifle typical for this model or an aberration?

Thanks!

Regarding MIM: Here's a webpage to read: http://www.chuckhawks.com/metal_injection_molding.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; One thing I found interesting was how many MIM parts are in a Kimber. (MIM parts include the thumb and grip safeties, magazine catch, firing pin stop, sear, hammer, disconnector, firing pin block, slide stop and the sights.)

Springfield Armory is apparently taking full advantage of MIM technology for their internals.

My guess is that a pocket was present in the MIM part here, weakening that metal.

Abraham wrote:The Annoyed Man,

I know absolutely nothing about this rifle or what MIM technology means.

That said, the rifle looks very much like an M14 to me, that is to say, very appealing.

The various M-14's I carried were robust, but not ah, bullet proof. I've had more than one come apart or malfunction due to parts failure. Of course, these were G.I. issue and no doubt had enormous use before I had my hands on them.

If your model is a civilian variant I too am interested in acquiring one, but if your recent negative experience is common, that creates some pause in my consideration...

Have you at this point determined your problem with the rifle typical for this model or an aberration?

Thanks!

Abraham, yes, the M1A is a civilian, semi-automatic only, variant of the M14. "MIM" means "Metal Injection Molding" (note that there is a trigger in the picture). And, as this link says:

"I mean, if they use MIM parts in jet engines at 30,000 feet going Mach 2, what makes people think MIM parts are inferior for a firearm?"

I don't think that MIM as a concept is necessarily inferior technology. What I do think is that when manufacturers look to MIM as a cost cutting measure, the temptation to cut too much cost can lead to sloppy quality control.

I don't think that the M1A is an inherently fragile and undependable rifle. I suspect that its degree of reliability is probably similar to the M14 variant you handled in the military. In other words, it has whatever reliability is inherent in a battle rifle of post WW2 design, which was in many ways a refinement of a WW2 contemporaneous design. The M1 Garand (the M14's predecessor) did not have a particular reputation for unreliability, and it was firing a larger, more powerful cartridge. In the other thread I posted at Sniper's Hide forum, there were a few responses from people who had opinions about MIM versus USGI parts, but only a couple who had actually experienced or witnessed a similar failure. And, I received a PM here from BobCat, who told me among other things:

FYI I saw a very similar failure at the range a few weeks ago - in a USGI hammer from a USGI trigger group.

So I would be hard pressed to attribute the failure to MIM as a technique, and perhaps more to this being simply a flawed part in my rifle to begin with.

My principle daily carry weapon is a Kimber, which uses a number of MIM parts. I've never experienced a part failure in that pistol, and I've shot pretty close to 1500-1800 rounds through it. I stake my life on it when I carry it.

That said, of those M1As out there which have experienced parts failures, hammer failure appears to be a common type of breakage. But I don't think that they fail so often as to give the M1A design a reputation as a fragile rifle.

I hope that answers your questions.

You know, I would be willing to Ummmmmm adopt your "Baby" if you just have to get rid of it. Since I am sure that your are just so frustrated with Her that you will just donate it to the Carl needs a M1A fund.

Ruger is one of the early adopters of MIM. Despite the recalls they've been through lately, none of those were related to MIM.

Their all-metal guns use MIM internals, and those seem to contribute to their "bulletproof" reputation.

Being local and needing it pronto, maybe Lee's Gun Parts will have a hammer. They're in Irving.

3401 West Pioneer Drive
Irving, TX 75061-1639
(972) 790-0773

The Annoyed Man,

Yes, thanks very much, that does answer my questions.

Good News!!

I phoned Springfield this morning and explained the situation and the time constraints. They sent me an RMA# and a FedEx 2nd Day Air shipping label.

I have to send them the trigger group and broken parts, and they will replace the MIM hammer with a forged piece. He said that it is not a USGI hammer, but it is also not MIM. He also said they would put a rush on it so I could have the trigger group back in time for the hunt.

I'm good with that.

Great news TAM! congrats on the upgrade!

The Annoyed Man wrote:Good News!!

I phoned Springfield this morning and explained the situation and the time constraints. They sent me an RMA# and a FedEx 2nd Day Air shipping label.

I have to send them the trigger group and broken parts, and they will replace the MIM hammer with a forged piece. He said that it is not a USGI hammer, but it is also not MIM. He also said they would put a rush on it so I could have the trigger group back in time for the hunt.

I'm good with that.

I think Springfield is going to be the company I buy a Rifle from

Well, good news indeed! Congratulations and good luck on the hunt.

I've not heard anything bad about Springfield CS and I think your experience backs this up. I would love to have your rifle and Springfield will be at the top of my list for manufacturers when/if I take the plunge.

By the way, how did your son's Christmas work out?