To scope or not to scope?

[WarpathEngineering]

My brother called the other day to say he was hurting for money and wanted to know if I wanted to buy his recently acquired Springfield M1A. I must admit that I didn't want to take advantage of his situation but I've always wanted an M1A, so I accepted. So that got me thinking, with all the available rifles I currently have in my safe, the M1A is probably the most capable weapon in a SHTF situation. I can't decide if I should put a scope on it or not. I must admit, I'm more of an iron sight kind of guy but over the last couple of years my eyes have been fighting me on this tradition so much so that I'm starting to change out my front sights with fire sights just so I can see them.

So here are my questions :

1 - Do I scope or not?
2 - What type of optic would be most useful? Hunting, Tactical, Red dot, Acog, etc
3 - What magnification would be most useful?
4 - What brand? (No Chinese Please!)

 

[m657]

In the SHTF scenarios battery power is obsolete in short order.

There's such a huge range of choices in glass optics that individual choice is getting harder IMHO.

Granted the inevitable geezer eyes, such device is a blessing to achieve real accuracy IMHO.

Better quality glass satisfies much longer than the transitory triumph of the econo-brands.

 

[Pal Val]

Why not use the iron sights? The M1A with the military-type peep sight is effective out to better than 350 yds, with a bit of practice.

 

[GunnyGene]

Unless you plan on engaging zombies at 500yds+ , I'd stick with something that works for you at much shorter ranges, say under 200yds. A good fixed power scope around 5x or less, with a wide field of view. That's plenty for deer at longer ranges also if you're thinking about putting meat on the table, although there are other ways of doing that, that aren't so noisy. If you're getting along in years like me, the last thing you want to do is go looking for trouble. Keep your factory iron as backup sights of course.

 

[DGW1949]

About those SHTF scenerios;
If you can shoot, a "good" M1A is good for 500 yds as-is.
If you don't know how to shoot, the first step is to get away from the bench. After that, participating in NRA Service Rifle Matches is a real good way to learn how. You'll be suprized at how many of the top shooters are old guys.
As a group, scopes are rather fragile. Me personaly, I don't want anything on a combat rifle which compromises it's reliability.
One of the best combat features of the M14/M1A is that it's magazine can be kept "topped off" via it's built in stripper clip guide. It can also be completely reloaded without removing the magazine the same way....but.....neither can be done if there is a scope covering the bolt area.
On a realated note, clips are a bunch cheaper than mags, can be had already in bandoliers (AKA re-pack kits), take up a lot less space on your person than carrying a lot of mags, weigh a lot less and besides....what if you was to actualy find yourself in the midst of a SHTF situation and the only mag you've got left is the empty one that's in your gun?...it could happen ya know, but even if it don't, I'd still want the option available....just sayin'.
Maybe a scout-type set up for a scope or one of those lighted-dot thingy's?...well, either way, I still aint risking my life on a battery or a glass optic...stripper capable or not.

But that's just me and how I look at things.

DGW

 

[Merle1948]

Why not use the iron sights? The M1A with the military-type peep sight is effective out to better than 350 yds, with a bit of practice.

Not with my eyes it isn't. When you can barely see the front sight that's too much of a handicap. I can't see the front sight at all on a Springfield.

So it all depends on how bad your eyes are. :shock:

 

[sebtool]

I've always preferred iron sights, but the older eyes I seem to possess these days prefer scopes. They seem to vastly improve the odds of a good, clean head shot on a squirrel, for some reason....

I use lower powered scopes, or 4x fixed. A decent 2-7 or 2.5-8x32-34 is a favorite size, and they normally don't make the rifle awkward to carry like the 44-50mm objective lenses that many seem to favor. I've looked at the 1-4x scopes, but most carry the 'tactical' badge, which triples the price for some reason, making them completely unjustifiable for my use. :roll:

I had a SuperMatch version years ago, and ended up in the same boat as your brother. :evil: Sweet shooter! My current M1A is the Scout model, which still sports irons, but I did pick up a EER pistol scope awhile back to try the Colonel's concept. Haven't gotten that far yet..... Hopefully I'll get to that this summer.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

Well I don't know about any last ditch effort to save myself from when the SHTF but for all around shooting and sight picture I think I would go with a conventional low-power scope, something in the 2-7 x 33mm range like this.
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/315034/

 

[WarpathEngineering]

Why not use the iron sights? The M1A with the military-type peep sight is effective out to better than 350 yds, with a bit of practice.

Out of the dozen or so rifles in my safe, all are iron sighted except the two hunting rifles that do not have factory iron sights. Personally I think all rifles should have them without exception. As it stands my eyes are getting weak enough that unless there is a fire sight or a globe sight at the end of the barrel all I'm looking at is fuzz. My 30-06 wears a Redfield 2-7x33 and my 7x57 wears a Leupold M8 4x.

I was thinking of tracking down either a Leupold M8 6x or maybe even one of their VX-6 1-6x24 and mount it on a Sadlak or Smith Enterprise mount.

All that being said DGW1949 makes a damn good point about the stripper clips, something to keep in mind for sure!

 

[Pal Val]

Why not use the iron sights? The M1A with the military-type peep sight is effective out to better than 350 yds, with a bit of practice.

Not with my eyes it isn't. When you can barely see the front sight that's too much of a handicap. I can't see the front sight at all on a Springfield.

So it all depends on how bad your eyes are. :shock:

I should assume you're exaggerating. If you can't see the front sights of a short rifle, how can you ID a target 500 yards away? Please, don't say you do it by looking through the scope. I caught some dumbass doing that during the hunt, not realizing he was aiming his rifle at my friend.

No offense meant.

 

[Merle1948]

Why not use the iron sights? The M1A with the military-type peep sight is effective out to better than 350 yds, with a bit of practice.

Not with my eyes it isn't. When you can barely see the front sight that's too much of a handicap. I can't see the front sight at all on a Springfield.

So it all depends on how bad your eyes are. :shock:

I should assume you're exaggerating. If you can't see the front sights of a short rifle, how can you ID a target 500 yards away? Please, don't say you do it by looking through the scope. I caught some dumbass doing that during the hunt, not realizing he was aiming his rifle at my friend.

No offense meant.

No offense taken. I too have been scoped by an idiot, who took great offense when I scoped him back, using the very edge of the scope if that makes any difference. He came down off the hill & we had words about it & I THINK he learned his lesson.

I can not see something as narrow as the sight blade without my glasses, but a big black bullseye is a lot different even if it is blurry. As for identifying a target at 500 yards, I need good optics for that - specifically a spotting scope or GOOD binos in the field. At the range is a different story.

 

[WarpathEngineering]

+1 Merle

I've got 20/15 vision and can read the drive up menu 5 cars back but I can't focus on the crisp edges of a 1/8" black blade sight at the end of a 22" barrel to save my life. Give it time, you'll find out one of these days.

 

[Merle1948]

+1 Merle

I've got 20/15 vision and can read the drive up menu 5 cars back but I can't focus on the crisp edges of a 1/8" black blade sight at the end of a 22" barrel to save my life. Give it time, you'll find out one of these days.

The M1 Garand or M1A sight I can barely see, but sometimes appears as a blur - or even triple blades. Depends on good day/bad day. These cataracts are giving me hell. Any razor thin sights like a Springfield or Krag are out of the question. The typical Mauser inverted "V" is still visible, but not all that precise.

Oh well, at least I can still get to the range - not too bad for a 66 YO guy! :mrgreen:

 

[Paul B]

Ever since I was 6 years old, I've been horribly near sighted, 20/66 in one eye and 20/800 in the other. Sixty-nine years later I had cataract surgery in both eyes. For the first time in my life I can see the front sights on the few iron sighted rifles I have. I had the choice of lens implants for close vision and wearing glasses or distance vision and needing glasses to read. I chose the distance lenses.
For those having trouble seeing that front sight and your eye doctor says it's because you have cataracts, discussing their removal should be considered an option.
Paul B.

 

[m657]

I'm just 6 months post-cataract surgery, long delayed due to the 'what-ifs'.

Yes I can now see that I have a front sight and almost use it almost reliably. More practice to come for increasing confidence in 'field of view'....yet there is another issue with retinas that will never improve, that means for my own set of geezer eyes, scope give me a better sight picture. I understand the arguments for/against iron sights, and given my choice would gladly replace my current field kit with a 19 year old version of my own body, it had certain....advantages....over this doddering geezer-shell I woke up in one day.

 

[Snake45]

+1 Merle

I've got 20/15 vision and can read the drive up menu 5 cars back but I can't focus on the crisp edges of a 1/8" black blade sight at the end of a 22" barrel to save my life. Give it time, you'll find out one of these days.

I hear you, my brother. :wink:

 

[Paul B]

I'm just 6 months post-cataract surgery, long delayed due to the 'what-ifs'.

Yes I can now see that I have a front sight and almost use it almost reliably. More practice to come for increasing confidence in 'field of view'....yet there is another issue with retinas that will never improve, that means for my own set of geezer eyes, scope give me a better sight picture. I understand the arguments for/against iron sights, and given my choice would gladly replace my current field kit with a 19 year old version of my own body, it had certain....advantages....over this doddering geezer-shell I woke up in one day.

I hear you. One knee totally trashed and the other one oging out. Arthritis in my right shoulder aggravated by my penchant for shooting heavy big boomers like the .404 Jeffery and .416 Rigby. That's been greatly curtailed but I won't give up some of the others. At least I'm still breathing but for how long????????
Paul B.

 

[exavid]

Why not use the iron sights? The M1A with the military-type peep sight is effective out to better than 350 yds, with a bit of practice.

I agree, the peep sight is definitely good well out past 300yds. Even for an old geezer like me. I sure envy you that rifle I really liked using the M14 in training. The '03 Springfield and M14 are a couple of my very favorites for military rifles. I sure wish I'd kept my '03, that one was a dandy. If only they'd made a left hand version.
On the other hand if you need a scope due to an eye condition why not? A regular non-lighted scope would certainly be a good choice to me but not anything that needs batteries. I do use a red dot for bullseye shooting and have one on my 10/22 but the iron sights are still there in case the red dot takes a powder.