Bought a SOCOM II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
17,870
Location
Santa Barbara, CA
Finally pulled the trigger (pun intended) and bought a Springfield Armory SOCOM II. I get it after the 10 day cooling off period. It ended up being around $2500 out the door with sales tax. It is a little high, but there isn't much wiggle room on new guns in CA.

That being said, this is my first long rifle. Does anyone out there own one or its M1A cousin have any ammo advice. The owners manual says to only use Military spec 7.62x51 rounds. Sorry no pics, will have them when I pick it up.
 
NICE rifle. I don't have one but I have .308 rifles and don't shoot 7.62x51 in them. I think the differences are greater than the difference between .223 and 5.56x45, for example, and wouldn't exchange those in a .223 only rifle. Maybe someone else knows better than I, but you can get deals on 7.62x51, so I would stick with that.
 
Yeah the 308 Win is too hot so you need to shoot the NATO stuff. Its basically the opposite of the 223/5.56 issues.

Not sure how the ordering ammo laws are in the peoples republic of cali, but AIM and others have good deals. Pick up a shotgun news and go through the ads.
 
RG (British Radway Green)or FNM (Portuguese) surplus shoots great in these rifles. It's not that easy to find these days, unfortunately. Just stay away from the surplus from India and Pakastan (POF) and you'll be fine.

Privi Partisan (PPU) is decent ammo and is boxer primed so you can reload the brass easily.
http://www.sgammo.com/product/prvi-parti...[censored]-case-boxer-

Do you reload? If not, this is a good opportunity to start a new hobby.
smile.gif
 
Last edited:
They're not. SCOTUS has long decided that the states have the right to regulate firearms sales.
 
Originally Posted By: Trajan
They're not. SCOTUS has long decided that the states have the right to regulate firearms sales.




Which obviously was an incorrect ruling.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
10 day waiting period - for a rifle?? That's terrible.

What part of "rights shall not be infringed" are they tromping on?


Hey the law that just got shot down in committee in CA wanted to ban all firearms with removable magazines and anyone who owned them would be required to surrender them to the state to be destroyed. That went over like a ton of bricks.

What is funny is since the SOCOM II does not have a pistol grip, I can have a removable magazine that does not require the bullet release button like all the AR's need.

Another interesting is that since my AR is a M&P 15-22 model and fires a 22lr when new, I can have removable magazines with no weird button because it is a rimfire. But as long as I have that Magpul angled fore grip, its considered an assault rifle.

64C3AC6C-A3E2-4797-BA9D-219011F3D8E4-4079-000004F683B87911.jpg
 
Originally Posted By: hatt
You can use most .308 ammo in M1As.


Fulton Armory, who builds M14 type rifles also recommends checking the headspace before doing so in any rifles chambered NATO. Nobody wants a kaboom.
 
Any good 165gr or 168gr bullet, 41 to 41.5gr IMR 4895, CCI 34 primer and LC brass.

Start there and tweak until you find the sweet spot. That load is usually pretty close to optimal in most M1A rifles.

Don't use powder much faster or slower than 4895. You want the pressure curve to be such that your port pressure is not too high or too low. If you have an adjustable gas system, you have more latitude.


Tim
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: Trajan
They're not. SCOTUS has long decided that the states have the right to regulate firearms sales.




Which obviously was an incorrect ruling.


Obviously it isn't. Thanks to their wisdom, over decades, people who fail background checks don't get to buy them. I'd rather that convicted felons can't buy guns legally. How about you?

EDIT: I see that your next post answers that. You don't mind if they do.

Where I live a convicted felon has been asking me to take him shooting. Guess I can sell him one of my AR-15s then.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
Originally Posted By: hatt
You can use most .308 ammo in M1As.


Fulton Armory, who builds M14 type rifles also recommends checking the headspace before doing so in any rifles chambered NATO. Nobody wants a kaboom.


This is with the knowledge that commercial .308Win ammo may have thinner brass in the base of the cartridge cases and NATO chambers are a bit more "generous" in headspace length.

There is NO Significant pressure differences between 7.62NATO and .308Win ammo. If there is...no one has shown data to document it to date. The big 'debate' on this issue is between different pressure measurement systems that are not equal or comparable. It is "paper research" and horribly flawed. Do you see a warning on ammo boxes? Gun and ammo makers that do have pressure barrels have been VERY Silent on this debate.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Trajan


Obviously it isn't. Thanks to their wisdom, over decades, people who fail background checks don't get to buy them. I'd rather that convicted felons can't buy guns legally. How about you?

EDIT: I see that your next post answers that. You don't mind if they do.

Where I live a convicted felon has been asking me to take him shooting. Guess I can sell him one of my AR-15s then.
Anyone who has served their sentence should have every Right anyone else does. You have to have some mental issues to believe someone who got 3 months probation for some monor offense should be forever barred for protecting themselves effectively. Not every convicted felon is Ted Bundy. I know how this all started. Some genius politician figured out he could use people's prejudices and fears for votes? Same with the drug nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Trajan


I'd rather that convicted felons can't buy guns legally. How about you?


I disagree with you.

Many felonies are stupidly minor offenses, almost all of them have nothing to do with firearms. Why should someone, a single mom, maybe, who wrote a felony bad check be permanently disqualified from owning or possessing a firearm? if the felony had something to do with a firearm it might be justifiable, otherwise it's stupidly punitive.

Nice Socom, btw, it's on my firearm bucket list.
 
Originally Posted By: Trajan


Obviously it isn't. Thanks to their wisdom, over decades, people who fail background checks don't get to buy them. I'd rather that convicted felons can't buy guns legally. How about you?

EDIT: I see that your next post answers that. You don't mind if they do.

Where I live a convicted felon has been asking me to take him shooting. Guess I can sell him one of my AR-15s then.


Not sure why you think I pushed your button. You are free to have your opinions without asking mine. But generally violent convicted felons forfeited their rights (2nd included), so they are not covered. Wrong thread, but many firearm laws are just stupid silly. And California went off the deep end. Enough said.

I want to see and hear more about the SOCOM II.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top