TexasCHLforum.com

Purplehood wrote:The M1A is just a classy-looking rifle, period. I hate to admit it, but I would buy it on looks alone. Kinda like my next wife.

Man, are you in trouble or what!??

LostInAustin wrote:

Purplehood wrote:The M1A is just a classy-looking rifle, period. I hate to admit it, but I would buy it on looks alone. Kinda like my next wife.

Man, are you in trouble or what!??

Not at all. I am twice divorced.

Purplehood wrote:

LostInAustin wrote:

Purplehood wrote:The M1A is just a classy-looking rifle, period. I hate to admit it, but I would buy it on looks alone. Kinda like my next wife.

Man, are you in trouble or what!??

Not at all. I am twice divorced.

so you dodged the bullet twice

marksiwel wrote:

Purplehood wrote:

LostInAustin wrote:

Purplehood wrote:The M1A is just a classy-looking rifle, period. I hate to admit it, but I would buy it on looks alone. Kinda like my next wife.

Man, are you in trouble or what!??

Not at all. I am twice divorced.

so you dodged the bullet twice

That doesn't sound like he dodged at all.

Sold no Sold?

Partial trade maybe? for an XDM-9 and $500 cash?

Just asking...

It is SOLD. It sold on GT.

why am I not surprised

Beiruty wrote:Ah, I $$$$ is no issue, I pick:

I saw an SVD on gunbroker this morning going for $1,000.00 — the same price as the used SOCOM 16 in the original post, and $600-$700 less than a new M1A. If money were no object, you should buy the better rifle.

The SVD has:

• Similar terminal ballistics to the M1A, except that the SVD uses a long action cartridge, and the M1A uses a much more efficient short action cartridge with greater inherent accuracy.
• Similar accuracy to a base model M1A. The National Match or M21 versions are even more accurate. (Mine came with National Match barrel, National Match tuned trigger, and National Match iron sights.)
• 1/2 pound heavier than the M1A and 4" longer than an M1A, which is already long for a battle rifle by today's standards; the SVD is really only suitable for the sniper role, whereas the M1A is more versatile by being suitable for both the sniper and the assault role.
• Worse issue optics in military version than an M1A (M21), consisting of a 4X PSO-1 fixed power scope compared to the Leupold MK4 10X scope for the M21
• MUCH uglier than the M1A. I'm sorry, but the SVD hit every single branch on the way down when it fell out of the ugly tree.

The SVD is exactly the kind of product that would be produced by commies. Industrial grade without any sex appeal. The M1A is exactly the kind of product that would be produced by capitalists. An appeal to the senses as well as the needs of a rifleman.

Is an SVD capable of fulfilling its intended role? Certainly. But can it do it in style? Not even close to the M1A. I would also very much like to own an AR10, and on the day I bought my M1A, there was an AR10 (and an FNAR) on the shelf right next to it. The AR10, arguably a more advanced design, and certainly at least as accurate, was $700 less in price than the M1A. I still bought the M1A because it was a matter of the heart — not because it is badass (it is), but because it is eye candy and I've wanted one for 40 years.

If $1,000 were the upper limit of your budget, and you were willing to spend the $1,000 for an SVD, you would be better off spending that same amount on an AR10. The AR will give you similar accuracy and range, more options for customizing (including changing calibers if you want to), parts availability will always be easier, and finding a competent gunsmith if you need one will be easier.

Just my 2¢.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Beiruty wrote:Ah, I $$$$ is no issue, I pick:

I saw an SVD on gunbroker this morning going for $1,000.00 — the same price as the used SOCOM 16 in the original post, and $600-$700 less than a new M1A. If money were no object, you should buy the better rifle.

The SVD has:

MUCH uglier than the M1A. I'm sorry, but the SVD hit every single branch on the way down when it fell out of the ugly tree.