End of an era... SA, Inc. discontinues NationalMatch and SuperMatch M1A models

nbkky71

nbkky71

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
1,730
Location
Davidson, NC
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
I happened to look on the Springfield Armory website today and noticed that they've discontinued the National Match and Supermatch M1A rifles. :confused:

It's not a surprising move as interest in those niche models has been waning for some time. Still, it's sad to see them go. End of an era for old school competitive shooters.


1641414676912.png
 
For someone wanting an accurate rifle in a medium cartridge, the AR platform is usually much cheaper. The M14 platform is still a very nice rifle........ I do prefer the safety location and the feel of a traditional rifle stock over the AR.

Its been a while back but Rock River and DPSM made some factory match type models...... out of the box they shot very good and about 1/3 - 1/2 the price of a super match. Scope mounts were also fairly expensive for the M14 platform.
 
Well I reckon my only safe queen just might rise in price.
 
SA could have done some things to make true match grade rifles including adding a true recoil lug for a bedding surface.
One of the first things top M1A smiths will do to make a top shelf rifle and way better if done via OEM receiver design.

They just kept cranking out stuff off 1950s vintage tooling and milking the product line IMHO.

Maybe they will add some new variants along the SOCOM / Scout veins with whatever capacity they freed up.

And yes - all $500 overpriced.
 
I expect they're not really discontinued. SA is probably just putting them on pause until demand increases further.

This is one of a few rifles that escaped "assault rifle" bans in blue states. That alone will drive demand well into the future.
 
Last edited:
General SA comment: I liked them better when they were 1911s and M1As. Like SIG, I feel (subjective) their overall quality dropped when they expanded to make everything. I am biased; the very first gun I purchased was a 1911 mil-spec lightweight. I love that gun.
 
Timfoilhat said:
I expect they're not really discontinued. SA is probably just putting them on pause until demand increases further.

This is one of a few rifles that escaped "assault rifle" bans in blue states. That alone will drive demand well into the future.
Click to expand...
Im guessing they will make a few every 5 years or go. There is some demand for the product, just not enough for steady production.
 
Years ago before the inter web when we were shooting Butner, a friend who served in "Nam as a Marine with a M 14 ordered the super duper cat's meow M1a. When it showed up it was 3 inches at best at 100 yards with match ammo. Screwy Louie called Springfield and they sent a pick up order. Screwy Louie cleaned it and off it went. When it came back to Traders Den in Cary- someone opened it up saw where Springfield fixed it ( crown and flash hider) hid the real work order then slipped a note in that said "maybe you should learn how to clean a rifle and shoot." Screwy Louie walked over to the phone and began to book a one way flight to Springfield's Head Quarters. Funny now, not then. Mine was built by Pete Hodges and is a laser. Yes much to do to build a across the course rifle but so thrilling to shoot a possible off hand at 200 yards.
 
Last edited:
Over priced for crap performance.

The M1A is one of the worst service rifles ever fielded and a POS precision rifle.

Its about time that turd died.
 
I owned an M1A standard for a time and I wish I still had it for the cool factor, mine was a FINE shooter but my half the cost PA-10 out shot my M1A and shot better than my friends fathers National Match, his father and I shot both rifles (the NM vs my PA-10) and we both got better groups with the PA-10 so John is bluntly correct (which is one of the several reasons I enjoyed meeting him, plus he has a hilarious sense of humor, his stories had me rolling in his class)

Now with all that said, I absolutely love the rifles for what they are and I plan on picking up another Standard M1A because I enjoyed shooting mine, a lot, but I’m not in a situation where I can hang onto multiple $1k plus firearms that get shot a few times a year, if I go more than 6 months without shooting one, it’s on the chopping block to make room for the next “gotta have” toy.
 
Last edited:
Tarowah said:
I owned an M1A standard for a time and I wish I still had it for the cool factor, mine was a FINE shooter but my half the cost PA-10 out shot my M1A and shot better than my friends fathers National Match, his father and I shot both rifles (the NM vs my PA-10) and we both got better groups with the PA-10 so John is bluntly correct (which is one of the several reasons I enjoyed meeting him, plus he has a hilarious sense of humor, his stories had me rolling in his class)

Now with all that said, I absolutely love the rifles for what they are and I plan on picking up another Standard M1A because I enjoyed shooting mine, a lot, but I’m not in a situation where I can hang onto multiple $1k plus firearms that get shot a few times a year, if I go more than 6 months without shooting one, it’s on the chopping block to make room for the next “gotta have” toy.
Click to expand...

It's interesting to me that the M1A holds such legendary status in some gun owners minds.

The idea of the M21 and the stories coming out of the Vietnam war were of "legendary status" as well.

I worked directly for a 8th Inf Sniper instructor who was on loan from the AMU from 1967-1969. He wrote a book on the M21 and how much work it took to get 2.5 MOA out of that system shooting M118.

Fast forward to images of SEAL's in Norway, Delta Snipers, etc and the legend is made.

Both categories the alternative was not even serviceable. AKA the SR-25 is a dog as well, so much so it's step son, the M110 SASS was canned and replaced by HK.

I spent time with Hunter, a well known CAG operator, who I asked why in 1993 he ran a M21 over the SR-25. He told me, and I quote " the SR-25 is what I started with, but after 7 extractors I swapped rifles" he kept extra extractors in his upper breast pocket.

So I have a strong feeling for the M14, and not a fan at all.

Last year I was at the Smith Enterprise factory that built the M14 Crazy Horse, that's a real rifle but it's a damn long shot to compare that to a M1A/M14

A interesting side note to my crazy post.
The US Army always loved the Semi-auto Sniper rifle. The 1903's were canned as soon as the M1C could be fielded.

My mentor told me the M21 was a direct replacement of the M1C only because, no one in the INF sqd in the Vietnam war shot 30.06. the M60 ammunition could be used by the M21. So there is that...

But, when a man I will call Major "Barbour" was the facilitator of the lease on the M24, the Army got the shaft on it's love of the Semi-auto Sniper rifle. Until the M110 came along.
 
Last edited:
At DM school we trained on the M14, and some guys used it in theater. I've no idea about results or how it worked out for them. I used the SAM-R mostly.

There's definitely a cool factor with them.
 
JBoyette said:
It's interesting to me that the M1A holds such legendary status in some gun owners minds.

The idea of the M21 and the stories coming out of the Vietnam war were of "legendary status" as well.

I worked directly for a 8th Inf Sniper instructor who was on loan from the AMU from 1967-1969. He wrote a book on the M21 and how much work it took to get 2.5 MOA out of that system shooting M118.

Fast forward to images of SEAL's in Norway, Delta Snipers, etc and the legend is made.

Both categories the alternative was not even serviceable. AKA the SR-25 is a dog as well, so much so it's step son, the M110 SASS was canned and replaced by HK.

I spent time with Hunter, a well known CAG operator, who I asked why in 1993 he ran a M21 over the SR-25. He told me, and I quote " the SR-25 is what I started with, but after 7 extractors I swapped rifles" he kept extra extractors in his upper breast pocket.

So I have a strong feeling for the M14, and not a fan at all.

Last year I was at the Smith Enterprise factory that built the M14 Crazy Horse, that's a real rifle but it's a damn long shot to compare that to a M1A/M14

A interesting side note to my crazy post.
The US Army always loved the Semi-auto Sniper rifle. The 1903's were canned as soon as the M1C could be fielded.

My mentor told me the M21 was a direct replacement of the M1C only because, no one in the INF sqd in the Vietnam war shot 30.06. the M60 ammunition could be used by the M21. So there is that...

But, when a man I will call Major "Barbour" was the facilitator of the lease on the M24, the Army got the shaft on it's love of the Semi-auto Sniper rifle. Until the M110 came along.
Click to expand...

I have absolutely zero military experience and never served in the military, the only experience I do have is being raised as an Army Brat, which amounts to exactly dick in the real world, but in reality it did allow me to experience things 99% of the general public will never understand.

I believe that the chosen weapons selected by the US military over the past 100 years have been a mixed bag of the absolute best to utter garbage, but our people always seemed to make them work, the M14/M21 definitely had/has its share of issues, sure it wasn’t all that accurate, it was nearly impossible to control in full auto and it was obscenely heavy, but our guys seemed to make it work while they were “in the shit”, that alone Is enough to make me want to learn as much as I can about the rifle, yes it absolutely falls a mile short in many aspects, but it was also all the guys had at one point, for me personally, learning about and experiencing the manual of arms, in my mind anyways, helps me understand what men better than myself experienced in days long past, so yeah, maybe I am a nostalgic kind of guy after all.
 
Honest question. How did we go from "the greatest battle implement ever devised" to inaccurate heavy garbage by simply changing the capacity with an easier to load box magazine and a slightly smaller and lighter cartridge?
A case of everything is relative? M1 was the hotness for it's time. The enemy then caught up and surpassed thus the successor rifle was now inadequate? FAL envy?
 
Timfoilhat said:
Honest question. How did we go from "the greatest battle implement ever devised" to inaccurate heavy garbage by simply changing the capacity with an easier to load box magazine and a slightly smaller and lighter cartridge?
A case of everything is relative? M1 was the hotness for it's time. The enemy then caught up and surpassed thus the successor rifle was now inadequate? FAL envy?
Click to expand...

My opinion: nostalgia. Things become mythologized over time.
 
GI issue Garands aren’t match rifles either.
Neither are FALs.
SA marketed ‘National Match’ branding which implies 10 ring accuracy at 600 yards.

And any SF snipers using M14 platform recently have rifles heavily worked over by the armorers.
 
Last edited:
Timfoilhat said:
Honest question. How did we go from "the greatest battle implement ever devised" to inaccurate heavy garbage by simply changing the capacity with an easier to load box magazine and a slightly smaller and lighter cartridge?
A case of everything is relative? M1 was the hotness for it's time. The enemy then caught up and surpassed thus the successor rifle was now inadequate? FAL envy?
Click to expand...
Yep, over the years I've read countless times that everyone here knew the FAL was better than the M14, but it wasn't made here - and as they say in Brooklyn, 'There was nothing we could do......and that's that.'
 
Last edited:
Timfoilhat said:
Honest question. How did we go from "the greatest battle implement ever devised" to inaccurate heavy garbage by simply changing the capacity with an easier to load box magazine and a slightly smaller and lighter cartridge?
A case of everything is relative? M1 was the hotness for it's time. The enemy then caught up and surpassed thus the successor rifle was now inadequate? FAL envy?
Click to expand...

The M1A was a hell of a jump from the 1903. The M14 had all the advances the M1A needed, Detachable Magazine, lower recoil ammunition, full auto/semi option.

What Springfield did was add these elements to the M1A and chamber the rifle from 30.06 to .308/7.62x51mm this is the creation of the M14.

"Side note, Ruger did the same damn thing, going from 7.62mm to 5.56 and the Mini-14 is a hell of a GREAT rifle, the M-14 design is better in 5.56mm then 7.62mm I think"

The other issue to this all the ONLY rifle round approved by NATO was 7.62x51mm from 1954 until 1980. in 1980 the 5.56mm was approved.

The history of the M14 is directly related to ground combat in Korea and the Springfield Armory armors.
 
Last edited:
JBoyette said:
The M1A was a hell of a jump from the 1903. The M14 had all the advances the M1A needed, Detachable Magazine, lower recoil ammunition, full auto/semi option.

What Springfield did was add these elements to the M1A and chamber the rifle from 30.06 to .308/7.62x51mm this is the creation of the M14.

"Side note, Ruger did the same damn thing, going from 7.62mm to 5.56 and the Mini-14 is a hell of a GREAT rifle, the M-14 design is better in 5.56mm then 7.62mm I think"

The other issue to this all the ONLY rifle round approved by NATO was 7.62x51mm from 1954 until 1980. in 1980 the 5.56mm was approved.

The history of the M14 is directly related to ground combat in Korea and the Springfield Armory armors.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking this is accurate with typos. Tell me if you meant M1...not M1A. And by Springfield you mean the government armory, not the butthole company that currently produces the M1A.
 
Timfoilhat said:
Honest question. How did we go from "the greatest battle implement ever devised" to inaccurate heavy garbage by simply changing the capacity with an easier to load box magazine and a slightly smaller and lighter cartridge?
A case of everything is relative? M1 was the hotness for it's time. The enemy then caught up and surpassed thus the successor rifle was now inadequate? FAL envy?
Click to expand...


I think we should remember when this statement was issued. Same person, if living and serving in today's military might not make the same comment about the same weapon.

.
 
Last edited:
Not really surprised considering what they cost for the accuracy you get out of the box, something I think most people don't understand. IMHO I think Springfield has slowly killed their market in several ways from price, quality, and not engaging the proper markets. Most Springfield MA1 owners typically fall into two lanes either nostalgia collector or competition shooter. However, most comp shooters are not shooting factory Springfields.... Also with the ever-dropping High power and CMP type event participation and the fact we don't really focus on "marksmanship" training the platform as a whole is dropping off. Springfields are okay rifles for the money but there are way better options out there such as Bula, LRB, and Fulton rifles. As others have stated I think Springfield could do well if they did better fitting and made a few changes producing a better rifle. However, with it being Springfield.... I feel they are just trying to make the biggest splash and catch the largest part of a given market when they can. M1As/M14s aren't really all that relevant at the current time and likely won't be coming back, if you don't do it well why do it at all?
 
If money is tight, then I agree with most here - they ain't worth it. But if you're OK financially, having an iconic M1A isn't the worst thing, especially for a collector. I love mine and own a few, but I know what they are. As far as military battle rifles go, they're after the FAL and G3 for sure.
 
Last edited:
I started with the M14, owned 4 M1As and 2 Polytechs over the decades. I like the platform. It is a compromise as all general issue military arms are, but it works for me.
 
I have to say I think it’s a lovely rifle.
That Vietnam era camo stock scoped look is just iconic. For those of us that grew up in the 79’s. Is like the silhouette of the G3.
It is indeed nostalgic.
I’ve never owned M1a or M1 garand. But I have shot both and found them enjoyable.
Cool recoil impulses.
I guess a Garand would cure my want for a rifle like that.

I used to admire those little Shubbs tanker conversions. Something like that would please me. I think they are tanker size like Billy is talking about. I think he did .308 mag conversions on them too.

At any rate, like Tarowah, it it isn’t get shot, it ain’t long for my small safe.
Maybe someday I’ll move some funds into “guns I want just because”.
 
Last edited:
I’d still like a M1A Loaded… never could bring ,shelf to spend the money on one.
 
Last edited:
RacerX said:
I’d still like a M1A Loaded… never could bring ,shelf to spend the money on one.
Click to expand...
I picked up one at the Raleigh gun show 2 years ago. Came out of someone's collection or the old man died, since it appeared new, but the SN said it was an older gun.

Its heavy, but its a heck of a shooter. I love mine.
 
I love my garands…. The M1A is just the “modern version”. At one point, I had multiple battle packs of 7.62 and 10+ mags for a gun i didnt even own! That was under the Clinton regime and my wait was 12+ months. I bought 2 ARs for the same money and never looked back! Hahaha. Suck is SA! Stag Arms happily got my business!
 
Last edited:
I've owned three SA Inc. M14 types, two loaded models ( parkerized and stainless) and a Standard.

Growing up I heard stories from not an insignificant number of veterans as to their love of the type. So naturally, I wanted one with a passion.

In 2001, I made a childhood dream come true when I bought my Loaded Standard (parkerized).
Which I still own, and currently resides in a SAGE chassis.

The others, came and went, including Chinese Polytech I had rebuilt into a bush rifle.

SA Inc. has had the Match, Super Match, and other match type rifles overpriced for longer than I can remember. But the rifle itself is sound, and I've shot multiple civilian versions, and more than a few no-shit GI models.

Personally I have NO problems with either model being discontinued, especially when there are more than a few reputable smiths that can turn a Sows ear into a silk purse.

As the saying goes, "Speeds just a matter of money, how fast you wanna go?"
 
Last edited:
I wonder if theyll still upgrade a standard to NM? Iirc it was like 700 bucks. Always wanted to upgrade mine.
 
Last edited:
Jabroni said:
I wonder if theyll still upgrade a standard to NM? Iirc it was like 700 bucks. Always wanted to upgrade mine.
Click to expand...
You might be better off having a gunsmith who is familiar with the platform work on it.

Those Springfield guns need a decent amount of work to get them to a point where they are mechanically capable of repeated accuracy, regardless of what barrel the gun is wearing.

- shim the gas cylinder
- bed the stock and set front ferrule tension
- unitize the gas cylinder
- time/tune the gas piston and gas plug

If you do those things to an M14 platform it will be a pleasantly accurate gun. In general it’s still won’t be capable of the accuracy a large frame AR is though.

That’s the deal with the M14/m1a, you have to know walking into it what to expect. Generally speaking, That gun is gonna disappoint you right of the the box accuracy wise. You’re gonna have to do work to get it to shoot.

BUT… I still LOVE the way that rifle looks, I love the iron sights and I love the trigger.
 
booboo51 said:
You might be better off having a gunsmith who is familiar with the platform work on it.

Those Springfield guns need a decent amount of work to get them to a point where they are mechanically capable of repeated accuracy, regardless of what barrel the gun is wearing.

- shim the gas cylinder
- bed the stock and set front ferrule tension
- unitize the gas cylinder
- time/tune the gas piston and gas plug

If you do those things to an M14 platform it will be a pleasantly accurate gun. In general it’s still won’t be capable of the accuracy a large frame AR is though.

That’s the deal with the M14/m1a, you have to know walking into it what to expect. Generally speaking, That gun is gonna disappoint you right of the the box accuracy wise. You’re gonna have to do work to get it to shoot.

BUT… I still LOVE the way that rifle looks, I love the iron sights and I love the trigger.
Click to expand...

Yup, well aware if all of the above, the problem is finding the right smith. John Wolfe in Columbus is highly recommended, but I think he had a huge back log from what I remember reading in the m14 boards.
 
Jabroni said:
Yup, well aware if all of the above, the problem is finding the right smith. John Wolfe in Columbus is highly recommended, but I think he had a huge back log from what I remember reading in the m14 boards.
Click to expand...
Yep, he is the first name I think of locally.
It’s been a few years since i frequented the M14forum so I’m not sure who’s who in the business right now.

Depending on the fit you have, making your gun shoot better may be as simple as shimming and buying a unitized gas cylinder. Shimming itself can make a huge difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom