CMP Forums

CMP Forums (http://forums.thecmp.org/index.php)
-   CMP Rules (http://forums.thecmp.org/forumdisplay.php?f=72)
-   -   modern military M1a (http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=241830)

ceresco 04-21-2019 08:00 AM

Fast track to the Unlimited Class. Cut out part of the stock to "make weight" and then put yourself back in with an obvious mod?? Good Shooting. ...

mac1911 04-21-2019 03:06 PM

Define similar
Define Iron sights? a2 , A1 , back up iron sights? Folding sight

Exterior dimensions used to be clearly defined...
Cutting a hole in a stock that meets “exterior” dimensions should not be a DQ
Heck
Then the fun begins on which “issued” stock from what time frame.

jsudduth 04-21-2019 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac1911 (Post 1827182)
Define similar

sim·i·lar
/ˈsim(ə)lər/
adjective
1.
resembling without being identical.

Quote:

Define Iron sights? a2 , A1 , back up iron sights? Folding sight
Not relevant to a discussion regarding the M1A/M14.

Quote:

Exterior dimensions used to be clearly defined...
It still is as regards the M1A/M14.

Quote:

Cutting a hole in a stock that meets “exterior” dimensions should not be a DQ
We’ll have to agree to disagree.

Quote:

Heck
Then the fun begins on which “issued” stock from what time frame.
That is also covered in the rules. If you can present sufficient evidence to the competition committee they will review and possibly make an allowance for you.

Mountain 04-21-2019 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickgman (Post 1827037)
This is a joke - right?

No- not that radical of a design- just a cut out in the center of a standard M14 butt stock. I can't quite make 9.0 lbs by removing the stock butt plates and stripper clip guide, so more measures must be taken. Shortening the barrel is another option, but that's going to get expensive and I might need to pin and weld the flash hider to stay out of NFA territory. Maybe just hollow out a lot of the butt stock so it has a more conventional look?

rickgman 04-21-2019 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mountain (Post 1827237)
No- not that radical of a design- just a cut out in the center of a standard M14 butt stock. I can't quite make 9.0 lbs by removing the stock butt plates and stripper clip guide, so more measures must be taken. Shortening the barrel is another option, but that's going to get expensive and I might need to pin and weld the flash hider to stay out of NFA territory. Maybe just hollow out a lot of the butt stock so it has a more conventional look?

A standard M1A can make the weight. Certainly with the polymer stock and maybe with the walnut stock depending on the density of the wood.

There is no way that anyone can consider a stock modified in the manner you described to be representative of a military rifle.

I think this sort of thinking is an unintended cosequence of a foolish equipment rule. The CMP needs to re-evaluate the changes that they have made.

jsudduth 04-21-2019 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mountain (Post 1827237)
No- not that radical of a design- just a cut out in the center of a standard M14 butt stock. I can't quite make 9.0 lbs by removing the stock butt plates and stripper clip guide, so more measures must be taken. Shortening the barrel is another option, but that's going to get expensive and I might need to pin and weld the flash hider to stay out of NFA territory. Maybe just hollow out a lot of the butt stock so it has a more conventional look?

How much weight do you have to shed?

Are you weighing anything else with the rifle like magazine or sling?

rickgman 04-21-2019 09:25 PM

Gentlemen, I do not think that a prudent person would consider a large hole bored in a stock to be representative of the external configuration of a military stock. It is quite possible to make an M1A meet the rules without engaging in this sort of ill advised modification.

Mountain 04-22-2019 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickgman (Post 1827268)
Gentlemen, I do not think that a prudent person would consider a large hole bored in a stock to be representative of the external configuration of a military stock. It is quite possible to make an M1A meet the rules without engaging in this sort of ill advised modification.

Quite possible? How, exactly, without spending hundreds of dollars on a re-barrel or barrel modification? I see quite the variations of stocks on AR's for MM class competition- why not the M1A / M14?

The M14 in question (that is how the heel is marked, not M1A) is a Bula and over 9.0 lbs. If I recall correctly, CMP may make some allowance for over 9.0 based on the published weight of a standard commercially available rifle. Some makers publish weight to the nearest tenth, which helps, but last I checked Bula simply listed 9 lbs. I'm sure it's not 9.0 lbs. Besides that, mine is self built on a Bula receiver.

Talking about ill advised- I think CMP's 9.0 lb weight limit is ill advised, as is the 7.5 lb limit for AR's. I will have a couple more ounces to lose after removing the clip guide and replacing the butt plate with a more simple one. Guess I could hollow out the butt stock as much as feasible.

rickgman 04-22-2019 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mountain (Post 1827323)
Quite possible? How, exactly, without spending hundreds of dollars on a re-barrel or barrel modification? I see quite the variations of stocks on AR's for MM class competition- why not the M1A / M14?

The M14 in question (that is how the heel is marked, not M1A) is a Bula and over 9.0 lbs. If I recall correctly, CMP may make some allowance for over 9.0 based on the published weight of a standard commercially available rifle. Some makers publish weight to the nearest tenth, which helps, but last I checked Bula simply listed 9 lbs. I'm sure it's not 9.0 lbs. Besides that, mine is self built on a Bula receiver.

Talking about ill advised- I think CMP's 9.0 lb weight limit is ill advised, as is the 7.5 lb limit for AR's. I will have a couple more ounces to lose after removing the clip guide and replacing the butt plate with a more simple one. Guess I could hollow out the butt stock as much as feasible.

Firstly, we both agree on the fact that these latest rules were ill advised. A little research prior to the release of the rules would have done wonders.

If one uses the "spec" weights for various rifles, they can be misleading. One really needs to do actual measurements. I am quite certain that some manufacturers round off the weight numbers. I am also quite certain that SAI included the weight of a magazine in their specs. The rules state that the weight is determined without a magazine and without a sling. If one needs to trim off a few ounces there are some very easy ways to do that and stay well within the rules. Send me a PM and we can discuss further if you wish.

Mountain 04-22-2019 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickgman (Post 1827331)
Firstly, we both agree on the fact that these latest rules were ill advised. A little research prior to the release of the rules would have done wonders.

If one uses the "spec" weights for various rifles, they can be misleading. One really needs to do actual measurements. I am quite certain that some manufacturers round off the weight numbers. I am also quite certain that SAI included the weight of a magazine in their specs. The rules state that the weight is determined without a magazine and without a sling. If one needs to trim off a few ounces there are some very easy ways to do that and stay well within the rules. Send me a PM and we can discuss further if you wish.

Thanks, your comments much appreciated.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:24 AM.