AIA #4 M10 Ejection

[tiriaq]

It is not unusual for spoiled Lee Enfield Rifles to be used for various projects. They are readily available and very inexpensive.
The fine old British sporting Lees are graceful, attractive rifles. Replicating one would be a challenge. Incidentally, it is possible to retrofit a tang safety, without great difficulty.
Switch barrels are a definite option, although once a barrel is fitted, a Savage type locking collar isn't much of an advantage. A fitted barrel can be installed without gauges, a barrel with a collar requires a gauge every time - and the headspace might change slightly every time, depending on the "feel" as the collar is torqued into place. The suggestion of a .22 insert barrel for a .410 is very interesting.
The disadvantages of rear locking, as well as undesirability of cock on closing have been overblown.
The AIA rifles are interesting. It took a lot of effort to get them into production. Not an easy thing to do. AIA does seem to be a bit of an odd outfit. Whether the rifles will ever be widely distributed is anyone's guess. I personally have no problem with outsourcing, as long as QC is maintained. What I find amusing is the evasiveness of the maker and distributor.
Springfield, Inc. started out the easy way with their early M1A production. Commercial receiver, everything else USGI surplus. Scratch manufacturing a M1A receiver is enough of a challenge, without having to make everything else. As the supply of original parts dried up, the operation had to start making more and more of the bits. There have been growing pains and QC issues. Current production M1As have receivers cast in Montreal, Canada, by the way. How many parts Springfield, Inc. currently makes in-house, and how many they outsource, I do not know.
Years ago I was involved in a small firearm manufacturing business, and I do have an idea of the sort of challenge it can be to get anything into production.
PH did have a rear locking .223 sized action in limited production, maybe the AR mag'd utility rifle was another company's project. I thought at the time it had potential. Still do.

[tiriaq]

Incidentally, how deep is the boltface counterbore on an AIA rifle?

[ireload2]

Interesting question.
I don't know if AIA used the same bolt diameter but if they did you can scale it compared to a #4 bolt. It looks like it is between .045" and .050" if they designed it in inches.

[Alfred]

PH did have a rear locking .223 sized action in limited production, maybe the AR mag'd utility rifle was another company's project. I thought at the time it had potential. Still do.

The odd looking Cadet rifle shown here
The latest in firearms technology from Parker-Hale Limited
Is definitely not the rifle I spoke of.

The rifle I saw photos of years ago was a more conventional BA lay out with very simple synthetic stock. Pretty much a bare bones woods rifle designed for cheap production while maintaining strength enough for the 5.56mm NATO chambering.
Something low cost that could be stored wherever the owner might figure a easy to reach rifle might come in handy. Around here we call them out house rifles. Farmers and others who might be out in the field away from the house like to have a rifle stashed in a tool shed or out house in case a trouble maker showed up between them and the house.

[tiriaq]

That's something else again, haven't seen that rifle before, although maybe the action is the PH one I'm thinking of.
The other rifle with the AR magazine used a one piece synthetic stock, rather conventional looking.

[Maxwell Smart]

Incidentally, how deep is the boltface counterbore on an AIA rifle?

It is fairly deep, the counterbore on my AIA boltface is .140"

[Maxwell Smart]

The disadvantages of rear locking, as well as undesirability of cock on closing have been overblown.

I can see some sense in the criticism of rear locking actions, but can someone explain to me just exactly why cock-on-closing is such a bad thing?

Is it just because it is different to Mauser type actions?

I can remember seeing "Speedlock" conversions available, IIRC these were to convert P14 and M17 to cock on opening. Supposedly to reduce the lock time - struck me as absolute hogwash, surely lock time is a function of striker spring energy and friction - just where in the cycle the mainspring is cocked should be irrelevant.

[ireload2]

I think that technically the cock on closing is superior for a battle rifle.
Rear locking has it's place if properly designed. The Swiss 96 is a good example.
Just way too long to be use with modern pressures.

[Dimitri]

Are SA Inc. M-1s welcome in the CMP M-1 Garand vintage match? I assume one could be used in the across the course National Match program.

CMP matches want a unmodified as issued rifle on the outside. I do not see why a SAI M1 wouldn't be allowed based on that requirement as they allow M1A rifles (and the Chinese M14S/M305 rifles to compete as "M14" rifles as long as externally they are the same as the originals (more or less selector system omitted of course).

I expect that an AIA could be used in a formal "Service Conditions" match here.

In theory per the DCRA anything is legal for matches, as its currently "Any rifle, any sight" in the regulations.

How many parts Springfield, Inc. currently makes in-house, and how many they outsource, I do not know.

SAI per my knowledge right now produces very little in their own plant. They finish machine the receivers and forged bolts, the barrels are made by a US maker otherwise most of the bits and pieces are made in Taiwan then finished assembled in their plant. There is a catalog online if you look hard enough for it for one of the Taiwanese arsenals that still have the ability to produce T57/M14 parts.

Edit: If anyone wants the link to the catalog let me know, I'll gladly supply it.

Dimitri

[tiriaq]

The CMP National Match program wants issue appearing rifles, which can be worked over internally, including match grade barrels, bedding, etc. I was referring to the CMP M-1 vintage match, which had 1300 entrants last year. I suspect that this match is for original rifles.
The plunger ejector and counterbored boltface used by AIA are a good way of dealing with a rimless cartridges. The Australian .223 and 7.62x39 conversions uses boltheads altered in a similar fashion.