There are a couple of youtube videos of this rifle. I watched because I was curious about how reliable the ejection would be with the rimless 7.62 cases.
The Lee-Enfield design works fine with a rimmed case. I have never fired a 7.62 version so I wondered how well the LE bolt ejected the rimless case.
At 2:06 into the video with the camera behind the shooter you can see that the ejection is very positive out and away from the rifle with little effort.
Reminds me of a 700 Remington ejection.
The earlier video showed positive ejection but you could not just how far away the the rifle the cases were ejected.
Anyway I was digging around in Marstar's web site and found this picture of the AIA bolt head. It's ejector design answered my question about ejection with the 7.62 case.
Information
Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.
I've found that the out of spec Lithgow action I've mentioned before, which I'm considering using for a sporter project, will eject rimless cases very nicely. This particular action has an odd extractor and doesn't handle the regular rimmed .303 cases well at all.
The No.1 isn't a good action for a cartridge like the 7.62 NATO but should be strong enough for the 7mm, in the lower pressure standard loadings though not the loads that puish the SAAMI max pressures for the 7mm, or similar less intense cartridges.
I checked the action with empty 7.62X39 and these also ejected nicely.
The No.1 action converted to .45 ACP works fine with that rimless pistol cartridge.
There are flat spring loaded ejector studs or tabs run through slots milled in the receiver wall that are used with a number of cartridge conversions of the No.1 and No.4 actions.
The No.5 was used as a test bed for the 7.92X33 and the .280 Enfield assault rifle cartridges and possibly a few others. If I remember correctly these test bed carbines had been altered for extraction and ejection, but the magazines were not altered to feed the shorter cartridges, test firing being as a single shot only.
Could I respectfully ask that this thread be moved to the NON-Milsurps General Discussion Forum as that is about the only appropriate place for more discussion about this commercial model rifle here at MILSURPS.COM
Could I respectfully ask that this thread be moved to the NON-Milsurps General Discussion Forum as that is about the only appropriate place for more discussion about this commercial model rifle here at MILSURPS.COM
Thankyou,
Brad.
I large part we agree that the M10 is not a Milsurp or an Enfield product, but as the only sucessful civilian bolt action based on an updated Lee Enfield design it has some interesting points.
Also previous postings about this rifle have served to warn those considering buying one for competition that it is unlikely to be accepted in service rifle category, so this may have saved a few prospective buyers from an expensive mistake.
I've always been more interested in the mechanics of antique rifle actions than their shooting qualities, one can always find a more modern rifle that will shoot as well or better.
Due to a long ago injury the short actions are of importance to me in particular, Mauser type bolt actions are awkward and sometimes painful to operate. Every bolt action rifle or shotgun I own has a rear locking short throw bolt action.
PS
Does anyone remember a short lived para military 5.56 bolt action, mid 90's I think, that used a rear locking action?
The rifle was designed more or less to serve as a Volks rifle type for civilian use in NATO countries. It used the M16 magazine and an action similar to the Enfield, though it had no other outward resemblence to the LE.
I don't think they sold many, the volks rifle idea being outdated.
I large part we agree that the M10 is not a Milsurp or an Enfield product, but as the only sucessful civilian bolt action based on an updated Lee Enfield design it has some interesting points.
Also previous postings about this rifle have served to warn those considering buying one for competition that it is unlikely to be accepted in service rifle category, so this may have saved a few prospective buyers from an expensive mistake..
In the US the Springfield Armory M1-A is used in service rifle competition.
It is not an M-1. It is a much modified commercial clone of the M-14 yet it is permitted in military matches. It is possible that at buyer of the AIA rifle can have his rifle modified or perhaps AIA will modify one of their production models to meet the service rifle criteria. If that happens the M10 rifle would be competing along side #4s.
I have always been curious about the competitions fired with the #4 rifles. What inspection is required of the rifles for competition?
1. Trigger pull
2. Sights
3. Weight
4. Barrel
5. Caliber
Are #4s required to compete against civilian versions of the currrent service rifle such are the AR 15 types used in the US?
The M10 could easily be modified to meet most of the #4 requirements, especially the sighting requirements. What is to stop a competitor from modifying a #4 with a modern bench rest quality barrel and chamber?
On one of the other threads there was a #4 modified to use what looked like a Canjar trigger. Are there any restrictions on these modifications?
In UK at least, an AIA wouldn't be competing in the same category as a .303 rifle. HBSA and LERA, which together probably carry out the core of organised .303 competition, have series of categories in each military match something along the lines of:
Vintage (Long Lees or, for the real sportsmen, Martini-Enfields...)
Classic (SMLE or CLLEs with a charger bridge)
Veteran (No4/5)
Postwar (2A1s, Sterlings)
Scoped/Open/etc (including bipods, other calibres, etc)
AIAs are few at the moment, but they'd probably fall into the same class as other 7,62mm weapons in military configuration.
Competitions which are pure target shooting (rather than military practices, eg maybe including rapid fire, etc) are usually further sub-divided into "service rifle A" (SRA) and "service rifle B" (SRB). The SRA is limited to rifles in pure military form (including sights and sling), whereas SRB rifles may have target sights and slings. Here an AIA No4 would probably fall into the "first generation" category, along with L39s/ Envoys/ etc.
In the US the Springfield Armory M1-A is used in service rifle competition.
It is not an M-1. It is a much modified commercial clone of the M-14 yet it is permitted in military matches.
Any and all external differences of the M14 and M1A are the same ones such as the AR-15 platform today and due to the laws have been made match legal without these features, the lack of the Go-Fast assembly, and therefor the wood is made to cover the openings that would have been there. However if you really want you can buy a fake Go-Fast assembly if it makes you feel better. And you can buy directly from SAI flash hiders with a bayonet lug as well.
IIRC, the rifle to which Alfred is referring was a Parker Hale project. Synthetic stock with mag. well and catch assembly for AR magazine, rear locking action. Nothing came of it, and PH is gone.
The M1A is accepted for competition because M-14 rifles are simply not an option for most civilians.
In Canada, there are various vintage rifle matches. Often there is a category for original vintage rifles, and one for everything else. The AIA is not a vintage rifle.
Doubt that an AIA would be welcome in the vintage bolt action matches hosted by the CMP at Camp Perry. 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.
I expect that an AIA could be used in a formal "Service Conditions" match here. I know original Lee Enfields (know of a chap entering with a K98K) have been used. Most competitors use an issue C-7 rifle or AR based rifle, both with optical sights. Other modern non-issue semi autos could be used, so I assume an AIA would be acceptable. Anyone using a bolt action rifle is entering the matches with a real handicap. Simply not competitive with a semi auto. Bolt action rifles require separate events for the rapid fire stages. Rapid fire matches - standing to kneeling or prone, 10 shots in 30 seconds with a mandatory reload for semi autos. I believe 40 seconds for bolt rifles. A real problem for match organisers if there are too few bolt rifles for a relay. One snap match requires 2 shots per exposure, standing to kneeling at 200m. Any bolt rifle is a handicap.
Any and all external differences of the M14 and M1A are the same ones such as the AR-15 platform today and due to the laws have been made match legal without these features, the lack of the Go-Fast assembly, and therefor the wood is made to cover the openings that would have been there. However if you really want you can buy a fake Go-Fast assembly if it makes you feel better. And you can buy directly from SAI flash hiders with a bayonet lug as well.
USGI M14 Rifle:
SAI M1A Rifle:
Dimitri
The first M1A I fired had the USGI stock with cut out for the selector but as far as I know the receiver was a new civilian production without accomodation for the assembly.
BTW
A warning on defective flash hiders came out at that time. Seems some early production flash hiders had been manufactured from "Pipe Stock" the center section of the ingots.
Apparently when an ingot is poured only the outer slabs cut from the ingot are used for high strength forgings, the center has a screwed up crystaline structure due to unequal cooling and is put aside for less critical components.
The flash hiders made from the inner core metal were known to shatter for no apparent reason while in use. I'm not sure but I think TRW was the manufacturer. The defect had been caught early on, but a few bad flash hiders had gotten past the inspection process and ended up in spare parts stores, some ended up being sold to makers of M14 clones.
This warning along with several other product safety warnings of the time, such as slam firing of some Garand type actions) were given to me in booklet form by a local gunsmith. Unfortunately the cat had kittens in the box where this booklet was put away. I expect Springfield Armory still has these warnings on file.
IIRC, the rifle to which Alfred is referring was a Parker Hale project. Synthetic stock with mag. well and catch assembly for AR magazine, rear locking action. Nothing came of it, and PH is gone.
That sounds like the rifle, but Parker Hale wasn't connected with it when I first read of it, perhaps the design was taken up for a time by another manufacturer.
On the subject of rear locking actions, my favorite civilian rifle is my early production Savage 23B in .25-20 caliber. This fine little rifle has features which offset the potential problems of rear locking actions, and is of course a fairly low intensity chambering.
The receiver is milled from the barrel itself, the single row mag opening and ovaled ejector openings are fairly small.
The bolt handle acts as one lug and the opposing, though further back, lug seats in a recess much like the LE lefthand lug. Both locking lugs are actually set much further to the rear than those of the LE rifles.
My Maverick Bolt Action 12 gauge is also rear locking and is an excellent shooter for this under rated type of low cost repeating shotgun.
I'd have liked to see the LE type actions reproduced in sporting rifle calibers, perhaps slightly scaled down to best suit the popular rimmed .30-30 and rounds based on that case type such as the 7X30 Waters or .225 Winchester.
Sporters that harked back to the fine old BSA sporters would probably sell very well. And an easily removable butt stock would allow them to be carried in a nice short fitted gun case, as was popular with shooters when rail transportation first became common.
A locking collar type quick change barrel would further aid in making such a travel case very compact, and a spare .410 gauge barrel would make it a true multi purpose sporter. Spare barrels in various combinations would allow the same rifle to be used for many types of game , large or small, or for varmint shooting. Spare magazines suited for different cartridge types would make feeding no problem.A spare fore end profiled for target shooting is another possible accessory.
A spare bolt set up for rimfire use and a barrel liner for the .410 barrel would further enable small game hunting or informal target shooting or plinking.
I've read that just such a .410 to .22 conversion was available in India at one time.
With the AIA rifle development perhaps something along these lines will come about one day.
Information
PM
Originally Posted by Son
