June 6, 2011

Fulton Armory M14 308 Winchester, $2755

Gun Tests December 2010

The stock on the Fulton was not quite as slim and trim as the original G.I. on the custom Polytech, but was gorgeous walnut with a bright, smooth oil finish that was a delight to look at and handle. The rifle shot as well as it looked. It outshot the Springfield significantly and had better fitting, too.

In the world of 308 auto-loading rifles, the M14 and its look-alikes reign just about supreme. They have it all: looks, power, function, capacity, plus a great variety of stock and accessory configurations from wood to all manner of polymer that can convert an M14 or M1A into just about any configuration you might want, particularly if you have deep pockets. In this test we look at a new Fulton Armory M14 ($2755).

We tested with three types of ball ammunition, the only type recommended in these firearms. It was Federal Gold Medal match, Magtech 150-grain ball from Brazil, and mixed lot of recovered ammunition purchased in bulk with headstamps from Israel, Italy, Belgium, and Canada, which we used unsorted. Here’s what we found.

Other than an extremely attractive rifle with a gorgeous stock, what do you get for your money over the cost of others in the category? That’s what we wanted to know. For one thing the metal finish is completely uniform on the Fulton, which it’s not on others. The metal bits seem to be slightly better finished, some of us thought, so there’s some extra attention to detail. The Fulton had a full quarter-inch less wood on the bottom in front of the magazine well, and about an eighth of an inch less all along each side of the stock. The Fulton’s wood was extremely smooth to the touch, far smoother than others. It had a lightly applied linseed-oil finish with just enough oil on there to give it some protection, but not so much that the owner ends up with an oil-soaked mess after applying more linseed oil over the years. The Fulton stock had the company’s cartouche stamped into the left side, giving it a touch of nostalgia.

Gun Tests December 2010

You get your choice of a 10- or 20-round magazine with the rifle. Everything about this rifle felt precise, and it shot about as well as it looked. The receiver is an investment casting with careful and precise machining. The metal finish and Parkerizing were very well done.

Also included in the heavy-duty shipping box were a sling, and one magazine, holding your choice of 10 or 20 rounds. You also get a comprehensive book, “The M14 Owner’s Guide by Duff and Miller,” about the history, care, cleaning and modification of the M14. We believe this book should be required reading for the owner of any M14-type rifle.

We got a chrome-lined barrel with the Fulton, $55 extra, and the barrel is a new one, not a new-old-service (NOS) G.I. Some time ago all the NOS surplus barrels, like the Winchester on our M14S, ran out, and newly manufactured ones are today about the only option. Fulton provides its own barrels, which it declares are NM quality. Fulton offers several types of barrel, and a mind-boggling host of parts and accessories for the rifle, all shown on the website (www.fulton-armory.com). The bayonet lug is a proper-looking item for those who live in states that permit them.

The investment-cast Fulton receiver’s contours and cuts are quite different. Fulton says it provides a NM flash hider with bayonet lug. The flash hider has wider slots than others. The Fulton had a 5.2-pound trigger pull, very clean, and the rifle came with a dry-fire device for practice. One possible justification for the cost of this rifle is the well-known Fulton practice of using extreme care combined with deep-seated knowledge of the rifle as it is being put together. Yes, we realize this is not always visible to the untrained eye, and it might not be worth it to you, but many of us here consider Fulton Armory’s reputation to be worth considering as having one of the better gunsmiths on military-type rifles in the business, Clint McKee, as the head honcho.

On the range we had zero problems, as expected. Our groups were all significantly smaller than what we got with other rifles. But how much accuracy do you need on a non-competition rifle of this type? We like all we can get, as do you, we suspect. A scope could have made the groups a bit smaller, but we thought it was better to use the iron sights to see if there were any gross differences between the three test rifles.

Our Team Said: The Fulton had a precise feel. It had better accuracy. It had a gorgeous, well fitted and finished stock. All those little things justified its cost to us. Bottom line, we could not fault the Fulton.

Comments (46)

Ian, that was a good analogy about 1911s since I owned several of many different makes and shot in local competition with them. A lot of winners seem to be doing some amazing things with out-of-the-box mil-specs in service pistol shoots. I am down to my best two 1911, a mil-spec SA 1911A1 and an ancient Colt Government Model. I also have a Colt Officer's ACP, but that is more of a carry weapon. I want one of the new Kimbers, or upscale SA pistols, but they are really pricey. I did notice that the Remingtons R1 (quasi mil-spec) is a quality weapon for ~$650-700, still pricey, but half the price of comparable 1911s. I think between that and some other newcomers, we will see a needed stablization in the 1911 market and checks nad balances in quality and cost due to healthy competition. Thanks for the response and good luck in your business.

Posted by: Nanjing03 | June 23, 2011 6:35 AM    Report this comment

As a business man myself Nanjing I completely understand your thoughts. My point is look at the economy. The rifle is phenominal but what I want to read about are guns most of us have a prayer of actually affording. Do I like to read about the occasioanl ferrari? Yes, but most of what I read about automobiles are about cars I could actually purchase. It seems more and more we are seeing are guns that are gorgeous but outrageously priced. An example of this is Wilson Combat 1911's. Incredible guns but at matches they are usually no more accurate than guns that cost half to a third the price. They are pretty but I have a Witness Eleite Match that those Wilson owners rave about. Sure it's made in Italy but my point is...it's an incredibley finished weapon that is just as or more so than the Wilson's. That's just one example. Look how many affordable 1911's that are fianlly coming out. For me it is a degree thing...is something marginally nicer or better or more accurate worth tripple the price? For some that is true but for most of us...no way. Thank you for your business lesson for all those who have not run their own business. I just want more things that I can actaully afford and enjoy reported on rather than safe queens. I hope Fulton does well and has priced accordingly.

Posted by: IanFrog | June 22, 2011 11:31 PM    Report this comment

Kinda like a Rolex?

Posted by: Dustbag | June 22, 2011 10:53 PM    Report this comment

Dustbag, any wage earner would say no. However, wage earners don't make that determination. I once told the owner of an automotive repair center that I wasn't going to pay him $700 to replace a bad fuel pump. The owner shimmied up to the counter, grinned and said, "Aw now, ya know, I gotta make a livin' too." I didn't grin back. I just called a tow service and took my vehicle elsewhere. I might be wrong, but I am guessing that the owner reassessed what he thought the market would bear when the next bad fuel pump walked into his shop. You see any business owner, craftsman, artisan, professional and businessman can rightly ask for any price they want for their product or service, but the ultimate decision to provide the business and pay the asking cost is that of the consumer. Further, a courteous consumer will state why s/he will take his/her business elsewhere. That is all part of what we call a market driven economy. Like I said earlier, I wish the owners and employees of Fulton Armory all the best, but quality and affordability have to go hand-in-hand.

Posted by: Nanjing03 | June 22, 2011 8:59 PM    Report this comment

Nanjing, I don't know what you do for work but would you work for less so you or your boss could charge less and have more business???

Posted by: Dustbag | June 22, 2011 9:57 AM    Report this comment

Nanjing: I agree with what your saying.Here's my excample not having any thing to do with preasent day Guns. I have a 1968 Torino Fastback I purchased to drive to college classes ect.I still own this car and purchased new was around $ 3200.I have totally restored the car and todays cost on this car if i decided to sell would be well over 15,000 dollars. The average guy out there is not going to pay that amount for this classic.BUT take it to a car show or a classic auction and there are people who would buy it on the spot. My point is reguardless what you pay for your M1A Springfield or used Grand.You decide what to pay and how much you would sell for if you were going to upgrade or just adding accessorys

Posted by: hogdog | June 22, 2011 8:36 AM    Report this comment

Nanjing - sorry; if you want quality, you have to pay for it. I agree that retail costs should not be unreasonable, but the producer still has to show a profit. In the example above, there is a lot of attention to detail involved in assembly of Fulton's arms. That takes time. Time costs money. As long as the customer demand (shown via purchases) is there, that rifle will sell for $2800, albeit to a niche market. If the demand falls off, the manufacturer reduces production until such time that supply and demand meet where the consumer will make the purchase at a profitable price. I agree with you that there aren't very many of us who want to spend that much money on a rifle, but there are enough who will, or Fulton doesn't get $2800 and the rifle sits on the rack.

I also say again, the authors of the report, whom are generally well respected on this forum, said the "extras" on the Fulton rifle are worth the cost. Everyone hereon has criticized the price, which I understand, but ONLY the price. We've beaten the price to death with no first hand observations on the merit of the actual rifle. We cannot have an intelligent debate on the Fulton rifle on price alone, as the "quality" is an uneducated perception because it lacks first hand observation of the product and company that made it.

Every time I raise prices, I know I may lose some customers. However, I cannot ignore rising costs of labor, material, health care, real estate, and so on if I wish to stay in business. It is, and needs to be, a two way street. Where the supply curve intersects the demand curve, that is your price. Obviously, if Fulton gets $2800 for this rifle, they found that point on the graph.

Posted by: PVB | June 22, 2011 8:17 AM    Report this comment

Agreed Ian. There seems to be a frame of mind out there that says quality has to be cost prohibitive, when in any good business, "quality and affordability" should go hand-in-hand, or the consumer market will abandon that product and the company behind it. If people are willing to choke down a $3 grand price tag on any product, then it is only a matter of time before the price goes to $3,500, and then %4000, and then $4,500, so on and so forth. Businesses will always charge as high as what they think the consumer market will bear, and then inch a little higher. In accordence to avoiding the risk of losing a consumer base, some companies will, according to proven marketing strategies, quickly come back down to Earth before getting tagged by the consumer, but a growing number will actually get defensive, hire a marketing firm to try to "justify" themselves and their price, belittle their competition, and during the final stages, they'll sweat bullets and go out of business. We see it happening in America every day. Likewise, we see it happening on the other end of the scale too. Cheaply made products sold at a cheap price get the same treatment from an ever unforgiving consumer. "Quality" AND "price" have to go hand-in-hand in today's brutal and unforgiving market. Using an opinion forum as a marketing platform is no alternative to those two basic ingredients to business success--quality and affordability. All the best.

Posted by: Nanjing03 | June 22, 2011 7:34 AM    Report this comment

Of course people are complaining about the cost. Sure it's a great rifle but in this economy who can pony this kind of money up? Why are companies not focused on providing accurate AFFORDABLE weapons? Ferrari's are fun to read about but how many of us will ever get to own one? I would rather hear about things I could actually afford that would justify my spending what little money is left after the bills are paid. If Savage can build sub MOA guns for $400.00 or less then why are so many of the new rifles placed in the market so far out of reach of the vast majority of shooters? It is a gorgeous rifle but how about they produce an accurate one for less than a grand? The wood is gorgeous but what Americans truly need now are AFFORDABLE shooters! When more of these are produced then our sport and hobby will be better for it!!

Posted by: IanFrog | June 20, 2011 1:46 PM    Report this comment

My M1A is going back Monday to have the tool mark taken care of. As far as customer service goes they are doing me right. There was a shooter at the match I shot at that threatened SA with a protest sign at Camp Perry during the rifle matches if they didn't take care of his problem. He said they called him at 730 am to appease him. I have a "loaded" model M1A. That has an NM barrel. I have absolutely no complaints about the accuracy. The difference between FAR and SA is FAR uses GI or new milled parts.

Posted by: Dustbag | June 11, 2011 9:36 PM    Report this comment

everyone is bashing price here on this weapon. I myself got tired of buying std weapons a long time ago and it's not that I'm rich. If a gun doesn't shoot 1/2" or better MOA, to me it is not a good shooter and i'm not talking 50 or 100 yds. I've owned 4 Mini 14s and to get one to group better then 9" after 2 clips and hot barrel your gonna pay between 800 and 1200 dollars for a barrel upgrade. I choose to buy NM quality weapons even though I don't shoot matches. Look at the POR AR10 series. It is same price as the FAR M1A. Bet no one complains fo that price. I know quite a few gun owners that or not "rich" who choose to buy quality over quantity for the simple reason they don't have to spend an extra 1000 dollars to get what they thought they were buying in the first place. Look at the AR 15s most people will buy a std and by the time they get finished putting all the geegaws on it they have a 2500 dollar plus weapon. It's all in what a person construes as to the best they can own at a price they are comfortable with. With my Colt M4 I finally got it to shoot 1 and 1/2" groups after 6 30 rd mags. Now to tighten that up I need to rebarrel it. Working with the Army in Iraq and AFG they tell me that is good groups after that many rds. One reason I bought the FAR Titan. I have done nothing to it and my bench sight is at 200yds. It shoots 3/4 MOA every time I shoot it. The only reason I can't group better then 1 1/2 MOA at 800 yds is my fault, not the weapons. If I wasn't so interested in my next gun being in 50 BMG chambering I'd buy the Fulton M1A and probably spend more because I want the Sage or Knight furniture like the EBRs have that would put the price well over 3000. Then throw a good scope on it and your litterally looking at a 4000+ weapon. But it is nice to go shoot at 1000 yds and hit a 1' bull consistently

Posted by: trk3 | June 11, 2011 12:30 AM    Report this comment

looking forward to the newsletter.

Posted by: dellawoods007 | June 10, 2011 9:04 PM    Report this comment

Dustbag, it looks like Springfield Armory had better straighten up and return to the quality the were known for. It really stinks when this happens. Hopefully, they won't make up any return to quality by "jacking" their prices which have been creeping upward. Everybody, including those of us who are fortunate enough to have managed our finances well, are getting sick and tired of the "one or the other" approach to good quality and fair prices. We demand both ... or not at all. Rest assured, the market will give Springfield Armory what they deserve in the form of quality and price competition from some other company unless they straighten out. I hope they are reading this. It is ironic that my $365 1943 SA manufactured M1 Garand has all World War II parts except for a post-war rear sight, a 1967 WRA barrel, and a few NM parts, and yet it shoots flawlessly.

Contact Springfield Armory and tell them that you demand better for the price you paid. Corporations will respond if consumers hold them to their quality and price.

Posted by: Nanjing03 | June 10, 2011 2:48 PM    Report this comment

I bought a Springfield M1A in February. I waited until the weather broke and took a box of Federal M1A ammo to the range to break in the rifle. WOW!! What a shooter. This past week I went back to Indiana to see friends and relatives and took the M1A with me to shoot with my friends. The night of Memorial Day I put an NM rear sight on. We got the pinion a little to tight but still easily turnable. After a few turns on the elevation knob the detent on the back of the drum rounded off and you couldn't count the clicks. The next day I ran over to Geneseo and they fixed it. Great customer service. I went directly to a rifle match at the IRSA. I fired 2 sighters, 2 strings of 10 rounds rapid fire and then 2 rounds sighters for slow fire prone. After 5 rounds slow fire my brass was not ejecting. I pulled the next 2 out and kept firing. The third was in tight. While waiting for it to cool more I looked down on the mat and low and behold there lay my extractor. The next day I was back to Geneseo. I told them they needed to stop using Chinese steel in their parts. They sent my rifle back to me in Colorado. They said they polished the chamber, replaced the extractor and test fired it with 40 rounds and all works well. For 2 days of my vacation, 700 miles driving, and $125 worth of gas I got a $50 gift certificate, a dirty rifle and a tool mark on the receiver.

Posted by: Dustbag | June 10, 2011 1:21 PM    Report this comment

P V B, yes, people buy what they want, that is indeed their prerogative. I already said that I wish the very best for every American company and every American wage earner, and that includes Fulton Armory. However, I was invited to give my opinion, and as a competition shooter, hunter, and someone who has had to watch the bottom line, that is what I did.

My opinion is that the product is grossly overpriced, and yes, price is part of the over package because price can make or break sales, especially in these times. They can take solace however that they are not alone in making bad marketing decisions. Corporate suicide is still common in spite of a wealth of business and marketing forecasting. As for Marlin, Winchester, etc, they made their own beds too, not by providing a superior product and at a reasonable price, but by taking shortcuts in quality and production, and “then” counting on their "good names" to save them from high prices that were unsustainable by the market and rejected by the consumers. We see where it got them. Today, they are reduced to hocking luggage, key chains, polo shirts and caps with their patented logos on them to help prop up their bottom lines, wherever they are, while foreign ammunition companies have pulled the ammo market out from under them.

Again, as a shooter, veteran, hunter, conservationist, collector of firearms, strong active advocate of the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and advocate of a viable and competitive free market economy, I really wish the best for FA in their endeavor. However, my opinion is that their product, good as it is, is also overpriced, and marketed to a consumer group that is overly narrow or non-existent. That is my opinion and you may or may not take stock in it. That is your prerogative too.

Posted by: Nanjing03 | June 10, 2011 12:32 PM    Report this comment

While I am one of many who made comments about the price of the Fulton compared with my Springfields, I, in no way, intended my comments as disparaging toward the Fulton rifles or those who own them . There will always be a market for ultra well made items that perform with ultra precision. It is the nature of the beast.....free enterprise. I'd guess that all of us would truly enjoy ownership of some really high end firearms, and if we are so motivated to purchase them, that's cool. I have long been fascinated with Korth pistols and revolvers. I have handled them, and they are truly great examples of the gun-maker's art, however, when I analyze what else I can buy for $15,000 to $20,000 in handguns, I immediately begin looking for the pieces that will expand my collection in such a way as to put more firearms in my collection than just one $15,000 piece.

Someday, I would like to own a Jaguar sport sedan, but until I lay out the cash to do that, I remain quite satisfied with my Chrysler 300C, Jeep Patriot Sport, and Chrysler Town & Country Limited. It's OK to dream.....and even to envy.....but the majority of us will still be quite satisfied with what we purchase, own, and use as long as we can justify what we do to ourselves.....without lying to ourselves.

Posted by: canovack | June 10, 2011 12:21 PM    Report this comment

Nanjing - people buy what they want. If you want a rifle that shoots better than you do all day long, and will last for many seasons of competition, you will pay accordingly. Most of us will never be good enough marksmen to notice the difference between the Ford and the Rolls Royce of rifles. Meanwhile, if one prefers the Rolls and can afford it, it's their prerogative. Fulton is a very good, small company that produces and rebuilds superb arms one at a time. As for the "exclusive" companies going the way of the dinosaur, over 70% of our GDP comes from the highest wage earners, so don't hold your breath on that one. Further, it is the "Henry Fords" of the arms business (Marlin, Winchester, etc.) who have failed and were resurrected via corporate buyouts. "Better and cheaper" is an oxymoron oft recited by corporate spin giants who slash budgets by moving plants overseas to cut labor, using lesser quality materials, having computers answer the phone instead of people; and think you and I are too stupid to tell the difference.

I say again - all this bashing of the rifle above, and not one negative comment from somebody who actually owns one. Yes, we all know the economy sucks, but bashing a finely reviewed product merely on price? The Gun Tests team we all trust and respect said: "The Fulton had a precise feel. It had better accuracy. It had a gorgeous, well fitted and finished stock. All those little things justified its cost to us. Bottom line, we could not fault the Fulton.

Posted by: PVB | June 10, 2011 10:52 AM    Report this comment

While I wish the very best for every American company and every American wage earner, the cold hard truth is that today's market economy -- more than ever, will severely punish bad marketing decisions as readily as it will reward good ones.

Unless Fulton Armory is in the business of being an exclusive custom shop for the shooting elite-- if there is such a demographic--they may go the way of other so-called "exclusive" products in these difficult times when what is needed are more "Henry Fords" in the arms business who can produce those same products both better and cheaper.

As far as "you get what you pay for," I think the watch phrase today is, "Don't pay for more than you get." I think the latter is an apt description of this dolled up M1A with it's monsterous $3 grand price tag.

Posted by: Nanjing03 | June 10, 2011 10:20 AM    Report this comment

jamraqui - well said!

Posted by: PVB | June 10, 2011 10:08 AM    Report this comment

That is one overpriced weapon. I can get my Chrome lined SKS to do the same thing. JMHO folks so don't go getting upset with me. Being friends with a few Master machinists helps quite a bit living in Utah makes it even easier. But if ya want bragging rights on how much you spend by all means buy one.

Posted by: Rob55 | June 10, 2011 8:30 AM    Report this comment

would love and M1A. What I can say about FAR is that I bought their Titan 308(AR10) about 3 yrs ago. One time home on R&R with family and friends I set an old fridge at 800 yds and used the cab of my duelly as the bench. Off the tripods and a monopod everyone shot 3" groups with 147 gr hunting ammo(wasn't going to let them waste my match ammo) I bought the gun in full NM arrangement. Just waiting to build mt 1000 yd range to see how it does there. So I can say as a FAR owner, and yes I paid 2700 or so for the Titan. You do get what you pay for when you buy a FAR. One of the reciever options for their M1A I'm sure is their recoil lug that is cast in the back of the receiver, I don't know if this gun offers that. The guys over here using the EBR with the 18" barrel routinely shoot it over 800 and 900 yds with good hits. To buy one of those your gonna pony up 2500 to 3000 depending on which stock and that is with the std GI barrel. So like the saying goes "you get what you pay for" I would love to get one of the USMC M1As but check the price on those nowadays. They are substantially more then 2500.

Posted by: trk3 | June 10, 2011 1:39 AM    Report this comment

I bought an Armscorp NM for 800.00 almost 20 years ago. Its a shame that a great rifle goes for that much. How many shooters spend that much and use that level of performance? I hear people brag all the time when a standard or bush model will do just fine for their abilities. If there is an extra Grand, we would be better off shooting it and let the collector have brag about how well his capable. Great comments from all.

Posted by: hobbyx | June 10, 2011 12:50 AM    Report this comment

Good comments, and they cut across a wide range of experience. I'm fortunate enough after a lifetime of working my butt off to be able to buy a $2800 rifle, should I choose. But it's not about being able to buy one. For me it's about buying the one that, for whatever reason, trips my trigger without wasting money. If you want to toss away money just because you can, have at it. I can buy a lot of reloading components for that extra grand, and enjoy the shooting part of things a lot more.

Posted by: Buck1911 | June 9, 2011 11:44 PM    Report this comment

jamraqui, indeed we live in, and we believe in a free market economy. In a free market, consumers can and will voice their opinions, and I dare say, influence that market. Just as you are free to say what you want, so are we. For the sake of consumers who seek advice; my advice, and apparently the advice of most of us here is that the Fulton Armory M-14 is shamefully and obscenely overpriced. Now, as for 3 holes in the same hole at ... hmmm ... "50" yards, well, I should certainly hope so, and with more "reasonably" priced rifles. Happy shooting.

Posted by: Nanjing03 | June 9, 2011 11:36 PM    Report this comment

Gentlemen... cost is an individual interpretation. It's not Fulton's intent to market an affordable rifle... but rather to market an excellent rifle. Apparently, for those that can't fathom it, there are folks buying them. They continue makiing them because... people continue buying them. It woudl be foolish to say that only idiots pay 2.8k$ for a rifle like that... idiots are not often rich. ;-) Personal budgets, folks... they're all different.

I haved a Fulton Armory AR-15 upper that they built to my personal specs. 1k$ delivered, upper only. But it's everything I asked for and puts 3 rounds in the same hole at 50 yards with nothing more than an unmagnified red dot for a sight. Could I have bought a thousand SKS's and a shotgun for that price? ;-) Sure... but it's not what I wanted. I am WAY impressed with Fulton Armory, and scores of others are also.
SO- to echo another writer here... quit groaning about the price. It's silly to do so. It is what it is, just like a Mercedes is what it is. Yes, you can get more car for the money... but it's not about the money. Obviously, or it would be priced lower. It's about the ITEM, and your inabilty to justify the price to yourself does not mean it's not worth it. It just means it's not worth it TO YOU.

...but you are not the only man on the market.


Posted by: jamraqui | June 9, 2011 11:11 PM    Report this comment

Hmmm, almost $3 grand--for an M1A? What were they thinking around the board room table at Fulton Armory when they quoted that price? Certainly, there was a copy of the Wall Street Journal in the room with it's dismal outlook for the nation's economy, 10% unemployment and 30-40% underemployed. Maybe these will be "exclusive specialty rifles for visiting international executives with discriminating tastes." Oh well, I'll just keep my eyes open for a stock, no frills Springfield M1A -- similar to the M-14 service rifles we had in the Navy. Until then, my tack driving M1 Garand will suit me.

Posted by: Nanjing03 | June 9, 2011 9:55 PM    Report this comment

I too was a high shooter at USMC RD San Diego/Mc Greager Range at Camp Pendelton Plt. 1097, 1971. When my M-14 was put into my hands it felt perfect. I bought my M1-A Springfield in 1998. Every time I take it to range, I have people ask if they can put a round or two down range. I have no idea how many M1-A's I have sold... There is no better rifle.

Posted by: MSD | June 9, 2011 8:21 PM    Report this comment

All you haters and not one of you owns the rifle! For cryin' out loud, you aren't buying the $2800 piece as your main battle rifle, so enough whinin' about the cost already... ;)

Like canovack and others, I have one of the "carbine" sized Springfields. There's nothing to hate, and everything to love.

Oh, and Mister E - another black rifle? Really?? It's an M-14, not a 16.

Posted by: PVB | June 9, 2011 7:39 PM    Report this comment

A while back, I purchased a Springfield M1A for $1300.00, and it did everything I wanted it to do. In fact, I liked it so much, I went out and purchased a Springfield M1A SOCOM 16. It is a great "go to" rifle for just about anything I want it to do, and it cost only $1464.00. Now, I know that the old saying tells us that we get what we pay for, but I have a hard time thinking of how much better than my Springfields the Fulton Amory rifle might be when it costs almost twice what I paid for my SOCOM 16. In fact, my basic M1A and the SOCOM 16 together cost about the same as the Fulton Armory piece. I may throw money around on firearms, but I do try to throw it in sensibly economical ways.

Posted by: canovack | June 9, 2011 6:57 PM    Report this comment

My Polytek 14s has over 200 rounds and still shoots 2MOA and better at 300 yards. 1/3rd the price when you could get them.Fulton makes a great weapon but an AR .308 can be had for less than 1/2 $.and easier to change if desired.

Posted by: Robert T | June 9, 2011 6:08 PM    Report this comment

USMC boot camp 1960 with an M1. We got M14 couple of years later. I was always top shot my platoon and company. I was a BARman originally which I hated, but I loved the M14 it was my rifle!

Posted by: worlon | June 9, 2011 5:36 PM    Report this comment

Gun prices are coming down. I bought the Springfield Scout for $1699 right after Obama was elected, out of fear. I knew I was paying too much at the time, and without being able to see the future, figured I had better get it while I could. Never regretted it since. Yes I would like to have a Fulton Armory , but not for another $1000. I am never gonna win a Match at my age anyway. Plus "Springfield" sounds better.

Posted by: Glockman | June 9, 2011 5:18 PM    Report this comment

Forgot to mention the Saiga AK 308 semi auto rifles on K-VAR'S website about $600-$700.

Posted by: PH/CIB | June 9, 2011 4:43 PM    Report this comment

I have a Springfield Armory Scout M1A, it is an excellent rifle and $1000 less than the Fulton Armory, got a PTR91 for $1000, a FAL for $1200, A Vepr AK in 308 for $1000 and an Armalite AR10T for $1700, for $1000-$1500 you can get a good 308 battle rifle, but the Fulton Armory M1A, Smith Enterprises M1A and LRB M1A are excellent M1A rifles if you can afford them.

Posted by: PH/CIB | June 9, 2011 4:40 PM    Report this comment

It's a Krieghoff over a Mauser P-08, a Weatherby over a CZ bolt gun, a Churchill over a Winchester double barrel, a Lincoln over a Ford four door. Like a Fabrege over a Pilgrim's Pride it depends on what your egg is to you.

Posted by: Shootingstar | June 9, 2011 4:31 PM    Report this comment

I agree with Steve H. 2800. is a lot of money for a M1A.Nice furniture is great but does not have to be that expensive. Its very limited in how you can dress it out with out changeing it up. I know there selling this gun as the way it says.But i can build an AR15 forless money lighter and faster.It also can be dressed out for many uses.

Posted by: hogdog | June 9, 2011 2:54 PM    Report this comment

I bought my Springfield M1A (up-graded with several NM options) years ago for less than $1700. As best I can recall, it is identical to the one I carried in Vietnam years ago (sans the full-auto option/switch). In my opinion it is the ultimate battle rifle. I've kept the iron sights, and my son - with his young eyes and steady hands - routinely breaks grounded clay pigeons off-hand at 100 yards. I can as well ... from a sitting-rest, with a few more rounds required. I've got the M1A I've always wanted; pretty true to the real deal. I wouldn't-and couldn't- buy another manufacturer's for an additional $1000+. I can't see where that extra grand goes. If you want a fine M1A, buy an up-graded Springfield-you won't regret it.

Posted by: Buck1911 | June 9, 2011 2:05 PM    Report this comment

I bought my Springfield M1A (up-graded with several NM options) years ago for less than $1700. As best I can recall, it is identical to the one I carried in Vietnam years ago (sans the full-auto option/switch). In my opinion it is the ultimate battle rifle. I've kept the iron sights, and my son - with his young eyes and steady hands - routinely breaks grounded clay pigeons off-hand at 100 yards. I can as well ... from a sitting-rest, with a few more rounds required. I've got the M1A I've always wanted; pretty true to the real deal. I wouldn't-and couldn't- buy another manufacturer's for an additional $1000+. I can't see where that extra grand goes. If you want a fine M1A, buy an up-graded Springfield-you won't regret it.

Posted by: Buck1911 | June 9, 2011 2:02 PM    Report this comment

i do not own a fulton armory m14 but i would like to have one. I have always believed that with rifles... you get what you pay for. I think the cost of this rifle, though rather steep, is well worth the price.

Posted by: Gerald Javier | June 9, 2011 1:40 PM    Report this comment

USMC bootcamp - late '60's.
Basketball sized target at 500 yds w/ peep-sights & a military barrel.
One heck of a piece & you can get a mil-spec one for about half the price...but I guess when the "clone wars" start you'd need that extra 1/3 moa, no?


Posted by: StinsonBeach | June 9, 2011 1:03 PM    Report this comment

Ho-hum. Another black rifle.

Posted by: Mister E | June 9, 2011 12:25 PM    Report this comment

It is a lot of money, but M1A rifles have always been expensive. I will say for that much cash I would prefer a more modern stock with some rails, better scope options, and some adjustability. I do like the wood stock and the classic look, but not for $2800.

Posted by: Steve H | June 9, 2011 12:19 PM    Report this comment

When I was in USMC boot camp in the early 1960's our drill instuctor said that if we lost or damaged our issued M14, we would be charged $114.00 to replace it. This was a big threat because $114.00 was two month's pay.

Posted by: Mark A. C | June 9, 2011 11:53 AM    Report this comment

Wish somebody would accurize and update the SKS, then sell it for about 1/4 or 1/5 the price of this $2800 pipedream. Now, THAT would be worth having!

Posted by: whooziss | June 9, 2011 11:36 AM    Report this comment

I agree with david b. That is a chunk of change for a battle rifle. It is not like I would be using it for a match or the like. Probably more apt to be used in case of a zombie invasion. If that were the case, nostalgia notwithstanding, there are other options for an M14 type rifle at half the price that would do the job just as well.

Posted by: 1015811414 | June 9, 2011 11:13 AM    Report this comment

Its not a criticism of the rifle, but for nearly $2800 if I had THAT much 'extra' cash at one time, there would be other things to spend it on. Seriously. I can pony up about half that for a gun, but not $2800. THAT kind of money makes extra house payments, or pays off th balance on a car note....

Posted by: david b | June 9, 2011 10:23 AM    Report this comment

Add your comments ...

New to Gun Tests? Register for Free!

Already Registered? Log In