Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 12/11/2003 9:46:22 AM EDT
it looks like a burly battle rifle but seems to have lots of parts and fairly tight tolarences?

so how much abuse can the M-14 take?

it looks like the sand would fall into the chamber more so than a AR?

the mags look very strong?

anyone been in combat situations with this big ole rifle?
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 9:53:17 AM EDT
When John Culbertson was the guest speaker for a mess night my unit did in 1999 he spoke of how his failed him under fire while taking part in Operation Tuscaloosa in Vietnam. The circumstances was they started to take fire following a river crossing, he got wet sand into the receiver of the weapon and it would not function. I remember reading a similar criticism of the SMLE in Gallipoli invasion. So if wet sand can foul a bolt action I would think it would do it to anything.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 10:02:52 AM EDT
The M14 is the superest, most bestest battle rifle there ever was. It is impossible to jam as God himself personally keeps the action clear by divine intervention. The super duper round it fires can kill a man instantly up to 2000 yards away. Any real special ops guys toss their Mattel M16's when they get "in country" in favor of the awesome M14.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 10:03:46 AM EDT
Its proven very reliable and durable in heavy use. One of those scary guy units in the military that dip themselves in the water a lot supposedly prefer them for beach ops. Any gun can malfunction if you introduce enough debris into the action.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 10:08:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/11/2003 10:09:47 AM EDT by mr_wilson]
Comments above aside, (don't think it was the rifles fault it got wet sand in it, murphy will get-ya tho) as they are built on the venerable "M1-Garand" model and share quite a bit in common, sans the caliber. IMO as a combat rifle believe they full-filled that role better than the M16 has, especially when considering the abuse occuring in a combat situation. Seems quite a few fellas carried them in the first Desert Storm action, mostly SF'ers IIRC and believe there are some over there "in action" right now. They definately provide a range advantage over the 223. Mike
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 10:58:35 AM EDT
so it will take more abuse than the m16.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 11:03:33 AM EDT
A buddy of mine started useing one in Somalia after one of the skinnies(high on Khat) he shot failed to drop after a few rounds to the chest and had to put one put one between the running lights. Starting using an M-14, Khat loveing skinnies there after met Allah via 7.62, no repeat shots needed!! My friend liked the fact he could use cleaning brush and rag to clean dust off the M-14's bolt rather easily vs the M-16. He had no issues with the M-16 mechanically as he kept his weapon immaculately clean.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 11:24:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SNorman: The M14 is the superest, most bestest battle rifle there ever was. It is impossible to jam as God himself personally keeps the action clear by divine intervention. The super duper round it fires can kill a man instantly up to 2000 yards away. Any real special ops guys toss their Mattel M16's when they get "in country" in favor of the awesome M14.
View Quote
I believe this summed it up rather nicely.[:D]
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 11:32:05 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Blackjack272:
Originally Posted By SNorman: The M14 is the superest, most bestest battle rifle there ever was. It is impossible to jam as God himself personally keeps the action clear by divine intervention. The super duper round it fires can kill a man instantly up to 2000 yards away. Any real special ops guys toss their Mattel M16's when they get "in country" in favor of the awesome M14.
View Quote
I believe this summed it up rather nicely.[:D]
View Quote
Just missing one thing to make it complete, a Hollywood magazine to eliminate the need to change mags!!![:D]
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 11:57:28 AM EDT
You coulda copied that one almost dead on from "Blackhawk Down," only the guy who used the M14 was Randy Shughart and he got killed at Mike Durant's crash site.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 12:09:21 PM EDT
Originally Posted By icemanat95: You coulda copied that one almost dead on from "Blackhawk Down," only the guy who used the M14 was Randy Shughart and he got killed at Mike Durant's crash site.
View Quote
Every time I hear Somalia, I think of Shughart, Gordan, and the Rangers, my blood pressure rises!!!
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 12:15:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By STLRN: I remember reading a similar criticism of the SMLE in Gallipoli invasion. So if wet sand can foul a bolt action I would think it would do it to anything.
View Quote
Sand can kill anything. The Japs, English, Australians, Americans, Germans, and Russians all had problems when fighting in a sandy environment. It's not an equipment problem, sand gets everywhere and gums up the rifles. Av.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 12:31:08 PM EDT
A lot more than the M16 can, IME. It's easier to get sand out of the action with an M14, too. Wet sand can cause ANY weapon to malfunction.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 7:36:08 PM EDT
The M14 has the sad history of being the rifle with the shortest service life of any rifle adopted by the army. My friend has an M1A and I would hate to carry it into combat. Why? All that steel, from the magazine to the exposed reciever, rusts in the rain. Combat load of ammo; M16-210, M14-140. While it is easier to clean sand out of the reciever it has more parts than the M16 and actually requires more maint to keep going. The M14 is hard to mount a scope on and most SF units are using the MK 25 or MK11, simply a 7.62 M16.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 8:28:23 PM EDT
To get the maximum accuracy out of a M14/M1A, you need to glue/bed the action to the stock. If you seperate the action and the stock you risk small specks of fiberglass getting into the inlet upsetting point-of-aim & accuracy.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 8:50:48 PM EDT
Originally Posted By warlord: To get the maximum accuracy out of a M14/M1A, you need to glue/bed the action to the stock. If you seperate the action and the stock you risk small specks of fiberglass getting into the inlet upsetting point-of-aim & accuracy.
View Quote
Not bragging here only making a point...I get 1/2'@100yds with my M1A and the stock is not glassbedded to the reciever.I'm not saying that it doesn't help accuracy but obviously not all M1A rifles NEED that kind of treatment to be accurate.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 9:06:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/11/2003 9:08:33 PM EDT by Mr_Happyface]
Originally Posted By MAC-DADDY:
Originally Posted By warlord: To get the maximum accuracy out of a M14/M1A, you need to glue/bed the action to the stock. If you seperate the action and the stock you risk small specks of fiberglass getting into the inlet upsetting point-of-aim & accuracy.
View Quote
Not bragging here only making a point...I get 1/2'@100yds with my M1A and the stock is not glassbedded to the reciever.I'm not saying that it doesn't help accuracy but obviously not all M1A rifles NEED that kind of treatment to be accurate.
View Quote
Same here, with iron sights, NOT the national match ones either! DAMN I love my M1A! Forgot to add that that is at 110 yards so the POA will match the BDC. D-O-G.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 9:23:05 PM EDT
Or use a synthetic stock instead of wood - much lighter and generally doesn't require any fitting.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 1:55:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/12/2003 1:57:58 AM EDT by osprey21]
M-14, The test of time. M-14 with US Army in Vietnam 1965 [img]http://m14.freeservers.com/images/fire6.jpg[/img] M-14 with USMC in Vietnam 1966. [img]http://m14.freeservers.com/images/letson-1.jpg[/img] M-14 with SF in Iraq 2003. [img]http://m14.freeservers.com/images/ussf3434.jpg[/img] M-14 with USMC in Afghanistan 2003 [img]http://m14.freeservers.com/images/o30223-m-4248g-004lowres.jpg[img] M-14(DMR) with USMC in Africa 2003 [img]http://m14.freeservers.com/images/lg-1430452982003.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 10:12:14 AM EDT
Originally Posted By MAC-DADDY: Not bragging here only making a point...I get 1/2'@100yds with my M1A and the stock is not glassbedded to the reciever.I'm not saying that it doesn't help accuracy but obviously not all M1A rifles NEED that kind of treatment to be accurate.
View Quote
Wow half a foot at 100 yards?
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 10:36:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SNorman:
Originally Posted By MAC-DADDY: Not bragging here only making a point...I get 1/2'@100yds with my M1A and the stock is not glassbedded to the reciever.I'm not saying that it doesn't help accuracy but obviously not all M1A rifles NEED that kind of treatment to be accurate.
View Quote
Wow half a foot at 100 yards?
View Quote
FWIW, While I believe he intended to put 1/2" originally, in "engineering" an angle is represented as 24°15'15", (deg°min'sec") so the 1/2' could, if your an old surveyor like myself denote "1/2 of a minute", or 1/2". Mike
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 10:52:37 AM EDT
My m1a can consistently hit minute-of-pumpkin at 300 yards with the factory iron sites. Its about my favorite rifle. The only thing that I can shoot to 300 yards a little (and I mean little...) better is my 129 dollar Swiss k31.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 12:57:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SNorman:
Originally Posted By MAC-DADDY: Not bragging here only making a point...I get 1/2'@100yds with my M1A and the stock is not glassbedded to the reciever.I'm not saying that it doesn't help accuracy but obviously not all M1A rifles NEED that kind of treatment to be accurate.
View Quote
Wow half a foot at 100 yards?
View Quote
Sure your not thinking Mini-14 groups? [>:/] [:D]
Top Top