Thank God for Lumpy and Different, both provide wonderful gun porn!!

Quoted: I have seen a few pics of the "SOCOM" type 16" barrel M-14 in use by US troops...and have heard second-hand accounts of them being used by SEALS, Army Spec Ops and Air force servicemen... Now here's my question if this is true...Why? OK, a 308 rifle has its uses, and would be uncontrollable on full-auto, so a civilian model would work...but, are our guys really trusting their lives to a product made by Springfield Armory? And wouldn't an AR-10 type rifle be better than an M-14? groups.msn.com/_Secure/0XQDtAlEd92Gu5p60GlzAzD*Jac19xg2jos!TIGSaFeGwJ4mk9Eck9Fp!I2CprJdfrBA2SCwCmBgcddKO*G6awkmOHcZPazq61D!ubngzUycJlOWxOL6GIUx2uOEeaoX5ueLeFbrRiEQ/IMG_1939.JPG?dc=4675485854344150527

The SR-25, IIRC, is also used by some 'special' units...

Quoted: Quoted: Oly-M4, I read that the military wanted to switch to AR10s/SR25s because there is no one in theater qualified to work on M14s anymore. These guys are all retired. It only takes  acouple of days to make an M16 armorer qualified too work on its bigger brother. Nice come back with the 250,000 figure . What is the rifle in use in the USN? What rifle is used during 21 gun salutes, funerals, honor guards, etc? It is much easier to train people to do something when you can go to the GPO and order up reprints of old M-14 user manuals, armorer's manuals, training course guidlines, etc. You are right, M16 to M11 (same math AR-15-M16, AR-10 to M11), transition should in theory be very easy. Of course some would want the magic "mil-spec" stamp.....................

Correction on the M numbers...

The AR-15 is the fifteenth rifle designed by ArmaLite/Fairchild

The M-16 was the  sixteenth rifle considered for adoption by the US Army since the M1 Garand.

It's pure coincidence...

Smith Enterprise is just about to do a large order for the military, and LRB is being talked about as the 5th USGI Contractor.  

New Rifles are being built and sent.

The only real problem is that some unit armourers have little experience with the platform, a lot of the guys getting the rifles also have no training on it. Most of what I've heard (and theres a lot to hear on m-14forum and Battlerifles) is positive,  there are some problems but they are exaggerrated by the lack of armourers familiar with the system but the knowledge is trickling down.

The truth of the matter is that the m14 is a good weapon, and the military can use it now, so they are using it.

Quoted: Quoted: OK, a 308 rifle has its uses, and would be uncontrollable on full-auto, so a civilian model would work...but, are our guys really trusting their lives to a product made by Springfield Armory? No, they are trusting their lives to GI Spec M14s not commercial semi-autos And wouldn't an AR-10 type rifle be better than an M-14? No.  M14s have a proven track record of remarkable real work reliability.  AR10s DONT. M14s are in the inventory right now, AR10s ARENT

+1
Lumpys the man!

Quoted: And just exactly what do you think is wrong with Springfield Armory? I think they were our first National Armory. They made and serviced millions of firearms for our troops for about 200 years. I know they went from a Government Armory to a privately held business years ago, but I still think they are a fine company. Lots of competition shooters start with a Springfield .45 and trick it out rather than buying the more expensive Colt and still having to trick them out.  I have some Springfield firearms and they are superb.

Springfield Armory the company has as much to do with Springfield Armory the Govt agency as ArmaLite the company has to do with the ArmaLite that designed the AR-15 (which was, btw, full-auto).

I.E. SA, Inc has NOTHING IN COMMON with the US-owned armory besides the name...

SA was responsible for US weapons production up untill the M16.

SA, Inc assembles guns from foreign/leftover GI parts...

Big diff...

Quoted: Quoted: what i wouldn't have dont for a battle riffle overhtere it gets really annoying when you shoot and they keep standing. sure the 5.56 is good for headshots and blasting alot of ammo really fast out of a SAW, but i wanted a round that woud stop someone in their tracks and reconsider life.  heck even an AK would have been better than that plinker I carried But bring a 20 mm onto the playing field normally requires a vechical of some sort. Any weapon that is going to knock a soldier down with one shot is going to take a crew served weapon mounted on a platform of somesort. Newton's laws of physics aren't just suggestions, they're actual laws of nature that can't be broken - really. Do you really want to get into it over the 5.56 vs. the 7.62x39 because it's only going to make you look really foolish.

Eg... 'What 30-30 rifle for shooting BGs?'

Seriously, there is a reason no major power uses .30cal for issue rifles anymore...

Even the ultimate pack-rats, the Russians, got rid of theirs in the 70s (AK74, .21cal (5.45x39mm)), perhaps based on intel gathered from our use of SCHV rifle ammo in Vietnam...

But the .223 lethality issue has been beaten to death here, and would be a major thread 'jack...

No one wants to be shot by either Caliber...

They each have thier strengths and weaknesses however.  5.56 is heavy enough for most situations a soldier will run into, however .308 has its uses.

The .308 is a little more reliable over 300 Yards in both lethality (Even the biggest .223 fans have to admit that outside of fragmentation range the .223 isn't doing anything better then .30 cal) and consistancy.

There are heavier rounds for the m16 that are fine and dandy at longer ranges, but they are not general issue.

Another issue is penetration, the .308 performs better firing through light stone walls, car windows,  building frames etc.

Now all this is not to say that the .308 supplants the .223, but having a battle rifle really augments the .223 very nicely.

It all boils down to helping our guys win, and its just damn handy to have an m14 around in Iraq and Afghanistan at the moment..

Curious, since SA inc seems to make okay/low qual M1a/M14s, how does one, aside from building your own, acquire a fine weapon such as the M1A/M14?

BTW...I already have a few mags for it too!

Ben

Quoted: Quoted: I have seen a few pics of the "SOCOM" type 16" barrel M-14 in use by US troops...and have heard second-hand accounts of them being used by SEALS, Army Spec Ops and Air force servicemen... Now here's my question if this is true...Why? OK, a 308 rifle has its uses, and would be uncontrollable on full-auto, so a civilian model would work...but, are our guys really trusting their lives to a product made by Springfield Armory? And wouldn't an AR-10 type rifle be better than an M-14? .308 hits harder at a longer distance out. Also a civilian model is already on the market. Check last months issue of AMERICAN RIFLEMAN for a write up. The troops have been trusting their lives with M-16's cobbled togethor by Colt since Vietnam.

Actually, the M16 has been being produced by FN for several years now.

Quoted: Curious, since SA inc seems to make okay/low qual M1a/M14s, how does one, aside from building your own, acquire a fine weapon such as the M1A/M14? BTW...I already have a few mags for it too! Ben

Fulton Armory makes a really good one.

Well FA's M14s cost more than my car. Even the cheap ones, and some of the reports from Fulton haven't been that great....

Ben

Quoted: Quoted: Military has a literally tons of low use M-14's squirelled away. No they have a few thousand left. Which technically is "Tons" "A few thousand X What 5-6 pounds each? = Tons

8-11 pounds, I think.