Armory Sponsor
Posted: 12/11/2005 7:45:06 PM EDT
Nah, the 101st is currently in Iraq. The M14's they have are not SEI bound. They were supposed to be retrofitted with Sage stocks (M4 butt-style ones), mounts, and optics once they got to Kuwait. |
| This is odd because this conversation came up at my sister's house last evening after dinner. It was also my understanding that most of the U.S. stock of M-14's were cut up and destroyed during the Clinton administration. Some were offered to law enforcement but other than that and whatever ones we gave away to other nations, they are history (unfortunately). |
|
I read the same article in Shotgun News. Kokalis makes it sound like the US Army as a whole is rushing to refurb M14's without any listed sources of verification. I know that individual Army units are refurbishing M14's, some doing as little as adding a scope and strap on cheek piece and others sending them to SE for the "Crazy Horse". Peter Kokalis sure writes some interesting stuff, but I take it with a grain of salt and always verify his information from other sources before taking it as the truth. His Crazy Horse article (also in Shotgun News) was full of bullshit and 1/2 truths. Granted, thats a recent article but I've felt that way about his writing for as long as I've read his stuff. |
|
If it were in Shotgun News, it must be true. Mounting Flash hiders (Flash hiders that are less effective than the original if you ask me) to an M14 and slapping a Vietnam era scop on it is hardly a refurbish program. The M14 is never, ever, ever going to be built again. As I have said before, it is being used in limited numbers in Iraq and Afghanistan as it was in.... Vietnam Grenada Lebanon Israel Somalia Desert Storm and so on. Brits are doing the same with limited L1A1 (and to some degree US M14 rifles) as well. However, truth be told, the L1A1 is much more suited to desert use than the M14. When the M14 was designed, desert warfare was not even a thought for the US, but the same does not hold true for the British Empire (now defunct). Love the M14, don't like the mythology. |
|
The Army isn't "refurbing" them technically but only modifing them. Anniston Depot does the rebuild program on M14's and stores them, something like 125k are still in the supply system. They rebuilt M14's at least thru the late 80's so you will see them with rebuild mark ( example ; ANNAD 8-82 ) electro pencilled on the right receiver edge under wood line. Like someone said the Army is just pulling stock rebuilt /serviceable M14's from the depot and sending them to be modified to Crazy Horse or whatever ... If someone is a " FED LOG " guru you can look up the M14 NSN 1005-00-589-1271 , it might show more info.. |
| I agree with you. I think Kokalis meant it would be a limited refurb. Other articles I have read about the M14 experience in Iraq and Afghanistan have stated that units using the M14 are running into spare parts shortages especially the lack of new spare magazines. Added to the fact that most soldiers/marines are not familiar with the M14. They have never trained with it. I remember from Army basic training how each soldier would field strip and re-assemble the M16A2; I don’t think the soldiers in the field have the training or the manuals to do that with the M14. From what I have read the M14 is less maintenance sensitive than the M16(M4), but I still imagine that preventive maintenance will need to be done in the sandy environments of Iraq and Afghanistan. That also brings up the issue of unit armorers having the training to work on the M14, I doubt that also. But I have seen stranger things. I have heard and seen photos of tanker units still using the M3A1 “grease gun.” I can only imagine the headaches of supporting that “museum piece.” |
George hasn't responded yet as to who they ar egoing to, but a fairly knowledgable member over there said that he heard that they weren't for our Government. When George posts, I guess we'll find out. George did post that the accuracy requirement is 4" groups at 300yds (1+MOA) but the rifles are getting between 1/2 and 3/4MOA. |
|
patriot73 and I may disagree on what "limited" use is, but the M-14 is being issued one per squad in most of the Army's combat units. And by "combat" units I mean even artillery and cav guys who deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan as grunts. Do the math and you'll see that it is a far greater number than has been previously encountered, probably more common now than at any time since it was retired. In fact, as per Different in another thread, the gubment has contracted this year for limited production of SOME M-14 components: op rods, extractors, hammers, sears, flash hiders, and front sights among others. When I was in the Army (Airborne Infantry) in Panama back in the mid-80's we had 2 M-21's per company but they never left the arms room. When a friend of mine and I gave some classes on the M-14 to the 101st this fall prior to deployment they had anywhere from 15 to 19 per company-sized unit (artillery batteries and a cav troop; we didn't run any classes for infantry units). So, while the M-14 is hardly going to replace the M-4 or M-16A2, it certainly is seeing a rebirth of sorts. One per squad is a decent number of weapons. It will be with us for longer than we originally thought when they were first pulled out of storage a couple years ago. |
Let it suffice to say that there is no comprehensive Army (let alone other service or DoD) program in effect for "refurbing" the M14...yet. Moreover, a search of open source domains or .mil domains will not tell you anything programmatic or otherwise useful about M-14 component or complete system/refurbishment acquisition strategies -- (recent) past, present or future. In other words, there are no reliable dots to connect. Now go home 
|
It does appear as if lots of them are going over there these days. That's good, an M14 is like AT&T....when you want to reach out and touch someone. I once heard a story that the Russians would destroy entire villages if the found one empty .303 case in Afghanistan. I don't know how true that is but it must be very frustrating working with an M4 in the barren lands of Afghanistan. One per squad is definately a decent number of weapons. |
|
Check-Mate Industries was awarded a three year Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contract by Rock Island Arsenal on September 19, 2005 for a minimum of 25,000 M14 magazines. The maximum quantity per the contract is 360,000 magazines. The M14 magazine shortage should be easing up for the troops. |
| Well a contract of that size seems to speak of the intention of the DOD to keep using the M14 in some extended capacity for a while. Maybe the M14 will be like the B52 bomber and have a longer than expected service life. (Some B52 pilots are flying planes their grandfathers flew.) As mentioned in the other posts, it certainly fills the long range gap in Afghanistan until the DOD can come up with something better. |
|
My friend's cousin is a scout/sniper in the 4th ID was preparing for another tour in Iraq last month. Their unit was gathered together asked if anyone knew anything about M14s. He was the only one who raised his hand. When asked about his experience, he told them that he had gone shooting with his cousin and me once and shot our M1As. He then got "promoted" to "armorer" and was handed a dozen M14s to "refurbish" for their upcoming trip. He scrambled around and begged his cousin and I for any information we had on M14s and M1As last week. Needless to say, my copies of Kuhnhausen's book, Scott Duff's book and a whole bunch of articles and web site printouts are now somewhere in Iraq. I also made sure that he had a list of critical parts that might break or need replacing while he was over there. He made mention that he was going "shopping" before he left. I got the impression that these rifles were not in the greatest condition and needed some real help. One thing that he was really struggling with was ammo. He told us that they were de-linking ammo for M-60s because it was all they could get hold of and he was hoping he would see some better stuff when he got over there. He mentioned that the M-60 stuff wouldn't group very well. He tried it in his M24 to see what it would do and said it was not gorouping very well, but never mentioned any numbers on what he was getting. At least we didn't have to ship him scopes like we did the last time he was over there. Things must be improving. |
Didn't the original run of CMI mags have problems? I hope our guys get good mags from them. I think I actually have a couple older CMI mags in my stash, if I do, mine work ok. |
| The 1996 Check-Mate contract mags had issues, mainly with followers and placement of the mag lock block thingy making them not compatable with every M14 esp with bedded NM's. We also had a number of follower legs bend causing FF'ds nose dives/stove pipes when you had 1-3 rounds left in mag. |
Armory Sponsor