mg357
Absent Comrade
Dear Smith and Wesson Forum i would like to hear some opinions from my fellow Forum members about the M14 Rifle sincerely and repectfully mg357 a proud member of the Smith and Wesson Forum
Last edited:
opinions on the M14 Rifle
- Thread starter mg357
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
kscardsfan
Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2008
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 44
Don't know much about the M14, only fired one and it was a DM rifle so the slector lock was on. But I love my M1A.
Can be an excellent battle or target rifle. Get Springfield and probably one reworked by an armorer. Stay away from China and other mfg.s Many available "bells and whistles" but far less than the ARs. I have an early one - full match - built by Glenn Nelson (himself). About 12.5 pounds with full mag but very accurate with iron (match) sites. Have not tried with a scope, but expect it would be fantastic. At my age (74) sighting and recoil a problem.
paperboy98
Member
I had one....
carried one (mostly over my head with arms extended in the air) while marching and running about 10,000 miles at Ft. Leonard Wood Missouri one summer........hope to never see another one as long as I live!
PAPERBOY98
carried one (mostly over my head with arms extended in the air) while marching and running about 10,000 miles at Ft. Leonard Wood Missouri one summer........hope to never see another one as long as I live!
PAPERBOY98
bmcgilvray
Member
I've got an Springfield Armory M1A rather than the real deal M14 but it offers a lot to the shooter. Though not some "match grade" variation, it certainly is accurate and shoots an admirably effective cartridge. Mine has given reliable function over many years. I keep it clean and lubed. No muss, no fuss. Though I have an AR 15 I admire the M14/M1A much more than the weenie rifle.
lonejacklarry
US Veteran
It wasn't any better in the winter either but I'd like to find a good one. I suspect it would be lots heavier now as I'm not in the shape that I was in 1966. The rifle range was a loooooong way, wasn't it?
An excellent rifle in my opinion.
The M-14 is, IMHO, the best battle rifle the U.S. Army ever had. Accurate, excellent range, and good knock-down power, with quickly interchangeable magazines. I carried it and used it to very good effect. Oh yes, it had a selector switch allowing full auto fire, but required a key that was retained by the unit's XO, and only issued to designated personnel - really kept new troops from blowing out all their ammo (usually in the tree tops) during the first few seconds of an hours-long fire fight (unlike the M-16 popgun that replaced it, an incredibly stupid idea). Been there, used them both, absolutely no comparison. One other thing, the National Match M-14s were even better, I had them on my rifle team, and I always shot high score on the 600, 800 and 1,000 yard stages (all with iron sights, BTW). The standard M-14s were almost as accurate. To replace such a fine rifle, with power, reliability, range and accuracy, with the "Swell Mattel" (yes, there was a run of early M-16s made under contract by Mattel, complete with their logo and motto - "You can tell it's Mattel, its Swell" stamped on the left side of the lower receiver above the magazine well, we were issued several) was just wrong. Going from a serious round to a varmint round (with a FMJ projectile, at that) in an unreliable weapon which was seriously deficient in accuracy, just because it was lighter (plus political reasons, the real reason), was a huge step backward. Sorry, got a bit off-track. A real M-14 is a great weapon, but, since it is select fire, would be a Class III weapon, and not available to the public. Of the civilian "clones," the advice to stay away from the Chinese replicas is good, but Springfield's M-1A (a semi-auto only clone of the M-14) is a well-made weapon with a good reputation. If you're considering one, I say go for it, you won't regret it.
SOCOM
Member
It is an exceptional weapon. Ironically, the US Army just began to reissue it under an Operational Needs Statement as the "EBR" (Enhanced Battle Rifle) for designated marksman. It's still an M14, call it what you will.
Carried one in Basic Training @ Ft. Ord. One day on a tactical (ITT, I think) course, it was raining cats and dogs. At one of the stations, I found Myself in a foxhole full of mud and water. As I attempted to fire the required 2-round-count (blanks) the trigger assembly was so full of muck that I couldn't depress the trigger.
I quickly removed the trigger group, rapped it on my helmet a few times to get the muck out, reinserted the trigger group and depressed the trigger. The trigger pull felt like grinding gravel, but both rounds discharged amid a hail of gunk and water from the barrel! Try that with an M16/AR!
I gotta think Charlie and his buds would have called it quits sooner, for real, if our people had been able to continue to carry the M14, instead of that pop gun! 5.56 vs 7.62; no contest!
Seems like the 7.62 is in use in combat zones today where the operator needs more WHOOMPH!
I quickly removed the trigger group, rapped it on my helmet a few times to get the muck out, reinserted the trigger group and depressed the trigger. The trigger pull felt like grinding gravel, but both rounds discharged amid a hail of gunk and water from the barrel! Try that with an M16/AR!
I gotta think Charlie and his buds would have called it quits sooner, for real, if our people had been able to continue to carry the M14, instead of that pop gun! 5.56 vs 7.62; no contest!
Seems like the 7.62 is in use in combat zones today where the operator needs more WHOOMPH!
Expensive to buy or build and shoot. Can be alot of work/money to get the type of accuracy most shooters expect today if you are reffering to an M1A. If you really mean an M-14 then you can just add the "extremely" to my first sentence. I like the weapon and I am not knocking it at all but just consider the following for thought. If it is/was so fantastic why is it no longer the rifle of choice for most shooters on the National Match course and why was it one of the shortest lived battle rifles we had???
NFrameFred
Member
Wish I hadn't had to part with mine - sold it to a lawyer who paid me what it was worth, thus guaranteeing I could never afford to buy it back . . . . . 
The most accurate semi auto 30 caliber I've ever owned.
The most accurate semi auto 30 caliber I've ever owned.
Oh Lord, here we go again...........
NFrameFred
Member
Agree with all of this.
Transition to jungle warfare and a different philosophy (misguided in my opinion but I didn't have to use it) by the powers that be so the individual grunt could carry more rounds.
As far as competitive target shooting, "game guns" will always rise to the top and the lowest recoil manageable usually turns in the best scores over the long haul. The .22 is easier on the shooter and the platform is lighter.
Every army in the world had full power battle rifles for over half a century and they all switched to lower powered weapons, and I don't think any have switched back. The M-14 was a good, solid, old school gun and I can see the need for a lighter and lower powered weapon but I think they went too far with the 5.56m/m. I like the AR platform O.K. but I would love to see a scaled down M-14 that fired a round like the .243 Winchester or .250 Savage.
The Last Standing Knight
Member
Boy, would I LOVE to see a picture of that one!
"Always remember your equipment was made by the lowest bidder..."
I loved shooting the M14, but I never carried one on duty – only shot it at the range. I saw it as the better "general purpose" weapon over the M16 (I carried the M16A1 and M16A2 while on active duty), but I saw the M16 the better urban warfare weapon. If the majority of my shots were to be under 100m in a tight environment, the M16 is still my preferred choice of the two, but if my shots were to be "anywhere, up to 800m, the M14 is my preferred choice. Also, the M14 is much easier to maintain and keep running than the M16 – in my opinion.
Agreed. I think the 6.8mm round the Army has toyed with has possibilities, and in a Mini 14 package I think it would really be interesting. (I once submitted a suggested a 6.5mm version based on the same case [.30 Remington] in the late 70's while I was shooting on an Army team.)
Note: While stationed in Central America, I was often able to forgo the M16 in favor of a military issue Winchester M1200 12 ga. and a M1911A1 for jungle ops. I liked that combo for that environment.
Peace,
Agreed. I think the 6.8mm round the Army has toyed with has possibilities, and in a Mini 14 package I think it would really be interesting. (I once submitted a suggested a 6.5mm version based on the same case [.30 Remington] in the late 70's while I was shooting on an Army team.)
Note: While stationed in Central America, I was often able to forgo the M16 in favor of a military issue Winchester M1200 12 ga. and a M1911A1 for jungle ops. I liked that combo for that environment.
Peace,
Last edited:
