M14 rifle question?

[Muley Gil]

Back when I was a Marine Corps midshipman in a Navy/Marine ROTC unit, the drill rifle was the 1903 or 1903A3 Springfield. The front sight was removed and the firing pins were ground down. Great for close order drill; not much good for shooting blanks.

For field exercises, we borrowed M14s with blank adapters from the Army ROTC unit. A few of the borrowed rifles had the standard stock and selector switches.

BTW, a 7.62x51 blank WILL mess up a Alabama copperhead in a kudzu patch.

 

[Dennis The B]

The M14 is probably one of the reasons why the Springfield Armory closed.

There had been complaints for years, that the Armory and the U.S. Army had too cozy a relationship. As the M1 was being developed, the preferred cartridge was the .276 Pedersen. However Chief of Staff, General Douglas MacArthur nixed the idea because of all the surplus .30-06 on hand from WWI. After WWII, and the Springfield Armory began development of what eventually became the M14, U.S. Army rifle doctrine began to change from the 800 yard target, to the 350 yard target. This was the result of extensive research on infantry engagements in WWII. However, the M14 was adopted in the face of changing infantry doctrine.

The 7.62mm round was shorter, to allow for faster cycling, but the M14 was only a baby step forward, and what was needed was a quantum leap.

When Robert McNamara became Secretary of Defense, he desired that DoD procurement be further outsourced to private industry. That spelled the doom for the Springfield Armory. As I mentioned earlier, the coziness of the armory with DoD procurement, just didn't sit well with McNamara, and his priority was to close Springfield.

While the M14 was being adopted, Eugene Stoner developed his AR platform, which used the same 7.62mm NATO round. He couldn't get the Army or Marine Corps to give him a fair trial, and he took his AR platform international.

When Curtis LeMay saw it, he had the US Air Force try it out, and the rest, as they write, is history.

This is not, in any way, an endorsement for McNamara's methods. The introduction of the AR15/M16, and the F111, aren't exactly ringing endorsements for McNamara. However, that's the way things happen sometimes.

 

[LVSteve]

I know I will probably be tarred and feathered, but I will say it anyway.

A bigger mistake than the M14 was the adoption of the 7.62 NATO cartridge. The Brits had a good .280 intermediate round and even 7mm Mauser would have been a better choice for facing off against the Soviets in Europe. Yes, I dislike 7.62 NATO for a number of reasons.

I have it on good authority from Army vets at work that the M14 was a bad joke in full-auto. "Aim for the knees and the second round MIGHT get the guy in the throat if he was tall" was the way one chap put it.

 

[walnutred]

For a while I was issued a National Match M14. The selector switches on the rifles we had were modified and the stocks were glass bedded in the semi position. I asked if the rifles were capable of full auto and it was explained to me by the former Marine who was the rifle team coach that they would. However at one point the military had modified most of the M14s so that it took a special wrench to switch the rifles to full auto.

When he was in S Vietnam for the war games the squad leader would carry the wrench and only switch one or two rifles to full auto and the rest would stay semi for ammo conservation purposes. The automatic riflemen would attempt short bursts of suppressive fire to give the rest of the squad time for aimed fire.

During the shooting season we only cleaned the trigger group and exterior. Bores were not touched unless we had shot in the rain and we removed the barreled actions from the stocks only at the end of the season for a pre-storage cleaning. He of course had saved a wrench, so at the end of one season we removed a barreled action from the match stock of a rifle that was going back for a rebuild, flipped the selector, and experienced the M14 on full auto.

Everything negative that has been said about the M14 on full auto has validated my impressions after firing three magazines in attempted three round bursts. The wrench was small and L shaped, in case you were wondering. The selector knob on the M14 I had looked like they had just ground the lever part off leaving a circle with a flat. Imagine taking a dime and cutting a piece off with a cold chisel across the top of Roosevelts head.

 

[ColColt]

One of the greatest and most reliable rifles ever. We were issued the M14 in basic training and it was so heavy to a just turned 20 year old who never held anything heavier than a 22 rifle. With a full 20 round mag I think it was about 9 pounds. The peep sights were excellent allowing you to hit a silhouette target at 300 meters...I'm talking iron sights. I could do that with young eyes. I never saw an M16 while in the military, only the M14 and it was a sweetie.

Ours were not the select fire variety although I wish we had been able to at least try them. IMHO, the best and most accurate long range rifle the Army ever had.

 

[DWFAN]

In 1966 I got designated as the guy with the full auto 14 and this was because I had some time on the sixty. This was an Engineer Company. My armorer was a nutcase. Without the a fore mentioned full stock this was not an enjoyable weapon to shoot. My first time testing it on the perimeter this thing was climbing for the sky. A guy from C company 1st Infantry came over to help. He had a cut down version of the full stock, no butt, but with the pistol grip and proceeded to teach me how to sweep with it. Three and four shot bursts were all you could hope for unless you had it held down with a sand bag. Barrels getting hot were an issue also. You could water them down but too much too fast would warp the barrel. Barrel life was not as good as the sixty either.
DW

 

[shep854]

All true M14s are capable of FA fire. Most have a cylindrical lock over the selector, to be replaced with a fun switch if desired. The wrench walnutred mentioned was to remove the lock.
----
LVSteve, you are exactly right. The Brit .280 did everything desired of a new round, but the Powers That Were wanted something with ballistics close to the .30cal, but smaller and lighter--therein lay the rub...
----
Muley Gil, when were you at Auburn? I attended '76-'79 and was in the PLC Program, so I ran around with the Marine Option NROTC cadets.

 

[ACP230]

Just talked to a neighbor today who carried the M14 in VietNam.

"Short bursts," he said.

He also said he loved the rifle and was not happy to give it up when it
was replaced by the M16.

 

[Alk8944]

You all have part of the story, but are hitting all around the truth.

When originally designed the T-44 (Thank you Wikipedia) was designed as two different models, which were to be designated M-14, and M-15 (Heavy Barrel). The original intent was for the M-15 to be selective fire and fulfill the mission now referred to as Squad Automatic Weapon. The M-14 was to be the semi-automatic version. Pert of this was during the tenure of Robert Strange McNamara as Secretary of Defence when he and his "Whiz Kids" tried to run the Armed Forces like a business!

The M-15 was dropped because the Secretary couldn't understand why two similar weapons were needed when one could perform both functions. Didn't work, for several reasons.

The M-14E2 was developed ca. 1965 in an attempt to make the M-14 more suitable for the SAW function. The stocks were weal and easily broken, which eventually resulted in the fiberglass version. There never were a lot of E-2 (or A-1) variants produced.

Selective fire. All M-14, M14 E-1, E-2 and M-15 receivers were identical. Without getting too deep, all could be made/used as selective fire weapons. The selector consisted of a cam which could be rotated 180 degrees to select semi- or full-automatic fire. In exactly the same fashion as in prior years, the major reason for converting most M-14s to Semi-Automatic was the supply concern that too many soldiers with fully automatic weapons would waste a lot of ammunition and complicate supply issues and costs, while accomplishing nothing.

How was the conversion to semi-auto only done? There was no "special wrench" or any other tool needed, simply a pin punch, hammer, and the conversion kit. Thje "kit" was nothing more than a cylindrical cap which replaced the selector knob and spring. With the semi-full option functional all you did was push the selector switch in against the spring and turned it 180 degrees. This changed the connector cam position which allowed the connector to pull the sear off and fire the gun until the trigger was released. It was the operating pulling against the connector and rotating the selector against the secondary sear which accomplished this. To do the conversion, the selector knob pin was driven out, knob and spring removed and replaced with the solid cylinder which would only fit when the cam was in the semi-automatic position, and the pin replaced. The selector knobs or switches and springs were stored securely in the company arms room and permanently retained for future use.

At the time much of this occurred I was in Army Ordnance as a Field Artillery, Small Arms, Chemical Weapons and Fire Control Instrument Repairman as Duty MOS's. In addition to being Armament Section Chief I was Company Armorer. I do know of what I speak. As Elmer said, "I Was There!"

 

[handejector]

As the M1 was being developed, the preferred cartridge was the .276 Pedersen.

A bigger mistake than the M14 was the adoption of the 7.62 NATO cartridge. The Brits had a good .280 intermediate round and even 7mm Mauser would have been a better choice for facing off against the Soviets in Europe. Yes, I dislike 7.62 NATO for a number of reasons.

It is hard to argue with the ballistic coefficient and sectional density of 7mm bullets. They are about the best.
The 7.62/51 is a great cartridge. It had to be- it is just a shorter 06 with a fat sholder.
I tend to agree they missed a chance to adopt a greater cartridge.

I have a great fondness for the M-14. It is a great rifle. I was very young when it was issued to me, making me a nearly invincible killing machine, around eight feet tall.

Funny story-
We did a 5 day biv in basic at Benning. In one of the earliest snafus I ever saw in the Army, they told us no weapons oil of any kind was available on the whole post that we could get. Maybe they were just messing with our heads.
It rained every day. We were crawling thru the bushes every day in some kind of exercise with the rifles. It rained every day. We were shooting a lot with blanks in the woods and ball on the ranges. Sand is very plentiful at Benning. It rained.
Needless to say, our rifles were turning orange by day two. The last day we were trucked to one distant range for some live fire. A DS caught me hunkered down in front of a deuce and a half, about to pop the hood and see if I could steal some oil off a dip stick. I just couldn't take seeing Baby all orange no more. He encouraged me to move toward the range foxholes by talking awful about my mother and playing the drum solo from In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida on my steel pot with a steel range rod. That piece is very hard to play with one drumstick, but he was very good and seemed highly motivated. He missed a few notes when he missed the steel pot and hit my sholders, neck, or back. I did not critique that. It was raining.

So, I'm in a plank lined foxhole, elbows on the ground, about to pop some targets. For the first 4 or 5 rds, I would fire, hook the op handle on the plank, and push the butt to eject. I'd then hook the handle on the other side of the plank, and pull to chamber a round. It was that rusty. I figured the technique out trying to chamber the first round- could not do it by hand! Enough rust soon rubbed off for it to work for 55 more rounds.

It is a confidence inspiring weapon. It REALLY made those early 16's seem like Mattels.

Still, there is the old saying-
We developed a great rifle in the 14, and the rest of the free world simply bought FAL's.
If you've never shot an FAL, you should try one.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

I trained on the M14 in basic training, and it was a very fine piece of equipment. Mine was manufactured by TRW (the satellite folks). Lord knows how many trainees had used it before me. It was so worn that I could shake it and it sounded like a bucket full of nickels rattling around. But that rifle took the trophy for me with a perfect score on the final qualification.

Later in infantry AIT we trained on the E2 version, straight stock, pistol grip, heavy barrel and bipod. Training emphasized short bursts of 3 to 5 rounds. I qualified as expert with the automatic rifle (Winchester made).

Never saw the M16's until I got to Vietnam. First one I was issued was made by General Motors Hydramatic Division. Nothing but trouble with it, so I did a little horse-trading and came up with a good M14. Not as lightweight or easy to carry as the M16, but extremely reliable under all circumstances.

All of the standard M14's I saw while in the Army had the selector switches removed and had been limited to semi-auto mode. Not a big deal in my opinion. Still a very fine rifle for the purpose.

 

[Alk8944]

TRW, Thompson-Ramo-Wooldridge. Aero-space, automotive spare parts, and they ran a credit reporting/rating service after the same fashion as the current Experian and others. Obviously they manufactured firearms, but only under Gov't contract.

 

[ColColt]

What was a real trip at Ft. Jackson was going through the day/nite infiltration course-crawling for 100 yards on your belly with an M14 cradled in your arms, pockets filling with SC sand and some guy shooting at you with a 30 cal water cooled machine gun. At night it was even better-you got to see those bullets coming at you as every 7th round was a tracer. Add to that the deafening sound of TNT going off in scattered bunkers, crawling over barbed wire and logs in the way and being dead still when the flares went up just to get to the end of the course...precious memories.

 

[mkk41]

TRW, Thompson-Ramo-Wooldridge. Aero-space, automotive spare parts, and they ran a credit reporting/rating service after the same fashion as the current Experian and others. Obviously they manufactured firearms, but only under Gov't contract.

Always thought they were part of GM. TRW made the forged pistons and valves used in most GM factory high-performance engines.

I have some wrenches marked TRW. Seems they forged and machined a ton of stuff.

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

In "U.S. Rifle M14:from John Garand to the M21" R. Blake Stevens says there were some quality control problems with the M14 and I recall some of the Old Sergeants saying the M14 was not as rugged as the M1. Stevens also says some of the M14 vs M16 tests were rigged to favor the M14.

 

[shep854]

In 1975, the M14 was still the official standard rifle of the Marine Corps, the M16A1 being 'substitute standard'. At Marine Corps OCS, I was issued an M14 (with the selector lock). As can be imagined, I became very close friends with it, and scored hits at 300m during a FAMFIRE, even though it was the first high-powered rifle I shot! When we turned them in, the armorers simply checked serial numbers and loaded them into wooden rifle crates, then tossed them into the back of a truck.

Two years later, at the second increment, we were issued M16A1s, and when they were turned back in, each rifle had to be inspected by an armorer; they did not think well of the rifle at all!

 

[Muley Gil]

All true M14s are capable of FA fire. Most have a cylindrical lock over the selector, to be replaced with a fun switch if desired. The wrench walnutred mentioned was to remove the lock.
----
LVSteve, you are exactly right. The Brit .280 did everything desired of a new round, but the Powers That Were wanted something with ballistics close to the .30cal, but smaller and lighter--therein lay the rub...
----
Muley Gil, when were you at Auburn? I attended '76-'79 and was in the PLC Program, so I ran around with the Marine Option NROTC cadets.

I was at Auburn from Sept '72 to Mar '77. I was in the NROTC unit until March '74. Had to leave due to allergies and bronchitis. Did you know Jim Charette and Butch Pike? They were Marine midshipmen in the Class of '77.

 

[shep854]

I was at Auburn from Sept '72 to Mar '77. I was in the NROTC unit until March '74. Had to leave due to allergies and bronchitis. Did you know Jim Charette and Butch Pike? They were Marine midshipmen in the Class of '77.

Charette rings a very faint bell; 30+ years is a long time.
I was in a similar boat; I failed my pre-commissioning physical in Dec. '78 due to insect sting allergy. It was rough, suddenly being on the outside...not to mention the death of a lifelong dream.