Moved: Obsolete weapons and ammo thread

[Jeep]

Yes, the M14 was obsolete before it was fielded (especially given the advent of the AK47) and is a POS that needs to be retired. In fact, the M1 rifle was probably more reliable than the M14, yet even the M1 was obsolete before the end of WWII, once the MP43/StG44 hit the field.

http://www.lightfighter.net/topic/m14-is-not-so-great

http://looserounds.com/2015/01/30/th...the-m14-legend

http://www.lightfighter.net/topic/m1a?page=1

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/677383.pdf

Doc: I carried an M-14 up mountains, through swamps, underwater on river crossings and I never had one cease working or saw one that couldn't easily hit the 300 meter target with the iron sights. I knew people who thought they were too heavy and too long, and I'd agree that both of those were issues, but my view was that it was a nice weapon. As an added bonus you could--before they substituted those cheap fiberglass stocks--use it for a vertical butt stroke, something that AR variants won't do.

I don't know anything about the condition of the M-14's in current inventory, and can't disagree that it is largely obsolete, but in my experience it was far from a POS. Of course, I thought the M-60 was a pretty decent weapon as well (though admittedly not as good as the MG-42 or M-240). For a true POS my view is you'd have to look at the M-73.

[Kyle Reese]

As an added bonus you could--before they substituted those cheap fiberglass stocks--use it for a vertical butt stroke, something that AR variants won't do.

An M16A2's buttstock is plenty robust enough to bring the pain during the butt stroke. We beat the unholy shit out of ours in training and never had one break.

[DocGKR]

The first rifle I shot expert on after getting commissioned in 1986 was an M14. Back when I shot Hi-Power, I had a lot of match grade McMillan stocked M1A's, both iron sighted and with optics (they were heavy beasts). M14's/M1A's can be made very accurate if you spend a lot of money...but they don't stay accurate very long. Had to buy at least 3 of them so that at any given time you had one that shot well, one for training, one that was being re-built. Mounting optics is much harder on the M14 than on an AR15/AR10 type rifle. According to the former Commander, the USAMU turned in its last National Match M14s to war storage at Anniston Army Depot in 2005. There is one example of a USAMU-built and maintained Vietnam-era M21 left, usually displayed for dog-and-pony visits. The average military rack grade M14 typically runs about 5 MOA, thus basic M14/M1A's work OK as simple, rugged iron sighted rifles of limited long term accuracy potential, much like an AK-47, just much larger and heavier.

The safety on an M14/M1A is MOST definitely an issue in a LE setting, especially for entries/CQB--in fact, it pretty much makes it a non-starter. I've seen more M1A and M14 clones break recently than I care to contemplate--particularly the SA M1A SOCOM's. I've yet to see a M1A SOCOM make it through a multi-day carbine course without breaking. I have sold almost all my M1A's and only kept two lightweight 18" SA M1A's in simple GI brown stocks, just because they are CA legal and I can throw them in the trunk when traveling. Soon as I leave the state, those POS M1A's are going away.

The M1A/M14 leaves much to be desired--it is time to let it retire to the land of myth and lore.

[Jeep]

The first rifle I shot expert on after getting commissioned in 1986 was an M14. Back when I shot Hi-Power, I had a lot of match grade McMillan stocked M1A's, both iron sighted and with optics (they were heavy beasts). M14's/M1A's can be made very accurate if you spend a lot of money...but they don't stay accurate very long. Had to buy at least 3 of them so that at any given time you had one that shot well, one for training, one that was being re-built. Mounting optics is much harder on the M14 than on an AR15/AR10 type rifle. According to the former Commander, the USAMU turned in its last National Match M14s to war storage at Anniston Army Depot in 2005. There is one example of a USAMU-built and maintained Vietnam-era M21 left, usually displayed for dog-and-pony visits. The average military rack grade M14 typically runs about 5 MOA, thus basic M14/M1A's work OK as simple, rugged iron sighted rifles of limited long term accuracy potential, much like an AK-47, just much larger and heavier.

The safety on an M14/M1A is MOST definitely an issue in a LE setting, especially for entries/CQB--in fact, it pretty much makes it a non-starter. I've seen more M1A and M14 clones break recently than I care to contemplate--particularly the SA M1A SOCOM's. I've yet to see a M1A SOCOM make it through a multi-day carbine course without breaking. I have sold almost all my M1A's and only kept two lightweight 18" SA M1A's in simple GI brown stocks, just because they are CA legal and I can throw them in the trunk when traveling. Soon as I leave the state, those POS M1A's are going away.

The M1A/M14 leaves much to be desired--it is time to let it retire to the land of myth and lore.

Good luck on your escape from California! I can't comment on the M1A, or the state of M14's still in inventory (which I presume have seen a lot of rounds through their barrels), but newly issued M-14's were much better than 5 mils--and had much better sights and generally better triggers than M-16's.

The safety was acceptable for Army work (I can't say about police), though the AR has a more user-friendly design (for right handers at least). I agree on optics, though back in the day, of course, we didn't have optics. I wish we had.

I won't debate about replacing it today, but what semi-auto would you replace it with?

[TR675]

Doc: I carried an M-14 up mountains, through swamps, underwater on river crossings and I never had one cease working or saw one that couldn't easily hit the 300 meter target with the iron sights. I knew people who thought they were too heavy and too long, and I'd agree that both of those were issues, but my view was that it was a nice weapon.

I really like the M-14. I think Doc's analysis of it is correct, and that the open receiver aspect is suboptimal but not that much of a handicap. The M-14 would have been state of the art in 1933. By the '50's and '60's forged and milled steel receivers, traditional wooden rifle stocks and full-powered rifle cartridges were 10-20 years behind the state of the art. The M-14 is a great case study in old-school procurement malpractice.

[Jeep]

An M16A2's buttstock is plenty robust enough to bring the pain during the butt stroke. We beat the unholy shit out of ours in training and never had one break.

Ummm, let me put it this way. There is no existing proof--none whatsoever--that I broke those stocks on certain M-16's or A1's. I never had a chance to break an A2 stock, but I'm kinda thinking that I might have been up to the task, and if not, I knew a guy who broke the receiver on an M-60 and I'm pretty sure he would have accepted the challenge..

[DocGKR]

"...but newly issued M-14's were much better than 5 mils"

Not according to contemporaneous USG acceptance testing for new M14's back in the day.

[Drang]

I believe Ezell pretty much established that the accuracy/reliability of any particular issue M14 depended a lot on the contractor who built it.

And Caleb's attempt at trolling over whether the M1 Garand was really All That runs square into the fact that it ain't really trolling if what you are doing is pointing out the truth:

The operating system is weird, and was actually susceptible to environmental damage due to the weird, exposed operating rod, it was impossible to top off a partial clip, and it has a safety that requires you to put your finger in the trigger guard to disengage. We can’t forget that it would also occasionally destroy the user’s thumb if you weren’t careful when loading it.

IIRC, the only part of that the M14 fixed was the box mag instead of en bloc clips.

I saw no one break the butt stock on an M16A2 on the bayonet course. Lots of lost fore-ends. Lots of blood from the charging handle. The M16 and it's variants are lousy spear handles, seemingly designed to be as user-hostile to that use as possible.

And my Battalion commander broke his elbow on the first obstacle on the Bayonet Assault Course at Ft Ord. Which went over well, actually, "Gee, those MI Geeks care enough to actually get hurt on the course..."

[DocGKR]

Beretta BM59 was a better magazine fed M1 than the M14...

[Tamara]

I hope I don't get struck by lightning for saying that I think my FN-49 is a better rifle in most any respect than my M1.

And for saying that the safety on the M1/M14/Mini-14 is an idiotic design that is an ND waiting to happen.