The Big Three M-1, M-14, M16A1

It really depends on where and why you are humping it. I would not want to be a door kicker with an M1 or M14, even with something like my 16" Socom16. Change the terrain to wide open, where you can engage targets at a distance, or where shooting through cover might be a concern... and the power of the .30 becomes a factor. You could likely say the same thing M16 vs M4... as a traditional battle rifle, I'll take an M16 over the M4, but going door to door... I'd take an M4.

These days, if you have a malfunction with an AR/M16 weapon, it's likely the magazines or ammo, not necessarily the weapon unless you have a part failure. All the jams I had when I carried an M16A1 were related to the crap magazines they gave us. All the jams I've had with my AR's have been part failures.

I enlisted in 1987, and the rifle I was trained on was the A1. I had some experience with the Garand in SF training (since there were many still in circulation world-wide) and later got my initial sniper training on the M21 (match grade M14 with ART scope). For a GP combat rifle, the M16 when properly maintained was fine. The more modern versions like the M4 with the excellent optics and other accessories really rule the battlefield, in this day and age.

The old 150 grain military ball ammo, for a 30.06, was designed to penetrate a 16" Oak tree trunk, then both sides of a galvanized bucket, filled with water. This was the DOD's contractual test, for acceptance of military ammunition. Now, I've gotten a little senile, and rusty, so I don't remember, anymore,
so maybe somebody else can recall, what does that 50 grain 5.56 penetrate, again ?

Terry G said:

I qualified expert with the M-14 and really like it. For a Military weapon the sights were very good and the two stage trigger wasn't bad. 20 shots of 7.62 MM was power. I bought two M-1's from CMP and find both of them to be great shooters and the nostalgia if firing that eight shot en bloc .30/06 is worth every penny. I also can make some pretty fair long distance shots with it. So what to pick if the deal got real? M-16A1 hands down. Accurate, reliable, and put's a perfect storm of fire. Try humping an M-14 and 300 rounds of ammunition in magazines and I'll bet you would trade for a 16 before the next sweep. Oh, but they jam! Funny, I cleaned mine when it was dirty and it never malfunctioned once. Bullet's too light! No, it's not. It does the job.

Click to expand...

Well...

- It takes a Three-shot burst of 5.56 NATO to even approach .30 Cal. killing power, so weight-of-ammo is almost identical.
- .30 Cal. will hit hard out to 500 yards and beyond, where the 5.56mm NATO poops out at ~ 300.
- A wood and steel rifle makes a hell of a club.
- While .308 is lighter than .30-06... clips are FAR lighter and more compact than 20-round mags.
- For sustained rate of accurate fire, a Rifleman with an M1 Rifle and a belt-load of clipped ammo can match a magazine-fed M14(M1A).
- The M1 Rifle, being 3/4" shorter, has a Barrel 2" Longer than the M14(M1A).
- The Service Grade M1 Rifle from the CMP is Half the cost of a new, walnut stocked SA/M14(M1A), and has a forged receiver and no MIM parts ta boot.

So, the wise choice is:

GR

Dibbs said:

The old 150 grain military ball ammo, for a 30.06, was designed to penetrate a 16" Oak tree trunk, then both sides of a galvanized bucket, filled with water. This was the DOD's contractual test, for acceptance of military ammunition. Now, I've gotten a little senile, and rusty, so I don't remember, anymore,
so maybe somebody else can recall, what does that 50 grain 5.56 penetrate, again ?

Click to expand...

So hardly scientific, but we shot some of the new steel and copper rounds at 1/4 ar500 plate that ate fmjs from a .308, amongst other stuff and when the 556s hit flat two went thru, one on the edge, one pretty much dead center. The plate was just laying on the berm at first and it wasnt untill i stood it up with my target stand (which got shot up too) the the rounds went thru, leaned back they skipped up into the dirt.

I was introduced to the M14 at Parris Island MCRD SC followed by the M1 at ITR (Infantry Training Regiment) Camp Geiger adjacent to Camp Lejeune NC. Even thou I scored expert with the M14, I was not overly impressed with the rifle, especially control ability on automatic fire mode. Of the time period the M16 was problematic. Research the "Hill Fights" VN in regards to the Marine Corps introduction to the M16 rifle and ammunition problems. As a side note The Marine Corps did evaluate the Stoner Weapons System at Parris Island and further tested with elements of 7th Marine Regt in Viet-Nam. It was found not suitable thus the M16 was issued . The weapon of today is not the weapon of yester year!

Hangingrock said:

Even thou I scored expert with the M14, I was not overly impressed with the rifle, especially control ability on automatic fire mode.

Click to expand...

Among other things, the full-auto M14 was a miscue; they wanted a do-all replacement for the M1 and the BAR, which they got, but like the BAR, it was really only effective when fired off the bipod. I have fired an M14 off the bipod... and even then, that's a lot of gun. I watch Tom Cruise shooting full-auto in Born on the Fourth of July... and I'm like... NO way!

You are also correct... the modern M16/M4/AR/et al is not the M16 of long ago. As a platform I believe it is about as ironed out as a gun can be, and reliability is a non-issue.

Dibbs said:

The old 150 grain military ball ammo, for a 30.06, was designed to penetrate a 16" Oak tree trunk, then both sides of a galvanized bucket, filled with water. This was the DOD's contractual test, for acceptance of military ammunition. Now, I've gotten a little senile, and rusty, so I don't remember, anymore,
so maybe somebody else can recall, what does that 50 grain 5.56 penetrate, again ?

Click to expand...

People?

Terry G said:

I qualified expert with the M-14 and really like it. For a Military weapon the sights were very good and the two stage trigger wasn't bad. 20 shots of 7.62 MM was power. I bought two M-1's from CMP and find both of them to be great shooters and the nostalgia if firing that eight shot en bloc .30/06 is worth every penny. I also can make some pretty fair long distance shots with it. So what to pick if the deal got real? M-16A1 hands down. Accurate, reliable, and put's a perfect storm of fire. Try humping an M-14 and 300 rounds of ammunition in magazines and I'll bet you would trade for a 16 before the next sweep. Oh, but they jam! Funny, I cleaned mine when it was dirty and it never malfunctioned once. Bullet's too light! No, it's not. It does the job.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much my findings also. I like all three. Trained and issued both M-14 and M-16. Owned an M1 Garand. I find it more useful to shoot between trees myself.

I was trained on the M-14 first. In full auto you aimed and took no more than 3 shots in a burst because the muzzle climb would take you off target. If I recall right issue M-14s deleted the full auto selector. A major reason to replace it with the M-16.

I don't know anything about the M-1 rifle,I trained with the M-14 rifle in boot camp in 1968 and qualified with it at the rifle range. I think it is the best rifle I have ever fired.I humped the M-16 in Vietnam 68/69,and i'll just say it got me back to the states in 1969.In my mind it's a winner.

d2wing said:

If I recall right issue M-14s deleted the full auto selector.

Click to expand...

They did, they replaced the full-auto selector switch with 'the button,' which locked it in semi-auto.

Charlie98 said:

They did, they replaced the full-auto selector switch with 'the button,' which locked it in semi-auto.

Click to expand...

IIRC, A ground down 'church key' common bottle/can opener could turn the selector to full auto and back.

There was a tool for doing so, so platoon leaders could set some rifles for use as Automatic rifles at squad level.

This is my fuzzy recollection of my Dad's reporting ( USMC '58-'64).

My Uncle (USMC '50-'77) was a big fan of the M16.

Ramone said:

IIRC, A ground down 'church key' common bottle/can opener could turn the selector to full auto and back.

There was a tool for doing so, so platoon leaders could set some rifles for use as Automatic rifles at squad level.

This is my fuzzy recollection of my Dad's reporting ( USMC '58-'64).

My Uncle (USMC '50-'77) was a big fan of the M16.

Click to expand...

I think the normal setup was one or two full-auto rifles per platoon... as the squad machinegunners. I'm sure someone somewhere figured out a way to defeat the lockout button...

M16A2. I was issued an A1, you can keep it. The A2 is 100x the rifleman's rifle, even with the stupid 3 rd. burst, than the A1. I've fired an M21, and Garands, but would rather take an A2 or an M4A1 into the two-way range (where I admit I have not been) than an A1, M14, or M1.

I trained on the M16A1, but given the chance in Korea I volunteered to be an M60 Gunner on the Quick Reaction Force. Yes, I had to lug around a 23 lb. weapon, but the comfort of having belt fed 7.62 gave me more confidence should the excrement hit the oscillating device.

In 1978 I saw my first AR15 when I was handed one during firearms training for the Air Force. We used .22 converters which jammed a lot. Got my marksmanship ribbon. Not many in basic had one of those. Saw my first Garand when doing military funerals. Shot them a lot with blanks over more than a few years. Never touched an M14 during my Air Force years (30 of them). Saw a few in the cage when drawing weapons, so I know they had some.

That’s a very young Nature Boy on an FTX in the cotton wood jungles of Ft Riley KS with my trusty M16A1



(Trigger discipline son!)

Dibbs said:

The old 150 grain military ball ammo, for a 30.06, was designed to penetrate a 16" Oak tree trunk, then both sides of a galvanized bucket, filled with water. This was the DOD's contractual test, for acceptance of military ammunition. Now, I've gotten a little senile, and rusty, so I don't remember, anymore,
so maybe somebody else can recall, what does that 50 grain 5.56 penetrate, again ?

Click to expand...

Enemy

entropy said:

M16A2. I was issued an A1, you can keep it. The A2 is 100x the rifleman's rifle, even with the stupid 3 rd. burst, than the A1. I've fired an M21, and Garands, but would rather take an A2 or an M4A1 into the two-way range (where I admit I have not been) than an A1, M14, or M1.

Click to expand...

I was M-16A1 for the first two years of my hitch ( USMC '80-84), qualified Expert with a GM Hydromatic that rattled so badly I accidentally invented the Accu Wedge by stuffing a little piece of shower shoe under the rear takedown pin.

We were issued the M16A2 in '83- mine was actually overstamped ' M-16A1 E2', and except for the Trigger, everyone thought it was great. Nobody thought that 3 round burst was a bad idea, but it made the trigger inconsistent and creepy.

During my enlistment I was issued an M16A2, then an M16A4, then after CQB school an M4, then as a DM an M39 EMR (heavily modified M14) and then finally a Mk12 SPR. While they all worked well for the tasks I used them for and the M39 was the most accurate, especially beyond 500 yards, I currently own civilian versions of the M4 and Mk12 and don't see a need to add the other for any reason other than nostalgia.

Nature Boy said:

That’s a very young Nature Boy on an FTX in the cotton wood jungles of Ft Riley KS with my trusty M16A1

View attachment 926606

(Trigger discipline son!)

Click to expand...

What right shoulder patch is that? I couldn't blow it up well enough to figure it out.

Sistema1927 said:

What right shoulder patch is that? I couldn't blow it up well enough to figure it out.

Click to expand...

It was my university ROTC detachment. I was at Ft Riley for advance camp. 1983-ish