Is the M1A/M14 any more accurate than a Garand?

[DMK]

It seems there are more tuned M1A/M14 rifles than there are tuned Garands. I realize the Garand is harder to put optics on, but is there anything that makes the M14 type rifles more accurate?

Maybe it's just that folks don't like accurate guns with iron sights anymore?

 

[444]

I sent a rifle to a gunsmith named Roland Beaver who specializes in M1s. He also works on M1As. He has been working on M1s for something like 50 years and I believe was a gunsmith for the Marine Corps. big team back when the M1 was the standard issue rifle in the Corps.
According to him, it is impossible to make an M1A as accurate as an M1. In his catalog, he gives the reasons, but I don't recall what he said now.
Neither is as accurate as an AR15, which is why the serious competitors no longer use M1s or M1As.

 

[SIGarmed]

If you're shooting .308 it's actually a more accurate cartridge than the .30-06.

I don't know about the specific rifle differences between those two rifles in regard to accuracy enough to comment.

 

[Grump]

NRA compared the two in the early 60s--statistical analysis of scores at Camp Perry, tracking the two rifles [and maybe(!) even scores from the same competitors???].

This was in the days of the old 5-V target. IIRC, the M14 type was about 10% more accurate overall (includes ammo effects), but the standing scores were a bit higher with the M1 because of its more muzzle-heavy balance.

Anyone have access to these reports?

Hard to say for me how much of the difference is the ammo. When I had one, the M1 was good for 1.5-1.67 MOA out to 300 and must have still been less than 2 MOA at 600, based on how it tracked to my shot calls. The M1A shot 1.0-1.25 MOA from 200, to no more than 1.4 MOA out to 600. Both were match tuned with fairly ordinary match barrels, and this is shooting Sierra 168 MKs, usually on top of 4064 or, for some .308s, WW748.

 

[P-32]

444, I too have a R/B 308 M-1. And a fine rifle it is. But you are wrong about the AR's being more accurate as the reason they seem to shoot better.....they don't have the recoil to deal with. To able able to shoot a 30 cal gas gun well you have to have good solid position. With the AR you don't. My AR weighs more than my heavy barrel heavy stock M-1 to boot. Want to smoke your class? Switch to a AR after learning to shoot that M-1 well.

Now on to the question. It took the Army/Marines several years to get the M-14 to shoot as good as the old M-1 for competitive shooting. But slowly the M-14 rose up and started winning. Then the M-16 came along. It took a long time for the M-16 to start winning and wasn't until the heavy bullets came along. The M-16 would out run a M-14 on the short lines but the M-14 would eat a M-16 at 600. In the late 80's earily 90's there was much back bitting with many Army/Marine shooters looking at the Navy guys with long sad eyes who still had the M-14 as their service rifle. The M-14 is the Navy's service rifle to this day. Now, nobody shoots a M-1 and few shoot a M-14/M-1A, even the Navy guys. The M-16/AR is hard to beat because there is just no recoil. I also think a 80 gr. SMK flies better than a 168 gr. SMK.

 

[USSR]

If you're shooting .308 it's actually a more accurate cartridge than the .30-06.

Only when the .30-06 is loaded down to .308 velocities as it is in the Garand. Using heavier bullets and modern slow burning powders, this is not the case at all.

Don

 

[Swampy]

DMK,

Good info here, but much not addressing your original question... Which is more accurate, M14-M1A or the M1??

As stated, Roland Beaver is a former Marine armorer who believes strongly that the M1 CAN BE MADE more accurate on a regular basis than can the M14-M1A. Another former Marine Armorer, Gus Fisher, who is one of the "Who's Who" among M1 collectors and parts suppliers, also supports this view. I think there are others who support this view as well, but don't remember their names.

I do not know the time frame during which Mr Beaver was an armorer in the Marines, but Gus as one of very few armorers for "THE" Marine Shooting teams during the late 60's and 70's when the transition between the M1 and M14 on the military Shooting Teams was being accomplished.

Not many people today will agree with or bother to look into the history as to why Mr Beaver and Mr Fisher hold these views. It is rather involved.... but has mainly to do with the fact that when the M14 was replacing the M1 in competition shooting by the military teams, new and vastly improved Match ammo (7.62 Nato), bedding materials, stock materials, and barrels were coming into notice and use. When applied to the M14 these brought the rifle up to a very high standard of accuracy, above what the Teams had been getting with the M1.

All well and good..... BUT, when the Armorers began retro-fitting some of their M1's with the same more modern barrels, bedding materials, and stocks, they immediately surpassed the best that they had been able to get out of the M14's. According to Gus Fisher, who also still builds Match M1's and M14's, this still holds true today..... Given equal quality barrel, stock material, bedding, and ammo, the M1 will beat an M1A-M14 95% of the time to a degree that matters on the range (he gave group figures in his treatise on the subject but I can't find my copy at the moment).

Now, the $64k Question: Why did the Teams continue to shoot the M14 when they had more accurate M1's at hand??? Very simple.... The M14 was "IN", the M1 was "OUT". They were ORDERED to shoot the M14..... No IFs, ANDs, or BUTs... it was a matter of, "Aye-aye, Sir. We'll shoot the M14 and like it, Sir".

That was then, this is now.... As for me in the here and now, the M1 speaks to me. The M14-M1A and M16-AR15 do not. I own two very nicely made M1 Match Grade rifles that I shoot in local shorty courses and Across the Course as well. I CAN shoot higher scores with an AR... but I LIKE to shoot my M1's much better. I currently shoot at the top end of NRA "Expert" in both Highpower and Long Range, all shot with an M1. I WILL get my "Master" rating with my M1's or die trying. Came very close this year.... It requires three 80 round matches in a row above the Master break point of 94% to get the upgrade in rating. Shot back to back 94%+ scores several times, but could never string 3 of them together.....

In any case, it's not the rifles fault. The rifles are VERY capable of cleaning the 600 yard target. My own downfall comes with the rapid stages and in standing. Once I get my own act together, me and my M1's are going places....

Hope this answers your questions....

best to all,
Swampy

Garands forever

 

[Onmilo]

Yes, no, it can be, it will never be.
I don't agree with Beaver, a heavy barrel M14 properly set up will usually and consistantly outshoot a heavy barrel Garand properly set up.
It is all in the position and location of the gas system.

If you are talking two rifles from two different gunsmiths, one a Garand and one an M1A and both guys are good at what they do then it could end up being a draw.
That's why the whole thing, from build to firing line, is called a competition.

By the way, an M16A1-A2-A- pick a number, using standard service ammunition, not special, super dooper, single loaded on a sled and hand fed carefully into the action ammunition is not more accurate at long distance, (long distance defined as ranges exceeding 800 meters), than an M14 or M1 Garand using service ammunition and that is a stone cold, argue the point all you like, fact.
And yes, I am also including the new 77 grain military 5.56mm service loads in my assessment.

 

[DMK]

Wow, interesting info guys. I'm glad I asked the question. Thanks for the replies.

So it sounds to me like depending on the gunsmith building it and assuming they are both .308, these rifles can be so close that shooter preference will probably make the biggest difference.

 

[30Cal]

The Service teams were moving to the M14 just as the good match grade barrels started coming out of Wisconsin, so the M1 never really reached the same apex as the M14. Before those barrels became available, the M1's outshot the M14.

I think today that the M1 can be as good if not better than the M14. One of the reasons that you can quote from Mr Fisher is that the gas port is at the very end of the barrel.