M1-garand vs M14

[chickenfried]

When I first started shooting highpower, I used Garands. When I switched to the M1A, I thought reloading in the rapid stages would be more trouble with the M1A. But turned out reloads with the M1A are easier and smoother compared with Garands, at least for me.

 

[rocky]

For just plain shooting the M1 Garand. For battle the M14. The M14 has higher cap , detach. mag. , flash hider and can be FA.

 

[mustanger98]

For just plain shooting the M1 Garand. For battle the M14. The M14 has higher cap , detach. mag. , flash hider and can be FA.

The only time a M14 can be full auto is if it's a military weapon or a civilian-owned Class 3 which requires the obligatory hoop-jumping. All other M-14's and M1A are semi-auto only and it's a felony to convert them to full-auto.

I also recall it being opined that different age groups will largely prefer different rifles dependant upon what that age group trained with. I guess I'm one of several oddities I've heard of, preferring my grandfather's generations rifle.

 

[444]

I shoot with a guy all the time that has a select fire M14. Civilians, Law Enforcement, and Military can all own a select fire M14.
Of course, actually firing it on full auto is a complete waste of ammo and is similar to grabbing a tiger by the tail.

 

[Fatelvis]

Faster loading? Nope...


Sorry, but YEP.....

Already proven that the M1 loads much faster than any other battle rifle in existence.

It takes MUCH fewer hand motions to load an M1 than anything else out there

The Garand may be a little quicker to reload, but you have to do it much more often,(8 rnds vs. 20-30 rnds) And you can't top off, and M14 magazines are cheap now, and the M14 can take a 5 rnd mag to create a "magazineless" feeling rifle IF you wanted that, the M14 is the IMPROVED version of the Garand. The key word here is IMPROVED. I'll admit, the Garand makes a nice deer rifle though.

 

[Father Knows Best]

The Garand may be a little quicker to reload, but you have to do it much more often,(8 rnds vs. 20-30 rnds) And you can't top off, and M14 magazines are cheap now, and the M14 can take a 5 rnd mag to create a "magazineless" feeling rifle IF you wanted that, the M14 is the IMPROVED version of the Garand. The key word here is IMPROVED. I'll admit, the Garand makes a nice deer rifle though.

1. I don't get the "you can't top off" comments that keep getting repeated. Sure you can! Just eject the clip and insert a new one. Wait? Do you mean that the CLIP can't be topped off? I call B.S. on that, too. The clip needs to be removed to top it off, but that's the case with just about every rifle using a detachable box magazine, too.

2. I'll grant that the M14 is supposedly an "improved" M1. Keep in mind, however, that "improved" does not mean "better." History is full of examples where "improved" equalled "worse."

 

[TechBrute]

I don't know about y'all, but I don't know anyone that has gotten M14 thumb...

 

[MechAg94]

I think both reloads could be fast if one practiced a lot. You don't have to reload as often with the M1A.

At the point where "Which is the better battle rifle?" would mean anything, the skill of the soldier carrying it would mean a great deal more, IMHO. Carry what you like have confidence in.

 

[Grump]

Internet BS Alert!!!

However, I've heard from long-range shooters that a M1 will be good to 1000yds while an M-14's 7.62mm will play out just past 800yds. How many of us actually shoot that far? Don't know, but wouldn't it be fun to try?

Yeah, yeah, heard it here and heard it there. Well, what I read was based on highpowered statistical analysis of literally thousands of shooters at Camp Perry right after the M14 appeared there in accurized form. Anyone can verify in various [usually September?] issues of _The American Rifleman_ just about every year through the 1960s.

1. The 173-gr Match ammo was measurably more accurate in 7.62 x51 M118 than was the M72 in .30-06, almost every year if not every single year.

2. Shooters' scores tended to go up when they switched to the M14.

3. Shooters tended to get a few more points offhanding using the M1, believed to be because of a more muzzle-heavy weight distribution. Shooters picked up MORE points at the other stages in the course b/c of better overall accuracy.

Now, regarding this "hits harder" nonsense--I HAVE fired both at extended ranges and your M2 Ball in .30-06 is going subsonic at only 600 yards. I've pulled targets for the poor sods shooting that stuff and it wasn't pretty. Anything more than a 5 mph breeze with any variability and they were lucky to hold the 7 ring, shooting prone slowfire with a sling. M80 Ball in the 7.62x51 is still supersonic and hits harder at longer ranges. I don't recall where it crosses over and catches up with the 100 fps and 3-4 gr bullet weight "advantage" of M2 Ball, but youse wit' ballistics programs can calculate that for us.

With 173-gr M72/M118 Match ammo, both are good to 1000 yards, but the M118 is virually guaranteed to group better, often a difference on the order of 1 MOA groups vs. 2 MOA groups. In my experience, it was more like 1.5 MOA in the M1 and 1 MOA or better in the M14 type rifle, with Sierra Matchkings.

The M1 *can* be topped off to 7 rounds easily, but it's a clumsy trick. Hit the "puke" button with your right thumb and your palm over the bolt. Keep the ammo and clip from coming out. Pull the oprod handle back until it locks, but just to keep pressure off your hand. Stuff rounds between the feed lips of the clip like it's a bolt gun's internal mag. (Stuff too hard down and your will unlock the oprod and it'll want to go forward.) Thumb down the clip/ammo with your right thumb and pull the oprod handle back 1/8-inch or so with the edge of your hand. You will feel the clip latch engage. Remove Thumb. Re-check that thumb is REALLY removed! Let oprod handle go.

To top with 8 rounds, it takes much more diligent holdback of the oprod with the edge of your hand because the oprod will, WILL be forced unlocked before you pull it back, and it takes a lot more thumb to cram round #8 into the clip.

As far as an accurized M1 in 7.62 being more accurate than an accurized M14 type in 7.62, well, I've never seen any large-sample studies. I do, however, believe that bedding on and M1 will tend to last longer than on and M14 because of the larger bearing surfaces on the receiver legs. However, proper care seems to make that not matter, since the barrel will shoot out before the bedding lets go, and you typically have to re-bed after putting in a new barrel anyway.

I'd take prone slowfire scores at 600 yards, across the Palma, and at 1,000 yards as evidence of which rifle shoots more accurately.

As for discounting bench accuracy with this tough trash-talk about "combat"--Bah-HUMBUG!!! So you think that quick and dirty aiming at speed, when you cannot reliably hit better than 12 MOA, negates the utility of accuracy?? Here's where I'm at. If I take a fast shot at 300 yards which breaks at the neck of my target instead of COM, which will serve me better--the 2 MOA [insert your choice of "combat" gun/"combat" ammo combination], or the 1 MOA gun/ammo combo that's available in the M14 or HK 91 style of rifle if fed good ammo? If you'd be plenty happy with a 6-inch area where that shot *could* hit, instead of a 3-inch area, you might be interested in this bridge I have for sale back east....you'll get a LOT of income from those toll fees you can charge!

 

[Thain]

I just think the M1 is better looking...

 

[Fatelvis]

FatherKnowsBest says:

I don't get the "you can't top off" comments that keep getting repeated. Sure you can! Just eject the clip and insert a new one. Wait? Do you mean that the CLIP can't be topped off? I call B.S. on that, too. The clip needs to be removed to top it off, but that's the case with just about every rifle using a detachable box magazine, too

Father, the M14/M1A has a stripper clip guide built into the reciever, so the magazine can be loaded, or topped off, without removing it.

 

[mustanger98]

I just think the M1 is better looking...

Yup, the M-14 may have a detatchable box mag and stripper clip guide, but us Garand guys get style points.

 

[444]

MY idea of topping off the rifle, isn't about loading loose rounds into the magazine in the gun. It is doing a tactical reload.
Obviously, this could be done with either gun. However, one can be done easily and quickly and the other can't. In one, it is a real, practical thing to do and in the other, it can be done for purposes of arguing on internet gun forums.

 

[Fatelvis]

Isnt that what these forums are all about? Talking about, debating, and sharing, trivial gun stuff, with other gun loving people? I know thats why I'M here!

 

[Father Knows Best]

FatherKnowsBest says:


Father, the M14/M1A has a stripper clip guide built into the reciever, so the magazine can be loaded, or topped off, without removing it.

I know. Note that I said "just about" every rifle requires the mag to be removed. My point is that while being able to "top off" a mag while still in the gun may be considered an advantage, that's a tiny little advantage at best, or it would be seen on a lot more rifles. Even the M14's successor, the M16, did away with it.

 

[444]

"Isnt that what these forums are all about?"
Yes, of course they are. But, you miss my point. What I meant by that is that it isn't really something that I consider practical. Yes, you can eject the clip from an M1 and replace it with a fresh one. Then you have to have a spare pocket or pouch to put a partial clip of loose ammo.................. IMO, this isn't realistic or pratical. Changing a magazine and putting a partial magazine in a pouch is for real.
Quite often in discussions such as this, people get caught up in defending their faviorite blaster that we end up with something like kids: No you can't, yes I can, can, can, CAN, CAN.

 

[Grump]

444:

What I meant by that is that it isn't really something that I consider practical. Yes, you can eject the clip from an M1 and replace it with a fresh one. Then you have to have a spare pocket or pouch to put a partial clip of loose ammo.................. IMO, this isn't realistic or pratical. Changing a magazine and putting a partial magazine in a pouch is for real.

Call me stupid, but I don't see what the real difference is, except for the rounds going back into the ammo belt are loose instead of in a half-empty box magazine.

I also don't see much difference between puking a partial clip out of an M1 and stowing the stuff back where the clip came from in the first place, and stowing a half-empty box mag. There's a small need to rotate the M1 a bit to catch all the rounds, but it never took me long enough to call it different from a regular M14 mag change.

If there's time for a "tactical" reload, there's time for either method. The '14 is just better because you can go longer between breaks in the shooting.

 

[mustanger98]

Considering tactical reloads with the Garand, if I have to do it, the half empty clip ain't going back on the GI ammo belt. I'm sticking it in my jacket pocket. This is probably partially because at this time, I do not own a GI ammo belt. So, it's going in my jacket pocket. If I have to do enough tactical reloads, I'll probably have enough to reload several partially spent clips- depending on my combat load- during the next break in the action.

As for just shooting at the range for fun, who cares which way I do it. Most guys at my range... we all have our own style.

 

[mustanger98]

Quite often in discussions such as this, people get caught up in defending their faviorite blaster that we end up with something like kids: No you can't, yes I can, can, can, CAN, CAN.

Well, this internet is different in that when we argue this stuff, it's not like somebody will say "you can't do blah blah blah" with half an expectation of someone responding with "yeah? watch this".

 

[444]

Oh Yeah ?

Hold my beer.

 

[Mad Bodhi]

I know. Note that I said "just about" every rifle requires the mag to be removed. My point is that while being able to "top off" a mag while still in the gun may be considered an advantage, that's a tiny little advantage at best, or it would be seen on a lot more rifles. Even the M14's successor, the M16, did away with it.

The M16 design ,as well as most other modern designs,do not facilitate a charger guide on the gun.Prior designs from virtually every country did incorporate a charger guide.Even some Winchester 70's had them.I believe their great for a bolt gun but of limited use on a gas gun.What i mean is,unless you have an empty mag in which case a mag change makes more sense,when you open the action to insert a 5 rd stripper a live round ejects so it is for all intents and purposes a 4rd stripper.Their great for quickly loading mags out of the gun with a mag charger though.Also,you can fit more ammunition in a magazine pouch loaded on strippers than you can with loaded mags.A gritty old Marine told me he always had one mag pouch reserved expressly for strippers for that reason.
That being said I like the fact that my M14 has a charger guide.

 

[mustanger98]

...designs from virtually every country did incorporate a charger guide.Even some Winchester 70's had them.I believe their great for a bolt gun but of limited use on a gas gun.What i mean is,unless you have an empty mag in which case a mag change makes more sense,when you open the action to insert a 5 rd stripper a live round ejects so it is for all intents and purposes a 4rd stripper.Their great for quickly loading mags out of the gun with a mag charger though.Also,you can fit more ammunition in a magazine pouch loaded on strippers than you can with loaded mags.A gritty old Marine told me he always had one mag pouch reserved expressly for strippers for that reason.
That being said I like the fact that my M14 has a charger guide.

I've been wishing I had a Model 70 .308 or .30-06 that had the charger guide and aperture rear sight. Thing is, it becomes a moot point when your rifle comes without sights and with intent to be scoped. This was cited as an odd feature about the USMC's M40 (M700 7.62) sniper rifle which has been scoped since its beginning back in the '60's.

A Brown-water Navy vet I know (met him through another board a few years ago) said when he was in 'Nam they carried M-14's and 13 20rd mags (counting the one in the rifle). When the expended all their mag-loaded ammo, the went to stripper-clipped ammo and either reloaded their mags at first opportunity, or loaded four 5rd clips into their rifle's empty magazine as it sat locked in the well. This is as I understand what he said.

That said, I still like my Garand, but I also like the M-14 having that charger guide. It looks like it can come in handy. But I still like en blocs. It's a toss-up that way.