M14 - catching my eye lately

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 24, 2018
Messages
1,438
Location
Texas
What's been on my mind all day this week has been the M14/M1A. After seeing Jerry Miculek handle one it's been kinda calling out to me.
Is the m14 worth it ? Also what's the difference between the M14 and M1A ?
 
M14- select/full auto, military issue

M1A- semiauto, civillian grade.

The M1A is a fine rifle, but fairly complicated, maintainance intensive, and heavy. Also, the magazines take some practice to change quickly. Speaking of magazines- good ones arent super common or cheap.

Springfield Armory is by far the largest producer of M1A type rifles, and they are a bit controversial because they use cast receivers. The vast majority are just fine, but stretching and rough castings are not unheard of. Some years also had problems with broken cast bolts and extractors.

There are a few other M1A-type rifle builders, such as James River Armory, which use forged receivers. Im not sure if they are still in production or not, but I remember them getting good reviews.

My Springfield M1A Loaded was very accurate, but also poorly balanced and quite unwieldy due to its extreme length. I kinda considered picking up the much handier SOCOM version, but finally went with an AR10 and havent looked back.

If you are smitten with the styling or historical significance of the M14, then by all means get an M1A. Its not a bad gun at all. But for any practical purposes, the AR10 is just better in most ways.

Just my opinion, having owned both. Good luck!
 
Last edited:
I used the M14 in many guises: standard, M21 SWS, M25 variant, and EBR. The M21 with ART scope was the first rifle I "really" learned to shoot. I carried the M25 and EBR versions in combat. Unless you are looking to rekindle an old relationship you had during 1960's military service, I wouldn't get one. A modern AR10 carbine is much more versatile. And coincidentally, is what the M14 variants have been replaced with in the military, unless you are on a drill team or some such.
 
I have a standard Springfield M1A, with walnut stock, though I sourced a used USGI M14 stock & sling from Numrich and ‘antiqued’ it. Today I put a scope mount on it. 0F8E1FE1-C72F-4BA6-A1F6-954AFA5CD40E.png 53B0F5DA-7949-4296-87E3-1EA39B548AD3.png Also have a new, unfired one with National Match barrel & OD green synthetic stock. The magazines aren’t cheap, I found a few 20 round ones. I really enjoy shooting the M1A, the recoil is far less than the kick from a .308 bolt action rifle. The trigger is superb. Life is short, get one.
 
What's been on my mind all day this week has been the M14/M1A. After seeing Jerry Miculek handle one it's been kinda calling out to me.
Is the m14 worth it ? Also what's the difference between the M14 and M1A ?
With ARs and AKs going for a grand or more, $1100 for an M14 type is totally worth it. Second coolest rifles ever, after the Garand. The M1A is the commercial name for Springfield Armory's semi-auto copy of the military M14, but M1A has kinda come to mean any semi-auto M14 variant. But there are M14Ses, etc. depending on which company you buy from. If money is no object, go LRB, IMO. https://www.lrbarms.com/m14-rifles-for-sale.html

Definitely a long, heavy rifle (around 10 lbs without optics) but fun as hell, great sights, lefty friendly, and in a man's caliber.
 
I'll play counterpoint for a moment. first, the m1a is a really cool looking gun. That said, it is heavy, scopes very poorly both in terms of positioning your face and mounting a scope base. My personal experience with 3 of them has been that they are a 2 moa gun at best. Also, I fight the magazine to get it seated right, and the trigger is pretty meh. They're like an old range rover or 69 mustang or something. Cool looking, but a miserable daily driver. And in the stubby socom configuration, you can add "stupidly loud" to all the other negatives. But again, they look cool.
Buy a garand and a thompson compass instead. You'll get something that looks cooler (garand) and shoots better (Thompson)
 
With ARs and AKs going for a grand or more, $1100 for an M14 type is totally worth it.

I have been eyeballing them for a few years now and have yet to see one at a shop for under $1500 in any variant. The last Garand I saw for sale was an H&R for $1100.
 
I had the scout squad version years ago, I sold it and it's been a regret. It was a fine rifle. I thought it had great balance. I too have been reminisce of the M1A lately after having watched Black Hawk Down a few weeks ago. I always loved that rifle, it just seemed like a masculine rifle. A man's rifle.
 
The first weapon I ever qualified with in the Army was the M-14, winter 1968, Sand Hill, Ft Benning... And as always, that marksmanship training came after humping the thing everywhere for weeks during all the other stuff you did in Basic... Never warmed up to it, struggled to qualify until I finally just let it beat me up to improve my scores.. A year out of basic we got M-16's to qualify with (I was still stateside..) and I had no trouble at all shooting at the Expert level... At that time I was barely 140 which might have something to do with the difficulty I had with that M-14...

Looking back on it I don't find anything at all to recommend it unless I needed a battle rifle and couldn't acquire something better. From what I remember the Army came to the same conclusion a long time ago... since they left general service before I came back from my senior trip in 1971, I believe..

Good luck with whatever you choose...
 
I've got the M1a's baby brother... the Socom16... which is a 16" barreled M1a with a muzzle brake. I like it... a LOT.

CPrTRZyl.jpg

Having said that... some of the others are correct. It is a Rifleman's rifle... there is something rewarding about shooting it, much like the Garand. It also carries a price... it is more to maintain and, sometimes, you have to work with it to get it to shoot well. Modifications are not easy, generally speaking. There are far better rifles that are easier to shoot, easier to maintain, and far more durable. But. If you want an M14/M1a, and you are down for the struggle, it's an excellent rifle. If I had a choice to take an M14 into combat, or an AR-10 variant... I'd take the AR-10.

Pre-Wuhan Flu scare, I was seeing new Springfields in the $1200 range... I find it unlikely they are that inexpensive now. Be careful buying an older M1a, many of them have been poorly maintained or, worse, significantly modified. The big keyword you will find is 'USGI parts.' Older M1a's were built using surplus GI parts, newer ones are made with commercially sourced parts. Some people take new rifles and install older USGI parts in the belief they are better. My Socom has mostly commercial parts, but it came in a USGI fiberglass stock, for example.

Source only CMI magazines... they are the USGI supplier, but they are also the best magazines available.

Springfield Armory M1a's have a lifetime warranty... you break it, you send it in and they fix it.
 
You just made me more interested in the significance of this rifle. Please explain to me the various models, and explain the M25 which you used in combat.
The standard M14 is just the M14 issued to every joe and jarhead until the M16 came out. My experience with it is limited to schoolhouse settings- students in SF weapons training work with them to this day, as thousands of our old M14's were gifted to allied countries as parts of various military aid packages over the years, which means SF guys may encounter them deployed. The M21 is a VN era sniper rifle that started off as a standard M14. It was modified into a match grade configuration. Mods include a match barrel and iron sights, fiberglass bedded stock (later replaced by a all fiberglass stock by McMillan) a "unitized" (welded) gas cylinder and retainer, permanent alteration to disable full auto capability, and a 3-9x ART scope and mount. The 168 grain M852 match round was developed and issued for use with the M21. They were standard US Army issue sniper rifles until the M24 was issued in about 1990. The M25 was designed "in house" in the SF community. They saw service in somalia and limited use in iraq/afg. The major differences are that it had an improved scope mount and recoil spring guide, and all were issued with a newer improved stock. The scope that came with it was a MK4 variant. The M25 AFAIK was only issued in SOF units. The SEALs had them, as well as 5th SF, 10th SF, and various units in JSOC. I never saw an M25 version that had any special receiver markings- they all retained the RIA M21 overstamps. The EBR is a frankenstein abomination we called the starship trooper rifle. It was/is issued in some conventional units as a "designated marksman rifle". It is a M14 variant in a Sage chassis. The chassis is big and heavy and festooned with rails. It is an attempt to modernize what is essentially a WW2 era rifle into something usable with modern accessories. It should not be disassembled by the user due to the configuration. It is also covered with many sharp edges. They typically come with a MK4 series scope. I was offered one of these things and declined. We had 2 in our stateside gun locker that never got used. I obtained a M25 during an early deployment to afg. I replaced the MK4 with a 1-4X Schmidt-Bender short dot. I primarily only used it for missions where I was perched in a helicopter supporting ground operations. It also had a "decent" mount for an IR laser for night use. I used it for this due to lack of better options for the task. If something like an AR10 based carbine or SCAR-H were available at the time, I would have gladly used either. The M14 was never designed for precision sniper engagements- it was supposed to be a standard issue infantry rifle- no more, no less. With the exception of a sling and bayonet, nothing else was ever meant to be attached to the M14. This includes items like scopes, night vision aids, Harris bipods, and suppressors. With today's technology and the dynamics of the modern fight, this is problematic to say the least. This is why the SCAR-H and carbine versions of the SR25 have been developed and issued within the SOF community. Carbine versions of the SR25/M110 are now standardized in the US mil, and as I understand are now being issued even in conventional units.
 
HKDS, if you are used to lightweight rifles like ARs an M14 Variant is going to seem long, cumbersome and heavy.

That is because they are long, cumbersome and heavy. <chuckle> Sorry! :)

... but ... like the M1 they are wonderful rifles and great fun at the range. And carrying them on walkabouts builds muscle.

I think that the Springfield Armory M1A is probably the best choice for almost all of the folks that are drawn to them.

If you have never worked with one, try to find one you that you can check out. Failing that, an M1 ("Garand") would be a good substitute.

If you are already familiar with the heavier, old-style, wood&steel, full-power-cartridge, battle rifles then you already understand. A lot of the folks I virtually encounter these days are only acclimated to the newer lightweight rifles, so ... ;)

====
I have M1s that I enjoy very much and felt the pull of the M14 Variants.

Rather than buy an "M1A", I decided to assemble one (yeah, I'm one of those guys :)) and started with an Armscorp receiver that I acquired 15 years ago. Prior to that I had started a hunt for USGI M14 components, mostly on Gunbroker, but I did find a fellow with a parts-stash over near Rt1 that let me pick thru his warehouse. I came away with a few gas cylinder assys and several other items at excellent prices. Also, I think that it was in '05 that DSA started selling off its stash of NIW USGI M14 mags ... so I got a supply of those. :)

O'course, that was at the end of the time when one could find (if one was patient and looked) VG-condition USGI M14 components at decent prices. <sigh>

Since I had many spare components (and a nice barrel), ten years ago I purchased another receiver (from Fulton Armory this time) and, eventually, built my 2nd/Last M14 Variant. This one I also setup with a quick-detach low-profile scope mount.

For me, both rifles are a delight to shoot, very accurate and, when I carry one on a walk around the farm I get a really good workout. :)

Have a good time finding & acquiring the right-fit rifle for you, HKDS. Enjoy!
 
Just about everything mentioned above I agree with in terms of why not to purchase an M1A.

I have a number of firearms that I can’t really justify owning in a practical sense. The M1A Scout is likely one of them. Yes it’s heavy. I’ll never use it as a hunting gun and I don’t shoot it a whole lot.

Yet, I bought it and it will never leave the inventory. Why?

Although the barrel length wasn’t G.I issued the action was and it’s the only firearm I own which Americans carried a version of into battle.

I like the Scouts barrel length.

While I don’t shoot it much (I’m not a rifle guy) when I do it’s a hoot to pull the trigger on.

I for one consider it to have a cool factor that my tricked out modern black guns don’t.

One day my fathers M1 Tanker will be sitting next to it in the safe. Neither will ever be replaced with an AR10.
 
Many great and correct info was stated above.
Anyone who's own M14/M14A variants will agree 100%, I found the M14A aestethicaly pleasant to handle and shoot, yet heavy but I don't care.
Along with FAL and a tad behind the HK-91 (PTR91 civy version) are my 7.62 to go rifles if semi rifles are in the air.
 
I bought one of the first civilian M1A's (serial number below 1000) way back in 1973. It cost $250. Still have it. As one of the now-legendary "Devine, Texas" M1A's, it's worth thousands.

One of the little-appreciated differences between the M1A and the M14 is the much wider right-side rail. This is intended to prevent the installation of the FA connector, but it also makes the receiver more rigid and allows for a more solid bedding to the stock. Since the current use of the M14 in the military is as a marksman rifle, that means that the M1A is more suitable for military use than the standard M14!
 
What I can gather from all the information above is basicially if you are drawn to the M14 and you like it then you'll enjoy it. And that's me with any gun that I start to develop a infatuation for.
I notice this conversation is all about comparing the M14 to the modern .308 rifles because the M14 is still relevant in the combat world. Thank you FL-NC for your information, much appreciated. Didn't realize it was such a relevant platform.
I've handled a M1 Garand, yes it's bulky to me but if the M14/M1A is any bit lighter than that then I'm bargaining exactly for what I know i'd be getting into. I'm already used to a variety of the old military rifles (which is one of my fondest categories).
I'd be getting the M14 as a curio and also a weekend day long shooter. I'm fond of .308 and the old military cartridges so recoil is not a problem for me.
 
Loved the M-14 shot 9 out of 10 in the same hole at 40 meters. A friend was a Sniper in Nam with the Sniper version and in two history books one made into a movie. Another friend shoots two in matches. That said I would probably buy an AR-10 first. Also owned a Garand. If you want one get one. I was also issues an M-16. Liked it too.
 
If you end up getting the M1A, I recommend the Sadlak scope mount. It's an updated version of the Brookfield Precision mount, which was military issue. The difference is that the Sadlak has standard Picatinny cross slots, whereas the Brookfield had Weaver cross slots. (When you install these types of mounts, you lose the clip guide.)

Other useful additions, when the rifle is used in the designated marksman role, are the M2 bipod and the M14A1 muzzle compensator. (These accessories are hard to find and therefore expensive.)
 
I have the Springfield NM M1A and it's my favorite rifle. I don't carry it around, just to the bench.
Basset scope mount, on and off no zero loss. Bradley cheek rest. I have no trouble with the magazines at all.
I shoot at 200yds, mostly with iron sights, which are the best. The target is at 200yds, scoped, reloads with 168gr Hornady A-Max. I have old eyes. M1A 168gr A-Max 42.7gr Varget.jpg M1A NM 2.jpg
 
Three weeks ago at the FW show, the only one there was a new SAI for $2300. Plain-Jane vanilla M1A. No extras, just the box.

I bought an early SAI in '94, ahead of the AWB, paid a "panic" increased price of $430 out of the Market Hall gun show door. During the 2008-2012 debacle it sold for $650. That's life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top