M14 - catching my eye lately

[FL-NC]

Excellent write-up, but I don't think your claim that "The 168 grain M852 match round was developed and issued for use with the M21" is correct.

I believe YOU are correct. I joined in 1987. We mostly used the M118 (173 grain) for the first few years I was in, but we did occasionally get the M852. The M118 LR (175 grain) was issued later. The M118 LR also uses a open tip match projectile. So either I was given incorrect historical information at some point in school, or I just got it backwards. During some of our deployments (esp. those NOT in the mideast) we may get issued the older M852 or M118 ammunition for training indigenous forces snipers, even though the M118 LR was requested. My guess is that due to the higher priority of ops in afg and iraq, we were getting the older/obsolete inventory for training purposes. The folks that manage ammunition inventories likely also saw this as an opportunity to rid themselves of stocks of inventory that we didn't want for our own training and operations. As far as the "not for combat use" labels, I did encounter/inherit some of this ammunition in my bunkers in afg. It is amazing what you can find on a firebase that has been active for a few years. I was aware of the labels and why it was on them; some of the fellows thought that this meant that there were QC problems of some type with the ammunition, and were wondering how it got into theater, let alone into our storage bunker. I explained what the deal was, but it really didn't matter, since we always had sufficient M118 LR (which all of our data and software was set up for anyway) to use for our operations.

 

[MistWolf]

...what's the difference between the M14 and M1A ?

The difference is, only Springfield Armory can call their rifle "M1A" as they hold the trademark. When the first civilian M14 pattern rifles were being made, calling it an "M14" meant, by BATF interpretation, the rifle was a machinegun although it was semiauto only. Ridiculous, I know. Back then, any AR called an "M16" was considered a machinegun as well.

So, it was called the M1A and the designation trademarked.

I love the M14 and have since a little kid. It's the only firearm I've ever wanted because it looked cool in the movies. I wanted the Jonny Eagle toy M14 so bad it hurt, but never got one. (I did get the Crossman M1 Carbine BB gun which more than made up for it.)

 

[Lineman65]

I had one from Springfield Armory, old enough to be mostly GI parts. It had a TRW barrel. My dad had one in the Army in the early 60’s and it bought a smile to his face when he handled it.
Mine was a good shooter, but I really never took it out much after my father died. I ended up trading it for a Colt SAA. Honestly, I don’t miss it at all.

 

[CapnMac]

The difference is, only Springfield Armory can call their rifle

SAI got their start by making Garands by using GI parts on new-made receivers.
Those were sold, non que suprise, as "M1"
The supply of Garand parts dried up and they pivoted to building M-14 copies.
They sold those as "M1A." The owner of the company has said that the resemblance of "A" to "4" was also part of it.
It also resembled US military nomenclature, too.

Aircraft use just a single letter to designate different models of the same airframe, so, the F-16 becomes the F-16A, then the F-16B, and so on
By long-standing tradition, Ordnance starts their increments at "A1." So, the M-1911 became the M-1911A1. The M-5 light Tank became the M-5A1, the M-1 Abrams has been the M1A1, the M1A2, the M1A3, and so on.

More trivia: The M-1 Carbine had an M-1A1 version, with folding stock. The M-2 Carbine was select fire, the M-3 Carbine had fittings of an IR scope. When the shortened M-16 was turned out as an official Carbine, it was, naturally, the M4.

 

[Hangingrock]

In my USMC days qualification at Parris Island was with the M14 ( H&R Mfg.) was usually the manufacture. At Camp Geiger Infantry Training Regiment we reverted to the M1. On Okinawa I was issued a M14 manufactured by Winchester. I believe Winchester of the manufactures produced the least numbers of rifles compared to the other manufactures. The M14 in the rule of the fire team automatic rifle was problematic in my experience and was a poor replacement compared to the BAR. The M16 early on was problematic in Marine Corp service in Viet-Nam reference the Hill Fights. Dead Marines with nonfunctional rifles due to rifle design/manufacturing issues along with problematic ammunition propellant incompatibility issues. Finished out my time at GITOM Cuba 3Rd-BN-8Th- Marines. The Navy as part of the defense arrangement provided personnel. They were issued M1 Rifles converted to NATO 7.62 MM. The conversion could be and was problematic on occasion with the chamber inserts extracting with the spent cartridge case. That's what I observed in my limited duties as a Marksmanship instructor..

 

[Reloadron]

Aircraft use just a single letter to designate different models of the same airframe, so, the F-16 becomes the F-16A, then the F-16B, and so on

Well then I have a question. For example to go back in time a little the F-4 Phantom was designated F for Fighter, the A-6 was designated A for Attack, but there was also the EA-6 (Electronic Countermeasures designation) and the C-130 designated C for Cargo. Now that works out fine for single letters but what about an aircraft like the F/A-18 Hornet designated F and A because it's a multi roll aircraft. Then on others I can make a C-130 a KC-130 designating it a Tanker and I can even go back to the old F-4 and designate it an RF-4 for Reconnaissance. So really the F/A- 18 Hornet or later Super Hornet started life with a two letter designation didn't it? The suffix just being a revision level but really the F/A designation is a good example of a departure from a single letter isn't it. While amusing none of this has anything to do with either rifle, the M1A or M14. I guess as a commercial rifle manufacturer if you make a rifle you can name it whatever you want as long as you don't step on another manufacturer's naming convention.

Would be nice if you could try before you buy. Just because myself and others like the rifle does not mean you will.

Ron

 

[Thomasss]

Springfield M1A at Cabelas plain jane a few weeks ago was $1800. There are a variety of options on them from the factory, including scope rails and cryogenic barrels, etc. Scope rails should be on your bucket list, cause some scopes can interfere with shell ejection. An all option Springfield M1A is around $4,000

 

[tark]

A lot of good history here, and some misinformation as well. All M-14s were marked '"M-14" on the receiver heel. When one was converted to an M-21, that designation was usually electric penciled on the receiver. All M-14s were capable of fully automatic fire; almost all of them had the selector lock in place. The M-14A1 employed a special pistol grip stock, a special sling, a heavy bipod, a folding fore grip, a special muzzle brake and a rubber "recoil pad" under the hinged buttplate. It weighed a bit more than a standard M-14 and was just as useless in fully automatic fire. I carried one in Vietnam. We have an example in the Arsenal Museum.

The M-15 was supposed to be the SAW but it never got off the launching pad. Only a handful were made, none were issued. The fourth gun from the top (6852) is an M-15, recognizable by its fat stock and noticeably heavier barrel. That bipod ( also used on the M-14A1 )was anything but flimsy. The gun weighs about 14 pounds unloaded. The gun under it is an M-14 carbine.(6864) About twenty of these were made. The barrel was shortened and thinned. Weight was saved by milling off anything they could including the protective wings for the rear sight! The flash suppressor was shortened and the bayonet lug was removed as well. It has an aluminum buttplate. They saved about a pound and a half. The thing overheated in the trials and somebody reminded the Army that we didn't have cavalry anymore ! They dropped the Idea. #6887 is the very first M-14 to come off the H&R production line. It has never been fired, not even proof tested. We have at least one example of every gun in the T-44 series that became the M-14. We also have two T-48 F.A.L.s that were actual Trials rifles.

All M14's are selective fire. It's just that most of them have the selector lock instead of the selector switch installed.

My apologies for the glare from the overhead lights.

The M14A1 was the "squad automatic" version. By all accounts, it was a failure. However, the muzzle compensator of that version, which slips over the standard flash hider, is useful in minimizing muzzle rise in rapid semiautomatic fire. Downside is you can't attach a bayonet while the muzzle compensator is in place. (The compensator must be locked in place on the bayonet lug, using the combination tool.)

It was. I never saw another one either in Vietnam or Germany.

of course the really good and useful select fire model was the M14 E2... improved stock, muzzle comp, improved bipod, lengthened sling.

I liked it better than the BAR.

-kBob

Everyone has their own opinion

 

[tark]

OOPS!! Don't know how my apology for the glare from the overhead lights got into AlexanderA's post.

 

[Bayou52]

I bought a M1A SA NM in 1988 brand new for $1100 or so back then. I got busy in self employment, and I put it up.

Fast forward 32 years later and I've never shot it. Never even loaded it, in fact. Not even once. The factory trigger tag is still attached.

Not sure of its value today. Lee Emerson published an article about rifles in this serial number range:

"042201 to 063000 This is the serial number range that I refer to as the Golden Age of the M1A. The receiver design had fully matured by this time. The receivers were hand finished by the original designer and master craftsman, Melvin Smith. Springfield Armory, Inc. was awash in USGI parts during this period. Thus, factory built standard model M1A rifles in this serial number range were built with a very high USGI parts count."

I'm still going to hold onto it. It's like an old friend...

Bayou52

 

[tark]

I bought a M1A SA NM in 1988 brand new for $1100 or so back then. I got busy in self employment, and I put it up.

Fast forward 32 years later and I've never shot it. Never even loaded it, in fact. Not even once. The factory trigger tag is still attached.

Not sure of its value today. Lee Emerson published an article about rifles in this serial number range:

"042201 to 063000 This is the serial number range that I refer to as the Golden Age of the M1A. The receiver design had fully matured by this time. The receivers were hand finished by the original designer and master craftsman, Melvin Smith. Springfield Armory, Inc. was awash in USGI parts during this period. Thus, factory built standard model M1A rifles in this serial number range were built with a very high USGI parts count."

I'm still going to hold onto it. It's like an old friend...

Bayou52

Quite correct. Bayou52. I bought one in 89 and It had almost all TRW parts. Thompson-Ramo- Wooldridge made the best M-14s. They normally made jet engine parts that were constructed from exotic metals, to very precise tolerances, to withstand high temperatures, among other things. Building a rifle was child's play to them. When the Army decided it needed more National match weapons, instead of having the AMU build them from existing stocks, they contracted TRW to build them from scratch. The resulting NM M-14s were the best of the breed.

TRW parts are clearly marked. Look for them on your rifle.

 

[Bayou52]

^^^ Thanks for that information, tark. Good to know that this rifle is likely made of high quality components. I'll check it over for those TRW parts!

Thanks again -

Bayou52

 

[Bayou52]

tark - out of curiosity, I pulled out the SA NM M1A to check for parts stamps. Sure enough, right on top of the bolt is "TRW" stamped just as you've described.

Thanks again for that information...

Bayou52

 

[Reloadron]

tark - out of curiosity, I pulled out the SA NM M1A to check for parts stamps. Sure enough, right on top of the bolt is "TRW" stamped just as you've described.

Thanks again for that information...

Bayou52

I worked in the plant the TRW guns were made. When I began there late 80s while the M14 line was long gone the test range still existed.

Ron

 

[kBob]

Tark,

If your museum has a pistol griped stocked folding front grip M14 with a Compensator over the flash hider marked M14A1 then that is incorrect as such is the M14E2 and the M14A1 is simply a stock M14 with a bipod, no Bullet stabilizer ( as the comps were called in the manuals). After the development of the E2 the modification on the bipod for that rifle began to be done to all bipods. This allowed units with M14A1 to have SARs loop the sling between the legs of the bipod and allowed the Squad Auto Rifleman to place downward and rearward pressure on the sling to help control the weapon on full auto. This also did much to correct vertical stringing when on semi as well as varying pressure on the bipod from the support hand caused noticable stringing even at 100 meters.

As for folders I like the BM59 style stock on that one in the photo. There were two others at that time, and underfolder that looked like an MP 40 stock on steroids and I imagined would be a bear to shoot and a big flat sided one that resembled the AR180 stock and folded to the left side.

Later about 1972 there was a model of folding stock that swung up and then along the left side of the rifle and then provided a carrying handle for folded carry. This was for a project that included an attempt at aluminum magazines and used "experimental" ammo to provide reduced recoil and ammo weight. It utilized the forward 90 grain bullet from the Duplex program, but only one per cartridge. Claims were from the Infantry School who pushed that thing (they were fighting 5.56 even at that late date) included a 3200 fps muzzle velocity and that for ranges of 0-300 meters a zeroed rifle with that ammo shot the same as one with ball ammo. The rifles could be used with standard ammo as well. The excuse for this project was that airborne troops needed a compact packing rifle that still had 7.62 in its name and that Rapid deployment Infantry units were likely to be along side 7.62 NATO armed allied troops .... and no where did it say to my knowledge "and us old WWII and Korean War E8s and O5s shooting for 30 still ain't happy about 5.56" though that was likely a driving force. They even went so far as to crow about ammo cpmpatability between the squad weapons and Platoon GPMG the M60 and conducted fifing test of the M60 with the lighter bullet.

I do wonder how that MV 3200FPS 90 grain .308 spitzer would compare to any of the FMJ 5.56 at "realistic Combat Ranges" as invisioned at that time (90 to 135 meters) in Ballistic gel or against the Armor of the time, especially the Soviet individual plate set of the era.

Odd thing about the over folder was all weight savings were in the stock and aluminum magazines yet they managed to split the difference between a standard loaded M14 and standard loaded M16A1 they claimed. I understand there were both all aluminum mags and composit mags with steel lips and aluminum body. I believe the Infantry museum may have all three of the folders I mentioned in storage or did back when it was in the old hospital building.

Also while the BATF considers all M14 "machine guns" the so called selector lock out is not a lock at all but a replacement part group that replaces not only the "switch " on a select fire M14 but the lever that trips the little stud on the side of the hammer hook when the bolt closes. It is pinned in place. On the NM rifles leant to State rifle teams this was generally also sealed with a blob of weld, but not on service rifles. It also locks the disconnector, that long arm in the right rail of the rifle in the forward position as though it were tripping the hammer in auto fire. On the M1A and semi clones these parts are not necessary and so that rail is solid, thicker, and heavier than on "real" M14 rifles.

NM M14s were marked NM on the barrel, BTW.

Around 1986 there was a recall on some M1A from Springfield for bolt issues. Whether they replaced bolts with TRW bolts or replaced TRW bolts I do not recall but TRW bolts were involved one way or another.

One nice thing about having a bipod mounted M14 was one could easily use the rifle mounted clip guide to load 5 round strippers to a magazine in the gun. The "Spoons" for using the strippers with individual loose magazines often had sharp edges that could cut the sides of a thumb or skin a thumb knuckle. With out a bipod you had to control the twisting of the rifle by hand and I found sitting and setting the rifle across your lap with the mag between your thighs the best way to do several. If you had a handy surface like a table top or a cornor of an M113 handy you could "safely" use the spoons by fixing a spoon on a mag, standing the clip in the spoon and then placing the top round against the hard flat surface and pushing the mag over the rounds as the stripper and spoon advanced past the edge of the hard object. This was also the preferred method for loading 5.56 in M16 mags BTW though one could use the carrying handle on the rifle as the ammo pusher if nothing else were available. Black heel and sole die for your boots covered up the exposed aluminum and brass stripes on the carrying handle quite well....unless you had a black Sharppie Marker on hand for your sights anyway.

One of the things I do not like about Museums is that mistakes then get the force of "established fact" Like the MP 40 in the Musee de Armie in Paris that is labeled MP38 , yet has a stamped mag housing and bolt handle safety and being marked wrong for an MP38 or even the M3 Greasegun in New Orleans that is marked as a standard Grease gun but is actually a 9x19mm conversion kit complete with 9mm Magazine.




-kBob

 

[AlexanderA]

"042201 to 063000 This is the serial number range that I refer to as the Golden Age of the M1A. The receiver design had fully matured by this time. The receivers were hand finished by the original designer and master craftsman, Melvin Smith. Springfield Armory, Inc. was awash in USGI parts during this period. Thus, factory built standard model M1A rifles in this serial number range were built with a very high USGI parts count."

Hmmm... Mine is serial # 0009xx and it's all GI parts except for the receiver.

 

[Ignition Override]

Four pages about a rifle.

This says something, all by itself——that it’s one of the coolest rifles ever created.

 

[JT-AR-MG42]

Thompson-Ramo- Wooldridge made the best M-14s.

You got that right, at least IMO.
Here's mine that I've had for 40 years now.





Middle of first contract by serial number IIRC with a barrel dated 12 - 63. All marked parts are TRW.
It came with the selector lock installed and the lock seemed to be the same age as the gun (for finish wear).
I added the selector and the sling.
As pictures show, it's been around the block with a lot of the wear coming from me.
Still shoots under 2 MOA with any sort of quality bullet in club CMP type shoots and that's good enough for me.

I don't usually name my guns, but have always called this one " 'lil shopper " after the cartoon dog.
It's always been a handful (for me at least) during automatic fire.

JT

 

[tark]

Great info, kBob. I'm thinking you know a lot more about M-14s than I do! My specialty is Garands and we have some fine ones in the museum.

None of the guns on the weapons wall have identifying tags saying what they are, just number tags. There are tables and books out on the floor for the patrons to look up the guns. Museum is still closed. When it ever opens again, Ill see if the M-14E2 is correctly listed. If it isn't.....It will be .

 

[Heir Kommt Die Sonne]

Four pages about a rifle.

This says something, all by itself——that it’s one of the coolest rifles ever created.

Well yea, this thread solidified my interest in them. I'm getting one at some point . In the time being I'll just watch the awesome photos of other peoples rifles flood this thread while I search for one of my own.

Thanks to everyone for the info and the nice photos. Especially Tark, FL-NC, Kbob, Reloadron, and others I'm forgetting to mention. For now we can just discuss how cool of a rifle it is and share experiences until the thread dies on it's own.

 

[22250Rem]

Thompson-Ramo- Wooldridge made the best M-14s

......... That's good to know; as the M-14 I qualified with in 1969 was a TRW with a 5 digit serial number, ( still have the serial number of it in my marksmanship book ).

 

[CapnMac]

The suffix just being a revision level but really the F/A designation is a good example of a departure from a single letter isn't it.

Yeah, that's been a mess. Most of the time the "/A" portion is just dropped. Especially now that the Super Hornet is up to the F/G models. The "F-35" began life as the XF/A-35 until every one decided the YF/A-35 was going to be a silly designation.
For really good trivial, the RS-71 (Recon Strategic) was mispronounced by LBJ as "S-R 71," and no one wanted to correct the President, so they changed it.

That bipod ( also used on the M-14A1 )was anything but flimsy.

Through my error of writing, above, what I meant to refer to as flimsy was the mono-fore-grip behind the bipod.
It does not lock to position, up or down, and is thin and flexible, and is not helped by having the sling strung through it (unless one is keep to bust the sling slot off).

Sad thing is that, had the BAR been given that pistol grip and that bipod, it would have been an outstanding weapon in WWII. (If putting at least one wingnut factory out of business.)

 

[AlexanderA]

Through my error of writing, above, what I meant to refer to as flimsy was the mono-fore-grip behind the bipod.
It does not lock to position, up or down, and is thin and flexible, and is not helped by having the sling strung through it (unless one is keep to bust the sling slot off).

Sad thing is that, had the BAR been given that pistol grip and that bipod, it would have been an outstanding weapon in WWII. (If putting at least one wingnut factory out of business.)

I have the M2 bipod and the compensator, as illustrated in your post, on my M1A. They both help a lot, even for a semiautomatic. My version of the bipod doesn't have the extra sling swivel on the front. I have the standard stock and not the M14A1 stock.

The sling used on the M14A1 is the same extra-long sling used on late BAR's. It's set up with the loop toward the front, instead of toward the back as on the BAR. Actually, that loop is what braces the handgrip in the down position. You unclip the grip from the loop in order to fold the grip against the stock.

I know what you mean about the BAR bipod wingnuts. They cannot be kept tight enough to keep the bipod legs, when in the folded position, from flopping down. The bipod is really needed for the BAR to be effective, but, darnn, it's a nuisance. Troops in WW2 managed to lose it even if that made the BAR less effective. (And also, the BAR bipod's position at the muzzle is not optimal.)

I disagree that the BAR would have been an outstanding weapon, even with alterations. Remember that you're comparing it to the Bren and the German MG34 and 42. The BAR would always have limited magazine capacity and no quick-change barrel.

 

[Charlie98]

I got to fire an M14 at one of the machine gun ranges in Las Vegas a few years ago... it's quite a weapon. They made me shoot it off the bipod, however, even though I told them I was a salty Special Ops Dark Team Operator and am used to firing it one-handed. I could see where it would be a handful trying to shoot it off-hand on full-auto.

If I knew how to post videos here, I have a video of it...

 

[Radkins313]

If I am not mistaken, the some of the M14's were modified back in the early 70's, into the M21 and were used as the main sniper rifle. So based on that I would say that at least 500 yards (or meters) and probably up to 600 or so. Just going by my recollections of those days.