wacki
Member
Is there any? So far I have:
1) magazine vs en-bloc
2) 7.62 vs 30-06.
Is there any other difference?
1) magazine vs en-bloc
2) 7.62 vs 30-06.
Is there any other difference?
Mechanical difference between M1 Garand and M1A
- Thread starter wacki
- Start date
- Status
Dr. Dickie
Member
The gas operating system is completely different (port, op rod, cyliner, etc.).
In the M1A there is piston that is seprate from the op rod that allows the gas to be bled off after the piston moves a certain distance (in the Garand, after the bullet leaves the barrel, the pressue drops and the spring loaded piston forces the gases back out the inlet hole).
Different rear buttplate, as the M1A has the hatch you have to open first.
Also, the flash suppressor on the M1A.
That's what springs to mind right away.
Also, just so you know 7.62 is .30 (or .308 really), they both are the same bullet, just different cartrige length (7.62 x51 vs 7.62 x 63mm).
Not that you didn't know that, just listing it as 7.62 vs .30 gives the appearence that they are different.
Oh yeah thought of another one. The upper hand guard in the M1A is metal, wood in the M1.
In the M1A there is piston that is seprate from the op rod that allows the gas to be bled off after the piston moves a certain distance (in the Garand, after the bullet leaves the barrel, the pressue drops and the spring loaded piston forces the gases back out the inlet hole).
Different rear buttplate, as the M1A has the hatch you have to open first.
Also, the flash suppressor on the M1A.
That's what springs to mind right away.
Also, just so you know 7.62 is .30 (or .308 really), they both are the same bullet, just different cartrige length (7.62 x51 vs 7.62 x 63mm).
Not that you didn't know that, just listing it as 7.62 vs .30 gives the appearence that they are different.
Oh yeah thought of another one. The upper hand guard in the M1A is metal, wood in the M1.
Swampy
Member
wacki,
Dickie covered it pretty well.
The M1A(M14) is a generational improvement of the M1 Garand rifle design.
One thing.... The fmj .30 bullet (30-06) and the fmj 7.62 Nato bullet are not the same. The .30 bullet is usually a 150 or 152 grain flat base. The 7.62 Nato is usually a 147 to 150 grain boat tail. The nose shape and seating depth in the brass is different in the two cartridges as well.
Best regards,
Swampy
Garands forever
Dickie covered it pretty well.
The M1A(M14) is a generational improvement of the M1 Garand rifle design.
One thing.... The fmj .30 bullet (30-06) and the fmj 7.62 Nato bullet are not the same. The .30 bullet is usually a 150 or 152 grain flat base. The 7.62 Nato is usually a 147 to 150 grain boat tail. The nose shape and seating depth in the brass is different in the two cartridges as well.
Best regards,
Swampy
Garands forever
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 22,509
The M-14 was designed to be a selective fire weapon, capable of replacing the BAR and yet still remain the service weapon of the common infantryman. It was lighter than the M-1 because of its White Gas System (something Garand didn't like) and lighter receiver thanks to the elimination of the en-bloc system in favor of a detachable magazine and because the receiver could be shortened thanks to the adaptation of the shorter 7.62 mm Nato.
As a selective fire weapon, even when equipped with a bipod and folding hand grip, was still too light a weapon for full automatic fire and was uncontrollable unlike the BAR. As Mykl Spencer put it (TFL staffer), the M-15 was a pogo stick.
Other changes include the roller on the bolt and the elimination of the stacking swivel. A flash hider was mounted on the muzzle to help reduce the signature of the piece.
As a selective fire weapon, even when equipped with a bipod and folding hand grip, was still too light a weapon for full automatic fire and was uncontrollable unlike the BAR. As Mykl Spencer put it (TFL staffer), the M-15 was a pogo stick.
Other changes include the roller on the bolt and the elimination of the stacking swivel. A flash hider was mounted on the muzzle to help reduce the signature of the piece.
Swampy
Member
As long as they are properly maintained I've never heard of a problem with these..... neither in US service or on civvy models.
Why would this be a weak point?? Roller bearings are commonly used in industrial applications as cam followers. They will do lots more function cycles in a day than the bearing on an M14 bolt does in it's lifetime.
Best,
Swampy
Garands forever
ScottsGT
Member
Fiberglass, not metal. BTW, early M-14's had a wood upper too. they were catching fire under sustaned full auto and went to the vented fiberglass, but these were cracking apart, so they went to the solid fiberglass. I have one of each for my M1A.
P99guy
Member
As thourough as you guys pegged it, I can believe you missed jotting it down, though no doubts you know it....the receiver is shorter by a half inch!
the M14/M1A receiver is .5 inch shorter than the Garand receiver.(to take advantage of the shorter cartridge, (that in service loads, is only about 100 fps behind the 30-06 M2 Service Ball as used by the M1 Garand)
They were able to shorten the cartridge case on the T65 due to advances in gunpowder..requiring less volume of powder to get almost the same performance with the 147-150 gr class service bullets.
the M14/M1A receiver is .5 inch shorter than the Garand receiver.(to take advantage of the shorter cartridge, (that in service loads, is only about 100 fps behind the 30-06 M2 Service Ball as used by the M1 Garand)
They were able to shorten the cartridge case on the T65 due to advances in gunpowder..requiring less volume of powder to get almost the same performance with the 147-150 gr class service bullets.
Dr. Dickie
Member
"Fiberglass, not metal."
Really! I am going to have check mine out tonight when I get home, I would have sworn it was metal, but I never really looked at it all the close.
Ya see, ya read ya learn.
Really! I am going to have check mine out tonight when I get home, I would have sworn it was metal, but I never really looked at it all the close.
Ya see, ya read ya learn.
High Planes Drifter
Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 1,204
M14' s came with chrome-lined barrels. Original USGI M1 Garands did not, tho IIRC the Army and Marine Corps started demanding that all barrles be chrome lined after WW2. Im not positive on that, I am sure someone more farmiliar with M1's will either confirm or shoot it down.
Swampy
Member
And as stated in my previous post... those same industrial apps get more cycles in a day than the M14 gets in it's lifetime.
How many cycles-days do those roller bearings go through before they fail??? Barring the occasional "lemon" of a bearing, I'm betting it averages in the hundreds of thousands.
The typical M14 barrel is going to be replaced within 10-15k rounds. I'm betting that standard armorer practice was to replace the roller bearing at the same time if it looked like it was wearing.
Just my thoughts,
Swampy
Garands forever
Swampy
Member
Drifter,
M1 barrels were never chrome lined.
After WWII the pads around the gas port were chromed, but the bores-chambers never were.... right up through the fabulously made SA M1 replacement tubes made in the 60's.
Best,
Swampy
Garands forever
AZ Jeff
Member
Here is a summary of differences between an M1 and an M1A (in it's original commericial form):
GAS SYSTEM: M1 uses "direct impingement system". M1A uses "White gas cut-off and expansion system" M1A also has the ability to shut off the gas system (intended for launching rifle grenades on the M14 military cousin).
FLASH SUPRESSOR: M1 has none (in standard configuation). M1A uses a long cage-type supressor.
HANDGUARD: M1 uses wood. M1A uses fiberglass.
BARREL: Standard issue M1 barrels are never chrome plated, and are most often in the original caliber, .30/06. Standard issue M1A barrels are most often chrome plated, in .308W, and are of thinner outer diameter compared to M1 barrels, to save weight.
BOLT: M1 uses plain hardened trapezoidal lug to run in operating rod cam track. M1A uses a roller
MAGAZINE: M1 uses integral magazine charged with enbloc clips. M1A uses removable (nominally 20 round) magazines.
REAR SIGHT: M1 uses rear sight elevation drum calibrated in yards. M1A sights originally were calibrated in meters, but as the supply of surplus M14 sights evaporated, M1 sights are often substituted.
BUTTPLATE: M1 buttplate has trap door for cleaning kit stowage in butt. M1A has this as well, but includes a hinged plate that flips up, an artifact of when the M14 had full-auto capability. Many later M1A's do away with the military buttplate altogether as a cost-saving measure.
GAS SYSTEM: M1 uses "direct impingement system". M1A uses "White gas cut-off and expansion system" M1A also has the ability to shut off the gas system (intended for launching rifle grenades on the M14 military cousin).
FLASH SUPRESSOR: M1 has none (in standard configuation). M1A uses a long cage-type supressor.
HANDGUARD: M1 uses wood. M1A uses fiberglass.
BARREL: Standard issue M1 barrels are never chrome plated, and are most often in the original caliber, .30/06. Standard issue M1A barrels are most often chrome plated, in .308W, and are of thinner outer diameter compared to M1 barrels, to save weight.
BOLT: M1 uses plain hardened trapezoidal lug to run in operating rod cam track. M1A uses a roller
MAGAZINE: M1 uses integral magazine charged with enbloc clips. M1A uses removable (nominally 20 round) magazines.
REAR SIGHT: M1 uses rear sight elevation drum calibrated in yards. M1A sights originally were calibrated in meters, but as the supply of surplus M14 sights evaporated, M1 sights are often substituted.
BUTTPLATE: M1 buttplate has trap door for cleaning kit stowage in butt. M1A has this as well, but includes a hinged plate that flips up, an artifact of when the M14 had full-auto capability. Many later M1A's do away with the military buttplate altogether as a cost-saving measure.
High Planes Drifter
Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 1,204
Thanks for setting it straight Swampy
- Status