AR27
Member
How reliable are the M14 style rifles? Specifically a springfield M1A. Are we talking AK-47 reliabilty or what?
Reliabilty of M14 or M1A
- Thread starter AR27
- Start date
- Status
The first thing you should be aware of is that an M14 and an M1A are ballistically superior to the AK47. You are comparing a .308 (7.62X51 NATO) to a 7.62X39, which, IMO, makes both the M14 and M1A the better choice. And, from my experience in the Army with the M14, I was impressed with it's reliability and power. Both the M14 and M1A are also more accurate than the AK47 (IMHO). Also, it's my guess that in similar circumstances, reliability would be about the same for all three of the rifles. I would personally take the M14; because, it's a selective fire automatic weapon (like the AK) but much more powerful and accurate.
Last edited:
AR27
Member
I know all about the accuracy and caliber of the M14 series rifle, the only thing i dont know is how reliable they are. I was not comparing the AK-47 to an M-14 in all around performance. Just wondering if a M-14 would be able to function like an Ak-47 or HK-416 would with mud and tons of fouling. I want to get a Springfield Socom 16 and would like to know if i can throw it in a creek, pick it up, and fire away.
The M14 I trained on and used every day was very reliable. I can't compair it to an AK47 because. I've never had one. However, I do have an SKS (same thing - right? 
) and my M14 was just as or even more reliable.
BTW, (not trying to be a smart alec here) do you honestly think there is anyone here who has thrown their Springfield Socom 16 into a creek and then fired it?
) and my M14 was just as or even more reliable.BTW, (not trying to be a smart alec here) do you honestly think there is anyone here who has thrown their Springfield Socom 16 into a creek and then fired it?
I cannot answer to reliability of M14 compared to the ak 47, However if you are wanting to get ak47 reliability with .308 punch with definate ak47 reliability consider the saiga .308, I have one & really like it.
It is probably also a safe bet to say unless you are some sort of contractor rambo that m14 would probably be more reliable than you would ever need it to be.
seems to me that Michael Bane dragged an m1 socom through the mud for a torture test on that shooting usa/sighting in tv series. I think it jammed up some but did ok generally, that might be worth looking up for ya.
It is probably also a safe bet to say unless you are some sort of contractor rambo that m14 would probably be more reliable than you would ever need it to be.
seems to me that Michael Bane dragged an m1 socom through the mud for a torture test on that shooting usa/sighting in tv series. I think it jammed up some but did ok generally, that might be worth looking up for ya.
I cannot answer to reliability of M14 compared to the ak 47, However if you are wanting to get ak47 reliability with .308 punch with definate ak47 reliability consider the saiga .308, I have one & really like it.
It is probably also a safe bet to say unless you are some sort of contractor rambo that m14 would probably be more reliable than you would ever need it to be.
seems to me that Michael Bane dragged an m1 socom through the mud for a torture test on that shooting usa/sighting in tv series. I think it jammed up some but did ok generally, that might be worth looking up for ya.
It is probably also a safe bet to say unless you are some sort of contractor rambo that m14 would probably be more reliable than you would ever need it to be.
seems to me that Michael Bane dragged an m1 socom through the mud for a torture test on that shooting usa/sighting in tv series. I think it jammed up some but did ok generally, that might be worth looking up for ya.
There are fewer and fewer veterans around who carried the M14 in combat. Soldiers just expect their equipment to work 100% of the time without any effort on their part. None are interested in the design aspects of the weapon; GI’s exhibit little to no interest in how it works or why it works other than it whether it works. Once I found a thread that had user comments on the M14, from Vietnam. There were no complaints about the rifle being unreliable or jamming in combat.
Coworkers and shooters I have known who carried the M14, when they were issued M16’s, those guys always had problem with the M16. The M16 was less reliable in combat than the M14. M16’s did not penetrate brush or bamboo, early ones without the chrome chamber, brass cartridges would actually rust in the chamber if left overnight, causing a failure to eject, magazines would not interchange, jams, lots of jams.
In comparison, those who used the M14 never expressed any of the bad problems encountered with the M16. The M14 was reliable in combat, under all conditions.
I am on my third barrel on one match M1a. My loads are moderate, the most important issues for me are accuracy and 100% function. The only misfeeds I have had were due to clumps of paste wax causing bolt over rides. I wipe Johnson paste wax on the outside of my cartridges to eliminate case head stretch during extraction. I found in 50 F or lower weather that I if I did not buff rapid fire cases, the paste wax slowed cartridge rise in the magazine and the bolt would close empty. That is not a fault of the mechanism, it is a user unique practice, the rifle was designed to function without cartridge lubrication. Never had a misfeed after I buffed my cartridges.
I have not had any parts break.
Ak's and M14's are close to the same weight. Just pound for pound, you would expect the M14 to have more parts breakage than a AK because the M14 absorbs at least twice the energy each shot because of its larger cartridge. However without test data there is no way to really know how the rifles compare.
Coworkers and shooters I have known who carried the M14, when they were issued M16’s, those guys always had problem with the M16. The M16 was less reliable in combat than the M14. M16’s did not penetrate brush or bamboo, early ones without the chrome chamber, brass cartridges would actually rust in the chamber if left overnight, causing a failure to eject, magazines would not interchange, jams, lots of jams.
In comparison, those who used the M14 never expressed any of the bad problems encountered with the M16. The M14 was reliable in combat, under all conditions.
I am on my third barrel on one match M1a. My loads are moderate, the most important issues for me are accuracy and 100% function. The only misfeeds I have had were due to clumps of paste wax causing bolt over rides. I wipe Johnson paste wax on the outside of my cartridges to eliminate case head stretch during extraction. I found in 50 F or lower weather that I if I did not buff rapid fire cases, the paste wax slowed cartridge rise in the magazine and the bolt would close empty. That is not a fault of the mechanism, it is a user unique practice, the rifle was designed to function without cartridge lubrication. Never had a misfeed after I buffed my cartridges.
I have not had any parts break.
Ak's and M14's are close to the same weight. Just pound for pound, you would expect the M14 to have more parts breakage than a AK because the M14 absorbs at least twice the energy each shot because of its larger cartridge. However without test data there is no way to really know how the rifles compare.
I'd caution the OP not to treat people's experience with the military M14 as if they apply 100% to the M1A. As similar as they are, they're different designs from different manufacturers. It would be similarly unwise to compare the original troublesome M16s to a modern day quality AR-15 - despite the cosmetic similarities, they're not the same.
loadedround
Member
My only experience regarding the reliability of the M14/M1A was the Springfield Armory NM M1A that I purchased several years ago. This rifle being new and rather tight had several malfunctions during recycling of the first 10 or 15 rounds. After that the function was perfect as long as it had ammo with a higher pressure curve to recycle. My rifle will not handle light loads for obvious reasons.
m1As have pretty good reps for reliability. 7.62x51mm vs. 7.62x39mm is really a different question, and it's more a question of suitability than which is "better". For some things (weight, controllability, cost), the shorter Commie round is better.
J
J
Hangingrock
Member
The M14 is Mil-Spec where as the M1A is a mixture of commercial and surplus parts. The surplus parts may or may not be with in Mil-Spec which are employed on M14 clones such as the Springfield M1A series rifles.
Those of us who slugged it out with Main Force VC or NVA never felt out gunned by the AK47.
I remember when us early twenty some thing Sgt-E5 types talked about such things at GITMO (3rd Battalion 8th Marines) in 1968. We were at ease with the M14 and glad that the M16 was not the issued rifle as it was in Vietnam. All of us were veterans of Vietnam. Based on our collective experiences the M14 was held in high esteem.
Those of us who slugged it out with Main Force VC or NVA never felt out gunned by the AK47.
I remember when us early twenty some thing Sgt-E5 types talked about such things at GITMO (3rd Battalion 8th Marines) in 1968. We were at ease with the M14 and glad that the M16 was not the issued rifle as it was in Vietnam. All of us were veterans of Vietnam. Based on our collective experiences the M14 was held in high esteem.
longdayjake
Member
They used a 110 grain hornady tap which is a home defense round. They should have used actual 147 grain ball. I have had issues cycling 100 grainish stuff from mine without having any mud in the chamber. Then he goes and stuffs mud in the chamber with his fingers. Your AK and AR would jam too if you stuffed mud into the chamber with your finger and used underpowered ammunition.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Depends on the M1A. I had a friend who owned a National Match M1A (probably tighter clearances than most), and it was accurate but a jam-o-matic. He eventually sold it and bought an AR.
Z-Michigan
Member
100% reliable in my moderate experience with a Springfield M1A loaded model, including various types of surplus ammo. Mags are important like with any gun; I have used Checkmate, Springfield (made by Checkmate), Taiwan Type 57, and Korean M14 clone mags, all with no problems. I would avoid Chinese mags and any US mags that are not USGI issue.
Your question is like asking who is tougher............hulk hogan or john wayne? The question you should be asking is.........who will win the fight?
The m14 is a more sophisticated, state of the art weapon. It will win the day over an ak. That being said...nothing is more reliable than the ak format.
If you want a gun that you do not have to clean for a year....get the m14/m1a. If you want a gun you do not have to clean for a lifetime....get the ak.
The m14 is a more sophisticated, state of the art weapon. It will win the day over an ak. That being said...nothing is more reliable than the ak format.
If you want a gun that you do not have to clean for a year....get the m14/m1a. If you want a gun you do not have to clean for a lifetime....get the ak.
reliable
Got my first SAI M-1-A in 1979. I have owned a total of 7. One of those was a Fedral Ordnance with a Chinees receiver.
Including the M-14 I went through basic with and the few I got my hands on across the pond, I have never had a malfunction with the platform. Not one.
Issued ammo, roll my own or surplus, not one malfunction.
Its the only semi auto I trust compeletly.
Got my first SAI M-1-A in 1979. I have owned a total of 7. One of those was a Fedral Ordnance with a Chinees receiver.
Including the M-14 I went through basic with and the few I got my hands on across the pond, I have never had a malfunction with the platform. Not one.
Issued ammo, roll my own or surplus, not one malfunction.
Its the only semi auto I trust compeletly.
kmcintosh78
Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2009
- Messages
- 344
Having owned both (Saiga 308, just got rid of it) and now a SAI Standard, I will have to say that I would trust my life and my families to either, function wise.
Now with that said, I have done alot of research into both. I know how to field strip, properly lube and how they both function. I understand the 2 different rifles.
I would not hesitate to drag my Saiga through any mud, water, sand and so on. I would hesitate to do so with my SAI, only because it is a Walnut stock.
The AK has less moving parts, not machined as tightly and looser tolerances, which means it will feed with debris, function with mud and run with very little maintenance.
The SAI, standard is machined much tighter, but should function just fine.
Now the NM and Supers are machined even tighter then the standard. They were made to be super accurate for a cleaner environment.
For the money, the Saiga 308 will be around $500 new, then $200-300 to convert to pistol grip.
A 7.62X39 AK, range from $350-$700.
If you have the funds, and want a great, accurate and beautiful rifle, do the SAI. I suggest the standard in 21". The SOCOM has a different gas system then the Regular.
Now with that said, I have done alot of research into both. I know how to field strip, properly lube and how they both function. I understand the 2 different rifles.
I would not hesitate to drag my Saiga through any mud, water, sand and so on. I would hesitate to do so with my SAI, only because it is a Walnut stock.
The AK has less moving parts, not machined as tightly and looser tolerances, which means it will feed with debris, function with mud and run with very little maintenance.
The SAI, standard is machined much tighter, but should function just fine.
Now the NM and Supers are machined even tighter then the standard. They were made to be super accurate for a cleaner environment.
For the money, the Saiga 308 will be around $500 new, then $200-300 to convert to pistol grip.
A 7.62X39 AK, range from $350-$700.
If you have the funds, and want a great, accurate and beautiful rifle, do the SAI. I suggest the standard in 21". The SOCOM has a different gas system then the Regular.
Hatterasguy
Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2010
- Messages
- 1,604
Its as reliable as you would ever need a rifle to be.
Heck of a lot more accurite than an AK, so it realy comes down to what your doing with it.
Heck of a lot more accurite than an AK, so it realy comes down to what your doing with it.
Last edited:
Chainsaw2
Member
Can anyone tell me how accurate the Saiga's are and how much the magazines cost?
06
Member
My "truck gun" is currently an M1A if that tells you how much trust I have in it. I keep it in a case and an SKS "M" style in a sock laid on top of it. Also in the case is the Rem. 700. All have a purpose and a reason. The M1A is my favorite. The AKs stay in the "closet" but are ready.
W.E.G.
Member
A trash AK is probably more reliable than a trash M1/M14.
A properly-assembled M1/M14, constructed of good-condition parts is extremely reliable.
A properly-assembled M1/M14, constructed of good-condition parts is extremely reliable.
KodiakBeer
member
I prefer the ergonomics and general characteristics of the M1A over the FAL, but... if you're looking at reliability in a .308 the FAL has one great advantage. You can adjust the gas port to adjust for fouling, temps, bullet weights, whatever.
For example when shooting old dirty Milsurp or cheap stuff like Wolf and you see function issues after the fouling builds up, you can just reach up and open the gas port another notch or two. If you want to shoot heavier slugs, you can reduce the gas port a notch or two.
Still, I like the M1A over the FAL because it just "feels" better. Stick with high grade ammo and it should run like a clock.
For example when shooting old dirty Milsurp or cheap stuff like Wolf and you see function issues after the fouling builds up, you can just reach up and open the gas port another notch or two. If you want to shoot heavier slugs, you can reduce the gas port a notch or two.
Still, I like the M1A over the FAL because it just "feels" better. Stick with high grade ammo and it should run like a clock.
Tuckerp229
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2007
- Messages
- 135
I own a Springfield NM.
Dead nuts on. If this is the gun you want, reliability will not be a factor. Now weight, length optics mounts etc... they are real things to consider.
- Status
