The M14 Rifle - Vietnam Experiences, Accounts, Comments

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Ruggz1515

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2014
Messages
36
Hello all!

I just started this thread to get responses from anyone who has any firsthand experience, accounts or comments with/about the M14 and its use in Vietnam or training! Accounts, experiences, and comments with that rifle in Iraq and/or Afghanistan is also very much welcomed!

I am in to the M14 and have been trying to get as much information as possible about its use when it was/is in battle from Veterans who have depended on that rifle for survival. I have messaged a few Veterans on THR that have provided superb and outstanding information, but wanted to start this thread to create a flow of comments and accounts from Veterans and others about the M14 and to share experiences with that weapon!

Thank you!

- Ruggz1515
 
I was in the 3rd Core area (1st Div.) in the fall of 66. We were issued M14s which we carried until January of 67, The M14 was heavy and we couldn't carry all that much ammo but the round would penetrate bamboo thickets and wattle & dab hooch walls. We turned these in for the "mattel-plastic gun" (M16) which most of us had trained with in AIT. Unfortunately for us, these did not function like the ones we trained with. Jams were so common that we took to strapping a cleaning rod to the outside of our rifles so we could clear the chamber. We did have a M14E2A1 rifles issued one to each squad which was a bit of a help when the M16 wouldn't do the job. After a couple of months we turned in the M14E2As for M60s which was a major step up in firepower.
 
I was issued a new Winchester M-14 in basic training in 1964.
I loved that rifle!

Accurate as far as you could see, and won me an Expert Rifleman's badge, and high score in my training company.

Another H&R one in AIT wasn't as nice, but just as accurate.

Then another one on active duty in 1968-70.

We built and shot M-14 National Match rifles at 5th. Army AMU.

Incredible rifles in my opinion.

rc
 
I was in the 3rd Core area (1st Div.) in the fall of 66. We were issued M14s which we carried until January of 67, The M14 was heavy and we couldn't carry all that much ammo but the round would penetrate bamboo thickets and wattle & dab hooch walls. We turned these in for the "mattel-plastic gun" (M16) which most of us had trained with in AIT. Unfortunately for us, these did not function like the ones we trained with. Jams were so common that we took to strapping a cleaning rod to the outside of our rifles so we could clear the chamber. We did have a M14E2A1 rifles issued one to each squad which was a bit of a help when the M16 wouldn't do the job. After a couple of months we turned in the M14E2As for M60s which was a major step up in firepower.
Click to expand...


Thank you for your comment sir, and thank you for your service! I just have a couple of questions about your comment. When first getting the M16, was there, at any point, a desire to get M14's back? And did the performance of the round, as well as the M14's reliability, compensate for the weight of the rifle? Thank you!
 
Accurate as far as you could see, and won me an Expert Rifleman's badge, and high score in my training company....Incredible rifles in my opinion.
Click to expand...



That's awesome, I bet you're a pretty good shot then! It sure sounds like a rather incredible weapon to me too!
 
I was never issued a M-16, although our AMU unit ran training ranges for them for every 5th. Army unit going to Vietnam.
So I got to fire them all day, every day if I wanted too.

I always liked the M-16.
But I had much more confidence in the M-14 taking care of business with one well placed round.

Ammo, and steel mags were heavy though, and limited how much ammo you could carry.

No worse then the other country's CETME's, HK's, or the communists AK-47 steel mags though.

And you didn't have to worry about stepping on one and bending it!!

As for weight??
I never even considered them heavy at the time when I was 25 and could do 100 push-ups with one arm behind my back.

Today at 71?
They are heavy as hell!!

rc
 
So I got to fire them all day, every day if I wanted too....I always liked the M-16...But I had much more confidence in the M-14 taking care of business with one well placed round...Ammo, and steel mags were heavy though, and limited how much ammo you could carry...No worse then the other country's CETME's, HK's, or the communists AK-47 steel mags though...And you didn't have to worry about stepping on one and bending it!!
Click to expand...

Not a bad job description! I had heard (or read) that the magazines for the M16's at the time were not all that durable, though I don't remember where I gathered that information. However, I did pick up an M14 mag once and was impressed on how durable it seemed, for a magazine at least...
 
The M-16 magazines in 1968 were exactly the same aluminum mags as they are today.

Gene Stoners intent was for the AR-15 / M16 magazines to be disposable.

Ammo was to be loaded in them at the factory, shipped in them, used in the field, and then discarded on the ground when they were empty.

(Just like an M-1 Garand clip.)

That plan fell through somewhere between inception, acceptance, and actual military use.

rc
 
Ruggz1515: On my first tour in Viet Nam. I was assigned to a Mech Infantry Company with the 1st Inf Div in 68 & 69. I carried either Car -15 or a M-14, most all of the time I was there. Both were just fantastic rifles. And each had their own strong points. A 100yd was a very long shot in the Jungle usually 50 to 75 yds and quite often half that or less was what was usually the distance. And either the Car-15 or the M-14 worked very well in this type of situation. But when we were working the Rubber Plantations in the An Loc and Loc Nhin areas or around the Black Virgin Mountain where ranges opened up some and the M-14 really came into it`s own. Both rifles put the VC and NVA down very well, but I always thought that the M-14, just did a better job. And if you put a Star Light Scope on an M-14 at night, you could make Uncle Chuck wish He had prowled and probed around some body else`s NDP or Fire Base that night. You could sure make them pay a heavy price using a M-14 wearing a Star Light Scope. And for some reason it took a while for the VC and NVA to figure that out sometimes. And the lessons they learned were very costly in, Front Line Troops to them. If I could ansewer any of Your questions concerning the M-14 or Car-15 I would be glad to do so. I have had quite a bit of time carrying and using each of these Rifles. In both of my tours in Viet Nam.
ken
 
Though I was issued an M16A1 I was also a Small Arms Repairman and Small Arms Training NCO so I was able to check out several M14 rifles during my units Familiarization and Qualification range time.
Anybody who wished to qualify or just become familiar with the weapons was welcome to do so.
Quite a few of our Officers and NonComs, myself included, chose to qualify with the M14 and were then allowed to carry them during training deployments if so desired.

As stated, these rifles and their basic load of five magazines are a LOT heavier than an M16A1 but not so much so now when compared to a fully decked out M4 Carbine and the 12 to 15 30 shot magazines many now carry.

All this took place was during the "Peacetime" early 80s Army.
Lots of WW2-Korea-Viet Nam vets still in service at that time and many preferred the M14 to the M16.
I'm sure most of the WW2-Korea guys would have chose to qualify with an M1 Garand if they could have done so but there were none available in any arms room I ever visited.

I do remember seeing new in the box M14 rifles and 1911A1 pistols.
 
I had an M14 in Basic and AIT in 1966 , before that in College ROTC it was M1 garand and Carbine. I really liked the M-14 and it could be trusted for reliability . When I hit nam in Jan 1968 and finally got to the 101st in March I was issued a 1911 and 3 mags but had access to other weapons in the arms room when I went out in the field. I choose the M14 over the AR15 which I felt was a joke, just like the whole "war" was. :( I did want a CAR 15 when they first came out XM177 but never could find one. I tried a M3A1 Grease Gun and bought a Swedish K during my 6 month extension when I got flight duty. Out in the field in the Ashau Valley as an Intelligence Sgt. I always wanted an M-14 and as I flew in Loaches most of the time the 20 magazines I carried were bareable for the firepower they delivered. Yes you owned the night when you hooked a ANPVS2 Starlight scope up to one.
Isn't it strange that in my later years I have come to love and trust the AR 5.56 ? My good old National Match upgraded by Smiths enterprises in the late 80s sits in the safe with the Starlight standing ready if I need it tho...:)
055.gif
 
Well since you said "or training" I will take up some space. My first experiences with the M-14 were in High School. My JROTC unit turned in its M-1 rifles in exchange for a batch of nice M-14, some with wood stocks and some with the greyish hard plastic. On arrival at the school arms room these rifles were all fully functional. All had the selector lock in place for semi auto fire only. All but those to be assigned to the Drill team (Which performed the flag raising and rifle salute with blanks at foot ball games) and those to be issued to members of what the Army called a "Counter Guerilla Organization" which was an after school operations and tactics club then had there extractor and spring, ejector and spring, and firing pin removed and stored in an ammo can in the Caged Area of the Arms room where .22LR rifles (Remington 513T and Winchester 52D) and ammo was stored. BTW also in the cage were 20 functional M 1911A1 pistols, 2 functional M-60 GPMG, and 2 functional M79 Grenade Launchers, though no ammo for any of these other than Blanks in 20 round boxes for the functional M-14s.

Shortly after the start of the school year the local National Guard unit which still had M-1s requested instruction on the M-14. I went to one weekend meeting wearing my fatigues with JROTC insignia along with one of the retired NCO JROTC instructor and the deed was done.

The blanks used would not function the action without the Blank Firing Attachment. The drill team did not use the BFA so when they used the rifles for a salute of more than one round the rifles functioned as straight pull rifles. When the run and gun club used Blanks they had BFAs and the first time we used them got the attention of the local cops in our rural town.

Of course you mix M-14s and teenaged boys and it only took a few weeks before we found out what shooting Ball ammo through them was like. Much like when we snuck Black tip AP into out M-1 Garands the year before but more so was the answer.

The following semester we borrowed an M-16A1 from a Reserve unit over in the Capitol and I got to learn it to be the cadet instructor and got out of normal classes for a day to give demos for the Battalion of Cadets as they did classroom instruction. Again we were a rural community and most of the deer and hog hunters were underwhelmed by the M-16A1 in comparison to the M-14.

At The Citadel, the military college of South Carolina in Charleston SC each cadet was issued a neutered M-14. Each rifle had the selector lock out and the bolt parts I helped remove in high school missing upon issue to the cadets. Issue was from the arms room in "The Tool Shed" the building ROTC was in (as in the building where "tools" were made) .Once issued the rifles were then either in the hands of the cadets, or members of inspection parties or in a wooden rack in the barracks room which had no lock. The Room or the rack. The rifles even stayed in the room during Thanksgiving break but turned in for the long Christmas break. Members of the Famed "Summerall Guard" Drill team had fully functional M-1903A3 Springfields rather than M-14s. Unlike the drill rifles in some places the 03A3s were complete with all sights and stacking and sling swivels.

Purchasing the "missing" M-14 bolt parts through say an ad in Shotgun News and installing them was not unheard of though when an inspector noted a NM M-1 Garand in a room rack and an upper classman's car got searched where his issued M-14 was found fully functional AND with Selector assembly installed and in need of cleaning things tightened up a bit.

When I enlisted after but a short stay at the vacation retreat along the shores of the Ashley I thought never to see an M-14 again. During basic at Ft. Knox this was true.

If you have a chance to visit the Sportsman's Paradise in Summer.....don't. Well certainly not Tigerland at Ft. Polk. Our first long march was on day one of full training after fill "week". It was to the night fire range. I think the real reason for the 12 mile march was to sweat out the two weeks leave some got between basic and AIT. I thought it odd that we would be shooting before zeroing our M-16A1s until they started taping up sights so we could not see them for the daylight portion of the shooting to learn how. As night fell a truck came out with an M-14 and ANPVS2 starlight scope. Also a couple of tripod mounted NODs (Night Observation Devices) for use by the instructors and for show and tell. As it turned out no one on the cadre or rifle committee had any experience with the M-14. The upshot was that I got to do the firing with the M-14 as demonstration to the others.

After that evening I was certain my M-14 days were over.

Several weeks later my kindly Drill Sargent Managed to get me on a break in with a Reserve out fit shooting the M-14 A1 (just a plain rifle with selector and bipod) and the M-14E2 which was an M-14 with bipod, a special long sling, forward pistol grip special stock and a bullet stabilizer on the muzzle over the flash suppressor. When the last was on one did not have access to the bayonet lug. I fired both on full auto in short bursts to 300 meters and on semi to 600 off the bipods. I had no difficulty firing them in two to three round bursts and knocking over targets. I could not under stand all the complains about uncontrollability and "walking" Shoot even short burst from the under arm and shoulder assault positions were not bad.......of course I was 19 in the best physical condition of my life large framed and 6'2" but why should that make any difference? Just as I was finishing a Nasty Guard unit showed up on the auto rifle range with M1918A2 BARs and I got to shoot one of those as well.

No more M-14s for kBob....I thought.

Upon arrival at my unit in Germany I was sent downstairs to be issued an M-16A1 rifle as I was approaching the window/door of the arms room being lead by my new Platoon Sargent he asked me what job I would like in my new squad. Looking though the arms room door I espied M-14E2s in racks and immediately volunteered to serve as an auto rifleman. Sadly it was never to be as the guns got turned in that very week.

Thus ended my USA sponsored experiences with the M-14.

Oddly after my GI bill and College ROTC and a return to Europe as a Commissioned Officer (not as though I would look up any formerly bothersome NCOs or anything) as late as 1982 the 3rd Armored Division out of Frankfurt (and diverse other places) still had M1D sniper rifles but no M-14s. Go figure.

-kBob
 
When I was an adviser, I trashed my issue M2 Carbine and carried an M1 Garand. On my second tour as a company commander, I got my battalion commander to get me two M14 sniper rifles. I had one trained sniper in the company and I kept the other one.

I often used both the M1 and the M14 to "work" a target -- shooting at and around a suspected enemy location. I got a couple of long range kills with the M14 and one very short range kill.
 
Ruggz1515:

Our first experiences with the M16 were pretty disappointing. Not only did the 5.56 lack penetrating power in thick brush they were definitely less effective in stopping power. Yes, we tried to get out M14s back but the Army brass wouldn't hear of it claiming we would come to love the new gun's light weight and firepower. Early in 1967 we began to experience failures to extract with our M-16s. We never had feeding/extracting problems with the M-14 but they were no longer available for re-issue. We were stuck with the M-16 despite its problems. We compensated by doubling up on M-60s and issuing more M-79 grenade launchers which we could rely on to work.
 
Not a VN vet but some experience as you asked for.

I used the M14 in college ROTC, only thing in our arms room. We shot them both semi and full auto. I don't remember ever having any problems with them. Our Field Training Exercises were normally only 2 or 3 days, dismounted. Even at a fit 18 - 21 years old the rilfe did get a bit heavy carrying at the ready while patrolling. BTW one of the biggest advancements in carry comfort is the newer sling set ups like the Vickers sling for the M16/AR that allow the gun to slung at the ready position - love it... Would have been great with the M14 with appropriate attachment points.

Mags are big, bulky and heavy, of course the old TA50 web gear wasn't very ergonomic for mag carry either. Particularly when assuming a prone position.

I must have formed an attachment in those years as I now own a couple M1As... Other than the sketchy SAI build quality, I like them very much.
 
Not sure if the old INFANTRY magazines published by the Infantry School are available on line, but in 72 or 73 there was a brief article (likely briefer than my description)about the school's efforts to have the M-14 available for troops that might be fielded places other than a jungle...and do OK there as well.

There was a new folding stock that was neither the AK style nor side folder tried in the late 60's. One feature of the folding stock was that when folded it provided a carrying handle. The main thing about it though was it was light weight. The weight of the folding stock equipped M-14 split the difference between it and the M-16A1 and I believe would have been at least as light as an A2 when they came along. The pistol gripped rifle could be fired folded if necessary.....wouldn't firing that folded on full auto be a hoot?

There was to be some work on magazines but I don't believe they said what. At the time we speculated aluminum or at least lighter steel, something G3-ish or original Stoner AR-10. Maybe even plastic. Never saw any of them though.

The rifles' Barrel and receiver group and trigger group remained unchanged.

The other big push mentioned was ammo weight savings and performance. Since the M-16A1 crowd touted the magic number 3200 fps as such a big deal over the old 7.62 NATO 2800 fps Someone had developed loads based on the forward bullet of the old Duplex round. This was a short 90 grain 7.62caliber bullet and it was said it had the same trajectory as the 147 grain FMJ Ball round to 300 meters with no loss of accuracy. The round required no changes to the rifle or magazines and one of the selling points was that troops could be issued the new round or M80 depending on the environment they were in.

After the one article I never heard another peep about it.

-kBob
 
My experience with the M14 was limited to basic training (winter 1968, Ft Benning) and I struggled to qualify with it -until I learned to just relax and allow it to do its job... A year later we were issued the 16 and I had no trouble shooting expert with it. I was not a combat type when I finally hit Vietnam in 71. My issue weapon there was only a 38 revolver...
 
In late 1968 and early 1969 when I was at Ft Lewis on the Weapons Committee, we still used the M14 for the initial training on the 1000 inch range. Basic firearms handling, and sight alignment/trigger control. After that they went to the M16 for "trainfire" (pop-up electronic targets at various ranges. No problems with either rifle.

May '69 I was with 1st Inf Div, and had a choice of either the M14 or M16. Initially carried the M14 as we were in open country (rice paddies or rubber plantation) where the range could help. Loved the gun (it was a National Match which had already been "combat lost", but I couldn't find a way to get it out of country). Switched to the M16 when we wound up in jungle (Trapezoid/iron triangle) for ease of carry, and lighter weight. You could carry about double the ammo for the same weight with the M16. Only problems with the M16 were some jams early on, so cleaning became a mandatory daily routine. Later we got some newer rifles, and the jamming seldom happened (chrome barrels??).

Today friends tell me I need a "black gun" for social issues, but I've decided the Springield M1a in "scout"style is way better for me. We'll see what happens when I get loads developed, and go to one of their matches.
 
The first half of my second Iraq tour in 2005 my platoon was attached to a Tank company from 1st ID. Their SDMs had the M14s while our SDMs had the M16 SDM-R.

Their rifles were nice and fairly accurate. My rifle was a good bit more accurate but they had Leupold Mk4s while I had an ACOG. So when we would shoot at range it was a toss up. However they did have some problems. Being that the guns weren't really supported anymore, made spare parts hard/impossible to get. Each guy only had 3 or 4 mags. Plus the rifles being 50 years old didnt help either.

However they didnt care as they were tankers so they didnt rely on their rifles like we did on the infantry side.
 
I was issued M-14s my entire time in the Army. I loved it from day one. Went in Oct 25th 1967 and took Basic at Ft Bliss Tx. We trained on M-14s because we were told that 16s couldn't function in the sand. I qualified Expert with it.

Went to Nam in May, 68. Landed in a Supply company (581st at Long My Depot in Qui Nhon. ) As we were REMFs, we were issued 14s. (Don't ask, you vets know what REMFs are.) I soon learned that you had better chain that M-14 to your person and sleep with it, or it would be stolen with an M-16 left in its place. The 16s were giving troops a lot of grief in those years and they were desperate for anything that WORKED!

Germany came next and I was slotted in an MOS I really liked, 45B20. Small arms repair. There were no M-16s in Germany in 69-70, so we had 14s. They, along with the 1911s, didn't provide much repair work. They rarely ever broke! When they did, it was usually the result of someone doing something stupid, like trying to shoot out a bore obstruction with a blank. I spent a lot of time in Grafenwohr on the tank ranges and I took my M-14 with me. The M-73s in the tanks were a real piece of you know what, and The Army decided that certain lots of ammo should not be used in them. I was allowed to shoot up all I wanted in my M-14.

And did I ever! I put around twenty to thirty thousand rounds through that M-14 in the summer and fall of 69. I remember replacing the extractor, and an extractor spring, along with a recoil spring. That was it. The fact that my 14 was a TRW might have had something to do with it, they were hands down the best M-14s made. A good portion of my partying with Uncle Sam's ammo was done in full auto. When I was finished, the chrome in the bore was discolored and dark looking but the rifling was still sharp and the gun lost none of its accuracy. I could still hit a man sized rock that was about four hundred meters away.

If I had to pick any of the full sized so-called "Battle Rifles" today, I would want an M14 , without hesitation. It has the best iron sights ever put on a military rifle, it is accurate, powerful, easy to maintain and easy to use for a right or left handed person.

It is my favorite milsurp.
 
In the latter part of 1962 I was transferred to the Naval Air Station in Key West, Florida to repair jet engines with Navy fighter squadron VF 101. Little did I know that the Cuban missile crisis would come in November. When the crisis was going full bore in January 1963 Marine fighter squadron VMF 531 arrived. I was assigned to provide heavy repair work on their engines. The first thing I notices was that every Marine had a good looking M14 and I had gone through Navy firearms training with an M1 so I was really jealous. I had worked with Marines before as about half of my class learning to be an aviation machinist was with Marines. VMF 531 was sent to DaNang Vietnam in April 1965 to fly bombing missions and I always wondered if they still had their M14's. Sure hope they did.
 
1968. Had the M14 in basic. Trained and qualified on the M16. Had the M14 in Infantry AIT. 1969 Issued M16 in country. Issued M14 in Germany 1970. 08/22/1970 Issued my freedom and never looked back. Comments? Never had a malfunction with the M16 in the bush.
 
In 1968 I was an armorer in 3rd Bn, 6 Inf, Berlin Brigade. 130 each M14, 18 45 M1911 pistols, 6 M90 Anti Tank recoilless rifles, 1 M50 50 cal Browning, 6 M60 machine guns, 6 M14A1 selector rifles. 81 mm mortars kept in mortar platoon, two 106mm recoilless rifles, 6 Stevens riot shot guns. 1 scoped 1903 A3 rifle. Shotguns and 1903 A3 rifle were used in jeep patrols for killing feral war dogs up until 1953 according to Berlin Brigade unit records and were atypical and not a part of TOE.

blindhari
 
We used to fill magazines for the 14 with tracer rounds stripped out of 60 belts. While giving away your position, it also let you see where your rounds went at or near dark when shooting at a distance. Alot of shooting and moving going on. I had a 16 for awhile but a cleaning rod and a knife were my constant companions. Went back to the 14. All the 14s I ever had contact with were accurate by the way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MatthewVanitas
  • Locked
Did many returning Vietnam vets buy the Colt AR-15?
Replies
23
Views
2K
SemiAutoMan
S
C-grunt
  • Locked
  • Poll
Iraq/Afghan vets, report on the M16/M4.
2 3 4
Replies
86
Views
16K
Wesson Smith
W
N
  • Locked
M1A/M14 Opinions Needed
Replies
22
Views
1K
Number 6
N
D
  • Locked
Building a M14 on an Armscorp Receiver?
Replies
11
Views
4K
DSS
D
B
  • Locked
Survey of Marine Infantry Reveals Complaints About Rifle
Replies
5
Views
745
Eightball
E
Back
Top