The M14 Rifle - Vietnam Experiences, Accounts, Comments

[84B20]

My story is a bit like lemaymiami only I wasn't issued a .38, I actually brought one with me. I was in the last group of GI's sent to Viet Nam by ship even though I was in the Army. We had what they called Packets, containers that carried our unit equipment. I was able to store some of my personal gear and one item was my S&W .38.

We were all issued two M16's, one for each of us and one as a replacement for another soldier. When we finally arrived the brass decided we didn't need the 16's since we were a PSYOP unit and M14 were just fine, by their standards. Since I was a photographer (84B20) I was also issued a camera and case. These were the old Speed Graphic, 4X5 press cameras. The whole kit weighed about 30 pounds.

Between that and an M14 there was no way I could lug all that gear and be expected to hop on a chopper and travel around the country and do my job. I just left the 14 in the armory and that is where the .38 comes in. I just put it in my shoulder holster and carried it along with a 35mm camera I also brought along. Between the camera and the my gun I was able to do my job and make it back in one piece. Another interesting note, I was actually issued a permit by the Vietnamese government as a license to carry (my very first carry permit )

To this day I will not own an M14, it just brings back bad feelings. I do however have a beautiful M1 Garand.

 

[119er]

I was in U.S. Army artillery in Iraq 04-05 and we had a scoped M14 in our section. I didn't know or care anything about them then because they were seen as sort of a red headed step child. At the time everyone had M16A2's which were then replaced by the A4's with quad rails, and I was stuck with the SAW. The armorer couldn't repair the M14 if it went down so it was drawn only for missions that would have us out of the FOB for days at a time. The last was pulling security for the first preliminary elections in Mosul. It was fed delinked 7.62 and was decently accurate considering we really had no formal training on the system. So there is my extremely limited experience.

Today I have an M1A Scout that I have put a lot of USGI parts in and I love it. It has actually edged out my M1 Garand for range time. There seems to be no shortage of haters against it, but I see it as no different than the AK platform in terms of being outdated; and plenty of people love AKs. It is a battle rifle and the ~2 MOA I get with 150 FMJ's is just great in my book. There is something about it that is just "right". It fits me and I shoot it well from various positions. It is actually one of my girlfriend's favorite rifles to shoot.

 

[Speedo66]

I was issued an M-14 in basic, Ft. Ord, Monterey CA, Nov. 1967. I had prior firearms experience, and was lucky enough to fire expert with it.

Thought it was an accurate rifle, especially considering all the training cycles it had probably been through. Never experienced a malfunction, remarkable because our range was on the beach, complete with sand.

Heavy? Yes, especially running with it at high port to the range and back. The people going into infantry later trained with M-16's, but I got a non combat MOS.
Back at my reserve unit we were still using M-1's and Carbines, so no more M-14 experience. Still would like to have one though.

 

[84B20]

Speedo66 we missed each other by 7 months. I was at Ft. Ord in April '67 for my basic. They must have changed the training regimen since I qualified in both M14 and M16. I earned Shapshooter in the 14 and Expert in the 16. and yes I remember the long marches through the sand in full gear!

 

[Hangingrock]

My experience with the M14 started at Parris Island. Funny thing was after the Island basic infantry training was conducted at Camp Geiger ITR adjacent to Lejeune and the M1 was employed. Left handed I hated the M1.

In August of 1965 Marine battalions 3/3, 2/4, and 3/7 composing the 7th Regimental Landing Team went into the fight Known as Operation Starlite Viet-Nam. It was I believe the first major fight thus all equipped with the M14 rifle.

An interesting side note was 3/7 Officers and I believe also Staff NCO grades side arms were not the issued 1911A1 but the M1 Carbine.

At the time the majority of M14 in service with the Marine Corps were produced by H&R. I myself acquired a M14 manufactured by Winchester to supplement 1911A1 made by Ithaca.

My perspective the M14 was the better rifle of the time period compared to the early M16 rifles. The M16 was problematic in early service with the Marine Corps especially in the Hill Fights.

 

[DJR]

I was issued an M14 at Ft. Lewis for basic late 1967. Liked it well enough except for the weight. Just a data point, not an indictment, but it had a catastrophic failure that would have been a problem had it been combat. Looking back on it I think it fired out of battery and blew up the bolt.

We transitioned to the M16 and I can't remember any problems with it. Overseas I did not use one a lot as I was aircrew and behind an M60 most of the time. Still, I thought it was a good choice for slogging through marshes with all the stuff that gets hung on a guy.

I think the M16 is handier for clearing buildings but when I was grabbed for riot control duty in Washington D.C. in '68 I was glad to have the M14. We were issued a bayonet but the scabbard had to stay in place and no ammunition. If your weapon is reduced to being a club the M14 wins every time.

I like them both but don't own either. (I do have a 1911 however )

DJR

 

[jeepnik]

Was issued an M16. Not the A1 but the original with all it's issues.

Long story short case head separated from the body. Tried to chamber another round. POS useless.

"Found" an M14. These weren't even issued by the USAF. Since I didn't do a lot of walking in my particular job I wasn't worried about the weight. Although I did end up stripping some rounds out of M60 belts so I didn't need to find any of those.

Observations. The M14 is heavier, the 7.62 hits harder and penetrates better, and the M14 works.

 

[entropy]

Speedo66 we missed each other by 7 months. I was at Ft. Ord in April '67 for my basic. They must have changed the training regimen since I qualified in both M14 and M16. I earned Shapshooter in the 14 and Expert in the 16. and yes I remember the long marches through the sand in full gear!

I was stationed at Ft. Ord, Apr. 86 to Dec. 88., as a 76Y, and Armorer for my unit. The only M14's I saw there were the M21's issued to the snipers. I got to fire one through knowing the crew at the Maintainence Activity, and helped build CAR's for the LRSD. The M4 hadn't been fielded yet, and the XM177E2 was withdrawn from service by then.

I've had a thing for the M14/M21/M1A since that time.

 

[84B20]

I was stationed at Ft. Ord, Apr. 86 to Dec. 88., as a 76Y, and Armorer for my unit. The only M14's I saw there were the M21's issued to the snipers. I got to fire one through knowing the crew at the Maintainence Activity, and helped build CAR's for the LRSD. The M4 hadn't been fielded yet, and the XM177E2 was withdrawn from service by then.

I've had a thing for the M14/M21/M1A since that time.

It's too bad they closed down the base, although the way CA is going I wouldn't want to visit it anyway and that is saying a lot since I was born in the state and still have a family member there.

 

[Gordon]

They FINALLY are finishing up a nice cemetery there at the old fort ord. Up on a plateau of Oaks, I think I would like to repose there

 

[Speedo66]

Speedo66 we missed each other by 7 months. I was at Ft. Ord in April '67 for my basic. They must have changed the training regimen since I qualified in both M14 and M16. I earned Shapshooter in the 14 and Expert in the 16. and yes I remember the long marches through the sand in full gear!

The story we got was all the M-16's they could spare we're going to Viet Nam. Since I heard almost all MOS's saw combat over there, seemed scary to have a gun thrust in your hands with no training in that situation.

 

[Ruggz1515]

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.

Thank you for your reply! What were some of the advantages to "working" a target like you mentioned? Oh and if I was in your situation as Company Commander, I would probably have done the same thing and try to acquire those 14's.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

In combat you almost always don't have a clear, well-defined target. So the thing to do is shoot where you THINK the enemy is (due to movement, dust, etc.) and work around that spot. With a rifle like the M14 the effect is enhanced because of the superior penetration of the 7.62mm bullet in brush, logs, etc.

I used to train my company to imagine a box -- the top of the box is the line the enemy can't be above and the bottom is the line he can't be below. Go outside and imagine you're under fire. Lie down and notice how close together those two lines are (usually.)

By adding fire control measures using tracers and smoke, you can get disciplined fire on target.

 

[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

Absolutely! I appreciate the information! Would you switch back and forth between the rifles (the 14 and Car-15) depending on the situation you knew you were going in? Were the majority of others using the 14 with you in those regions (An Loc and Loc Nhin/ Black Virgin Mountains?) And did you ever have to watch out for others that tried to take your rifle?

 

[Ruggz1515]

In combat you almost always don't have a clear, well-defined target. So the thing to do is shoot where you THINK the enemy is (due to movement, dust, etc.) and work around that spot. With a rifle like the M14 the effect is enhanced because of the superior penetration of the 7.62mm bullet in brush, logs, etc.

I used to train my company to imagine a box -- the top of the box is the line the enemy can't be above and the bottom is the line he can't be below. Go outside and imagine you're under fire. Lie down and notice how close together those two lines are (usually.)

That makes perfect sense to me, with a special note on the effectiveness of having the 7.62x51 to penetrate, especially in heavily vegetated areas. Do you think that having M14's around longer in the conflict would have helped provide a powerful base of fire? (instead of force issuing the M16's in bulk to everybody)

 

[Ruggz1515]

"Found" an M14. These weren't even issued by the USAF. Since I didn't do a lot of walking in my particular job I wasn't worried about the weight. Although I did end up stripping some rounds out of M60 belts so I didn't need to find any of those.

Observations. The M14 is heavier, the 7.62 hits harder and penetrates better, and the M14 works.

I'm sure glad you found one! And was, in your opinion (anybody else can chime in on this), the harder hitting and penetrating effectiveness worth having the rifle be heavier?

 

[Ruggz1515]

I was issued an M14 at Ft. Lewis for basic late 1967. Liked it well enough except for the weight. Just a data point, not an indictment, but it had a catastrophic failure that would have been a problem had it been combat. Looking back on it I think it fired out of battery and blew up the bolt.

We transitioned to the M16 and I can't remember any problems with it. Overseas I did not use one a lot as I was aircrew and behind an M60 most of the time. Still, I thought it was a good choice for slogging through marshes with all the stuff that gets hung on a guy.

I'm glad you weren't in combat when that happened obviously! I wonder if malfunctions like that ever did happen in combat?

 

[Ruggz1515]

Between that and an M14 there was no way I could lug all that gear and be expected to hop on a chopper and travel around the country and do my job. I just left the 14 in the armory and that is where the .38 comes in. I just put it in my shoulder holster and carried it along with a 35mm camera I also brought along. Between the camera and the my gun I was able to do my job and make it back in one piece. Another interesting note, I was actually issued a permit by the Vietnamese government as a license to carry (my very first carry permit )

To this day I will not own an M14, it just brings back bad feelings. I do however have a beautiful M1 Garand.

That just sounds rather heavy... I bet you have some pretty neat pictures! BTW that Garand is pretty sweet! I've never really seen one like that before.

 

[Invisible Swordsman]

I did my basic at Ft. Dix in January and February of '69. Most of the training was with the M14. We spent two full days on the M16, and I think we had them on a third occasion for full auto fire (basically dumped 2 mags to show you how hard it was to hit anything). Shortly after I left basic I heard that training had changed to M16 only.

When I got to my duty station at Phu Bai I was pleasantly surprised to be issued an M14. I was also a REMF, so weight and ammo load weren't factors for us. About 4 months before my tour ended, they pulled our 14's and issued everyone an M16 that came from another unit that had rotated out.

When we went off post with our 14's a lot of people thought we were snipers, since they had been through basic and AIT without ever seeing an M14. We kept very close tabs on our weapons since we couldn't charge them off to a combat loss (you lose it, you pay for it).

 

[84B20]

I'm sure glad you found one! And was, in your opinion (anybody else can chime in on this), the harder hitting and penetrating effectiveness worth having the rifle be heavier?

Heavy rifle means heavy ammo. Not a good solution in the heat and humidity of Viet Nam. As far as penetration, the jungle vegetation can deflect a round, even a 762x51. Fortunately I was usually in less dense areas and rarely traveled alone. Although, come to think of it when I exited the chopper and had to make my way to my assignment I was on my own for a time. What was I thinking!

 

[Ruggz1515]

At the time the majority of M14 in service with the Marine Corps were produced by H&R. I myself acquired a M14 manufactured by Winchester to supplement 1911A1 made by Ithaca.

My perspective the M14 was the better rifle of the time period compared to the early M16 rifles. The M16 was problematic in early service with the Marine Corps especially in the Hill Fights.

I think you had mentioned the hill fights in a personal massage, and I looked it up! I found that some Marines were retaining their M14's for as long as they could especially in said hill fights!

 

[84B20]

That just sounds rather heavy... I bet you have some pretty neat pictures! BTW that Garand is pretty sweet! I've never really seen one like that before.

I did customize the Garand. I took off the wood (stored it carefully) and added a Ram-Line stock along with an Ultimak upper rear handguard so I could add a scope. It is very accurate and reliable. As far as photos, yes I have many from my two tours as an Army photographer. The issue is my procrastination. They are all processed and proofed and someday I will get to printing them. :banghead:

 

[Ruggz1515]

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.

Woah! That is really cool looking. I can imagine that 14 doing great work at night obviously. Did a lot of men you were with carry the M14 as well?

I choose the M14 over the AR15 which I felt was a joke, just like the whole "war" was.

Hard to argue with that! I would choose it too!

 

[Panzerschwein]

I am curious as to what the combat load out for ammunition was for those who carried the M14. How many magazines did you carry? Thanks!

 

[CapnMac]

IIRC, the M-56 "Universal" Ammo pouch was to hold a bandolier of M3 in Garand clips; 6 .30 carbine mags, 2 BAR mags; and either 2 or 3 M-14 mags. (It would hold 3-4 20 round M-16 mags, but worked best with a Carlyle field dressing in the bottom.)

The USMC M-61 "782 gear" had four single M-14 mag pockets, but more pockets could be snapped on the belt to need.

So, the by-the-book load-out was probably 5 magazines

Now, the M-14 could be topped off by using a 5-round stripper clip, so a bandolier could be used, rather than loaded magazines.