Why did the US army pick the M14 over the FAL?

[Neo-Luddite]

Nightcrawler--I got your point--I did like reading your additional explanation. Thanks for posting it.

Really, it's just a prejudice---I rationally know the FAL is a great platform.

As for use in extreme cold--I figured no lube would work best like it does on most weapons.

 

[Old Time Hunter]

The M14 was adopted when we still had "real" men carrying them, their concern for weight was a secondary consideration and still gave homage to the one round and down theory. The newer stuff is for the girls and girly, girly guys.

 

[Slamfire]

As for weight, if you look up the specs for the current M16 variant, which is the A3, it weighs as much as an M14. But fires the .223.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Most people don't realize it, but the modern American soldier carries anywhere from 150% to 200% more than the WWI American soldier.

 

[AndyC]

I'm a die-hard FAL-fan, but I'll use anything in combat that's reliable in whatever current theater I'm in.

FAL was made in Belgium, M14 was made in the US - of course people are going to be patriotic and buy local (shame that the Brits are still stuck with that SA80 horror of theirs, although it's admittedly gotten better of late).

 

[kcmarine]

As for weight, if you look up the specs for the current M16 variant, which is the A3, it weighs as much as an M14. But fires the .223.

Yes, but you can stick more crap on an M16A3 than you ever could on an M14. And you can still carry more rounds. And the M16 just looks cooeh.

But really, that has nothing to do with the original subject. When you balance out the pros and cons of each rifle against each other, there isn't really a victor. The real reasons that the M14 got adopted were that it was an AMERICAN design made in AMERICA, and the FAL was just too new for the Ordinance Corps to accept. They liked the traditional look of the M14, and this plastic and steel contraption from Belgium was just too out there.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

FAL was made in Belgium, M14 was made in the US - of course people are going to be patriotic and buy local

Several people have made comments about the FAL being foreign, but if it had been adopted, wouldn't it have likely been licensed to be produced in the USA? Kind of like the Beretta M9 is produced by Beretta in the USA?

And also, aren't some of the current rifles the army uses produced by FN?

 

[kcmarine]

Well, the FN rifles that we use now and the Berettas we use now all have one thing in common: we use them now. My guess is that the attitude towards foreign arms was a bit different back in the 50's.

 

[Correia]

The newer stuff is for the girls and girly, girly guys.

Yep, because when you're carrying 300+ rounds of ammunition, a helmet, body armor, SAPI plates, a belt for the M240, some grenades, and it is 122 degrees, then you're a girly man.

Give me a break.

 

[Evil Monkey]

Glad Correia dealt with that. My response would have had me banned.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

We've adopted foreign weapons before. Our very first US-adopted Infantry musket, the M1795, was a copy of the French Charleville.

The famous "minnie ball" was a French invention (much modified by Captain Burton). We also used many British Enfield rifle-muskets in the Civil War.

The Army's first smokeless powder rifle, the M1892 Krag, was a foreign invention. The rifle that replaced it, the M1903 Springfield, was a modified version of the M98 Mauser. The cartridge, the .30-03, was based on the 7x57 Mauser. It was modified slightly to match German developments to produce the .30-06.

During WWI we bought so many M1917 Enfields (a slightly modified version of the British P13 and P14) that we seriously considered scrapping the Springfield and adopting the Enfield as our basic issue weapon after the war.

 

[Oohrah]

I trained with the M-1 Garrand and M 14 and would take the Garand
in most cases. During that period, shorty there after, the M-16. That
one was just above hand to hand in most cases if you were lucky. So
then I would rate it not at all unless it was the only thing available. Surely
look for something to steal or take away some other. Those never reliable,
poor accuracy with a spray and pray function. The 14s would have worked
great with a 3 burst instead of full. However, it's up to the man behind
trigger to milk the burst, the same as the BAR or 60s. Proven many times,
directed semiauto provides many more hits, than full auto due to better
control. The 14s are magazine fed Garands with a different upgraded gas
system. Early ones were Garands converted by Berettas converted. Believe
Model 59s was the model designation. Can't argue calibers cause it isn't
fair to those who are not versed in 30 Cal, and only witness what they have
used. I believe that our troops were totally out gunned in hilly jungleland
with the other side using 7.62x39s vs our first up M-16s. Sorry, but never
heard any one with a choice, not want a .30 Cal.

 

[Limeyfellow]

(shame that the Brits are still stuck with that SA80 horror of theirs, although it's admittedly gotten better of late).

Hey now, sure it took twenty years but the L85a2 works damn fine now. Reliable and extremely accurate. Could have done with fixing it in the first place properly but you know how it goes.