The poor M14! Neglected diamond!

[Rekraps]

Very few available, always a hit at the range and man ‘o man, you do not want to be on the receiving end of this gun!

[TSMGguy]

The M14 started to get an online bum rap several year ago. Don't know where this came from. My own experiences with it were overwhelmingly positive. It's a great design, accurate and reliable. 

[APEXgunparts]

The M14 faced an uphill battle replacing the M1 Rifle in US Service.
Reading the history of the M14 the Army went so far as to ask the NRA to publish favorable articles about the new rifle.
There were also many production delays because Springfield Armory had lost a lot of expertise in the manufacturing area.
It is why they turned to contractors to build the rifle due to a high reject rate on parts and assemblies.
The M14 was expensive to build and slow to deliver.
It put an end to the US Arsenal system.
Studies showed that the M16 was a better fit for small size Soldiers such as those of South Vietnam.
I have a couple of documents that show the testing done in the mid nineteen sixties.
I wish I could post them here.

Richard

 

OH, I guess I can share the link to the documents:
 

Reports of Engineering, Service, and Service-Type Tests of Small Arms Weapons Systems (SAWS)

 

Field Test Report, AR-15 Armalite Rifle

 

assess the M14, M14 (USAIB), AR-15, AK-47, and SPIW to determine the preferable weapon in meeting the desired military characteristics

Edited April 20, 2025 by APEXgunparts

[DINK]

Gun Jesus did one of his "Forgotten Weapons" videos on the M-14 and how it had a rocky start to its service.

[johnsonlmg41]

11 hours ago, TSMGguy said:

The M14 started to get an online bum rap several year ago. Don't know where this came from. My own experiences with it were overwhelmingly positive. It's a great design, accurate and reliable. 

I don't get it either, but it's a common myth? 

As to cost, in looking at it, it would be cheaper than a FAL to produce but that all depends on your scale, expertise and equipment.    The only things that favor the M16 are the ammo load weight, cost, and reduced recoil for girls/girlymen.  All of those are very significant, however government choices are made first, then justified by reports generated by experts and altered testing after the decision is made.   Guns are generally mission specific, but you can't have a regular army trained in multiple firearms, that's just not a thing.

[TSMGguy]

 

1 hour ago, johnsonlmg41 said:

I don't get it either, but it's a common myth? 

As to cost, in looking at it, it would be cheaper than a FAL to produce but that all depends on your scale, expertise and equipment.    The only things that favor the M16 are the ammo load weight, cost, and reduced recoil for girls/girlymen.  All of those are very significant, however government choices are made first, then justified by reports generated by experts and altered testing after the decision is made.   Guns are generally mission specific, but you can't have a regular army trained in multiple firearms, that's just not a thing.

I blame Macnamara.

To me there is little to choose between the FAL and M14. Both are solid performers.

Edited April 20, 2025 by TSMGguy

[TSMGguy]

3 minutes ago, TSMGguy said:

Delete duplicated post.

 

Edited April 20, 2025 by TSMGguy

[Rekraps]

So, given the M16 and M14 platform, the M16 is so much easier to manage, but there is no replacing the bark of the 7.62x51 round. I think it met its demise with the FA function. You really have to  practice to control that gun on FA.

[TSMGguy]

All of the US Army M14s I saw had the button installed and were incapable of full auto fire as they were. We didn't have the switches and wouldn't have been able to install them. All we ever did with those rifles was clean them and drill with them. They had replaced M1s as drill rifles in the early 1970s. We got no M14 range time but could generally do a fine manual of arms. Not so much with the M16! 

[Rekraps]

10 hours ago, TSMGguy said:

All of the US Army M14s I saw had the button installed and were incapable of full auto fire as they were. We didn't have the switches and wouldn't have been able to install them. All we ever did with those rifles was clean them and drill with them. They had replaced M1s as drill rifles in the early 1970s. We got no M14 range time but could generally do a fine manual of arms. Not so much with the M16! 

Exactly the same case for me at West Point. We all had M14's, for drill only. In the field we used M16's. 

[DARIVS]

I'm still drilling with the King's musket (brown Bess).  Perhaps I should start thinking about an upgrade?  ?

 

[Rekraps]

That sir, is a fine looking weapon!

[TSMGguy]

Deleted.

Edited April 23, 2025 by TSMGguy

[ranger1385]

The M14 is a excellent weapon.  When I was in, the M21 was the sniper weapon we used and we carried M14's during training, so we wouldn't beat up our 21's.  It was pretty accurate and took a beating.  Not a maintenance monster like the M16A1 of the time.  I continued to carry the rifle, even after I was promoted to team leader/squad leader and the assigned weapon was supposed to be a Car-15.  We seldom shot them on full auto.

[jim c 351]

I think the M14 is a fine rifle.

I went thru basic training with the M1  (1962).

When I arrived in Korea the issue rifle was the M14. The squad AR man had the selector, no one else had the selector.

I was a bit of a gun nut even at 18. I figured out that if the selector block was removed from the receiver , the little pin filed off, rotated the bloch 180

degrees and reassembled, the rifle would shoot FA only. 

One day the tank platoon was headed for the range to practise with the M3 and 1911. I ask the LT if I could accompany them with my M14. Permission was granted.

I moved to the far left side of the range  and commenced firing.  Halfway thru the second mag I became aware of people behind me. When I looked behind me i saw the LT and several buck sgt's.

The Lt asked me, a pvt, for permission to shoot my rifle.To make  a long story short the Lt sent a sgt back for more 308 ammo. A great time was had by all.

Now I have a SA M1a and its a nice rifle,

Jim C

 

[Rekraps]

20 hours ago, jim c 351 said:

I think the M14 is a fine rifle.

I went thru basic training with the M1  (1962).

When I arrived in Korea the issue rifle was the M14. The squad AR man had the selector, no one else had the selector.

I was a bit of a gun nut even at 18. I figured out that if the selector block was removed from the receiver , the little pin filed off, rotated the bloch 180

degrees and reassembled, the rifle would shoot FA only. 

One day the tank platoon was headed for the range to practise with the M3 and 1911. I ask the LT if I could accompany them with my M14. Permission was granted.

I moved to the far left side of the range  and commenced firing.  Halfway thru the second mag I became aware of people behind me. When I looked behind me i saw the LT and several buck sgt's.

The Lt asked me, a pvt, for permission to shoot my rifle.To make  a long story short the Lt sent a sgt back for more 308 ammo. A great time was had by all.

Now I have a SA M1a and its a nice rifle,

Jim C

 

Fun times! My M14 is an original three digit SN SA factory select... lovely gun. But my go to for neighborhood riots, roach riots and such will be my SA M1A's. I prefer the Scout Squad, but have standard and SOCOM's also. They NEVER misfire, never jam, bark like hell and hit whatever you aim at. Who could ask for more!