Your gun sucks
This time, it’s the M14.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
February 2nd, 2015 at 6:24 pm
The M14 is OK, but it is damned hard to accurize.
The DCM and Match crowd eventually abandoned it for top level competition. A rifle that degrades to rack-grade accuracy just because someone accidentally picked it up by the fore-stock is not competitive.
For half the money, I can make a better rifle out of one of the new AR-10 descendants. Hell, my FAL is a better rifle, in my completely unprofessional opinion.
February 2nd, 2015 at 6:30 pm
But, but… it has the shoulder thing that goes up! That makes it apocalyptically deadly, doesn’t it? Yeah, I kinda like my M1A, but I’m not figuring on taking that out in the field, much more likely my old 2A1 Ishi Enfield, bolt and all.
February 2nd, 2015 at 6:34 pm
Hmm, all the specific problems listed are manufacturing sloppiness, supply problems and ammunition problems (and the cartridge is still a NATO cartridge used on several other platforms, you’d think the ammo issues would manifest in those too). Except one; the stock bedding deteriorates every time you take it down, which is true. The link to the pdf that reportedly gives us the real scoop is broken.
If it’s a modified M1, which it is, and the M1 is great and the M14 sucks, I’d like to know specifically why. There can’t be more than one, or two or three, actual design issues, i.e. not related to manufacturing sloppiness, that make the difference. And the M1 HAS to be a ton more expensive to produce – it’s the same operating system, but considerably more complicated, with more machined parts. The safety is given as a problem on the M14, but the identical safety is not given as a problem on the supposedly faultless M1. Same goes for stock bedding– They use the same system, but one sucks and the other is golden (“The best battle impliment ever devised” and all that).
As far as cost goes; try getting an AR in .308 compared to a new M1A and tell me there’s a significant difference. Or is the AR more?
How many viable (i.e. readily available and supported) choices are there in a .308 semi, and what are the cost differences? A .308 Saiga or Vepr are good choices, and probably cheaper than a .308 AR.
One guy in the article said he carried an M60 out of choice, but the M14 and its ammo were too heavy. Uh…
And yes; I own an M1A personally, which stays perfectly safe in its case while one of my light carbines goes along with me in my truck. The differences to me are weight, length and user inferface. Any accuracy difference within 100 yards (for a PDW) is a non issue, and at this point I can’t tell you for sure that there are any, without getting out my dial calipers.
It contains a slew of typos and other editing problems that make it hard to follow at times, and a few contradictions, but it’s an interesting article.
February 2nd, 2015 at 9:37 pm
Hey Lyle,
You can build a 1 MOA AR-10 for less than $850. They are lighter than an M1A too. Check out palmetto.
I have had two M1A’a and like them a lot, but the AR-10 is a better platform.
And the SCAR 17 blows the M1A out of the water.
February 3rd, 2015 at 11:03 am
I dropped an absurd sum of money into what I hoped would be the Ultimate™ M14. Seriously, I’ve bought cars for less. Decent cars.
Still haven’t managed to get it to shoot 1MOA yet, and it’s not the loose nut behind the trigger.
February 3rd, 2015 at 2:52 pm
Interesting article, but several wrong points along with some valid points. And yes,I have several including one I compete with across-the-course. The handguard statement confuses the accurized M1 with the accurized M14. The M14 handguard is not the fragile flower depicted. The accurized M14 is far tougher than an M1 similarly modified. The weak point is the bedding as stated, however there is no real need to take it in and out of the bedding (read stock) any more than once a year. And this is with firing several thousand rounds in that time. For a sniper grade rifle it’s no different than the M40. You’ll burn out the barrel accuracy-wise first. Typically it’s skim-bedded when you re-barrel if you don’t tear it down completely every time you shoot it.
The results of the testing done to random samples of rack-grade M14s mentioned documented Q.C. problems with H&R rifles especially but also Winchester and some Springfield rifles very early in the production cycle. Later tests done prior to project cancellation were not as bad. No production flaws involved TRW produced M14s that I’m aware of. The M1 had far more teething issues at that stage of production and had a single-source manufacturer until Winchester was brought online.
Yes they are hideously expensive, heavy, and require a knowledgeable builder to bring them on-par with an M40 or a match conditioned AR. The mousegun rules the HP community because its cheaper to shoot and maintain, easier to shoot rapids, and single-loaded 80gr round can compete in moderate to heavy wind at 600 yards, although you can’t stuff it in a magazine. And yes, I shoot mostly an AR to be competitive.