Buying my first M1A

[jarhead714]

For # 54, we had m14 rifles in Europe up to the middle of '67 with the AR's being issued in June July etc at the Husterhoh Kasern in Pirmasens, West Germany. Just passing this along. I was in HHQ 59th Ordnance Group, AWSCOM. Any AWSCOM guys out there ? 65 to 67 ?

Psalm 1

M14s were used by the US Army in places like Turkey well into the 70’s. They’ve never left many Navy ships either.

[Sicarius]

Thats if SA survives this last round of anti 2A bs they pulled.
Kevin

[crufflers]

There are old guns that I own because they are collectors and even though they can't compete with modern stuff, I like them because they are unique and have character and history. The M1A isn't one of those. They are a nice box mag semi-auto .308.

[therealnickb]

Might have to get one to run a cowitness red dot.

I tried running a scout and socom with different optics and a cheek riser. I really prefer the M1A without a cheek riser. UltiMak makes it work.

[smle-man]

For # 54, we had m14 rifles in Europe up to the middle of '67 with the AR's being issued in June July etc at the Husterhoh Kasern in Pirmasens, West Germany. Just passing this along. I was in HHQ 59th Ordnance Group, AWSCOM. Any AWSCOM guys out there ? 65 to 67 ?

Psalm 1

M14s hung on in 7th Corps until the early-mid 70s. I don't know how widely they were distributed at that time but they were still around. also M1D rifles with 3ID.

[Mojaveman]

M14s hung on in 7th Corps until the early-mid '70s. I don't know how widely they were distributed at that time but they were still around. Also M1D rifles with 3 ID.

I arrived at VII Corps in Stuttgart in '80 and in addition to the M16A1s there were still dozens of M-14s in our arms room. Got to shoot them too.

[russ69]

Springfield M1As are GTG. I have 4, from a mid 80s SuperMatch to a 2019 Standard, they are all great rifles.

[ScottsBad]

So there is no real reason why this guy hates the M14....he hates how the Army went about testing it and using it(in conflicts he hasnt served in, so hes rehashing what hes heard) and, according to his logic, the argument could be made that the m16 is a terrible weapon because it was rushed into service.
Really this guy has a problem with the US Army and the bureaucracy of how they handle things and takes it out on the rifles. Which, for any of us who have served or worked for the government know, is pretty much normal operations.

Sorry, what he says about the rifle is true, and he is an expert. I know how hard it is when your world view is challenged. The rifle is not a good design.

I almost bought one once.

I'm just trying to steer you to a more practical alternative. Even a FAL would be a better rifle, but the best choice for a practical rifle is an AR in 7.62 NATO.

If you are buying it as a historical piece that gives you pleasure, that makes sense. If you are buying it for practical use, I'd say you have better choices available.

[Tere_Hanges]

Sorry, what he says about the rifle is true, and he is an expert. I know how hard it is when your world view is challenged. The rifle is not a good design.

I almost bought one once.

I'm just trying to steer you to a more practical alternative. Even a FAL would be a better rifle, but the best choice for a practical rifle is an AR in 7.62 NATO.

If you are buying it as a historical piece that gives you pleasure, that makes sense. If you are buying it for practical use, I'd say you have better choices available.

I agree with this with one caveat, there are some real heavy 308ARs like the Aero M5E1. Its too dang heavy to be practical. Go for the lighter designs like the SA Victor, DD5, M&P10, and Windham. Preferably with 16" bbls.

[ScottsBad]

I agree with this with one caveat, there are some real heavy 308ARs like the Aero M5E1. Its too dang heavy to be practical. Go for the lighter designs like the SA Victor, DD5, M&P10, and Windham. Preferably with 16" bbls.

We are on the same page. I don't like the heavy 308 ARs either. But a lot of times guys load up on heavy optics, mounts and stuff, even on the light rifles. I would avoid that.

[smle-man]

Completely.

[smle-man]

Sorry, what he says about the rifle is true, and he is an expert. I know how hard it is when your world view is challenged. The rifle is not a good design.

I almost bought one once.

I'm just trying to steer you to a more practical alternative. Even a FAL would be a better rifle, but the best choice for a practical rifle is an AR in 7.62 NATO.

If you are buying it as a historical piece that gives you pleasure, that makes sense. If you are buying it for practical use, I'd say you have better choices available.

He's an expert? Because he made a video? If I make a video am I then an expert?

These guys seem to say the M14 is a durable rifle that will fire and function with little apparent maintenance.





The rifle is a late 50s execution of the infantry rifle concept from the mid 40s, but that doesn't make it a bad rifle, just not a modern rifle.

[1919_4_ME]

[smle-man]

The M16 would still have been adopted for Vietnam and the T48 issue version would have been removed from service. The Australians who entered the VN war with L1 rifles started issuing M16s to its troops in VN.

I own both the M1A and FAL (multiple copies of both over the years) and the M1A/M14 is significantly more accurate than the FAL. Neither is controllable on full auto and neither is a usable and practical SAW.

The FAL failed the arctic trials portion of the test and in the end the Infantry board couldn't decide on which rifle to standardize. That High Standard and H&R failed to make reliable test versions of the FAL when given the time and drawings probably helped tip the decision in the favor of the T44/M14.

An over simplification of the decision process but we wouldn't have taken T48s to Afghanistan and Iraq if that had been our pre-VN infantry arm. The long distance accuracy of the FAL is just too poor.

[ScottsBad]

He's an expert? Because he made a video? If I make a video am I then an expert?

These guys seem to say the M14 is a durable rifle that will fire and function with little apparent maintenance.





The rifle is a late 50s execution of the infantry rifle concept from the mid 40s, but that doesn't make it a bad rifle, just not a modern rifle.

https://smallarmssolutions.com/about-chris.html

Very experienced. What is an expert anyway? I think Chris is about as close as you can get. You may not like what he says about the M14, but he is referred to frequently in firearms discussions as very knowledgeable player.

Take a look at his other videos, especially the ones discussing older rifles. I am frequently able to find flaws in many youtube video experts, but Small Arms Solutions has been solidly credible.

Do you have more experience in the firearms industry? If so I'd like to hear how you differ and where Chris is wrong. I am always open to other viewpoints...

This is not the first time I've heard the criticisms of the M14 Chris has voiced. Its not new.

BTW - Are you recommending a M14 clone over a 308AR? Or are you just defending the M14?