August 18, 2014, 01:02 PM | #26 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 27, 2013
Posts: 1,139
|
Where are the small parts coming from? My understanding was that the older M1A rifles were 95% GI parts built on Springfield's receiver. Over time, those parts became scarce, and the current guns use a lot of cast parts that don't work or hold up as well.
If the good parts dried up for SA a decade ago, where are these other companies getting quality parts? |
August 18, 2014, 01:11 PM | #27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 12, 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,336
|
Quote:
When it comes to M14 pattern rifles, the M1A outsells all of the others combined 3:1 In other words, of the 400K M14 pattern rifles in the US, 300K are M1As. .
__________________
The History and Development of the M14 EBR Last edited by SR420; August 18, 2014 at 01:27 PM. |
|
August 18, 2014, 09:56 PM | #28 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 27, 2013
Posts: 1,139
|
So are the better companies also making their own small parts, or have they held onto that many GI parts for the last 20+ years?
|
August 18, 2014, 10:18 PM | #29 |
Member In Memoriam
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
|
FWIW, the name issue as I understand it. BATFE says a rifle marked "M14" is a machinegun IF it is also marked as made by the government Springfield Armory or one of the original contractors (Winchester, H&R or TRW). So it is the total marking, not just the "M14" part. So any of those other companies can make an "M14" and mark it that way, since they were not makers of the M14 machinegun.
Apparently Springfield Armory had a problem; they insisted they weren't the original Springfield Armory, and BATFE said the name could be confusing, so they compromised on M1A. If H&R or TRW or Winchester wanted to make a semi-auto "M14", they would also have to call it something else. Again FWIW, the Army at one time planned to modify M14's to a semi-auto configuration, with the FA parts welded, and release them for sale to NRA members through the DCM. Some M14's were actually modified and marked M14NM. Approval for the sale had been cleared by the President (an NRA Life Member), the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Treasury. An announcement was to be made in the American Rifleman in the January 1964 issue. We all know what happened on November 22, 1963, and the new president ordered plans for the sale to be scrapped, along with future sales of M1903A4 sniper rifles with scope sights. The M1903A4's were later sold, but the scopes were broken up and the lenses given to schools for "educational purposes." Jim |
August 18, 2014, 10:34 PM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 12, 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,336
|
Quote:
__________________
The History and Development of the M14 EBR |
|
August 19, 2014, 09:25 AM | #31 |
Junior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2014
Posts: 5
|
Most of the commercial parts are coming from wayne machine and tool in taiwan these days. Some companies like Bula and LRB are making bolts.
warriors in need....that's funny. and the crazy horse and/or rebuilt rifles by sei for the military is not in the hundreds....or much above hundred... last time I heard anyway.... Next thing you know, these 'warriors in need' will be wanting to put the vortex on the mini-gun barrels so the enemy can't see those flashes as well either. the funniest thing is excellent customer service from sei.... have you actually read what happened to many, many guys yet?...I don't think they are making it up, I have seen the proof and emails and paid and dated receipts from the vendor. I don't consider what they did to people, loyal past customers included, like myself, as good customer service, let alone excellent. just my opinion. |
August 19, 2014, 09:29 AM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 12, 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,336
|
It's funny that you find facts funny, thankfully you are in the minority. Just my opinion.
__________________
The History and Development of the M14 EBR |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|