Want a 30 cal battle rifle .. can I complain just a little?

[SR420]

You are welcome.

The AR10 never shot as well as my M14s either... I just didn't see what all the fuss was about.

[44 AMP]

But, I think the AR10 style rifle is the best choice today in this category if you're going to actually fight with it. It has all the modern features that you may want.

A) what "modern features" would those be, and how are any of them a significant aid to using the rifle in combat?

B) What if I don't want those features???

Here's an important point, I'm not in the military, so, what ever I do is not supported by the military. Now, this does mean I do get to make my own choices about weapons and gear, but it also means that I pay for them out of my own pocket and there is NO maint OR supply support except what I provide for my self.

Also no squad of guys to fight with me, no air support, no artillery on call. no one with a belt fed GPMG or .50cal for suppressive fire support, and no medivac. I can count on NOTHING except being on my own.

That is, for me, a good reason not to choose the AR10 type rifle as my combat rifle. It may, to you, have 'modern features" you feel are benefits, but to me it LACKS some rather important "old school" features I feel are necessary and beneficial.

So, please, lay out, point by point where and why you think the AR10 is the best rifle to choose "if you are going to fight with it", and I'll tell you where you are wrong, where I think you are wrong, and where what might not be wrong for you is wrong for me. Game on!

[HiBC]

Also no squad of guys to fight with me, no air support, no artillery on call. no one with a belt fed GPMG or .50cal for suppressive fire support, and no medivac. I can count on NOTHING except being on my own.

That is, for me, a good reason not to choose the AR10 type rifle as my combat rifle. It may, to you, have 'modern features" you feel are benefits, but to me it LACKS some rather important "old school" features I feel are necessary and beneficial.

I guess I'm dense. I honestly don't understand the point you are trying to make,and so I'm not prepared to discuss it.

For those compelled to nitpick : I'm fully aware of the differences between the Armalite AR-10 and the M-110/ SR-25 / DPMS/etc and the M-14/M1-A .

I'm not going to try to write like some lawyer to keep you from getting triggered. Its too much keyboarding. Sometimes it matters,sometimes it doesn't . In this discussion,it does not matter. If you want to get your thong in a knot about it,fine. Please write to your therapist. I don't need to hear it.

I admit,I don't own an M-14,and I'm not in the loop. I don't need M-14 parts. I don't keep track.

I can go to Aero and get "M-110" (AR-10) parts. No problem. Magpul,C-products,etc. I don't understand the problem.

Once again... this reminds me of having a beer with a devoted Harley rider.

There is nothing to be gained in the discussion.

I ABSOLUTELY believe our guns are one place we ought to be able the excersise our preference,"just because". It needs no justification.

With the M-110/AR-10 , I bought one that ws 7.9 lbs,NIB. (DPMS LR308L)

Out of the box,just over 1 MOA. I know,you aren't impressed. Thats OK. It meets my needs.

The original magazines are a fail. As Colorado had passed a "over 15 round ban" about the time I decided to order the rifle,I made a "Grandfather Clause" order of magazines from "C" products. They work. Laser welded thin wall spring tempered stainless in black.

My trigger is fine. If I want a Gisselle, all it takes is $ and R+R a couple of pins. IIRC, I ay have put a Rock River NM in it.

If I want a Kreiger bbl, all it takes is $. I have the tools.

Furniture,Barbie Bling,etc,etc, junk mail in my inbox every day.

I sincerely support you enjoying your M1A/M-14. Its a great rifle!!

If I was starting over,I'd still go the AR-10/M-110 route. I'm happy.

Regarding full auto,early1970's I was in an ROTC outfit that trained seriously.

Ft Carson sent us Hueys for Airmobile FTX's. We accompanied the 19th Special Forces (Guard) unit on exercises. The year some of my classmates had the option of going to Airborne School or Ranger School as an option to summer camp,they came home with 3 Airborne Wings and two Ranger tabs.
We mostly trained between 7000 and 10,000 feet. Fall,winter,and Spring quarters. Plenty of cold nights and uphill.

OK.I was the class behind them. The USA left Vietnam. I became a machinist.

Aside from carrying the M-14 in training, I rangefired the M-14E2 beside the BAR and the 1919A6 and the M-60.

Long time ago. I've had an AR-10,and an FAL double/triple on me. It was fixed immediately,but I agree effective,controlled full auto infantry rifles in 7.62x51 are not in my experience. Seems silly to offer . In my experience,the general issue M-14 did NOT have the switch. AFAIK, as an infantry rifle,the full auto M-14 is pretty moot.(Except the E-2)

In my very limited experience, flipping the buttplate doohickey up,using the bipod and forend grip,preloading everything, its no problem to control full auto M-14E2 fire center chest of an E-silouhette at 100 meters.
With a standard infantry M-14, the second round is probably a miss at 50yds.
Quicker to recover semi auto and send a second shot.

I would not want a full auto AR-10.either.

[rickyrick]

I wouldn’t want a .308 AR.

If I were to go into battle with a rifle chambered in something in the full sized .30 caliber range... I’d want a bolt handle, charging handle or whatever it would be called, that
I could beat both ways.

[SR420]

Full auto burst fire from the M14 made easy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qv1O9VOpjQ

[SR420]

And lets not ignore the fact that the issued M14 has moved beyond the wood stocks of years gone by. The best M14s issued were M14EBR-RI in EBR chassis stocks and Crazy Horse M14s in modified GI synthetic stocks. These rifles didn't reach troops until sometime around 2010, that's when a decent amount of money was finally spent on improving what had been in use since 1957 or so.

[44 AMP]

Mine hasn't moved beyond the wood stock, and I don't want it to. In fact, I removed the black fiberglass stock it was wearing when I first got it. Personal preference...

These rifles didn't reach troops until sometime around 2010, that's when a decent amount of money was finally spent on improving what had been in use since 1957 or so.

I'd point out that the M14 hasn't really been "in use since 1957 or so" since when the M16 became the issue rifle, the M14s were removed from service. And for the next 30 years or so were not really "in use" as a standard issue rifle. I understand the Navy got to keep there. and they did serve in use onboard ships, but the rest were turned in and warehoused, until a certain administration had many (most?) cut up and destroyed.

After which, the military rediscovered the fact that an actual rifle between .22 and .50 can be a useful things and began to modernize some of the few remining M14s to modern standards.
Of course, that's just my opinion, and worth what you paid for it

[Reloadron]

I'd point out that the M14 hasn't really been "in use since 1957 or so" since when the M16 became the issue rifle, the M14s were removed from service.

I went through Marine Corps boot camp in April through June of 1969 and we were issued and trained with the M14. My next Marine Corps duty station was Cherry Point NC and again I was issued an M14 which I qualified with again. Marines had rifle qualification once a year and when your time came you and your rifle were on the range. It wasn't till 1972 when I got to Vietnam that I was issued an M16A1.

My understanding was Marine Corps Recruit Depot Paris Island SC started issuing the M16 before MCRD San Diego where I went but those were well after 1957. Possibly you meant 1967 verse 1957? When I returned from Vietnam I was assigned to Marine Barracks NAS North Island CA and by then it was all M16 till I left after 9 years service.

Qual Day June of 1969. I am shooting prone at the 500 meter line. I am the one shooting left handed. Shooting the M14.


Ron

[SR420]

M14 in service:
1959–present.
1959–1964 as the standard U.S. service rifle.

"1957" was a typo by me.

[Sunflowers+Sixguns]

I'd love a BM-59, but those aren't exactly common.

[44 AMP]

Apologies for not being clear.

1959–1964 as the standard U.S. service rifle.

This is the point I was overfocused on.

I did not mean no M14s were in use somewhere in the service after the M16 was adopted, but that the rifles the M16 replaced were generally withdrawn from service and so I didn't feel the M14 was really in continuous use. I probably should have said large scale use or something like that. My bad.

[Reloadron]

OK, now it makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

Ron

[SR420]

Clarification for those that missed it.

The M14 has been in continuous service since 1959... it is still in service today.

Matter of fact: With the lone exception of the Springfield M1903, the M14 rifle is
the longest serving rifle used by units of U.S. Armed forces

[JustJake]

Clarification for those that missed it.
The M14 has been in continuous service since 1959... it is still in service today.
Matter of fact: With the lone exception of the Springfield M1903, the M14 rifle is
the longest serving rifle used by units of U.S. Armed forces

Well, if we're using the "in service" standard, the M1 Garand served from 1936 at least until the early years of Vietnam where some "Kennedy advisers" carried it along side the RSVN troops they were there to "advise" and train.

Not saying the M1 served longer than the M14, just pointing out the longevity.

[44 AMP]

As long as we count "limited service" as "in service" a number of arms have long histories. IF we look at how long a weapons serves as the primary issue arm (in its class) then those numbers are often quite different.

Sometimes an arm's service longevity is cut short by changes in technology, sometimes by changes in mission requirements and sometimes for entirely political or politico/economic reasons.

And some guns and cartridges soldier on and on, because nothing newer does what they do, as well as they do, as cheaply as they do.

I believe Browning's .50BMG round and "Ma Deuce" are approaching the full 100 year mark soon, having been in continuous, uninterrupted full scale service use since their adoption. Even the beancounters haven't managed to kill it just yet.

[SR420]

.30 caliber Battle Rifle.

[FairWarning]

Thanks for reminding me I still need to buy my first M14......and I've already spent way too much lately.

[44 AMP]

They aren't going to get cheaper....

[rickyrick]

This thread has me considering building an AR10 style, just because I have a ton of .308 hanging around.

[FairWarning]

This thread has me considering building an AR10 style, just because I have a ton of .308 hanging around.

Or you could sell that stockpile of .308 and buy a new HOUSE. If I didn't already have several .308s, I wouldn't enter that arena now. I saw a box of 20 .308 FMJs going for $50 today!

[Reloadron]

I saw a box of 20 .308 FMJs going for $50 today!

Midway is selling 308 Win Fiocchi for $25.99 or about $1.30 a round. It's in stock at this writing. Also 200 rounds for $239.99. Glad I have plenty of brass, powder, primers and bullets.

Ron

[jonnyc]

Offered at, but surely not "going" for $50...at least not to any normal sane person.

[101combatvet]

Who made the M1A receiver, and what type of barrel does it have? Is it new?

[101combatvet]

Originally Posted by SR420

And lets not ignore the fact that the issued M14 has moved beyond the wood stocks of years gone by. The best M14s issued were M14EBR-RI in EBR chassis stocks and Crazy Horse M14s in modified GI synthetic stocks. These rifles didn't reach troops until sometime around 2010, that's when a decent amount of money was finally spent on improving what had been in use since 1957 or so.

More like McMillan stocks. They were fielded way before 2010.

[4V50 Gary]

Even with better stocks, the M-14 has the disadvantage of more moving parts than an AR action. That's more things that must have the same harmonic frequency every time to have consistent results. The latter is easier to accomplish with the AR10.