The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: Semi-automatics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 25, 2021, 02:17 PM   #51
SR420
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,279
There has been a lot of fake news created & spread about the Chinese M14 rifles, but know that Chinese M14 receivers are all hammer forged and excellent hosts for dream rifle builds. If you are going to have a problem it will be with the Chinese bolts, this is why many have undergone a USGI bolt conversion. Ron Smith at Smith Enterprise Inc. has performed extensive testing on Chinese M14s... contact him if you wish to dispute what I have said here.

Springfield Armory Inc. M1A receivers are all cast, as are all Fulton Armory M14 receivers... I hear that the new batch of F.A. receivers are excellent.

I like the M1 Garand (not the commercial version S.A.I. sold several years ago, those were crap)... if I couldn't own an M14 then there would be a reason for me to own a Garand, but that's not the case.
SR420 is offline  
Old July 25, 2021, 06:34 PM   #52
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 23,982
Quote:
I have my Grandfathers Springfield 03A3 that is very accurate for a WW1/WW2 battle rifle. I would gladly take it to battle without hesitation.
Glad you have Granpa's 03A3. The rifle in the picture isn't an 03A3, its an 03.


Quote:
There has been a lot of fake news created & spread about the Chinese M14 rifles, but know that Chinese M14 receivers are all hammer forged and excellent hosts for dream rifle builds.
Ok, today they're good, you say, but were they always?? I don't remember it that way...

Quote:
Springfield Armory Inc. M1A receivers are all cast, as are all Fulton Armory M14 receivers...
Again, kind of the same thing, today they're cast (and nothing wrong with that if done right) but weren't the original Springfield Armory M1As made with forged receivers?? Didn't the switch to cast happen later? Along with new made parts when the supply of GI parts ran out?

I don't know for certain, but its what I remember, though I could be in error. Truthfully it never mattered to me, and once I got mine, I didn't bother to keep up on what the company was doing, or how, in any detail. Other than thinking they stupidly priced a good $500 rifle over $1,000 when they got more popular. Today, some are going over $2k which is sad for those now in the buying market.

Now, here's a trivia question, do you know you can cock the M1/M1A without working the bolt???

Don't know why one would want to, but it can be done.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 25, 2021, 10:36 PM   #53
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 7,534
Pull the trigger guard down.
HiBC is offline  
Old July 25, 2021, 11:34 PM   #54
chadio
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2011
Posts: 795
Quote:
...Today, some are going over $2k which is sad for those now in the buying market....
(raises hand)
__________________
Ex - Navy, Persian Gulf Veteran. Loved shooting the M14, 1911, M60, M2
chadio is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 01:43 AM   #55
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 23,982
Cgngrats HiBC, you got it on one!
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 07:41 AM   #56
JustJake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2020
Posts: 241
Quote:
Again, kind of the same thing, today they're cast (and nothing wrong with that if done right) but weren't the original Springfield Armory M1As made with forged receivers?? Didn't the switch to cast happen later? Along with new made parts when the supply of GI parts ran out?
There's a reason the military only used forged receivers and USGI parts.
__________________
I use the Jake Brake every chance I get.
Don't care if it annoys you.
Hear me now?!

Last edited by JustJake; July 26, 2021 at 09:44 AM.
JustJake is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 08:51 AM   #57
SR420
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,279
Springfield Armory Inc. never used forged receivers, all M1As use cast receivers and there is nothing wrong with a well made cast receiver. The cast parts Springfield and other makers are using since the supply of GI parts dried up can cause problems, but the receivers & barrels are typically good

The Chinese M14s were always good, but they have not been imported into the U.S. for decades so you have to buy the rifle used.


Norinco & Poly Tech M-14/S rifles


A really nice M14 / M1A that's built by an M14 armorer using USGI and SEI parts is more like $3,000 and up... GI parts kits sell for over $1,500 by themselves.
SR420 is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 09:46 AM   #58
JustJake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2020
Posts: 241
Does anyone remember those cracky, out of spec, Lithgow cast receivers?

Total junk ... KABOOMs! waiting to happen.
__________________
I use the Jake Brake every chance I get.
Don't care if it annoys you.
Hear me now?!
JustJake is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 11:53 AM   #59
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 23,982
Quote:
GI parts kits sell for over $1,500 by themselves.
I realize its supply and demand, and the changing "value" of the dollar, but that much money for a GI parts kit just seem beyond rational.

When the MacNamara defense dept killed the M14, parts stayed in the Army supply system for several years (some might even still be there) but eventually the bulk of them got sold off as surplus, or worse, scrap.

Nor was there any great interest in them as surplus parts, UNTIL Springfield Armory began putting together rifles with them, and those rifles became quite popular. So popular as to use up the supply of surplus parts over a few years, and that demand hasn't gone away. If anything, it has increased over the years.

To a certain segment of the gun owning population, the M14 (M1A) is the last "real" rifle the US fielded. The M16 is designated a rifle by the Army, so technically it is a rifle, but to some folks, a carbine sized "rifle" firing a .22 caliber cartridge just isn't in the same class. (this has nothing to do with how well the M16 has worked in military service, which is and should be its own separate topic)

It's just an opinion, but it is an opinion quite a few people back with their wallets, enough so that there are $2-3K being asked and gotten.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 12:24 PM   #60
HWS
Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2018
Posts: 63
FAL, SCAR, you can spend a fortune. But if you want a battle rifle for self defense, how can you go wrong with the A-10?
HWS is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 02:03 PM   #61
JustJake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2020
Posts: 241
Quote:
To a certain segment of the gun owning population, the M14 (M1A) is the last "real" rifle the US fielded. The M16 is designated a rifle by the Army, so technically it is a rifle, but to some folks, a carbine sized "rifle" firing a .22 caliber cartridge just isn't in the same class. (this has nothing to do with how well the M16 has worked in military service, which is and should be its own separate topic)
On the nomenclature, be advised there's a 1967 report which interviewed about 100 Marine combat veterans as to the weapons they used in combat in da 'Nam.

The compilers of this report asked a lot of questions as to the performance of the weapons, and what improvements the Marines thought were needed or not needed, and what could be improved upon or upgraded in the way of materials used, supporting equipment (like magazines and carriers), body armor and vests, etc.

In their responses, the Marines clearly termed the M14 as a "rifle," and the M16 as a "carbine."

In fact, in the summary of comments/extra information at the end of the report, the lighter, shorter, "carbine"-nature of the M16 gets mentioned in connection with "jungle fighting," where the Marines engaged the enemy close-up, versus longer-range engagements where they might be shooting at enemy soldiers across rice paddies, 300-400yds away, which is where the rifle-size M14 excelled.
__________________
I use the Jake Brake every chance I get.
Don't care if it annoys you.
Hear me now?!
JustJake is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 03:56 PM   #62
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 7,534
I'm not questioning the battle worthiness of a US Soldier or Marine with an M-14 ,M-16.or M-4 anywhere in the world.
Its my opinion the M-14 was developed primarily with Europe,NATO,and the USSR in mind.
That sort of war did not happen.
Vietnam did.
I'm not a Veteran. I'm not going to blow smoke. I may ask a few questions.

No matter which rifle you carry,or how tough you are,there is a limit to how much you can carry. As things work out with Murphy's Law , The troop's stroll through the countryside may go according to plan, or not. It ain't over till its over. Reenforcement,pickup,resupply,etc can be great when they work.
As I mentioned,my brother was a Special Forces Medic in an A-camp in 1968.
Just a little bit south and west of DaNang,if I picture it right.
He mentioned the CIDG forces might not be real dependable under fire. As a medic,he rigged a WW2 BAR belt into his web gear. He carried 24 loaded magazines going out. (along with maybe a few hundred 7.62 linked)
So,480 rounds of 5.56 in aluminum magazines. Running out of bullets is a bad thing.

How many loaded steel M-14 magazines can you carry into battle?

Two horrible things to run out of....Water and ammunition.

Vietnam is over, Remember "Blackhawk Down?" Things didn't quite go as planned. Those Rangers ran the Mogedeshu Mile pretty much out of ammo. They growled.
Suppose it would have gone better with M-14's?

War gets fought different these days. The USA typically enjoys total air superiority (weather permitting)

No need to waste troop lives on the ground,fire and maneuver when it can be avoided. The A-10 Warthog, AC-130, Apaches,Drones,Hellfires get used a lot on those 400 or 500 yard targets. Many units have sniper/sharpshooter capability.

As I said,I'm not a Veteran. I do not know for sure...But I suspect if the brilliant leaders in Washington DC decided all the M-4 and M-16 type rifles were to be turned in and everyone was going back to the M-14

There would be massive resistance.

The M-16/M-4 package has been carried about 55 years.No rifle is perfect in every situation. But,for those 55 years, what rifle has been able to kick our....shins?

FWIW,I hold my Garand in high regard, great rifle!! The M-16/M-4 has served longer, Its outgrown its teething problems.

The early B-17's, P-38's, and P-51's had their growing pains. They went on to serve very well.
HiBC is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 04:32 PM   #63
Reloadron
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,674
Quote:
Want a 30 cal battle rifle .. can I complain just a little?
So I have found 4 that trip my trigger
I like rifles and have plenty of rifles, all of which I like very much. My own AR10 is an Armalite early rifle. Armalite simply because when my wife gave me the gun as a gift Armalite was about the only guys marketing the things. My M1A is an early Springfield Armory flavor and again at the time the selection of who made them was limited. None of this even matters.

Rifles just like a good truck or motorcycle are an extension of our personal taste. I drive a GMC Yukon Denali and ride a 92 Harley and all of that matters not. What matters is that you like the rifle you choose to buy. The rifle in your own words needs to trip your trigger and not mine or anyone else. Hold the rifles you mentioned and see what fits you. I have seen rifles, trucks and motorcycles that if my dogs had faces as ugly as the rifles I have seen others with I would shave their butts and walk them backwards.

You choose a 308 be prepared to pay at least a buck a round or learn to start rolling your own. Now if you don't see that happening then I suggest you look for something else. The only rifle I have that groups well with off the shelf factory ammunition is my M1A using Federal Gold Medal Match 168 grain and 175 grain which last I saw was about $1.75 to $2.00 per round.

We can debate the merits or inferiority endlessly of different rifles but again the only person who need be happy with your decision is you. It will be your rifle but of course if it's buck ugly I'll just quietly laugh. Now go buy something.

Ron
Reloadron is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 06:56 PM   #64
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 23,982
Quote:
As a medic,he rigged a WW2 BAR belt into his web gear. He carried 24 loaded magazines going out. (along with maybe a few hundred 7.62 linked)
So,480 rounds of 5.56 in aluminum magazines. Running out of bullets is a bad thing.

How many loaded steel M-14 magazines can you carry into battle?
A couple of points you might not be aware of, but first the last question...

How many steel M14 mags got carried? What was issued, and then some more, when possible.

Spoke with a Marine who was there 65-67, ALL were armed with M-14s. Combat load when they hit the beach was 5 loaded magazines, 4 in pouches, one in the rifle. So, that's 100rnds, which squares pretty well with what the WWII GI carried for his M1 Garand, 96 rounds in 8rnd clips.

He also said when they got to their units, their gunnies scrounged up two more mags for each of them, so in country their total was 7 20rnd mags. Now, that is a bit of weight, no denying that, but remember what they were (Marines) and what they were using (M-14s locked in semi auto mode).

Which brings me to the next point, something non-veterans and even some veterans don't always consider. Its not just the amount of ammo you have and can carry but its ALSO how fast you use it up.

and this is a result of tactics, training, the equipment you have and the pressure of the situation.

So, consider this, the usual figure is our 5.56mm round is half the weight of our 7.62mm NATO round. Which is usually stated that one can carry twice as much 5.56 as 7.62 for the same amount of weight. This is true, no question. And this is where the discussion is usually ended, leaving the 5.56mm with the apparent advantage when it comes to firepower available. And, this is ALSO true, as far as it goes.

Now, factor in, if you can what the difference in sustained fire would be when your 5.56 shoots twice or 3 times as fast (or more) than the bigger round and gun.

AND the effect on the rate of expenditure of ammo when almost everyone has a full auto M16. Combat is chaos, and even the best trained soldiers have trouble (as a group) with fire discipline, and that's even worse when those troops are new to full auto rifles, and new to combat in particular.

I was in a few years later (75) and our issue load for the M16 was 7 30 rnd sticks (originally 20rnd mags, changed to 30s once I left CONUS) two pouches of 3 plus one in the gun. SO that's 210rnds. TWICE the basic load those Marines had with their M14s or the WWII GI had for his M1 Garand.

BUT...damn if it didn't go fast. Faster than the 100 rnds of 7.62,... not always, but rather ...often.

Because we were shooting more rounds faster (full auto, high cyclic rate, low recoil weapons) we would burn through rounds FAST, and sometimes too fast for the available supply and harsh discipline was needed to keep from running out too soon.

Now, for what its worth, EVERYONE carried as much extra ammo as they could hump. Riflemen carried extra belts for the M60s, as well as as many extra mags as they could. Medics carried extra ammo for the unit, and so did good officers. Nam was a pretty wet place, so running out of water wasn't the concern it was in the desert, but running out of ammo always was.

History is FULL of examples of higher command failing to adequately support and supply troops on the ground, both in small and in large degrees. Pick what ever example you want, failure of adequate supply and resupply is not due to the size of the rifle round your troops carry.

the point I'm trying to make (probably poorly) is that a smaller lighter round that lets you carry twice as much ammo isn't the benefit it seems to be when you use up that ammo at 3 or 4 times the rate of the larger heavier rounds.

I've fired the M14 on full auto. There is a GOOD reason that over 90% of them issued were locked on semi auto only.

One of the old pilot sayings is "you can never have too much fuel...unless you're on fire!" The GI equivalent is "you can't have too much ammo, only more than you can move"...

So, consider for a bit how double the amount of ammo can and does double the amount of firepower, but doesn't necessarily double the endurance of you base of fire. And, sometimes endurance is more valuable than it seems.

to illustrate this idea a different way we can chose an example from WWII. 1942, Pacific. Our standard Navy fighter plane was the Grumman F4F Wildcat. The F4f-3 had 4 .50 cal machine guns. Flown by the Navy and the Marines. By the middle of 42, the next version of the F4F was being introduced. The F4F-4. It had six .50 cal machine guns. You'd think this was an improvement, right? well, it was, and it wasn't, and there were a lot of pilots who did not like the change.

Because even though there were more guns, each gun had less ammo. SO the result was each burst was heavier firepower BUT there were fewer bursts possible before running out of ammo. The "throw weight" went up, but the firing time went down. And in air combat, the amount of lead you throw in a single burst might not be as important as how often you can throw a burst.

DO you get that picture? Because it applies to a lot of things in a lot of different and sometimes subtle ways.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 07:06 PM   #65
chadio
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2011
Posts: 795
Ron - thanks for the reply.

I am complaining about the panic buying and panic prices... when I recently decided to buy another rifle.

Everything I am interested in buying is either out of stock, or priced 1.5 times what it should be.

Ugly? I think the M1a, FAL, AK47, AR15, are all good looking rifles - plus, they have street cred and military significance.
__________________
Ex - Navy, Persian Gulf Veteran. Loved shooting the M14, 1911, M60, M2

Last edited by chadio; July 26, 2021 at 07:23 PM.
chadio is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 08:22 PM   #66
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 7,534
44AMP : As a non Veteran, I'd best not pretend I know very much. I'd certainly agree I can mag dump an AR-15 faster than I can my DPMS "Ar-10 type" rifle.

But I tend to shoot aimed semi auto.

We have all seen footage of troops behind cover holding the rifle over their head and burning mags full auto.

I like to think my fear of running out of ammo would help my fire discipline.
But I'm not going to say "I would do better" Keyboard is easy.

We could talk about SLA Marshall's work,and tens of thousands of small arms fire per casualty...etc.
But I think I'll just let it go, I recognize I lack standing.
HiBC is offline  
Old July 26, 2021, 08:28 PM   #67
chadio
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2011
Posts: 795
Me, circa 1991 ish...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg m60.jpg (65.3 KB, 19 views)
__________________
Ex - Navy, Persian Gulf Veteran. Loved shooting the M14, 1911, M60, M2
chadio is offline  
Old July 27, 2021, 08:47 AM   #68
SR420
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,279
Prices

Prices for just about every commodity have risen dramatically ever since stimulus checks became a thing... if you think guns & ammo have gotten expensive, go out and try to buy a new 1/2 ton truck. It's not a buyers market right now, but you may still find a decent face-to-face deal locally. Buy a decent pre-owned rifle, then send it off to Smith Enterprise and let them make it an awesome rifle for you.

Me Circa 1996


Last edited by SR420; July 27, 2021 at 09:06 AM.
SR420 is offline  
Old July 27, 2021, 10:21 AM   #69
Reloadron
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,674
Quote:
Ron - thanks for the reply.

I am complaining about the panic buying and panic prices... when I recently decided to buy another rifle.

Everything I am interested in buying is either out of stock, or priced 1.5 times what it should be.

Ugly? I think the M1a, FAL, AK47, AR15, are all good looking rifles - plus, they have street cred and military significance.
__________________
Ex - Navy, Persian Gulf Veteran. Loved shooting the M14, 1911, M60, M2
Oh yes, prices are not where we like them. Maybe in time and hopefully things will come down. During this entire pandemic mess I have bought a few handguns which I felt were priced well enough. It also seems, just at a glance, that handguns have seen the largest increase. Again, just at a glance so not like I have conducted some sort of study.

My own experiences were in Marine Corps training (boot camp) during 1969 I was issued and qualified with the M14 and I liked it. All my requalification were with the M14. It wasn't till 1972 that I ended up in Vietnam and was issued a M16A1 but flew in country with a 1911 as a courier. This is likely why I have a M1A and several AR15 rifles to include a Colt SP1 (actually two SP1). Guess it was a nostalgic thing.

Now as to my reference to taste in a rifle and an ugly rifle. Again, my taste.


They are all basic less any whistles and bells or as many call "tacticool" with added rails and everything from flashlight to grenade launcher hanging on the rifle. The rifle on the far right is an AR10 which I do have a scope and open sights for. Not really visible are the match sights on the AR10 rifle. As I mentioned, just a matter of personal taste.

Back to rifles in general. Hopefully prices will come down. My best gun prices were always private sales on lightly used guns from people who suddenly needed money so don't rule out used but only if you catch a good price. Once we regain some stability "out of stock" should diminish.

Ron
Reloadron is offline  
Old July 27, 2021, 09:50 PM   #70
tomrkba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2011
Posts: 742
If price matters, then get a Garand from the CMP. It's a good gun, fun to shoot and the sights are top notch. My dad got lucky with his CMP Garand and his restoration of the wood reveale beautiful walnut furniture.

If you like the M14/M1A, then it's certainly a great choice. I really liked mine.

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.

Obviously, 5.56x45mm is the primary choice, but the lone civilian can be well served by 308/7.62x51mm as a general purpose semi-auto rifle.
tomrkba is offline  
Old July 28, 2021, 07:58 AM   #71
JustJake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2020
Posts: 241
Quote:
If price matters, then get a Garand from the CMP. It's a good gun, fun to shoot and the sights are top notch. My dad got lucky with his CMP Garand and his restoration of the wood reveal beautiful walnut furniture.
Not only that, but CMP warranties that its armorers will fixed your M1 if it doesn't function correctly after you receive it. ... And these are M1-knowledgeable 'smiths who actually know what they're doing and how to correctly diagnose Garand-malfs.
__________________
I use the Jake Brake every chance I get.
Don't care if it annoys you.
Hear me now?!
JustJake is offline  
Old July 28, 2021, 09:09 AM   #72
SR420
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,279
I got tired of fighting with my AR10, so I sold it and modernized another M14.
SR420 is offline  
Old July 28, 2021, 09:30 AM   #73
Reloadron
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,674
What was the fight about?

Ron
Reloadron is offline  
Old July 28, 2021, 09:42 AM   #74
SR420
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,279
The trigger was awful, and there was no weight savings compared to my M14s.
SR420 is offline  
Old July 28, 2021, 10:01 AM   #75
Reloadron
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2016
Location: Cleveland, Ohio Suburbs
Posts: 1,674
Thanks, just curious.

Ron
Reloadron is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2020 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.09637 seconds with 9 queries