A Brief History of the M14 Rifle: A Time of Transition

Note: This article was originally posted on NRA Blog: http://bit.ly/2j5seap

NRAblog.com
NRAblog.com

USA -(Ammoland.com)- In the aftermath of World War II, it was widely recognized that the American .30-06 M1 Garand semi-automatic rifle gave U.S. forces a decisive edge in combat. While faster than the bolt-actions used by other countries, the semi-automatic Garand was still limited by its eight-round en-bloc clip by which rounds were loaded into the firearm.

Following the war, armies sought the benefits of a semi-auto rifle chambered for rounds similar to the .30-06 and 8mm Mauser that had been used in the recent conflict. This resulted in the development and adoption of main battle rifles – full power, select-fire rifles with 20-round detachable box magazines. Overseas, these included Germany’s Heckler & Koch G3 and Belgium’s FN FAL. Here in the U.S. the M14 emerged.

(Photo courtesy/Loose-Cannon.com)

The M14 was designed to replace the Garand, as well as the M1 and M2 carbines and the M3 and M3A1 submachine guns. These new rifles – the M14 included – were most often chambered for the 7.62x51mm NATO round, similar to the commercial .308 Winchester, and were widely used by NATO forces through the Cold War. One of the benefits of this cartridge was that it was approximately 10 percent lighter than the .30-06 cartridge. This meant 10 percent more ammo could be carried by a soldier or transported by air. When in combat, that extra 10 percent could mean the difference between taking the field or being overrun.

Four different manufacturers ended up securing the contracts to make M14s. The first went to Springfield Armory. Next up was Harrington & Richardson, followed by Winchester. Finally, Thompson-Ramo-Wooldridge earned the last contract. All told, more than 1.5 million M14s were produced.

(Photo courtesy/Loose-Cannon.com)

Extensive post-WWII studies had found the single best predictor of enemy casualties was the number of rounds fired in an engagement. They also found that actual combat most often occurred at close range, seldom beyond 200 to 300 yards, and nearly never at the 500-yard range that required the full power ammunition of main battle rifles. The full power rounds also proved nearly impossible to control in full-auto firing.

This led firearms designers to seek a new type of primary rifle for military applications, but would retain the advantages of a detachable box magazine. As such, the M14 existed in a period of transition that would greatly influence its official history. Despite being adopted by the U.S. military as a standard issue weapon in 1957, it holds the distinction of being one of the shortest-lived standard issue firearms in American history. The last contract for the M14 was in 1964. That same year, the M16 was ordered as its direct replacement. By 1968, the M14 had been completely phased out, after only an 11-year run.

(Photo courtesy/U.S. Army)

New firearm designs based on the post-WWII studies eventually rendered the M14 unnecessary. The desired features of these new firearms included effective full-auto fire capability by using less powerful, more controllable ammunition, such as the .223 Remington cartridge used in the M16.

The lighter ammunition in these new guns retained a benefit from the M14, which allowed the individual soldier to carry more rounds and encourage better marksmanship by reducing the heavy recoil of the more powerful rounds.

(Photo courtesy/Loose Rounds)

Main battle rifles were eventually replaced by modern lighter rifles designed to meet those criteria. However, the full-power main battle rifle still lingers in service in niche roles, sometimes as a designated marksman rifle and even as a ceremonial weapon carried by color guards. Despite its short tenure of service, the M14 left an indelible mark on the face of U.S. military arms and paved the way for the future.

For more history on the M14, read Cut Down In Its Youth by NRA National Firearms Museum Senior Curator Philip Schreier, then come see the U.S. Springfield Model T44 E4 Selective Fire Rifle, the rifle that went on to become the M14, at the museum in Fairfax, Virginia.

98
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
48 Comment threads
50 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
71 Comment authors
Wild BillGregBobJakeJoeUSooner Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Greg
Member
Greg

I trained in boot with the M16 in 1975, then was sent to Naples & Sicily where the M14 was still being used with our security detachments. I fam fired with it a couple of times and was very pleased. That 7.62 is a really great round. Wouldn’t mind having a mini for home defense. I think they shoot 5.56mm or .223cal.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@Greg, thank you for your service. Mini 14s are not terribly expensive.

Jeff Foster
Guest
Jeff Foster

We had M-1’s (DCM) in the rifle club I belonged to in High School. Went to basic at Fort Jackson in 1963 – Qualified Expert with the M-14 on a Trainfire Range Back home in the Guard unit/Artillery we were issued M-1 Carbines. Then DOD changed us to MP’s in 1967 and we were issued M-1’s. They seemed so heavy after using the carbines. I have an early Springfield Armory M1A. Sent it out to a Marine armorer for a new barrel and trigger job and had the gun glass bedded by an NG armorer. Best shooting gun I own.… Read more »

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@JF Thank you for your service, too.

Dave Hood
Guest
Dave Hood

I was active duty Navy 1975-1980. In boot, we drilled with the M1903A3. Once in the fleet, the rifle kept in the ship’s armory was the M14. Seabees and UDT/SEAL carried the M16 but fleet sailors toted blue steel and walnut.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@DH, Thank you for your service, too.

JS
Guest
JS

Ft. Leonard Wood, 1963-65 then to Germany where I left the Combat Engineer MOS to become a Tank Commander. Albeit, an AVLB(Armored Vehicle Launched Bridge), and we were issued one each: M-14, 1911A1, M3 Greaser, and a 3.5 Launcher…..although I never saw anything more than the 1911A1’s for most FTX’s. The armorer was a lazy ass and didn’t like cleaning up after us…haha Qualified Marksman stateside, targets were frozen, mags had ice in them on the day (Jan.’64) we shot. We had 14 bolos in the company and the Bn. C.O. was pissed. He sent them out later to requalify.… Read more »

Bob
Guest
Bob

Best rifle I ever had to this day. Shooting three shots from 450 yards all bulls eyes where can I find one

D Yaros
Guest
D Yaros

I do not know about the accuracy of this statement in the article: “By 1968, the M14 had been completely phased out, after only an 11-year run.”

My questioning of it is based on personal experience/knowledge as the rifle issued to me in USMC boot camp in June of 1969, and on which I qualified at the range, was a M14.

Jake
Guest
Jake

The M-14 was the standard issue USMC rifle at that time. The M-16 was issued to Marines as a specialized weapon for Vietnam. M-14s were available but the weight penalty precluded their general use.

Allan M.
Guest
Allan M.

I trained in ’66 at Fort Knox with the M14. It had a slot in which a key fit to make it full auto. CO had all the keys and we never got to use them. Got my expert medal with it. 600 yards were fairly easy to hit for young eyes, 1000 were a challenge. This with iron sights. I now have the M1A Scout Squad with 18 inch barrel from Springfield and it is a lot handier than the original M14. The bite is I was a volunteer full of youthful ardor, wanted to be a lifer. Instead… Read more »

Kevin
Guest
Kevin

When it comes to stocks, I prefer the Blackfeather RS and the USGI E2 for my rifles. I really like the SAGE EBR, but it adds too much weight.

Danbear
Guest
Danbear

I trained at Fort Polk in 1968 with the M14 rifle. Went on through to aviation AIT qualified with the M16 prior to shipping to Vietnam. Got to my assault helicopter company, volunteered to be door gunner and was handed an M14 with a selector switch and custody of two M60Ds. In spite of all the dirt, sand, crud, rain etc that a combat service UH-1D/H helicopter with no doors can kick up that M14 never, ever let me or my crew down. On rare occasions when down time permitted turn the selector switch to A and touch the trigger… Read more »

Tom Coats
Guest
Tom Coats

Danbear–

Where and when did you observe the destruction of the firearms you describe?

Thank you, Viettom

Joe K
Guest
Joe K

Qualified with the M14 at Ft. Polk basic and AIT in 1966. Although issued the standard M16 in Nam, the 1st versions of the weapon often jammed. For a brief period we had a company commander who did not care nor trust the M16. He managed to authorize a M14E2 along with riot shotguns. Only 2 squads per platoon, each squad had a riot shotgun for the point man and 1 M14E2, which I carried one of them. Although I could not carry the normal compliment of 20 M16 mags, I did manage to carry about 12 or 13 M14… Read more »

A.R. Reyes
Guest
A.R. Reyes

I HAVE A 9 mm Glock G43 pistol Compact Carry .It has a capacity of 6+1 . I sleep with it under my pillow with a loaded
and an extra magazine. I believe having it is enough for my wife and my protection. Besides, I have a Gauge 12 Mossberg Shotgun and a Remington Cal .30-06 Rifle. What else do you think do I need? Ammo? Yes I got plenty.

Dave Eckart
Guest
Dave Eckart

You need what you want and what will keep you safe. No one’s opinion is the “right” one when it comes to personal defense. Everyone’s situation is different and everyone’s comfort level with various arms, needs, and methods of defense vary.

The likelihood of “needing” to defend oneself is quite low, to the point of almost not likely in one’s entire lifetime, but just like fire extinguishers and spare tires, a firearm is great to have if the situation arises when its needed.

Practice and hope you never need it.

Captain Bob
Guest
Captain Bob

Did I miss something? What does this have to do with M-14/M1A’s and M16’s?

Dave Eckart
Guest
Dave Eckart

Absolutely nothing, as far as I could tell.

glenn hopper
Guest
glenn hopper

don’t laugh My M 14 was a SEARS 1967/Lenard Wood

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@Glen H, Leonard Wood, 29 July – Jan 75 One station unit training (Basic and AIT 12B), M16

Lee
Guest
Lee

I trained with the M-14 through Basic and AIT in 67/68 and kept M-14 in Nam 68/69 in Engineer Unit and in 69/70 had M-16. Kind of liked the M-14 better. But I also didn’t have to hump the rifle either.

Stephen Culbertson
Guest
Stephen Culbertson

I trained with and carried the M14 from bootcamp at Ft. Ord 1967 until they were replaced in my unit with the M16 – I love the M14 and although I own many AR’s today my M1A’s are what I consider a real battle rifle. The M16 never fit me very well ergonomically and I felt like I was in a fight with 1 arm tied behind my back – the 556 is lethal especially at close ranges but the 762 is the king – now when it comes to humping ammo it’s a different story LOL

R J Koceja
Guest
R J Koceja

I was issued the M-14 in the states, and the M=16 in Vietnam. I now own an AR=15 and just purchased an M1A.
If i”m going to shoot it, I’ll take the M=14. If I have to carry it I’ll take the M=16. Both great weapons.

Eric D.
Guest
Eric D.

I guess we all are comparing apples to oranges and forgetting that they both are fruit. Is one better than the other? Matter of opinion. I love the 7.62×51 round, but due to my age, I was trained with the M16A2 and carried and shot the Pig (M60). But if it was up to me, the perfect rifle of the two would be a AR10.

cisco kid
Guest
cisco kid

Go to the web site “forgotten weapons”. They have a blowing dust and sand test between the M14, M16 and French Mas. Guess which gun jammed up after the 1st shot. Yep it was the M14. The French MAS made it almost through and entire magazine and the M16 did make it through the entire magazine but the caveat was that the M16 started the test spotlessly clean inside.

mac
Guest
mac

Basic Training with Garand… en bloc clip ejection noisy and awkward to replace but very fine rifle..M14 for familiarization and to set up web gear for 8 magazines…two pouches in front and two in rear… plus two cartridge bandoleers…220 rounds as patrol …. .fired Lived Fire later with the M-16….used an XM177 E2 carbine for a while during jungle training in Panama…carried an M1A1 .30 Carbine with paratrooper folding stock…strictly short range piece as the wooden hand grip is too thick and too short for most hand sizes…very awkward trying to get a grip with that metal rod and pivot… Read more »

R HANSEN
Guest
R HANSEN

Hi and Thank you Joe. See the NAVY SPECIAL WEAPONS WARFARE CENTER at CRAIN, IND. The Tec’s at CRAIN can show you many new M14 Type Seal Snipers Rifles. Also the Scopes and Mounts. I held the latest M14/M39 EMR. The TIME OF LIFE FOR THIS WEAPON IS 2035 ! Thanks ..R HANSEN.

John
Guest
John

I would like to own one today!

John
Guest
John

Trained at Fort Ord CA, in 1968 with the M14. Loved it a lot, very accurate although a bit heavy. Wish I had one when in Nam instead of the M16. There was something about that rifle that the M16 could not live up to.

R. G. Montgomery
Guest
R. G. Montgomery

I’ve heard a lot of propaganda about how the M16 is better than the prior rifles. Mostly bunk. The ‘advantages’ are one can shoot more (in order to make up for the lack of marksmanship training and poor terminal effectiveness of the the smaller round) and the arm is lighter, therefore easier to carry.

Shooting four times as many shots wildly does not make up for missing the target.

chuck
Guest
chuck

during late 60’s was USAF FAC team assigned to Army. USAF was m16 (which jammed often due to not loaded with proper powder) and range guns were horrors. Army “suggested” team run through Army weapons familiarization and we got to shoot everything from 81M to 1911’s, most fun was the M14’s which were extremely accurate and not lots of recoil. Even got to fie one with scope. Note Did qualify with 45 and as Expert with M14. Note we had issue 45/14 as the Army never knew what the USAF did and USAF not quite sure what Army issue… worked… Read more »

Joe Cronin
Guest
Joe Cronin

I toured the Federal Armory Museum at Rock Island Illinois a couple years ago. They had M-14’s that were modified with scopes and sniper stocks. I asked about them and they said they made them for the “desert wars” because the 5.56 rifles weren’t reaching out far enough in the sand flats. So maybe the M14 lives on.
If you are a gun person, this museum is on the military base in the middle of the Mississippi river and is very historical.
Great collection of tanks and cannons too. It is a must see and it’s free.

R HANSEN
Guest
R HANSEN

I still have and shoot my National Match M14/M1A Rifle. I have one of Springfield Armory’s pre 1986 Title 2, Class 3 Select Fire, M14/M1A”s. I paid a $200.00 Dollar N.F.A. Tax plus did the usual endless Form 4″s with Picture’s and Finger print Card’s. I made this Purchase in 1984 from Springfield Armory with the Glen Nelsen National Match Package. I use the Selector Shaft Lock-Out Drum for NRA or DCM/CMP Match’s. NFA registry shows over 7500 Class 3 M14″s and some 400 M1A”s as of 2010. All of them privately owned !!! Thank you, R. HANSEN. CEO HANSEN… Read more »

frank
Guest
frank

always uneasy with a weapon needing a forward assist

Martin C Sprick
Guest
Martin C Sprick

That charging handle on the right side of the M14 and M1 Garand (and the M1 Carbine, AK-47, and any other firearm with an op handle directly attached to the bolt)…?

Yeah, that’s a forward assist, too.

byron jones
Guest
byron jones

enjoyed reading all above comments. even c. kents, never knew a kent worth talking about. I entered basic at ft. leonard wood in winter of 72. all that was offered was m-16 , m60, grenade launcher , and law. never had the opertunity to fire a m-14 , regret it. have seen garands and lusted heavily . I really appreciate you men that was in nam. you were never treated right while in service or after. I feel you were shafted with a 22 cal. after shooting a 30 cal. I’ve seen what a 30 will do to a at… Read more »

Harold
Guest
Harold

At Parris Island, Nov. 1964, we were issued M-14,s. 1320565 serial number of my rifle, will never forget it! Greatest rifle ever! 500 yards was a walk in the park for the M-14. I spent MANY hours with the M-14 being held over my head with both arms extended for what seemed like hours at a time. I can’t praise the M-14 enough!!

vic
Guest
vic

this is to joeusooner. i too was at fort polk from august until october/november? but who’s counting and i to trained on the M14. i remember hearing that we might be the last and the new guys were etting the m16. when were you there.

JoeUSooner
Guest
JoeUSooner

Hi, Vic! Nice to meet you…

I was also there from late August to early late October, in C-1-2 (south area, near the movie Theater).

[It was, indeed, hot as hell that time of year LOL In fact, the alligators crawling along the side of the runway – we flew in from Oklahoma City on an old DC-9 – should have given me a clue! But I was a naive city boy…]

Jesar1220
Guest
Jesar1220

I own 2 M1As brand new purchased from Springfield. Both have national match grade barrels and triggers. 1 is standard military walnut stock, mounted bipod, Leopold scope and sling. Dead nuts accurate and deadly. The second is costume composite, archangel stock mounted with an ATM high Def, will cook breakfast for you scope, bipod as well. This rifle I don’t have to mention the accuracy. B9th rifles the best purchases I have ever made!!! Actually, all I can say is, with my colt 1911 45 call defender, there is nothing I am not ready for!!!

Paul DeBoni
Guest
Paul DeBoni

I also trained on the M14 back in 1966. It was a tough machine that could be counted on any time. The M16, not so much as we always had someone with a jam problem. Usually associated with dirt or residue in the mechanism. You could dump an M14 in the mud and it would still fire reliably. Contrary to previous comments, we were all issued M14s that were full auto capable. I don’t recall ever seeing an M14 that couldn’t accept the full auto conversion kit. The full auto kits with a different operating rod were kept in supply… Read more »

P.DeBoni
Guest
P.DeBoni

I also trained on the M14 back in 1966. It was a tough machine that could be counted on any time. The M16, not so much as we always had someone with a jam problem. Usually associated with dirt or residue in the mechanism. You could dump an M14 in the mud and it would still fire reliably. Contrary to previous comments, we were all issued M14s that were full auto capable. I don’t recall ever seeing an M14 that couldn’t accept the full auto conversion kit. The full auto kits with a different operating rod were kept in supply… Read more »

Joe K
Guest
Joe K

To P.DeBoni The M14E2 could be controlled. Different stock, bipod, and forward folding hand grip.

173rd LRRP
Guest
173rd LRRP

Issued and qualified with the M14 in Army Basic Training in July 1965 and AIT in September of 1965-never fired it on full auto. After Jump School went to 82nd at Bragg in December of 1965 and immediately issued the M16. Never saw the M14 again.

OLDMARINEGRUNT
Guest
OLDMARINEGRUNT

The M-14 also was a replacement for the BAR.although they failed to design a buffer device for the M-14 like the BAR had. A BAR on full auto was a comfort to shoot, compared to the 14 that when fired full auto was like working a jack hammer. When the Corps replaced the BAR only the AR men in the rifle squad had the auto fire knob installed on the M14 rifle. The other squad members had no way of putting the 14 on full auto with out that device. The text of the article shows the 14 as a… Read more »

Joe K
Guest
Joe K

Trained with the M14 at Ft. Polk for both basic and AIT in 1966. Qualified with the M16 prior to going to Nam. First M16s were not reliable (M161A). We had one man who had an AR-15 which seemed to jam less. At one point we had a company commander who wanted more punch and issued each squad an M14E2, which I got to carry. Although I could not carry 20 magazines like with the M16, I carried about 12 mags and bandoleers to havet 400 rounds. Another advantage was the green tip duplex bullets that were piggy backed.

Tom Coats
Guest
Tom Coats

I never tire of the never ending comment on most gun boards detailing the effects of old vs new firearms. soldier has little choice in what he is issued and fights with. The decisions are made at the top and used by those on the bottom. I am 68, and unlikely to be in battle for my life, I have owned and shot firearms since I was ten. I have never bothered to learn much about muzzle velocity, or minute angles etc. A soldier should be taught to shoot the weapon he is issued, supplied with more than enough ammo… Read more »

OLDMARINEGRUNT
Guest
OLDMARINEGRUNT

One weapon that the m-14 replaced that was not mentioned was the B.A.R.(Browning automatic rifle). As stated in the text, the M-14 was designed to replace the M-1, the m-1 and m-2 carbine and m-3 Sub machine gun but should have noted the BAR as well. The M-14s biggest disadvantage was its uncontrollable, full automatic fire. Had the new 14s been designed with the buffer system of the BAR, this would have given better control during full auto fire but still only half of the recoil control of the BAR. When firing a BAR off a the grounded bi-pod, in… Read more »

sgt.s.bigors
Guest
sgt.s.bigors

Went through Parris Island 1963 went to Camp Geiger train with the M1 then was sent to Camp Lejeune was issued an M14 had that for 2 years went to Vietnam carried an M14 extremely accurate and durable never had a Jam however I did have a ouple of cook-offs in a major firefight was able to pick up another rifle M14 tremendous rifle I own one today never fired it but I can still take it apart and put it together blindfolded or with my eyes shut, never fired or carried an M16

John G
Guest
John G

I was born in 1970 and never shot any of these guns. But I like reading about you guys that did –
thank you for your service!

Paul C
Guest
Paul C

I trained with both the M14 and the M16 at Fort Lewis, Washington, in 1968. I shot well with both of them. In Vietnam we were issued M16’s and I don’t remember even seeing an M14. I prefer the M14 and would love to have one today, or even its modern version, the Springfield Armory M1A, Standard Model. I have bought a lot of guns in recent years but still have not made the leap. After this discussion I’ve decided it’s time.

Larry Christensen
Guest
Larry Christensen

I also went into the Army with the M14 in 1967. It was a heavy beast, but I quickly fell in love with it, even the rifles that had been dropped, dragged, mishandled in countless cycles of basic training, could be counted on to fire and be accurate to 100 or 150 yards. When Springfield Armory put out the M1A, I put my money on the counter for one. To me, I enjoy bringing the rifle to the range and going through 60 or 80 rounds. I also have a 5.56 that is fun to shoot, but if I ever… Read more »

Handgunner
Guest
Handgunner

Went through basic training at Ft. Knox Ky. in 1966 after being drafted. We used the late great M14. Took home the trophy for high firer. Loved the rifle and loved the cartridge. Came home sold my 06′ and have only purchased 308’s for my big game rifle since.

Captain Bob
Guest
Captain Bob

I had a fairly unique experience with issue military weapons during my short career. Was issued the M-1 Garand in Basic in 1962 (Ft. Dix). Was issued the M-14 in Germany in 1963. Was issued the 1911A1 pistol in ‘Nam (1965) and issued the M16 in the Reserves back in CONUS in 1981 .( Nope, not a typo. I rejoined after a 17-year gap, to get tuition aid). My favorite? The M-1 Garand, with the M-14 a close second.

Ronnie D Garner
Guest
Ronnie D Garner

I was in Fort Ord basic in late 1968. I trained, carried and qualified with the M-14. Loved that weapon…though it got heavy on long marches and runs. Never saw an M-16 until 1969. Assigned USARVN May 1969 to May 1970. Upon arrival, was assigned an M-14. No complaints. My prior training with the M-16 proved to me that they jammed way too often and weren’t as accurate at distance.

Ed LeFevre
Guest
Ed LeFevre

Trained with the M-14 at PI in ’63. Notwithstanding the ’14’s advantages, it did not have the balance of the Garand we used at LeJune – still my preferred. So, watch your thumb!! Semper Fi!

Marty Sprick
Guest
Marty Sprick

Actually the “M1A1” is a M1 Carbine with a folding stock. The M1A is the Springfield semi-auto only copy of the M14. The BATFE considers any firearm, even if permanently modified, that was at ONE TIME full-auto to be forever a full-auto. “Once a machine gun, ALWAYS a machine gun.” There was even another copy made by an off-brand that was too close in design to the original and was deemed illegal. I had one of my Marines get his confiscated by the ATF. Apparently it was so close in machining, you could attach the selector switch and sear. The… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@ Gunny Sprick, First, thank you and all the other vets on this thread for putting their lives on the alter of freedom. Second, we need to get rid of the BATFE that makes all the decisions because we are not smart enough. Time for the NFA, the GCA, and the BATFE to go.

Joe Reid
Guest
Joe Reid

I used an M-14 in basic training at Fort Ord,California. How does a guy find one of this to purchase? I got a Marksmanship award with this rifle.

Kendoist4162
Guest
Kendoist4162

Spring field still sells them as the M1A1 in various configurations.

George a hages
Guest
George a hages

M14 run from about $1700.00 up. They have them for sale at several BXs here in the statesSpringfield still makes them, or check out gun broker, guns international, GunsAmerica or talk to your local gun shop.

Marty Sprick
Guest
Marty Sprick

You can’t buy an “actual” M14, they are select fire and as such controlled by the BATFE. I know of no actual M14’s ever being released from US Gov’t control for sale. You can, however, buy a civilian legal semi-auto only M1A from Springfield Armory.

Colonialgirl
Guest
Colonialgirl

Sorry Marty, but the ACTUAL M-14 I used in basic training was NOT “select fire”; they were modified to “Semi-Auto” only before they trusted us with them on the rifle range. That said, I do believe that those issued to people on the field of battle were able to be semi, or full auto. I don’t know why you would need full auto, the dang things could be fired fast enough to make your head spin on “Semi”

Coastie
Guest
Coastie

Plenty M-14’s out there, Gov’mnt de milled and sold plenty in the 70’s and 80’s. Most full auto’s were given to allied countries, and some found their way back. You can own one if you have a class 1 BATF license.

Martin C Sprick
Guest
Martin C Sprick

I beg to differ. I’ve looked, and there are no select-fire M14’s on any website I can find anywhere. If you can find one, I’d love to see a link to it posted.

JimmyD
Guest
JimmyD

I qualified on the M14 at Ft Leonard Wood in 1966. Always wanted one since then and finally got it in September. Sights are so good I can put 10 rounds out of 10 in a 6″ target at 100 yards. Pretty good for an old guy! At least I think so. Of course, I have only put 70 or 80 rounds through it so far. How knows, I may get even better! I love it!

Don
Guest
Don

Where can you buy a M14? I trained with one at Ft. Knox in 1966. Thanks

Allan Morrison
Guest
Allan Morrison

I have a Springfield Armory Squad Scout which I purchased at Cabelas. It has the 18″ barrel and is not as bulky as the original M 14 was. Supposedly ballistic performance of the 7.62 x 51.cartridge shows minimal performance loss from the shorter barrel. I too trained at Ft. Knox in 1967 with the M 14, and so I bought this expensive memory enhancer. The original M 14 had a slot for a key which you used to convert from semi to full auto fire by inserting in a,slot in the receiver. The keys were kept in company HQ. I’m… Read more »

Lee
Guest
Lee

I used both in Nam and kind of like both.

Dave Hood
Guest
Dave Hood

You’re a wise man, Lee

Ol' Vet
Guest
Ol' Vet

The one great problem with the “new” rifles was having to shoot the “enemy” more than one time. I recall soldiers in Iwack saying they needed a rifle that can break the cement block the houses were made of, as the 5.56 would even scratch the paint, and of course the M14 would do the job. They were the same people that begged for the return of the M1911A1 pistol for the same reason, not being able to knock the “enemy” down but rather shooting them several times with the infamous 9mm mistake. I carried the M14 my first tour… Read more »

Clark Kent
Guest
Clark Kent

According to the laws of physics if firing a bullet from a handgun knocks the enemy down it will also knock you down. Every action has a equal and opposite reaction.

Colonialgirl
Guest
Colonialgirl

Thanks for being totally ignorant about recoil and the M-14 rifle; your “law of physics” iof bull in this regard.s a large bunch I trained with one in 1966 and it never knocked me down; BUT the power and velocity WOULD knock down an enemy soldier.

Clark Kent
Guest
Clark Kent

No it did not. Check with Isaac Newton.

JoeUSooner
Guest
JoeUSooner

Clark, re-read Newton… Colonialgirl is correct. Newton was indeed spot on with the idea that there is an equal and opposite (emphasis here on “equal”) reaction… but you’re forgetting that the reactive energy is applied to different masses. The amount – total foot-pounds – of energy necessary to push a heavy [16lb+] rifle backwards in a (rather violently felt) recoil is the exact same amount of energy that is applied to a very small projectile weighing only a fraction of an ounce! When that moving projectile suddenly meets a human body, presuming it hits something solid (bone), all that energy… Read more »

durabo
Guest
durabo

Clark Kent, you have your head up your vent.

Woody
Guest
Woody

Only if you’re a wuss Clark. One would think somebody by the name of “Clark Kent” could handle the recoil of a large caliber pistol!

Woody
Guest
Woody

And the recoil is minimum from my M1A as the weight of the rifle absorbs the recoil. It is a pleasure to shoot and I can shoot it all day without hurting my shoulder. Sounds like Clark Kent has been nipped in the bud by some Kryptonite!

JPS
Guest
JPS

Joe U Sooner is ALMOST right , but not. The action and reaction equality applies to the impulse or momentum , that is mass x velocity , whereas energy is 0.5 mass x velocity ^2 ( squared) . If you want to calculate the recoil energy you first have to know the free recoil speed ,of the rifle based on mv (bullet) + mv ( ejected gas ) =MV ( rifle) and then with that V calculate the recoil energy . Normally the ejected gas mv is difficult to evaluate , the m is the mass of the powder charge… Read more »

Wild Bill
Guest
Wild Bill

@JPS I think that JoeUSooner’s explanation is “right” enough for the field and your explanation is appropriate for the lab. Joe’s explanation is probably not appropriate for the lab, and your explanation would not mean much in a FTX scenario. But that is what communication is all about.

Ma Dang
Guest
Ma Dang

sounds like you have never shot a pistol or rifle before, Clark. Too bad for you, it’s best to have some degree of understanding of the subject you are speaking to.

JoeUSooner
Guest
JoeUSooner

My basic training unit (at Ft Polk, LA) in 1968 was the last to train with the M-14. Despite its weight (16lbs+ loaded), I loved that old beast. It was powerful, well-balanced, and unbelievably accurate. Although it had (a LOT of) straight-back recoil, it had very little “muzzle flip.” I would have trusted my life to it… considerably more than I actually trusted that Mattel toy of an M-16 I was issued in VietNam!

2nd Amender
Guest
2nd Amender

I trained with an m-14 in basic during the period April through June ’68, at Ft Bragg NC.

I carried m16, SN926745 from October ’68 thru November ’69 while wth A 1/28th Infantry, 1st Infantry Division. That rifle was neither a toy, nor any trouble, or lacking in it’s respect as a weapon by my fellow squad members, or by the enemies at whom I aimed and fired.

Bill Douglas
Guest
Bill Douglas

I trained on the M14 at Fort Polk LA in 1967
Great rifle…

Glenn Middleton
Guest
Glenn Middleton

A brief correction is in order. I conducted basic training in 1970 with the M-14 at Indian Town Gap, Pa. We also received training on the “Mattie Mattel” AR-15 at that same basic training program.

Larry
Guest
Larry

Son that was not an AR15, it was a M16, a different animal. The M16 had a different trigger and a full auto selector, where as the AR15 is semi auto only.
I qualified in basic with a M14 and had one issued to me in Vietnam. As a requirement, I had to qualify with the M16 prior to deployment to Vietnam, but never used one.
The writer of this article, I believe meant to say the last M14 was produced in 1968, but I assure you it was not phased out of the military, it is still in use today.

Mike
Guest
Mike

You need to do a bit of research. You will discover that AR-15 marked select fire rifles were issued in the 60’s and early 70’s. I carried one in Korea.

Dave Eckart
Guest
Dave Eckart

Mike, technically correct. The Armalite select fire weapon that they designed was the AR-15. When the military adopted it, it was designated the M16. The confusion begins with the civilian AR-15 – it is not and never was a select fire weapon.

In order for it to be produced for civilian use, it was required to be semi-auto, and not be able to be easily converted to full-auto.

Rick
Guest
Rick

Agree, the M-14 is a fine weapon. Qualified in 1965 at Ft Benning, GA. then had to qualify with the M-16 in 1969, deployed to Korea. I currently own a M1A, still continue to shoot.

bill Cannon
Guest
bill Cannon

At Fort order califorina in 1969 we to were the last boot camp unit there to use the m-14 rifle I shot expert with it I loved this wepon ,an would love to get one to day a great part of my life in Vietnam.

Sailboatbum
Guest
Sailboatbum

M1A’s are commonly available. check out the web or go to spring field armory. They are still making them. Just picked one up about 5 mo. ago. Shoots great but do not like the ark angle stock and put on a used stock from numric arms. Great rifle. Semper Fi

Bill Lide
Guest
Bill Lide

Joe: I also completed basic at Ft. Polk in 1968 – June-Aug.. with the M 14………..HOT. BillUSAR

JoeUSooner
Guest
JoeUSooner

Bill, you were right ahead of me… I arrived on-post 30Aug, and spent 48 hours doing absolutely nothing while waiting for the 1Sep-to-30Oct session. My DI on that lovely 8-week vacation was an E-6 named Pangelenan, who was 5 feet 4 inches… in every direction – stout individual! But he taught us well!

fineran
Guest
fineran

I was also at Ft. Polk in March 1968 and trained with M-14. I preferred the wood stock to the plastic stock models. Back then the weight was not an issue.

Matthew Luxa
Guest
Matthew Luxa

The M14 story was great,want more articles like that!

David Gordon
Guest
David Gordon

I trained with the M-14 in 1970, at Ft. Dix, New Jersey. I was Sharpshooter with the M-16, but expert with the M-14. Heavy rifle. I believe that the weight of the M-14 contributed to its accuracy.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

To all the vets that posted here, thank you all for your service and forgive me for not posting that individually to each of you.