Teething issues with the M14?

[halfmoonclip]

Been rereading Blake Stevens' The Black Rifle. Several times, he makes reference to the M14, which was the M16's predecessor/competitor. He says that, whatever the M16's problems, the M14 was not without its own. He even claims that the M14 might not be as good as the Garand.
Any knowledge about this? The M14 ended up stillborn, and was never in use for long. What says the group?
Thnx,
Moon

[MountainRaven]

I Googled, "M14 problems," and this was the first thing that came up: The M14, Not Much For Fighting ( A Case Against The M14 Legend ) • LooseRounds.com.

One of the things listed is a .mil pdf from the late 1960s auditing the M14 program: M14 RIFLE COST ANALYSIS REPORT.

The M1 Garand was a good rifle in 1936. And an excellent rifle in 1945. Serviceable but obsolescent by the time the FAL hit the market in c. 1954. The M14 has all the problems the M1 Garand did and brought some of its own.

[mack7.62]

The M14 was very much a big gov ordnance department dinosaur, not horrible, not great, the TRW rifles were the best of the lot due to using modern manufacturing techniques to produce an archaic design. The biggest scandal of the whole program and the main reason for it's early demise was the insistence on sticking with a full caliber round, if they had gone with something like the British .280 the M16 would have had a much harder time gaining traction.

[shadowrider]

I agree with mack7.62. My thoughts have always been that if they had went with a case that took a small rifle primer and a bullet in the .250 to .280 range, it'd still be our standard issue rifle. The M14 magazine is possibly the most reliable ever made from a design standpoint. Had they just scaled everything back just a little bit, it would have been what the M16 platform is today.

[Bret]

Had they just scaled everything back just a little bit, it would have been what the M16 platform is today.

[TexHill]

What's funny is that John Garand himself, prior to the introduction of the M14, stated in an interview that the future US service weapon would be a light weight weapon which would be made using new alloys and fire a small caliber, high velocity round.

Fast forward to the 9:00 minute mark.

[halfmoonclip]

'Raven, thnx, the included reference in the Hitch report is what prompted me to ask the question. Your link makes it clear that not everyone was a fan of the M14, tho' a Dr. Carsten helped in its development, and wasn't a fan of the small caliber high velocity concept.
After the German midrange assault rifle proved the vitality of the concept, it's not clear to me why the full powered .308 was our response. I do recall the debates back in the day, including our insistence on the .308 as the NATO standard, to the consternation of our allies. We didn't like the FAL, either; not invented here.
BTW, one of 'Raven's links makes reference to full auto rifles that fired from an open bolt. Shifting gears entirely, were cook-offs ever an issue with the M16? I don't recall us being trained to clear the chamber after a long burst of full auto, but then we weren't trained to usea big burst of full auto.
Moon

[RetroRevolver77]

'Raven, thnx, the included reference in the Hitch report is what prompted me to ask the question. Your link makes it clear that not everyone was a fan of the M14, tho' a Dr. Carsten helped in its development, and wasn't a fan of the small caliber high velocity concept.
After the German midrange assault rifle proved the vitality of the concept, it's not clear to me why the full powered .308 was our response. I do recall the debates back in the day, including our insistence on the .308 as the NATO standard, to the consternation of our allies. We didn't like the FAL, either; not invented here.
BTW, one of 'Raven's links makes reference to full auto rifles that fired from an open bolt. Shifting gears entirely, were cook-offs ever an issue with the M16? I don't recall us being trained to clear the chamber after a long burst of full auto, but then we weren't trained to usea big burst of full auto.
Moon

It's funny that the Russians got it right using the German STG 44 design concept with our M1 Garand bolt and carrier group all based around a mid-range cartridge.

Had we been thinking more technologically we would have seen the light a lot sooner or at least adopted the FAL and ended up with the FNC.

[Doc Safari]

The only reason the M14 existed is because some crusty old farts with brass doodads on their collars didn't want to let go of the M1 Garand.

[halfmoonclip]

My impression was, back in the day, that the Army was not impressed with the FAL. Whether there really was an issue, or just that it wasn't our rifle, I'm not sure. The FAL was a long way from the conventionally stocked Garand, which may have been part of the problem.
There were certainly reservations from our own military (especially the Marines) to the Matty Mattel M16 shooting them durn little bullets.
Moon