Teething issues with the M14?

[RetroRevolver77]

There's nothing wrong with the M14. It's simply a product of it's time. However with the right barrel (med contour), a proper optic with mount, national match spring guide, shimmed gas cylinder, and the right ammo- it's easily 2 MOA rifle. Now you can cry saying well they make AR10/SR25's that are more accurate with less end user fuss- fine but limp wristing aside, none of those standardized. The M14/M1A is. I own one, it's a pre-ban M1A/GI model built with all TRW parts- and it's about a 2.5MOA rifle with standard ball ammo. Thirty cal holes with sucking chest wounds out to 700 yards- is fine by me. If I need something to perform farther, I have a bolt gun good out to 1400 yards if needed but who cares. Simply, there is no other standardized US designed 7.62NATO rifle outside of the M14/M1A.

M

[vicious_cb]

There's nothing wrong with the M14. It's simply a product of it's time. However with the right barrel (med contour), a proper optic with mount, national match spring guide, shimmed gas cylinder, and the right ammo- it's easily 2 MOA rifle. Now you can cry saying well they make AR10/SR25's that are more accurate with less end user fuss- fine but limp wristing aside, none of those standardized. The M14/M1A is. I own one, it's a pre-ban M1A/GI model built with all TRW parts- and it's about a 2.5MOA rifle with standard ball ammo. Thirty cal holes with sucking chest wounds out to 700 yards- is fine by me. If I need something to perform farther, I have a bolt gun good out to 1400 yards if needed but who cares. Simply, there is no other standardized US designed 7.62NATO rifle outside of the M14/M1A.

M

This is not about modifying your M1A. This is about the M14 historically being a garbage rifle.

[RetroRevolver77]

This is not about modifying your M1A. This is about the M14 historically being a garbage rifle.

Every small arm we produce is garbage and should not exist. Yet here we are arguing over which finicky crap design is better than another. We should have adopted the FAL and Browning Hi Power in the 1950's. Today we'd have something like a modernized FNC and a CZ 75 SP-01.

[1168]

Every small arm we produce is garbage and should not exist.

Yet here we are arguing over which finicky crap design is better than another.

I’m pretty happy with the M4, and most of our other current/recent small arms. The M14 was dumb.

[RetroRevolver77]

I’m pretty happy with the M4, and most of our other current/recent small arms. The M14 was dumb.

We handicap ourselves requiring our own design "innovation".

[halfmoonclip]

From a civilian point of view, long shots are a non-starter in anything less than an EOLAWKI situation.
Frankly, PCCs are likely a better answer for defense at civvie distances.
None of this speaks against owning centerfire rifles/carbines; just a matter of practicality. It's kind of analogous to full capacity magazines; I fully support civilians being able to keep and bear them, but, realistically, we don't need 15 rounds.
BTW, for the benefit of FUDDs and others, apparently one of the (many) gun proposals put out by the D candidates for prez includes a prohibition of rifles capable of long range accuracy. So it goes.
Moon

[MountainRaven]

The SP-01 is a great civilian race gun. It's a shit duty pistol (big, heavy, complicated).

And the BHP was no panacea in the 50s (not only is there no tactile trigger reset, not only will they make you bleed, but the safety is pathetically small and useless). Jeff Cooper probably wasn't wrong when he said that nothing in the 1950s offered meaningful improvement over the M1911A1.

The FNC was so awesome that only two countries adopted it: Sweden and Belgium. The Swedes are upgrading theirs and the Belgians are going with SCARs (which, entertainingly, means that twice as many NATO members have adopted the SCAR as their standard rifle as NATO members who adopted the FNC as their standard rifle).

[RetroRevolver77]

The SP-01 is a great civilian race gun. It's a shit duty pistol (big, heavy, complicated).

And the BHP was no panacea in the 50s (not only is there no tactile trigger reset, not only will they make you bleed, but the safety is pathetically small and useless). Jeff Cooper probably wasn't wrong when he said that nothing in the 1950s offered meaningful improvement over the M1911A1.

The FNC was so awesome that only two countries adopted it: Sweden and Belgium. The Swedes are upgrading theirs and the Belgians are going with SCARs (which, entertainingly, means that twice as many NATO members have adopted the SCAR as their standard rifle as NATO members who adopted the FNC as their standard rifle).

Again, this thread proves that most countries, including our own- are retarded in terms of weapon selection. The only smart ones being the Belgians, Swiss, and Austrians for designing proper firearms. The FAL was a better rifle than the M14; more ergonomic, adjustable gas system, easier to maintain. However we had to have the M14 because "it's designed here" and it's based on a rifle that won a world war- leading to another debacle of a design that literally just injects carbon directly into critical moving parts. Worse, other countries were going to double stack high capacity 9mm pistols three quarters of a century before we figured out that more rounds is better- as we hung onto our single stack limited capacity "muh stopping power" 45. My point is, had we adopted the FAL with the BHP in the 50's- we'd have an advanced FNC likely with a polymer lower like the SCAR and some type of advanced polymer double stack pistol today. No the SIG USA abortion where the slide moves ever so slightly every time you pull the trigger is not "advanced" and SIG USA is a horrible company that only rivals IWI with bad weapon designs. We should just let the Swiss and Belgians design our rifles then buy Glocks from the bond villain and call it a day. B&T all the things, SCAR H's for far away things, Glock everything else- and stick to doing what we do best, air superiority.

[mack7.62]

M16's and variants have been putting bad guys down for the last 56 or so years, more of them have been or are in service than any other rifle except AK's and still just look at the negativity. More than a few foreign special forces groups picked M16/M4's instead of their countries own service rifles, some are now going to the HK which is really just a piston M4.

[RetroRevolver77]

M16's and variants have been putting bad guys down for the last 56 or so years, more of them have been or are in service than any other rifle except AK's and still just look at the negativity.

Simply stating that there were better options when we adopted the M14 that would have taken us in vastly different directions.