-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
selecting a battle rifle
- Thread starter Runs With Scissors
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,331
An AR-15 can have any number of parts- including calibers- changed in seconds. The M14/M1A certainly can't do that.
The M14 is a rifle not a "system".
No-one's insulting you, Danny, just because we realize the M14 was a failure as a general-issue weapon.
The M14 is a rifle not a "system".
No-one's insulting you, Danny, just because we realize the M14 was a failure as a general-issue weapon.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,594
I can live with the idea that my M-14 is a rifle, and not a system.
I think I prefer it that way.
I think I prefer it that way.
The M14 is the last great battle rifle- made after no one wanted battle rifles.
I would not call it a 'failure'. It can be called that because it did not address current military thinking and needs when produced, but intrinsic to the weapon, it does have, and is very useful.
If it had been in service the way the AR is today, any 'front sight' issue would have long been addressed and corrected, and certainly tools and a repair friendly environment commonly available. The M14 arrived and left. The support systems no sooner in place were removed. I guess it remains a kind of expert's weapon. Special forces do use them to great effect today.
After listening to Spectre and Dave Rishar, I can see why the leftovers in any base might not be worth bothering with. Neglected and abused. If a civilian or special ops had an individual weapon- different story.
In fact, my experiences are much different than Spectres and Daves. They both have worked in large bureacracies. I don't know why I didn't think of this before- when this issue kept returning. Could any rifle with such a short service exposure been a 'success'? If the AR had been introduced, then pulled back, with confused support and tools, how would it's reputation have been built?
As for the HK91, I did not find it 'badly balanced'; just different from what I was used to. It may fire full auto better than the other 308 bullet chuckers, being as forward heavy as I recall.
If you like the way a bolt action rifle holds, particularly the service Springfield 03, you will like holding the M14. It is a classic rifle.
I've always thought the FN/FAL did what the AR later did- changed the way one holds rifles. Both systems seem to be cradled, or 'envelope' the user. Sorry for my english. I'm not a technician/engineer.
When I could shoot rifles, I could shoot all of these fairly accurately. They were all a lot of fun.
To tell the truth, as far as balance with its cartridge and handling characteristics while in operation, the AK action seems smoother to me than all of them. By 'smoother', I don't mean to dismiss HK's roller system, but the AK actions with their rotating bolts just feel as if something 'right' is happening, and not a mechanical task. Like hitting a baseball.
It was an interesting test environment- the Southern California desert in the 70's through the early 90's: there are not many soldiers who fire as many rounds as the crowd did regularly out there. The surplus stuff was pouring in from China and then Russia later. You'd get serious shooters, and then a lot of partying shooters. Geeze. What a place and time. They'd get crocked on something then shoot their barrels too hot to hold.
It was in the desert I thought of the 'dance of ten thousand bullet holes'; the fate waiting for any abandoned vehicle left for too many days and nights unattended.
These civilian shooters could have taught something to the Army and the arms manufacturers. So many weird things would happen, things you'd say were impossible. I wrote to the American Rifleman once about a pinned barrel SKS, the barrel being 'shot loose' after so many many cases of ammo through the gun. Guy brought it into the gun shop. In their arrogance of never hearing of such a thing, the Dope Bag staff wrote back they'd, 'never heard of it', 'doubt very much it could happen," and saw no reason to prefer a pinned barrel over a screw in barrel for that reason. (which may be correct, actually) But the point is the High Desert days of California were a mad time for blasting ammo I've never seen since. Most the weapons were maintained to some degree, but a lot weren't. Imagine shooting a case of ammo in an afternoon drinking beer, then returning home and the rifle to the closet, uncleaned, only to take it out next Sunday to repeat?? Well, that's a lot of what happened too. San Bernardino was the birthplace of the Hells Angels. You had bikers, hippies, yuppies, meth lab people, desert rats... engineers from Lockheed and school teachers from the Valley. There was no 'desert protection act' and the wide open spaces, thousands of sq miles, were there to roam. Imagine all the spillage from the large urban centers, Orange County, Tri Empire, and LA, cruising to the desert for shooting, hiking, whatever? You can't even imagine it. We are talking about an awful lot of gunfire.
And honestly? The only failure to fires I really heard much about were from AR's. Maybe the people who bought M1A's, after expending such an amount- usually well over a 1000, and that was 20 years ago, took care of them; and inaccurate was never a word associated with them.
When AK's and SKS were cheap, people used to burn them out shooting.
munk
I would not call it a 'failure'. It can be called that because it did not address current military thinking and needs when produced, but intrinsic to the weapon, it does have, and is very useful.
If it had been in service the way the AR is today, any 'front sight' issue would have long been addressed and corrected, and certainly tools and a repair friendly environment commonly available. The M14 arrived and left. The support systems no sooner in place were removed. I guess it remains a kind of expert's weapon. Special forces do use them to great effect today.
After listening to Spectre and Dave Rishar, I can see why the leftovers in any base might not be worth bothering with. Neglected and abused. If a civilian or special ops had an individual weapon- different story.
In fact, my experiences are much different than Spectres and Daves. They both have worked in large bureacracies. I don't know why I didn't think of this before- when this issue kept returning. Could any rifle with such a short service exposure been a 'success'? If the AR had been introduced, then pulled back, with confused support and tools, how would it's reputation have been built?
As for the HK91, I did not find it 'badly balanced'; just different from what I was used to. It may fire full auto better than the other 308 bullet chuckers, being as forward heavy as I recall.
If you like the way a bolt action rifle holds, particularly the service Springfield 03, you will like holding the M14. It is a classic rifle.
I've always thought the FN/FAL did what the AR later did- changed the way one holds rifles. Both systems seem to be cradled, or 'envelope' the user. Sorry for my english. I'm not a technician/engineer.
When I could shoot rifles, I could shoot all of these fairly accurately. They were all a lot of fun.
To tell the truth, as far as balance with its cartridge and handling characteristics while in operation, the AK action seems smoother to me than all of them. By 'smoother', I don't mean to dismiss HK's roller system, but the AK actions with their rotating bolts just feel as if something 'right' is happening, and not a mechanical task. Like hitting a baseball.
It was an interesting test environment- the Southern California desert in the 70's through the early 90's: there are not many soldiers who fire as many rounds as the crowd did regularly out there. The surplus stuff was pouring in from China and then Russia later. You'd get serious shooters, and then a lot of partying shooters. Geeze. What a place and time. They'd get crocked on something then shoot their barrels too hot to hold.
It was in the desert I thought of the 'dance of ten thousand bullet holes'; the fate waiting for any abandoned vehicle left for too many days and nights unattended.
These civilian shooters could have taught something to the Army and the arms manufacturers. So many weird things would happen, things you'd say were impossible. I wrote to the American Rifleman once about a pinned barrel SKS, the barrel being 'shot loose' after so many many cases of ammo through the gun. Guy brought it into the gun shop. In their arrogance of never hearing of such a thing, the Dope Bag staff wrote back they'd, 'never heard of it', 'doubt very much it could happen," and saw no reason to prefer a pinned barrel over a screw in barrel for that reason. (which may be correct, actually) But the point is the High Desert days of California were a mad time for blasting ammo I've never seen since. Most the weapons were maintained to some degree, but a lot weren't. Imagine shooting a case of ammo in an afternoon drinking beer, then returning home and the rifle to the closet, uncleaned, only to take it out next Sunday to repeat?? Well, that's a lot of what happened too. San Bernardino was the birthplace of the Hells Angels. You had bikers, hippies, yuppies, meth lab people, desert rats... engineers from Lockheed and school teachers from the Valley. There was no 'desert protection act' and the wide open spaces, thousands of sq miles, were there to roam. Imagine all the spillage from the large urban centers, Orange County, Tri Empire, and LA, cruising to the desert for shooting, hiking, whatever? You can't even imagine it. We are talking about an awful lot of gunfire.
And honestly? The only failure to fires I really heard much about were from AR's. Maybe the people who bought M1A's, after expending such an amount- usually well over a 1000, and that was 20 years ago, took care of them; and inaccurate was never a word associated with them.
When AK's and SKS were cheap, people used to burn them out shooting.
munk
Last night I got another Brownell's mini-catalogue in the mail, and roughly 50% of it was dedicated to bolt-on gizmos, gadgets, doo-dads and thing-a-ma-bobs for AR-15 guns. So, if you want what everyone else is apparently "selecting" these days, that would probably be an AR-15. Brownells doesn't promote this stuff - they just stock what everybody wants and what gunsmiths are making their profit margin installing these days.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 971
Can't go wrong with an M1A. There are a few companies that will rig up a DMR package for around your price range.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2004
- Messages
- 3,178
That's not modular. Modular is changing your caliber, barrel length, sights, and even operating system in under a minute. However, modularity is not the issue here. Ease of maintenance is. An AR can be built from the ground up in about an hour with an armorer's wrench, a vise, and a set of headspace gauges. (That's not an exaggeration.) Any other work is only easier and quicker.
I would not personally attempt to build an M14 at all, even if I had the tools to do it.
More to the point, things just plain go wrong less frequently with the M16. I've only personally dealt with two that were deadlined for good that I can remember -- one kB! and one dropped into the bottom of a drydock. (I saw a few go out of service due to overenthusiastic automatic fire but they could've been restored to service fairly easily, although I wouldn't expect them to group well afterwards.) I also saw several more OOC rifles at the Ft. Lewis DRMO, all of which were quite visibly trashed; one in particular looked as if it had been run over by a tracked vehicle. I didn't get a confirmation on that but those folks at Lewis certainly know how to have a good time.
I've seen enough faulty M14's that I can offer points about the frequency with which certain things go bad, why they go bad, and possible solutions. Hence, my point to John about the front sights; while the blade is protected by ears, the entire assembly itself is secured by one rather small dovetail and a tiny hex head screw and is not protected. Any blows to the ears won't affect the blade but they will dislodge the mount, throwing your windage off at the very least and probably stripping the screw out at the same time. Note that a spare screw is not included with the rifle, nor does the combi tool feature a driver for it.
Result? I've got to track down a replacement and a hex wrench. It's not too bad if it happens in my garage, but anywhere else...
Even if they arrived from the depot with the windage set and the sight mounted properly (these are not givens, BTW) and myself or someone else has taken the time to confirm the windage and scribe witness marks on the sight and dovetail so that the setting can be restored when someone invariably knocks it out of alignment, there's no guarantee that it will stay where it is when the barrel heats up. When I sighted in my own M1A I resolved the situation by star-torquing the damned screw, Loctiting everything, scribing the marks, peening the mount and screw, and praying. It's only come loose once since then. The best part about it is that if I didn't take the time to check the witness marks before shooting, I won't even know things are hosed until I fire it.
I love surprises, but not like this.
If anyone thinks that the front sight is not particularly exposed to damage, I invite them to take their rifle and run around in full gear indoors or enter and exit vehicles. Do so in a hurry under the influence of an adrenaline dump. If that doesn't do the job, drop it. Another approach is to simply box it up and ship it somewhere. Report back, and consult the instructions above to fix things. If you got the rear sight too you're out of luck, as there are no quick fixes for when those go wonky -- you'll just have to replace more parts.
We have not even addressed the operating rod, stock, recoil spring guide rod, recoil spring itself, rear sight in detail (oh, that rear sight), and the flash suppressor -- any of which can trash the weapon's accuracy and/or zero fairly easily and with no obvious evidence. In fact, sometimes they arrive like that.
Hot-swapping bolts is never a good thing to be doing casually, but I'd be particularly careful about it with a Garand or M14. If the tolerances and heat treat are good the action will be amazingly strong but it's best not to take such things for granted. The same goes for the op rod, as the interface between the bolt roller, op rod, and receiver all affect the bolt's lockup.
As I've said, I still like mine but I make no bones about what it is -- the best rifle of WWII. It was obsolete for its designed purpose before it was built. The fact that it still soldiers on in very limited roles speaks more for the ingenuity of the military than the utility of the rifle. "This is what they gave us, so let's make it work..."
If the object of maintenance is simply to keep it working, that's rather easy. It's a reliable rifle and reliability is easy to design in -- use a robust operating system that imparts plenty of energy to the reciprocating components and make those components heavy. That's how Garand did it, that's how Kalashnikov did it, that's how everyone does it. Keeping it working and hitting where you point it at is the real trick.
As a military rifle it was an abject failure. As a civilian rifle, it's not bad at all. It's important to make the distinction in this case. That's why I say that I like mine, but I hated working with them.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2003
- Messages
- 1,065
What do you think of this statement Dave Rishar? I thought the GI chrome lined barrels were good for a lot more rounds than 5000.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2004
- Messages
- 3,178
Dunno. I only ever saw record books attached to match weapons. Some probably went longer than this. Some definitely did not even make it that far, although it wasn't necessarily because of the barrels.
I served with Gunmaurer at my last duty station. I got out of the game in '05 and he's still playing it. 5000 sounds slightly low but if he says 5000 is the average, that's probably what it is. I don't recall what the navy specifies. (If it even specifies anything at all.)
I served with Gunmaurer at my last duty station. I got out of the game in '05 and he's still playing it. 5000 sounds slightly low but if he says 5000 is the average, that's probably what it is. I don't recall what the navy specifies. (If it even specifies anything at all.)
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2006
- Messages
- 1,173
Howdy. Can I revive this for a few things I never found out. My first thought on the CETME was that with it's $400 price tag it was going to be junky. Are you saying that hk-91's are expensive junk, or that CETME are undervalued jewels? They are practically the same right? But the CETME's are rebuilt recievers? Everyone seems to think they are junky after being rebuilt. Is that not the case?
Discussions like this get confusing, because we're talking about .223 and .308 models all in the same discussion, when they're apples and pomergranates, so to speak. In the .308 world obviously the concensus in M1's and M14's are great, no question. But I personally have taken great interest in this discussion cuz I'm looking for ONE, and only one do-it-all tactical carbine-ish (16") .308. Those two seem bulky and I don't really like the way they feel, per say. Stocks feel clunky to me. I guess I want pistol grips, one that's light, powerful, that can be tricked out, and effective at both 100m and 500m. I personally want a .308 carbine I can love. The choices that come up a lot are AR, DPMS, JLD/HK 91's, FAL's, and CETME's. But, each and everyone of them seems to be met with low opinions for various reasons. I thougth HK-91's were $2.5K cuz they were really really great rifles, so therefore the new JLD's would be well recieved, but no? Do you have to spend upwards of 2k to get a good one? Is there a descent .308 base model that I can build on for around 1K? Thanks.
A ex-army friend of mine always perferred the SLR ( FN-LAR ).One of the reasons he said he perferred it to a M16 was that with the SLR you could bash someone over the head with it and it wouldn't break...ah yes it indeed was a far simpler time way back then....LOL.
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2006
- Messages
- 1,173
Sure. But aren't the FN's rebuilt? Wikipedia says the BATF regs make these foriegn ones have to be cut out and rebuilt, right?
Armalite AR10 A4? Noones mentioned it. Anyone?
If I sound a little scattered, it because I am. Each carbine .308 rifle I've mentioned seems to get critical reviews here. So if there's a .308 model that fits the bill, then can we talk about it? Instead of talking about what isn't good, what IS a good .308 by todays standards? Armalite AR10A4? Or maybe it is "none, they're all junk in one way or another so just get a Russian Saiga for $300 and save your money for ammo"? Is there a .308 carbine I can love?
Armalite AR10 A4? Noones mentioned it. Anyone?
If I sound a little scattered, it because I am. Each carbine .308 rifle I've mentioned seems to get critical reviews here. So if there's a .308 model that fits the bill, then can we talk about it? Instead of talking about what isn't good, what IS a good .308 by todays standards? Armalite AR10A4? Or maybe it is "none, they're all junk in one way or another so just get a Russian Saiga for $300 and save your money for ammo"? Is there a .308 carbine I can love?
- Joined
- Nov 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,331
FoB,
Just about none of the weapons under discussion are junk. The M1A is not really the super rifle many think it is- especially if you want a rifle that stays accurate without a lot of work dedicated to keeping it that way (the rifle, not you- of course, you have to practice). It is attractive Americana, though. I think it's really so popular because a lot of Americans, perhaps subconciously, use the M14's replacement to represent why the US did not prevail in Vietnam. To them, the M14 represents power and doing things right, and individual power over stupid bureaucrats.
Saigas are excellent rifles, and great values, but finding mags at present will be difficult and expensive.
HKs tend to be reliable, but don't have great ergonomics. Yes, the CETME is basically the same rifle, and most furniture will fit on either. Occasionally, the folks at Century will do a really bad job of putting a firearms together, but in general, most CETMEs should work great for you. The price is starting to climb on these, so if you "have" to have one, get it soon.
FNs were used by more non Comblock countries than any other rifle, due to the US bullying NATO into accepting the .308 Winchester/7.62x51mm. The US changed its mind a few years later, and went with the M16, but most of the countries using the .308 battle rifles kept theirs for years. FNs, like most modern autoloaders, are interchangeable parts. It doesn't really matter if the receiver it's on now is the same one it was originally fitted to, as long as the fitting is done well- and I have non-gunsmith friends who have built several. The two complaints you may hear about the FAL rifles is that they're not tack drivers, and some say they don't feel as much like a rifle as a wood, traditional American-stocked rifle. Personally, I think wood-furniture FALs are some of the most beautiful rifles in the world. DSA in the US makes FAL rifles that have been described by more than one gun expert as "The best FALs ever".
ARs in .308 tend to fairly accurate, but are rumored to be less reliable than some other systems. Please be aware that it's difficult to find a single rifle to do everything. Personally, I have come to believe that a good, sturdy, handy bolt-action rifle in something like .308 or .30-06, teamed with an autoloading rifle in a military caliber, is the best compromise.
Regards,
John
Just about none of the weapons under discussion are junk. The M1A is not really the super rifle many think it is- especially if you want a rifle that stays accurate without a lot of work dedicated to keeping it that way (the rifle, not you- of course, you have to practice). It is attractive Americana, though. I think it's really so popular because a lot of Americans, perhaps subconciously, use the M14's replacement to represent why the US did not prevail in Vietnam. To them, the M14 represents power and doing things right, and individual power over stupid bureaucrats.
Saigas are excellent rifles, and great values, but finding mags at present will be difficult and expensive.
HKs tend to be reliable, but don't have great ergonomics. Yes, the CETME is basically the same rifle, and most furniture will fit on either. Occasionally, the folks at Century will do a really bad job of putting a firearms together, but in general, most CETMEs should work great for you. The price is starting to climb on these, so if you "have" to have one, get it soon.
FNs were used by more non Comblock countries than any other rifle, due to the US bullying NATO into accepting the .308 Winchester/7.62x51mm. The US changed its mind a few years later, and went with the M16, but most of the countries using the .308 battle rifles kept theirs for years. FNs, like most modern autoloaders, are interchangeable parts. It doesn't really matter if the receiver it's on now is the same one it was originally fitted to, as long as the fitting is done well- and I have non-gunsmith friends who have built several. The two complaints you may hear about the FAL rifles is that they're not tack drivers, and some say they don't feel as much like a rifle as a wood, traditional American-stocked rifle. Personally, I think wood-furniture FALs are some of the most beautiful rifles in the world.
DSA in the US makes FAL rifles that have been described by more than one gun expert as "The best FALs ever".ARs in .308 tend to fairly accurate, but are rumored to be less reliable than some other systems. Please be aware that it's difficult to find a single rifle to do everything. Personally, I have come to believe that a good, sturdy, handy bolt-action rifle in something like .308 or .30-06, teamed with an autoloading rifle in a military caliber, is the best compromise.
Regards,
John
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2003
- Messages
- 1,601
Put a moderate power scope on the bolt gun, preferably in a forward position and you have a rifle for hunting anything native to North America, and in most terrain. If that guy Kilimanjaro (sp?) Bell can kill elephants with a 7X57 then a .308 can drop a griz. Might be overkill for a rabbit or quail though...
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2006
- Messages
- 1,173
Thanks a lot guys. In the world of .308 carbines, that seems to be the consensus. Not the most reliable, right? JLD's making a 16" HK-91 clone; does that fall into the not-so-reliable carbine group? Anyone like the new Armalite AR10A4?
That's good to know about CETME's, Spectre. The Wikipededia article on them says this about their imports:
"In the case of the Century CETME, the receiver, trigger group, muzzle attachments and plastic furniture are of US manufacture, so the Century CETME complies with regulations. Unfortunately, the Century CETME "clone" is so far removed from the original CETME in quality and operation that it's function can not be assured by the company and their reputation has suffered."
I'd assumed that's why they were only $399 at my local pawn shop. Your comments about the HK reminded me that the gas systems on the HK's wasn't very effective either, right? Is there a tactical that does? I just read the AR-10 article in Wikipedia and it sounds like it was the end-all-be-all of .308's. Are the modern ones missing anything?
That's good to know about CETME's, Spectre. The Wikipededia article on them says this about their imports:
"In the case of the Century CETME, the receiver, trigger group, muzzle attachments and plastic furniture are of US manufacture, so the Century CETME complies with regulations. Unfortunately, the Century CETME "clone" is so far removed from the original CETME in quality and operation that it's function can not be assured by the company and their reputation has suffered."
I'd assumed that's why they were only $399 at my local pawn shop. Your comments about the HK reminded me that the gas systems on the HK's wasn't very effective either, right? Is there a tactical that does? I just read the AR-10 article in Wikipedia and it sounds like it was the end-all-be-all of .308's. Are the modern ones missing anything?
- Joined
- Nov 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,331
The thing is, Wiki is an open-source document. Anyone can write anything, true or not.
Despite some initial problems, the AR-15 has had many years to have most of its major bugs worked out. AR-10s have been used much less, so naturally haven't had as much chance to be improved.
The general concensus from many of the gun folk I respect most is that the FN FAL is the best autoloading .308 battle rifle ever made. Several of these folks that I am honored to call my friends describe it as the best balanced battle rifle, as well. The folks also typically own, or have owned, other quality .308s such as HK 91s and M1As.
The FN FAL is not the most accurate of the bunch (probably AR-10 would take that honor), but is certainly the best combination of fair price, excellent ergonomics, reliability, and accuracy.
John
Despite some initial problems, the AR-15 has had many years to have most of its major bugs worked out. AR-10s have been used much less, so naturally haven't had as much chance to be improved.
The general concensus from many of the gun folk I respect most is that the FN FAL is the best autoloading .308 battle rifle ever made. Several of these folks that I am honored to call my friends describe it as the best balanced battle rifle, as well. The folks also typically own, or have owned, other quality .308s such as HK 91s and M1As.
The FN FAL is not the most accurate of the bunch (probably AR-10 would take that honor), but is certainly the best combination of fair price, excellent ergonomics, reliability, and accuracy.
John