The American Combat Rifle

[Oddball]

Next good pay day....

 

[MikeK]

Still love my Garand.

Whatever gets hit stays hit.

Got to agree with you about that.

I've never even seen an M-16 but I've read and heard enough about it to wonder why it ever replaced the M-1 (Garand), which, in the words of General Patton, was "the greatest combat implement ever devised."

I read about the M-16 jamming and costing lives in Vietnam and I heard about it first hand from a neighbor who had it happen to him and saw it happen to others. But I've never heard of an M-1 jamming and I've seen a film of one being tested (along with an AK-47) by sinking it in water, mud and sand. Both the M-1 and the AK functioned perfectly when retrieved. No malfunctions.

The M-1 is a 30.06, which is substantially more powerful than a 223. Someone hit with a 30.06, even at 500 yards, is going down.

What I like best about the M-1 is the clip-of-eight loading, which takes a trained shooter less than two seconds to do. That means a rifleman in the prone position with a few bandoliers at hand can keep shooting without significant interruption until he runs out of ammo. But the M-16 is magazine-fed and unless one is carrying a load of magazines he is out of luck if he runs out in a firefight and needs to stop to load one.

I've never seen an M-14 either, so I have a question:

Someone told me the M-14, which is magazine-fed, can also be loaded through the top just like the M-1 with a clip-of-eight. Is that true? I can't imagine how that would work. But if it isn't true then I would still prefer to carry an M-1 in combat for the reason I stated (rapid continuous loading).

I should mention I qualified four times with the M-1. Marksman in boot camp (because it was a cold, rainy, windy day). Expert twice thereafter. Sharpshooter the last time. I don't know how well I would do today, but the M-1 is an amazing weapon and I don't believe they should have replaced it with such an exotic contraption as the M-16. I believe the AK-47 would be a better choice based on all I've read and heard about it. (I've never personally handled one.)

 

[MikeK]

The grunts that walked point in my AO seemed to prefer the 870 to anyhing.

In a jungle that is understandable. Loaded with 00 the pump gun is a wicked weapon at close range. Very under-rated by the unfamiliar.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Clinton destroyed most if not all our M14's as President.

Really? How does that explain the use of M-14's in Iraq and Afganistan?

M14 rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Doesn't change the fact Clinton order a shit load destroyed. The NRA begged him to allow them to sell them for the Government or to release them for meet wins like they have the Garand. But you go ahead and pretend it didn't happen.

True. He also dumped thousands of tanks and APC's in the ocean to make off-shore reefs.
Some folks thought this was a great idea but not long afterwards were complaining that we sent our boys to Iraq without enough armor.

 

[MikeK]

There is method to the madness of destroying military gear: It must be replaced. And the Military Industrial Complex fields a generously grateful lobby.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Like any other tool some weapons are better at some tasks than others. A saw and a hammer may both be good tools but they aren't equally good at the same tasks. An assault rifle is designed to be short, light, handy and accurate enough for short/intermediate range hits and able to to put a lot of lead in the air for fire suppression (which is where the "assault" came from).

An M-14 is in fact a M-1 Garand with the reciever shortened to use the 7.62 NATO round, a detachable box mag. and selector swithch for full auto fire.The M-14 is well designed for long range accuacy and lethality. A purpose mod. version was the Army issue sniper rifle in Vietnam. It is a favorite of troops in the ME. A great many M-1 Garand recievers have been used to make "M1A's" which are simi-auto versions of the M-14 for civilian use.

 

[Moonglow]

I prefferred the M50 or M60

 

[9thIDdoc]

...but I've read and heard enough about it to wonder why it ever replaced the M-1 (Garand)...

It didn't. The M-14 (really just an improved Garand) replaced the Garand.

I read about the M-16 jamming and costing lives in Vietnam and I heard about it first hand from a neighbor who had it happen to him and saw it happen to others. But I've never heard of an M-1 jamming

The prototype tested version was just fine but when it was put into full production changes were made to keep down costs. The later versions were about as reliable as the AK if kept reasonably clean. The primary cause of jaming with either is dirty/damaged magazines just as would probably be the case if you shoved a clod of mud into a Garand along with the clip. Also the higher capacity the mag. the more likely to jam. We normally loaded only 18 or 19 rnds per 20 rnd. mag. to help avoid jaming.

What I like best about the M-1 is the clip-of-eight loading, which takes a trained shooter less than two seconds to do. That means a rifleman in the prone position with a few bandoliers at hand can keep shooting without significant interruption until he runs out of ammo. But the M-16 is magazine-fed and unless one is carrying a load of magazines he is out of luck if he runs out in a firefight and needs to stop to load one.

A mag. changes at least as fast as clips and holds 2 or 3 times as much ammo. In addition the mags themelves are normally loaded from stripper clips. And, yes, bandolers of 10 ea. 20rnd. mags. were carried.

The bandolers in the pic above contain loaded spare mags. for M-16s.

 

[usmcstinger]

Outstanding research. I Carried an M16 as a USMC Infantry Fire Team Leader in Vietnam 67-68.
There were some still jamming. We were firing during the day to see how well our weapons were firing.
Usually, problems were caused by faulty extractors. Mine was caused by a faulty ejector. During September, we were issued stronger buffers to slow down the rate of fire. Just before I left to go home, my unit received the first new and improved M16s.

 

[MikeK]

Are there any vets out there (Vietnam or otherwise) who have experience with the Garand, the M-14, and the M-16? If so, which do you prefer and why?

 

[usmcstinger]

Are there any vets out there (Vietnam or otherwise) who have experience with the Garand, the M-14, and the M-16? If so, which do you prefer and why?

We were issued M14's at USMC and qualified with them.

When went for Infantry Training, we were issued M1's and used them in live fire exercises.

When I was assigned to the 3rd Bn 2nd Marines, I was issued an M14. They were still using the M14 in Vietnam in 1966.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Are there any vets out there (Vietnam or otherwise) who have experience with the Garand, the M-14, and the M-16? If so, which do you prefer and why?

Never fired the M14, I own an M1 Garand and used the M16a1 and a2 in the Marine Corps. I have fired 7.62 Russian rifles and the AK-47. ( slightly different round between the M14 and the AK-47.)

They each have different jobs. The M1 Garand is for aimed fire and is good out to 1200 yards. It has an 8 round clip and is easily reloaded so works well as a battle rifle. I assume the M14 is the same, with a larger magazine rather then a clip. The M16 is for medium to short range. Maximum effective range according to the Army is 460 Meters. ( 500 yards) Pretty sure the Army only fires to 300 Yards with it. In the military the M16 originally had a full auto mode. Waste of ammo they changed it to a 3round burst mode. It is accurate for the ranges it fires at. It has a smaller round with greater velocity as I recall.

The AK-47 is rugged and tough but the one I fired was a Chinese made copy and the sights were useless. It fired way off to the right and even with the sight fully adjusted to max it still hit OFF the target to the right at 50 yards and 100 yards. But the Soviets were not interested in aimed fire accuracy, they wanted a reliable weapon that held a large magazine, was quickly manufactured and easy to use. They used to use bolt and clip fed weapons before transitioning.

I own a Garand and an M1 Carbine. Carbine fires a 30 caliber pistol round. accurate and effective to at least 200 yards better at 100. 200 is pushing it. Carbine uses a magazine. I also have fired the ww2 Soviet rifle, my Grandad owned 2 of them taken from dead Chinese in Korea. ( not by him he was to old) he bought them from a friend. No safety and kicks like a MULE. Weighed a ton and low count internal magazine.

 

[whitehall]

General Patton said "the M-1 Garand rifle is the greatest implement of war ever devised". It may have been overstated but the M-1 Garand still stands out as one of the greatest rifles in history. It's interesting that the basic rifle issued to Japanese and German troops was a bolt action rifle while US troops had an 8 round powerful semi-automatic rifle. The 30-06 packs a punch but the recoil was rather stiff and uncomfortable for later pampered generations. Forget about the .45. The little girls that Clinton thought should be allowed to be in combat couldn't even hold a .45 with one hand so the Military went to a gentler 9MM.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Are there any vets out there (Vietnam or otherwise) who have experience with the Garand, the M-14, and the M-16? If so, which do you prefer and why?

Before the Army-in JROTC-I trained with the M-1 Garand. In basic I trained with the M-14 and qual. Sharpshooter in '68. I qual. Expert with the M-16 in '69 and trained with the 1911A1 .45ACP pistol. In '69-'70 I carried the M-16 and, to a somewhat lesser extent, the .45 pistol, the M79 grenade launcher and occasionally was de facto gunner for the M-2 .50cal BMG during combat operations in Vietnam. I qual. as "living".

Following a four year active stint with the Army I was in the USAR for aprox. 15yr. during which I-at various times-qual. expert with .45 pistol and-along with M-16 instructed in their use. I also functioned as armorer and NCOIC of the unit arms room and as "Capt." of the unit rifle/pistol team where both the M-14 and M-16 were used in military comp. shooting. During this time I owned an issue condition 03A3 Springfield that would shoot right with most comp. M-14's.

Training and logistical concerns probably make the M-16 the better choice for general issue in Vietnam.

 

[Publius1787]

I have always preferred the M-14

Clinton destroyed most if not all our M14's as President.

We are still using them Gunny. One of these walked in to my office once at WTBN.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I have always preferred the M-14

Clinton destroyed most if not all our M14's as President.

We are still using them Gunny. One of these walked in to my office once at WTBN.

Clinton destroyed at least half of the surviving M14's. Carter destroyed some too. My link said something like 1.3 million were made and Clinton is known to have destroyed close to 500000 in his first term. No count from second term.

 

[Publius1787]

Clinton destroyed most if not all our M14's as President.

We are still using them Gunny. One of these walked in to my office once at WTBN.

Clinton destroyed at least half of the surviving M14's. Carter destroyed some too. My link said something like 1.3 million were made and Clinton is known to have destroyed close to 500000 in his first term. No count from second term.

Oh I dont doubt that at all. We could'nt event afford toilet paper or blanks after Clintons hack job. Remember when they tried to blame Bush for the lack of armor on our hmvee's? Hell, I sill remember Marines trying to figure out what they were going to do after their manditory early discharges in some MOS's with their wives and children worried sick.

 

[whitehall]

I was a kid from New York who never held a rifle bigger than a .22 and I was left handed to boot. The Marines taught me to fire a M-1 Garand right handed and I qualified sharpshooter in Boot Camp.

 

[Publius1787]

I was a kid from New York who never held a rifle bigger than a .22 and I was left handed to boot. The Marines taught me to fire a M-1 Garand right handed and I qualified sharpshooter in Boot Camp.

They did the same to my father. However, when the DI chided him for not being able to shoot my father told him he was left handed. The DI said go ahead and shoot left handed. After coming within a point of the Battalion record he allowed him to stay that way.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I was a kid from New York who never held a rifle bigger than a .22 and I was left handed to boot. The Marines taught me to fire a M-1 Garand right handed and I qualified sharpshooter in Boot Camp.

They did the same to my father. However, when the DI chided him for not being able to shoot my father told him he was left handed. The DI said go ahead and shoot left handed. After coming within a point of the Battalion record he allowed him to stay that way.

Ya they don't like lefties cause the brass ejects to the right. On all the weapons we are discussing. Further with the M1 that hunk of metal that is the clip ejects to the right also.