The M14; To me its the finest battle rifle

M-14 is a good weapon.

Gotta go with the M-4 myself......Lightweight, durable (you can beat the crap out of it), accurate as all get out when properly zeroed. The folding stock and short barrell make it the best battlefield weapon there is. Particularly in close range, urban battle situations......And, on Airborne and Air Assault missions, it's size makes it ideal when you need to drop and fire on a dime.

All in all, A fantastic, deadly weapon.

And versatile to.
Very.....You can do head shots from 300 meters all day long. But it's within the 1-150 meter range where it really shines. Friggin' awesome.

I still have a nostalgic love for the M-16, I carried one for quite awhile in the 80's. But, it could be quite the pain in the ass. The length alone during Airborne and Air Assaults could often make it a pain the ass. Plus, the cooling issues it always seemed to have.

Those hand guards do get hot during full auto. Thats one of the reasons I would have an AR-15.
 
Haven't tried my hands with a FAL yet. I have fondled them but they never really felt comfortable to me. I have heard the Argentinian kits from sarco are very nice and very accurate.
 
M-14 is a good weapon.

Gotta go with the M-4 myself......Lightweight, durable (you can beat the crap out of it), accurate as all get out when properly zeroed. The folding stock and short barrell make it the best battlefield weapon there is. Particularly in close range, urban battle situations......And, on Airborne and Air Assault missions, it's size makes it ideal when you need to drop and fire on a dime.

All in all, A fantastic, deadly weapon.

And versatile to.
Funny thing is, in Iraq, the Bogy's were putting bounties on M-4's and compatible 5.56, they wanted 'em so bad.........The crap we would seize from them was laughable.
 
Haven't tried my hands with a FAL yet. I have fondled them but they never really felt comfortable to me. I have heard the Argentinian kits from sarco are very nice and very accurate.




The FAL I pictured shoots about 2 MOA. My G3 on the other hand shoots about .5 MOA. I have hit people sized targets at 1200 meters with the scope and at 800 meters with iron sights. It's a tack driver. What most people don't know is the barrel is free floated on the HK series of rifles. A standard G3 will outshoot a National Match M1A any day of the week, especially if you drop a PSG-1 trigger group into it.

The Argentine kits are fine but it is the person putting it together that matters.

I have a Colt AR that I've tricked out with a Evolution barrel and a Wilson Combat match trigger and it shoots .5 MOA all the way out to 600 meters with a 69 grain VLD projectile.
 
Haven't tried my hands with a FAL yet. I have fondled them but they never really felt comfortable to me. I have heard the Argentinian kits from sarco are very nice and very accurate.




The FAL I pictured shoots about 2 MOA. My G3 on the other hand shoots about .5 MOA. I have hit people sized targets at 1200 meters with the scope and at 800 meters with iron sights. It's a tack driver. What most people don't know is the barrel is free floated on the HK series of rifles. A standard G3 will outshoot a National Match M1A any day of the week, especially if you drop a PSG-1 trigger group into it.

The Argentine kits are fine but it is the person putting it together that matters.

I have a Colt AR that I've tricked out with a Evolution barrel and a Wilson Combat match trigger and it shoots .5 MOA all the way out to 600 meters with a 69 grain VLD projectile.

Wow a G3 shooting .5moa!!!! I believe thats the one where you can get 50 mags for $125 also. I know people that are building those up on bent flats and maybe would be cool to build some day.
 
Haven't tried my hands with a FAL yet. I have fondled them but they never really felt comfortable to me. I have heard the Argentinian kits from sarco are very nice and very accurate.




The FAL I pictured shoots about 2 MOA. My G3 on the other hand shoots about .5 MOA. I have hit people sized targets at 1200 meters with the scope and at 800 meters with iron sights. It's a tack driver. What most people don't know is the barrel is free floated on the HK series of rifles. A standard G3 will outshoot a National Match M1A any day of the week, especially if you drop a PSG-1 trigger group into it.

The Argentine kits are fine but it is the person putting it together that matters.

I have a Colt AR that I've tricked out with a Evolution barrel and a Wilson Combat match trigger and it shoots .5 MOA all the way out to 600 meters with a 69 grain VLD projectile.

Wow a G3 shooting .5moa!!!! I believe thats the one where you can get 50 mags for $125 also. I know people that are building those up on bent flats and maybe would be cool to build some day.




So long as you are shooting good ammo (like Federal Premium Match) instead of cheap surplus mine will do it quite handily. Don't forget the Germans built a sniper rifle (G3SG1) and used the basic G3 with a barrel selected for its accuracy. But the basic system is very good due to the free floated barrel. The PSG-1 trigger group is a drop in unit that breaks clean at 3.2 pounds and is the trigger group used in the dedicated PSG-1 sniper rifle.

One other thing, there is a huge difference between a factory HK product and a homebuilt rifle. The best I've ever seen a homebuilt rifle shoot is around 3 MOA, they don't have the reciever rigidity that the original has so there is barrel whip that you don't have in the original.

And please note I'm not trying to insult the M-14, it's a good rifle, but there's also a reason why it was only adopted by 21 countries (most of those we gave to them as part of our military aid) while the G3 was adopted by 66 countries (9 of which used the M-14 before switching to the G3, in fact two of the countries are license building the G3) and that reason is the G3 is a more modern design that is better because it is 20 years newer in design. The M-14 was a great rifle in its day and is still serviceable today which says a lot about it!







G3SG1
 
They make a fine deer rifle as well. I shot them from the fantail of a destroyer back in the 70's, I've shot them in other situations, and I've shot the Mattel/Colt 5.56 that replaced them. No comparison, and no question that the M-14 is the superior weapon.
 
They make a fine deer rifle as well. I shot them from the fantail of a destroyer back in the 70's, I've shot them in other situations, and I've shot the Mattel/Colt 5.56 that replaced them. No comparison, and no question that the M-14 is the superior weapon.

Well the M-16 had its issues back in the day, Nothing beats its versatility. I can have a purpose built weapon in any caliber from .22 long rifle to God knows what caliber By swapping the upper receiver and bolt carrier group with no tools. I can also do that for half the cost of a new rifle. They will also shoot as good as or better then any large bore assault rifle out there. On top of that, An AR-15 can be built in a pinch from a parts kit, vise grips and a flat head screw driver. Not even the AK-47 can boast as much. I agree that the M-14 is a great rifle, but it has been eclipsed by the cost, and versatility of the M-16/AR-15 design. The M-16 0f today is not what it was in the 60's. :poke:
 
They make a fine deer rifle as well. I shot them from the fantail of a destroyer back in the 70's, I've shot them in other situations, and I've shot the Mattel/Colt 5.56 that replaced them. No comparison, and no question that the M-14 is the superior weapon.

Well the M-16 had its issues back in the day, Nothing beats its versatility. I can have a purpose built weapon in any caliber from .22 long rifle to God knows what caliber By swapping the upper receiver and bolt carrier group with no tools. I can also do that for half the cost of a new rifle. They will also shoot as good as or better then any large bore assault rifle out there. On top of that, An AR-15 can be built in a pinch from a parts kit, vise grips and a flat head screw driver. Not even the AK-47 can boast as much. I agree that the M-14 is a great rifle, but it has been eclipsed by the cost, and versatility of the M-16/AR-15 design. The M-16 0f today is not what it was in the 60's. :poke:

The M-16 still poops where it eats. They need to upgrade it to a piston design.

I'm not a big fan of a 22 cal. Doesn't have enough know down power. For me a battle rifle has brute strength reliability, ease of maintenance, large powerful caliber, and is capable of accurate fire out to 1000 yards. That doesn't mean I don't have some 22 cal in my safe. Just not a "battle rifle" caliber in my opinion. M16 is a battle carbine in my opinion.

AR platform is cool but I would probably only buy one for prairie dogs and other varmints.
 
They make a fine deer rifle as well. I shot them from the fantail of a destroyer back in the 70's, I've shot them in other situations, and I've shot the Mattel/Colt 5.56 that replaced them. No comparison, and no question that the M-14 is the superior weapon.

Well the M-16 had its issues back in the day, Nothing beats its versatility. I can have a purpose built weapon in any caliber from .22 long rifle to God knows what caliber By swapping the upper receiver and bolt carrier group with no tools. I can also do that for half the cost of a new rifle. They will also shoot as good as or better then any large bore assault rifle out there. On top of that, An AR-15 can be built in a pinch from a parts kit, vise grips and a flat head screw driver. Not even the AK-47 can boast as much. I agree that the M-14 is a great rifle, but it has been eclipsed by the cost, and versatility of the M-16/AR-15 design. The M-16 0f today is not what it was in the 60's. :poke:

The M-16 still poops where it eats. They need to upgrade it to a piston design.

I'm not a big fan of a 22 cal. Doesn't have enough know down power. For me a battle rifle has brute strength reliability, ease of maintenance, large powerful caliber, and is capable of accurate fire out to 1000 yards. That doesn't mean I don't have some 22 cal in my safe. Just not a "battle rifle" caliber in my opinion. M16 is a battle carbine in my opinion.

AR platform is cool but I would probably only buy one for prairie dogs and other varmints.


my lower is built, I just dont know what it wants to be when it grows up. I will never convince you on .223, but all I can say for it is there are allot of dead bad guys around the world who would say different. I dont think I would want it in a bolt gun for combat, but in an M-16/AR-15 I would feel fine.
 


my lower is built, I just dont know what it wants to be when it grows up. I will never convince you on .223, but all I can say for it is there are allot of dead bad guys around the world who would say different. I dont think I would want it in a bolt gun for combat, but in an M-16/AR-15 I would feel fine.

The 5.56 isn't a horrible round. It just lacks a lot of power and lacks a whole lot more past 500 yards. As much as I like some of the features of the AR like bolt hold open and pretty good sights, I would prefer a AK with some yugo bolt hold mags and a eotech on top.
 
my lower is built, I just dont know what it wants to be when it grows up. I will never convince you on .223, but all I can say for it is there are allot of dead bad guys around the world who would say different. I dont think I would want it in a bolt gun for combat, but in an M-16/AR-15 I would feel fine.

The 5.56 isn't a horrible round. It just lacks a lot of power and lacks a whole lot more past 500 yards. As much as I like some of the features of the AR like bolt hold open and pretty good sights, I would prefer a AK with some yugo bolt hold mags and a eotech on top.

Ack ptui ! I commie guns. They are tough for sure. And beyond 500 yards cant be disputed.
 
Aint nuttin wrong with commie rifles. They go bang everytime unlike some ARs:razz:
 
Just a question. I know you can buy an AR-10 that shoots .308 rounds. Does our military deploy this weapon? If not, why don't they? It seems to me that you've got the same versatilty of the AR-15, but your shooting a bigger round with ALOT of knock down power. I know weight of the rounds and number of rounds in the magazine plays a role, but the .308 is also one of the most accurate rounds out there.
 
Just a question. I know you can buy an AR-10 that shoots .308 rounds. Does our military deploy this weapon? If not, why don't they? It seems to me that you've got the same versatilty of the AR-15, but your shooting a bigger round with ALOT of knock down power. I know weight of the rounds and number of rounds in the magazine plays a role, but the .308 is also one of the most accurate rounds out there.

True all. The thing is, the .308 can be a bear when shooting full auto from a light rifle. As well as the points you made.

liebuster, Ak is a good rifle. I pointed out before that to me the crime bill compliant guns seem to shoot better for me. I wouldn't feel naked if that's all I had, just not as sexy as I would with an M-16. :dig:
 
Just a question. I know you can buy an AR-10 that shoots .308 rounds. Does our military deploy this weapon? If not, why don't they? It seems to me that you've got the same versatilty of the AR-15, but your shooting a bigger round with ALOT of knock down power. I know weight of the rounds and number of rounds in the magazine plays a role, but the .308 is also one of the most accurate rounds out there.

True all. The thing is, the .308 can be a bear when shooting full auto from a light rifle. As well as the points you made.

liebuster, Ak is a good rifle. I pointed out before that to me the crime bill compliant guns seem to shoot better for me. I wouldn't feel naked if that's all I had, just not as sexy as I would with an M-16. :dig:

I know they deploy the .308 as a sniper round. But they should deploy the AR-10 as a "precision strike" weapon. It doesn't have to necessarily be full Auto, but made for accuracy. You may have 5 guys firing full auto at a target a good ways off, and need a precision shot without having to call in a sniper. From what I hear the M4 isn't exactly great at long distances compared to the AK. I saw a report a while back that said the troops were having trouble engaging the enemy who were attacking them from long distances with AK's.
 
Just a question. I know you can buy an AR-10 that shoots .308 rounds. Does our military deploy this weapon? If not, why don't they? It seems to me that you've got the same versatilty of the AR-15, but your shooting a bigger round with ALOT of knock down power. I know weight of the rounds and number of rounds in the magazine plays a role, but the .308 is also one of the most accurate rounds out there.

True all. The thing is, the .308 can be a bear when shooting full auto from a light rifle. As well as the points you made.

liebuster, Ak is a good rifle. I pointed out before that to me the crime bill compliant guns seem to shoot better for me. I wouldn't feel naked if that's all I had, just not as sexy as I would with an M-16. :dig:

I know they deploy the .308 as a sniper round. But they should deploy the AR-10 as a "precision strike" weapon. It doesn't have to necessarily be full Auto, but made for accuracy. You may have 5 guys firing full auto at a target a good ways off, and need a precision shot without having to call in a sniper. From what I hear the M4 isn't exactly great at long distances compared to the AK. I saw a report a while back that said the troops were having trouble engaging the enemy who were attacking them from long distances with AK's.




The Knights Armaments SR-25 is used by both the US Navy (MK11, Mod 0) and the US Army (XM110) as a sniper rifle.


Modern Firearms - Mk.11 mod.0, M110, SR-25
 

Similar threads

Forum List

Back
Top