I love mine, bought it surplus in 1988.. I used the G3 rifle a lot during military service ( in and out of the army for many years..) The G3 is good but I find the M14 faster and more instinctive to shoot. The trigger pull on the M14 is also far superior to the G3 and FN FAL too..
Mine is also very accurate with norwegian army surplus ammo.
Posts: 3965 | Location: Vell, I yust dont know.. | Registered: 27 March 2005
You obviously don't live in the US; M14s are all full auto and were not sold as surplus. But yes, the M14 was an old school wood and steel, battle rifle. Obsolete for military use for several reasons. We can only have newly made, semi auto clones. Of which there are many. I have built many of them on various makes of receivers and GI parts. Which are no longer available either, but commercial parts are. Great rifles. But I like the FN FAL too. G3: just a stamped cheap to make, rifle, that does work. I have a semi auto version of that too.
Posts: 17106 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009
Well the M14 was selective fire. Don't know anything about the G3 or the FN AL. I did think that there were some not selective fire M14 sold at first, and I think I have read that the DOD retained a large number in reserve and some were issued to seals and special forces. And to selected marine riflemen. But my memory is vague about it. I did shoot the M14 a lot Full auto and semi. I really liked it. Much more lethal than the M4. However I don't have one and never wanted to buy one. I have FNAR with a 16 inch barrel and a Smith and Wesson AR10 clone.
I was stationed at Offutt AFB in Omaha Nebraska. It is SAC HQ. in 1981 my family took vacation and drove out to see me. I asked Pop to buy me an M1A. Believe it or not I could not find one locally. He did.
I had to keep it in the armory on base, since I lived in the dorms. The armory was on the flight line in a hangar building.
The first time I checked it in I was floored. All the MP's and Guards carried Shorty M16's. BUT in the armory I could see 4 double decker 16ft long racks of M14's. I asked if I could swap mine. That at least got a good laugh.
There had to be 250 - m14s'.
Posts: 6386 | Location: NY, NY | Registered: 28 November 2005
There were no semi auto only M14s made. All were select fire, albeit the selector was removed and a lock installed on most of them. And since the US rule is, once a machine gun, always, so even though you could permanently deactivate one by cutting off the selector leg, it couldn't legally be done, so none were sold. I heard a few got out to rifle teams, but I can't confirm that. I actually still have the weapons card for the one I was issued. I never got rid of any documents. The Army still used M14s in Afghanistan and they were converted with Sage stocks and issued from TACOM at Rock Island. I was in Tank Armament, but I saw the small arms guys do it, about ten years ago. The FN FAL and the G3 were also select fire.
Posts: 17106 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009
Originally posted by dpcd: You obviously don't live in the US; M14s are all full auto and were not sold as surplus. But yes, the M14 was an old school wood and steel, battle rifle. Obsolete for military use for several reasons. We can only have newly made, semi auto clones. Of which there are many. I have built many of them on various makes of receivers and GI parts. Which are no longer available either, but commercial parts are. Great rifles. But I like the FN FAL too. G3: just a stamped cheap to make, rifle, that does work. I have a semi auto version of that too.
You actually can buy an M—14. You have to go through a Class 3 dealer with a more aggressive background check and pay the NFA Tax of 200 dollars.
Posts: 10839 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky | Registered: 31 July 2016
Originally posted by GMyers: There were semi auto only National Match versions of the M14, probably modified as noted above. They were used by the military rifle teams. Also, the CMP loaned them to civilian shooting organizations for civilians to shoot in service rifle matches. In the 80's the Idaho Rifle and Pistol Assoc. had four of them. My wife shot one for a couple of years before she got her own M1A.
Posts: 173 | Location: Idaho | Registered: 28 June 2014
When I was shooting a lot of high power competitively in the 1980s, I had the loan of one with a semi-auto trigger group and the selector welded in the semi-auto position from the Colorado State Rifle and Pistol Association. The DCM would issue M14s to state associations for member use. I also had a match grade M1A of my own. When I earned my distinguished I sold the M1A and turned in the M14.
One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I'll never know. - Groucho Marx
Posts: 3816 | Location: Eastern Slope, Colorado, USA | Registered: 01 March 2001
TRW made 7600 semi auto only M 14's for cross the course target shooting, only one is still in civilian hands. In the 80's it was very common that the State rifle & pistol associations had Govt. owned m14's for loan to the team shooters. Michigan had 6 and turned them back in to the Govt. in the early 2000's. All had a cap silver soldered on, in place of the selector switch. The team members would also get ammo supplied by the Govt.
Posts: 749 | Location: MI | Registered: 26 November 2009
There is no such thing as a "semi auto only" M14. ALL were made as select fire, and are considered as such by the Govt. Doesn't matter what you do to the selector switch; even cutting the leg off does not count: once a MG, always an MG, is the law. Yes, TRW did make National Match rifles; but they are all classified as select fire/full auto.
Posts: 17106 | Location: USA | Registered: 02 August 2009
The ship’s self defense force I was on used the M14. We’d qualify by shooting across the width of the fantail of the ship. MAYBE 40’ shooting at a miniature silhouette outline of a man. They never allowed us to give full auto a try unfortunately. I grew to love that rifle and have looked at buying an M1 several times but never took the plunge. Might still get one.
I think it's hysterical the way so many think that the M16 is better than the m14, which incidentally is still in use. All the BS about the m14 being outdated and too heavy. Methinks somebody needs a little more protein in their diet. I remember when the M16 came out, the guys in Nam HATED it! They wanted their m14's back. It was weak and unreliable and they got their asses handed to them by AK 47's vs the new wonder weapon. They claimed that "it is better to wound the other guy" while our guys were getting wasted. The truth is it was cheaper to make and supply ammunition for the m16. Better rifle my arse.
Posts: 10135 | Location: Tooele, Ut | Registered: 27 September 2001
The early Vietnam experience with M-16 was ugly. The early ammo burned dirty and the city boys didn't take the time to clean their weapons properly. An early version M-16 when dirty was a disaster. No forward assist to get a partially chambered round fully into the chamber and no effective means to extract it. The forward assist addressed one of those issues, but there still isn't a way to put a boot on the op rod to extract a case like the M14 and M1 Garand.
For punching paper in DCM matches, the M16/AR-15 is much easier to shoot accurately with the current ammunition. It could be me, but shooting the 200 yd. OH stage I thought the M16/AR-15 was much more forgiving if you got aggressive with the trigger. The lower recoil 5.56 cartridge made the rapid fire stages much easier to complete with accuracy. However, this only occurred after the forward sling mount was moved off the barrel. Before that, the POI changes caused by sling tension changes made precision shooting difficult.
Which is the better choice for combat, that depends on the situation. If your crashing doors and sweeping a room, the lower recoil of the 5.56 round works exceptionally well. If you're engaging targets at 200m or more, the extra energy and momentum of the 7.62 round is advantageous.
John in Oregon
Posts: 938 | Location: Oregon | Registered: 23 November 2002
Bought a Like new M1A back in the early 90's that looked like the guy never got around to shooting it. Trw bolt H&R barrel and I forget who made the other parts. Shoots well, is easy to hit with ising the issue sights and always a favorite with whoever I let shoot it.
350 Legend, imitation is the highest form of flattery. Aww, Thanks Winchester!
Posts: 31 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 17 June 2016
Reading this post from the UK - we can only dream about shooting such rifles. They took away our ability to own and shoot any self loading rifles in the 1990’s. We can still use a .22 rimfire semi, but anything centrefire is not allowed.
We are allowed straight pulls, even spring assisted, and in the club there are several who have such rifles. Pulling and releasing a charging handle between each shot rather defeats the point.
But a strong interest in bolt action military rifles, right from the earliest Enfields to the latest Accuracy Internationals in all calibres up to the 338 Lapua.
Posts: 981 | Location: Scotland | Registered: 28 February 2011
Reading this post from the UK - we can only dream about shooting such rifles. They took away our ability to own and shoot any self loading rifles in the 1990’s. We can still use a .22 rimfire semi, but anything centrefire is not allowed.
So far we have held the anti's off in most of the country.
I have owned and shot most of the semi-auto versions of the worlds military rifles. Kept the ones I like and sold the ones I haven't.
We are still working hard at fighting the anti's.
If you ever happen to be in the US. I would gladly let you shoot some.
Posts: 19364 | Location: wis | Registered: 21 April 2001
