Which rifle kicks harder from the point of view of the shooter.

M1 Carbine
M16
AR15 chambered in 7.62X39 Bloc
M14

Just curious what everyone thinks. The rifles are listed by increasing weight and power.

Todd E

M-14,though it is hair splitting as none really develop enough recoil,to find offensive(in my opinion).

That being said,my M1A1 was the most fun of the lot............

The calculated recoil number support Bigsticks observations. The M14 does if fact generate considerably more recoil than the other three. That said it is still very light. About the same as you typical sporter weight 22-250 or 243. It has always amazed me the comments made about how a 243 in a 7 pound rifles porduces no objectionalbe kick, while the M14 kicked too savagely to be an effective battle rifle. Much of this had to do with rapid fire exercises. You cannot hold any of these weapons on target in full auto. There is too much toruqe about the butt plate due to the drop at comb.

Of the other three options, which kicks harder.
The M1 Carbine, the M16, or the AR15 7.62X39 Bloc?

Todd E

Calculated numbers only tell half the story. Stock design is critical as is a recoil pad. The M-14 doesn't have one(recoil pad). Put that rifle in a McMillan M3A with the soft adjustable butt and recoil is greatly diminished. Part of that due to a weight increase,but the most due to a design change and the addition of a recoil pad.

Of the three remaining,an AR in a light barreled 7.62x39,has the most felt recoil. According to my "kick meter"...............

Todd,
Assuming a standard configuration (and semi- auto fire) for all four rifles, 'perceived' recoil in descending order would be:

• M14
• M1
• AR-15 7.62x39
• M16 5.56mm
  

Perceived recoil includes muzzle flip, and backwards thrust.

George

------------------
Shoot straight, shoot often, but by all means, use enough gun!

M14 is hard to hold on target, even with the front grip on the A2 stock.

That said, it's far superior, in every way shape and form, to the other cartridges mentioned, and rifles, except, lugging the ammo around, if you want to use it as a squad suppression weapon.

The most accurate rifles I have ever used where M1A's, shooting an easy 1/2 MOA, @ 100 yards, with handloads, and open sites.

It was rather intresting finding a scoped 06 couldn't match em in accuracy.

Course, they are not cheap, like most of the others you mentioned.

gs

I've yet to shoot the M1A1 that would shoot with an AR,in regards to extreme accuracy.

I very much like the M1A1,but don't believe it to be a better or more accurate platform.

It takes about twice the funds,to assemble an M1A1,that will shoot on the same page as an out of the box AR(Bushmaster especially).

For rugged duty,I'm hard pressed to look beyond the HK91. They are no slouch in accuracy either.

But what does any of that,have to do with recoil?(grin)..............

Damn Big stick:
I didn't have to pay for the rifles, I just got to shoot them.

My friend also had two, completely tricked out Ar's, and they drove tacks, but, not as well as the M1A's.

1/4 vs. 3/4 MOA.
BIG difference.

gs

"I very much like the M1A1,but don't believe it to be a better or more accurate platform."
those are fighting words;-)

I firmly believe that an M1A can be as accurate as any rifle in the world, period.

gs

I won't argue. We all see things differently..............

I gotta do it.

A case in point is,that there are numerous Gunsmiths,that will GUARRANTEE sub 1/2MOA AR based rifles. Pretty common really.

You'll be HARD pressed to find anyone crazy enough to even seriously mention that,on the M14 platform. Some will guarantee 1MOA,but that is about as good as you'll find.

The AR is easier to bed(float)and more simplistic,with less moving parts to get out of sync. She's damn hard to beat,regarding extreme accuracy,in a Service Rifle and the M14 isn't the one to do it.

Now I feel better...........(grin)

Since this had digressed into a which is more accurate thread. Question. How accurate is a M21?

Thanks,
Todd E

Get hold of Clint Fowler,Fulton Armory,Compass Lake,etc,all the high end rifle builders. Pose them but a single question.

"What you can you make more accurate,the AR or M14"? Secondly,"Which has a longer accurate lifespan"? Thirdly,"Which requires more maintenance".

The M21 is a pretty good platform,I've played with them. The bitch of that weapon system,is keeping them bedded,despite the additional lug. That is the beauty of the AR. There is NO bedding.

I'm a nobody. Certainly do not take my word for it.

Make some calls,to the guys that laurels rest upon the manufacture of extreme accuracy,shooting machines. There is an overwhelming consensus,I didn't invent any of it. But have dabbled with both,using an open mind.

Hard to beat the Mouse Gun and the M14,won't do it...........

Bigstick,

Pardon my ignorance, but can you provide me with a little information as to what a M21 actually is? I really am not too sure. All I know is that it is a semiautomatic tactical weapon system.

Thanks,
Todd E

One way to look at it...the 223 is a mediocre coyote round, the 308 will handle anything from mice to moose! No problem rolling over the rams with the M-14, try that with the M-16. In open terrain hard to beat the M-14!

The M21,is essentially a "hopped up" M14. Added lug in the rear of the receiver,to help with bedding issues,due to recoil impulse. Better grade barrel,gas system,oversized adjustable Walnut stock. Just some refinements and creature comforts,to eek the most from that weapon system.

I've read about Springfield's newest venture,but have yet to see one. Their salute to Gunny Hathcock and a new twist on the old weapon design. It incorporates a McMillan stock,new trigger group and if my understanding is correct an integral scope mount. If I was of the means,I'd purchase one as a matter of principle................

Tyler,

A quick twisted AR,shooting high BC projectiles. Just might cause you to open your eyes. That combo has whipped up on more than one 308,at the range.

Should you be a diehard 308 fan,there are weapons so chambered,based on the AR design. Armalite and Stoner,foremost in my mind. Both can be tweaked in the same manner as the AR in 223 and share many of it's inherent design and accuracy attributes...........

I've lost my Springfield printed catalogs,so I went looking for their site. It gives a description of each of their M1A variants,including the M25 Hathcock Tribute Rifle(I'd forgotten the designation).

Pretty informative site. http://www.springfield-armory.com/prod-riflesm1a.shtml ................

Big Stick... I agree with you however were not talking about tricked out guns and loads. Your basic M-16 with G.I. standard issue ammo cannot compete with the M-14 and it's equivalent. We can make a Geo Metro into a race car, but there are better choices. Most G.I's don't have a machine shop, chronograph and reloading bench. Our fighting men deserve the best...the M-14, leave the M-16 to the experts, like the ones who post here!

I said,from post one(regarding comparative accuracy),that an out of the box Bushmaster is MIGHTY impressive.

A shoot out between a rack grade M16 and M14,would be as equally convincing.

There isn't any smoke and mirrors,to making the AR shoot. It is a simplistic design,with few moving parts. Today's issue M16's are quick twisted and utilize the higher BC projectiles.

It is good,because it is sooo simple. Today's ammo whistles through it,it is superbly accurate and the mechanism requires little in the way of maintenance. Chrome lined bores are a Godsend(my opinion).

As far as "Joe Average". He'll do better with the lighter recoiling,easier to operate M16.

It really isn't a fluke. Most overlook the effectiveness of the design..................

Reliability must be the the overwhelming factor in a battle rifle, then power then acceptable accuracy. At close range, jungles etc. the M-16 shines. Come out to the wide open spaces and the M-14 rules. I gave up my 223 because there are far better coyote rounds out there. If the 223 is mediocre for coyotes why would we use it as our main battle rifle? Yech!

After literally thousands of rounds in all except the 30 carbine, I honestly never felt recoil enough to think in terms of comparing the felt recoil. I think they are all "fun" guns to shoot, and deserve to be shot as much as possible. I usually recommend the 308 as a beginners gun because the felt recoil is nada. I realize it is all subjective, but most people who have tried the 308 as a first gun, wifes gun, kids gun, etc., are pleased with the result, at least the ones I have talked into that caliber. The shooting instructor down at Fort Ord used to put the butt into his crotch, fire off a few, then talk about how light the recoil was, with the M14. Maybe he was just a masochist, but I don't think so.

People confuse energy,with trajectory. The 223 is capable of pushing high BC projectiles,at pretty good speeds. that yields a nice trajectory curve.

The 308 will deliver more energy,because it is launched at similar speeds,but is of much greater mass.

I have quite a few 308's in various forms. From handy bolt action Model Seven type carbines,to multiple 26" barreled "Tactical Rifles"(M40A1 guise)and assorted semi-autos. I get along fine with the 308.

However,I own multiple 223's in the same sort of spectrum of weapon types. 20" Sporters,26" Tactical(M40A1 guise again)M40A2's,etc. I shoot them in a myriad of twist rates and utilize multiple projectiles. I've never found the 223,anything to sneeze at,or scoff. I have always found it easy to do well with,accuracy is superb in all weapon types and it does things the 308 can't. Namely launching vermin skyhigh,via a 40gr V-Max. It simply can't manage the same kind of muscle as the 308,but that is so obvious as to not even merit mention.

So I've enough examples of each,in enough variants,to know what I like.

I submit there are quite a few Coyote rounds,that are vastly superior to the 308 as well. However,that is worthy of it's own Thread................

So Big Stick: Please explain how the 223 offers the same bullet flexibility as the 308, and weight variances?

I'm also kind of curious why most match grade stuff is done with 308, 30-06, or 300 magnum?

As for accuracy, a 22 lrifle is accurate, too.

gs

If the military wanted a lighter round, why didn't they just download the 308 to a lighter, below 130 grain bullet?

I remember pushing 308 bullets over 3300 out of an 06, with 120-130 grain bullets.

Why not make a 55 grain, 308 bullet?

gs

Here I thought we were discussing recoil. A little off topic, but aren't military hand/field weapons design centered to wound, not necessarily kill, at least quickly? Not meaning to start a flame war, but the 308 was about the last of the military rounds that could be adapted for hunting/sporting purposes for big game. Before hand, yes I know. I too have killed large animals with the venerable 22LR. I'm not trying to define what constitutes a big game rifle, just where my personal line is, approx.

------------------
Good Shooting!

Just proves,it is impossible to enlighten the ignorant...........

For kicks and giggles, here are the latest iterations of the accurized M-16 and M-14/M-21/M-25:

Navy SPR:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=83354

Marine DMR:

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/lookupstoryref/20021157511

Cheers,

mfw

Mark F. Ward
mark@swervingatom.com

Big Stick,

I hear you buddy........ Some people are in a 1957 time warp.

There is a very simple and effective way to sort all this argument of 223 vs 308.

Don some webbing (no, not the wife's) and go for a run with 6mags of 5.56 and a bandolier of 50(British Army first line scales). Then do the same with 7.62. (A bit of a cheat because first line scales with 7.62 was only 4 mags of 20 and a bandolier of 50 due to the increased weight and bulk)

No person who has ever done this will ever, ever, ever choose 7.62 ever, ever, ever again even if there life depends on it (which it does)

I can't help but join in! I fired the M16A2 and an M1A1 Nat Match while in the Navy. I can tell you the field M16 is no Bushmaster! The smaller cal does allow a soldier to carry more rounds for the same weight, but.... I spent many hours on a " security detail" in the Gulf and I was laying behind a M1A1. The links above were interesting. When the Marines are sitting on a 7.62 there is a definate reason. Each clearly has its place but I was never in a situation where I was worried the M1A1 would fail to get the job done or function because of the environment.