Which is more accurate the M1 Garand or the BAR? How do both of these old rifles stack-up against the current versions in their role i.e. M16A2 and M249 SAW?
Axel I am going to recommend two books for you to read that have a wealth of knowledge on those two rifles written by two people who knew a lot about guns. "SHOTS FIRED IN ANGER" by Lt. Col. John George
"ORDNANCE WENT UP FRONT" BY Roy F. Dunlap Also a book with good info; "U.S.RIFLE FROM JOHN GARAND TO THE M21" by R. Blake Stevens.
"The stock on the M14 rifle smoked heavily after firing 200 rounds and flames appeared after about 220 rounds. After 300 rounds the foward section of the stock burned freely. On the 473 round the bbl ruptured causing the handguard to seperate from the rifle...."
Posts: 16134 | Location: Texas | Registered: 06 April 2002
I dont know about that, I have seen several M-1's that would give a AR a good run for its money, and Axel, I belive the M-1 is more accurate than the BAR and has been in the very limited shooting I have done with the BAR
Posts: 675 | Location: anchorage | Registered: 17 February 2002
quote:Originally posted by Dark Paladin: I dont know about that, I have seen several M-1's that would give a AR a good run for its money
While that is true of a freshly tuned M-1 (lugged receiver, glass bedded stock/action, unitized gas system, match barrel), the M-1 cannot maintain that level of accuracy for as long as an AR-15 can.
The M-1's recoil wreaks havock with all glass bedding, working it loose in 1500 to 2000 rounds on average. Once that happens, the op-rod starts contacting parts of the stock that it shouldn't, and accuracy deteriorates even faster.
None of that happens on the AR-15, due to the design and recoil differences between the rifles. It is not unusual to see National Match grade AR-15 service rifles that display a match-winning level of acuracy with 4000 to 5000 rounds through them. AR-15s basically become inaccurate only when their barrel's throat becomes too worn. Period.
Those are the reasons why the AR-15 rules the NRA and CMP service rifle roost.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
Dark Paladin, you have experience with both the M1 and the BAR! That is awesome! I have spoke with a few veterans and they seem to be mixed on the subject of which rifle was actually more accurate. To a man all the former BAR shooters say the BAR was more accurate. A few of the M1 guys agree that the BAR was more accurate while the remainder say the M1 was.
How do these two rifle stack-up against the modern day equivalents, though? Is the M249 better than the BAR in the suppressive fire role? How about the M1 against the M16A2.
Now that's an easy one. The BAR was and is an exceptional weapon. The BAR guys that I know (having never fired it myself) think it's the cat's ass, except the having to carry it around thing. The BAR is really limited in suppressive fire mode, as the M249 shoots flatter/fartherand does so with a belt-fed ammo capability. By flatter/farther, I mean, while the BAR has greater overall range than the M249, grazing and suppressive fire is superior in the M249 due to: belt-fed ammo, flatter tragectory and rate of fire. Not the least of which is the lighter weapon and ammunition of the M249. Having said that, I don't particularly like the M249. And I really don't have a good reason why. I would rather hump an M240 and the additional ammo and gun weight to do the same kind of job.
I don't know how the pure accuracy of the BAR compares to the M1, but I was always able to shoot much more accurately with the M1 at long ranges (up to 800 yards) on silhouette targets than I could with the BAR. It had something to do with "holding through" until the slow-slamming bolt closed before the BAR would fire. I think if you had a lot of practice with a flintlock, it would be a lot like shooting the BAR....
I think under battle conditions the M-1 is a little bit better than the M-16 action wise but the 8 round clip is a pain as compared to the 30, under range conditions unless you just got the M-1 back from being accurized its probably not going to shoot as well as an M-16/AR-15 but the SAW is the better choice for a squad weapon.
Posts: 675 | Location: anchorage | Registered: 17 February 2002
I have used both too. I qualified on an M-1 in the navy back in the 80's and an m-14. On one ship we had about 5 BAR's that I got to shoot a few times. They were good for making numerous holes in a target in a hurry but not very accurate. It wasn't the rifles fault They were very old,very heavy and normaly is not used for accurate shooting. I wish the navy still used them but I have a feeling my ship was the last to have them in the inventory. It is gone now in the mothball fleet hopefully to be turned into a museum in sandiego soon and the rifles are scrapped or dropped overboard probably. I have owned several M-1 and M-14 rifles and They are very accurate. In arsenal new condition they can and will easily out shoot any m-16 in like condition. In match condition M-16 shooters better look out. I use my m-14 in sniper matches occasionaly. The only rule is don't shoot anyone and must use military Type weapons. Every target past 300 yards I own. Unless someone has a very highly modified m-16 or ar-15 they can't compete against the 30 cals. When we get to the 1000 yard targets the ar shooters usualy go home. I saw one guy there a few months ago with a really nice semi auto BAR and his shot fine groups but it was in new condition, something rarely seen in the service. We were both shooting iron sights, prone with bipods and I had to work to outshoot him.My 14 is a pretty heavily modified match rifle weighing in at about 18 pounds without the mag so that is saying something. A lot of peoples experience with the BAR may have been different but remember this, If it hadn't been for the BAR a lot of us might not have been born. It saved a lot of lives in wartime and took a lot. If all we had was the m-1 garand and carbine then we would have at least been fighting a lot longer. It was a really good weapon. Someone mentioned the M-1 is hard on bedding. Not so. My Garand is at 3000 rounds since I bedded it and my 14 is over 5000. If it is done right with modern materials it will last a long time. I only use the brownells steel bed these days and it really takes a beating.
quote:Originally posted by m14dan: I have owned several M-1 and M-14 rifles and They are very accurate. In arsenal new condition they can and will easily out shoot any m-16 in like condition. In match condition M-16 shooters better look out. Every target past 300 yards I own. Unless someone has a very highly modified m-16 or ar-15 they can't compete against the 30 cals.
My AR-15 will take on you all the way to 600 yards. I would need another upper, with a 1 in 6.5 twist barrel to score at 1000 yards. We'll even play a friendly wager, if you're so inclined.
I don't know what you consider "highly modified". Can you clarify? Do you include in that things like 1/4 MOA rear sight and a barrel twist rate faster than 1 in 9?
BTW, I've never seen an arsenal-new M1 or M14 that could shoot better than 2 MOA. Plenty of rack grade (not National Match) AR-15s will do 1 MOA.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
Simple... when the BAR and then the M1 first came out, they were far ahead of everybody and everything else. The M249 and M16A2 aren't far ahead of anything really.
Posts: 723 | Location: Ny | Registered: 17 March 2002
IMHO, the M-1 is far and away the most accurate. I carried and used both in Korea in '52. This is only my impression. I didn't perform test to be positive but, I think the reason for this is that the BAR starts with a bolt locked to the rear. Once the trigger is pulled, the bolt slides forward, stripping around from the magazine and chambering it. Once the bolt closes the weapon fires. With the M-1, the rifle is in a bolt forward, hammer cocked position. Once the trigger is pulled, the hammer starts its fall and strikes the firing pin. The lock time is much quicker with M-1, and movement during the much longer lock time of the BAR sure doesn't help accuracy. As I said, this is just the impression I got while using them.
I've had a go with both of them also and for the reasons Bob outlined, I think, from a "bench" or "non stress firing situation", the M1 will win everytime but there is a lot to be said for putting a lot of steel downrange, correcting as you go. Firing on the forward cycle helped dampen the recoil of the BAR (that and the damn weight) so you could spot your hits and make Kentucky windage adjustments.
Posts: 2037 | Location: frametown west virginia usa | Registered: 14 October 2001
i own an ar-15, m1a (m14), and an m1 garand. the ar-15 cost half what the m1a did and will out-shoot it all day long. the m1? it`s a great piece of history and a blast to shoot, but it ain`t even close, guys. i`ve never shot a BAR. but my uncle told me that during ww2 he was in the middle of a fire fight and the bar guy got hit. my uncle was ordered to take tha bar and he refused- it was that unreliable. he said he`de rather go with a court-martial and his trusty garand. the m249 shoots well, but not as well as the m240.
Posts: 2 | Location: ohio | Registered: 22 June 2003
quote:When we get to the 1000 yard targets the ar shooters usualy go home.
The Porter Trophy and Farr Trophy are contested at Camp Perry by Service Rifles (M1 Garand, M14, and M16). Last year both were won by shooters with M16/AR15 Service Rifles.
Last year was also the first the 1000 yard target was cleaned at the Interservice Matches. It was done by Chris Hatcher shooting an M16.
M1 Garands are fantastic battle rifles, but to make them competitive for Highpower Rifle takes a lot. They also take more maintainance (Bedding, Gas System and Op Rod Tuning) to keep firing accurately.
The M14's are a little better. However during my time with the 14, I was plagued with parts breakage (elevation knob, Trigger, Gas System...) The USMC was the last branch to push the 14's hard in Highpower Competition and they would rebed or at least skim glass several times during the season. However many didn't hold hard enough to tell the difference.
Posts: 192 | Location: USA | Registered: 29 January 2003
quote:Originally posted by m14dan: In arsenal new condition they can and will easily out shoot any m-16 in like condition. In match condition M-16 shooters better look out. I use my m-14 in sniper matches occasionaly. Every target past 300 yards I own. Unless someone has a very highly modified m-16 or ar-15 they can't compete against the 30 cals. When we get to the 1000 yard targets the ar shooters usualy go home.
Someone mentioned the M-1 is hard on bedding. Not so. My Garand is at 3000 rounds since I bedded it and my 14 is over 5000. If it is done right with modern materials it will last a long time. I only use the brownells steel bed these days and it really takes a beating.
[ 06-22-2003, 18:53: Message edited by: Orion 1 ]
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
quote:Originally posted by m14dan: When we get to the 1000 yard targets the ar shooters usualy go home.
Someone mentioned the M-1 is hard on bedding. Not so. My Garand is at 3000 rounds since I bedded it and my 14 is over 5000. If it is done right with modern materials it will last a long time. I only use the brownells steel bed these days and it really takes a beating.
What kind of load are you using at 1000 yards out of that M-14? Factory stuff ain't gonna get it, and anything loaded "hot" will tear your M-14 apart in short order.
...ah yes, but the winner, Mike Getchel was still shooting an M16.
I had another recollection. I was resistant to changing over to the AR for Highpower Competition. My M14 was a consistent 10 shot MOA rifle.
For kicks, I bought a stock Colt 7 twist HBAR, loaded up some 80's and tested it off the bench wtih a scope. 10 shots into 1MOA out of this stocker told me the system was worth a closer look.
Posts: 192 | Location: USA | Registered: 29 January 2003
This is my third year shooting highpower, and one thing -especially with service rifle shooters- is clear, the mouse gun dominates!!
I still shoot the M1, it kicks. The M1A was a big step up, but it kicks too. Compared to the AR's...well there is no comparison, the AR's with heavy bullets rule the roost(or range as it were).
packrat
Posts: 594 | Location: MT. | Registered: 05 June 2003
I've NEVER heard anyone say the BAR was unreliable. One of dads good friends was a BAR man all through the European theater. Never spoke a bad word about it other than the weight. Chances are pretty good that any refuseals were made from not wanting to hump it, and not wanting to be a prime target.
Posts: 723 | Location: Ny | Registered: 17 March 2002
quote:Originally posted by Orion 1: Hey Cold Bore, where did Mr. M14 dan go? He's not been seen since he got challenged to put up or shut up.
Ya know, I was wondering the same thing...
His "I own every target beyond 300 yards" comment dug his grave.
I wonder if he'd bet his beloved M-14 in a rifle-for-rifle, winner-takes-all match? (Then again, why would I want to take an M-14 that just got beat? )
quote:Originally posted by Dark Paladin: I think under battle conditions the M-1 is a little bit better than the M-16 action wise but the 8 round clip is a pain as compared to the 30, under range conditions unless you just got the M-1 back from being accurized its probably not going to shoot as well as an M-16/AR-15 but the SAW is the better choice for a squad weapon.
All this wisdom from an 18 year old kid.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
Do you have a point? or are you just against the fact that I am 18? no else seems to dispute my point the M-1 has a better action for a battle rifle IMHO, I know many a soul with the CIB there are even a few in my unit. And all that have used both the M-1/14 and the M-16 say the same. Is it realy so hard to beleive that I have fired all those guns? next are you going to dispute the number I own because I am giving advice based on my knowledge and use of said firearms?
[ 06-26-2003, 21:49: Message edited by: Dark Paladin ]
Posts: 675 | Location: anchorage | Registered: 17 February 2002
m14dan, I'd like to offer to help you get started in Highpower Rifle. I've got Highpower friends spread around Texas and while I'm not sure where Lubbock is in relation to them, I'd like to volunteer them (I know they wouldn't mind) to help you experience the joys of the sport that I and some of the others on this thread have been fortunate to experience.
Here's a little fun offer for ya too. I'm headed to Camp Perry next year and will likely spend part of my time with the Texas mob. If you're there, we can team up and take on Orion1, coldbore and Kevin Buckley for some friendly team match fun. Start now, and I bet we can take their money.
Posts: 192 | Location: USA | Registered: 29 January 2003
quote:Originally posted by landshark: No M1 that I've shot was anywhere near as accurate as an AR, but the runner up in the Farr trophy last year was John Rea shooting a .308 M1.
Funny thing the man the trophy's named after shot the 70 bulls with a Springfiedl bolt gun.
Owning an M-1, an M-14 and an AR, as well as a couple of earlier bolt guns, I have been watching this thread for a while, and for what it is worth will put my two cents worth in.
All the weapons discussed on this thread are or were of the best quality and technology available, at the time. Hell, one look at a Carcano, Label or a Mas and you begin to understand why the French and Italians are not the greatest infantry in the world.
That said, the M-1 was great in it's day. Then as now it is heavy. Complete with ammo an all other ancillaries compared to the M-14 and the AR it is heavy. The M-14 and ammo is somewhat lighter. I "improved" my M-14 with a fiberglass stock. It is now guaranteed to give you a flinch. The AR-15 is without a doubt the easiest and cheapest of all three to get to shooting well, CONSISTENTLY WELL, and maintain.
As much as I like the M-1 and the M-14 they are not as accurate as the AR-15. At least with me shooting them.
The gentleman that is getting 1,000 yard accuracy out of .30 cal gas gun has gotten a bit carried away. And if he hasn't, you all probably don't want to shoot him. In any case, what's the point of continuing to shame him? I'm sure he has figured it out by now.
Posts: 614 | Location: Miami, Florida USA | Registered: 02 March 2001
Phantom Duck, I'm in agreement with you. Much of the swaggering going on here is unnecessary. What's being missed here by my fellow Highpower Competitors is the opportunity to draw someone into the sport that's given us the opportunity to hone our skills and gain so much enjoyment.
Coldbore, If M14dan does choose to hook-up with the Texas Service Rifle group, he will be getting some very high quality coaching from the like of Alonda Roy, Jeff Rost et al. Don't go spending any money just yet.
[ 06-27-2003, 04:06: Message edited by: Chris F ]
Posts: 192 | Location: USA | Registered: 29 January 2003
Some company (Springfield Armory or Auto-Ordnance?) is currently making and selling a semi-auto version BAR (saw one at a local gun shop). Wonder how well it shoots? Maybe on their web site...?
Posts: 1946 | Location: Michigun | Registered: 23 May 2002
quote:Originally posted by Chris F: Phantom Duck, I'm in agreement with you. Much of the swaggering going on here is unnecessary. What's being missed here by my fellow Highpower Competitors is the opportunity to draw someone into the sport that's given us the opportunity to hone our skills and gain so much enjoyment.
Coldbore, If M14dan does choose to hook-up with the Texas Service Rifle group, he will be getting some very high quality coaching from the like of Alonda Roy, Jeff Rost et al. Don't go spending any money just yet.
Chris-
Notice my after my last post. I was trying to show that it was a "bluff", or "trash-talking", just like we do on the line all the time. Please don't take it as swaggering. I put my initial "spanking" out there to Dan, but see now that he hasn't come back, although I suspect that he IS reading along.
I have shot with some of the best in the business, and will continue to. And I've taken a sound thrashing on occassion. Heck, I'll shoot "against" anyone, just to put more bodies on the line.
I'll be shooting a 600 yard Prone match on Saturday, and taking a buddy along. I got him to try it last month for the first time, after a few years of trying to get him out there. He's hooked now!
I spent my time as Leg fodder, and now I try to keep new guys coming in behind me.
Dan, if you're still reading, take the opportunity offered above, and go shoot some High Power with these guys. Then I'll come down with Orion & we'll all have a go at it. When the dust settles, I promise not to take your rifle. (You'll be needing it for swapping material when you run out to get an AR-15! ).
![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif){kind=icon}
![[Roll Eyes]](images/icons/rolleyes.gif){kind=icon}
![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon}
![[Razz]](images/icons/tongue.gif){kind=icon}
![[Wink]](images/icons/wink.gif){kind=icon}
