M-14 compared to the M-16, M-4 Etc.

[jyerxa]

I have never been able to appreciate the M-16 and its offspring. And I still can’t bring myself to buy its variations. My first book report in school back in 1964 was about the failures and jamming, the complaints the GI’s first felt about it when it was first deployed in Vietnam. And ah…………………. the pain it caused.

A lot of people really like the AK-47 and purchase that and its renditions.    To me that is a weapon, maybe better a symbol of oppression to me.  Not sure. I hate it!!!

But I’m an American kind of guy. Three cheers for the Red White and Blue. 

My personal opinion is the M-14 (M1-A1) is the best rifle ever made.

[jeepasaurusrex]

The early M-16s with out the forward assist did have problems with jamming. Later the tolerances were opened up to allow for expansion and build up of carbon/dirt. The M16A1 performed much better. Later on the M16A2 offered a better gas system, 1-9 twist barrel, and adjustable rear sight for distance. I carried one for 8 years and never had an issue with it. I would (will) buy one soon.

[sebek556]

advantages m-14 has a longer range, a more lethal round, weapon durability
advantages m-4 lighter, carries more rounds, easier to maneuver in close quarters
disadvantages m-14 weight, length, round count, 
disadvantages m-4 weapon durability, round lethality,
for todays military the m-4 is a better weapon due to the current fight, and the forces using them. We pack more weight then ever before with all the body amour and electronics, plus the expanded role of women in todays military, the lighter more versatile M-4 is a better choice.
Don't get me wrong the M-14 is still a bad ass, building a skeletonized one right now, just a few more parts and I can assemble. 

[MikeWalking]

Most of the M16's early failures and bad reputation can be blamed on the hype the manufacturer gave the military.  They insisted it was such a perfect weapon it never needed cleaning, as such  10's of thousands were issued without cleaning kits.  Failures in combat opened the Pentagons eyes and mass issues of cleaning kits followed.

I can't count the rounds I fired on Ranges and assault courses in temps from -40 to 115 degrees with 80% humidity, Alaska to Panama.  The only failure I had in 10 years was a broken extractor.   I used to run into a lot of  guys who never served always eager to trash the M16, always pissed me off.

[AWS]

In Vietnam I preferred the M-14 and swapped my 16 for one.  I didn't have to pack it in the bush, if I had to do a patrol it was with a shotgun, our patrols were just outside the fence looking for evedence of tunneling.  I was in the Seabees and most of the time I was on a dozer running the camp dump.  My weapon would be hanging off the aircleaner right in front of me and would get coverred with dirt everyday.  The M-14 was more reliable for me.  Another job was controling feral dogs on the base and the 16 usually needed more than one round to put them down, not with the M-14.  Another job was shooting floaters around the docks, anything that floated near the LST's got shot either to explode a hidden mine or kill a sabateer, everyone was issued a M-14 for that job.

[MikeWalking]

    Dad was a SeaBee  Guam 1944-45

[brokenvet]

I carried the black rifle in service and bought the civilian version when I got out and still have them. 

Three years ago the M14 bug bit me hard so I built one.  Finally finished it in May 2011, since then I have not taken the black rifles out and now they are stored in the back of my safe collecting dust.  My M14 is in the front along with my M1 Garands.  Collecting parting parts for a second M14 build.

The M14's are making a come back in the military, small amount only for long range engagements, beyond 300 yards.

I will take the M14 any day over the black plastic rifle.

[ellensburgpo]

Theyre all great guns. To me they excell in different areas. When deciding between them it all comes down to what the end use is. Clearing houses I would want an M4. Sure you can shorten an m14 down, but you still have issues with that big round over penetrating through walls.

Anywhere with some distance I'd rather have the m14 any day. Tough question to generically answer for someone.

I would like to think ive run an m4 in some fairly extreme conditions, it's not the same gun it wa 40+ years ago. It's a very good platform to use if you understand how it works, use it within its limitations, and are willing to spend the time taking care of it.

All that being said, if the zombie apocalypse started now, I'd want a socom style m14 or one with a short barrel and Sage type stock....

[ellensburgpo]

advantages m-14 has a longer range, a more lethal round, weapon durability
advantages m-4 lighter, carries more rounds, easier to maneuver in close quarters
disadvantages m-14 weight, length, round count, 
disadvantages m-4 weapon durability, round lethality,
for todays military the m-4 is a better weapon due to the current fight, and the forces using them. We pack more weight then ever before with all the body amour and electronics, plus the expanded role of women in todays military, the lighter more versatile M-4 is a better choice.
Don't get me wrong the M-14 is still a bad ass, building a skeletonized one right now, just a few more parts and I can assemble.

  and I agree with him about why the m16 family of weapons is better for the military as a whole then the M14 for most of the same reasons.

[wraithen]

Most of the M16's early failures and bad reputation can be blamed on the hype the manufacturer gave the military.  They insisted it was such a perfect weapon it never needed cleaning, as such  10's of thousands were issued without cleaning kits.  Failures in combat opened the Pentagons eyes and mass issues of cleaning kits followed.

I can't count the rounds I fired on Ranges and assault courses in temps from -40 to 115 degrees with 80% humidity, Alaska to Panama.  The only failure I had in 10 years was a broken extractor.   I used to run into a lot of  guys who never served always eager to trash the M16, always pissed me off.

I think the military is owed a large amount of the blame as well. If the originally designed and tested rounds were kept the same and everything else was then the weapon would have been better off. The tight tolerances didn't help things but the military stepped on their own junk a bit with some of their decisions.

[Bean Counter]

They need to be oiled copiously if you're lazy. I'm of the training that if you dump oil in the bolt carrier and the distal end of the charging handle that the oil will at least keep the dirt in suspension and keep parts moving until it drains off. I've picked up many uncleaned M4s and still have them shoot with some oil added. Yes, I clean my own. 

[MikeWalking]

Most of the M16's early failures and bad reputation can be blamed on the hype the manufacturer gave the military.  They insisted it was such a perfect weapon it never needed cleaning, as such  10's of thousands were issued without cleaning kits.  Failures in combat opened the Pentagons eyes and mass issues of cleaning kits followed.

I can't count the rounds I fired on Ranges and assault courses in temps from -40 to 115 degrees with 80% humidity, Alaska to Panama.  The only failure I had in 10 years was a broken extractor.   I used to run into a lot of  guys who never served always eager to trash the M16, always pissed me off.

I think the military is owed a large amount of the blame as well. If the originally designed and tested rounds were kept the same and everything else was then the weapon would have been better off. The tight tolerances didn't help things but the military stepped on their own junk a bit with some of their decisions.

I'd heard reports the military went with the lowest bid on 5.56  (get what you pay for) at the start too and that caused problems.  Our supply guys in Panama sucked.  We went on Patrols for 17-21 days in a row, doing live fire courses every other day, burning thousands of rounds and oiling our M16's with DEET, yeah, Army issue bug repellent...gawd it stunk, never had any problems though

[wraithen]

Yeah some ammo just sucks. We had a gunnery exercise in yakima and must've gotten some ancient surplus stuff. Clogged up a 240 gas system in under 1000 rounds. (I keep mine oiled so 2000 is usually a warmup.) I was pretty mad. Downrange I did an experiment with miltec. Treated as directed and just kept it well oiled (not soaking wet!) and went 6 months before I couldn't take it anymore. Gun cleaned up in under an hour and she had fired over 10,000 rounds  Yet another reason I HATE clp on automatic weapons.