# Opinions of a .308 Battle rifle.



## trovilcl (Dec 30, 2018)

Ok, so I have the rifle. I made it a couple of months ago, and it is a real shooter. However, I have it set up for a DMR style gun, but im thinking because of my location, I want to try and cater it more towards a battle rifle. I'm thinking of throwing an ACOG on it and getting rid of the big scope. Any thoughts on some lighter weight gear to remove the weight? Thoughts on a carrier set up? As to why I don't have a AR15, well I got the .308 for free, and thats the best cost there is.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

I have my .308 set up as a classic scout. Long-relief, low power scope and I just installed it with quick-release rings yesterday. The idea is to be able to see around the scope as well as through the scope as well. And the QR rings are if the scope fails, I can take it off fairly quickly and use the iron sights. I'm not to keep on fancy scopes with all their technical whiz-bang stuff..... especially if it relies on a battery. Other than a bipod and a sling, I'm not adding anything else. KISS. If you're going to depend on it to save your skin, make it as basic as possible.

If you find a cache of free .308's in the future, be sure to save a couple for me.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

trovilcl said:


> Ok, so I have the rifle. I made it a couple of months ago, and it is a real shooter. However, I have it set up for a DMR style gun, but im thinking because of my location, I want to try and cater it more towards a battle rifle. I'm thinking of throwing an ACOG on it and getting rid of the big scope. Any thoughts on some lighter weight gear to remove the weight? Thoughts on a carrier set up? As to why I don't have a AR15, well I got the .308 for free, and thats the best cost there is.


.308...what platform?


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

.308 is a great round. M 14 lends itself to longer distance precision shooting well. Other platforms include the ar 15, l1a1, g3, centme amoung others


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

My .308 battle rifle is a 1993 Springfield Armory M1A Standard Model with a wood stock.
The real deal, like the M14’s Uncle Sammy issued to me.
Iron sights, no trick “tactical” crap. The only things I hung on it were a Vietnam era OD Geen web sling and an M6 bayonet.
Weight with full magazine and bayonet about 12 or 13 pounds. If you can’t hump that kind of weight, stay in the kitchen.

An AR10 is still an AR, I prefer the greater dependability of the M14.

Ooooo!!! Do I sound a little prejudiced? :vs_laugh:


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Yes what Platform is it and what ranges to you expect to engage targets. A good Redot not a bargain basement type will server you very well Will co-witness with your iron. One like an AIMPOINT Pro can be removed and put back on with no loss of zero a battery that last for 3 years if you never shut it off. There is no faster way to engage and hit mutable targets . It will stand up to any wear and tear the 308 can through at it. Weight is an advantage in a 308 maybe not as much for the first shot but every shot after that a few pound helps. Best answers come with more details. This is 2019 Good quality Scopes don't generally fail. Under 300 yards had to beat a Good Reddot for just hitting the target. Now scoring paper different story.
Ar10 with 18 inch barrel is a great weapon.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> My .308 battle rifle is a 1993 Springfield Armory M1A Standard Model with a wood stock.
> The real deal, like the M14's Uncle Sammy issued to me.
> Iron sights, no trick "tactical" crap. The only things I hung on it were a Vietnam era OD Geen web sling and an M6 bayonet.
> Weight with full magazine and bayonet about 12 or 13 pounds. If you can't hump that kind of weight, stay in the kitchen.
> ...


Yup. M1A with no whistles or bells added. I have an SR762 but it was an impulse purchase. I much prefer the M1A; the ergonomics work for me.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

If you are getting over run and your magazine is empty, that 10+ pounds of wood and steel still make an effective close combat weapon. Especially if you were smart and had your bayonet already fixed.
We were well trained in The Spirit Of The Bayonet.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

If I’m a little hard core today, I just came from the funeral service of a Brother, a Marine.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If I'm a little hard core today, I just came from the funeral service of a Brother, a Marine.


Introduce me to him in that day.


----------



## bigwheel (Sep 22, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If I'm a little hard core today, I just came from the funeral service of a Brother, a Marine.


Deepest condolences. Prayers for his family and friends.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If I'm a little hard core today, I just came from the funeral service of a Brother, a Marine.


My regrets. we are loosing to many of you hard core guys and have way to many guys who can't figure out what bathroom to use and are looking for safe places.


----------



## trovilcl (Dec 30, 2018)

So the rifle is a Aero Precision .308 AR. It has a 18" barrel with Mlok rail. I had a standard A2 stock with large grip on it and a Nikon Monarch 7 4-16x50 and aero precision lightweight single piece mount on it. I had it set up for a precision rifle, with my own loads in it and everything. However, after much consideration I have decided to go to a battle rifle set up; engaging targets between 5-600 yards efficiently. 

If im getting overrun, well then i've been shooting improperly, but I have a sidearm and a knife tomahawk combination for that purpose. Patriot?

Don't think I dont like the ole M1A's and M14's. Shoot, thats a dream gun of mine. This rifle was free though, and I just don't think you can beat free.


----------



## trovilcl (Dec 30, 2018)

Prepared One said:


> My regrets. we are loosing to many of you hard core guys and have way to many guys who can't figure out what bathroom to use and are looking for safe places.


I agree, and its mostly my generation that is the disgrace to the men hat built this great country. I for one though; like to think of myself as one of the few hardworking men under 30 that isnt afraid to get a little bloody or dirty.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

I'd suggest a 1-4 or 1-6 power scope of your choice and a Burris quick detach mount with iron backups. Could also just use some Trijicon 45 degree angle mounts for the irons. Instead of the quick detach and use what you already have for the scope. The one power will give your the ability to use both eyes open for close up shots. Of course crank it up for longer engagements.


----------



## trovilcl (Dec 30, 2018)

Chipper said:


> I'd suggest a 1-4 or 1-6 power scope of your choice and a Burris quick detach mount with iron backups. Could also just use some Trijicon 45 degree angle mounts for the irons. Instead of the quick detach and use what you already have for the scope. The one power will give your the ability to use both eyes open for close up shots. Of course crank it up for longer engagements.


Im working on right now of trading for a ACOG.


----------



## Old SF Guy (Dec 15, 2013)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If I'm a little hard core today, I just came from the funeral service of a Brother, a Marine.


Condolences Brother.


----------



## Old SF Guy (Dec 15, 2013)

trovilcl said:


> I agree, and its mostly my generation that is the disgrace to the men hat built this great country. I for one though; like to think of myself as one of the few hardworking men under 30 that isnt afraid to get a little bloody or dirty.


Your Generation was Born from, educated by, and Governed by people of Our generation. You don't own any guilt for people in your age group. Your responsible for you and yours. Nothing and no one else.


----------



## dwight55 (Nov 9, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If I'm a little hard core today, I just came from the funeral service of a Brother, a Marine.


Sorry to hear that, . . . really a sad day to end the year with.

My condolences to you and the family on the loss of a friend and family member.

As a member of 2 different veteran groups, we do the honors at the funerals (3 shot volley / fold & present flag / taps ) I see all too many of them, and occasionally there is one that I know all to well.

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

He actually passed away on Christmas.


----------



## Inor (Mar 22, 2013)

RPD: My condolences. You are in my prayers.

Trovilcl: Before you spend a bunch of money on upgrades to your rifle, how much have you spent on ammo just getting to know it the way it is set up now? This is not meant to be condescending, although it probably sounds like it is. But FAR too often we start to rely on gadgets in place of good old fashioned practice and repetition.


----------



## ekim (Dec 28, 2012)

Inor is correct. You can't make a good judgement on what needs attention until you know how it shoots as is. Does it actually fit you, is the trigger gritty, stiff. Can the trigger be adjusted. Can the sights be adjusted. New or used have you cleaned the bore. Not all guns shoot the same with different ammo. What do you expect out of the gun as far as accuracy. Will you use it for plinking, hunting or serious target shooting? When you've answered these questions you should have a good idea which way to good updating your gun. Just my .02


----------



## Hemi45 (May 5, 2014)

Happy New Year Peeps!

I'm another with a M1A. I went with the Scout Squad variant and have a Leupold LER fixed power "scout scope" on QD rings. Strong & simple.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

trovilcl said:


> I agree, and its mostly my generation that is the disgrace to the men hat built this great country. I for one though; like to think of myself as one of the few hardworking men under 30 that isnt afraid to get a little bloody or dirty.


As @Old SF Guy said, be responsible for yourself and your family. We in our generation all had a hand in what this country has come to. 
Three things to think about:

1) Less TV, more books
2) Learn to be a critical thinker
3) Be a man, take responsibility

Sounds as tho you are on the right path.

As to the 308 question, I would suggest @Inor 's take on the matter, learn the rifle before you put a lot of extra's on it. Is it reliable and true? does it fit your intent? Send rounds down range before you spend a lot of money on a rifle that's going to be a back up.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Hemi45 said:


> Happy New Year Peeps!
> 
> I'm another with a M1A. I went with the Scout Squad variant and have a Leupold LER fixed power "scout scope" on QD rings. Strong & simple.


Blasphemy!! :vs_lol:

Just kidding. :vs_peace:


----------



## The Tourist (Jun 9, 2016)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If I'm a little hard core today, I just came from the funeral service of a Brother, a Marine.


Agape' prayers sent. I'm sorry to hear the news.


----------



## trovilcl (Dec 30, 2018)

Oh yeah guys, I've put about 2000 rounds through this rifle, as well as developed my own loads with the 178gr ELD-x. It's a great gun, but in its current set up; I am handicapped when it comes to close range stuff. Not to mention the gun weighed in at 12lbs without a mag. As a gunsmith, I have made sure to put this firearm through the tests. I modified the trigger to a nice 4 1/2 lbs, and have done other things to make sure it functions properly and reliably. One thing I have noticed though is that it doesnt like the 3rd gen SR-25 Pmags. It'll only shoot em well if I file a little on the mags, but 2nd gens work great. 

As for the scope and stuff, I am just using what I have in the rifle.Trying to do a trade for the 2x ACOG as the scope I have has about the same value. In regards to the training, though I have been lacking on it for about a year, I plan on having some field time as one of my new years resolutions. haha.


----------



## JafoDawg (Dec 28, 2017)

Plain and simple, You cannot beat the 308 - 7.62x51 round for hitting power, distance, etc.

The standard 556/223 can easily be deflect by brush and doesn't have the power of the 308.

The only problem with the platform is the ammo weight. If you can hump the ammo you need.

I can easily carry 12 mags on my person, plus enough rounds in stripper clips to sustain myself for quite awhile.

Don't get me wrong, I like my AR15's and I wouldn't feel under armed carrying one, but I prefer the 308 battle rifle!

It's kind of like the old Ford/Chevy deal. It's what you like and what you can handle.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

trovilcl said:


> So the rifle is a Aero Precision .308 AR. It has a 18" barrel with Mlok rail. I had a standard A2 stock with large grip on it and a Nikon Monarch 7 4-16x50 and aero precision lightweight single piece mount on it. I had it set up for a precision rifle, with my own loads in it and everything. However, after much consideration I have decided to go to a battle rifle set up; engaging targets between 5-600 yards efficiently.
> 
> If im getting overrun, well then i've been shooting improperly, but I have a sidearm and a knife tomahawk combination for that purpose. Patriot?
> 
> Don't think I dont like the ole M1A's and M14's. Shoot, thats a dream gun of mine. This rifle was free though, and I just don't think you can beat free.


Aero precision makes a very good product. Their barrels are made by Ballistic Advantage and have MOA guarantee.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Few older people here are going to trash me.
The m14 was in standard issue from about 1959 to 1970. They were replacing them mid 60's already That is not long. Sadly in the real world the M14 failed. They had been looking for a replacement most of that time. The real value of the 308 was in the automatic weapons the M60 and the 240 versions. The m14 had a lot of variations and it was used as a sniper rifle and is still used today by some designated marksmen but that is fading. The 308 was also chosen for the M40 and m24 Remington sniper rifles That were ahead of their time back then.
We know standard issue is not the only time a weapon is used so yes the m14 was around before and after. The M14 was to long to heavy for most mission requirements. Funny part the M16 was also found to be to long. That is another reason you got the m4 version.
There is a good likely hood the 308 may fade away in US military once the new version of the 6.8 is rolled out. It will not be over night but likely to happen. The sniper rifles are moving to 300 win mag more and more. The M60 long gone 240 is not used as a Squad machine gun. And the current Squad SAW 249 will be replaced with 6.8. of some type.
It hurts but truth gets buried by myth and hype. Due to failings of the m14 the M16 was first considered in about 1957. The AR10 had been seen as better than the m14. But was passed over.


----------



## Mad Trapper (Feb 12, 2014)

I'm with RPD and Denton on the M1A, or other variations/vendors of semi-M14s

USGI bayonet are getting hard to find. Get the cleaning kit that fits in stock. Drill bits to clean the gas piston. Simple tools to strip the bolt and spare USGI parts for the bolt.

If you need an optic keep it simple, a Basset mount, and a good 3 X 9 40mm scope. The Basset mount is 1 screw, will go on/off back to zero

If Springfield, Try to find a late 80s-early 90s with USGI parts. The matches are nice especially if you can find a G. Nelson build.

P.S. RPD sorry for the loss of your friend.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Smitty901 said:


> Few older people here are going to trash me.
> The m14 was in standard issue from about 1959 to 1970. They were replacing them mid 60's already That is not long. Sadly in the real world the M14 failed. They had been looking for a replacement most of that time. The real value of the 308 was in the automatic weapons the M60 and the 240 versions. The m14 had a lot of variations and it was used as a sniper rifle and is still used today by some designated marksmen but that is fading. The 308 was also chosen for the M40 and m24 Remington sniper rifles That were ahead of their time back then.
> We know standard issue is not the only time a weapon is used so yes the m14 was around before and after. The M14 was to long to heavy for most mission requirements. Funny part the M16 was also found to be to long. That is another reason you got the m4 version.
> There is a good likely hood the 308 may fade away in US military once the new version of the 6.8 is rolled out. It will not be over night but likely to happen. The sniper rifles are moving to 300 win mag more and more. The M60 long gone 240 is not used as a Squad machine gun. And the current Squad SAW 249 will be replaced with 6.8. of some type.
> It hurts but truth gets buried by myth and hype. Due to failings of the m14 the M16 was first considered in about 1957. The AR10 had been seen as better than the m14. But was passed over.


The M14 was designed to streamline the typical WWII rifle squad which used the M1 Garand, and one BAR man. The idea was that each man could have the firepower of a BAR in a smaller package that weighed half as much.
The trouble was immediately discovered - the weight of the BAR helped controllability in full auto fire. The M14 was uncontrollable. One solution was to make a flip up butt plate which, by resting on top of the shoulder, was an attempt to solve the problem. 
By the time I was in, 1967, the selector switch was removed from every M14 I encountered and replaced with a "button" cover.
The whole idea behind the design was faulty.

It is said the military always plans for the LAST war, and in Vietnam most contact was sudden and very close range, often without even seeing the enemy. The M16 proved to be the better rifle for this type of warfare. Unfortunately, good men had to die before the bugs were worked out.
You could put select fire weapons in the hands of every rifleman, but with the cyclic rate of fire and the 20 round magazines of the period, full auto was not always desirable.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> The M14 was designed to streamline the typical WWII rifle squad which used the M1 Garand, and one BAR man. The idea was that each man could have the firepower of a BAR in a smaller package that weighed half as much.
> The trouble was immediately discovered - the weight of the BAR helped controllability in full auto fire. The M14 was uncontrollable. One solution was to make a flip up butt plate which, by resting on top of the shoulder, was an attempt to solve the problem.
> By the time I was in, 1967, the selector switch was removed from every M14 I encountered and replaced with a "button" cover.
> The whole idea behind the design was faulty.
> ...


 Your right on why it was designed . But the truth was it failed from the start in most every way except a couple. Had it not been for politics the AR10 would have been chosen . It was well known it out preformed the m14 in every way. It was politics that stopped the m16 in 1957.
The m14 in full auto was pretty much uncontrollable . It made a good so called sniper rifle but even then the weight was a draw back . The Remington m24 heavy barrel had great range and was more accurate. The m14 I own is put away. I really don't own it. It was entrusted to me by someone that had to let their weapons go. I will some day past it on to his son that is in the 82nd. He does not even know the weapon is still around. His father gave it to me but I know where it belongs.
At one time the military had to many options on weapons. The battle has long been to reduce that.
IMO there is no machine gun that will fit all3 needs . Light , medium and heavy. The light and medium can be combined. It won't happen now but the AR10 was the answer. It could well end up being some form of the 6.8.


----------



## WhatTheHeck (Aug 1, 2018)

The Defense Acquisition Cycle states the contract will be awarded to the candidate that met the _most requirements_, at the _lowest cost_. 
While the M14 may have beaten the AR10 in some aspects, it lost in others and, of course, cost. 
It is cheaper to manufacture a aluminum gas tube than it is a gas piston design.

In open contracting competition, different from sole souce, the DoD will always award the contract to the lowest bidder.
They will always consider the logistical aspects, as differing materials require different costs and funding lines.

GYSGT Carlos Hathcock strongly recommended the Winchester Model 70, the Rifleman's rifle, chamber in 30-06 as THE sniper rifle.
The DoD bean counters went with the Remington 700 as it was cheaper. It is cheaper to produce a simple On-Off safety, vs a three-postion safety. It is cheaper to produce a simple plunger ejector, vs a blade ejector. 
They both do the same job. 
The Remington is simpler, and costs less to produce. 
The Winchester is more refined, and costs more to produce.

The 7.62x51NATO is already in DoD invintory and costs less.

Ironically, we are seeing the .300Win being more employed in sniper roles. Had they taken the Gunny's advice, would the 30-06 still be fielded?


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

WhatTheHeck said:


> The Defense Acquisition Cycle states the contract will be awarded to the candidate that met the _most requirements_, at the _lowest cost_.
> While the M14 may have beaten the AR10 in some aspects, it lost in others and, of course, cost.
> It is cheaper to manufacture a aluminum gas tube than it is a gas piston design.
> 
> ...


 The M14 failed darn near every thing . It was said at the time the Ar10 was the best ever. The big problem was production. They just were not up to speed and Springfield was a favored son at the time. I understand why many went the way they did . I am not saying there was a something dirty going on. But the M14 was a total fail. The one thing they said good about it the 308 punched heavy brush well. Ok so would the Ar10 308. Another issue with M14 not borough up much was the wood was often broken and had to be replaced. I would have to check but it may have been the shortest life span of all times. Hard to except such a cool rifle was a failure but every single fact says so.


----------



## Mad Trapper (Feb 12, 2014)

Smitty901 said:


> The M14 failed darn near every thing . It was said at the time the Ar10 was the best ever. The big problem was production. They just were not up to speed and Springfield was a favored son at the time. I understand why many went the way they did . I am not saying there was a something dirty going on. But the M14 was a total fail. The one thing they said good about it the 308 punched heavy brush well. Ok so would the Ar10 308. Another issue with M14 not borough up much was the wood was often broken and had to be replaced. I would have to check but it may have been the shortest life span of all times. Hard to except such a cool rifle was a failure but every single fact says so.


That total fail saved a lot of GIs in MiddleEast and Afganistan.

I've shot match M1As and they put a whole 20-rd magazine in ONE big hole at 100-yds without any flyers. And that was not special ammo, UMC 150gr FMJ by Remmington.

Punching brush is a myth too. I've hunted deer 40 years with 12ga slugs (425gr) and a twig will throw them just like anything else.

Yes wood in a jungle environment is not a good idea. I don't think breaking was as much a problem as swelling, and not being able to take care of the wood in a combat situation. They did make nice USGI fiberglass stocks. I'll defer to RPD on that one.

Keep yer plastic fantastic........


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Mad Trapper said:


> That total fail saved a lot of GIs in MiddleEast and Afganistan.
> 
> I've shot match M1As and they put a whole 20-rd magazine in ONE big hole at 100-yds without any flyers. And that was not special ammo, UMC 150gr FMJ by Remmington.
> 
> ...


An M14 reworked to match grade is not a standard issue weapon never was never will be. The Remington M24 would leave the m14 in the dust. They issued the m14 because they were sitting in inventory. You could request them . No standard 150 gr issue was not sub MOA ammo. Never at any time. It was 2 MOA at best. The wood did split and break.


----------



## Mad Trapper (Feb 12, 2014)

Smitty901 said:


> An M14 reworked to match grade is not a standard issue weapon never was never will be. The Remington M24 would leave the m14 in the dust. They issued the m14 because they were sitting in inventory. You could request them . No standard 150 gr issue was not sub MOA ammo. Never at any time. It was 2 MOA at best. The wood did split and break.


Smitty, YOU are the one that turned this into an M14 bashing thread.

And I'll tell you that M1A shot that ammo as stated. It was 30 years ago and no plastic phones to take selfies with, sorry. I've handloaded many years and if you find factory ammo that shoots like that you buy as many cases as you can afford.

I'm glad you started a new thread about ARs. Can I come over and bash them?


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

When my eyes were 19 years old, with a standard issue, well used, M14 with the iron sights I could hit a target the size of a man's torso at 500 meters. With regular issue NATO ammo.

The qualification firing was done on targets ranging from 25 to 500 meters. I managed to qualify Expert - twice: once in Basic, and once a year later at my duty station with another rifle.
That is not a testament to my great shooting ability. It IS a testament to the accuracy of the M14 rifle.

In 1967 the Army taught marksmanship. And the only shooting aid available was the rifle's sling. Back then we were trained that every man was a rifleman first, no matter what MOS.


----------



## WhatTheHeck (Aug 1, 2018)

Smitty901 said:


> The M14 failed darn near every thing . It was said at the time the Ar10 was the best ever. The big problem was production. They just were not up to speed and Springfield was a favored son at the time. I understand why many went the way they did . I am not saying there was a something dirty going on. But the M14 was a total fail. The one thing they said good about it the 308 punched heavy brush well. Ok so would the Ar10 308. Another issue with M14 not borough up much was the wood was often broken and had to be replaced. I would have to check but it may have been the shortest life span of all times. Hard to except such a cool rifle was a failure but every single fact says so.


That is the myth they want you to beileve.
The M14 exceeded the AR10 in many ways but cost.


----------



## WhatTheHeck (Aug 1, 2018)

Smitty901 said:


> An M14 reworked to match grade is not a standard issue weapon never was never will be. The Remington M24 would leave the m14 in the dust. They issued the m14 because they were sitting in inventory. You could request them . No standard 150 gr issue was not sub MOA ammo. Never at any time. It was 2 MOA at best. The wood did split and break.


You are comparing two different weapons systems.

Without a doubt your bias for the AR10/M16 is evident.

How can one compare a match grade M14 to a match grad M24?


----------



## WhatTheHeck (Aug 1, 2018)

If you want a real comparison, look to the SCAR trials. 
There is a reason why the FN was first, the HK a very close second, and the Colt a very distant thrid.


----------



## The Resister (Jul 24, 2013)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If I'm a little hard core today, I just came from the funeral service of a Brother, a Marine.


Late to the thread as usual. My deepest sympathies for your loss and I will still pray for you and your fallen brother in arms.


----------



## The Resister (Jul 24, 2013)

Smitty901 said:


> Few older people here are going to trash me.
> The m14 was in standard issue from about 1959 to 1970. They were replacing them mid 60's already That is not long. Sadly in the real world the M14 failed. They had been looking for a replacement most of that time. The real value of the 308 was in the automatic weapons the M60 and the 240 versions. The m14 had a lot of variations and it was used as a sniper rifle and is still used today by some designated marksmen but that is fading. The 308 was also chosen for the M40 and m24 Remington sniper rifles That were ahead of their time back then.
> We know standard issue is not the only time a weapon is used so yes the m14 was around before and after. The M14 was to long to heavy for most mission requirements. Funny part the M16 was also found to be to long. That is another reason you got the m4 version.
> There is a good likely hood the 308 may fade away in US military once the new version of the 6.8 is rolled out. It will not be over night but likely to happen. The sniper rifles are moving to 300 win mag more and more. The M60 long gone 240 is not used as a Squad machine gun. And the current Squad SAW 249 will be replaced with 6.8. of some type.
> It hurts but truth gets buried by myth and hype. Due to failings of the m14 the M16 was first considered in about 1957. The AR10 had been seen as better than the m14. But was passed over.


Smitty, The M14 is the last true battle rifle. I've heard the pros and cons, read what the pundits have to say, but an AR 10 is still an AR. Those who grew up on the M14 platform don't see the AR being able to take the abuse of the M14.

Some will argue the AR 10 is more accurate, but that is questionable (depends upon who is behind the trigger.) IF there are any differences in accuracy, they are marginal, at best. Those with M1a rifles will not be as easily swayed to change platforms and if the need arises, an M1a with military parts will get the job done.


----------



## The Resister (Jul 24, 2013)

Smitty901 said:


> Your right on why it was designed . But the truth was it failed from the start in most every way except a couple. Had it not been for politics the AR10 would have been chosen . It was well known it out preformed the m14 in every way. It was politics that stopped the m16 in 1957.
> The m14 in full auto was pretty much uncontrollable . It made a good so called sniper rifle but even then the weight was a draw back . The Remington m24 heavy barrel had great range and was more accurate. The m14 I own is put away. I really don't own it. It was entrusted to me by someone that had to let their weapons go. I will some day past it on to his son that is in the 82nd. He does not even know the weapon is still around. His father gave it to me but I know where it belongs.
> At one time the military had to many options on weapons. The battle has long been to reduce that.
> IMO there is no machine gun that will fit all3 needs . Light , medium and heavy. The light and medium can be combined. It won't happen now but the AR10 was the answer. It could well end up being some form of the 6.8.


Not everybody feels like you do. Hook Boutin helped me build a rifle many years ago. I wanted him to build it, but he was past 70 and said he wanted a few of us to learn how to work on their own weapons since he wasn't going to be around forever.

After building that rifle, we went into Hook's back yard and he shot a five inch group with iron sights that you could cover with a quarter. That rifle has always been more accurate than I am. So, that is sufficient enough.


----------



## Mad Trapper (Feb 12, 2014)

The Resister said:


> Not everybody feels like you do. Hook Boutin helped me build a rifle many years ago. I wanted him to build it, but he was past 70 and said he wanted a few of us to learn how to work on their own weapons since he wasn't going to be around forever.
> 
> After building that rifle, we went into Hook's back yard and he shot a five inch group with iron sights that you could cover with a quarter. That rifle has always been more accurate than I am. So, that is sufficient enough.


You are very fortunate to have one of "Hook's" works of art. Even more so to have met him. He had quite a legacy

Boutin, Gerald J. | Georgia Public Broadcasting


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

The Resister said:


> Not everybody feels like you do. Hook Boutin helped me build a rifle many years ago. I wanted him to build it, but he was past 70 and said he wanted a few of us to learn how to work on their own weapons since he wasn't going to be around forever.
> 
> After building that rifle, we went into Hook's back yard and he shot a five inch group with iron sights that you could cover with a quarter. That rifle has always been more accurate than I am. So, that is sufficient enough.


 Not about how I or anyone feels it is historic fact The M14 was a failure it is not the magic rifle it has been hyped up to. Yes with work it can be made to be a great bench shooter. But then again the other options of the the day were better.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

WhatTheHeck said:


> You are comparing two different weapons systems.
> 
> Without a doubt your bias for the AR10/M16 is evident.
> 
> How can one compare a match grade M14 to a match grad M24?


 The early m21 and m25 were issue sniper versions .m24 was an the issue sniper weapon in 308 that pushed both of them to the back row. Still is to some degree . It was based on a Remington 700 not a M14.
Myth say the M14 stood up to heavy use , fact was it did not it did ok and had many revisions. The issue M14 was not the great sniper rifle myth made it out to be. The goal with the M14 was a good one. But the weapon that came out of the idea failed in every way. That is why it was canned.
The weapons people spent $1,000's on today are not the same weapon the M14 was. History was clear on what the m14 turned out to be. Before it was even issued they were searching for a replacement. The manufactures of the AR10 at the time were not ready for the big stage. No way they could meet production requirements. Had they even been close it would have been chosen over the the M14. Some weapons got it right for their time. The m1 Garand , the 1903 Springfiled some did not really shine like the Enfield.
The m14 was suppose to take the m1 Garand to a new level and improve on it. Did not come out that way they tried. Maybe they set the bar to high for the M14. Even the m21 and m25 version were pushed to the second row very quickly. 
History often does not often follow the hyped up versions pasted on. Sure modern m14 custom modified rifles make great Match bench guns. But do not confuse them with the issued m14. I never said the M14 was junk. It was a failed battle rifle.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

I've used the M16A1 and the M21.

I own a couple AR15 rifles, a Ruger SR762 (Their piston-driven AR10 rifle) and a Springfield M1A Scout version. 

My preference between the SR762 and the M1A is the M1A. Why? Both are dependable and both are piston-driven which keeps the fouling away from the bolt, so why would I grab the M1A? Simple. To me, it's about ergonomics.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Denton said:


> I've used the M16A1 and the M21.
> 
> I own a couple AR15 rifles, a Ruger SR762 (Their piston-driven AR10 rifle) and a Springfield M1A Scout version.
> 
> My preference between the SR762 and the M1A is the M1A. Why? Both are dependable and both are piston-driven which keeps the fouling away from the bolt, so why would I grab the M1A? Simple. To me, it's about ergonomics.


 I do like piston better. I have piston AR15's to compare them to and they run cooler and cleaner. Advantage to DI less moving parts, less total parts


----------



## The Resister (Jul 24, 2013)

Mad Trapper said:


> You are very fortunate to have one of "Hook's" works of art. Even more so to have met him. He had quite a legacy
> 
> Boutin, Gerald J. | Georgia Public Broadcasting


I put that rifle in a military gun case, stowed it in the safe and always shot an M1 that Hook rebarreled for me. I doubt that I will ever use that piece of history. The funny thing is, M14 aficionados take one look at that rifle and say, "that's a Hook Boutin special." He was a nice guy that I miss a lot.

FWIW, he got to test the FN FAL series of rifles and told me he preferred the M14. Today that rifle is still in service, but they put a stock costing a grand on them. Over the years I've owned standard ones and the Squad Scout. When it comes to accuracy, bolt action rifles have an inherent advantage, but the M14 allows you to make very quick follow up shots. If I were in a SHTF scenario with only one rifle, the M1a with a couple of mods would be up to the task.


----------



## The Resister (Jul 24, 2013)

Smitty901 said:


> Not about how I or anyone feels it is historic fact The M14 was a failure it is not the magic rifle it has been hyped up to. Yes with work it can be made to be a great bench shooter. But then again the other options of the the day were better.


Smitty901, What you present as facts simply aren't true. They are opinions. There are people on the battlefield today with a souped up M14 and they are confident with them.

If you think about it, they have not been tested in the kinds of wars we had prior to WWII. They hold their a price for a reason. It is my *opinion* that some people did not like the M14 because there were better sniper weapons. Then again, they were backed up by a squad of guys with high capacity M16 rifles. The M14 failed as a squad automatic weapon since even Rambo couldn't control it in fully auto.

But, as a Main Battle Rifle, it's a formidable tool.


----------



## Mad Trapper (Feb 12, 2014)

The Resister said:


> I put that rifle in a military gun case, stowed it in the safe and always shot an M1 that Hook rebarreled for me. I doubt that I will ever use that piece of history. The funny thing is, M14 aficionados take one look at that rifle and say, "that's a Hook Boutin special." He was a nice guy that I miss a lot.
> 
> FWIW, he got to test the FN FAL series of rifles and told me he preferred the M14. Today that rifle is still in service, but they put a stock costing a grand on them. Over the years I've owned standard ones and the Squad Scout. When it comes to accuracy, bolt action rifles have an inherent advantage, but the M14 allows you to make very quick follow up shots. If I were in a SHTF scenario with only one rifle, the M1a with a couple of mods would be up to the task.


Yes Hook taught Glen Nelson. What a warrior, teacher, marksman, good man.....

Would like to hear about Hook's comments on M14 trials?

I've some nice bolts and we've heard spew about M700 rifles. I'll take a M70 any day. Have had a bunch of pre-64 in 06 and 300 Win. The M700 were not the equal and I've had the defective ones that shot the round when the safety was released, won't happen on a M70, ever. Now we'll hear about the M24 spew ...........again........

Ready for M70 bashing? Get your earplugs ready..........


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> I do like piston better. I have piston AR15's to compare them to and they run cooler and cleaner. Advantage to DI less moving parts, less total parts


And DI tend to be more accurate overall at least in AR platforms.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

RedLion said:


> And DI tend to be more accurate overall at least in AR platforms.


 In my case the gas piston ones we have had better barrels on them so they were easy sub MOA. What I like most was shooting the heck out of them wipe off done some claimed better control of recoil , can't say I noticed that. Depending on the system you go with they are easy to switch back and forth f you want.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> In my case the gas piston ones we have had better barrels on them so they were easy sub MOA. What I like most was shooting the heck out of them wipe off done some claimed better control of recoil , can't say I noticed that. Depending on the system you go with they are easy to switch back and forth f you want.


I have had an Adams Arms AR15 carbine piston kit sitting around for a couple of years that I got for $199 on sale. I have yet to get the bug to use it on a build.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

RedLion said:


> I have had an Adams Arms AR15 carbine piston kit sitting around for a couple of years that I got for $199 on sale. I have yet to get the bug to use it on a build.


They come in handy if you want to run a suppressor . gas block is adjustable for it


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> They come in handy if you want to run a suppressor . gas block is adjustable for it


All of the AR's that I have built the past couple of years and going forward have adjustable gas blocks. It makes sense to me to put one on all AR's as you can now get them for only $10-20 more than a standard gas block. The better adjustable gas blocks like superlative arms allows you to adjust for a particular round, but also has a "bleed off" function that pushes extra gas out of the front of the block instead of sending back through the system.
I do not have any suppressors yet, but will some time soon.


----------



## Old SF Guy (Dec 15, 2013)

WhatTheHeck said:


> ...
> 
> How can one compare a match grade M14 to a match grad M24?


Easy. Just like when I saw my Dad peeing in the woods when I was little and asked him what it was. He said, "Why son, this is called a penis...and its a perfect penis too." A week later Sally saw me peeing and asked "What is that?" and I said, "Sally, this is a penis. And if it was two inches shorter it would be a perfect penis."


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Old SF Guy said:


> Easy. Just like when I saw my Dad peeing in the woods when I was little and asked him what it was. He said, "Why son, this is called a penis...and its a perfect penis too." A week later Sally saw me peeing and asked "What is that?" and I said, "Sally, this is a penis. And if it was two inches shorter it would be a perfect penis."


 I committed a sin. All I did was state the truth. The M14 was a failure . They wanted to replace it before it was ever issued. Sure you can take a M14 to a pro let them work some magic on it and make a dam good match weapon out of it.
It just was not the magical battle rifle it was hype to be over the years. Failure means it did not do what was expected. I do think they expected to much from it.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

RedLion said:


> All of the AR's that I have built the past couple of years and going forward have adjustable gas blocks. It makes sense to me to put one on all AR's as you can now get them for only $10-20 more than a standard gas block. The better adjustable gas blocks like superlative arms allows you to adjust for a particular round, but also has a "bleed off" function that pushes extra gas out of the front of the block instead of sending back through the system.
> I do not have any suppressors yet, but will some time soon.


 I am not above spending a few extra dollars to make a weapon or motorcycle more flexible. Of to make it ready for future upgrades.


----------

