I didn't want to be crapping on someone else's thread any more and I believe that this subject deserves just a little more discussion, as some pretty strong claims have been made.
Quote from: SamD on November 12, 2008, 02:58:42 PM
QuoteYou are joking, right?
I won't get into the doctrinal differences that came up or the logistics issues either.
Given strict comparisons between the two, I'd much rather see all those 6 MILLION M1's out among the citizenry, than the few hundred thousand available M14/M1A.
The M14/M1A has never been as easy a rifle to keep in service as the M1. It was even a royal pain in testing adn development.
I'm not an M14/M1A basher, nor an AR basher. I do not believe that our government conspires to adopt inferior weapons. What I believe is that the M1 with it's long history of reliability and much higher availability of parts and weapons, is the better rifle for "everyman". I would really have no issue with "everyman" having an SKS as the preferable weapon.
Quote from: Nickle on November 12, 2008, 04:33:43 PM
Since this is the Rifle Knowledge Bank, it's the appropriate place to discuss this.
Yes, some of us do believe the M1 Garand is superior to the M14 (including the civilian copies).
I am one of them. I've read up well on the subject, and I tend to agree with Sam. I'll give you some history on the subject. It isn't pretty, but it's pretty much true.
......The Army wanted less recoil, and a smaller cartridge, without sacrificing velocity or bullet weight. (See a problem here?) Can't have it both ways.
.........
The M14 was adopted mostly because of a stupid and hide-bound National Armory system (Dr Carten and others). .......
Now, I do like my M14 clone, but I absolutely LOVE my M1.
Initial purchase cost and current availability is the only advantage which jumps out at me for the M1. Easily found for 1/2 the price of a M1A.
What makes the M1 Garand superior in performance and therefore the M14 based rifles inferior in comparison???? Seriously, please explain your positions on this.
Rifle Politics from the 1950s and 1960s is not relevant to this discussion. What other issues were there regarding keeping the M14 in service?
Any "M14" or clone anyone is likely to own on this board is not going to be a transferable full auto rifle, and definitely not an original M14 with a $40K+ price tag. That being the case, it is not relevent to this discussion that there were developmental issues with the original design and issue of the M14s.
There is nothing inherently inferior about the 7.62x51/.308 caliber rifle round for killing men in comparison to a .30-06 ball round. The lower felt recoil is actually an advantage for rapid fire.
I was one of the fortunate few to have been issued an actual M14 (CMP Loan Program National Match M14) from my state rifle club for High Power shooting. It was hard to give it up when the CMP recalled these rifles in 2007. :'(
I shot in matches up to 600 yards. I tried out other guys' M1 Garands and preferred the M14. I never had reliability problems and I prefer the magazine vs clip fed configuration. This probably has something to do with my years of shooting my M16 and AR15s.
What makes the M1 superior?
greater ammo availability off the shelf, adn with aa Schuster and good handloads ballistically much superior.
Better ergonomics, no wobbly monopod, balances better
more durable
more parts available
mature design, it's been shaken down and the weak points identified and corrected
QuoteAny "M14" or clone anyone is likely to own on this board is not going to be a transferable full auto rifle, and definitely not an original M14 with a $40K+ price tag. That being the case, it is not relevent to this discussion that there were developmental issues with the original design and issue of the M14s.
Those developmental issues are relevant. They apply as much to the semi's as the Full auto's. And the differences in the design between those with and with out the switch aren't part of the problem.
The gas system is a weak spot because of the need for an expansion cutoff system because of the high pressures. Easy to gum up, especially if full of solvent/oil not fast or easy to clean.
Additionally the cycling rate was to high and needed the roller on the bolt. A high stress point, along with the rear of the receiver cracking from higher impact speeds. All other things being equal, M1's break fewer op rods even thought they are physically weaker because they aren't stressed as highly
Those were all issues related to making it an FA weapon and they are all on the M1A as well.
The M1A is designed to operate with the 7.62 which is a typical 'modern" round. Loaded to a relatively high pressure level to keep similar performance in the shorter package. Figuratively it runs at full throttle all the time. The M1 has performance just a tad better running at lower pressure. That means lower op rod and bolt speeds, less wear and longer life.
Total production of the M14 and the M1A is real low compared to the M1. Additionally it hasn't been used extensively and really hasn't had all the bugs shaken out, at least not compared to the M1. which had a long and rough service life to "shake it down"
M14 magazines are another weak spot. They exist. M14's were really designed to be loaded with strippers and not changed real often. they were issued 3 per weapon. The en bloc was issued in it's bandoleer and thrown away after use, no extra parts to loose or get damaged. You just can't booger up the feed lips on an M1 can you? Hard to loose the magazine too ;D
The M1A "wobbly monopod" isn't there to get in the way on the M1. That means you can get into prone easier and lets you hold it at the balance point and carry with 1 hand. It makes a good palm rest in standing but that's about it.
I "arranged" to have an M14 issued to me for most of my career, I like them, more than 16's, a bit less than M1's
Sam
Both the M1 And M14 are so superior to every other rifle out there that arguing the merits of the two usually comes down to a matter of individual preferences.
Both are equally effective - or can be.
Both are tried and proven.
Nitpicking usually comes down to ammo costs (a few years back this was all in favor of the M1A, and may one day if we're lucky, be so again), or mag costs (clips vs magazines), or some other 'off-stage' issue.
For some reason, I shoot an M1A better than an M1. For some of you, the reverse is true.
So, it's not surprising that we "like" the one we shoot better (or shoot the one we "like" better :)).
While it may be fun to argue 'which is best?' I think we should pause a moment in sympathy with all those people who don't have either one...
Technical note: You can determine "which is the best rifle?" by defining the use it's needed for - but also by its lack of vices.
It's not all the "good things" about a rifle that makes it best - it's the absence of "bad things" that could get you killed that makes it best.
Aside from having to be careful in tightening up the rear sight (not only the 'how' but the need to keep it tight), there are really no vices to either the M1 or M1A (yes, the latter requires special tools to clean the gas system, and I'll admit it as a minor vice in the same league as the rear sight).
But, man, how lucky we are to have our choice of either.
And to be able to Appleseed, so we can keep them, and maybe some future generation will be able to keep and enjoy them (they never wear out ;D).
Quote from: Fred on November 13, 2008, 06:30:54 AMWhile it may be fun to argue 'which is best?' I think we should pause a moment in sympathy with all those people who don't have either one...
Here is the most important point of this thread. I came to Appleseed in August. Just before then, I purchased a Saiga in .223, because I "probably couldn't hit anything out past 100 yards anyway." If things deteriorated quickly in the country, I wanted to have some sort of rifle larger than .22 rimfire to defend me and mine. I didn't look for a long range rifle, because I have never been taught how to shoot correctly. Sorry to say it, but squabbles between an M1 and M1A are foreign to me. I'm pinching pennies, like many people these days, and it looks like my first battle rifles will be a pair of Mosins and a few 440 ammo packs.
I would prefer to be ahead of where I am, but instead of saving for an M1, I built another LTR. Last weekend, my brother-in-law used it to shoot Rifleman on his first Appleseed. He owns two guns. A .380 pistol and a .270 deer rifle. He had not picked up the rifle after over 10 years because of a bad miss on a deer. He had no confidence in his rifle shooting. He doesn't own an M1 or M1A or AR-15 or FAL. But I would bet that if push came to shove, his bolt action .270 could do some damage in his hands with the training he learned at the Appleseed. That my friends is what this is all about.
Myself, I'll eventually be going with the M1. Purely because of cost/function. I know I will have a few more Riflemen/women in my family soon. Some cannot afford to equip themselves properly. I am going to do much better with another M1 or two on the line with me, rather than myself firing my M1A alone.
indyjoe, that's why this thread should be closed to all non-M1A/Garand owners, as while we gloat over our caviar, we don't want to be discouraging people who eat beans.
And because it's pretty much a waste of our valuable Appleseed time to be even talking about this. (If debating "which rifle" is a bit of a waste of time - as the choices are so clear - then debating M1 vs. M1A is near 100% a waste of time, as the articles are so close to being perfect - both of them.)
Most rifles will serve fine for Riflemen. About all of them will do 96% or 98% of the job required.
And, as they say, "that's close enough for government work".
Yet, if we said nothing on this issue, most people wouldn't have a clue which is the 'best rifle.'
FYI, and FWIW, my own list of 2A rifles would be as follows, from cheapest to most expensive:
SKS or any Lee-Enfield
M1 Garand
M1A (note: I am completely unbiased in ranking the last two this way... ;D ;D)
You should have a goal of an M1 Garand, because the CMP Garand is the "buy of the lifetime" and who knows how much longer they're gonna have 'em to sell.
Now, that's a list I came up with, pre-Appleseed.
I have come to realize that some kind of future 2A scenario is unlikely - and not worth worrying about - while the much greater task of restoring rifle marksmanship and creating riflemen lies before us.
So, now, in all seriousness, I would rate an LTR as the highest and best use rifle to buy and own - and use.
It wasn't the battleships that won WW2; it was the humble Liberty ships...
There is a a curious intrusion of past technology into the modern era framing the M1 M1A comparison debate. If the modeern design era offers the detachable box magazine rifle, the previous era consisted of Mannlicher clip fed internal magazine rifles; late nineteenth century technology. Except for the M1, I'm not aware of a single other successful implementation (i.e., widely used today in the US for target shooting) of the Mannlicher system.
The M14 advances the Garand to the mid 20th century, doing away with the Mannlicher system in favor of a detachable box magazine. For the worse, the M14 was saddled with another early design capability- the role of the squad automatic rifle. Each rifleman had a rifle (fairly light) platform, but a BAR full auto capability without the BAR's steadiness or mass. So, history 'enlightened' the Garand by making the M14, but cursed it with an ability to act like a squad automatic without that weapon's steadiness. Moreover, the mechanism of the Garand had no precedent as the basis for a full auto weapon; those are purpose built for that rigorous application.
AK series really learned this lesson- the 74 delivers smooth, controllable full auto in comparison to the 47.
Full auto is irrelevant to target shooters, though.
From a target shooter's POV, both deliver lead with precision, both have exquisite windage and elevation adjustable aperture sights.
From a soldier's POV, you'd reach for an M14 perhaps before the Garand due to mag increased mag capacity and NATO cartridge standardization, but perhaps find the full auto useless.
Aside from implications of history and design versus intended role in a military environment, I'd be surprised if anybody could establish a substantial benefit, for target purposes, of the M1, M1A or M14 as the 'clearly best' solution.
Redleg comented to me after the first Ossage Appleseed that he wouldn't feel naked running a Garand in Iraq.
Interesting coming from a military man.
I prefer the 14 over the Garand for a number of reasons, most having to do with the way the 14 fits me. I can, unlike many without monkey arms, get my elbow under the 14 and still clear the 20 round mag. I can also place my forward hand on the sling swivel, which means consitancy for my index point, and my hand never slides forward thus losing elevation.
The flip-up butt plate also means that the rifle never falls out of my pocket.
These problems can be overcome by others. 10 round mags. A forward handstop (bondo or wood for a permenet (crap, wish I could spell!) stop, a couple of brass cases and duct tape for a temporary) and a mouse pad on either the buttplate or the shooting jacket.
I find that both do the job well for the Rifleman, as long as you are willing to make the mods that make the rifle fit you better.
No safe queens in RWVA!!
The Garand can be fitted with a scout scope using a mount from CMP or from Ulti-Mak. So can the 14, although I believe a standard barrel must be had, due to contour. Several "normal" mounts are availible for the 14, I use the Springfield gen III mount, which gives me see through for my irons. I also use a cheek peice from Fulton that is quickly detachable for this purpose.
I use the 14 simply for the 20 round capacity. However, I wouldn't feel naked with either if that is all I had.
Most (almost all) troops that carried the M14 didn't get the selector switch (in theory anyways, Vietnam yielded some stories that rebutt this).
The prototype for the selct fire M14 (T44) was the T20 series. A select fire M1, with a 20 round mag, developed at the tail end of WW2. It got canceled due to the war ending and no further need. If we had invaded Japan, there would've been a bunch of T20's there.
I will echo what Fred said. Top priority should be a .22 trainer. I own 8 .22's, always looking for more of them. If I were to go into a "survival situation", a .22 rifle would be there with my gear, along with a centerfire. Ammo is cheap, they are quiet, and good small game getters. Squirrels and rabbits (and birds and others) are what fills the pot on a regular basis, not venison.
That M1 will be worth about double what you pay for it, if you buy from CMP. Check gun show M1 prices, and you'll see beat M1's bringing around $1000. That relates to Rack Grade (or lower) from CMP, which runs a paltry $445 these days, when they have them.
I will revise his list, IMNSHO, to remove the Lee Enfield, and add the Mosin Nagant. Lee Enfields aren't as easy or cheap to get these days, and surplus ammo is near gone. Mosins are plentiful, cheap, and the ammo is plentiful and cheap. If you think they aren't adequate, ask the Russians. They suffered a beating by the Finns in 1940. The top snipers of all time used them (and were Finns and Russians). The top one, Simo Hayha, used an M28 Mosin, with iron sights, 545 Russians killed in about 6 months.
The real deal is the man behind the trigger. I will be attempting to provide conclusive (and non-rebuttable) proof of that in the future. The lowest considered rifle of all time is clearly the 6.5 Carcano. Yup, I will be getting one, and will shoot a Rifleman score with it. That should end the argument about rifles being more important than the shooter.
Oh no...another "Ford vs. Chevy" debate? "Glocks vs. 1911s?" "5.56 vs. 7.62?"
This topic seems to generate a lot of smoke, noise and arm-waving, but what else does it do?
Everyone has their preferences. What "you" like doesn't diminish what "I" like, so what's it matter?
I like my M14. Modified it similar to The Guy's specs and it works for me. 'Nuff said. Garand is on the "to-get" list and I'll make that work for me too.
Basically, if it's a rifle I can shoot to Rifleman standards, I'll like it. And as Nickle points out, it's the nut behind the trigger that has more to do with that than anything.
We can niggle the details all we want, but I would not thumb my nose or otherwise engage in insults downrange from a Rifleman, no matter what sort of rifle he's slung up to.
+1
Let's let this die. 9mm vs. .45 always bored the crap outta me anyway. Don't matter whatcha got in your hands, the weapon is between your ears.
NOW, having said that, some rifles are easier to shoot than others. Good sight radius, aperture iron sights, good trigger and correct fit make it noticeably easier to shoot well. A rifleman should, however, be able to use any rack grade rifle and surplus ammo to accomplish the mission. He also should know enough about himself to be able to take that short list of desirable attributes and determine which machine is the best choice for him...us thrashing it out online is a waste of time.
It's kinda like dieting...you grab the edge of the keyboard and...push it away. Welcome to real life. Now get busy on something that matters worth a damn...
SoM
I guess this evolution of the "Glock vs 1911" debate is new to me. I truly didn't realize that this is simply all the diversion within these 2 threads really is. The difference is that I don't see the M1A supporters saying anything negative about the M1. I had only previously been exposed to the AR vs M1/M14 debate and never realized the division in this camp....
Ergonomics is a subjective thing. What is comfortable to one Rifleman may not be ideal for another. Some like myself prefer the removable box magazine of the M14 and have no issues shooting prone or off hand with it. I am quite comfortable with this platform.
Both platforms have proven themselves to be accurate and any talk of the .308 vs .30-06 is just bench racing as both exceed the range and accuracy of the 7.62x39 which some now are saying kills just fine at 600 yards +.
The only man in this discussion who stated that during active duty he was issued one "by choice" stated no negative function issues with the one he was issued and carried for "most of" his career.
Since this is obviously a case of personal preference of one platform vs another, we will just have to agree to dissagree and embrace the diversity of each others hardware.
I won't even begin to mention the absolutely positive experiences I have had with my Armalite AR10 with both a high level of accuracy and reliability.... ;D
Like I mentioned before, I have a metric buttload of trigger time with the M16 and semiauto variants and I hold none of the predjudices against this platform which many proponents of the M1 and M14 hold......
To someone without the good fortune to already own a battle rifle and who is looking to step up to something larger than a LTR, my advice would be to get what you can afford whether that is a SKS or whatever and upgrade as your budget allows if that is what you wish to do.
I guess we can move on from this distraction onto subjects more worthy of our time and effort.... ;D
QuoteI guess we can move on from this distraction onto subjects more worthy of our time and effort....
And give a small prayer of thanks that we have these fine tools to discuss and the freedom of speech to do so.
In the hands of a "Rifleman" just about anything that pukes lead is dangerous to the wrong colored "grape".
I mean what would you really worry most about; an army of "riflemen" armed with whatever they grabbed from above the fireplace or a well regulated army of conscripts sent on a fools errand? Hint; for the answer read Paul Reveres Ride.
FWIW....my opinion.....buy the M1 from CMP. The price can't be beat, 495 Field Grade, 595 Service grade, plus 22.95 shipping and sales tax if Ohio, maybe others. I highly recommend spending the extra for the Service Grade.
A few hoops to jump through in the form of paperwork, proof of citizenship, competition experience (Appleseed will qualify as does military service), CMP affiliate Club membership such as Ohio Rifle & Pistol Assoc., etc. Download all forms from CMP website,
www.odcmp.com
CMP has always been great to do business with, providing fast order processing and in my experience, great value. To my knowledge, most if not all profits go back into programs supporting their marksmanship programs at Camp Perry and CMP affiliated clubs across the country.
It wouldn't be Appleseed if someone didn't say "And one more thing...".
The M-1 and M-14 are okay, but the last really good rifle development was the 03-A3. I only own 3 really nice ones. ( If you know of any for sale, let me know). :D
Quote from: Arc on November 13, 2008, 12:42:26 PM
I'd take a good shooting SKS over a M1A.
I've got an sks that shoots nice. Want to trade?
The best rifle is the one you are most comfortable with. I am most comfortable right now with my 1898 Mausers because I have been shooting them for almost 20 years. I am trying to get comfortable with modern semi-auto's. I used to love my SKS's until I shot an AK varient. Both have awfull sights but the trigger feel on the AK is much better. Neither has the power to be a main battle rifle. I shot the M1 once and decided it didn't like me because I'm left handed. I recently bought a M1A and it seems more lefthand friendly but I still don't feel as comfortable with it as my old 98's. This means I must shoot it more often:) I guess my advice to anyone just starting out, come to an Appleseed and ask to shoot whatever you are intrested in shooting. Chances are you will find someone there willing to let you try out their rifle. I know I would. Aim and Squeeze...VaWolf
I'd not be embarrassed to be caught afield with an 03, or even a Krag.
We all have out preferences of course and that's the discussion. I'm as interested in why people make the choices they do as what the choice is.
This is not an internal war over absolutes.
Remember, no nation ever equipped it's troops with an absolute POS. Even the Carcano has things going for it.
This thread has been characterized as a rifle version of the 9mm vs 45 debate. I don't see it that way.
Haven't seen anyone falling on theri sword over it.
Like I said, I am as interested in how you make your choice as in what the choice is.
That's why I'm reading the thread. I want to know why each of you love your rifles. Whoever values the same things I do in a rifle is going to really help me make decisions. There's a reason I didn't ask about rifles on thehighroad or somewhere else. Some people buy rifles for the way they look. To my knowledge, Appleseeders don't.
Quote from: SamD on November 14, 2008, 12:08:22 AM
I'd not be embarrassed to be caught afield with an 03, or even a Krag.
There's much to recommend that Krag, too (with a nod to it's original caliber, to my thinking).
Which brings my thinking around to a rifle that has not graced this debate, the 41 Johnson.
Like the Krag, it's near optimized for right-hand reloading while set up in a sling. Johnson has some detraction in having that skinny, and recoliing, barrel. But, against that, it, like the Krag, has a very nice balance amd fits that "off" hand right nicely.
In full disclosure, I have only a few firearm regrets. One is in not buying a mint Johnson when I could. Another is passing on a USN .308 Garand. Only other rifle on my regret list is a very nice .30-40 Krag. Life goes on.
Quote from: longjohn on November 14, 2008, 01:07:52 AM
I want to know why each of you love your rifles. Whoever values the same things I do in a rifle is going to really help me make decisions.
I agree with LJ why we like the rifle we like, regardless of what it is, is more helpful to those deciding between them. I shoot and love the M1, but would be happy to shoot an M14 also. For me the M1 made economical sense when I bought it and still does. I also have a soft spot for all things WWII so it services that interest of mine. It was also my first MBR and I was immediately in love (even though at the time I couldn't shoot it worth a damn, but that's another story...). But on the practical side the M1 just
feels better then the M14 (or any other MBR I've shot), its just a natural fit I guess.
All that being said, longjohn might I suggest that you may be being a little too analytical in your rifle selection process. The perfect rifle on paper may be worthless to you in the field because it doesn't fit you at all. So my suggestion to you is to use that orange hat of yours to get out and shoot every MBR and find the one that
fits. I almost guarantee that you'll step form behind one of those rifles with a smile on your face and say 'that's the one.' But then again what do I know.
Ben
Quotemight I suggest that you may be being a little too analytical in your rifle selection process
You're right. It's my nature. I do this with most things. Eventually, I get enough experience and just go with what feels right. I find that I'm happier with my choices when I put in this work on the front end. I agree that doing the Appleseed shoots is the way to get that experience. Stupid winter getting in the way of our fun...
Wow, I must have a personality issue. Here's a thread I read all the way through and some posts twice.
People, people with experience doing what they are talking about, and then expressing their opinions based on their experience. When we can't do that anymore what type of place would this be?
I doubt anyone here has had there M1A as many years as I have (30 years now). Not sure how many folks here deer hunted with their M1A as many years, or killed their deer with there M1A like I did (till I came down to the "land of the shotgun only" anyway). I like my M1A. For many years if I went on a road trip, the M1A and a serious supply of ammo was in the trunk, the back seat or the camper shell on the truck bed.
For several reasons, my 1944 SA M1 Garand has replaced that M1A as my carry rifle. No reason to list the reasons, they've already been listed, and I agree with them.
SamD, you are only the second person I've ever heard talk about the problems with the early M14's. I once heard an "old Marine" talk about all the jamming problems they had with M14's and how he preferred his M1 Garand over it. I was floored. In my 4 years in the Army my M14 (TRW 1490317) performed flawlessly. I've never had problems caused by my Springfield M1A either. You can get a "bad" rifle (car, stove, TV, etc) at any time. It's a fact of life that not everything sold works satisfactorily.
I have my likes and dislikes (rifles and cartridges) but if you can hit what you need to hit when you need to hit it, then by all means, use that rifle/cartridge I don't. That's what learning to shoot is about - hitting that target. If you can do it with your AR/moisinnagant/lee enfield/eyetalion ;D rifle, great.
If any one here thinks an M1 (due to the 8 round clip) can't put out a high rate of accurate fire try laying next to VMI88, 7.62BBQ, or trobertson5-0 (I believe that's him, he hasn't visited here for quite some time). They can cover you up with hot brass - at the rate of about 30 rnds. a minute. If you're gonna use it, you have an obligation to learn to use it well.
To me, the bottom line is whether or not you have confidence in your ability and can demonstrate it by hitting the target. Why does the rifle, or cartridge matter, if you can get the job done with it?
For my part, these types of discussions are a good thing. It gives us a chance to get to know each other a little better (by reading each others opinions/arguements) and to get different perspectives on a subject we all like. If one of us learns something useful from it - how can it be a waste of time?
QuoteFor my part, these types of discussions are a good thing. It gives us a chance to get to know each other a little better (by reading each others opinions/arguements) and to get different perspectives on a subject we all like. If one of us learns something useful from it - how can it be a waste of time?
I've met all kinds of people over the years, some I liked, some I didn't and I expect they felt the same about me, but I have never met ANYONE that I didn't manage to learn something useful from.
Sam
Sam....M1A,
you guys are right on. :)....learning a bit more about each other will indeed help us.....we will most likely never see eye to eye on every detail of things, but that's one of the beauties of being an individual..... ;D
I tend to think the fellows at Lexington & Concord were of the same stripe, fellows & family, but very definitely individuals.....and it is reflected back with us here now, 230+ yrs later...... ::)
I will have to say tho', in 45+ yrs of shooting & being around & working with guns & ammo, I have -never- met a gun of any kind that I didn't like..... ;D Some just fit me better than others, or were more ballistically capable than an alternative for the job at hand......never saw it as making them a "bad gun"...... 8) ;D
BTW, in boot, we were "thrown" an M1 ("Catch it, do NOT drop it!!)......as the armorer on the AR-6 (USS Ajax), I had over 350+ M14's (most with select fire!)....along with a couple of M60's & M2's.......I miss those little boogers.....to this day, I miss them all...... :'(
TTYS, guys.
LLP
QuoteI have -never- met a gun of any kind that I didn't like
Obviously never had a Stevens Visible (read miserable) Loader ;D
Nope! that is true...... ;D
But I did have an old Greener SxS w/ Damascus barrels I had to reload in black powder (full brass shells) that was kind of a booger.....never could seem to make that one happy.....traded it for an '55 8.375" Mod 29....one of my "better" deals.... ;D :o
OK, gotta 'Seed....we're trainin' this weekend in Piru........ ;D ;D 8)
TTYS
LLP
Why do I like what I Like? Reliability, Natural point of aim without a lot of adjustment to my hold. Good sight picture and hitting at the point of aim, and last but not least, a good trigger feel. How should a trigger feel? Compare a Mosin Nagant to a Mauser, an SKS to an AK, which feels better to you? I guess it boils down to fit, sights, and trigger to find out which gun(any gun) YOU like. Then you take into consideration caliber, action type, ect. This is not a science, it is an art. Bullet trejectory is science. VaWolf
I own both of these superb rifles and very much prefer my M1A for several reasons. First of all for me practice is really important and I am somehow unable to use the Garand much without developing a lflinch from the 30-06. I can shoot my M1A all day and not flinch a bit. I've also found the 168 sierras fired from my M1A seem to make much smaller groups than the same bullet from my Garands. Super fast reloading with the 20 round GI mags is another plus but I do shoot offhand better with my Garands because of my support hand being right under the magazine. I love skiing with my M1A more than my Garands too. I saw this ammo thing comming quite some time ago so the ammo situation is no big deal for me. I shoot my M1A all I want.
Quote from: SamD on November 14, 2008, 05:16:45 PM
QuoteI have -never- met a gun of any kind that I didn't like
Obviously never had a Stevens Visible (read miserable) Loader ;D
I had one of those once SamD, Best $85 I ever spent. Bought it at a Wisconsin gun show for $85.00, brought it home cleaned it up, test fired and sold it a week later at local show for $300. I ended up buying a Ruger 10/22 International with the new found cash ;D
For me, the M1 feels better, it is just a more comfortable/pointable rifle for ME to shoot. I also do not care for the cast receivers on most of the M14 clones or the seemingly constant issues with new SA rifles performing as they should until you throw USGI parts at them.
With that being said, the day I have the spare cash to afford an M1A, I'll be buying one ;D
Quote from: biathlon on November 16, 2008, 02:25:39 PM
First of all for me practice is really important and I am somehow unable to use the Garand much without developing a flinch from the 30-06. I can shoot my M1A all day and not flinch a bit.
That is why my Garand is chambered in 7.62X51. For some reason I develop a pre-shot blink when shooting a garand in 30-06. The same doesn't happen with 7.62X51.
Only problem I have had is finding appropriate bandoleer kits for 7.62X51. Luckily I found this guy named Fred who sells stocks on the internet. He sells these rare bandoleers kits with cardboard cheap! Not only that, but he has USGI Garand clips for just $7.50 per 10! Sounds a little crazy to me... ;)
I was handed an match grade M-1a and sa ball ammo at ridgecrest (I am used to an M-1 Garand) I found no problem with the 20 round mag getting in my way ,The only problem I found with the M-1a was OHS witch made 2 out of the 20 rounds go over the top of the target (600 yards steel) ohs is a seruose problem folks it can creep up to any Rifle ,,,,,ok your wondering what is this OHS problem we all get it once in awhile ,,,Operator Head Space ,I had to do the math for my come up the rear sight had not been indexed ,I did not do it just right .
Other then the price of ammo I would take either one and with the m-2 ball ammo being flat based it don't go as far as acurratly as the 7.62x51 nato .
Based on all that if I had the extra cash around to buy an M-1a match grade Rifle (or even a standerd M-1a) I would ,,,I would still keep my M-1 tho.
Wade
I have been having problems getting youngsters to want the M1. I love mine. They think it is not sexy enough, I guess.
OK, I am going to buy another M1. Im thinking, if I ever have a shoot that has more the 60 people,( should be easy next yr) I will offer it for a raffle. Its how I got mine and its a good promotion for AS. Think about it, 20 buck gets you into a chance for a real rifle with the odds being 1 in 35.( only 35 tickets sold) All of us Instructors could do this, I think.
Quote from: colycat on November 17, 2008, 12:05:54 AM
OK, I am going to buy another M1. Im thinking, if I ever have a shoot that has more the 60 people,( should be easy next yr) I will offer it for a raffle. Its how I got mine and its a good promotion for AS. Think about it, 20 buck gets you into a chance for a real rifle with the odds being 1 in 35.( only 35 tickets sold) All of us Instructors could do this, I think.
Um I think you are wrong,,,I for one could never give up an M-1 Garand :o,call it a short coming ::) ;) greed?
Wade
For purposes of Appleseed and AQTs there is no real advantage to the big magazine.
Some folks find it easer to get prone with the M1.
The M1 kick more than the M1A? Never realized it. Similar bullet/weight. Similar rifle weight. Similar bullet velocity. To me the advantage of the M1A is that flip up butt plate. I use it in all three positions. Some day I may "carve" on a spare M1 stock to see if I can get an M14 butt plate mounted to it. I think my M1A is heavier than my M1 though. The scope/scope mount, cleaning kit in the butt and bipod probably cause that. The M1 is kind of muzzle heavy due to the synthetic stock, the scout scope mount and pistol scope on the barrel. You get used to the "feel" is you use it enough.
For more serious work, like those described in that short story about UN troops moving on a small town out in the flatlands of the west a mix of M1s and M1As might be a good thing. One of the things we learned in the Army was when setting up and ambush the M16's should be set up with a combination of 30 rnd. mags. in half the team and 20 rnd. mags. in the other half. That way everyone didn't run out of ammo and do a mag change at the same time. Not sure anyone does things that way today with all the 30 rnd. mags. out there but it sounded good back then.
Two great rifles. Enjoy'em!!
I certainly love both, and plan on picking up a couple field grade M1s in the VERY near future.
I have a question, though. Does it concern anyone that the m1 has no flash hider? I consider that a good feature of the m1a (even though my scout squad has a brake, not a hider). Who here has fantasized about a flash hider installed on their garand? Don't judge me if I'm the only one :-[
J
I've never noticed that a flash hider or lack thereof has made any difference in how well I shot or in the accuracy or amount of returned fire.
The are a couple of flash hiders available for the M1 if it's an issue for anyone.
A US gov model that clips on to the bayonet lug and a commercial one that replaces the CG lock.
Sam
The Army/Marines had 2 different kinds, one officially adopted (M2), one left "experimental" (T37). The T37 was never fully adopted, though some are said to have been fielded. Both were only intended for the M1C and M1D Sniper rifles, and if I were to put a flash suppressor on my M1, it would be the T37 type.
They sell for $30 to $50, and at those prices, I'd say they probably are replicas. Some yahoo tried selling one (real one, not a replica) this month on Gunbroker starting at $250. Needless to say, he got no bids.
Take notice that they aren't used by the match shooters. Also note that National Match M14's had the suppressors opened up some.
I've only used the T37 type. Looks nice. Probably not really necessary due to the big long barrel on the M1 Garand.
I had to drill mine out quite a bit on the inside as the bullets were "skating" up the bottom prong and hitting 6" high at 25 meters.
Thanks guys.
;D
J
Is that the consensus, that they're not needed on an M1? I'd hate to muck up a perfectly good rifle if there's no point. I was considering getting one of the T37 replicas from Fulton Armory or Sarco (I think they have them).
The problem with flash hiders or any other device attached to the end of a barrel is it concentricity, and does it allow exiting gases to pass the bullet evenly. If it does not, you will have accuracy issues. If it contacts the bullet, even worse (hench the tapered reamer treatment to M14 flash hiders). Most of the T-37's that I have seen were poorly made and the flash hider cuts were not equally spaced around the bores axis. Do they look kick a$$, hell yeah, but as an aid to making Rifleman or concealing your position, I think they are a waste.
One thing about it. If you get it, and don't like it or have accuracy problems it's as easy to remove as it was to install.
To install - remove the gas plug, unscrew the gas cylinder lock (keep this in your pocket), screw the T37 on it (takes the place of the gas cylinder lock) and reinstall the gas plug and tighten it. If it doesn't work out you can remove the T37, reinstall your original gas cylinder lock and you're back to normal.
After all these years with my M1A, an M1 just looks naked with that T37 on it.
To each his own. Many folks don't like my synthetic stock or scout scope set up either but it shoots just fine for me and feels right - and that's what counts.
**)
Sorry guys I couldn't find the best site for this inquiry. Having been chartised for 3 days over my missing the intent of Appleseed and stressing markmanship, a little thought came to me. Several years ago I attended Appleseed in Evansville (RED BRUSH) and noticed when the shooters took the line there had been no ammo inspection for the gas-guns. Hopefully you already caught my point, but if not, let us suppose some dufus decides to use his half-a** ammo reloads, or stick too hot a 308 in his 7.62X51 and suppose this thing blows up and the poor fellow to his right has to eat what's left of his op. rod. What then, just a casuality of the training? I would highly recommend gas-gun ammo be inspected prior to the entering the firing line. You know the old saying "if it can go wrong, it will". Not trying to change how Appleseed does things, just looking out for you a little.
Quote from: colycat on November 16, 2008, 11:43:10 PM
I have been having problems getting youngsters to want the M1. I love mine. They think it is not sexy enough, I guess.
Get'em to use the right dictionary. I forget what publisher or printing it was [sometime post '80, but one of the dictionaries available for general referral at the college library where I went to school had a line art Garand under the heading "rifle."
It doesn't get much cooler than that! ;)
Quote from: longjohn on December 02, 2008, 06:10:03 PM
Is that the consensus, that they're not needed on an M1? I'd hate to muck up a perfectly good rifle if there's no point. I was considering getting one of the T37 replicas from Fulton Armory or Sarco (I think they have them).
Well, the T37 type [being screw on]
does prevent the use of a bayonet w/ the rifle, if that's of any consideration... ;D
I've got a Garand. Love it dearly, but, it's a 9pound sledgehammer.
Got a trio of #4Mk1's, too. Love'em dearly, and shoot'em well.
Got a gaggle of Mosin Nagants in various variants, and various grades of "what the hell kind of story could THIS one tell?"
Got a couple of Yugo Simonovs
Got a couple of long-barreled Mausers, one Turk, one Czech. (the VZ24 started the whole addictive-behavior thing...my gateway gun, if you will)
Got a Schmidt-Rubin K-31 (straight-pulls are smooth...think "hand-operated semi-auto", and GOOD GOD! what accuracy!)
Got an AR, one scoped bull-barrel/freefloated 5.56 upper and a more conventionally outfitted 6.8SPC.
Love them all. If the SHTF, which one would I carry to the fracas? Depends upon who my comrades-in-arms were, really. I'm a scratched-and-dented markdown of a guy, no longer really suitable for run and gun, grab and stab. Put my butt on a wooded hillside with a Garand or an Enfield (both have peepsights....that kind of assignment would be too important for me to be putzing around with a notch rear-sight), and I'll rain death on the higher-value badguys and destruction on the more expensive pieces of their equipment, while you high-speed/low-drag young whippersnappers get upclose and personal with the confused and leaderless former subordinates of the guys I popped.....make it count, however, because when I become a mortar-shell magnet, I'm no longer fast enough to outrun the shards, and my lead-based thunderstorm mightn't last very long.
So, IMHO, which rifle is best? Match the piece of equipment to the mission that you're going to assign to the man. Give the running-and-attacking and "in your face!" guy something light and fast-handling, like an M4. Give the fat old stationary bastard a Garand, some sandbags and a pile of en bloc clips full of M2 ball. Give the "in between" reinforcement guys something intermediate, like an M-16/AR15, or a Mosin Nagant carbine, or an AK, or a Simonov, or even a Schmidt-Rubin K-31
For hardhitting/universal ammo, however, I think "best-case-scenario" might be a bunch of guys with 5.56AR-15's and a few guys with AR-10's.
If I had to be used in a run-and-gun capacity (what totally chitty chain of events would have to take place for the Free World to depend on MY running speed?) I'd prefer a standard-configuration AR. They're light and accurate. A small low-horsepower HIT is more valuable than a larger, higher-horsepower MISS....If I've got that kind of condition going on, how much longer will it take for my breathing to settle down if I'm lugging a Garand, compared to an AR?
I hope and pray that NONE of these scenarios, and NONE even remotely similar come to pass.
I've read all of the posts on this thread and learned some things, laughed at some things, and generally enjoyed it, but it seems that the 'best' rifle for any individual is what that individual is most proficient with. I am fortunate in that I own several MBRs, and unprepared in that I am not yet proficient with any of them. My plan is to do virtually all of my practice with an LTR until I am at least a Rifleman and then practice with each of the MBRs until I am equally proficient with all of them. That said I have to agree with those who have said that different rifles can be best utilized for different types of situations. The 03-A3 is my favorite to shoot and the one with which I am, at this point in my development, the most accurate, and will always be an iron sight weapon for use inside 500 yds. The M1D is my second favorite and since it is scoped but retains the utility of iron sights is potentially my best all around weapon when I have developed the skill to properly utilize it's capabilities. The M14 is probably my 'carry'/'utility' rifle with the potential for both accuracy and ease of use. The scoped AR10T is probably the 'Reach Out and Touch Someone' rifle but the one to which I am least attached. The M1 Carbine, Mini 14 AR15, and AK 47 types are perimeter defense or assault weapons. Why so many MBRs (I don't yet own them all)? I am the one within my 'squad (family)' with the resources to obtain them and have each one assigned to an individual who would have the primary responsibility for the purpose to which each rifle is best suited. I don't plan to ever use these weapons for these purposes but I don't plan for my house to burn either but I still pay the insurance premium. Meanwhile I will continue to go to Appleseeds, practice, and recruit others to do the same and will be having fun at the same time.
the fact that you can get 3 or 4 m1s for the price of an m1a is pretty tempting (and pretty decisive for me). why not grab one as a shooter and another to keep for parts?
Generally I like to avoid this kind of thread since nothing is ever settled. But here is my 2 cents and excuse the inflation. I hate talking about other peoples choice of weapons so can only give my opinion on mine.
Ive had enough of the M-16 and the 223 in the military.
I am very impressed with simple rifles that would shoot under the conditions of a battle field. Mud, sand, dirt, rain, all kinds of matter falling from the sky, etc in short no telling what that rifle will have deal with to operate. MBR is not for putting holes in paper and the one thing it must do is fire no matter what and hit center of mass close enough to do what I need at up to 300 yards. Of course every rifle can and does fail but its the likelihood that matters. When I see a receiver packed with mud fire dependably that's the weapon I want in my hands given a choice.
I avoided the AKs from mil surplus just due to the fact of what they go though before they get to us and purchased a Saiga. After converting that god awful fire control group it's a fine MBR. Yes I want an Garand also for every reason I wanted the AK plus its the quintessential American Battle Rifle by which all others are judged. I know ammo is not cheap but Id rather have 90 rounds of 30 cal rifle than 300 of a lesser caliber. Yeah I know I'm weird.
I hear the wait is pretty long now (so hurry up and order a bunch) but the Greek surplus from the CMP is the best deal out there on ammo. Its the right caliber for your CMP M1, its non-corrosive, its reloadable, its dependable and accurate. Don't get caught wishing you'd ordered some (lots ;)).
Quote from: Rhodes on May 27, 2009, 12:06:25 PM
I avoided the AKs from mil surplus just due to the fact of what they go though before they get to us and purchased a Saiga.
There is no such thing as a mil surplus semiauto AK... This is a misconception. The WASR rifles are all new production rifles as were the MAC 90s, Maadis, MISR, etc of years past. Most of the SKS rifles you will find are what you can consider surplus with the exception of some Chinese versions exported by Norinco in the late 80s early 90s.
It is precisely because of my USMC experiences with the M16 that I am a huge AR proponent and this is my "go to" rifle. I would rather see someone with a SKS than with nothing because they are saving more money. That is the beauty of Appleseed. You are encouraged to "run what you brung" and rifle snobbery is just plain taboo and foolish. A person can argue on other boards 24/7 about what is better, but our message and mission both dictate that it simply does not matter if you can shoot 4MOA with it and qualify as a Rifleman. O0
Quote from: Old Dog on May 27, 2009, 01:20:25 PM
I hear the wait is pretty long now (so hurry up and order a bunch) but the Greek surplus from the CMP is the best deal out there on ammo. Its the right caliber for your CMP M1, its non-corrosive, its reloadable, its dependable and accurate. Don't get caught wishing you'd ordered some (lots ;)).
Order limit of 12 cans (192 rounds) per year now.
Quote from: fepowered on May 27, 2009, 03:07:03 PM
Quote from: Rhodes on May 27, 2009, 12:06:25 PM
I avoided the AKs from mil surplus just due to the fact of what they go though before they get to us and purchased a Saiga.
There is no such thing as a mil surplus semiauto AK... snip..
It is precisely because of my USMC experiences with the M16 that I am a huge AR proponent and this is my "go to" rifle.
I would rather see someone with a SKS than with nothing because they are saving more money.
That is the beauty of Appleseed. You are encouraged to "run what you brung" and rifle snobbery is just plain taboo and foolish. A person can argue on other boards 24/7 about what is better, but our message and mission both dictate that it simply does not matter if you can shoot 4MOA with it and qualify as a Rifleman. O0
I know the import system and replacing the receivers, been dealing with it for years now. Some are good some not, some barrels better than others, wanted that new Russian one along with that excellent barrel, its even cheaper now. Been looking for a used hydraulic press to stamp out one or two AK receivers myself right now just for giggles, might be fun.
As for the M-16 I think it has to do more with what part of its cycle you were introduced to it. Vietnam era was not its shinning moment and it really made us jealous of those AKs. It stuck so that's where I come from on this. I finally have the MBR I always wanted and since Tech-Sights is bringing out good sights for it Im happy. ;)
I really like the SKS once a couple of items that are well documented are fixed. I wont go into it here but if anyone has one go to the SKS forums and see how to check your rifle. Kind of the Russian Garand especially with the Tech-Sights installed.
Amen to that. So far with the Ammo being what it is of late the 22LR is what I saw on the line in all but a couple of cases, one AR and Saiga. I see that as a good thing though since people were more focused on the shooting than the rifle. Fortunate side effect of an unfortunate event.