The M14 EBR - a Continuing Evolution
 

This is not new, but may be a good reference document for those that are looking..

:munchin

Drool. Thanks JJ

My favorite is the second to last slide.......... I want some of those "explosive fox-hole diggers"...........

I am currently crying in the corner with envy. I want one of these. I'll trade my first ex-wife for a base model. She cooks(marginally), cleans(seldom), and speaks three languages.

I would love to get one, but it is currently not in the budget. You an have my ex wife too. Don't clean, can't cook worth a damn and is currently facing hit and run charges and 2felony fraud charges (the latter filed by me):D

Wouldn't own one. :munchin

why? I really only want one because it is what my father carried during his first tour in Nam and I like the 7.62 over the 5.56 for longer ranges. Of course, I am a bit of an old school type when it comes to arms but do build my own ARs

Carried both the M14 and the M21. The M14 was a great battle rifle, the M21 sucked. They are trying to make a quasi sniper rifle out o fa weapon that will not be a sniper rifle but is a great battle rifle. The presentation showed a basic load of modern semis that will do better and hold up better as a sniper weapon in the field.

If you want it for the sentimental value. go for it, as an accurate weapon for sniping purposes, not.

I also shot the M14NM in competition, a very temperamental beast. :D

As an aside, worked with the 82d troops when they got theirs and they were having all sorts of problems with them. From not holding zero, to opening up when they got hot, and even worse when they got "field dirty".

They do look pretty for a wall hanger though. :munchin

I just assumed you were talking about the ex-wives... :munchin

Don't have any. :D

A neat system but was created because they had a shitload of M14s in storage and tried to repurpose them. I've only handled them at Crane and never had to live with them but can't imagine them being better or cheaper to convert than it is to buy an AR .308 variant.

Today I have been married to the same young lady for 43 years. We eloped in 7/7/70 and that number has saved me heart ache numerous times as it is easy to remember. Why she has put up with my sorry ass is beyond me and the many individuals that know me and my lovely wife.

M21 problems, it was based on the very finicky M14 National Match. While very accurate on the range during competition, what many did not understand is that during down time at a match, many times it was being tweaked and after every match it was rebuilt. Can't do that in the field. Add to the problem was a myth that the operator was not to take it apart and only a qualified armorer was allowed to do so. Now cleaning it becomes a problem as you can't take it apart and any debris in the operating rod/barrel area would change the barrel harmonics thus a zero change. The bedding was a very fragile point and most weapons in the arms room had crap bedding as it had not been fixed since it was built. All bedding breaks down over a period based on number of recoil impulses it is absorbing. Again, this changes vibrations and resets. Most guys did not know the differences in a M14 and the M21 so the gas piton plug would get changed for a non NM plug. This caused a momentary vacuum, that would not be replicated and again a change in zero. The ART I and II scope was a disaster, some liked it but in reality it did not repeat, changed zero when you removed it and you needed to, to properly clean the chamber, which most did not do because you had to remove the scope. Due to the spring you increased wear on the cam and that caused a light groove to appear in teh cam at teh longer range settings where the accuracy needed to be the greatest. As the need for the M21 was increased, the lower the standards was on the original receiver and some came form a manufacture that actually drilled the receiver at a slight angle making windage zero a real pain. Yes those receivers are still out there and on the new "improved M14ERBs".

That is actually only a very short list of the problems I and others have encountered with the M21.

Add to that, that the ERB is made from rack grade M14s, as stated by Streck-Fu, and not National Match guns. You have a battle rifle trying to act as an accurate sniper support weapon. Now lets have some more fun, the weapon system was designed to handle the lighter bullets, 155 - 173/175. I have a slash on 173/175 because a hot 175 will cause the weapon to malfunction over time. The number of times I have fixed a bolt on a M14 NM shooting the original 175 gr at 2750-2800 is enough to make me shudder to think of this happening in combat. Not fun when the extractor flies off the bolt and the trigger pin cracks. Shooting the 180 gr will cause real problems.

Again, a quick overview with more than just what I have mentioned being problems. Again, as Streck-Fu has mentioned, there are plenty of more modern designs that will beat the pants off of the ERB, more durable, more accurate, and more stable. Problem was Clinton stopped the military from selling off the rack grade M14s through CMP and Congress passed a bill stopping him from destroying them. Thus the military had a huge supply of the suckers. Easier to have in house rebuilds than to go through the expense of open competition bidding and all the lawsuits that always follow.

Anyway, that is why I would not own one. :munchin :D

7/7/70.....Three months before I was born.......Congrats..... ;)

I really wish there was a way to get the M-14s sold through the CMP. Have the CMP convert to semi-auto only and sell them at the stores. I'd buy one to shoot along side my Garand and M1 Carbine.... :D

07-07-1970,, Congratulations to you both.. :D:lifter:D

Thanks guys!

Yes, I do like the M14 battle rifle. I would like to see them come onto the CMP market. They could do the same thing they did with the M14NM, and weld the selector switch thus rendering it inoperative. But the libs call it an assualt rifle, HAHA, and would not allow its sale. "There are enough of those military killers out there now", I believe it was Diane Feinstien that said that little piece of BS or something very similar.

Klinton had hundreds of thousands of M-14s destroyed during his administration.

You could easily cut off the auto selector lug, but the ATF's position is that once a weapon has been full-auto, it will always remain an NFA weapon.

There have been several efforts over the years to get M-14s sold by the CMP. None succeeded.

TR

Congratulations to you and your bride. May you have many more years together.

Congrats, I'm on my way to 24 years.


My current interest is in a battle rifle in .308 with carbine sizing. Something with a folding stock and probably a suppressor. Something that would be easily legal in most of the USA.

I've had a little experience with the M-21 system. 10rds and the Redfield scope made it easy to hit targets at 300-900m. I've since heard some of the 'reservations' about the M-21. I understand your problems with it.

Put 3rds through the M-24 system, but without a spotting scope who knows who hit what.

Most of my "long-range" shooting (out to a klick) was with various battle rifles in .308 using open sights. Opposition learned to stay at least that far away. Got quite expert with the M-8/M-40 system but I don't think I can get a permit for that anymore...

Does anyone know the real story of where those selector welded up M14NM's came from? I remember my first years at Perry with the NH state team 15ish years ago, we had M14's with welded selectors. I always thought it was weird that we had them set up that way. I believe the M14's somehow came from CMP or NRA and were donated to the NH state team. From time to time the welds would break loose and ruin someones target. Which at the Nationals, completely sucks.

For the record (for me) they shot very well in the 200yrd offhand and 600yrd prone. I was always clumsy with them in the rapid fire mag changes. Overall, I liked it better at Perry than the AR. The heavy weight gave them good stable shooting.

The two assigned to me was one with a wood stock and one with a really tacky looking woodland camo plastic stock.

The M14 NM came from several sources, some were from Rock Island, the actual arsenal. (You should see the museum there, they have a compete run down of the M14NM evolution. Very interesting. Some were from Benning's shop, and I believe some came from Picatinny.

Yeah, if they were still shooting them in your time frame then the system would be pretty beat. We had babied ones at Bragg with SOTIC and they had been there since 85 when we first started the program. I had a Benning armorer that kept them in top shape for the course. He re bedded them on a regular basis and we shot groups with them before each course to see which ones to issue and which ones needed re-working. Never had that weld break, but had some other really interesting things happen. Dave Zavitz was a whiz with the rifles and one hell of a shot.

I agree with the auto-receiver definition. I think there was something special about the M14NM with the teams. May have stumbled into some strange NFA history with this thread. Thinking about it some more the other State teams, as well as my State team allowed the team member to take the guns home with them between matches to continue to practice. There was never a "transfer" or Form 3/4. You just signed a book that you had XXXX serial number assigned to you. Very much like how we do in the Army. (To be clear, I am referring to Civilian teams, not a Army NG or RA team.)

I have to wonder about if certain M14NM's were "dewated" under some old ATF definition that made the welded selector a legitimate configuration for the time.(During the first AWB, late 90's.) Changing the gun to Title I status.

I do not know what year the definition of "torch cut/Saw cut deactivation" came about. My only guess is that possibly some M14 receivers were old enough? I would ask the ATF, but I know they would not be able to tell me. (Seems like a good thing for Small Arms Review to write an article about.) :cool:

And LongRange, Congratulations on the long marriage. That is some really good stuff. :) (Year six for me.)

As well, thank you for your input and wisdom whenever these weapon related subjects pop up.

There was another version of the M14, the M14M, which stood for "Modified." These were rack grade rifles with the selector lug welded to prevent its operation. I read somewhere that 12,000 were produced, with the intention of civilian sales, probably to NRA-associated groups. That source said that the sales program never got going due to events of 11/22/63. Small Arms of the World has a little section on the M model.

In the fall of 2000, my state's shooting association received a few M models from the CMP on a loaner basis. I was lucky enough to rent one of the seven rifles received, cost was $25/year with some goodly restrictions on storage and use. All these and other (NM) rifles got returned to CMP in '06.

The one I had was basically brand new from Springfield Armory, s/n in the 563k range. The M was overstamped at the heel, done not quite straight. It had the usual build issues relating to accuracy but had better machining than what SA Inc was doing at the time or earlier. (I had an M1A in the 49k range for comparison.) This rental M's biggest problem out of the box, was loose bedding from having the trigger group locked for maybe thirty-seven years.

I don't agree with it. If the weapon can be modified to safely and permanently make the weapon semi-auto, it should be permitted.

I don't agree with any of the restrictions based on maybe. Both bolt and lever action weapons have been turned full auto and that is one slippery slope. :munchin


I do not trust this gov't one whit especially when it comes to guns.

It is...

I have built three AK's and an FAL using kits. All "NEW" US manufactured receivers were semi-auto.

Turning an "auto" into a semi-auto is accomplished daily...

The ATF is talking barry's anti-2nd amendment game plan..

I did not mean I agreed with the ATF’s practices. I meant I agree that the ATF would see the receiver as a MG. My point was that for all intensive purposes it was a fully functional MG with a spot welded selector. Also the guns seemed to freely move around outside of the NFA registry. (My assumption).

Of course there are all kinds of formally full-auto platforms that have been modified to semi-auto. That is a little different in that there are certain conditions to completely change a Title II status to a Title I status. There are strict rules that govern such modifications. The M14NM and M14M would have been foul to all of them.

The M14M, as the above poster pointed out, was something different. I have not seen anything like that since. Have you ever seen a Full-auto (Title II ) AK47 with a welded selector that was being put up for sale as a Title I Semi?(Personally, I would say that’s likely a ATF sting.) It is a weird configuration and seems unlikely for the obvious reasons of the ATF calling foul.

You are not using the original full auto receivers, are you?

Even a .50 BMG parts kit does not include the right sideplate (serial numbered and registered part, according to the ATF).

The M14 loaners were an odd duck under a long gone DCM program.

You can grind off and weld up all you want to. If the serial numbered part of the weapon (receiver or frame) was originally full auto, you cannot legally remake it as a semi. You can use most of the parts, minus the serial numbered frame or receiver portion to make a new weapon on a semi-only receiver.

TR