When I was growing up in the UK there were several rifles I really hoped to one day be able to own. Obviously, being a Brit, I wanted a Lee-Enfield above all else but I also wanted, in no particular order, a M1 Garand a British Army L1A1 - more commonly, and simply, known to Squaddies as a 'SLR' - and, of course I also wanted a M14. Well, as fate would have it, I now am able to own an Enfield and a Garand but, sadly, our elected officials have decreed that most of us are not trusted to own an either of a SLR nor a real M14. Fortunately, several civilianised versions of the M14 are available to us and there is a lot of comment on-line, and at the ranges, about the quality (or otherwise) of the various "M14" offerings. Nothing, it seems, can stir up as much interest as a posting about 'how good are the M305's from Marstar etc' In light of this I thought I would share my observations and thoughts on some "M14 - style" rifles. Of course many of you will have your own thoughts on these issues but some people, especially those yet to buy into the platform, may find the following interesting and, perhaps, helpful.
I ought to make it clear that I am far from an M14 expert and I am not a gunsmith. I am however an experienced and keen shooter and, while I like a variety of different firearms, I have observed that comments and opinions about guns are sometimes written by folk who either have a love affair with one brand over another or the writers are people who only own one type and feel compelled to criticize other types ( some validation of a purchasing decision perhaps ?). Obviously we all have likes and dislikes but at least I own, or have owned, all the rifles I comment on and all the purchasing decisions - good and bad - are therefore my own problem.
In what follows I offer up my comments on some particular M14 type rifles. I subdivide my observations into categories such as Price, Looks, Fit and Finish, Handling/Ergonomics, Aftermarket Upgrades and Accessories, Sights as Supplied, Accuracy and lastly my thoughts on Value for Money. Naturally all the opinions are exactly that - opinions- and therefore 100% subjective (except the accuracy results) and I'd welcome other views - especially from more experienced owners. What I am not going to comment upon is the politics of the countries making the various products as that is simply, in my opinion, outside the scope of a gun review.
So without further ado, the rifles being compared are as follows:
1) A Springfield Armory M1A 'Loaded'
2) A USGI/Norc Hybrid M14s - custom built on a mystery receiver, USGI walnut stock, loads of other USGI parts but with a Norinco barrel and
3) A stock 2007 Norc M14s
I currently own both the Springfield and the Hybrid USGI/Norc. I have owned 5 other Norcs and all are now sold so I borrowed the 2007 Norc from a friend. It is about as stock as they come and is still housed in the Chu wood.
Price: There is an enormous price difference between these rifles.....
M1A - Somewhere about $2500 will allow you to put your paws on a Springfield M1A 'Loaded'. This is the stock M1A with a number of National Match upgrades. Mine has the black synthetic stock with the stainless steel NM medium-contour barrel. For those of you who wish to look further Springfield details, on their website, the various configurations available to prospective purchasers of their M1A.
USGI/Norc Hybrid - this was a rifle built by CGN's own M14 Doctor. It has a really odd receiver that, while registered as a Norc, may in fact be of US manufacture ( a so-called 'lunch pail special' made by workers at the US factory and then mysteriously moving to the workers lunch pail and out of the door ! ) It also has a USGI Bolt, Crazy Horse Trigger group, US Op Rod, US sights and is housed in a USGI walnut stock ( with the cut-out filled in by me using a dummy selector switch ). The barrel is a Norc which is topped off with a US NM Flash Hider with bayonet lug. In present configuration it is the nearest I can get it to look like a 'real M14'.
How much is it worth ? Well I turned down offers of $1800 when I thought to sell it a while back on the EE so someone was prepared to pay at least that. To me it is somewhere around a $2000 item before scope etc.
Stock Norc - This particular one was bought when Marstar had at $399 deal. Today I think bone stock Norcs go for about $500 or so before tax.
Looks: All the rifles look pretty much the same to anyone other than an aficionado of the M14 platform. The USGI/Norc Hybrid looks the most traditional and the M1A 'Loaded' looks the most modern but in essence and by design, they all look pretty much like an M14.
Fit and Finish: None of the rifles are new so all carry so wear marks but my comments are more to illustrate things like obvious defects and tool marks.
M1A 'Loaded' - Easily the winner in this category the metal surfaces are free of any and all tooling marks and are finished in a dark, near black, tone. The stainless barrel is likewise finished perfectly and looks like any you would find on a Remington/Savage etc hunting rifle. The stock fits perfectly and is equally flawless. Anything less would be most disappointing in a rifle costing this much.
USGI/Norc Hybrid - given that this is a mishmash of parts and bits of varying vintages, the wear is different and finish is not uniform. The receiver is the star of this particular show though - finished perfectly without any tool marks or rough bits at all. It is coated in that greenish phosphate so common to US military rifles of the 40's, 50's and 60's. Held next to my 1953 Garand, the Hybrid's receiver looks to have come from the same place. While I did my best to refinish the stock ( keeping the cartouche and proof P markings ) it is of 1960's vintage and now has some marks that certainly wouldn't have existed when new. A used rifle, the only bit that today looks new is the USGI fibreglass hand-guard which I painted dark earth using Krylon.
Stock Norc - another used rifle but the tooling marks that are visible were present (so I am told ) when the rifle arrived new. The receiver is generally finished rough and again, so I am told, this is how it arrived. The Chu wood is good and seems to fit well. There are no rough spots on the barrel or any metal other than the receiver. The impression I get from this rifle ( which is consistent with all the Norcs I have owned ) is that they could all benefit from a final 'once over' by a competent finishing person/process. I do note though that overall finish was better on my, now sold, 2009 version than on this 2007 and others of the same vintage - this observation seems consistent with other reports that the 2009 (and I suppose 2010) Norinco offerings are better finished.
Handling/ Ergonomics
There are a few fundamental differences between the three rifles:
M1A 'Loaded' - slightly nose heavy compared to the others due to the medium weight tube. A slightly (1") longer LOP because of the thicker rubber buttplate and a slightly narrower pistol grip. The rifle weighs 9.2lbs w/o magazine according to Springfield but weighs an even 10 lbs on my scale when fitted with the ARMS #18 mount. Charging handle operation smooth, trigger is a clean military two stage and magazine insertion and removal of both long and short magazines also smooth and easy.
USGI/Norc Hybrid. The USGI walnut stock is my personal favourite - I can only describe it as feeling 'just right'. The rifle seems more balanced than the M1A 'Loaded' . As expected with a rifle put together by M14 Dr., the operation of all controls is smooth and easy and the trigger is very, very nice ( maybe a tad too light for a military job but perfect for a range rifle ). Magazine insertion and removal also easy - but not as smooth as the M1A.
Stock Norc. I am not a big fan of the Chu wood stock profile - thicker than USGI, it reminds me of the fat Boyds stocks without the refinement of a nice finish. The op rod seems to bind up a bit when compared to the other two ( no surprise here at all ) and the trigger feels gritty. Magazine insertion and removal with the 5/20 rounders is OK but the 5 rounders are another story being hard to remove once seated.
Upgrades and Accessories
Upgrades - Commonly, owners often try to add USGI parts to the Norcs as USGI parts have long been thought to be superior to the Chinese parts. Today the supply of the parts is dried up but some commercial replacements are available. National Match conditioning and tweaking is available through qualified gunsmiths and through keen hobbyists. Four of the five Norinco's I have owned were NM conditioned by M14Doctor and in each case I found accuracy and function to be improved after the work was performed. CGN's 'Hungry' does a similar thing at his clinics and both of Barney and Tom have a very good reputation and are a wealth of knowledge. In my opinion, spending a bit of cash to have the trigger smoothed, the stock properly fitted, op rod aligned and the gas system unitised is money well spent. Having said all that, I have yet to hear of a Norc that won't work just fine out-of-the-box so I wouldn't go so far as to say that this is work you must have done.
Accessories - The M14 was designed as a battle rifle. It was intended to be an upgrade to the venerable M1 Garand ( pronounced, incidentally, GARE-end ) and while accessories are available it isn't an AR so if Leggo For Big Boys is your primary game go with Eugene Stoner's design. While upgraded stocks do allow for the attachment of lights and lasers to be bolted onto rails etc, the most common accessory is a scope and it is here that the M14 shows its' Achilles' Heel as it wasn't really designed with scope mounting in mind. It can, of course, be done but mounts are pricey and when installed and a scope is mounted cheekweld becomes non-existent without using a cheekpiece or adjustable comb.
Sights as Supplied
M1 and M14 sights are about the best battle sights I can think of and it is here that people often complain about the Norcs. How do the test rifles fare:
Springfield M1A 'Loaded' - comes equipped with NM front and rear ( non hooded ) sights with one half minute for windage and one minute for elevation. Simply put - they work great.
USGI/Norc Hybrid - has USGI front (NM) and rear (standard) and while of unknown vintage they work perfectly.
Stock Norc - Sadly, these are for 'decorative purpose only' on this rifle. The owner doesn't care as he has his rifle scoped but they would need to be replaced if the rifle was going to be used without glass. This is consistent with my observations of other Norcs but again I am advised that the more recent arrivals from China are better.
Accuracy - With talk of sights and scopes out of the way how did the rifles shoot when tested ? Before giving the results, I would like to add a word to new shooters so that expectations are properly managed. While I have heard (and read on-line) of sub-moa M14 tack-drivers I haven't seen this myself. I'm not calling anyone out here, I am just saying that sub-moa with a semi is very, very good and in my view expecting such accuracy borders on the unrealistic. The military considered accuracy requirements for National Match rifles to be 3.5" at 100 yards (10 shot group ) and I am advised that standard M14's were expected to group about 3 MOA ( 3 shot group ) but I haven't been able to confirm this latter figure from a credible (non internet) source. Anyway, 1" at 100 yards is good shooting - witness the accuracy guarantee of Weatherby when speaking of their bolt action rifles: "guaranteed to shoot 1.5" at 100 yards 3 shot group when using Weatherby of factory premium ammunition" !
The test I performed was a simple one - over a couple of visits to the range each rifle fired three 5 shot groups of American Eagle 150g FMJ and three 5 shot groups of Federal Gold Medal Match tipped, of course, with Sierra's fine 168gr HPBT 'Match King' bullet. I had planned to use handloads but the loads I have made up for my TRG are too hot, too long and also tipped with 175g SMK's and the loads for the Kimber Tactical were also set aside as I was concerned that while 168g SMK was OK the 45g of Varget may be too hot. In due course I will work up some good loads for the M14 but I suspect that the FGMM is a pretty good benchmark anyway.
Each group was shot from the bench, at targets posted 100 meters (not yards) away, off sandbags and using rear 'bunny ear' bags. Rifles were allowed to cool off between groups and the rate of fire was about one shot every 10 seconds - not slow like a target bolt gun but not Real-World fast either.
I know most gun rags ( err, I mean Firearms Magazines or Periodicals ) quote tests in 3 shot groups but I prefer 5 shot groups as even my SKS can produce the occasional spectacular three shot grouping.
Each rifle wore a scope properly mounted for the testing. The M1A carried an Elite 3200 10x40 attached to an ARM#18 mount using weaver rings, the Hybrid carried a Leupold Mk 4 Tactical 3.5x10x40 attached to a Sadlak (Aluminum) M14 mount using TPS HRT rings and the stock Norc carried a Falcon Menace 4.5x18x56 attached to a Springfield Armory 3rd Gen Mount using Burris rings. Each scope mount was secure and each of the Leupold and Falcon scopes were dialled in to 10x magnification to provide parity with the Elite.
Springfield M1A 'Loaded' - FGMM Best 5 shot group = 1.062" ( a 'one off' sub moa, I guess, since the target was 100 meters away. Mmm, guess I have seen a sub-moa M14 ) AE Best 5 shot group = 1.846"
USGI/Norc Hybrid - FGMM Best 5 shot group = 1.713" AE Best 5 shot group = 2.455"
Stock 2007 Norc - FGMM Best 5 shot group = 2.6" AE Best 5 shot group = Over 3.0"
Incidentally the best 3 shout grouping also came from the M1A - 0.634"
Throughout the test there were no FTF's or other problems except for an irritating problem with a shell casing getting stuck on ejection on the ARMS #18 mount - this is a known issue with some rifles and if I lived in the States I could ship it back to Springfield who would play with the ejector to ensure it didn't happen but, alas, I am here and the minor irritation ain't worth the x-border shipping hassle etc.
Value for Money and Concluding Comments
I suppose I ought to say the M1A is the best rifle and best value since it won the test and end the comments there but I won't. Sure, it is the most accurate and I really like it a lot but you pay one hell of a premium to tighten the group from a respectable 2.6" to a very good indeed 1.062". As far as looks go, while the M1A is the best finished I am a sucker for wood and steel in a military rifle so my almost-as-expensive Hybrid gets the nod in that department. While the poor old stock Norc came up last in the review I can't get away from the fact that they only cost $500 ! So where do I sit on this ? My view is that if you can afford to do so, get the best rifle you can afford to get. If you buy a M1A then enjoy it 100% - sure, it costs a lot but you can always sell it if circumstances change as there is a ready market for what is, in Canada, a premium rifle. If you want to build the best rifle you can go out and do so - but bear in mind you will spend a lot of money getting there. I have a lot of cash into my Hybrid and I could spend even more on a good barrel but it is unlikely I can get the cash out because no matter where I, and others, think the receiver was made the fact remains it is registered as a Norc. The stock Norc is an amazing value, a cheap way to see if you like the M14 idea and a perfectly serviceable rifle out of the box. Some moderate upgrades and you may well have a very reasonable shooter that will group 3" or so day after day.
Final note to those who aren't sure of a M14 or a Garand
Here is my warning to you - buy a $500 Norc and don't touch a Garand ever. Why ? The M1 is the Grand-Daddy of them all and unlike all the copies of M14's (remember - we can't own real ones ) it is truly the 'Real Deal', and IMHO kicks some serious butt. Eight rounds of 30-06 followed by the 'ping' of the en-bloc clip is some major addiction. Sitting at home cleaning it watching a DVD of Band of Brothers - friggin' priceless ! Oh, and by the way, Garands can also shoot - today I had my 1953 all matching Springfield out and, shooting el-cheapo Remington UMC, it produced a respectable 3.174" 5 shot group at 100m followed by three clangs of a gong at 200m followed by a lovely 'ping'. Scope ? - phah ! With irons !! While everything else can always be let go for sufficient cash, the Garand is one of those 'cold dead hands' things LOL.
Hope you liked the review.
I ought to make it clear that I am far from an M14 expert and I am not a gunsmith. I am however an experienced and keen shooter and, while I like a variety of different firearms, I have observed that comments and opinions about guns are sometimes written by folk who either have a love affair with one brand over another or the writers are people who only own one type and feel compelled to criticize other types ( some validation of a purchasing decision perhaps ?). Obviously we all have likes and dislikes but at least I own, or have owned, all the rifles I comment on and all the purchasing decisions - good and bad - are therefore my own problem.
In what follows I offer up my comments on some particular M14 type rifles. I subdivide my observations into categories such as Price, Looks, Fit and Finish, Handling/Ergonomics, Aftermarket Upgrades and Accessories, Sights as Supplied, Accuracy and lastly my thoughts on Value for Money. Naturally all the opinions are exactly that - opinions- and therefore 100% subjective (except the accuracy results) and I'd welcome other views - especially from more experienced owners. What I am not going to comment upon is the politics of the countries making the various products as that is simply, in my opinion, outside the scope of a gun review.
So without further ado, the rifles being compared are as follows:
1) A Springfield Armory M1A 'Loaded'
2) A USGI/Norc Hybrid M14s - custom built on a mystery receiver, USGI walnut stock, loads of other USGI parts but with a Norinco barrel and
3) A stock 2007 Norc M14s
I currently own both the Springfield and the Hybrid USGI/Norc. I have owned 5 other Norcs and all are now sold so I borrowed the 2007 Norc from a friend. It is about as stock as they come and is still housed in the Chu wood.
Price: There is an enormous price difference between these rifles.....
M1A - Somewhere about $2500 will allow you to put your paws on a Springfield M1A 'Loaded'. This is the stock M1A with a number of National Match upgrades. Mine has the black synthetic stock with the stainless steel NM medium-contour barrel. For those of you who wish to look further Springfield details, on their website, the various configurations available to prospective purchasers of their M1A.
USGI/Norc Hybrid - this was a rifle built by CGN's own M14 Doctor. It has a really odd receiver that, while registered as a Norc, may in fact be of US manufacture ( a so-called 'lunch pail special' made by workers at the US factory and then mysteriously moving to the workers lunch pail and out of the door ! ) It also has a USGI Bolt, Crazy Horse Trigger group, US Op Rod, US sights and is housed in a USGI walnut stock ( with the cut-out filled in by me using a dummy selector switch ). The barrel is a Norc which is topped off with a US NM Flash Hider with bayonet lug. In present configuration it is the nearest I can get it to look like a 'real M14'.
How much is it worth ? Well I turned down offers of $1800 when I thought to sell it a while back on the EE so someone was prepared to pay at least that. To me it is somewhere around a $2000 item before scope etc.
Stock Norc - This particular one was bought when Marstar had at $399 deal. Today I think bone stock Norcs go for about $500 or so before tax.
Looks: All the rifles look pretty much the same to anyone other than an aficionado of the M14 platform. The USGI/Norc Hybrid looks the most traditional and the M1A 'Loaded' looks the most modern but in essence and by design, they all look pretty much like an M14.
Fit and Finish: None of the rifles are new so all carry so wear marks but my comments are more to illustrate things like obvious defects and tool marks.
M1A 'Loaded' - Easily the winner in this category the metal surfaces are free of any and all tooling marks and are finished in a dark, near black, tone. The stainless barrel is likewise finished perfectly and looks like any you would find on a Remington/Savage etc hunting rifle. The stock fits perfectly and is equally flawless. Anything less would be most disappointing in a rifle costing this much.
USGI/Norc Hybrid - given that this is a mishmash of parts and bits of varying vintages, the wear is different and finish is not uniform. The receiver is the star of this particular show though - finished perfectly without any tool marks or rough bits at all. It is coated in that greenish phosphate so common to US military rifles of the 40's, 50's and 60's. Held next to my 1953 Garand, the Hybrid's receiver looks to have come from the same place. While I did my best to refinish the stock ( keeping the cartouche and proof P markings ) it is of 1960's vintage and now has some marks that certainly wouldn't have existed when new. A used rifle, the only bit that today looks new is the USGI fibreglass hand-guard which I painted dark earth using Krylon.
Stock Norc - another used rifle but the tooling marks that are visible were present (so I am told ) when the rifle arrived new. The receiver is generally finished rough and again, so I am told, this is how it arrived. The Chu wood is good and seems to fit well. There are no rough spots on the barrel or any metal other than the receiver. The impression I get from this rifle ( which is consistent with all the Norcs I have owned ) is that they could all benefit from a final 'once over' by a competent finishing person/process. I do note though that overall finish was better on my, now sold, 2009 version than on this 2007 and others of the same vintage - this observation seems consistent with other reports that the 2009 (and I suppose 2010) Norinco offerings are better finished.
Handling/ Ergonomics
There are a few fundamental differences between the three rifles:
M1A 'Loaded' - slightly nose heavy compared to the others due to the medium weight tube. A slightly (1") longer LOP because of the thicker rubber buttplate and a slightly narrower pistol grip. The rifle weighs 9.2lbs w/o magazine according to Springfield but weighs an even 10 lbs on my scale when fitted with the ARMS #18 mount. Charging handle operation smooth, trigger is a clean military two stage and magazine insertion and removal of both long and short magazines also smooth and easy.
USGI/Norc Hybrid. The USGI walnut stock is my personal favourite - I can only describe it as feeling 'just right'. The rifle seems more balanced than the M1A 'Loaded' . As expected with a rifle put together by M14 Dr., the operation of all controls is smooth and easy and the trigger is very, very nice ( maybe a tad too light for a military job but perfect for a range rifle ). Magazine insertion and removal also easy - but not as smooth as the M1A.
Stock Norc. I am not a big fan of the Chu wood stock profile - thicker than USGI, it reminds me of the fat Boyds stocks without the refinement of a nice finish. The op rod seems to bind up a bit when compared to the other two ( no surprise here at all ) and the trigger feels gritty. Magazine insertion and removal with the 5/20 rounders is OK but the 5 rounders are another story being hard to remove once seated.
Upgrades and Accessories
Upgrades - Commonly, owners often try to add USGI parts to the Norcs as USGI parts have long been thought to be superior to the Chinese parts. Today the supply of the parts is dried up but some commercial replacements are available. National Match conditioning and tweaking is available through qualified gunsmiths and through keen hobbyists. Four of the five Norinco's I have owned were NM conditioned by M14Doctor and in each case I found accuracy and function to be improved after the work was performed. CGN's 'Hungry' does a similar thing at his clinics and both of Barney and Tom have a very good reputation and are a wealth of knowledge. In my opinion, spending a bit of cash to have the trigger smoothed, the stock properly fitted, op rod aligned and the gas system unitised is money well spent. Having said all that, I have yet to hear of a Norc that won't work just fine out-of-the-box so I wouldn't go so far as to say that this is work you must have done.
Accessories - The M14 was designed as a battle rifle. It was intended to be an upgrade to the venerable M1 Garand ( pronounced, incidentally, GARE-end ) and while accessories are available it isn't an AR so if Leggo For Big Boys is your primary game go with Eugene Stoner's design. While upgraded stocks do allow for the attachment of lights and lasers to be bolted onto rails etc, the most common accessory is a scope and it is here that the M14 shows its' Achilles' Heel as it wasn't really designed with scope mounting in mind. It can, of course, be done but mounts are pricey and when installed and a scope is mounted cheekweld becomes non-existent without using a cheekpiece or adjustable comb.
Sights as Supplied
M1 and M14 sights are about the best battle sights I can think of and it is here that people often complain about the Norcs. How do the test rifles fare:
Springfield M1A 'Loaded' - comes equipped with NM front and rear ( non hooded ) sights with one half minute for windage and one minute for elevation. Simply put - they work great.
USGI/Norc Hybrid - has USGI front (NM) and rear (standard) and while of unknown vintage they work perfectly.
Stock Norc - Sadly, these are for 'decorative purpose only' on this rifle. The owner doesn't care as he has his rifle scoped but they would need to be replaced if the rifle was going to be used without glass. This is consistent with my observations of other Norcs but again I am advised that the more recent arrivals from China are better.
Accuracy - With talk of sights and scopes out of the way how did the rifles shoot when tested ? Before giving the results, I would like to add a word to new shooters so that expectations are properly managed. While I have heard (and read on-line) of sub-moa M14 tack-drivers I haven't seen this myself. I'm not calling anyone out here, I am just saying that sub-moa with a semi is very, very good and in my view expecting such accuracy borders on the unrealistic. The military considered accuracy requirements for National Match rifles to be 3.5" at 100 yards (10 shot group ) and I am advised that standard M14's were expected to group about 3 MOA ( 3 shot group ) but I haven't been able to confirm this latter figure from a credible (non internet) source. Anyway, 1" at 100 yards is good shooting - witness the accuracy guarantee of Weatherby when speaking of their bolt action rifles: "guaranteed to shoot 1.5" at 100 yards 3 shot group when using Weatherby of factory premium ammunition" !
The test I performed was a simple one - over a couple of visits to the range each rifle fired three 5 shot groups of American Eagle 150g FMJ and three 5 shot groups of Federal Gold Medal Match tipped, of course, with Sierra's fine 168gr HPBT 'Match King' bullet. I had planned to use handloads but the loads I have made up for my TRG are too hot, too long and also tipped with 175g SMK's and the loads for the Kimber Tactical were also set aside as I was concerned that while 168g SMK was OK the 45g of Varget may be too hot. In due course I will work up some good loads for the M14 but I suspect that the FGMM is a pretty good benchmark anyway.
Each group was shot from the bench, at targets posted 100 meters (not yards) away, off sandbags and using rear 'bunny ear' bags. Rifles were allowed to cool off between groups and the rate of fire was about one shot every 10 seconds - not slow like a target bolt gun but not Real-World fast either.
I know most gun rags ( err, I mean Firearms Magazines or Periodicals ) quote tests in 3 shot groups but I prefer 5 shot groups as even my SKS can produce the occasional spectacular three shot grouping.
Each rifle wore a scope properly mounted for the testing. The M1A carried an Elite 3200 10x40 attached to an ARM#18 mount using weaver rings, the Hybrid carried a Leupold Mk 4 Tactical 3.5x10x40 attached to a Sadlak (Aluminum) M14 mount using TPS HRT rings and the stock Norc carried a Falcon Menace 4.5x18x56 attached to a Springfield Armory 3rd Gen Mount using Burris rings. Each scope mount was secure and each of the Leupold and Falcon scopes were dialled in to 10x magnification to provide parity with the Elite.
Springfield M1A 'Loaded' - FGMM Best 5 shot group = 1.062" ( a 'one off' sub moa, I guess, since the target was 100 meters away. Mmm, guess I have seen a sub-moa M14 ) AE Best 5 shot group = 1.846"
USGI/Norc Hybrid - FGMM Best 5 shot group = 1.713" AE Best 5 shot group = 2.455"
Stock 2007 Norc - FGMM Best 5 shot group = 2.6" AE Best 5 shot group = Over 3.0"
Incidentally the best 3 shout grouping also came from the M1A - 0.634"
Throughout the test there were no FTF's or other problems except for an irritating problem with a shell casing getting stuck on ejection on the ARMS #18 mount - this is a known issue with some rifles and if I lived in the States I could ship it back to Springfield who would play with the ejector to ensure it didn't happen but, alas, I am here and the minor irritation ain't worth the x-border shipping hassle etc.
Value for Money and Concluding Comments
I suppose I ought to say the M1A is the best rifle and best value since it won the test and end the comments there but I won't. Sure, it is the most accurate and I really like it a lot but you pay one hell of a premium to tighten the group from a respectable 2.6" to a very good indeed 1.062". As far as looks go, while the M1A is the best finished I am a sucker for wood and steel in a military rifle so my almost-as-expensive Hybrid gets the nod in that department. While the poor old stock Norc came up last in the review I can't get away from the fact that they only cost $500 ! So where do I sit on this ? My view is that if you can afford to do so, get the best rifle you can afford to get. If you buy a M1A then enjoy it 100% - sure, it costs a lot but you can always sell it if circumstances change as there is a ready market for what is, in Canada, a premium rifle. If you want to build the best rifle you can go out and do so - but bear in mind you will spend a lot of money getting there. I have a lot of cash into my Hybrid and I could spend even more on a good barrel but it is unlikely I can get the cash out because no matter where I, and others, think the receiver was made the fact remains it is registered as a Norc. The stock Norc is an amazing value, a cheap way to see if you like the M14 idea and a perfectly serviceable rifle out of the box. Some moderate upgrades and you may well have a very reasonable shooter that will group 3" or so day after day.
Final note to those who aren't sure of a M14 or a Garand
Here is my warning to you - buy a $500 Norc and don't touch a Garand ever. Why ? The M1 is the Grand-Daddy of them all and unlike all the copies of M14's (remember - we can't own real ones ) it is truly the 'Real Deal', and IMHO kicks some serious butt. Eight rounds of 30-06 followed by the 'ping' of the en-bloc clip is some major addiction. Sitting at home cleaning it watching a DVD of Band of Brothers - friggin' priceless ! Oh, and by the way, Garands can also shoot - today I had my 1953 all matching Springfield out and, shooting el-cheapo Remington UMC, it produced a respectable 3.174" 5 shot group at 100m followed by three clangs of a gong at 200m followed by a lovely 'ping'. Scope ? - phah ! With irons !! While everything else can always be let go for sufficient cash, the Garand is one of those 'cold dead hands' things LOL.
Hope you liked the review.
Last edited:
