What's better than an M14?

I've always coveted the G3, myself. I know, it's sort of the glock of the rifle world, best at nothing, but still... it's a G3!

Maybe a nice 20mm like this...
kevinch2.jpg
 
Ardent said:
No holds barred and cost is no consideration, would you guys take an AR10 over an M14? Fictional Canada where everything is non-restricted again. How about a Valmet M78 (.308 AK, was also available in non-.308 but we'll talk the .308)? FN FAL? .308 M1 Garand since cost no longer matters? Or an HK G3 / 91?
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll bite.

Having handled and/or shot most things on this list, I can say quite honestly that I would still go with the M-14. Maybe it's just the familiarity, the history, or the ability to customize, but I can't quite put my finger on just one thing.

The G3 (AK4) I carried in Latvia didn't really strike me as anything special. The cocking handle was nifty, it balanced ok, but really there's nothing all that special about a pressed/stamped and welded receiver. It was light enough to carry for a 7.62 though. Most of the parts were loosely fitted and rather wobbly. Granted they were used and abused school weapons, so that's forgivable. The belt fed MG variant (HK 21) was a blast to shoot though!

The AR-10's I've handled and got a chance to play with whenever time permitted struck me as heavy and cumbersome. Granted, they were marksman variants and not a true plain Jane AR-10. One thing I noticed was that most of us are so used to the C7-AR family, the difference in size and bulkiness are exacerbated by something so familiar yet beefed up. Like holding a rifle made for a giant. It felt weird.

Never touched a Valmet, but I imagine the experience would be much the same as with the AR-10, only vis a vis the AK/CZ58 family.

The FAL is nice and I would totally get one. If only for the historical factor of the weapon itself. Handles and balances nicely, the gas is adjustable and the recoil is negligible, despite the horror stories I heard before I actually shot it. But that is something I would buy and keep totally stock. Just oil the wood whenever and shoot it with irons for the fun factor alone.
 
Can agree on a lot of points Tyler, but of course the AR10 came first (and I know you're aware, voicing for the thread) and it's the AR15 that's a peculiar size when viewed from that perspective! A standard AR10, admittedly an extremely rare bird, is a joy to shoot actually. The .308 Valmet I find less of a jump in size from the AK47 than the AR10 from the AR15, for what reference that is worth. It's the same "size" in the hands as an M14, G3, or FAL just with a Kalashnikov action.
 
Ardent said:
Can agree on a lot of points Tyler, but of course the AR10 came first (and I know you're aware, voicing for the thread) and it's the AR15 that's a peculiar size when viewed from that perspective!
Click to expand...

Very true! However we don't have those in the vault at work, so I have no basis for comparison. :p
 
saskcop said:
The AK pattern guns are reliable, but ergo's suck and accuracy is lacking. The AR10 is accurate, but reliability is less than stellar.
Click to expand...

Have to say, the accuracy part is largely a result of comm block manufacturing and very loose tolerances on everything from headspace, to bore diameter, to the ammunition itself. Everything in an AK47 is generally loose spec to accommodate the plethora of different ammunition made for it and so forth. Finnish AKs are actually very accurate, as accurate as any other semi battle rifle, one of my Valmets, albeit a .243 so it basically gets a heavy barrel just using the .308 barrel profile, shoots 1". So there's nothing wrong with AK accuracy it's just they usually have terribly commblock "coarse" sights and no good scope mounting options, and most are crudely mass produced. Build the design well and it shines like any other.

Ergos of the AK, I agreed, until I used it in winter. The selector / safety lever is the best thing out there if you're wearing gloves, the rest of it is as good as any other rifle, I actually like that lever now.

For AR10's, I think we'd be hard pressed to put a strike against any of the modern, "worked out" stuff compared to anything else.
 
I had a Valmet M78 in 308. It was OK to shoot but certainly the heaviest rifle I ever owned. the machining in the forged receiver was very nicely done.

I have a USGI M14 (CA) now a safe queen, that I enjoyed before it was legislated to the safe...it was the best pointing rifle of all the 308's I own.

I have 3 Norc M14's that are fun to shoot and it gives me great pleasure to have my sons rocking at the pumpkin shoots, all of us with the same rifles. Can't beat them for the price, and they are shooters out of the box.

But my FN L1A1...gives me the most confidence. I used to be able to shoot it pretty well before my eyesight realized I was getting older.

Never fired a Galil. But I have handled an AR 10 and a HK 91, for a minute or two. I will stay with my FN.
 
When i passed my restricted course, it was with the sole intention to get as first restricted one AR-10 NM, but after sending messages to big dealers, i was told the wait time for one would be one to tree years, so i bought a brand new NM M1A instead, had over 2000 rounds out of my 305 with no real problems, when a brand new NM AR-10 show up i will be ready for it, but a NM M1A is one sweet rifle... JP.
 
Here in the states, I have easy access to just about any rifle available (Scar, AR-10, ETC...), but none are any 'better' than my M14.
Other rifles may be a little better in some areas, but I have not found any other rifle that does most everything as well as the M14.

CH-M21A5-EBR-SASS.jpg
 
Last edited:
Mark Williams said:
SVT 40, Accurate, lightweight, reliable.

Accurate ?
Lightweight ?
Reliable ?

All those attributes don't come to mind when I think about an SVT40, more likely they are low cost decent rifles, that shoot a decent round that is also low cost.
Nothing at all comparable with a true M14 (not a m305).

Great dog though!
Click to expand...
 
Ardent said:
No holds barred and cost is no consideration, would you guys take an AR10 over an M14? Fictional Canada where everything is non-restricted again. How about a Valmet M78 (.308 AK, was also available in non-.308 but we'll talk the .308)? FN FAL? .308 M1 Garand since cost no longer matters? Or an HK G3 / 91?

I have to be honest, much as I enjoy working on the M14, I think there are a lot better rifles out there. Our rules shrink the pool drastically however.

I've used all but one of the above here and abroad, and of all those listed I prefer nearly every one to the M14. The others never chuck extractors (Garands aside), seldom to near never blow up, often have superior ergonomics (G3, FAL left side charging, and and all less the M1 have a lower bore axis, less muzzle climb), better intrinsic accuracy (AR10), more reliable (AK / M78), better scope mounting, etc. The M14 will always be a winner along with the M1 with regards to its incredible iron sights, the rest is a pretty aged design of mediocre merit, that works fairly well.

So, all costs and considerations such as laws today aside, what would you have in the slot for your M14 in the cabinet?

I have a couple of these, and with a side mount scope it's my pick, mine run the basic irons which are poor beyond 200 yards, its only real drawback in my opinion. Close second is the AR10, actually it could even inch to #1.

EE515123-4FAB-4B30-AF1D-BECC221BD716-4383-000004835C3F29EB_zps64ce1c0f.jpg
Click to expand...

FNAR, 2000$, very accurate at par with a national match m14, TOP quality (FN doesnt make crap), very reliable, but ugly as crap and heavy!
 
mikethebike said:
Mark Williams said:
SVT 40, Accurate, lightweight, reliable.

Accurate ?
Lightweight ?
Reliable ?

All those attributes don't come to mind when I think about an SVT40, more likely they are low cost decent rifles, that shoot a decent round that is also low cost.
Nothing at all comparable with a true M14 (not a m305).

Great dog though!
Click to expand...

Sure they are comparable rifles, both full size, box magazine fed, semi auto, and chambered for a full size round. It's the Russian equivalent from the same era.

My SVT is amazingly accurate, much better than any M14 or Garand that I have shot. It weighs 8.5 lb unloaded compared to the M14 @ 9.2lb. It's just as reliable as an M14.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Yes and no. In the Canadian context both are limited to 5 rounds, whereas 10 vs 20 is a big difference. There is simply no comparison with the iron sights on an M14 to the SVT40. Nor the ergonomics - the SVT40 is very long and unwieldy IMO. Cleaning the SVT40 is much more trouble IMO.

For my 41 year old eyes, its the sights that make the difference. I shoot my Garand and M14 better than any other iron sighted rifles I own.



Mark Williams said:
mikethebike said:
Sure they are comparable rifles, both full size, box magazine fed, semi auto, and chambered for a full size round. It's the Russian equivalent from the same era.

My SVT is amazingly accurate, much better than any M14 or Garand that I have shot. It weighs 8.5 lb unloaded compared to the M14 @ 9.2lb. It's just as reliable as an M14.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Some U.S. soldiers in Irak and Afganistan were using, NM M1A for there service rifle, that should say a lot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom