do not buy one of THOSE guns

[sanjuancb]

M14 is by no means obsolete and plays an important role as the Designated Marksmen Rifle (DMR).

I would love to see it replace the M4/M16 provide a truly effective platform for rifllemen. Necessarily, the engagement dictates the weaponry, so the M4/M16 is a good compromise, but in a open environment the M14 is vastly superior.

[TAB]

I would still rather carry a m14 ( or m1 for that matter) then a AR. 


Some one has to teach the bad guys the diffrence between cover and concealment.   

[tombogan03884]

M14 is by no means obsolete and plays an important role as the Designated Marksmen Rifle (DMR).

I would love to see it replace the M4/M16 provide a truly effective platform for rifllemen. Necessarily, the engagement dictates the weaponry, so the M4/M16 is a good compromise, but in a open environment the M14 is vastly superior.

I to would like to see the M 14 re adapted by the Army, ain't gonna happen, as I stated before DMR is a fairly special purpose weapon. The best you can expect in the future is an AR type weapon in an intermediate caliber like .270 or so.
You will never see the Armed forces adopt another 7.62 x 51 (.308)  for general issue due to the fact that in individual weapon weight ranges it is uncontrollable in full auto and MODERN doctrine requires select fire capability. Semi auto may be fine for extended engagements but in modern warfare full auto is mandatory for achieving fire superiority in the assault or counter ambush situation where keeping the enemies head down, preventing him from applying accurate fire is more important than killing people who you probably can't see any way. The reasoning behind the "battle RIFLE" died in the mass assaults of WWI and unlike Lazarus will not be resurrected.
Would I love to have an M1A for competition, HELL YES ! Would I carry one in combat? only till I could get my hands on an AK (full auto) In modern warfare the trend is the same as in industry, "Do more with less", smaller units engaging in patrols raids etc. in these circumstances "fire superiority" is the key to success If the amount of fire your unit puts down forces the opposition to keep their heads down they aren't aiming therefore they are not presenting EFFECTIVE resistance, this makes it easier for your unit to achieve their objective, whatever may be. Notice I never said, "spray and Pray"? If one aimed round is effective (and probably impossible when the enemy has had time to dig into an ambush or defensive position) Then 3 - 5 aimed rounds will be more effective. When the situation warrents it, you select semi assume a stable firing position and pick them off.
Remember, we are talking about general issue to Infantry units, NOT Marksmanship units or specialists like DM's or snipers.

[tombogan03884]

I would still rather carry a m14 ( or m1 for that matter) then a AR. 


Some one has to teach the bad guys the diffrence between cover and concealment.  

TAB, with the M203 (grenade launcher under M16 barrel) you can teach them that neither one is good enough 

[DesertMarine]

Did a google on the "Appleseed Project".  http://www.appleseedinfo.org/
Did a very quick read on it and not sure what they are trying to promote.  Claim they are trying to promote markmanship.  Try the site.

[Sponsor]

[sanjuancb]

What about a select-fire version of Springfield Armory's SOCOM II in 6.8 SPC or something along those lines? 6.5 Grendel? Is that practical in the M1 platform?

That would fit the bill handily! 

[warhawke]

I was working on a new rifle design before I moved (what can I say, I have weird hobbies). It is a super lightweight weapons platform, modular like the XM8, able to go from PDW to Sub-machinegun to carbine, rifle, DMR rifle and SAW. It uses a roller-locked delayed blowback like the CETME/G-3 with a recoil reduction system. Chambered in 6.5 Grendel it would use 90gr flat-based bullets for CQB and standard use, 123gr VLD bullets for longer range use and 144gr VLD for special applications. I would weigh less than an AR, be as reliable as an AK and it would be super accurate given good ammo. It would (IMHO) be the Uberweapon until somebody can out with Phasers or phased-plasma weapons, but of course the problem is getting it built, getting it tested and getting it adopted.

Governments do not buy one or two weapons, they by thousands, even millions of them, plus spare-parts, magazines and cleaning kits, tens of Billions of rounds of ammo and all the other things it needs to equip hundreds of thousands of troops, to say nothing of having to retrain all the troops. Replacing the M-16/M-4's would take billions of dollars, which is why they don't want to do it. Even just going to a new upper like the H&K 416 would be massively expensive. No, I fear that we are stuck with what we have until those Phasers come out.

[tombogan03884]

I was working on a new rifle design before I moved (what can I say, I have weird hobbies). It is a super lightweight weapons platform, modular like the XM8, able to go from PDW to Sub-machinegun to carbine, rifle, DMR rifle and SAW. It uses a roller-locked delayed blowback like the CETME/G-3 with a recoil reduction system. Chambered in 6.5 Grendel it would use 90gr flat-based bullets for CQB and standard use, 123gr VLD bullets for longer range use and 144gr VLD for special applications. I would weigh less than an AR, be as reliable as an AK and it would be super accurate given good ammo. It would (IMHO) be the Uberweapon until somebody can out with Phasers or phased-plasma weapons, but of course the problem is getting it built, getting it tested and getting it adopted.

Governments do not buy one or two weapons, they by thousands, even millions of them, plus spare-parts, magazines and cleaning kits, tens of Billions of rounds of ammo and all the other things it needs to equip hundreds of thousands of troops, to say nothing of having to retrain all the troops. Replacing the M-16/M-4's would take billions of dollars, which is why they don't want to do it. Even just going to a new upper like the H&K 416 would be massively expensive. No, I fear that we are stuck with what we have until those Phasers come out.

Keep at it Warhawk, remember, Sam Colt started out with 3 things, an idea, a pocket knife and a block of wood. (he also went broke once or twice)

Did a google on the "Appleseed Project".  http://www.appleseedinfo.org/
Did a very quick read on it and not sure what they are trying to promote.  Claim they are trying to promote markmanship.  Try the site.

Great program, started by Fred of Fred's M -14 stock's, Sole purpose of the Appleseed project is to promote American Rifle Marksmanship skills, We are having one up here in the spring. Several other members have attended them and reported favorably. Search for it on here, I know there are a couple threads.

What about a select-fire version of Springfield Armory's SOCOM II in 6.8 SPC or something along those lines? 6.5 Grendel? Is that practical in the M1 platform?

That would fit the bill handily! 

I'm not familiar with the rounds mentioned (heard of them but never fired them) but even if you converted it to shoot laser beams The Govt will not buy it unless it is "Modular". The complexity of the weapon removes it from consideration. Govt. buyers do not buy for the cadre, they buy for the million or so draftee's that could be called upon to use a given weapon. That is why so many countries field some variant of the AK,you don't need much smarts, education, or technical background to safely and effectively use it, or maintain it, you can be a medical student like Che Guavarra, or a cattle herder in the deepest Congo and still become equally adept with it.

[someguy]

Ok, I can't remember the blog that this originates from, but I remember reading it last week on the authors's site, and yes - it is sarcasm.  Some of his regular readers took him to task for not including his (evidently) favorite wheelguns, which he proceed to mock in his comments section, in the interest of 'equal time'. 

It's a swipe at the ever-present naysayers, not the guns.

[Big Frank]

Tom, the 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel are readily available in AR-15s. You're probably wondering like I am why anyone would custom-chamber a M-14 in either of those when you can get them in AR-15s. And you hit the nail on the head on your previous post about assault rifles and changing tactics. The M14 was a MBR invented in a time AFTER assault rifles were already becoming common. Right weapon, wrong time. Also when you carry an M16 with 240 rounds it still weighs less than an M14 with 100 rounds IIRC. If you fire an M14 full-auto the second bullet is probably 6 feet too high and after that you're gunning down airplanes.