A lot to read in this thread with opinions all over the place. I prefer the M14 platform over the AR10 style platform for several reasons.
One is I hate direct impingement, really , I hate it. Second is durability of the M14 in the elements. Third is subjective, but there is just something about them.
That is not entirely true in this day and age. Check Smith Enterprise. With this sytem, you get what you pay for.
http://www.smithenterprise.com/
No glass bedding. Repeat, no glass bedding any longer. Smith doesn’t do it with USGI glass stocked Crazy Horse rifles going to the 2nd ID and the 101st, among others. It is not necessary with new gas system unitization and/or modern chassis systems. You have to remember also, it is still a battle rifle at heart , so if you really want accurate, bolt action is the way to go. For general SDM accuracy though, it will work just find under various adverse conditions. It is the child of the Garand, and we all know that rifle would work anytime, anywhere, and in any conditions.
While not entirely untrue, the amount of rounds you will most likely shoot will never require any “gunsmithing”. The only real issue would be a barrel swap. Just about anything else you can do. The M14 style rifle is easier to keep clean because you don’t have hot gas, carbon, and unburned powder jetting back into your receiver.
Totally untrue. Check the photos for yourself:
http://www.lrbarms.com/
At this juncture, I would stay LRB is the best receiver available and contrary to what was stated, it is forged just as USGI receivers were. It is remarkably close to my Winchester M14, so much so that I can’t find any differences. SEI currently has an updated (from their original) with minor improvements barstock receiver in the works but is yet to be available.
SAI receivers are ok, as are Fulton/Armscorp, but the forged LRB currently rules the day. I would not sacrifice the heart of the weapon for a few hundred dollars, but that is me.
Actually 750,000 were destroyed. That it correct, three quarters of a million serviceable rifles. Many never used. We paid for the R&D to develop the rifle, paid to store the rifle, and paid to destroy the rifle. Nice use of the taxpayers money. F*#@ing government.
My first many moons ago was a Devine Springfield NM built by the USAMTU. Old school. Can’t remember the fellows name off hand, but he is well know in the circle. Nice piece for sure. Had some early Smith's in SA and FA. Never had a problem with either. Some of the early Smith's were cast, and some were bar stock, but marked 'forged'.
Smith Enterprise IMO builds the best 'battle ready' M14 style rifle available. Hence they do them for the military. The resurgence of the platform speaks volumes about its reliability and durability. The inherent accuracy of the system is legendary, even in stock form as a traditional battle rifle with iron sights.
I think you would see many more in service today if they hadn’t been destroyed. The KAC SASS is not worth half of what they get for it. It is a joke. You could have 4-5 SEC Crazy Horse or MK14 SEI variants for the same money. But hey, what do they care, it isn’t their money being spent.
A lot to read in this thread with opinions all over the place. I prefer the M14 platform over the AR10 style platform for several reasons.