M14 and all of the variants/teach this guy about the M14 in general.

[Dot.Com]

Oh well of course I may still get one, it just wouldn't be for what I planned.

Budget? I had planned to drop anywhere around 2,000 for the parts to make a fairly decent rifle(plus or minus a few hundred depending on how long it would take to acquire parts, if its gonna take a while, then the gun-fund has time to build up)

Again, until about a few days ago I had just started looking into it, and I don't exactly know how much everything in all would cost - but the setup in mind was just a basic wood stock and irons to begin with. Don't need to factor in optics for later down the line, as I already have that covered, and don't need to factor in ammo, because I already have that as well.

I have been saving up a lot for my next purchase, and money doesn't always have an opportunity to go to the gun-fund, so I don't mind paying out a little more buck at once for a better bang in the long run. If the springfields are going to fail on me, I don't particularly want to put more time/energy/and most importantly cash into it.

[Gramps]

Thanks DOC. I've been thinking about replacing my M1A Bush with an AR 10. All these post have put me one step closer. But for FUN, the M1A is fun to me to shoot.

[DocGKR]

Fun is always a good reason to go shooting and have a rifle; whether an M1A is right for someone all depends on what they want to use it for--the key is to not have any illusions about capabilities...

[edmorseiii]

The M14 has been my favorite rifle since the first time I picked one up on the firing line in the Navy. So much so that I had been wanting one for years. I have AR's in a few different flavors and styles, and you can't argue with all of the statements made in this thread, but when I just recently came across the right deal I abandoned my current AR project for an Armscorp M14 clone.

I LOVE my M14. I shoot it better then I do any of my AR's (with irons), but if I needed to grab a long gun in a fight, I would probably go with one of my go fast AR's.

[Cobra66]

Its is hard to add to what the others hear have said, but I'll add a couple of points. I have a great love for the M14 platform and I honestly can't decide which I like more, the M14 or AR15. Keep in mind that the M14 is NOT going to be an alternative to an AR15. The M14 is a battle rifle and has all the advantages and disadvantages of its type. I have owned M14 patter rifles for almost 20 years now and there is far more about them that I don't know than I know, but I am learning. Here are my thoughts.

You mentioned that you wanted MOA or sub MOA accuracy. MOA accuracy is about all that can be reasonably expected out of a Match Grade M14. Some will shoot better, but you really can't expect it. Also keep in mind that a glass bedded rifle will shoot loose its bedding every couple thousand rounds or so (depending on factors) and will need to have maintenance done to the bedding. This is something that you can do if you are willing to do a little armoring on your own, but it is far more maintenance intensive than a match grade AR15 will be. If you are envisioning high volumes of fire, I would stay away from glass bedded stocks for this reason. Your other option here would be to use a modern stock such as the JAE or TROY. These stocks will allow you to have accuracy approaching a glass bedded stock (as long as your rifle has other match conditioning attributes), but they will end up costing you $700-1000 over the cost of the rifle its self. By this point you are looking at $2200-3000 for the rifle! For this amount, you could go gung ho on a AR-10 pattern rifle.

Optics mounting is also problematic. While the M14 has wonderful iron sights, it wasn't designed for optics. The cheep mounts will not give you good results so you are looking at another $150-300 for a good mount. If you have a regular stock, this will prove problematic as you will not get an adequate cheek weld. You can solve this by adding a cheek raiser or rest. The modern stocks like the JAE (as well as Springfield's M21 stock) have these built in.

All that said, the M14 is a joy to shoot and will certainly provide you a lot of pride of ownership. The M14 despite having the shortest lifespan as a general issue rifle in the US military also enjoys the fact of having the longest lifespan of use on any rifle in the US military. Many consider the M14 to be the ultimate evolution of the "riflemans rifle." With proper maintenance they will provide you with years of highly reliable and accurate service.

As far as semantics, I call them all M14s or M14 type or pattern rifle. M1As are Springfield's name for their M14 just like M&P15 is Smiths name for their AR15. If I had a real M21, then I might call it that, but I'd probably still call it a 14.

If I were looking for a good all around M14 pattern rifle to fulfill my needs (and cost not being an option) I would go with an 18 inch Criterion barreled rifle in a JAE stock with a unitized gas system and match conditioned GI parts. Such a rifle would be able to give me an honest 1-2MOA out to 500 meters but still be a little shorter than my National Match rifle. We will see if I ever turn my Socom into such a beast.

[Dot.Com]

Cobra,

you bring up a lot of good points, and what you have said really addressed some of the things I was wondering about. Others as well as you have mentioned that accuracy or more appropriately "precision accuracy" will be hard to maintain with traditional bedding jobs. I have put aside around 2,000-2,500 dollars for my start into the m14 world, and from what you are saying it seems that this would be enough to buy into a chassis system.

However, the dilemma I find myself running into is that I really do just want to start out with a wood stock and simplicity, but to maintain my standard of accuracy with a wood stock will in fact be just the opposite, requiring eternal vigilance in maintaining my rifle. It could be that I may be over-estimating the actual complexity of maintaining an m14, but again, I have never owned one, much less had time to tinker with one so I guess what I'm asking is whether or not it will be a hassle.

As far as money goes compared to other platforms such as an ar-10, I guess the issue is not so much how much I could be getting for the same money with another type of firearm, because I do in fact want to get an m14, but more that I am able to get the most out of my budget and get reasonable results with the route I eventually decide on.

[Cobra66]

I think it really depends on what you want the rifle for. Others have said that before me and to use the new buzz term "the mission drives the gear."

If you want a rifle that will deliver good accuracy, is absolutely beautiful to behold, has historical significance, and that you can shoot service rifle matches with, a nice National Match rifle would be the way to go. You would be looking at about $2000+ and would have the issues associated with a glass bedded rifle. One thing I would recommend is look for an older M14 that has mostly GI parts on it. As others mentioned, after about Y2K, SAI started using more and more commercial parts and some of these (but not all) have dubious reputations. Most rifles people buy are really safe queens and even if the bedding is loose, it is way cheaper to have the bedding repaired (skim bedding) than it would be to replace the bolt group and operating rod with GI parts. Even if you find an older rack grade rifle with GI parts, it might be cheaper in the long run to buy that rifle and have it match conditioned. A rack grade M14 should be about a 2-3 MOA gun.

If on the other hand you want to build rifle on a modern stock platform I wouldn't waste my money on a New Match gun (no use in paying for bedding if you don't use it). If you are wanting a 20 inch platform, get yourself one of SAI's "Loaded" rifles which includes a 20" Krieger barrel, match sights, and some other upgrades. Or find yourself a nice used rack grade rifle. Keep in mind that you will still not have a match gas system so there is still some room for improvement. This should run you a little under $1500 and then you can drop it into the JAE or TROY stock. If you go this route, your rifle really won't require any more maintenance than would an AR type rifle. The problem you will have is that the M14 is still a lot harder to "gunsmith" than an AR platform is, so things like barrel replacements, bolt swaps, and the like will most likely require you to take it to a gunsmith who is familiar with the platform.

If you want a shorter barrel, then you are looking at the "Scout" or the Socom rifles. The Scout is what Springfield used to call the "Bush" and has a 18" barrel. To my knowledge, none were ever offered from the factory with match grade barrels. Both the Scouts and Socoms are newer rifles and as a result will have mostly commercial parts on them. All Socoms and the "Squad Scout" have forward optic mounts for scout scopes. If you can find a used Bush rifle, this might be the best option as you will have more GI parts.

On receivers, the LRB receivers are nice and closer to GI spec (but still not a true "forged" receiver) but I really have not heard of too many issues with SAI cast receivers falling apart on their owners. There have been some issues with dimensional tolerances on the SAI receivers that can come up when mounting 3 point scope mounts such as the ARMS#18. I would rather save my money on the receiver and spend it in other places (GI parts, stock, etc), but that is me.

On commercial parts, there is a lot of debate about them going on (just like on the AR15 platform). The general agreement is that GI spec parts are better, but the problem is that they stopped making them years ago, Klinton chopped up thousands of M14s, and the Military is now hogging up all the M14 parts they can get. This is making the parts more and more expensive for the civilian market, thus there may be no alternative to commercial parts in some areas. Just like with ARs, if you have a rifle with commercial parts, consider upgraded them as you go. One good thing, if you buy a SAI rifle, they will repair any parts that break for free - but that will not be any comfort when your op rod breaks when the goblins are at the door.

Oh well, I have babbled enough. Hope my thoughts helped a little, like I say, I have been a fan of the 14 for years and have been studying it, but there is so much I don't know about it. m14tfl.com is to the M14 what M4carbine.net is to the AR. Go there and your head will explode with information. Also, should you pick up an M14, get yourself Scott Duff's "M14 Owners Guide" - this is an excellent book and will help you understand and maintain your rifle (it also made me realize how much I don't know).

[Safetyhit]

The M1A is the semi auto M14 variant that Springfield Armory Inc. sells. They wanted to call it a M14 but ATF wouldn't allow it when they were introduced, so they went with M1A.

Firstly, you need to ask yourself what you want to use the rifle for. Are you wanting a clone of the USGI M14, a heavier barreled target rifle, a custom build DMR (designated marksman rifle), a shorter barreled carbine type?

Springfield Armory has a somewhat spotty reputation on current M1A's. This is mainly due to the fact that they ran out of USGI parts about a decade ago, so all their rifles are commercial grade. The earlier M1A's were built using their commercial receiver and mostly USGI surplus parts, and they have a much better reputation.

Armscorp also makes a commercial receiver, which a lot of knowledgeable M14 guys prefer over the Springfield if they're going to go with a cast receiver. Both Springfield and Armscorp are cast, the original M14 receivers were drop hammer forged like the M1 Garand.

Fulton Armory uses Armscorp receivers branded Fulton.

LRB are forged, and are about as highly regarded as they come. They are extremely well built, using premium commercial parts and GI where they can. Instead of using .308 Win. chambered non chrome lined Wilson barrels like Springfield, they use Krieger chrome lined 7.62 NATO chambered Criterion barrels.

You pay for it though.

So, what are you looking to do with it? That will go a long way towards where you want to look, and the features you'll want on your rifle.

I was positive I was going to finally buy my first M14 variant this month, a black 16" or 18" SA Scout. Now I am not so sure.

[gunsouth]

I would suggest that you go to Smithenterprise.com and see what has been done to the M14 weapons platform to bring it up to date. The new technologies that are being used allow the platform to keep a very high degree of accuracy for a very long time. The site has information that explains all of this and is quite informative.

I have one of the Crazy Horse varients and so does a friend of mine. We are both extremely pleased and have put quite a few rounds down range. You will pay to have a rifle built up (mine started with a Poly-tech forged receiver).

This rifle shot MOA to 1000 yds. at Ft. Benning with Match ammo. It shot less than 10" at 1000 yds. with handloads. That's less than MOA. By the way it cost less and outshot it's competition, side by side,which was the new SASS rifle being tested. I believe this is also outlined on the Smith site. I believe the SASS rifle is around $10 to $15K a copy, but I'm not positive about that.

My experience is different than others have experienced and this is JMHO from what I have also seen and experienced.

Gunsouth

[Motel Bravo]

Alright, first off, Investment castign is NOT the same as just mold casting where the metal is basically tin and lead like "Hot wheels" car.

People blow the whole Investment cast Vs. Forged thing way out of proportion. A springfield Investment cast reciever will outlast several barrels and the owner of the rifle, Lee Emerson wrote a book where they tested a Springfield Reciever with Cases packed with pistol powder and it still took twelve rounds of that way over pressure dangerous crap to even make the reciever start to fail.

Thats said, I haven't inspected one, but i suspect the SOCOM M1A has a larger gas port due to less barrel in front of the gas cylinder, this would cause a much more violent recoil impulse that would be be beating the hell out of the everythign behind the operating rod and bolt, and in the M1A the hammer is impacted by the bolt causing it to re cock, and SOCOMS break hammers. The whole action/reaction thing somethign the chain WILL GIVE if the force is stronger than normal.

I would get a Scout of standard length barrel if in question(The scout still has a longer barrel than the SOCOM, but is still short enough for inside work.