Posted on 05/15/2006 6:01:44 PM PDT by LSUfan
Responding to a US Army Special Operations Command (SOCOM) requirement, Sage International developed a chassis-type stock for M14 rifles that transforms the M14 into a 21st century enhanced tactical carbine. This stock is now being used to modify M14 rifles at Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane, Indiana. The result is the Mk 14, Mod 0 Enhanced Battle Rifle (EBR), which can be obtained by any force that uses M14 rifles either by purchasing the EBR stock and converting existing M14 type rifles or buying a semi-automatic-only version of the Mk 14, Mod 0 from US company Fulton Armory.
The conversion from standard M14 to Mk 14 involves several modifications. First, the M14 barrel has been shortened from 559 mm to 470 mm with the standard M14 flash suppressor replaced by a Smith Enterprises Vortex flash suppressor that reduces flash by approximately 99 per cent. With a 470 mm barrelled carbine, the high-performance Vortex flash suppressor was a virtual necessity. The front sight that once sat atop the flash suppressor has been moved to the gas cylinder lock.
The bolt stop has been replaced by a 'paddle' type similar to that of the M4 Carbine. This allows the bolt to be released without removing the trigger hand from the pistol grip as opposed to the original M14 that required the bolt handle to be pulled to the rear after a fresh magazine was inserted to release the bolt stop. The addition of the bolt release is a major advantage in combat where every second counts, not to mention being more convenient.
Finally, the clip guide on the receiver has been replaced by a 38 mm section of the MIL-STD-1913 rail to allow optics to be mounted, as with our test rifle, along with the Sage EBR stock
(Excerpt) Read more at janes.com ...
But I am glad to see the M14 back. Sensational weapon. I have heard stories of the 5.56mm round from the M16 not being a reliable stopper in Afghanistan and Iraq. I would like to see us go back to the 7.62NATO M14. It is basically a modified M1 Garand, the rifle that fought and won in every clime and place from the Aleutians to Guadalcanal to North Africa and Italy and France. No one ever had much bad to say about the Garand design. I prefer it even to the Kalashnikov.
I share in your feelings.
An Mk-14 would be the ULTIMATE firearm for either comabt, plain 'ole shooting or even hunting, I'd wager.
>An Mk-14 would be the ULTIMATE firearm for either comabt,
>plain 'ole shooting or even hunting, I'd wager.
Hunting what?
It would be a waste of game.
I own an M1A, which is the civilian version of the M-14 and when I used to hunt, I hunted deer with it. There is a 5 round magazine available for it and it shoots .308 Winchester. Damn good rifle for hunting.
I wonder how many M-14's we have left in inventory. I am sure I read that Clinton had ordered them destroyed, or at least a lot of them destroyed somewhere in Alabama.
Deer? And just about anything else that that requires a full-power rifle round.
I guess the modifications reduce the weight as well.
"I wonder how many M-14's we have left in inventory. I am sure I read that Clinton had ordered them destroyed, or at least a lot of them destroyed somewhere in Alabama."
C'mon, Clinton is a prick, but do you seriously reckon any president would micro-manage down to that level?
At typical hunting range, there is very little difference in "killing power" between the 7.62X51 Nato than hundred plus year old cartridges like the old 30-30 Winchester.
That's a little different than the M14 I trained with in the late 60's.
The US military will not return to .308.
The best we can hope for is an adoption of the 6.8 round.
Don't hold your breath. It ain't gonna happen.
In terms of small arms, the military is more concerned with putting optics on rifles than finding or fielding a larger bullet. With limited dollars in the budget, this is the correct choice. Most people, our enemies included, have no idea how much more effective a soldier or marine is with glass on top of a rifle. Iron sights alone is warfare in the last century, not this one.
BTW, the question of reliability in the M16/M4 rifles is largely a thing of the past. Keep your rifle clean and well lubed and it will not let you down. Failure to clean and lube your rifle is a human failure and not that of the rifle.
OOOO Pretty
I never ran into any reliability issues with either the M16A1 or M16A2 when I was in the Marine Corps.
I also have no problem with optics--as long as the Marine Corps still teaches basic marksmanship with iron sights like they always have, first. Marines need to learn to shoot with iron sights at known distances out to the 500 yard line from the basic shooting positions first and foremost before they move on to more advanced techniques and gee-whiz gear like Tijicon sights.
Oh, now that is too F'n cool. The greatest ever coming out of retirement to serve the country again.
"Yes
479,367 M14 rifles were destroyed by Presidential Executive Order during the Clinton administration
Of course there is always the possibility that he just hates guns and wants all destroyed that he possibly can.
I say the answer is "C"...both of the above.
LSUfan, things change, progress, and many times get better. "Better" is usually assured with quality organizations like the USMC.
One "better" might be for the marines to learn to shoot the way they will fight- with optics. The BUIS (back-up iron sights) will be a secondary tool.
For comparison, maybe it's better to teach a marine or soldier the dozens of things a GPS can do as primary, while also teaching the comparatively primitive and limited compass as secondary.
You want more tools in the tool box. But, more importantly, you want to train the way you'll fight. That means optics and GPS first, BUIS and compass as back up.
So, expect in a few years for the USMC to focus primarily on optics, with BUIS as a back up system.
Optics are the future, an improvement, and a "force multiplier", if that term is still in fashion. They will supplement and improve the performance of a marine, who will still be able to shoot the old fashioned way, with iron sights, just like you and I first learned to shoot.
Bigger, heavier bullets are way, way, way less important than optics.
BTW, I wasn't specifically responding to you. I was commenting on the thread in general.
Little tin plated dictators love guns..... as long as THEY control them.
I've heard two reliability compaints about the M-14. Many years ago, I had a conversation with a guy who was in Vietnam circa 1965 and said the extractor could come loose but only at the worst possible moment. The second complaint I've heard was that in a firefight, lots of stuff such as dirt and other debris is flying about. The top ejection of the M-14 was more prone to being fouled by falling debris than a side ejection weapon such as the AK.
Most everyone I ever knew who carried one said it was too damned heavy.
My only complaint about the M-14 when I was in service was that full auto was useless. It was absolutely uncontrollable by anyone that I knew. Even a 3 round busrt had you way off target.
On the other hand, it was a superb semi auto weapon with plenty of "stopem" power, even with the full metal jacket bullets.
Very accurate.
It figures that Clinton would have them destroyed.
They should have been mothballed in National Guard Armories.
I'd like to find a new GI chrome barrel in case I decide to return my M1A bush rifle to standard configuration someday.
You think I can find one? Sheesh. At last year's Tulsa gun show, I found ONE. Very rough, very well used. Asking price? About 500 bucks.
I passed.
PS They will need to stake that bipod into the ground if they want to shoot full auto!
"It would be a waste of game."
It uses the .308 round (NATO Version) with essentially the same ballistics as the 30-06 round.
Just fine for anything from deer to elk
It would be a waste of game.
What in the world are you talking about? This is an M-14, which fires a 7.62mm NATO cartridge: AKA .308 Winchester, one of the finest deer cartridges around!
I've used my M-14 for hunting a number of times. All you need is a restricted magazine. My Federal Ordinance M-14 is more accurate that I can shoot it off-hand at 300 yards.
Mark
That is why they issued the Carbine rifle... The Garand does make a formidable club if there is no time to reload!
It is my all time favorite semi-auto on the range. No matter who I hand it to, it is always dead on target. (Watch your fingers on that top loading magazine.)
I also have an M1A with a match grade barrel, and two M1 Carbines. One of the Carbines is still in the canvas US bag, never issued. The other is out of the Korean War and is really an M2 . They all work very well.
M-60...
Exactly right, along with sniper rifles , many of which are M-14 variants .
Cool Gun Porn
About 150 fps. slower than the .30'06, and a thicker rim for more positive function in semi-auto/auto actions, inherently more accurate, but not as good with heavier bullets, is the standard lore.
Now with moly bullets and continuing development, the gap should shrink.
http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/content_sub/sage_ebr_review/ebr_both_models_small.jpg
Mark I wish I could find the link I had for a company in No. California which converts M1As to .338 Win. Mag. Says the action is extremely strong, which is generally unknown to most people.
I still have a few 10 year old crimped dummie rounds on my dresser... ; ^)
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m240g.htm
It's an M-240G now.
http://www.hqmc.usmc.mil/factfile.nsf/0/681bfe800dc442378525627b006b71c7?OpenDocument
Jimmuh Carter
I fully agree that optics are better sights for small arms, and GPS is better than a compass.
There is value in learning the basics, however. Some smart guy will figure out how much we depend on GPS and spoof it, and a shooter with busted glass should still be a shooter.
I am a big fan of high tech, but am wary of those who point to it as "the answer". Our enemies have a nasty habit of finding low tech ways to nullify our high tech advantages.
Pick up AK-47 instead.
Seems to me that the AK-47 design in superior. After all these years now the assertion of it.
Bad governments.
"Jimmuh Carter"
Good call.
"Yes
479,367 M14 rifles were destroyed by Presidential Executive Order during the Clinton administration
Wikipedia"
I stand corrected, but it must be noted that that article paints the rifle as a piece of crap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
