The M14 Enhanced Battle Rifle

The M14 Enhanced Battle Rifle The changing nature of the war in Afghanistan led to the re-issue of the 7.62x51 mm NATO M14 rifle. By Maj. John Plaster, U.S. Army (Ret.) Not long after U.S. forces invaded Afghanistan, al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies came to realize that America’s 5.56x45 mm NATO infantry rifles lost most of their lethality beyond 500 meters. Demonstrating their adaptability, the insurgents exploited Afghanistan’s sprawling valleys and distant mountainsides to seek engagements beyond the M16’s and M4’s effective ranges.

This is borne out by U.S. Army data, which reveals that more than half of the war’s small arms engagements are now beyond 500 meters, with the enemy employing heavier weapons and then withdrawing before air support or artillery fire can arrive.

One solution, military planners could see, was employing a more capable cartridge already in the system: the 7.62x51 mm NATO. Today’s standard U.S. sniper cartridge, the 175-grain, M118 Long Range load, delivers four times the foot-pounds of energy as the standard 62-grain, 5.56 mm round at extended ranges. In other words, at 600 meters the 7.62 mm round packs about as much energy—1,000 ft.-lbs.—as the 5.56 mm round at 100 meters.

Although M14 rifles were pulled from depot storage, fitted with scopes, shipped to Afghanistan and issued to Army and Marine designated riflemen, the guns proved less than ideal for today’s warfare. First, their fixed stocks could not be adjusted to fit the length-of-pull needed for today’s body armor. And second, the 40-year-old rifles could not accommodate modern accessories such as lasers, night vision scopes and lights, which require MIL STD 1913 Picatinny rails. Fortunately, a solution had already been developed by the U.S. Navy’s Surface Warfare Center at Crane, Ind.

The SEAL CQB Rifle One year before the 2001 terrorist attacks, U.S. Navy SEALs had gone to Crane to request an updated version of the 42-year-old M14. Great believers in the M14’s reliability and the 7.62x51 mm NATO cartridge’s lethality, they wanted a shortened version with a pistol grip and adjustable-length buttstock for close-quarters use.

The design task fell to David Armstrong, an accomplished small arms engineer who previously had developed the well-received SOPMOD (Special Operations Peculiar Modification System) for the M4 carbine. A mechanical engineer, machinist and recreational shooter, Armstrong began by searching for an off-the-shelf collapsible buttstock.

After trying several, he chose a Sage Int’l collapsible, pistol-grip stock made for the Remington Model 870 shotgun. The telescoping design offered five lengths of pull, in 1-inch increments, that worked well with body armor. Armstrong connected the Sage buttstock to the forward section of a modified M14 fiberglass stock. He also replaced the rifle’s standard 22-inch barrel with an 18-inch unit, reducing its overall length by nearly 10 inches, to 35 inches.

The fiberglass stock, however, did not satisfy him. “The [M14] design has always been tough to beat for reliability, but required laborsome bedding and tuning for best accuracy,” he explained. Earlier sniper versions of the M14, especially the M21 Sniper System, which used a resin-impregnated stock with epoxy bedding, proved so temperamental that snipers were instructed not to remove the action from the stock while cleaning it.

Armstrong took the bold step of designing his own chassis stock, machined from aircraft-grade aluminum. Not only would this be more rigid than fiberglass, but it would include an aluminum bedding block and an assortment of Picatinny rails for optical and illumination accessories. The result was a true “drop-in” stock, requiring no bedding or special fitting. “This stock floats the gas system through a replacement operating rod guide screwed to the rigid stock fore-end and a simple spacer replacing the front band,” he said. He also modified the Sage buttstock’s cheek rest to give it 2 inches of vertical adjustment in 1/4-inch increments.

In addition to installing quad Picatinny rails around the fore-end, he attached a short-rail scope mount that replaced the M14’s stripper clip guide. The final additions were a more effective flash suppressor, three ambidextrous 1 1/4-inch sling slot locations, and a Harris Engineering S-LM Series S bipod. Patented to the U.S. Navy with Armstrong as its inventor, the chassis stock is now produced under license by Sage Int’l in Oscoda, Mich.

“Simply adding the chassis stock system cut the group size of a basic M14 in half without the need for glass-bedding,” he reports. Firing five-shot groups with M118 ammunition at 600 yards, Naval technicians at Crane recorded 2 to 2.5 minute-of-angle (m.o.a.) extreme spreads—meaning 12 to 18-inch groups. Standard M80 ball ammunition shot nearly as well.

The EBR & EMR When the U.S. Army and Marine Corps later sought modernized M14s, Armstrong merely switched the Navy’s Mk. 14 Mod 0 rifle’s short barrel for a full-length 22-inch version to create the Army’s Enhanced Battle Rifle (EBR) and the Marine’s M39 Enhanced Marksman’s Rifle (EMR). These versions measure 38.5 inches overall, with the stocks collapsed, and 45 inches when fully extended.

Although 3 pounds heavier than the standard M14, the EBR and EMR compare favorably to America’s current 7.62 mm sniping platforms, such as the Army’s M24 and M110, and the Marine Corps’ M40A3. The Army is issuing two EBRs per infantry squad, while the Marines have placed the EMR at platoon-level.

The Army EBR is fitted with a Leupold 3.5–10X scope, and the USMC’s EMR optic is the Schmidt & Bender M8541 Scout Sniper Day Scope, the same scope used by Marine snipers. Thus equipped, these designated riflemen have the ability to engage enemy personnel to 800 meters.

Each service is now building its own rifles, with Navy Mk. 14 Model 0’s being produced at the Crane facility, while Army rifles are assembled at Rock Island Arsenal, Ill., and the USMC version at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va.

Some 5,000 EBRs have been produced at Rock Island Arsenal, with funding for another 1,200. A further 2,000 Sage stocks have reportedly been sold directly to military units and individuals for conversion of M14s. Still more rifles issued to Marines and SEALs suggest that perhaps 10,000 of these modernized M14s are now in service.

Firing The EBR Thanks to Fulton Armory of Savage, Md., I was able to test fire a platform nearly identical to the EBR. Available to civilian shooters, this semi-automatic-only rifle incorporates Fulton’s own M14 Receiver, installed on the same Sage Int’l chassis stock that David Armstrong designed.

Examining the rifle in my shop, I found that its military two-stage trigger broke cleanly at 3 pounds, 7.5 ounces—about perfect for me. For test-firing, I mounted a Bushnell Elite 6500 4.5–30X Tactical Scope, which was a simple task with the rifle’s Picatinny rails.

Ergonomics had concerned me because of the stock’s square edges. Nonetheless, I found its balance and heft surprisingly good with the center-of-balance at the magazine well. Having trained on the M14 in the 1960s, I already appreciated the reliability of its gas piston and operating rod system, and the action’s resistance to sand and carbon buildup. Of course, I experienced no stoppages or malfunctions of any kind.

Weighing 14 pounds with a scope, a bipod and a loaded 20-round magazine, this weight plus the straight-line stock resulted in a mild recoil “push,” making it very comfortable to fire. This also assisted target reacquisition for follow-up shots.

The basic difference between the military EBR and Fulton Armory’s version is a National Match barrel—and that really showed on the range. Accuracy with the Fulton Armory EBR was impressive. Firing off sandbags at 100 yards, my Federal Gold Medal Match, .308 Win., 168-grain ammunition punched a three-round group measuring 0.721 inches. Switching to the U.S. military’s load specifically designed for sniping—the 175-grain, M118 Long Range round—the rifle fired even better, scoring a 0.50-inch three-round group.

In the hands of a trained marksman, the EBR—especially with a National Match barrel—is more than capable of dealing with insurgents to 800 meters and beyond. Perhaps the Taliban and its allies have proven adaptable; but, as demonstrated by these 21st century M14s, so have we.

I built a sweet AR15 with 2 uppers,.223 and 7.62x39. I prefer the 7.62x39 which works well with C-Products magazines.

The 7.62 payed for itself in reduced ammo cost.

So other than the odd 500 yards shot, I would build the AR15 lower with multiple uppers for the same price as an AR 10 plus ammo.

I didn’t mean it that way. Those companies make excellent firearms, and they each set up factories in the U.S. after winning DOD contracts.

I just think it’s sad that we need to look to Europe for modern firearm designs. It’s hard to imagine Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, or Italy relying today on U.S. companies to equip their military and police.

I hope McNamara burns in hell for taking away the M14 from our troops during JFK-LBJ’s Vietnam War.

Well, he tried, but he didn't get 'em all.

I carried an M-14 for my tour 69-70.

Sometimes I regretted holding on to it, especially on some of those long humps with 20 loaded mags and a bandoleer on my skinny frame, not to mention all my other ash and trash.

And those were the days of C-rats, too. Them cans got heavy. I was probably humping 80 pounds, at any given time, on my skinny little 160 pound ass.

My battalion commander encouraged the continued use of the M-14 for several reasons.

First and the one that made the most sense to me was the fact that it and the M-60 MG used the same round.

Second, it was nearly indestructible in comparison with the POS first generation M-16's.

“There is a couple more but I keep drawing a blank. One of the Thompson contender rounds was a shorten 308, loaded with a 357 bullet wasn’t it.”

That would be the 30 and 357 Herrett rounds based on the 30/30 case. Usually chambered in the TC Contender.

A 35 on the 06 is the 35 Whelen and a 35 on the 308 case is the 358 Winchester. Both excellent rounds with the nod going to the 358 Win. in a TC Encore.

When you start out with 2-3 M.O.A. of uncertainty and factor environment and skill in the equation, you have a 50/50 chance of hitting your 12 x 18 target at 600 yards. If only a portion of your target is available, your odds go down further.

Start with 1 M.O.A. and your odds improve. I was just making the observation that 2-3 M.O.A. is not at all impressive.

Thank you for your story and your service. From what I read, the worst sin was McNamara rushed the M-16 into production without and any cleaning kits. It is not a great gun when it gets a little dirty.

The M-14 was a lot to carry plus ammo and everything else.

“True, I have a 30-30 + barrel and most of the ordinal factory loads, but never had any of the wildcats.”

30/30 in the Contender is an excellent round IF you have it in the 14” tube. Early versions in the 10” tube were very inefficient.

Also the Ackley Improved version is good in the Contender and reduces bolt thrust considerably.

Man it is very updated FAL FN looking to me.

I am kind of hot fo the DSA Arms STG58

http://www.dsarms.com/FAL%20STG58%20Austrian/products/9/

Or the FAL SA58 which is more expensive.

http://www.dsarms.com/FAL-SA58%20Rifles/products/8/

The solution is to send those crappy old rifles to me ☺

I was puting together a collection, I have two frames and all of the factory octagon barrels. Have hunted deer with the 30/30, with a rest and scope it does well. Have no idea what they are worth today, but like to have never found the jet barrel.

Want to have fun?

1) Get yourself a 14” bbl in 44 Mag. with the TC muzzle tamer brake.

2) Have Bellm rechamber it to 444 Marlin. 6 screw mount with 4 rings on the scope.

3) Have a hoot at the range.

I have 2 of them. A 12 and 14. Deer don’t like them either. LOL

Another great cartridge is the 357 Maximum. Sweet in a 10” bbl(about 1950fps with a 180)or a 14”. Very easy to handload and excellent for deer sized game at woods ranges.

“Have hunted deer with the 30/30, with a rest and scope it does well.”

Try a 130 gr. Nosler Ballistic Tip in that. Picks the velocity/efficiency up a bit in the 14” tube and the ballistic tip is an excellent terminal performance bullet at extended ranges.

Cheers

Thanks. Yeah, I think I’m going to go with the AR15 and put a 20 inch barrel on it that will handle .223 Rem and 5.56mm. I figure that will give me 600 yrds.

I was looking at ammo. Wow. .308 cost between $0.70 and $1.00 per round. Pretty hard to stock up on 10k rounds at that price.

“I think I’m going to go with the AR15 and put a 20 inch barrel on it that will handle .223 Rem and 5.56mm. I figure that will give me 600 yrds.”

I used a Yankee Hill Machine flat top upper and bought the barrel from Model 1, which uses E.R Shaw to produce all sorts of different configurations, .223 vs 5.56 Nato chambers, and a variety of twists, lengths and weights. I am very pleased and the price was good at that time, late November 2008, but things have gone up since, thanks to the best arms salesman ever.

I bought the rest from Brownells. I had the lower built for $200 so I have less then $500 in a very nice set up with a stainless fluted barrel, alum forearm and quad rail gas assembly. Be tough to do for less than $600 now.
http://www.model1sales.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=category.display&category_ID=106

Because they are still in great condition and they work and they don’t have to use taxpayer money, except for the mods, of course.

BTW, the M14 parts are far superior to the SA Inc. parts, the vast majority of M14 parts are made from forged steel.

Rebarrel them for .308 and they wouldn’t have to field anotehr cartridge. Besides the .308 has been proven to be about twice as accurate as the .30-06. But if you aren’t going into a village and will be out in the open, a semi-auto or full auto just allows you to miss faster.

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.