Also, at one time there was an article posted here re:the dismal results of M4A1 carbine in Afghanistan. It didn't reach out to 500 meters-ACOG or not. In fact story said Taliturds were mocking the US troops as they new they couldn't be hit.
And M-14 in this situation would have changed their mocking to writhing...
Right. That "Story" was written by one of the dentist's butt boys from one of those gun-nut websites. There are a number of details in it that show that it was not written by anybody in Afghanistan, or in special ops (or, probably, in the military. Maybe in MI, QM or some other paramilitary activity). The after-action report from Operation Anaconda documented 500m kills with the M4, "a range it is not even designed for." I'll believe an official AAR before I believe stuff written by 400 lb. wannabees that hang around gun-nut sites and talk about how bad they be.
I have access to all the official AARs and lessons learned and have never heard of TB "mocking" our guys... and the thing about them being out of range proves that it was written by some gun goon, and not an actual soldier. Because only some drooling wannabe would not realise that there are plenty of things that can reach out and touch the guy you can't hit with your rifle: sniper rifles, machine guns, mortars, helicopter gunships, and jets to name a few. Most SF teams have at least one guy that can drop a first- or second-round 60mm mortar shell on a guy in the open, direct lay, at 500-1500m ranges. That tends to diminish any taunting the guy plans.
Then, an issue M14 is not accurate to 500m. Not even close. In fact, it's usually less accurate than an issue M16-series weapon. And a National Match M14 is not reliable in field conditions. The various imitation M14s sold to civilians are mostly REAL junk with cheap Chinese cast receivers that won't hold up to regular shooting (the issue military weapons have forged receivers, but these receivers were never released to the civilian market. The early Springfield Armory (Geneseo) M-1As had forged receivers, but later ones didn't -- and the very earliest ones didn't either. Caveat emptor.
The only reason that the US adopted the M14 is that we had to justify the national armory that developed it. No foreign nation adopted it except Taiwan, which did -- briefly -- for political reasons only. I have a friend who carried one because he could hit at long range with it, and he thought it looked cool, and he had the option. I had the option too, and carried an M4A1 and was quite happy with it.
For an issue weapon it was a bad choice even in the fifties, with little improvement over the Garand it replaced. At the same time we made the even worse choice of the M60, which piece of dung we are only finally disposing of (the only ones I saw still in use were chopper door guns).
Finally, don't mistake the custom-smithed weapons that some special operations units use for issue weapons. Apples and oranges. And don't mistake any movie for reality.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F