The M-14 Was Terrible (or Why the Military Chose the M-16) (Updated)

I've been seeing a lot of articles and videos lately attacking the sacred cow of the reliability and performance of the M-14/M1-A1. These have focused on the problems with having a bolt open to the environment, and related issues regarding the dog-leg gas piston system. However, Loose Rounds goes a step further, and has summarized and quoted portions of studies and tests performed by the military as to problems with the M-14 and attempts to improve it. Several things jump out from the reports:

• The M-14 was poorly manufactured.
• The M-14 had poor accuracy as measured by the size of groups.
• It was expensive to maintain and not very reliable--the report cites 3,500 rounds to overhaul, and 599 mean rounds between stoppages (compared to nearly 1,700 mean rounds between stoppages for the M-4).
• Its utility as a sniper rifle is limited because of the expense of turning it into an accurate weapon, and how sensitive it was to timing issues.

He adds his own opinion:

The M14 remains popular in the civilian world and not just from service rifle shooters.  It still has a life among collectors, plinkers and even serious shooters.   The new variants trying to breathe life into it as well as pictures on the news of M14s forced into use in the first half of the GWOT.      Some still  get caught up in its legend and its lore .  The romance of the piece has lulled many away from the fact it is not a fully capable modern fighting tool.   Many of its fans over look its many drawbacks.  The safety needing a finger inside the trigger guard and to push forward to deactivate.  The limited capacity and  reload time that is slow (which when compared to a practiced user of an M1 Garand is actually slower to reload than a M1). 

The maintenance, as Chandler said above is a nightmare if the gun is used often.  Every time it comes apart, the bedding gets worse and worse.  It may seem like no big deal for a combat weapon, but it is.  The gun is heavy in all its forms and is as slow as a monkey doing Chinese algebra compared to the faster more natural  manipulations and ergonomics  of better designs.   The oft used excuse of ” I  will pick them off at 500 yards before they get close enough to worry about” is absurd.   The last 15 years have shown very few cases of infantrymen laying prone and picking off enemy soldiers at 500.    It is laughable to consider using the M14/M1A on your lonesome in an urban or CQB role.   Sure, some SOF  have done it, but they have some one covering them. 

While the ergonomics of the M14 are already not wonderful for modern TTPs, the use of some of the newer stocks, like the Sage exaggerates the difficulty for anyone other than a giant who drags his knuckles when walking  Never mind the astounding increase in weight, let alone the cost of such an “upgrade”.

Read the whole thing.

Update: The WeaponsMan writes:

We have a soft spot in our heart for the M14 rifle, even though we experienced it in the service primarily as the M21 sniper system, a fiddly, unstable platform with, “no user serviceable parts inside.” (Seriously. The operator was not permitted to field-strip the gun — that was strictly for the armorers who built the thing. You could swab out the bore, but they’d rather you didn’t).