Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > M1A/M14
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-26-2020, 12:09 PM
JimF JimF is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by milprileb View Post
Just a note to current generation of M1A or M1 Rifle owners. In military service the wood stocks would swell. Take a rain drenched such rifle, tear it down to clean it and that stock is going to have to dry out before trigger assembly will go back in fully.

Just a comment of what we knew back when the Infantry carried these models in all weather conditions.
Many years ago, I was told by old Perry competitors, some would soak the stocks of their M1’s in tubs of water the night before they were used in competition. Gotta’ tighten up the sloppy fit, don’t cha’ know.
__________________
--Jim
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-26-2020, 12:56 PM
EODCOL EODCOL is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 79
Default

Thanks for posting this information. Very interesting reading.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-28-2020, 11:24 PM
Col. Colt Col. Colt is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 458
Default

Of course you will have different opinions in any group of men. No surprise there - and most will take easy and light - every time.

I've always wondered if a good fitting (for accuracy) low maintenance synthetic stock had been standard issue on the M14 in Vietnam, (since they came into use only as the M14 was being phased out) it would have been better thought of. We now know that a really good fit (like the SAGE chassis system) can make a standard M14 a tack driver.

At close range, the M16 does excel. But in open terrain (and Vietnam had both) the M14 had reach - and penetration in brush, which Vietnam had a LOT of. But using a real rifle to best advantage requires Marksmanship - which requires actual training. I suspect the average draftree did not arrive in Vietnam a marksman. (Although Marines may have!) The full auto switch does not help, either.

The bigger issue to me is that the "One Size fits All" philosophy of only ONE issue weapon was the real mistake in Vietnam, caused by replacing the WWII mix of weapons in a squad with first the M14, then the M16. A compromise at best.

For most use in WWII the M1 was the best choice, but the BAR and Thompsons had their places during specific types of fighting, and the carbine or .45 was carried by radiomen and support personnel, who could not operate well with a clumsy, large weapon. I think today's platoons would be better served with a couple of DMR guys embedded with 7.62 for where the small caliber is lacking, but door kicking done by guys with Carbines. A mix of weapons - so every situation has the right tool for the job available. CC
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-28-2020, 11:49 PM
M1A Rifleman M1A Rifleman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommiep54 View Post
Interesting to know!

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
So, what is different from the M1 in use in the jungles of the South Pacific? Wonder what rank and MOS were those actually filling out the survey
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-29-2020, 12:05 AM
Gewehr43 Gewehr43 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M1A Rifleman View Post
So, what is different from the M1 in use in the jungles of the South Pacific? Wonder what rank and MOS were those actually filling out the survey
It explains who they surveyed in the document.................

Quote:
Originally Posted by Col. Colt View Post
Of course you will have different opinions in any group of men. No surprise there - and most will take easy and light - every time.

I've always wondered if a good fitting (for accuracy) low maintenance synthetic stock had been standard issue on the M14 in Vietnam, (since they came into use only as the M14 was being phased out) it would have been better thought of. We now know that a really good fit (like the SAGE chassis system) can make a standard M14 a tack driver.

At close range, the M16 does excel. But in open terrain (and Vietnam had both) the M14 had reach - and penetration in brush, which Vietnam had a LOT of. But using a real rifle to best advantage requires Marksmanship - which requires actual training. I suspect the average draftree did not arrive in Vietnam a marksman. (Although Marines may have!) The full auto switch does not help, either.

The bigger issue to me is that the "One Size fits All" philosophy of only ONE issue weapon was the real mistake in Vietnam, caused by replacing the WWII mix of weapons in a squad with first the M14, then the M16. A compromise at best.

For most use in WWII the M1 was the best choice, but the BAR and Thompsons had their places during specific types of fighting, and the carbine or .45 was carried by radiomen and support personnel, who could not operate well with a clumsy, large weapon. I think today's platoons would be better served with a couple of DMR guys embedded with 7.62 for where the small caliber is lacking, but door kicking done by guys with Carbines. A mix of weapons - so every situation has the right tool for the job available. CC
28% of the Respondents carried a M1911.

When asked; "How well did your training prepare you for this type of combat?"
82% were either Fairly or Very happy with the training they got.........

One post is this: "...
Smaller caliber than the 7.62 NATO but larger than the M16 with more
accuracy. Ilhe weapon should be made of a more rust resistant alloy...…"
__________________
Service Rifle.... RIP .... 1884-2015
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-29-2020, 12:12 AM
M1A Rifleman M1A Rifleman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gewehr43 View Post
It explains who they surveyed in the document.................
My point was, the questionnaire and issue at the time was political, and were those surveyed actual shooter types, or officers in the rear looking for promotion by backing the push for the new AR/M16 at the time. Will never know.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-29-2020, 12:28 AM
Gewehr43 Gewehr43 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M1A Rifleman View Post
My point was, the questionnaire and issue at the time was political, and were those surveyed actual shooter types, or officers in the rear looking for promotion by backing the push for the new AR/M16 at the time. Will never know.
Sir:
Again......It explains who they surveyed in the document.................

Read page 3. The Instructions for the questionnaire.......
(Or page 5 of 19 of the pdf).

This survey was directed at feedback on the M14 and M1911.

Another survey they did covered the M16:
".....It supplements data from troops carrying the M16 rifle - already
published in HEL Technical Note 5-66, Small Arms Use in Viet Nam: Preliminary
Results......."
__________________
Service Rifle.... RIP .... 1884-2015

Last edited by Gewehr43; 12-29-2020 at 12:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-29-2020, 12:35 AM
M1A Rifleman M1A Rifleman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gewehr43 View Post
Sir:
Again......It explains who they surveyed in the document.................

Read page 3. The Instructions for the questionnaire.......
(Or page 5 of 19 of the pdf).

This survey was directed at feedback on the M14 and M1911.

Another survey they did covered the M16:
".....It supplements data from troops carrying the M16 rifle - already
published in HEL Technical Note 5-66, Small Arms Use in Viet Nam: Preliminary
Results......."
Yes, and on page one.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-29-2020, 12:39 AM
Gewehr43 Gewehr43 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,268
Default

Yes... so if you read it, you'll realize who they surveyed and it wasn't "Officers in the rear" nor were any of the answers or questions political in nature.
It was a pretty straight forward survey.

I only wish they had contacted greater numbers......
__________________
Service Rifle.... RIP .... 1884-2015
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-29-2020, 12:42 AM
M1A Rifleman M1A Rifleman is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gewehr43 View Post

I only wish they had contacted greater numbers......
I agree with you in the wish for greater numbers. But the survey is suspect to me because of some of the responses. Also I'm biased as I prefer the M14.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:18 AM.