My grandma was in Viet Nam 1968 in the army, she didn’t like the M14 and used the M1 Garand. She said the marines always say one shot one kill, that’s baloney! I took out three VC with one shot almost everytime, sometimes two, I threaded them like a needle. She said the M1 was far better, had big knock down power, could go through three guys, close or longer range it didn’t matter, back home she bought her own M1 for hunting, she outshot everyone that was in the marines using the M1A, while they were wrapping the sling around their arm to steady the M1A, granny just picked up her M1, loaded it like a pro, then raised and quick fired 8 times at 600 yards, hit each target dead center, got off all eight while the marines were still aiming and squeezing of shots, they got off three rounds to grandmas eight, she just cleared her M1 and walked away. She said the M1 was her baby and the jarheads ( she called them that) were pussies and couldn’t out shoot her, she was 24 when she was in the Nam.
That's the best USMC short novel I have read in my years of being literate :') P.S: Anyone remember the tank scene from Indiana Jones when he shot a row of nazi soldiers with only one shot?
😂😂😂 idk there is a pistol that wont shoot accurately if you had it in the same exact spot. You would get the bullets in 2 different places 1 infront of you and one shot the person behind you
he's screwing with you; anyone who says it's the worst is just trying to start something. I carried an M14 in the Army and later owned an M1A. there is NO other fighting rifle I would take over the M14 pattern. It's accurate and SUPER reliable and has no disabling deficiencies. It is the king of battle rifles.
@@joelee2371 What does the M14 have over the SCAR? The Scar has: -Faster reloading -More sealed action -Easier to modify/accessorize -Lighter -Folding Stock Standard -More controllable full auto With equal stats to the M14 in every other category
As a Marine in the 1980s I carried an M14. This is the rifle I chose. I had several rifles to choose from depending upon the mission with my tour and 2nd Force Recon . Our armorer was great. Great for longer engagements as opposed to being in the bush where it's much shorter. Great knockdown power, pretty good on accuracy, and as far as durability goes. Unmatched.
Well the ar10 is a stopper and it comes with better mags a free floated barrel and can shoot sub moa without reciver bedding and you dont have to throw money at it to make it accurate
@@fishlife1013 yeah, but you can't wear Rhodesian short shorts with those, and you can't use the phrase "superior German engineering" every 5 minutes either
@@SuperBastidthere is far more to being a soldier than simply knowing how to shoot a rifle… And there is far more to shooting a rifle than simply being a soldier.
@@Nclake5485 if I stuff mud in any receiver they won't work. Yes, even ak. Your job is to maintain your weapon at all times. I bet you don't own a firearm
@@JohnDoe-mt8rf it's been proven over and over again the ak platform is superior when it comes to reliability in harsh environments and being able to operate with low maintenance, can your pretty m1a do that???. Even garand thumbs channel proves this in the mud and frozen test, The m1a is the most overhyped hunk of shit that the US military ever adapted into combat only to get replaced by a bigger piece of shit, The m16 🤣 you can ask any vietnam veteran or even Iraq/afghanistan veterans which is the better weapon and the ak comes out on top every time. And no, I know for a fact I've got more firearms than you do and they can all pass the drop test unlike yours
At my local Gun Club. Theres a Vet that's told me that out of all the guns he occasionally had to "Procure" weapons off of in the field. His personal favorite Bring-Backs were all SKS's "There Damn fine Rifles, and at first they were for CERTAIN better than the early M16s."
@@TheBuster0926 I love my SKS. It has been converted for high capacity magazines ( before I bought it) But it’s still an outstanding weapon. I have been torn on my next rifle, either an M1A or a socom 16. 🤷🏻♂️
The 14 variants we used in Iraq & Afghanistan were but one tool we could draw from our toolbox. Honestly, everyone fought over who got to carry the 14’s. It wasn’t what you wanted to clear houses in Fallujah, but it was what you wanted to take out that asshole 700m out on the ridge line.
As a military service rifle, yea I’ll agree it was by no means a success. The glory hound that is the M16, got all the attention since it was the next major leap in firearms technology. However for the sport of shooting: I’ve never had a more pleasant experience shooting a rifle. The best quote I’ve heard about it: ”The M14 is THE Man’s battle rifle, it’s not meant for bitches”
I qualified on the M-16 about ten times. I never carried it in combat. It's a good weapon. I think I was shooting the A-2 version. Much improved over what went to Vietnam. Lighter weight and especially for the ammo has been key to its success. Having said all that. If you are man enough to carry the 14 you have yourself a real weapon.
There were MAJOR problems. But the issue was not the design, or the user\shooter. Two of the three main manufacturers screwed their stuff up, only the Springfield made ones were sny good. At one point new M14s were shooting 6 MOA! It was fixed with better manufacturing standards, but was too late with the Armalite 15 coming out about then.
Eugene Stoner made a sexy gun, but it is an overly complicated & fragile kluge compared to the Garand/M14/M1A/US30 Carbine/Mini14 design. The M16/M4/AR15 design also suffers in its inline stock goofed-up ergonomics compared to classic drop in heel stocks; it suffers having a floating bolt carrier group that’s overly complex, and requires both a floating fragile charging handle plus necessitates a forward assist button…way too complex (gas rings) & is failure prone; the high positioning of sights requires memorizing point of aim offset for CQB engagements; the direct impingement system benches soot into the breach, and is fragile compared to gas piston designs; the gun gas ~ 18 springs…way too many. Plus, the underpowered 5.56 (.223) is a varmint rifle cartridge pressed into military service…it is recognized as a poor choice for the task.
@@desertwaffen5608 The only rational read of your comment is for the satirical one, that historically, military decisions-making in weapon systems has been fraught with political park-barreling, shortsightedness, and strategic ineptitudes; and the M16/M4 could be a poster child. The military knows the gun is an engineering kluge, is prone to failure, and is chambered in the wrong caliber, yet the powers that be, limp along with it, protesting the costs are too high to do the right thing by the soldiers serving on the front lines. Equipping soldiers to win wars ostensibly is not our politicians’ prime objective. That’s my rebuttal, an oft & widely repeated one.
I qualified as Markman during a sand Storm at White sands during boot camp , only occasional could see the Target at 350 meters or see anything for that matter, it never stopped
I am a twice combat veteran (infantry) and M14 was the rifle that I carried and never had any problem with them. The bullet hit hard! It’s a great rifle.
I carried one back in the day. My sons Scout Platoon had an M-14 issued to them in Iraq. They came to love it as they were able to engage hostile vehicle borne IEDs before they could get in close. He told me he could see why we loved the M. 14. Got the job done every time !
The M14 is the rifle we almost had in WW2, bur Garand was forced to swap from BAR mags to clips because Ordnance Corp thought soldiers would waste ammo. The M14 was designed with the hindsight of how dumb a decision that was, but not a drop of foresight.
The M-14 is one of the most proven 7.62 Battle Rifles. It’s a war horse. The SCAR-17 is a considerable upgrade with a few modifications…however the cost of a SCAR is overkill. M-14 is just an upgraded M1 Garand With a box mag and it’s perfect.
Yeah totally not gonna blame the non free floated barrel,wondering zero,poor accuracy,and man if it was so great why isn't it used in the cmp service rifle matchs...oh right it takes a shit ton of money to get it to keep up with the ar platform
@@deb0nes230 well that is the reason the rifle has accuracy problems always has its very hard to get it to shoot sub moa and I hate reciver bedding them because epoxy is messy and it needs to be re-done every 2000 rounds or so and I dont like that modern chassis because of the barrel swing issue
As a 13 year old Cadet, in Canada, on a Mechanical Target Range, I was dropping man Sillouette targets at 800 meters, consistently and how I got on the Cadet Shooting team. We shooting with an FNC1A1 in 7.62mm FMJ's with a folding disc sight of the apature type adjustable in increments of 200 meters from 200 to 800 meters ... iron sights. The Belgians knew how to make an awesome rifle, Very much like the M14. M4's are very nice, yet the limited range and punch are a limitation. In later years in the Canadian Forces when deployed to Cyprus in a Peace Keeping role, we were the first group to go operational with the C7 in 5.56mm and when one of our troop bragged about it with some British troops, one of them smiled and asked if the round could penetrate a concret block wall? That's what they used in the Falklands against Argentinians ... nuff said??? Previous comment was correct ... call it .308 Nato or 7.62mm ... it's an awesome round, hard hitting and very effective at distances. Wish I could own one in Canada .... Semi Automatics now on the Prohibited list ... I'd settle for a Lee Enfield bolt action in British .303 ... it maybe 150 years old, however an awesome rifle. To cap off ... doesn't matter what you're shooting, even as a Cadet, I realized if the point of impact was not slaved to the sights, you would'nt hit anything. So spend some time on a range, use a sand bag or rest, and learn how to adjust your sights to get a tight grouping. On the shooting team I got to the point where I could sight in the Lee Enfield with 3 rounds ... two to confirm point of impact and one to adjust ... man that brings back memories. Yes it was a static range and we had amazing shooters coaching us, yet several of us could put 10 rounds under a quarter and 10 rounds of .22 under a dime. I carried that knowledge from the cadets to the forces and on a military skills competition, after running 10 kms with fullkit and a 50 lb pack and C7 rifle in under an hour on mixed terrain, shot a 2.5 inch grouping of 10 rounds at the finish line, Standing, unsuported, at man sillouette targets at 100 meters in under a minute using the Iron peep sights. What is shooting??? What ever your firing Position: It's Holding, Aiming, Breathing, Squeezing the shot/firing and the Follow through all in a nut shell. This can be taught to anyone and practice makes perfect. 😳😲🤯🤠🤗🤗🤗🤗
@@z6u5 you were not there, the entire Cadre of cadet instructors was. I'm not a person who cares about cancel culture, PC or any of the stupid shit you dummies buy into. Why would I worrry about what you think? When you don't have respect for yourself, to even realize that you could too if you shut your mouth and learned. Do you know what type of sights the FNC1A1 had? No? Learn. What did the Lee Enfield have for sights? No? What were the range on the respective rifles? No? My point exactly. 😳😲🤯🤮🤠😎👅 P.s. and It wasn't a one shot deal either ... 4 times after to show it was not a fluke, and one of the Instructors, now a friend, still calls me shooter ... long before you were born. Just saying.
Bullshit. A good shooter with an AR can hit more targets, faster. The M14 *would have* been the best rifle of WWII, but it was 100% obsolete as a general issue rifle by Vietnam.
@@joelee2371I’ve shot many conventional stocked weapons. (SMLE, G98, Kar98k, Mosin Nagant, M1) and I’ve never unintentionally shot it chicken winged. It feels unnatural, and it makes cycling a bolt action weapon MUCH harder
Because when u been jumping for 10 miles through forests mountains jungles swamps, and carrying 50-100 pounds of gear, and suddenly come up against 10-20 enemy, I want a 7 pound rifle and 30 round 1-2lb magazines. Not a 10 pound rifle with 3-4 lb 10-20 round mags.
I own one currently and I love it. I’m running iron sights at the moment but was scoring hits out to 500 meters the first day I sighted it in. 200 meter zero then tested her out to 500. Shooting the Federal 168gr Gold Medal match brought the best groups of about 3 inches shooting from a standing rest position.
The worst military rifle? The Navy SEALS still equip their sniper teams with these.They are (as you can see) accurate hard-hitting, rugged and reliable.
In the Army I started off with the M16a2, on my deployment we broke out M14s and I was issued one. As a civvy, I own AR15s, AR10s, including an Armalite AR-10a2 and a couple M1As. If we had a revolution, my go to will be an M1A. My next will be the AR10, then AR15.
M14 is one of the best infantry rifles ever made. When I'm serving the U.S. Army , we train with it and had more lethality than a M-16 due to its large caliber 7.62x51mm cartridge 😅
Its so good we literally couldn't get a country to buy the mass over stock if them we had and it was so good that we had to make a chassis system to improve its already mediocre accuracy
From my research it seems the rifle itself was very good, it’s basically an M1 Garand with a 20 round mag and full auto. As a marksman rifle it was good enough for delta operators but its introduction was spotty for a number of reasons, mainly due to the wooden stock that would expand in humid conditions. It was also a large gun and hard to control in full auto, the main competitor at the time for the other side was the AK-47 which was simply a better all round gun. This is what drove the introduction of the M16, funny enough this rifle was heavily disadvantaged by the armament department due to a bias towards Springfield. The final version that would see service in Vietnam had different powder from the original ammunition, the clowns used powder that was used in artillery shells, it was cheaper and I think they had a lot In surplus. This powder burnt at a considerably higher pressure and after repetitive fire would jam the system basically by cycling the gun before the powder is burnt off. They also gave the guns out telling the soldiers it would be self cleaning which combined with the heavier powder completely clogged the gun after short use. This was eventually amended but not before killing dozens in combat.
@1371CEA I was with formation recce based out of mob price but we could be all.ober the place depending on where we was needed what about your self mate
We did have the shape shooter riffle as well towards the end of Afghanistan but tbh I normally took my gpmg off the front mount of the jackal and patrolled with that beast of a wepon didn't mind extra weight for extra fire power
@@ashleygarnish9995 I was literally everywhere in Helmand Province, I was a Combat Engineer in the Marine Corps. Was there 2010 out of COP Edi near Musa Qaleh, and 11-12 out of Dwyer. Had some fun times with the Brits.
As a man who used one in sniper school and in subsequent sniper competitions, I own my own civilian version I assembled and all I can say to a threat is; “come and try!”
My brother in Christ, post the content before advertising. Everyone is here because of their low attention span and theyre not gonna remember to come back
One of the only issues I've ever heard about the M-14s was that it was too heavy, and they wanted a lighter replacement with a moderately equal cartridge to match.
The m14 looks okay until you’re in the jungle and you can only see 2 feet in front of you when an ak47 opens from out of nowhere. If Afghanistan was where the m14 made its debut it would have a completely different reputation.
Yes, the 14 was made with Europe in mind not Southeast Asia. We never should have been there. Kennedy and Johnson were amateurs. Tricky Dick Nixon would have dodged that bullet and saved our nation enormous pain. And we still would have beat the Soviets in the Cold war.
@@scottw5315 I don’t even know that the m14 would have been a great match for the AK in the eto because the assault rifle changed the game completely. Don’t get me wrong, good rifle. But If one is fighting in the city that 30 round mag is going to shine compared to the accuracy and 20 rounds of the m14. I say this even though I’m a fan of the m14.
@@6literbeater976 I'm not thinking urban combat, more like the Russian steppe or fields of Flanders in WWI. The AR won the debate and with modern optics and coming targeting computers 1000 yard shots will be routine. 5.56 is plenty deadly out that far. So, it can be the submachine gun or long range rifle depending on the situation.
I carried my M14A1 in the Navy, along with my Swisvale PA US&S made 1911 45 with canons and dolphins on it. Loved them so much, very accurate, I always kept them ready.
those tunnel scenes reminded me of Jin-Roh: The Wolf Brigade. Big tanky guy with a big tanky machine gun lighting up tight corridors with shots plinking off of him.
I used to be the M14 automatic-rifleman. You use short bursts - and start low so the rounds walk up the target. Even with the weight, I'd take it any day over the M16 (which they eventually made me take).
@@twostep1953my m16a2 was a piece of garbage, jammed every 3 or 4 rounds, always thought that thing would get me killed. Yes, I kept it clean, not sure what the problem was.
😅😅😅😅😅😅 bro M14 is a wonderful rifle a bit clunky but wonderful 💯 it's just you are a very bad shot it has a effective range of 1000 meters n in very capable hands upto 1200-1400 meters 😅 it was replaced with an horrible riffle supposedly made of plastic 😅 later it was improved don't be a dumbass M14 was replaced cause of corruption n in the name of modernization which costed us thousands of soldiers lives n many more injured 😅
@@ParaBellaActual okay let's agree with you 1100 meters tell me what is the most effective range of a modern Infantry rifle max is 400-500 meters at most n max 600 meters I think for an Ak it's 500 max and also iam forgetting the channels name where they modified the M14 according to their preference and it scored a shot 1280 or 1300 meters if iam not wrong n I have seen a M14 in a military convention on my side and it performed with full accuracy
My guys often fought over who got to carry our M-14 variants overseas. There was a reason why they were so popular in Afghanistan. Hadjiturd would snipe at us from 7-800 meters up the ridgeline. It was a stretch with an M-4’s rainbow trajectory, but easy pickings with the M-21.
Sometimes it is the gun back when the m14 was new the marines did a test and most of their guys couldn’t hit shit with it but those same guys did just fine with the garand.
@@jacobmccandles1767 It still in use today by snipers and marksmanship Marines, why haven't they found something better? It is still the longest serving service weapon in existence. It's just not standard issue because the boys these days don't drink their milk, and can't handle 3 lbs.
@@brooktech7869 not even close to the longest serving weapon in existence. That would be the M1911 and M2. The M-14 was the shortest lived infantry rifle in U.S. service, even sucking hind tit to such crappers as the 1873 Trapdoor, Krag-Jorganson, and Lee Straight-pull. Canibalizing the action of an M-14 to build an M-25 for a whole different purpose, *does not* make the M-14 Battle Rifle a good general issue weapon for the Assault Rifle era. The M-25 is no more an M-14 than the SVD is an AK-47. Derived, yes. The same? Not at all.
@@brooktech7869 also, I drink my milk. I go 270 weght-lifting pounds. I hike a 9lb rifle all over the Rocky Mountains... *but you can't run fast enough to make me purposely carry an inferior rifle!!* It's inferior....AND heavier. What a POS! If I needed a .308 general issue rifle, ALLLL of the rest are superior.
The US really should have adopted the FAL instead of the m14, but they just had to have an American rifle, even if it was the objectively worse and outdated design
Well, most critical videos have guys shooting it that would fit right in at a women's swim meet locker room. It's a man's rifle, shoot it like a man. I get sub MOA out to 500yds, and MOA at 1,000.
This is the rule, not the exception, but the rule usually is, the rifle isn't the problem it's the way it is implemented and what role it is supposed to fill, the M14/M1A was really just the Garand being brought to its natural conclusion. The reality was that warfare was moving away from large battle rifle or large caliber rifles to smaller intermediate cartridge carbine style rifles that overtime were being designed more as multi-purpose tools. It's not that it was a bad rifle per say, just that it wasn't meant for the jungles of Vietnam. Also, this is just an opinion. I mean, I know plenty of guys who hated it in Nam, plenty of guys who were indifferent about it.
Not really. This was pretty decent during the time period it was adopted but the jungle conditions of Vietnam made the M16 and M16A1 look (and objectively BE) like better options.
My uncle who was marine of the year 1969, served 1966-1970 always used an M14 never failed him. He said he said his buddies blow out of m16 barrels, jam all the time. Constant maintenance.
We discovered the stg-44 and then adopted this 14 years later. Its a good marksman rifle but as a standard issue infantry rifle we had better options before it was adopted.
Outdated. Optics can't be mounted center line over bore. Gas cylinders rust. Bolt roller assemblies pop off. And they have to be greased. Chassis systems add undue weight. Just not a good rifle.
Hmmmm......., Every scope mount I ever had for it mounted the scope over the bore. And I never heard of or had a roller fly off, and never greased it, just a little oil on the bolt, roller, trigger and hammer. And rust is a failure of the operator, not of the weapon.
Hmmmm....., every scope mount I ever saw or had for it put the scope right over the bore, and I never saw or heard of a bolt roller detaching. Rust is a failure of the operator, not of the weapon. And I never greased it, just a little oil on the moving parts and a film of oil on the barrel and receiver to prevent rust. Just a great reliable and accurate rifle.
I used these in the Philippines for awhile. I had a scope on it so it’s easier to hit things far away. It also had the full auto function too. Tried it out on auto and it just recoils too hard to be of any use.
My grandma was in Viet Nam 1968 in the army, she didn’t like the M14 and used the M1 Garand. She said the marines always say one shot one kill, that’s baloney! I took out three VC with one shot almost everytime, sometimes two, I threaded them like a needle. She said the M1 was far better, had big knock down power, could go through three guys, close or longer range it didn’t matter, back home she bought her own M1 for hunting, she outshot everyone that was in the marines using the M1A, while they were wrapping the sling around their arm to steady the M1A, granny just picked up her M1, loaded it like a pro, then raised and quick fired 8 times at 600 yards, hit each target dead center, got off all eight while the marines were still aiming and squeezing of shots, they got off three rounds to grandmas eight, she just cleared her M1 and walked away. She said the M1 was her baby and the jarheads ( she called them that) were pussies and couldn’t out shoot her, she was 24 when she was in the Nam.
The comment section never fails to disappoint…
That's the best USMC short novel I have read in my years of being literate :')
P.S: Anyone remember the tank scene from Indiana Jones when he shot a row of nazi soldiers with only one shot?
Grandma was the best. ❤️
That would be a great story if any of it were true.
I'll take bullshit that never happened for 500 please
The real problem are the shooters not the rifles
Tell that to all the American troops ditching their m16s for ak47s in vietnam
It was the powder in the ammo. Not the rifles
😂😂😂 idk there is a pistol that wont shoot accurately if you had it in the same exact spot. You would get the bullets in 2 different places 1 infront of you and one shot the person behind you
@@Nclake5485AKM*****
@@Nclake5485per tienes razon
he's screwing with you; anyone who says it's the worst is just trying to start something. I carried an M14 in the Army and later owned an M1A. there is NO other fighting rifle I would take over the M14 pattern. It's accurate and SUPER reliable and has no disabling deficiencies. It is the king of battle rifles.
@@DeathSquared7 ummm, no; the SCAR & FAL are excellent weapons and are equal to the M14, but no one has superceded it, certainly no AR platform.
@@joelee2371 why do you say that?
@@joelee2371 What does the M14 have over the SCAR?
The Scar has:
-Faster reloading
-More sealed action
-Easier to modify/accessorize
-Lighter
-Folding Stock Standard
-More controllable full auto
With equal stats to the M14 in every other category
I'll take a buried ak47 from the jungles of vietnam over the m14 any day of the week
I have used those in the not-US miitary. The auto connector is a bitch to take down. IMHO, BM-59 is much better.
As a Marine in the 1980s I carried an M14. This is the rifle I chose. I had several rifles to choose from depending upon the mission with my tour and 2nd Force Recon . Our armorer was great. Great for longer engagements as opposed to being in the bush where it's much shorter. Great knockdown power, pretty good on accuracy, and as far as durability goes. Unmatched.
Better watch the full review Marine…
To make sure I got your rifle “right.” 🤙🏻
The M14 hits like a truck, it’s a true stopper and will stop most anything from breathing.
Firearms will tend to do that 😅
Did you watch the full review?
Yeah I watched the whole thing. I love the M-14 I used it more than I used my M40
So does the FAL and g3, and they do it better
Well the ar10 is a stopper and it comes with better mags a free floated barrel and can shoot sub moa without reciver bedding and you dont have to throw money at it to make it accurate
@@fishlife1013 yeah, but you can't wear Rhodesian short shorts with those, and you can't use the phrase "superior German engineering" every 5 minutes either
Best rifle I've ever fired in the US Army. 25 years. I carried one in the 3rd US Infantry. If it's well zeroed, if you aimed at something you hit it.
Better check out the Full Review 👍🏻
@@ParaBellaActual Carrying it in battle supersedes any argument you got!
@@SuperBastidthere is far more to being a soldier than simply knowing how to shoot a rifle…
And there is far more to shooting a rifle than simply being a soldier.
@@ParaBellaActual m1a far better than m16,
I have a m1a standard that i had modified a little bit and its been great. I guess some people can't shoot , thats why they blame the rifle.
Its probably because it can't handle the mud test like most nato weapons.
@@Nclake5485 if I stuff mud in any receiver they won't work. Yes, even ak. Your job is to maintain your weapon at all times. I bet you don't own a firearm
@@JohnDoe-mt8rf it's been proven over and over again the ak platform is superior when it comes to reliability in harsh environments and being able to operate with low maintenance, can your pretty m1a do that???. Even garand thumbs channel proves this in the mud and frozen test, The m1a is the most overhyped hunk of shit that the US military ever adapted into combat only to get replaced by a bigger piece of shit, The m16 🤣 you can ask any vietnam veteran or even Iraq/afghanistan veterans which is the better weapon and the ak comes out on top every time. And no, I know for a fact I've got more firearms than you do and they can all pass the drop test unlike yours
For some reason my replies keep being erased.
ua-cam.com/video/mby4hOq-DpI/v-deo.html
@@justsomeguy922r3 oh ,that guy lol that guy can barely whip his a$$.
Plenty of Vietnam vets liked that thing.
It's no FAL, but it's not bad.
plenty of us post-Nam cold warriors love our M1As too .. I've buried plenty of WWII Admirals with an M14
At my local Gun Club. Theres a Vet that's told me that out of all the guns he occasionally had to "Procure" weapons off of in the field.
His personal favorite Bring-Backs were all SKS's
"There Damn fine Rifles, and at first they were for CERTAIN better than the early M16s."
I mean, they were kinda brainwashed into believing so, but yeah they liked what they had when they didn't have anything else.
@@TheBuster0926
I love my SKS. It has been converted for high capacity magazines ( before I bought it)
But it’s still an outstanding weapon. I have been torn on my next rifle, either an M1A or a socom 16. 🤷🏻♂️
Q: why is this the worst military rifle?
A: It’s not
It is, it was obsolete when it was adopted
Never in combat but I was platoon high shooter using it; can't complain.
The 14 variants we used in Iraq & Afghanistan were but one tool we could draw from our toolbox. Honestly, everyone fought over who got to carry the 14’s. It wasn’t what you wanted to clear houses in Fallujah, but it was what you wanted to take out that asshole 700m out on the ridge line.
Check out the Full Review to make sure we did the 14 right 🤙🏻
If we had the scout version that would have been cool
Well stated,
Thank you for you service 🥾🪖🇺🇸.
Basically a magazine-fed M1 Garand
Pretty much
But in .308
@@Arthur_Deadeye_Morgan THAT shows how little you truly know about either rifle
it M14 it not M1 garand
As a military service rifle, yea I’ll agree it was by no means a success. The glory hound that is the M16, got all the attention since it was the next major leap in firearms technology. However for the sport of shooting: I’ve never had a more pleasant experience shooting a rifle. The best quote I’ve heard about it: ”The M14 is THE Man’s battle rifle, it’s not meant for bitches”
I qualified on the M-16 about ten times. I never carried it in combat. It's a good weapon. I think I was shooting the A-2 version. Much improved over what went to Vietnam. Lighter weight and especially for the ammo has been key to its success. Having said all that. If you are man enough to carry the 14 you have yourself a real weapon.
There were MAJOR problems. But the issue was not the design, or the user\shooter. Two of the three main manufacturers screwed their stuff up, only the Springfield made ones were sny good. At one point new M14s were shooting 6 MOA!
It was fixed with better manufacturing standards, but was too late with the Armalite 15 coming out about then.
Eugene Stoner made a sexy gun, but it is an overly complicated & fragile kluge compared to the Garand/M14/M1A/US30 Carbine/Mini14 design. The M16/M4/AR15 design also suffers in its inline stock goofed-up ergonomics compared to classic drop in heel stocks; it suffers having a floating bolt carrier group that’s overly complex, and requires both a floating fragile charging handle plus necessitates a forward assist button…way too complex (gas rings) & is failure prone; the high positioning of sights requires memorizing point of aim offset for CQB engagements; the direct impingement system benches soot into the breach, and is fragile compared to gas piston designs; the gun gas ~ 18 springs…way too many. Plus, the underpowered 5.56 (.223) is a varmint rifle cartridge pressed into military service…it is recognized as a poor choice for the task.
@@Snookynibblesyup that’s why we’ve kept it for nearly 70 years and the m14 was in service for 10
@@desertwaffen5608 The only rational read of your comment is for the satirical one, that historically, military decisions-making in weapon systems has been fraught with political park-barreling, shortsightedness, and strategic ineptitudes; and the M16/M4 could be a poster child. The military knows the gun is an engineering kluge, is prone to failure, and is chambered in the wrong caliber, yet the powers that be, limp along with it, protesting the costs are too high to do the right thing by the soldiers serving on the front lines. Equipping soldiers to win wars ostensibly is not our politicians’ prime objective. That’s my rebuttal, an oft & widely repeated one.
It’s not the rifle that’s the problem.
I qualified as Markman during a sand Storm at White sands during boot camp , only occasional could see the Target at 350 meters or see anything for that matter, it never stopped
@@darwanwinkler3584 lmfao!!!!!
That’s insane, but of course not surprising lol
It absolutely is. It cost so much time and effort to make it DMR capable.
Granted, the FAL is always less precise.
I would take an M14 over anything else if I knew I’d be fighting at range
Get a socom or scout model. 16 or 18 inch barrel. Depending on needs
I am a twice combat veteran (infantry) and M14 was the rifle that I carried and never had any problem with them. The bullet hit hard! It’s a great rifle.
Better watch the full review then… to make sure I got everything right 🤙🏻
I carried one back in the day.
My sons Scout Platoon had an M-14 issued to them in Iraq.
They came to love it as they were able to engage hostile vehicle borne IEDs before they could get in close.
He told me he could see why we loved the M. 14.
Got the job done every time !
I have two of these babies. They have been amazing. Theres a reason why they are still in use.
Nobody still uses them they’re rotting away in arms rooms long outclassed by superior designs
@@CheekRunner You couldnt be more wrong
@@adamcasas6519it’s been replaced by the sr25 and 417 no one is still using them the m21 was a failure by every metric sorry friend
@@CheekRunner replaced when again? Was in service for how long? Hmmm. Keep trying
@@adamcasas6519 in service or in inventory? The things are sitting in the back of storage facilities collecting dust
The M14 is the rifle we almost had in WW2, bur Garand was forced to swap from BAR mags to clips because Ordnance Corp thought soldiers would waste ammo.
The M14 was designed with the hindsight of how dumb a decision that was, but not a drop of foresight.
Foresight cannot exist in the practical world, because it is impossible to know what the next war, football game, or day at the office will be like.
Because UA-camrs need something to talk about
The M-14 is one of the most proven 7.62 Battle Rifles. It’s a war horse. The SCAR-17 is a considerable upgrade with a few modifications…however the cost of a SCAR is overkill. M-14 is just an upgraded M1 Garand With a box mag and it’s perfect.
Better watch the full review 😉
@@ParaBellaActualshow it please.
M1A costs $1800 these days, not exactly a bargain
Some children can’t handle the 7.62 so they turn to they little 5.56 and blame the rifle.
Yeah totally not gonna blame the non free floated barrel,wondering zero,poor accuracy,and man if it was so great why isn't it used in the cmp service rifle matchs...oh right it takes a shit ton of money to get it to keep up with the ar platform
@@fishlife1013 sounds like complaining
@@deb0nes230 well that is the reason the rifle has accuracy problems always has its very hard to get it to shoot sub moa and I hate reciver bedding them because epoxy is messy and it needs to be re-done every 2000 rounds or so and I dont like that modern chassis because of the barrel swing issue
@@deb0nes230 sorry but a complaint can be anecdotal facts cant
That rifle was using .308
As a 13 year old Cadet, in Canada, on a Mechanical Target Range, I was dropping man Sillouette targets at 800 meters, consistently and how I got on the Cadet Shooting team. We shooting with an FNC1A1 in 7.62mm FMJ's
with a folding disc sight of the apature type adjustable in increments of 200 meters from 200 to 800 meters ... iron sights.
The Belgians knew how to make an awesome rifle, Very much like the M14. M4's are very nice, yet the limited range and punch are a limitation. In later years in the Canadian Forces when deployed to Cyprus in a Peace Keeping role, we were the first group to go operational with the C7 in 5.56mm and when one of our troop bragged about it with some British troops, one of them smiled and asked if the round could penetrate a concret block wall? That's what they used in the Falklands against Argentinians ... nuff said???
Previous comment was correct ... call it .308 Nato or 7.62mm ... it's an awesome round, hard hitting and very effective at distances.
Wish I could own one in Canada .... Semi Automatics now on the Prohibited list ... I'd settle for a Lee Enfield bolt action in British .303 ... it maybe 150 years old, however an awesome rifle. To cap off ... doesn't matter what you're shooting, even as a Cadet, I realized if the point of impact was not slaved to the sights, you would'nt hit anything. So spend some time on a range, use a sand bag or rest, and learn how to adjust your sights to get a tight grouping.
On the shooting team I got to the point where I could sight in the Lee Enfield with 3 rounds ... two to confirm point of impact and one to adjust ... man that brings back memories. Yes it was a static range and we had amazing shooters coaching us, yet several of us could put 10 rounds under a quarter and 10 rounds of .22 under a dime. I carried that knowledge from the cadets to the forces and on a military skills competition, after running 10 kms with fullkit and a 50 lb pack and C7 rifle in under an hour on mixed terrain, shot a 2.5 inch grouping of 10 rounds at the finish line, Standing, unsuported, at man sillouette targets at 100 meters in under a minute using the Iron peep sights.
What is shooting???
What ever your firing Position:
It's Holding, Aiming, Breathing, Squeezing the shot/firing and the Follow through all in a nut shell.
This can be taught to anyone and practice makes perfect.
😳😲🤯🤠🤗🤗🤗🤗
You were not hitting 800m iron sight shots ever
@@z6u5 you were not there, the entire Cadre of cadet instructors was.
I'm not a person who cares about cancel culture, PC or any of the stupid shit you dummies buy into. Why would I worrry about what you think? When you don't have respect for yourself, to even realize that you could too if you shut your mouth and learned. Do you know what type of sights the FNC1A1 had? No? Learn.
What did the Lee Enfield have for sights? No?
What were the range on the respective rifles? No?
My point exactly.
😳😲🤯🤮🤠😎👅
P.s. and It wasn't a one shot deal either ... 4 times after to show it was not a fluke, and one of the Instructors, now a friend, still calls me shooter ... long before you were born. Just saying.
@@z6u5why not?
@@gregpaterson2675 “a 13yo in cadets hitting 800m irons” him being a lizard is more believable
@@gregpaterson2675 read his response to me tho lol its great, he goes on about gen z and cancel culture
Got to shoot a full auto m14 in the army. Much more powerful than the m16s, and looked way cooler in the field.
Looking cool is half the battle 😎
Be sure to watch the full review!
Your content is stellar. You earned my subscription today big pimp.
Hold up…
You dropped this 👑
@ParaBellaActual lol you're wild. I hit that bell hard though!
Its the worst because you have to not suck at shooting to make it work.
underrated comment
inferior to the FAL in every way
Bullshit.
A good shooter with an AR can hit more targets, faster. The M14 *would have* been the best rifle of WWII, but it was 100% obsolete as a general issue rifle by Vietnam.
@@joshuawhite1692someone with some sense
Thats what it seems like judging from some of these haters commenting
That reload was CLEAN BRO! I gotta practice more with mine for sure
so this is where everyone was complaining about "chicken winging"
People whose only experience is with pistol type stocks (AR, AK) don't realize that it's the normal and proper hold for the conventional stock.
@@joelee2371I’ve shot many conventional stocked weapons. (SMLE, G98, Kar98k, Mosin Nagant, M1) and I’ve never unintentionally shot it chicken winged. It feels unnatural, and it makes cycling a bolt action weapon MUCH harder
Anyone who ever carried one in theatre would say it’s amazing
I have a forged Smith Enterprises with a fun switch (pre-86) and I love it..... A real crowd pleaser....
Jealous…
Be sure to watch the Full Review 🤙🏻
The author of the statement was being a smart ass. They showed you how effective the rifle is.
Because when u been jumping for 10 miles through forests mountains jungles swamps, and carrying 50-100 pounds of gear, and suddenly come up against 10-20 enemy, I want a 7 pound rifle and 30 round 1-2lb magazines. Not a 10 pound rifle with 3-4 lb 10-20 round mags.
Tell that to the 240 gunner 🫠
@@ParaBellaActual yeah, I'll take a 240 with a couple thousand rounds!
“Holy shit private pile I think we finally found something your good at”
And they traded it in for a BBQ gun
Because someone had the bright idea to make it full auto. Its the last best rifle from the markmanship days.
This rifle is bad because of its weight, size, high cost and strong recoil. In addition to being an unreliable weapon in humid and dirty environments.
It's worst rifle because it does not have the iconic garand ping
Probably because that’s not a M1 Garand
@@HESSTOYTRUCKENTHUSIASTIt's a direct modification of the M1 Garand. Do you not see the resemblance?
@@lkhdmrtnI know it is but it’s not a m1 garand it’s a m14
We ain’t mentioning Randy Shughart? His M14 was awesome
I own one currently and I love it. I’m running iron sights at the moment but was scoring hits out to 500 meters the first day I sighted it in. 200 meter zero then tested her out to 500. Shooting the Federal 168gr Gold Medal match brought the best groups of about 3 inches shooting from a standing rest position.
Nothing wrong with an M1A at all.. I want one honestly
Better watch the full review then 🤙🏻
It's not the rifle, it's the man carrying it.
The worst military rifle? The Navy SEALS still equip their sniper teams with these.They are (as you can see) accurate hard-hitting, rugged and reliable.
No the dont they us the m110 sass now and for good reason
FAL is better stock but doesn’t have any good DMR options.
The M14 is just money and time from being precise.
Nobody still uses this trash
@@CheekRunnermy cousin literally had a ebr
@@chukuma4760 15 years ago, it’s been replaced for awhile
In the Army I started off with the M16a2, on my deployment we broke out M14s and I was issued one.
As a civvy, I own AR15s, AR10s, including an Armalite AR-10a2 and a couple M1As.
If we had a revolution, my go to will be an M1A. My next will be the AR10, then AR15.
M14 is one of the best infantry rifles ever made. When I'm serving the U.S. Army , we train with it and had more lethality than a M-16 due to its large caliber 7.62x51mm cartridge 😅
Guess you haven't shot a 77 grain 556 load before
Used one in gulf war one and two
Where did you train with the M14?
And when did they switch you out to the M16
Its so good we literally couldn't get a country to buy the mass over stock if them we had and it was so good that we had to make a chassis system to improve its already mediocre accuracy
@@OakConeRattler09 had a 14 with the airud
From my research it seems the rifle itself was very good, it’s basically an M1 Garand with a 20 round mag and full auto. As a marksman rifle it was good enough for delta operators but its introduction was spotty for a number of reasons, mainly due to the wooden stock that would expand in humid conditions. It was also a large gun and hard to control in full auto, the main competitor at the time for the other side was the AK-47 which was simply a better all round gun. This is what drove the introduction of the M16, funny enough this rifle was heavily disadvantaged by the armament department due to a bias towards Springfield. The final version that would see service in Vietnam had different powder from the original ammunition, the clowns used powder that was used in artillery shells, it was cheaper and I think they had a lot In surplus. This powder burnt at a considerably higher pressure and after repetitive fire would jam the system basically by cycling the gun before the powder is burnt off. They also gave the guns out telling the soldiers it would be self cleaning which combined with the heavier powder completely clogged the gun after short use. This was eventually amended but not before killing dozens in combat.
Shit looks like a hell of a good rifle to me, right on the mark, they are hard to destroy very reliable gun....
Sweet gun and on behalf of old fudds everywhere it makes me happy to see younger folks shooting one of the all time classics. Stay safe
This is a man stopper I would of happily used this in Afghanistan over my 5.56 sa80 a2
We had em over there, I think you'dve been better suited with an SLR though. Lol. What province were you in?
@1371CEA I was with formation recce based out of mob price but we could be all.ober the place depending on where we was needed what about your self mate
We did have the shape shooter riffle as well towards the end of Afghanistan but tbh I normally took my gpmg off the front mount of the jackal and patrolled with that beast of a wepon didn't mind extra weight for extra fire power
@@ashleygarnish9995 I was literally everywhere in Helmand Province, I was a Combat Engineer in the Marine Corps. Was there 2010 out of COP Edi near Musa Qaleh, and 11-12 out of Dwyer. Had some fun times with the Brits.
@@ashleygarnish9995 Talking about the 240 I take it?
As a man who used one in sniper school and in subsequent sniper competitions, I own my own civilian version I assembled and all I can say to a threat is; “come and try!”
My brother in Christ, post the content before advertising. Everyone is here because of their low attention span and theyre not gonna remember to come back
One of the only issues I've ever heard about the M-14s was that it was too heavy, and they wanted a lighter replacement with a moderately equal cartridge to match.
Now dissasemble it, and do it again
Great channel Great shooting!
The m14 looks okay until you’re in the jungle and you can only see 2 feet in front of you when an ak47 opens from out of nowhere.
If Afghanistan was where the m14 made its debut it would have a completely different reputation.
Yes, the 14 was made with Europe in mind not Southeast Asia. We never should have been there. Kennedy and Johnson were amateurs. Tricky Dick Nixon would have dodged that bullet and saved our nation enormous pain. And we still would have beat the Soviets in the Cold war.
@@scottw5315 I don’t even know that the m14 would have been a great match for the AK in the eto because the assault rifle changed the game completely. Don’t get me wrong, good rifle. But If one is fighting in the city that 30 round mag is going to shine compared to the accuracy and 20 rounds of the m14. I say this even though I’m a fan of the m14.
@@6literbeater976 I'm not thinking urban combat, more like the Russian steppe or fields of Flanders in WWI. The AR won the debate and with modern optics and coming targeting computers 1000 yard shots will be routine. 5.56 is plenty deadly out that far. So, it can be the submachine gun or long range rifle depending on the situation.
I carried my M14A1 in the Navy, along with my Swisvale PA US&S made 1911 45 with canons and dolphins on it. Loved them so much, very accurate, I always kept them ready.
Now that’s a loadout 💪🏻
90년대 군시절 K2 육안조준으로 250~300m 실거리 영점잡고 직경14Cm 원형 표적지에 중거리 저격수 사격을 했는데 엎드려쏴 입사호쏴 등 의탁사격을 할시에는 20발중 18발 이상 어느때는 20발 전발 명중할때도 있었음... 그만큼 5.56mm K2잘맞음...(300m이상은 14cm 표적 안보여서 사격을 안했음 표적을 14cm로 한것은 50m권총 표적지 원형중앙 기준이 14cm인데 그것을 기준했고 300미터 이내의 숨어있는 적의 머리를 일발저격(헤드샷)하겠다는 의지를 반영한것임 ...^-^) 추후 K2에 10배율 조준경 보급되고 탄약도 신형탄인 K100탄으로 변경되면서 500야드(450m) 사격도 실시했는데 엄청 잘맞았지요...
the heavenly "*pling*" will hit different
It's the worst because UA-camrs have been telling people for years that it is.
Or because it’s the shortest-lived NATO standard weapon ever?
those tunnel scenes reminded me of Jin-Roh: The Wolf Brigade.
Big tanky guy with a big tanky machine gun lighting up tight corridors with shots plinking off of him.
US Marines tested that rifle in combat with best results , M14 is great.
My dad loved the M14. Still can’t believe he’s been gone for two years now.😢
Incontrollable Full-Auto Recoil.
I used to be the M14 automatic-rifleman. You use short bursts - and start low so the rounds walk up the target. Even with the weight, I'd take it any day over the M16 (which they eventually made me take).
@@twostep1953my m16a2 was a piece of garbage, jammed every 3 or 4 rounds, always thought that thing would get me killed. Yes, I kept it clean, not sure what the problem was.
So is anything else in .308 lol, FAL and G3 included
I use it every season for killin. Been doing that forever
The operator has two choices; he decides that he is going to control the rifle, or he decides that the rifle is going to control him.
The title of the video should be how is the M14 the worst military rifle.
The .308 is scary powerful especially against 7.62x39 and 5.56. It would drop me in a second at 500 yards direct hit.
❌Bad rifle
✅Not the right rifle for vietnam
The M14 is the best. The shooters now are the worst. Oh and for the new young shooters the boys bathroom is the one not wearing the dress
Folks that do fast reloads standing upright with no one firing back at them are so cool
"Holy shit private pile. I think we finally found something you're good at"
😅😅😅😅😅😅 bro M14 is a wonderful rifle a bit clunky but wonderful 💯 it's just you are a very bad shot it has a effective range of 1000 meters n in very capable hands upto 1200-1400 meters 😅 it was replaced with an horrible riffle supposedly made of plastic 😅 later it was improved don't be a dumbass M14 was replaced cause of corruption n in the name of modernization which costed us thousands of soldiers lives n many more injured 😅
"effective range 1200-1400 meters"
*M14 max sight setting: 1100 meters* 🥴
@@ParaBellaActual okay let's agree with you 1100 meters tell me what is the most effective range of a modern Infantry rifle max is 400-500 meters at most n max 600 meters I think for an Ak it's 500 max and also iam forgetting the channels name where they modified the M14 according to their preference and it scored a shot 1280 or 1300 meters if iam not wrong n I have seen a M14 in a military convention on my side and it performed with full accuracy
Actually this is a view point out out by forgotten weapons. Something about it warping in the jungle i believe
My guys often fought over who got to carry our M-14 variants overseas. There was a reason why they were so popular in Afghanistan. Hadjiturd would snipe at us from 7-800 meters up the ridgeline. It was a stretch with an M-4’s rainbow trajectory, but easy pickings with the M-21.
Comment section is literally 98% fuddlore lmao
I was just thinking the same thing.
“That right there is a gimmick son. The M14 is a real man’s rifle.”
"My great grandpa used the m14 to kill Osama during the vietnam war"
AR is just cheaper/easier to manufacture with greater inherent accuracy.
Your comment restores my faith in the comment section… 👍🏻
There are pros and cons to each weapon system
It ain’t the gun, it’s how folks use ‘em.
More truth to that; and how they understand 'em.
Sometimes it is the gun back when the m14 was new the marines did a test and most of their guys couldn’t hit shit with it but those same guys did just fine with the garand.
To be fair the worst rifle to have in a combat situation is the one you dont have.
I think the M14 has proven itself time and time again even it’s predecessor was fit for battle
The M-14 has proven itself? Yeah, as a combat failure.
I guess maybe as a match rifle, or parade rifle
@@jacobmccandles1767 It still in use today by snipers and marksmanship Marines, why haven't they found something better? It is still the longest serving service weapon in existence. It's just not standard issue because the boys these days don't drink their milk, and can't handle 3 lbs.
@@brooktech7869 not even close to the longest serving weapon in existence. That would be the M1911 and M2.
The M-14 was the shortest lived infantry rifle in U.S. service, even sucking hind tit to such crappers as the 1873 Trapdoor, Krag-Jorganson, and Lee Straight-pull.
Canibalizing the action of an M-14 to build an M-25 for a whole different purpose, *does not* make the M-14 Battle Rifle a good general issue weapon for the Assault Rifle era.
The M-25 is no more an M-14 than the SVD is an AK-47. Derived, yes. The same? Not at all.
@@brooktech7869 also, I drink my milk. I go 270 weght-lifting pounds. I hike a 9lb rifle all over the Rocky Mountains... *but you can't run fast enough to make me purposely carry an inferior rifle!!*
It's inferior....AND heavier. What a POS! If I needed a .308 general issue rifle, ALLLL of the rest are superior.
@@jacobmccandles1767 so, which theatre did you carry the M-14 in, that you found it to be such a failure?
Quality weapon. Nicknamed the tack driver. Marines in Vietnam fought to keep they're old m14s
I have a FAL and a M14 the fal is so much better a rifle it's not even comparable
The US really should have adopted the FAL instead of the m14, but they just had to have an American rifle, even if it was the objectively worse and outdated design
Are there any FAL DMR models?
@@Seth9809 NOPE! outdated
@@Seth9809the fal has an accuracy issue due to the bolt being pressed on by the magazine with varying spring tension
A good rifle, for the wrong mission, war and environment
Find out why!
ua-cam.com/video/ttxaRw6HJVk/v-deo.htmlsi=_d-yPtHnpsq2WFkB
Say that to your great grandfather 😂😂
Nice new gun channel. M14 based for a win! Good luck , hope to see channel grow.
VN vet here. Qualified expert on the M14. Great rifle!
Well, most critical videos have guys shooting it that would fit right in at a women's swim meet locker room. It's a man's rifle, shoot it like a man. I get sub MOA out to 500yds, and MOA at 1,000.
Sure buddy
I bet you can do the same with a .44 Magnum too, somehow.
Sure buddy
@@fishlife1013 so what kind of accuracy do you get with YOUR M-14?
This is the rule, not the exception, but the rule usually is, the rifle isn't the problem it's the way it is implemented and what role it is supposed to fill, the M14/M1A was really just the Garand being brought to its natural conclusion. The reality was that warfare was moving away from large battle rifle or large caliber rifles to smaller intermediate cartridge carbine style rifles that overtime were being designed more as multi-purpose tools. It's not that it was a bad rifle per say, just that it wasn't meant for the jungles of Vietnam. Also, this is just an opinion. I mean, I know plenty of guys who hated it in Nam, plenty of guys who were indifferent about it.
Obsolete before the idea of it came to someone's head
Not really. This was pretty decent during the time period it was adopted but the jungle conditions of Vietnam made the M16 and M16A1 look (and objectively BE) like better options.
My uncle who was marine of the year 1969, served 1966-1970 always used an M14 never failed him. He said he said his buddies blow out of m16 barrels, jam all the time. Constant maintenance.
It's the best military rifle out there and fuck the fal
This comment is going to start a war 😅
FAL and HK G3 owner FOR LIFE 💪
@@jsledge8557my man
Fal is ten times better than the m14. Anything else is boomer cope
Meh
I think it's the best military rifle we ever produced.
Absolutely.
The m14 walks circles around these new guns that exist today tf😭
It couldn’thold it’s own against an AR-10 or most of the 308 rifles like the Scar, Bren, APC, JAKL, etc.
It's not the worst It's the best I rather take this one instead of m16
200 plus yards clean hit no optic is crazy
It never did anything it was supposed to do
What, like reliably kill people at 500 yards as it was made to do? I never had any complaints about mine.
We discovered the stg-44 and then adopted this 14 years later. Its a good marksman rifle but as a standard issue infantry rifle we had better options before it was adopted.
Bro is saying the rifle sucks, but he doesn’t even know how to tuck his elbow when shooting.
Okay mr. Chicken wings please teach us
*marksmanship has left the chat*
Got to have that chicken wing thing.
@@whomagoose6897 no. You tuck your elbow and bring it in when shooting
@@whomagoose6897 yea it gives the enemy something to shoot at.
Wasn't he just kidding?
I use the strap when dumping a mag.
Remember.... thats .308 he's slingin.
I call BS
Same…
ua-cam.com/video/ttxaRw6HJVk/v-deo.html
Smacking shit 700 yards out with iron sights
Just another day at the office 🎯
Outdated. Optics can't be mounted center line over bore. Gas cylinders rust. Bolt roller assemblies pop off. And they have to be greased. Chassis systems add undue weight. Just not a good rifle.
Hmmmm......., Every scope mount I ever had for it mounted the scope over the bore. And I never heard of or had a roller fly off, and never greased it, just a little oil on the bolt, roller, trigger and hammer. And rust is a failure of the operator, not of the weapon.
Hmmmm....., every scope mount I ever saw or had for it put the scope right over the bore, and I never saw or heard of a bolt roller detaching. Rust is a failure of the operator, not of the weapon. And I never greased it, just a little oil on the moving parts and a film of oil on the barrel and receiver to prevent rust. Just a great reliable and accurate rifle.
I used these in the Philippines for awhile. I had a scope on it so it’s easier to hit things far away. It also had the full auto function too. Tried it out on auto and it just recoils too hard to be of any use.
Imagine if our troops had this thing in WW2
I thought that was an m1 garand and I was boutta use every word I know