M14 Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,829 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just kidding of coarse, but these guys destroy a perfectly good M1A rifle, and for what? It is already common knowledge that the M14 type rifle is very tolerant, durable, tough, handsome, etc., BUT, it is apparently NOT idiot proof. Anyone this neglectful should only be issued a USGI forged paint scraper, or maybe sing and dance for the USO.

Video link: [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0-3OQsnR-w[/ame]

They have another M1A "test" video too, let me find it and I will post a link to it too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,829 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Here is the newer video. This abuse video turned my stomach, but I was impressed. My only issue is they said a broken "ear" is a replaceable part, umm, yea, I guess the entire receiver could be considered a "part". I think it could be repaired to a usable state though.

WARNING! If you are sensitive to violent abuse videos, then I suggest for you to not view this video.

Some of you may have seen it on TV Monday night.

http://archives.gunsandammo.com/node/6191/video
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,935 Posts
Wasn't it a G&A article and/or video not too long ago that the writer named the Socom(II I think) as the preferred rifle for TEOTWAWKI?

G&A and I parted ways after they did a review of a non firing prototype of the then new Colt King Cobra just so they could be first.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,829 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Forgive me, but what does TEOTWAWKI mean? I am not a big fan of their magazines or show either. It just reads like one long advertisement to me, and the show is even worse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
TEOTWAWKI. The end of the world as we know it.

I think that rifle ended up being another project for the G&A guys that became a cover story. If I remember correctly, they had the rest of the rear sight removed and added a scope mount. They had it rebarreled to some type of a .338 cartridge, again IIRC. Put it in a fiberglas stock and duracoted all the metal some poop brown color, which I'm sure had some tactical name like ultra dark desert earth brown or something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,048 Posts
The End Of The World As We Know It.

Anyway, stupid people do stupid things and then still don't understand why they got the results they got.

I let my Guns and Ammo subscription go years ago. I get along just fine without it. It was pretty good back in the days Elmer Keith and Bob Milek wrote for it. I always enjoyed their stories/articles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crowbar

·
Registered
Joined
·
783 Posts
proves two things. one. how some people don't deserve to own or test firearms & just how good an m14 really is.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,047 Posts
He's lucky it didn't blow up in his face. I challenge you to cake any chamber with mud like that and get it to fire, eject and cycle another round..... Well maybe an AK. I'd like to have them compare this test to an AK in similar conditions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,542 Posts
Ah! The old infiltration course. I remember doing basic at Ft Dix in 64. The red tracers gliding overhead, and the demolition charges blowing up all around you, and me and my M14 slithering under the barb wire
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,843 Posts
Saw the drag through the mud by a jeep test and it was disturbing. Was not surprised it functioned without any problems. Maybe he meant the ear on the rear sight base?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
I did the crawl at Ft. Campbell. We had to take great pains to keep our M16's out of the mud, i.e., on top of our bodies.

That idiot would have been put in the front leaning rest position, removing a bit of slime each time he came down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,816 Posts
The "ear" is a replaceable part, as mentioned it is part of the rear sight assembly, not the receiver.

 
  • Like
Reactions: hytekrednek

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,829 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
The "ear" is a replaceable part, as mentioned it is part of the rear sight assembly, not the receiver.


Thanks for pointing that out. For some reason I thought it was the ear of the receiver, but now that I think about it thanks to what you pointed out, it does make sense after all.
Still though, that is a healthy piece of steel that got snapped. Not a gentle test by any means, ridiculous, but impressive. I would like to have seen him try to fire a full mag of 20 or so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
248 Posts
I'd like to chain up those two fat boys behind my CJ-5, drag them down a nasty trail for 1/2 mile, and see how they would function afterwards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,373 Posts
I just don't get why anyone would get sore over this, so they torture test a rifle and it functions?
Where I come from that is a positive, even if we already knew it could take a licking and keep on ticking.

So it's M1A, not like they used an original full auto M14 in an E2 stock. GI3

He's lucky it didn't blow up in his face. I challenge you to cake any chamber with mud like that and get it to fire, eject and cycle another round..... Well maybe an AK. I'd like to have them compare this test to an AK in similar conditions.
Lucky? They weren't anywhere near the rifle when test fired.
The chamber and bore were washed out, guarantee it.

Here is a nice video of the Russians torture testing the Saiga12.
I have Saigas in several calibers, and all run like Jesse Owens.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSx22HRbnqo[/ame]

Drag a Black rifle like that and see whats left ,white coat zombies
Haha, I hear that. An AR wouldn't stand a chance in one of these test.
They can't even make it through a twinkie, much less any real adverse conditions. I have a couple, I like them a lot and they both go bang when I pull the trigger, but regular powder/carbon fouling is all they can handle.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KXiySQpSMM[/ame]
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top