With respect, there have been quite a few problems reported with the piston driven HKs currently employed by certain units and said units have gone back to the DI M4s. I'll see if I can find the report in writing. With that said, nothing is perfect. The M14 was certainly ahead of its time during its inception but I do feel there are better choices available today.
I have an aversion to comments based on feelings. Please tell me what weapons platform in small arms is a better choice. You left the comment unfinished.
I don't base my conclusions on feelings, the M1 Garand/M14 platfrom has the best performance based history available. Can it jamb, yes, is it easier to unjamb, yes, I saw the above video showing the M1A doesn't like the mud, I would love to see the AR platform tested the same with a comparison to difficulty in rectification.
The Military tests of old were and are some of the toughest, well thought out, difficult tests ever devised. Funny, the AR platform was exempt from the old style tests, ever read about the tests performed on the AR in comparison to some other weapon, like the M14 vs the FN?
The greatest tests ever performed and are irrefutable, the WWII battelfield, the M1 was used by the millions around the world in every theater, if the weapon had failings it would have shown up. Now after all these years the shortcomings of the AR platform are out, if you search the info is available and it is not hard to find. History has shown that the AR platform should never have been deployed as a MAIN BATTLE RIFLE. If you want a target gun stick with the bolt action, the Military has, if you want a Main Battle rifle stick to the M14, the Military has, if you want a general weapons system to lay down suppresive fire(current Military doctrine) use the AR platform.
Old school aim at what you shoot, teach proper sight, trigger, position, and breathing.
Everyman is a rifleman has gone out the window.
So here is a thought, it was asked M14/M1A vs the AR in a 308, why, if the cartridge performs the same, if the AR platform is heavier, if the minute of man is enough to get the job done, would we even ask? If someone is hit by a 308 bullet from a M14, or the same target a man, is hit by an AR in 308 but the group size is smaller will the man be any deader? The only time group size matters is if you need more than 1 hit, the 308 round rarely needs more than 1 hit, can the same be said for the 223?
The whole idea around the AR platform was to make a lighter weapon, has it achieved this goal? What does the current M4 AR platform weigh?
If someone has a weapon system that is better, please step up and share, I have put my opinion out there and am looking forward to the debate, if a better weapon system exists I would trade or sell my beloved M1A's.
One of the finer points I have tried to illuminate, the current weapons are all from the 1950's, were is the new and improved weapon system, all are either M14, AR, or bolt actions, not one new proven system has come out since the 1950's. Dated? Really?
I love Bull Durham, there is a comment made about baseball:
"A good friend of mine used to say, 'This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains.' Think about that for a while."
War is a simple game, if you want to participate, you kill the people on the other side til they quit, you break all of their toys til they won't work.
The M14 platform based on the M1 Garand has done a better job at killing and breaking than any other weapons platform in history.
Jim
