M14 Forum banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
145 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Forgive me for asking a dumb question, some may say I have been smoking some good stuff DI5 I own an M14 with all USGI parts H&R on a Norinco receiver. I wonder if anyone has placed a proof punch mark on their clone receivers? To make it look more GI. Thank you. I meant prick punch, thank you for the correction.
 

·
Registered
Custom service rifle builder
Joined
·
8,300 Posts
I believe the punch mark on the top of the receiver ring is from Rockwell testing rather than an indication of proof firing. Some parts, like bolts, were only required to be proof punch marked on repair parts. Barrels were also proof punch marked after firing one high pressure test round. I haven't found any references to proof punch testing receivers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
OP,
Just as the experts above have posted, the U.S. M14 Rifle was prick punched on the receiver ring. The top of the OP rod on the early M14 rifle below was also prick punched but I don't know why it was done. Prick punch on rear of the HRT A03 bolt is also visible along with asterisk indicating OWC Engineering Order 164 compliance. HTH

U.S. M14 Rifle s/n 87156 manufactured during the first H&R contract:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,468 Posts
The M14 receiver proof firing prick punch mark is located on the top receiver ring ,usually a large square or rounded dimple .Each and every factory level rifle was prick punched when it succesfully passed the high pressure proof load.The bolt was dimpled and the (P) on the barrel was dimpled .The last picture shows the bolt proof mark and a demill front ring with proof mark .Notice the diamond heat treat test on the M1 bolt lug ,very small sharp 120 degree diamond point used for D scale testing of this hardness.

Here is the data from Bill Ricca







 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
The point of manufacturers for placing the marks is to prove that the metal meets the governments specifics of metal hardness right?
So why on earth would you intentionally put a punch/prick/proof mark on an aftermarket rifle not knowing if the metal meets those specs? (Even though it most likely does) It is fraudulent if it was not tested at the manufactures facility and you place the mark once you received it right?

Sometimes I think people get too caught up in the clone thing to see the forest standing in the front of the tree....

This kind of thing will only invite questions later on down the road when these rifles are on the market again.

Please leave the markings to the manufactures for the sake of future collectors/shooters.

SMAWman
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,961 Posts
The point of manufacturers for placing the marks is to prove that the metal meets the governments specifics of metal hardness right?
So why on earth would you intentionally put a punch/prick/proof mark on an aftermarket rifle not knowing if the metal meets those specs? (Even though it most likely does) It is fraudulent if it was not tested at the manufactures facility and you place the mark once you received it right?

Sometimes I think people get too caught up in the clone thing to see the forest standing in the front of the tree....

This kind of thing will only invite questions later on down the road when these rifles are on the market again.

Please leave the markings to the manufactures for the sake of future collectors/shooters.

SMAWman
No not really, as the only ones to mark them this way were the original four who built M14 receivers for good old uncle sam.....ie H&R,TRW,SA. and Winchester. No current maker marks them this way and so there is no confusion. All it does is add a bit of realism to the M14 clone, simply put, no harm no foul.

If he wants to mark it, mark it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
No not really, as the only ones to mark them this way were the original four who built M14 receivers for good old uncle sam.....ie H&R,TRW,SA. and Winchester. No current maker marks them this way and so there is no confusion. All it does is add a bit of realism to the M14 clone, simply put, no harm no foul.

If he wants to mark it, mark it.
We know that, but will the now 13 year olds that are buying these in 25 years know that? Maybe, maybe not.

SMAWman
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,961 Posts
We know that, but will the now 13 year olds that are buying these in 25 years know that? Maybe, maybe not.

SMAWman
Yes Sir, I believe they will, the information thats here today will be there tomorrow. All one needs to do is a little study and will easily find the answers. Just a short 18 months ago I knew nearly nothing about the m14, now with the knowledge I have aquired and people I trust, I can make informed buying decisions.
 

·
Registered
Custom service rifle builder
Joined
·
8,300 Posts
Proof testing

Not all companies do proof testing, but some like LRB Arms does do both destructive tests and hardness testing. I posted in my column several months ago about the results of destructive testing done at White Laberatories for LRB and the picture attached here shows some of the hardness testing done on their receivers and bolts. Prick punching not required.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,566 Posts
Me,too. I would have said "center-punched."
That's the pesky problem with nomenclature. Parts and procedure names were established long ago to accurately depict an item or process and then someone comes along suggesting a change that no one can identify to the process being discussed. I'm not picking on you and please don't think I am, it's just that I've never quite understood why folks don't spend a little time familiarizing themselves with the topic. It's downright scary sometimes to read some of the posts on this site from persons who buy an M1A as their first firearm and have absolutely no idea what they are doing. Then they ask a question about something that with their very limited knowledge they can only refer to as a "thingy." I started out long ago with my first firearm being a single shot bolt action .22 rifle, and I learned from there. Old guys like me just don't understand ....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,961 Posts
That's the pesky problem with nomenclature. Parts and procedure names were established long ago to accurately depict an item or process and then someone comes along suggesting a change that no one can identify to the process being discussed. I'm not picking on you and please don't think I am, it's just that I've never quite understood why folks don't spend a little time familiarizing themselves with the topic. It's downright scary sometimes to read some of the posts on this site from persons who buy an M1A as their first firearm and have absolutely no idea what they are doing. Then they ask a question about something that with their very limited knowledge they can only refer to as a "thingy." I started out long ago with my first firearm being a single shot bolt action .22 rifle, and I learned from there. Old guys like me just don't understand ....
GardenValley,

You sound so familar, I started out with a single shot 12ga. when I was 11 years young. Boy was that along time ago. My son puts up with me and my M14 collecting, I quiz him on the different parts and he can name them.

Everyone has a different starting point, but most do eventually catch on, I guess us old timers just need to be a little more patient with those with less knowledge.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top