M14 Forum banner

21 - 40 of 85 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
I have shot a lot of both the M1-A, and the M1 Garand, in 30/06 and 308.
I have also shot the shorter barrels of both models [ie ,Bush M1A's, and Tanker Garands in 308 and 30/06].

So here are some random thoughts...
On reliability I "think" in good guns it is equal. I have no evidence to suggest one is better than the other.
On accuracy, in standard guns I have seen no real differences.

So lets look at the advantages and disadvantages of each system.

First the Garand. If one prepares correctly, ALL of your ammo will ALLREADY be in 8 round clips.

So it is easier to carry/transport, and fight with, 1000, or 5000 rounds of ammo in the 8 round clips.
Cheaper too as M1-A magazines are fairly spendy.
How many are you going to have??? And each one yhou loose is a problem. You can afford to loose some 8 round clips, as long as you save a few...
A Garand is a lot more sleek than an M1-A with a 20 round mag... But you could have a few 10 round mags for "casual" use until the balloon goes up.

30/06 vs 308 Garands... I have found that I have had nom m problems shooting commercial factory ammo in my 308 Garands. I have had some problems shooting commercial hunting ammo in my 30/06 Garands. I have not tried an adustable gas plug as I just load my own hunting ammo in the 30/06 Garands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
The advantages of the M1-A.

Having 20 rounds at the touch of your finger, with no reload, is an advantage for the M1-A over the Garand.
And this advantage continues until all of your M1-A mags are empty. Then you have to reload them.
If you are "walking out and about", then there is a limit to how much you can carry. Here the M 1-A has the advantage.

If however, you find yourself with good cover, in the "Night of the Living Dead situation, then once you have shot all your loaded M1-A mags, a fella with a Garand, with ALL of his ammo in 8 rounds clips, now has the advantage.

Another advantage of the M1-A is that is is a lot easier to mount some kind of optical sight.
You can do it with a Garand, but it requires a good gunsmith.
The M1-A is superior in this area.

COST $$$$
In this area the M1 Garand is the clear winner, as you can get a good one from the CMP, with 1000 rounds of ammo for what a basic Springfield M1-A would cost.
Or get 3 M1 Garands for the cost of about one basic Springfield M1-A.
In todays world at the present economy, that is a big plus for the M1 Garand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
For the future... With thoughts on the near past...

After the first Assault Weapons ban I acquired a 308 and a 30/06 Tanker Garand,.
I ordered tha 308 as I had other guns in 308 so I had ammo and reloading stuff for it.

On "accident" I bumped into a fella at a gunshow that had a 30/06 Tanker, I knew my 308 "T" was several months away so I bought it too.

My thought process was; The Garand was the one RUGGED Semi-Auto, that was under the radar of the legislation being presented against "Assault Weapons".
It does not have ANY of the EVIL features, ie, a Hi Cap detachable mag, it holds less than 10 rounds, does not have a pistol grip, no flash hider, and no folding stock.

So most probably it would be the last legally owned RUGGED semi-auto. [We al know that eventually they want to ban ALL guns]. And it would be legal for me to travel with on my "road trips" and could double as a backup hunting gun.

In fact just a couple of days ago I carried my 308 Garand Tanker on a Pig hunt...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
The bottom line [IMHO of course] boils down to personal preference and MONEY...

I think either system would serve a trained individual very well...

However one thought is to get "an" M1-A, or a whole fleet of them if you have the $$$...

Then add a M1 Garand or a "FEW" of them for spares, stash guns, or "loaners",or traders, as for the "Dollar spent, vs value recieved", the M1 Garand, and its ammo IN CLIPS from the DCM is the best value on the Planet, IMHO.

Also the Garand is one of the MOST FUN rifles to shoot.
EVERY law abiding American should have at least one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
Let's pretend that we have two 308(7.62 NATO) battle rifles (no optics). One M1 Garand and one semi-auto M14. Both are built perfectly to spec, and have flawless parts that interface impeccably. But wait, China, North Korea, Iran and Barak Obama have formed an unholy union contrived to replace our American values and way of life with a theocratic socialist totaltarian dictatorship. Fret not my friends, we're prepared. We established a stronghold in the mountains years ago because we forsaw this day. News of the invasion spreads and we are faced with a tough choice. Only being able to take one, do we grab the Garand, or the M14 (this question is to be answered by the main question below)? We will eventually take back our country but until we increase our numbers, our mission objective will be simply to provide security and sustenance. Magazines/clips aren't an issue, nor is ammo. So, with that being the case...

Regarding durability, which rifle would continue functioning longer with regular maintenance but no spare parts?

Remeber, these rifles are "new" at the start of the invasion.

First let me say that you have brought up a good question... I should have stated that in my first post
In my above posts I baised my thoughts or reliability, on the fact that I have fired both M1-A's and Garands, a fair amount over the years. I have shot both of them from a hundred rounds to several hundred rounds in a single day, in formal competition to just plinking, and informal combat shooting with no problems.

I would have NO PROBLEMS, NO WORRIES using a standard 30/06 M1 Garand, that I knew worked 100%, as my Battle Rifle for the Bad Days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
Charlie, that is a good question. I have carried all of them in the woods, as well as the FN-Fal, and do not get out the Tar and Feathers My favorite 308 Battle rifle, the H&K 91...

But since you asked about the Garand, and the M1-A, I will say this...

I really do not find any difference in handling between the two if you use a 10 round mag in the M1-A.

When Pig hunting this week I used 2 different rifles. My 308 Tanker Garand, weight with the scout scope 11 lbs, loaded. It has the Obermeyer heavy Match barrel.
My Blaser R 93 Tracker [19 3/4" barrel] synthentic stocl with a S&B 1.5-6x42 stock weighs 9.15lbs. Loaded with 6 extra rounds on the butt stock, ie carried hunting weight.
We were "walking up" pigs in VERY heavy, thorny, viney cover.
I was helping one of my buddies "guide" some out of state friends, so I was not a primary shooter but carried my rifle anyway...

The M1 Garand did "seem" heavier, but since were not at "altitude" it was not that big of a deal.
As a comparision;

A 30/06 Tanker, no optics, with a standard weight 30/06 barrel weighs 9.95lbs.
A M1-A Bush gun, in a GI Plastic stock, with a Basset mount and a Leupold 1.75-6 weighs 10.85lbs
A standard M1-A in a USGI Plastic stock weighs 9.3lbs.
An Armscorp Super Match with a McMillan stock weighs 12.65 lbs.
A 20" Colt AR Heavy Barrel weighs 9.15lbs.

Most of the above guns had a sling, all were unloaded except for the Blaser and the 308 Tanker.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
569 Posts
Thanks for all the intel! My all time favorite was stolen 20 years ago, and was the best out-of-the-box shooter I ever had, after a trigger job, and 42.5 gr. 4895 and a 150 gr. Speer sn. bullet. I have a M1a and a Garand, but my shooting is from the bench. I haven't been in the woods for at least 20 years now. Do you prefer the Tanker over the standard M1?

Charlie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
For most of the hunting I do, I would prefer a Tanker Garand or an M1-A Bush Gun over the regular sized rifles if money is no object.
The reason I say "if money is no object", is if you are putting a rifle together from scratch, or buying a new one, then a short barreled, and a standard barreled rifle cost the same...

However, truth be told if you are on a budget a CMP Garand will work just fine.
Likewise if you already have a standard M 1-A it will work good too.

My African elephant, cape buffalo, double hunting rifle has a
28" barrel. Elephant and Buff are hunted in some pretty thick stuff... I have not found the 28" barrels to be a problem...
I have shot cape buff as close as 12 yards...
I have shot 4 elephants at 6 yards or less...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
I have both and would feel equally comfortable with either. And if I survived a gun fight, I would also have whatever my adversary had :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
OK at the risk of being Tarred and Feathered, I will state the following...

For MOST people, a 16" AR 15 is the best rifle for the Bad Days... They are just so easy to shoot, heck a 9 year old girl can shoot one..., as can most wives. Commercial SP and HP ammo is very effective. Every member of your family should have an AR or two...

IF you are on a Budget [and who is NOT], then your family may have to "Cowboy Up", and go with a CMP M1 Garand...
You can get them for WAY less than any other Rugged semi-auto, including several thousand rounds of 30/06 ammo already in 8 round clips...

If you have the $$$, then in the present day, an M14/M1-A is hard to beat. It has the advantage of the PUNCH of the M1 Garand, and the detachable magazines of the AR's...
The reliability of the M1 Garand, and the M14/M1-A has NEVER been questioned... The only Combat rifles that have the reliability record of the M1 Garand and the M14 are the H&K G3/H&K91, and the AK 47...

I have shot a bunch of FN-Fal's and H&K 91's. I have been using the H&K 91 since 1977, and it is one of my most favorite rifles on the Planet... But in todays world the M1-A is the Battle Rifle of Choice...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
439 Posts
Interesting "theoretical" question.

I would have to go with the M14 or M1a rifle. I love my M1 Garand in 30.06 deeply. I love both rifles equally. In this apocalyptic scenario I would choose to go with the M1a because of the .308 & 7.62 NATO ammo use. If you wanted to use this ammo in an .308 Garand it would have to be a specific ammo. If you happen to use a M1A you could put any type of NATO or hunting round through it and it would go "bang!" Too many issues with the Garand. Plus as someone else noted, NATO uses 7.62 and you could resupply.

Is this post a 21st century RED DAWN movie in the making? Wolverines!! haha
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
My wife is a fan of the M1. I floated the idea of selling a few of them to fund more M14's and was quickly shot down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
My wife is a fan of the M1. I floated the idea of selling a few of them to fund more M14's and was quickly shot down.
Your wife is a smart Lady, Pretty too.DI2

And that is a NICE looking Garand.

My wife calls Garands TREE GUNS... When I asked why??? She said, "It looks like it took a WHOLE tree to make the stock"...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
bevo...

I have not had any problems shooting commercial 308 ammo in my 308 Garands..

I have had issues shooting commercial 30/06 ammo in a 30/06 Garand...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Regarding durability, which rifle would continue functioning longer with regular maintenance but no spare parts?

Remeber, these rifles are "new" at the start of the invasion.
Within the narrow constraints you've given, it doesn't really matter at all. If both rifles are set up and in good shape, either one will be durable enough for you to stake your life on, and they fill similar roles.

There are quite a few Garands that out lived their soldiers. There are quite a few soldiers who didn't live to shoot even 1000 rounds out of their Garands during a fight. Soooo.. ?

Odds are good you'll die before the rifle is shot out. And if not, you'd have any number of opportunities to pick up some form of replacement to carry on the fight.

If you are comfortable with an 8rd Garand as your battle rifle, I urge you to consider it strongly over the M1A/M14 clone only because of economics. For the price of an M1A, you can get a Garand and a bunch of ammo to practice with.. or you can get two Garands and gut one for some spare parts you can easily carry. On top of that you'll be getting milspec parts that should be more durable than the commercial parts you'd get from a new M1A.

I am not comfortable with a Garand. I love the rifle, but I'm not happy with the idea of facing 30rd AR's and AK's with only 8rds in a clip. Whereas I am more comfortable with a 20rd 308. I'm not at as much of a capacity disadvantage, and I gain an advantage in distance shooting and cover penetration. I'll take that.

For me it wouldn't be a question of whether I take one 308 battle rifle over another. It would be whether I take a full-on battle rifle, an AK/AR carbine, shotgun.. maybe a 9mm carbine, etc.

In reality, unless it was clear which of the above I should take based on the terrain or likely area of engagement, I'd probably ditch redundant clothes, extra side arm ammo (maybe the entire sidearm), and any other luxuries and take two long guns..
 

·
"Death From Above"
Joined
·
11,607 Posts
I join in but my response might not be well taken. I have both rifles. Both have Krieger heavy barrels and been match conditioned. I also built a SM LRB with gi parts. If I only had the option of the M1 and a SAI M1A I would take the M1 everytime. If you toss the LRB SM into the mix built with GI parts I would take the LRB SM over the M1. I am not basing my answer on anything but reliability and track record. We would not have the option to have the rifle worked on with postage paid to and from. Hands down the M1 over the M1A and the M14SA over the Garand. Just to make it clear I have an M1A SM with the same heavy barrel. It's not the barrel that concerns me. On occasion I find myself referring to this simple example when it comes to reliability of the M1A. The state of california purchased 250 M1A's I was told that at any given time a large portion of the arsenal was in for warranty repair. I'm not talking about 10% more like 30%. These are the fish and game guys that are in the field looking for the marijuana growers in the hills. The reason I know this info is because they approached someone I know to build them a replacement prototype to be field tested.
Please don't take this as me bashing SAI, I'm just saying the rifle has never been tested in battle. Let's not confuse an M14 which has been tested. We are talking about heavy field use and training. I just don't think I would take the chance given the choice. If it were an older SAI rifle built with GI parts? Yup I would take it. I think if one out of the box today would not hold up to our expectations. So in summary, I would take a garand over a new SAI M1A or my M14SA(GI parts) over the garand simply because of the magazine. Hope this does not offend anyone. Just to make it clear I am a proud owner of a SAI M21 but I would not want to take it to battle.
Great thread buy the way!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
I join in but my response might not be well taken. I have both rifles. Both have Krieger heavy barrels and been match conditioned. I also built a SM LRB with gi parts. If I only had the option of the M1 and a SAI M1A I would take the M1 everytime. If you toss the LRB SM into the mix built with GI parts I would take the LRB SM over the M1. I am not basing my answer on anything but reliability and track record.
This sounds pretty reasonable and sensible to me, and I can understand the bias against SAI in this regard.

I wouldn't want to take a NIB gun - of any type - into a fight. Even hand assembled masterpieces. Mass production errors happen. Human errors happen. So, to be fair.. I would say that whatever guns we are considering to take - the M1, SAI M1A, LRB build, whatever .. all of them should have been used enough to earn our trust, inspected for excessive wear, etc.

I've been rough on my SAI's as far as forcing them to get dirty, shooting up loads of ammo and heating the gun up, etc. Never had a problem. I've never fired, or handled a real-deal M14. I've never had the honor of using one in combat, so I can't speak to the durability or reliability of the M14 over the M1A. But I can speak to the durability/reliability of the M1A over other commercially produced guns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
IMO this is an apples to oranges discussion. You're taking 1930's technology (albeit damn good technology) and putting it up against mid 1950's technology. Most would go with the newer technology, as would I. To put this in another perspective, it's like asking car aficionados if they would rather drive cross-country in a 1936 Chevy or a 1955 Chevy. MOST would pick the '55 Chevy, due to the improvements made over the previous 19 years to the ride, power, handling, and performance. Some nostalgic or die-hards would still pick the '36 Chevy for their own personal reasons but given the two choices, going wither newer technology is almost always the way to go. There are always wild cards to anything though, technology included. Interesting thread nonetheless!


Motown out


ARMY1
 
21 - 40 of 85 Posts
Top