Re: M-1 vs. M-14

drieux, just drieux (drieux@WETWARE.COM)
Wed, 1 Oct 97 23:30:22 -0800

--- On Mon, 29 Sep 1997 07:49:41 +0000 "W. D. Ehrhart" <wdehrhart@WORLDNET.ATT.NET> wrote:
> Regarding Henry Beigh's posting about the M-1 and M-14 rifles:
> The M-14 is really just a revamped and improved M-1. The barrel
> diameter was changed from .30 caliber to 7.62 mm in order to accomodate
> NATO ammunition standards. The breech-loaded 8-round clip was replaced
> with a bottom-loading 20-round magazine. And the bolt release mechanism
> was changed so that you no longer had to stick your thumb into the
> breech in order to release the bolt during inspections, thus removing
> the greatest hazard related to use the M-1: "M-1 Thumb." In all other
> respects, the M-14 is pretty much that old WWII rifle, the M-1. Unlike
> the early versions of the M-16, both the M-1 and the M-14 were
> remarkably durable and dependable weapons.
> Bill Ehrhart


not to be too pissant about this,
but.. the first number is the diameter of the bullet
and the second digit is the length of the brass.

.30-06 ( M-1 Garand ) is 7.62x63

.303 enfield ball is 7.62x56

the NATO (M-14) is 7.62x51

the AK round is 7.62x39

the .30 cal carbine round is 7.62x33

M193 ( M-16 ) round is 5.56x45

It should be recalled that the M-1 Carbine was the
general sidearm for 'advisors' and officer rank personnel
who would be carrying a 'long arm'.

So, in the main I basically agree with Bill on the basic
distinctions between the 'M-14' and the 'M-1 Garand'. But there
is the amusing impact in all of this, that many of the 'advisers'
who would wind up as dead and wounded PRIOR to the two battalion
of marines arriving to provide perimeter security at the Air Force
Base in Da Nang were carrying the smaller WWII era 'intermediary
cartridge' M-1/M-2 carbines. Which of course complicates Country
Joe's original position. Since to go this way means addressing the
american dead, and wounded, from Before the Gulf of Tonkien Resolution,
as well as that interrum period to the 'canonical' arrival date of the
marines in 1965.

I toss in the .303 and the AK for 'perspective' - the .303 ball was
the standard british rifle round until they went to the NATO round.
The AK round - in some histories - is a WWII cartridge - and whether
we are talking about the original AK-47's that would be out of First
Line Units in the USSR by the Vietnam War, or their Chinese Variants,
or the follow on AKM family, were all shooting that most excellent and
well known of 'intermediary' cartridge rounds.

I also plonk all of this in place so that folks can 'get a grip'
about the 'relative size' problem facing so many folks when they
whine about 'assault weapons'. The AK get the 'bad press' - in part
I feel because it is so directly associated with 'wars of national
liberation' - the complaints that folks make about this 'deadly round'
are meaningless when we are talking in terms of ripping open Threat Level I
kevlar body armour, since Grandfather's .30-06 full rifle round would
open the very same 'cop vest' with no questions asked.

So how far have we really come in the process of dealing with the
'relevant' issues - "just the facts." and how much of the debate
remains clouded in political rhetoric that has it's roots in mere
emotional rage about collateral issues.


Date: 10/01/97
Time: 23:30:22