Nearly done. Krieger is on the way and then it's sourcing an op rod to make it as "100% USGI" as possible. Handguard will get painted once we have less than 200% humidity.
Sir could you please tell me the manufacturer of the suppressor on the M25.
I hate to keep hashing and re-hashing the same pic:
Interesting, may I ask what kind of stock they had? Was it a grey SAGE chassis w/ tan parts (including an integrated bipod)? or the earlier Mk 14 Mod 0 that had a grey SAGE chasiss without all the tan parts, or perhaps a tan fiberglass McMillan stock like used on the SSR? Any recollections are appreciated. My guess is that the last M14s used by NSW/SEALs were probably the Mk14 Mod 1 rifles that had a distinct SAGE chassis, as seen here:
I think that was an honest typo. The XM21 designation occurred in Sept 1969, and the rifle became a standard item in 1972 as the M21.
They were first tested in Vietnam as early as 1968 on M14s, and by late 1969 they were extensively fielded. Lots of pictures of them on the net and in books, many are seen with the AN/PVS-2 Starlight night vision scope. The best book on their use with XM21s is Peter Senich's The Long-Range War (1994). He has a couple of chapters dedicated to the Sonics suppressors used in Vietnam on both the M14 (Chapter 4) and M16 (Chapter 5). One report noted "40" M14SS-1 suppressors were sent to Vietnam in early 1969 for the 9th Infantry Division, but it is likely hundreds were used by US Army sniper and certainly Special Forces. The manual for the M14 SS-1 suppressor is dated December 1969. The US Army TC 23-14, Sniper Training and Employment, dated October 1969 has a page of "Special Equipment" and the Sonics suppressor is shown on that page, etc. (See red arrow).
Most likely, yes - but most M14s were rebuilt after the Vietnam war and given new barrels and other parts as needed. Roughly 100K+ rebuilt M14s went into long-term storage in the USA, principally at the U.S. Army depot at Anniston, AL. Tens of thousand of other M14s were either given to Israel; or sold to various other allies. They more or less sat in storage for 2 decades.
Most likely, yes - but most M14s were rebuilt after the Vietnam war and given new barrels and other parts as needed. Roughly 100K+ rebuilt M14s went into long-term storage in the USA, principally at the U.S. Army depot at Anniston, AL. Tens of thousand of other M14s were either given to Israel; or sold to various other allies. They more or less sat in storage for 2 decades.
The US Army thought they were done with the M14 in the 1990s, but the conflicts in the early 200Xs in Afghanistan and Iraqi resulted in a bunch of field requests that forced the Army to reconsider limited use of the M14. They quickly determined that the Army needed a bunch of 7.62 NATO Designated Marksman or Squad Designated Marksman rifles to engage targets well beyond the capabilities of the M16A2/A4. So around 2003 they pulled thousands of rack-grade M14s out of storage (reportedly Anniston, AL) and units added all kinds of ad-hoc scopes and scope mounts to the M14 to increase its hit probability out to 600 meters or so. I understand that U.S. Army Units used their quasi-discretionary deployment funds to purchase whatever optic systems they could acquire for these rack grade M14 rifles. There was no standardization, hence the variety of optics seen in that era.
The rifle in the pic appears to have a very low scope rail, so probably an A.R.M.S. #18 mount with a Leupold 10X Mk 4 scope w/ M3 turrets and I think high height or ultra high height Leupold Tactical rings. I doubt that rifle was accurized, although I understand a small number of M14s pulled were former National Guard National Match M14 rifles that had been accurized as competition rifles pressed into combat service, but the vast majority were rack-grade. The M21 rifles had been de-commissioned with the optics removed in the early 1990s and more or less lost to time due to disassembly or destruction, but a few rifles built by Smith Enterprises Inc into their M14 SE "Crazy Horse" were hand engraved "M21" on the receiver heels, so those were former M21s. (Many people call any M14 with an optic an "M21" but that is not correct, as M21s had unique build process to accurize them to NM standard, and as a consequence had unique NSN numbers.)
So it was a mixture, but according to most sources, Anniston had tens of thousands of rack-grade M14s that had been rebuilt into "Condition A" rifles back in the 1983-84 period, and then put into long-term storage...Many of those rifles were withdrawn in the 200Xs for combat use in Afghanistan and Iraq, and my guess is that is precisely what the rifle is in the above picture. Here's a good article from 2011 re this history of the M14 EBR-RI, which was a program to standardize the U.S. Army's 7.62 NATO SDM rifle as of 2009:
How the U.S. Army Builds the M14 EBR-RI - Guns and Ammo
The M14 EBR-RI has become a legend in the military community, and this was the only time a writer was allowed inside TACOM to document the building of these chassis-based M14s.www.gunsandammo.com
Agreed, it's more than likely an M14 with a picatinny base and those are commercial rings. I don't know what the scope is.Most likely, yes - but most M14s were rebuilt after the Vietnam war and given new barrels and other parts as needed. Roughly 100K+ rebuilt M14s went into long-term storage in the USA, principally at the U.S. Army depot at Anniston, AL. Tens of thousand of other M14s were either given to Israel; or sold to various other allies. They more or less sat in storage for 2 decades.
The US Army thought they were done with the M14 in the 1990s, but the conflicts in the early 200Xs in Afghanistan and Iraqi resulted in a bunch of field requests that forced the Army to reconsider limited use of the M14. They quickly determined that the Army needed a bunch of 7.62 NATO Designated Marksman or Squad Designated Marksman rifles to engage targets well beyond the capabilities of the M16A2/A4. So around 2003 they pulled thousands of rack-grade M14s out of storage (reportedly Anniston, AL) and units added all kinds of ad-hoc scopes and scope mounts to the M14 to increase its hit probability out to 600 meters or so. I understand that U.S. Army Units used their quasi-discretionary deployment funds to purchase whatever optic systems they could acquire for these rack grade M14 rifles. There was no standardization, hence the variety of optics seen in that era.
The rifle in the pic appears to have a very low scope rail, so probably an A.R.M.S. #18 mount with a Leupold 10X Mk 4 scope w/ M3 turrets and I think high height or ultra high height Leupold Tactical rings. I doubt that rifle was accurized, although I understand a small number of M14s pulled were former National Guard National Match M14 rifles that had been accurized as competition rifles pressed into combat service, but the vast majority were rack-grade. The M21 rifles had been de-commissioned with the optics removed in the early 1990s and more or less lost to time due to disassembly or destruction, but a few rifles built by Smith Enterprises Inc into their M14 SE "Crazy Horse" were hand engraved "M21" on the receiver heels, so those were former M21s. (Many people call any M14 with an optic an "M21" but that is not correct, as M21s had unique build process to accurize them to NM standard, and as a consequence had unique NSN numbers.)
So it was a mixture, but according to most sources, Anniston had tens of thousands of rack-grade M14s that had been rebuilt into "Condition A" rifles back in the 1983-84 period, and then put into long-term storage...Many of those rifles were withdrawn in the 200Xs for combat use in Afghanistan and Iraq, and my guess is that is precisely what the rifle is in the above picture. Here's a good article from 2011 re this history of the M14 EBR-RI, which was a program to standardize the U.S. Army's 7.62 NATO SDM rifle as of 2009:
How the U.S. Army Builds the M14 EBR-RI - Guns and Ammo
The M14 EBR-RI has become a legend in the military community, and this was the only time a writer was allowed inside TACOM to document the building of these chassis-based M14s.
Yes, and you also see them with the Knight's Armament Company rail that replaces the handguard (see attached), and other scopes, including 10X Tasco scopes, etc. I've also read about Pride Fowler scopes also being issued on M14s, but Leupold Mk4s are the most common as they usually had NSNs. SEI scope mounts are also seen as they have an NSN number and were available via the federal supply chain. I've seen ACOGs too of course.
Like Tasco, I think Bushnell operated somewhat as a marketing/branding company with their Tactical scopes in the late 1980s to 1990s. The designs of those two scopes and most esp the turret design - are almost identical. In fact, a buddy of mine bought a used B&L 10x that had issues with the turret detents, but took apart the turret on his SWFA SS HD 10x42mm scope and sure enough, the internals of the turrets are identical and interchangeable, so he fixed his B&L for a retro project. To me, the SS HD 10x42mm is a good substitute for a retro project if the old B&L scope can't be located.
Some tell-tale things to look for on a match conditioned M-14 with a wood stock:Is this just a rack grade Vietnam era M-14 with a Leupold on it?
I don't know how many obsolete WWII, Korean and Vietnam era machine guns and shoulder-fired destructive devices have been destroyed via orders of the Defense Logistics Agency over the past 5 or 6 decades, but since only 1.38M M14s were made from 1959-1964, it could not have equaled 1.4M that DLA de-milled. (Some people have the tendency to lump the M1 with the M14 - but the fact is the M1 Garand is NOT a machine gun, but the M14 was always designed as a machine gun and is categorized as select-fire by the military and ATF, so it gets lumped into the same category as old M16s, M60s, M2 50BMGs, M3 grease guns and other obsolete machine guns). Here's the agency that has a process for de-milling old and obsolete military equipment. https://www.dla.mil/HQ/LogisticsOperations/Services/FIC/DEMILCoding/
I’d love to get the build sheet on our USAF EOD M14 SMUD rife we used to have. I remember the walnut stock was fatter in the forened and we had Redfield 3x9 Illuminators in Brookfield mounts. It had the selector removed. Much later on, we got our hands on the Mk14 Mod 0 PJ variant. Those still had the fun switch installed.
The USAF M14 SMUD rifle is a bit of an enigma. I never could find pics of one, but I do know that its NSN was created in 1987 and it refers to a "Redfield 3-9x Widefield" scope. The only book that has some details that appears to answer your question is Lee Emerson's excellent reference series, M14 Rifle History and Development, Sixth Edition, Vol 1, pages 192-193. I think the last sentence is the closest I have found as to its configuration, and the "three point mount" is presumably the old Brookfield mount that you mentioned. Basically is sounds like a standard M14 that was glass-bedded into a heavy profile National Match wood stock, and equipped with a late 1980s era Redfield 3-9X Widefield scope and the old BPT scope mount. I hope that helps.
Maybe give Bill Walter down at Hurlburt a call. He is retired AFSOC, pretty heavily into USAF ordnance, including small arms and is a competitive shooter, so may be able to at least get you pointed in the right direction.
The original M1A stock is still on their website, but the company was recently sold to another entity - so you'd have to call and ask about
mcmillanusa.com If anybody knows, Bill does.
It could be an old Surefire. I have not seen an M14 muzzle attachment for that unit, but I suspect they did make them at one point. It could also be a Smith Enterprise-based M14 DC ('Direct Connect') suppressor, as they sold quite a few to the US Army for use on M14s from 2004 to 2007. (Reportedly 2nd and 25th Infantry Divisions, 82nd and 101st Airborne units, etc). The 3rd/middle picture are Nevada NG M14s that were updated by SEI ~ 2010. Last pic has older model on top, newer model on bottom. Both require an SEI Vortex flash hider. FWIW: http://www.smithenterprise.com/products11.html
Far from a solid piece of information to confirm/deny your assessment, but that Soldier is wearing aircrew/vehicle crew ACU pants. Might be a Stryker-borne infantryman from 1-25 SBCT, as I seem to remember them wearing those while I was attached in 2005.
www.ammoland.com 
I've read Lee Emerson's 2012 M14 history, threads here, and a few on the M14 forum and want to point out some things that might be confusing.
When you read there were differences between Navy and Army programs you have to recognize there were at least FIVE or more separate distinct and different groups trying to squeeze more function and life out of the M14.
First, you had the conventional Army and the USAMU. Army Materiel Command (later Tank and Automotive Command) and Rock Island had the Big Army responsibility for formal small arms programs and whether or not the Army adopted a weapon, first assigning a formal "XM" and then a formal "M-" type-classification once the weapon is formally adopted an put into service (XM-4 to M4 Carbine for example). The Army G3 (Operations), G4 (logistics), G7 (training), and G8 (force structure, budget, and dollars) all agree there's a requirement; how many we need (as opposed to how many we're going to actually buy); who gets how many; and how the dollars are going to be spread (between purchases and maintenance). Add USSOCOM and SOCOM dollars after 1987 and the math gets even more complicated (by law the Army buys an item for Army Special Operations Forces if it's a common item -- if it's a USASOC-peculiar item, USASOC pays for the SOF-queer modifications. If the whole GUN system is SOF-queer then it's bought with all-SOF dollars. An M4 is bought by the Army using a chunk of Mother Army's budget, but SOPMOD accessories are paid for by USSOCOM.
Rock Island (after Springfield Armory closed) had responsibility for specifying National Match standards for the M1 and M14 rifles and the M1911A1 pistol. After JFK, RFK, and Martin Luther King were all murdered the Army dropped support for the National Matches at Camp Perry after 1968 and no longer published, kept up with, or maintained National Match specifications (which is why there are no National Match standards for the M16, M9, M11, M17, or M18, nor for 5.56mm or 9mm).
View attachment 7731493View attachment 7731494View attachment 7731499View attachment 7731498
The US Army Marksmanship Unit is tasked to R&D, field, and maintain competition and match weapons for the National Matches, so it has free rein to hot-rod anything the Army or Army SOF Forces has or buys, or has a hardware hole that needs filling.
The M21 is basically a National Match M14 with a scope, so there was overlap. Rock Island had a National Match Armorer course and was supposed to be the stateside maintenance depot for M21s, but they sucked. To fix M21s, a lot of weapons came back to the USAMU, specifically to Hook Boutin's service rifle shop to get fixed or to un-f@rk Rick island's work.
The M21 was a tiny fraction of all the M14s, M16s, M79s, M203s, and M60s bought for the Vietnam War. Divisions would lose in combat or deadline more standard line small arms than all M21s ever built for units across the entire Army. Once Vietnam fell and before the M24 was adopted it was neglected and forgotten, a curiosity since the most exposure Army officers had to the M21 (kinda-sorta) was the M14s they may have seen or handled as cadets.
The only units that were still constantly using them were scout platoons, marksmanship / shooting teams, and Special Forces -- a very small demand pool. Shooting teams maintained their own weapons or sent them back and forth to the USAMU, the National Guard Marksmanship Shops, or small regional MTU shops.
In 1984 the Army adopted the M24 and started to replace the M21 on a direct 1-for-1 basis. Most of the regular Army complied because the M21s were plain worn out, and good riddance. Shooting teams and Special Forces wanted to keep their guns and just plain refused to turn them in. For SF spotters there simply wasn't an option -- there wasn't another 7.62 self-loader until the SR-25 and AR-10 were introduced in 1993/94. USSOCOM would buy SR-25s, but only outfit a few units, and buying enough to fill a small "Loaning library," the USSOCOM Joint Operational Stocks.
10th Group wanted to keep their upgraded M21s and took to calling them "M25s" in the hope USASOC would adopt them as a SOCOM-peculiar weapon. SOCOM and USASOC were was still so new they didn't assume the full mantel for outfitting Army SOF, and Big Army wasn't willing to spend more money on a dead program. M25 died. Besides Tom Kapp and MSG Ammelung, Rick Boucher (retired SOTIC Instructor and a 10th Group counterpart to those gentlemen) is probably the last of the Mohicans when it comes to first-person 10th Group, M24, and SF Sniper School information.
So, for the Army, you have Rock Island and the USAMU. For US Army Special Operations Command you have Mother Army providing standard weapons to be modernized. If USASOC wants SOF-queer guns, modifications, ammo, or accessories they have to buy them with SOF dollars. There are only so many dollars, so weapons have to compete with hard armor, different uniforms and gear for fighting around the world, or better items than the Army is providing (Oakleys, quad-tube night vision, lightweight helmets, radios, armor plates and carriers, web gear, medical stuff, etc.).
For the SEALs, outfitting them for a whole year to five years was still less than the cost for a single prop for a major capitol ship, and they throw money at their frogmen with a "Yeah, whatever, here -- take your money" (for Navy budgeteers, until you start talking boats and submarines, small arms is a rounding error). Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane (after Vietnam as busy as the Maytag repairman) was more than willing to build guns for the SEALs, and worked that into becoming SOCOM's small arms buyer because it takes forever for the Rock Island and Picatinny Arsenal to produce anything.
The Marine Precision Weapons Battalion functions a lot like the USAMU. They can build whatever the Marines need, but they don't control the Marine Corps budget.
Crane serves the Fleet Navy's needs besides the SEALs (Camp Perry; Master-at-Arms police, security, and boarding party; and EOD), so their Special Warfare expertise bleeds over into small arms developments for the Big Navy ("Port Security Rifles," EOD M14s, and Mark 18 boarding party carbines).
Just because you say "Army," "Marine Corps," or "Navy" M14 programs, the real only common thread you have between all of them is old, paid-for ("Free") M14s that nobody really cares if you modify since they're no longer standard weapons in short supply.
