Over the last 15 or so years, the sniper rifle in both concept and rifle has changed.It was not until the Vietnam War where a semiautomatic sniper rifle based on the M14 rifle was introduced. However, it did not perform as well as the bolt action counterpart and required a full time gunsmith to keep it working. So the semiautomatic rifle was in limited use with the standard still being the bolt action sniper rifle.

However, in the late 1950s a rifle was designed by Eugene M. Stoner at ArmaLite, Inc. called the AR-10. ArmaLite was a division of Fairchild Engine and Aircraft located in Hollywood, California. This revolutionary rifle was truly “Tomorrow’s Rifle Today,” that was more true than anyone knew back then. Although it never had a chance to compete head-on with the M14 for the next U.S. infantry rifle due to Army politics, as well as the deep rooted thought of a rifle having to be made from steel and wood, the AR-10 did get noticed. During its limited testing it was known to be the most accurate auto loading rifle made as said by the testers from Ordnance Corps. Limited numbers of AR-10 rifles were manufactured in the Netherlands by Artillerie-Inrichtingen. They were manufactured for Dutch Army trials as well as sold in limited numbers to some other countries including, Sudan, Cuba, Italy, Guatemala and Portugal. As predicted, the M14 was adopted and the AR-10 was tossed in the Ordnance Corps scrap heap. The requirement came down to scale the AR-10 down to a .22 caliber and the AR-15 was born. The rights were sold for the AR-15 as well as the AR-10 to Colt’s Patent Firearms Manufacturing Company. Colt went on to produce the AR-15 but ignored the AR-10 design. That was left for other companies to capitalize on. To trace the AR-10 lineage to today’s most advanced sniper rifle we must skip ahead nearly 30 or so years ahead to 1991.

In November of 1991, a Mission Needs Statement was drafted for an Enhanced Sniper Support Team Weapon (SSTW). This was written by Lt. Col. David Lutz while serving as the Program Manager for Infantry Weapons at MARCORSYSCOM at Quantico, VA. This documentation was an effort to restart a cancelled Designated Marksman Weapon program (DMR) based on the M14 which could not be made to do all the things needed in a logistically supportable package acceptable to the Fleet Marine Forces. Its requirement document was weak because it totally lacked objectivity in doing a mission analysis or seeking other viable solutions. At the time, the current SSTW was the M16A2 rifle. This weapon supported the M40A1 sniper rifle in the two man scout sniper team. The M16A2 SSTW was used to engage close-up targets and provide rapid fire suppressive fire if needed. Some noted deficiencies were the M16A2’s poor interface with the soldier when having optics mounted, including night vision. The current issue M855 ball ammunition did not meet the accuracy specifications of a SSTW.

The enhanced SSTW would fill the role of a 0 to 600 meter intermediate range sniper rifle. It would have ammunition interchangeability with the M40A1 7.62x51mm sniper rifle and it would have the ability to mount a sound suppressor. Optics would be mounted in-line with the shooter’s eyes for a comfortable mount. This rifle will also have to overcome current problems with the unit, direct, general, and depot support problems (availability and maintainability) long associated with the hand-built and Marine Corps customized M40A1.

Lt. Col. Lutz recalls that he knew of (5 each) Dutch NATO AR-10s that were in a bunker at Picatinny Arsenal from when he was stationed there during 1980-83. So he had one of his successors, USMC Liaison Officer Maj. Dody Knootz, pick out one that shot the best and “temporary loan” it to them at Quantico. Several modifications were made with the most significant being the carrying handle cut off and a weaver rail attached to the upper receiver. The AR-10 had some of the improved M16A2 components added to it including the pistol grip and handguards. All this was to make it look like and use A2 service rifle parts and training. Additionally, they removed the AR-10’s faux muzzle, which incorporated a grenade launching spigot, exposed its skinny barrel and threaded muzzle. Lutz recalls sending the upper to Phil Seberger to have a suppressor made & fitted to it.

As recalled by Lutz, as a concept demonstrator it was a success. “When my general came out to fire it he brought with him his Australian Army Liaison Officer, a full colonel. My general was reluctant to fire the weapon as I presented it to him, and handed if off to the Australian Colonel. Offhand, the Colonel hit a steel gong at 100 yards with 20 of 20 shots (suppressed). When he handed the rifle back to my general, he said “General, this is the finest rifle I have ever fired.” When the General handed the rifle back to me, he said “Dave, you have a program.” I guess the rest is history…” Though the concept was sound, the Marines or big army were not ready for a semiautomatic sniper rifle, at least not yet. So the AR-10 lay dormant once again until the early 1990s. Even though the original DMR program failed, the STSW maintained life in the requirement and allowed Rifle Team Equipment builders at Quantico to produce more prototype M14 based variants as “interim measures.” This eventually took on a “life of its own,” and an M14 based program eventually found traction as the M39 Enhanced Marksman Rifle (EMR). However, the M39 is one of the weapons being replaced by the Marines recent purchase of M110s. The M110 was inherently able to meet the STSW requirement for mounting of Night Vision without lose of zero, sound suppressor integration, M16 ordnance maintenance and training commonality, supply system commonality and cross-service weapon commonality.

The name Eugene Stoner, although not as well known as Browning, is just as significant in the history of the gun. Stoner’s design is the longest service rifle in U.S. military history. During Stoner’s ArmaLite days his goal was to develop 7.62x51mm weapons. He was very fond of his direct gas system. After the M14 was selected, the future was only in the smaller caliber round so Stoner went on to develop other rifles to fire the 5.56mm cartridge including the AR-18 and the Stoner weapon series. He never quite forgot his AR-10. In the early 1990s, Stoner went to work with C. Reed Knight, Jr., the president of Knight’s Armament Company. The union spawned the rebirth of the AR-10. This would be the SR-25 (Stoner Rifle-25 (15+10)). This rifle would be an AR-10 but would take on the advancements of the M16A2 rifle and maintain 60% parts compatibility.

Released in the early 1990s, the SR-25 Match Rifle was equipped with a 24-inch Remington 5R match grade barrel – the same barrel blanks used on the M24 sniper rifle. The heavy barrel was free floating with a fiberglass handguard. The rifle was equipped with a flat top upper receiver with the Mil-Std 1913 rail and the receivers were made from aluminum extrusions. The rifle was equipped with a 2-stage match grade trigger. The bolt carrier group kept with the original AR-10 in that it was chrome plated and it also sported the captive firing pin retainer pin. These were not mass produced rifles. The uppers and lowers were mated together and had matching serial numbers to identify them. They were specifically designed around the 168gr OTM Match cartridge. Using this factory load, the ogive of the bullet set right on the rifling. This is something match shooters want to accomplish due to not wanting the bullet to “jump” into the rifling thus maintaining control of the projectile right from the moment of chambering. The original rifles used the standard “waffle” pattern 20-round magazine and later a steel magazine that looked more like an M16 20-round magazine in appearance. The SR-25 was sold initially through commercial channels that funded R&D. Every SR-25 was test fired at the factory and provided with a target. Knight guaranteed that this rifle would fire 1 MOA or under with factory ammunition. Gene Stoner would work with Knight up until his death in 1997.

The SR-25 quickly gained its reputation for precision accuracy and reliability and its versatility and benefits were appreciated right away by the special operation forces. SOCOM liked the idea of having a semiautomatic rifle that held 20 rounds of ammunition and rivaled the M24 and M40A1 bolt action rifles. They also liked that you could engage multiple targets in less than half the time they could with a manual bolt action rifle.

After more than 40 years, the AR-10 would have its day. In May of 2000, the U.S. Navy and SOCOM adopted the SR-25 as their new Mk 11 Mod 0. This would be follow by another contract in 2007 for 9.9 million dollars with the need from the Global War On Terrorism. The Mk11 had some departures from the original design. Designed to meet the SOCCOM requirement, the rifle was designed to fire the M118 and M118LR match grade 7.62x51mm NATO ammunition. The Remington barrel was replaced with an Obermeyer barrel and was shortened to 20 inches and equipped with a mount for a quick detachable sound suppressor also developed by Knight’s Armament Company. The 11.35-inch Rail Accessory System free floating handguard provided quad Mil-Std 1913 rails enabling attachment of any given number of accessories including night vision, lasers, tactical lights and bipods. The standard M16A2 stock and pistol grip are used for parts commonality. A flip up front sight was added to the gas block as well as KAC’s fully adjustable back-up iron sight was added. The rifle was equipped with 20-round magazines, a Leupold Vari-X mil dot scope with detachable rings and a Harris bipod. The Mk11 weighs 15.3 pounds unloaded and has an overall length of 45.4 inches. The Mk11 would see action with U.S. Special Operations troops all over the world. The weight of the complete Mk11 Mod 0 with the Leupold 3.5×10 scope & SIMRAD adapter, bipod adapter with LM type S Bipod is 13.7 pounds.

Enter the M110 SASS (Semi Automatic Sniper System)

The success of the Mk11 was undeniable and spread to the other branches of the military – the sniper units in particular. Seeing the benefits in September of 2005, Knight’s won the contract for the M110 SASS rifle. The M110 was to replace the M24 bolt action sniper rifles in the U.S. Army. The M110 trials had many submissions including ArmaLite, Remington and DPMS Panther Arms. It would not be until April of 2008 that the M110 would see its first combat action with U.S. Army snipers from Task Force Fury in Afghanistan. During the early M110 period, the Marines purchased 180 XM110 variants they designated Mk11 Mod 1 and then in 2010 ordered 803 M110 rifles.

The M110 has many similarities to the Mk11 Mod 0, however with many enhancements. . The stock on the M110 is adjustable for length with a dial on the rear allowing for the length to be increased or decreased as desired. The stock has one moveable sling swivel mount on the bottom rear plus two QD mounts on the front of the stock on each side. The receiver is manufactured from an aluminum forging and incorporates fully ambidextrous selector lever, bolt catch and magazine release. A button right above the magazine catch on the right side of the receiver is the ambi-bolt release. This allows the right handed shooter to release the bolt without his hand ever leaving the pistol grip. On the left side of the receiver under the bolt catch is a button to release the magazine for a left handed shooter. The trigger is Knight’s 2-stage match trigger, which is exceptional for a sniper rifle.

The upper receiver utilizes the new URX (Upper Receiver Extending) free floating rail with an integral folding front sight. This saves space and makes for a dependable back-up sight. The bottom of the handguard is removable for cleaning. Quad Mil-Std 1913 rails allow attachment of any accessory imaginable. The top rail is continuous for adding thermal, night vision and scopes. The handguard comes with three KAC rail protectors that allow the rifle to be shot in a normal shooting position. It is also equipped with a Harris Type S bipod. The 20 inch Obermeyer heavy barrel has 5R grooves with a 1 turn in 11 inch twist that optimizes the 168 and 175gr match bullets of the M118 and M118LR ammunition. The M110 barrel has an A2-style compensator attached to the end. The pinned-on gas block has a Mil-Std 1913 rail on top of it. The M110 is a self-regulated direct gas operated rifle. The upper receiver is manufactured from a forging and now has an integrated fired cartridge case deflector. Early rifles, due to the upper being made from an extrusion, had the fired cartridge case deflector attached to the rail as a separate piece.

The bolt carrier group follows in the tradition of the original AR-10 in that it is chrome plated making for ease of cleaning. The bolt carrier has a captive firing pin retainer pin that prevents it from being lost during cleaning. The bolt utilizes a 1-piece gas ring that is much more durable than the standard 3-ring set. The extractor and, in particular the spring, have been enhanced since the inception of the rifle.

The M110 is packed with four 20-round and four 10-round magazines and pouches. The M110 can also use the Magpul LMag as well.

The optic used is the Leupold 3.5×10 Illuminated Reticle SASS scope with .5 MOA elevation clicks and 30mm SASS mount manufactured by Knight’s. The shooter can adjust the brightness of the reticle to suit the lighting conditions he faces. The scope is provided with lens covers.

The SASS also is equipped with a Knight’s Armament Company sound suppressor. The suppressor interfaces with two vertical slots cut on both sides of the gas block. There is an alignment pin on the underside of the gas block that prevents improper installation. The suppressor has a decibel reduction of -28dB.

Additional accessories include an operator’s repair parts kit that includes scope ring cap screws, bolt rings, extractor assembly, spring, pin and buffer, cam pin and firing pin. Am optics cleaning kit is provided and a torque wrench for the scope mounts. A complete cleaning system is provided as well. This includes an Otis DMR/M14 7.62 cleaning kit, Dewey rod and bore guide, multiple brushes, rod ends, pipe cleaners and swabs. Cleaning patches a bore snake and CLP is provided as well. A sling is provided as well. All this is provided in a large Hardigg box that is hermetically sealed with a pressure release valve.

The ammunition used in this test and evaluation firing was the M110 Silver State Armory (SSA) M118LR ammunition. There were 200 rounds fired with the barrel being cleaned every 10 rounds. The range was 100 meters and the rifle shot consistently sub-MOA. The best group was 5 rounds in a 1/2 inch group. The average was 3/4 inches. This is accuracy of a match bolt action rifle. Silver State Armory ammunition is match grade and they manufacture their own brass cartridge cases and blend their own powders to the particular load. Additional rounds of the 168gr OTM ammunition were fired with the same results as the M118LR.

It this shooter’s opinion there is no bolt action rifle out there that can beat the M110 on accuracy, speed and firepower. A sniper with a M110 can easily engage the same number of targets in less than half the time a well trained sniper can with a bolt action rifle. The suppressor makes it that much better: less noise, less invitation to reveal your position and no affect on accuracy. As expected, no malfunctions of any sort were encountered with the M110.

The M110 has a weight of 12.82 pounds equipped with iron sights, bipod adapter and scope. With M118LR ammunition the muzzle velocity is 2,571 feet per second. The overall length of the M110 is 40.5 inches with the stock at its shortest setting. The sound suppressor only adds 1.62 pounds to the rifle. The maximum effective range is 875 yards and is subjective to the skill of the shooter.

It is most unfortunate Gene Stoner did not live to see his AR-10 finally get into the U.S. inventory and equip the most elite snipers this world has ever known. He was way ahead of everyone in the late 1950s; they just did not have the vision to see it. Gene Stoner’s legacy has been the defense of this country and allies for nearly 50 years and being one of the most brilliant weapons designers of all time. Thanks to Reed Knight, Stoners vision was realized, produced and reintroduced to the U.S. military. Combining the genius of Gene Stoner with Knight’s technical and manufacturing abilities of KAC, the AR-10 will be with us for another 50 years.

I sat quietly taking notes as the Purchase Description was being reviewed, making sure I would capture the important points. The development of a new rifle for the U.S. Military is not an everyday occurrence and I wanted to make sure I understood all of the requirements clearly. The Government speaker went quickly over the next point. He knew that this one rarely enlisted any questions: “The rifle shall be compatible with the multi-purpose Bayonet and attach securely at the bayonet mounting points.” No eyebrows were raised, no questions asked. And why should there be? It was a foregone conclusion that every service rifle would be configured to accept the standard bayonet.

What does this mean to a designer of weapons? For one thing, whatever had been envisioned or planned for the muzzle area of the weapon was now complicated by design constraints. Any muzzle device, no matter how effective in its current configuration, would now have a 0.86 diameter so that the bayonet ring could pass over and ride securely. The fit would have to be loose enough for a quick deployment yet tight enough so there was no rattle. At a prescribed position aft of the muzzle, the gas block or other appendage would need the special T-configuration for securing the bayonet. This would require chamfered corners for a smooth and rapid connection. The rifle would have to be rugged in the muzzle area as well. When the M14 was in development, testing showed that thrusts with the bayonet resulted in damage to the weapon prompting a redesign. There were but few words in the Purchase Description where the bayonet was mandated, yet in an instant, the freedom of design was greatly restricted.

Why in the world do we need a bayonet anyway, I asked myself? During the break I considered other devices that might be better suited to the end of the barrel. How about a stun gun or a Taser? Maybe a pyrotechnic wire cutter or a laser would be better; something, anything that was more “21st Century.” Surely there must exist some new technology that might carry us beyond these design constraints from which we seem to be forever encumbered? I needed to give this more thought and also made a mental note to check how we got to the point of a never-ending bayonet requirement.

Weeks later, while searching my files and other reference sources, I learned that the first bayonet use was recorded in the 17th century. Riflemen wielding a matchlock rifle were protected by a soldier carrying a pike, whose job it was to keep the enemy at bay long enough for the rifleman to reload. When they closed in on the enemy, the rifleman jammed a special “plug bayonet” in the end of the barrel so he could join the pikesmen in combat when there simply wasn’t time to reload.

In the years that followed, bayonet designs were never very innovative but there was one that is remembered for out of the box thinking. Early rifles needed a ramrod and later ones a cleaning rod, so one designer sold the U.S. on a ramrod bayonet combination design. In 1905 this bayonet received some high level attention when president Theodore Roosevelt wrote a letter to the Secretary of War telling him, “I must say that I think that ramrod bayonet is about as poor an invention as I ever saw. As you observed, it broke short off as soon as hit with even moderate violence. It would have no moral effect and mighty little physical effect.” He questioned the need for a bayonet and went on to ask that further studies be undertaken by officers seeing combat in the Philippines and from military attachés who were sent as observers to the Russo-Japanese war. Two American Colonels from the office of the Surgeon General were assigned to accompany the Russian Army in combat in order to study the wounds caused by weapons of modern warfare. Observations on the use of the bayonet would be part of their mission.

The Russian and Japanese armies faced off on three different fronts in battle lines that extended 10 miles, 60 miles, and 80 miles. Nocturnal engagements were frequent and much use of the bayonet was made on both sides, yet the actual number of casualties attributed to the bayonet was a mere 0.3%. In their report, the Colonels concluded: “The experience of the Boer War and that of the present Russo-Japanese war has shown that the bayonet is not yet an obsolete weapon and that we still must reckon with it.”

Reckon with it we did, from the First and Second World Wars and the Korean War right up until the 1950s when the M14 rifle was being developed to replace the M1 rifle, Browning Automatic Rifle, M2 Carbine and M3 Grease Gun. The bayonet used with the M1 rifle did not fit the M14, which got the Army thinking about the requirement for a bayonet. Mr. Amos Bonkemeyer, who was then head of the Light Weapons Section of the Army’s Infantry and Aircraft weapons section, stated the Army “… is considering not using a bayonet with the M14.” This came as a result of a recommendation from Fort Monroe where they reported, “The bayonet is rarely used in combat.” These observations led to seriously consider arming the soldier and Marine with a K-bar knife with no means of attachment to the rifle. This concept met resistance from the troops and eventually the bayonet was accommodated on the M14. The front end of the weapon was redesigned and the stock reinforced to a point where the M14 was tested and determined to be as good as the M1 for bayonet fighting. The M16 that followed met the same requirement.

Resigned to be forever burdened with a bayonet, the Army funded a project to make the bayonet more useful. The soldier needed a saw, a wire cutter, or an all purpose knife far more frequently than those combat situations that required him to affix a bayonet to the end of his rifle. In 1973 a project was funded to develop a multi-purpose Knife-Cutter Bayonet that would perform multiple tasks and also be effective as a fighting tool. A contract was awarded, designs were conceived, and a number of prototypes were built for field trials. Just as the multi-purpose M14 rifle that preceded it, the Knife-Cutter Bayonet proved once again that a product that makes design compromises in order to do multiple jobs ends up doing none of them very well. Their overweight designs were not able to cut double strand barbed wire and were too cumbersome for most practical uses. At the time these studies were undertaken, men had already been sent to the moon, yet these developers were overwhelmed by the challenge to develop a multi-functional bayonet, their final report stating: “Development was terminated when it was concluded that it was beyond the state of the art to develop a single item encompassing all the features stated as essential.”

Only one year after the first “new rifle for the military” meeting, I found myself in a carbon copy of the first meeting. It was another new requirement, this time for a carbine that would also require the accommodation of a bayonet at the muzzle. When they reached the point in the purchase description that would cover the bayonet I thought once again about Teddy Roosevelt, the Russo-Japanese War, Stun guns, Tasers, and Lasers. I turned to a combat veteran next to me and whispered, “Why are we doing this again? Do you guys really need a bayonet?” The answer was short and profound. “George, when the soldier’s weapon no longer works for whatever reason, the bayonet is his last remaining means of defense.” Gee, I never thought about it like that. I don’t feel so bad though. Teddy Roosevelt didn’t get it the first time either.

Background Information Muzzle flash occurs when partial combustion products from the propellant emerge from the muzzle of a firearm and ignite in the atmosphere. The combustible products consist of hydrogen and carbon monoxide from the deflagration of the fuel-rich nitrocellulose propellant along with partially consumed propellant particles. These gases and particles are expelled from the muzzle at high temperatures and pressure. Like any fuel, they must reach a satisfactory air-to-fuel ratio before they can be ignited. Flash suppressors interfere with this mixing process. Some additional factors dictating the presence or absence of muzzle flash and its character include barrel length, propellant type and chemical composition, the effectiveness of any flash retardants in the propellant, flame temperature, muzzle pressure, gas volume generated by the propellant, exhaust gas products and by-products and adequate mixing of these products with air. This mixing usually takes some time and distance. Consequently, photographs of muzzle flash from most small arms often show a non-luminous space between the fireball and the muzzle. Any small amount of flame present in or at the muzzle is likely due to the primer.

The size, character and color of muzzle flash can vary greatly ranging from virtually no visible light in front of the muzzle to a very large fireball. Color can vary from a dull to bright red, yellow-orange to yellow to nearly white with a slight lavender hue. The presence of muzzle flash is, of course, a serious problem in firearms intended for military and law enforcement.

Over the last 50 years, manufacturers of military firearms such as the M14, AR-15 and other similar rifles have developed muzzle attachments that attempt to reduce or even obviate muzzle flash. Flash suppressants in the propellant are also an important constituent of nearly all military and law enforcement ammunition. Nearly 20 chemical additives have been listed in the literature as flash suppressants. The most common are potassium sulfate, potassium nitrate and potassium chloride in amounts up to about 2% but the presence of a flash suppressant is seldom if ever noted on canister propellants or, for that matter, on boxes of commercial ammunition.

Test-Documentation Procedures

The U.S. military under the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command has a Test Operations Procedure (TOP) for evaluating and measuring muzzle flash for a variety of small arms and larger weapons systems. TOP 3-2-045 (December 1983) contains a rather archaic procedure calling for the open shutter cumulative recording of twenty (20) shots with a 4×5 film camera positioned 4 to 5 feet out from the muzzle of the test firearm. A particular film speed and f-stop are also described. The testing is, of course, to be carried out in darkness. Strangely, no mention is made of the ammunition to be used or its composition or propensity to produce a muzzle flash with or without a flash suppressor attached to the firearm. This procedure not only seems awkward in the extreme but also self-defeating if one wants a realistic view of muzzle flash and some idea of its shot-to-shot consistency and reproducibility.

Contemporary digital cameras and a few chosen selections for f-stop and ISO settings comparable to those described here, along with a standoff distance on the order of 3 to 4 feet, provide the reader given to scientific testing a means for documenting and comparing muzzle flash.

While not absolutely necessary, a mechanical gun rest of some sort makes a very desirable addition to any set up since it keeps the rifle at the same standoff distance from the camera and area of interest immediately in front of the muzzle centered in the camera’s view. An outdoor location free of ambient light except for a full moon was chosen for the majority of this work. Alternatively, a small camp light placed on the ground and behind the camera will provide sufficient working light and will not interfere with the photographic process.

The authors used a Nikon D100 digital camera for the tests illustrated in this article but most any camera with a bulb setting or a built-in timer that will hold the shutter open for at least 4 to 5 seconds will accomplish the same end. If the bulb setting is to be used, a cable release will also be necessary and the cameraman will have to count off 4 or 5 seconds of exposure. The camera was positioned on a sturdy tripod so that it viewed the test rifle in profile from a distance of 4 feet with the test gun at the right edge of the frame. The remainder of the frame was reserved for any muzzle flash produced by the test shot.

The exposure time was set at 4 seconds, with Auto White Balance, an ISO setting of 400 and an aperture of f/5.6. With a little practice, this time interval allows for a strobe to be flashed followed by the discharge of the test rifle. A hand-held strobe was held near the camera and at such a position so as to properly ‘burn-in’ the pre-discharge image of the rifle. The rifle was then fired and any muzzle flash is added to the previous image. The immediate playback on the rear screen of the digital camera also allowed for the confirmation of a suitable image. A minimum of three shots with each rifle/flash suppressor/ammunition combination was carried out as a test and documentation of reproducibility.

It is important to realize that in this method all visible light is captured and integrated into the final image. The duration of a muzzle flash is on the order of 0.01 to 0.03 seconds and even less in some cases whereas the average duration of an involuntary eye blink is about 0.1 to 0.4 seconds. This means that it is possible that an eye witness looking directly towards a nighttime gunshot will not see the muzzle flash even though other witnesses see it and subsequent testing shows that the gun-ammunition combination consistently produces a large, bright muzzle flash.

Firearms

The first series of tests employed the following firearms:

• Olympic Arms MFR – 20-in. barrel
• Bushmaster XM15E2S – 14.5-in. barrel
• LAR15 Rock River – 7-in. barrel

All three of these firearms possessed a 1 in 9-inch twist

Ammunition

Two sources of .223Rem./5.56mm ammunition loaded with 55-gr FMJ-BT bullets were used in these tests. These consisted of Norinco .223Rem ammunition (Chinese manufacture – no lot number – headstamps “C J 8”) and Federal brand XM193 ammunition bearing the Lake City headstamp “LC 07”.

Flash Suppressors

The flash suppressors tested were as follows:

• A1
• A2
• Phantom A1
• Phantom A2
• Vortex
• Early Vortex

Test Considerations and Results

The essence of the Scientific Method in any testing protocol is to only change one variable at a time. The combined use of six flash suppressors and three barrel lengths allows a number of comparisons to be made. For example, one can isolate barrel length and ammunition (hold barrel length and ammunition constant) and study the effect of the six flash suppressors as well as the total absence of a flash suppressor. Alternatively, the effect of barrel length can be isolated by holding ammunition and flash suppressor constant. Finally, any difference due to the ammunition used in this study can be assessed by inter-comparing the appearance of any muzzle flash where the ammunition is the only variable.

Observations and Interim Summary – Phase 1

• 1. With only a few exceptions, muzzle flash, when present, was consistent and reproducible in appearance and size for each ammunition-barrel length-suppressor combination.
• 2. The muzzle flashes with both sources of ammunition were consistently yellow-orange in color. They invariably possessed a non-luminescent space between the muzzle and the actual fireball.
• 3. The Federal ammunition appears to contain a more effective flash suppressant than the Norinco ammunition (based on the results of the 20-inch rifle without a flash suppressor).
• 4. As expected, barrel length played an important role in the presence or absence of muzzle flash. The longer the barrel the less the muzzle flash, keeping the other variables of ammunition and flash suppressor constant.
• 5. Of the six flash suppressors employed in this study, the Vortex units far exceeded all other makes and models in their ability to suppress muzzle flash.
• 6. This technique or some simple modification of it will allow the reader to record and study muzzle flash. For those involved in ammunition selection, the inclusion of a scale at the gun position will allow quantitative measures of muzzle flash and criteria to be established for large quantity ammunition purchases. It also provides a means to study and compare the effectiveness of other existing or future flash suppressors.

Results and Observations According to Barrel Length

• 7. The Federal ammunition only produced a significant muzzle flash in 1 out of 3 shots with the 20-inch Olympic rifle without a flash suppressor. All of the flash suppressors were effective with this rifle and ammunition combination.
• 8. The Norinco ammunition produced a large muzzle flash with all 3 shots with the 20-inch Olympic rifle when this rifle lacked a flash suppressor. All of the flash suppressors were effective with this rifle and ammunition combination.
• 9. The Federal ammunition produced a large muzzle flash for all 3 shots with the 14.5-in. Bushmaster rifle without a flash suppressor. All of the flash suppressors were effective with this rifle and ammunition combination with the exception of the A2 suppressor that failed to totally suppress the muzzle flash for one of the three shots.
• 10. The Norinco ammunition produced a large muzzle flash with all 3 shots with this rifle when it lacked a flash suppressor. All of the flash suppressors were effective with this rifle and ammunition combination.
• 11. The Federal ammunition produced a large muzzle flash for all 3 shots with the 7-in. LAR15 rifle without a flash suppressor. The A1, A2 and Phantom A1 flash suppressors were only slightly effective with this rifle and ammunition combination. The Phantom A2 was partially successful in that it suppressed the flash in 2 out of 3 shots. Both Vortex suppressors were completely effective in suppressing muzzle flash with this rifle-ammunition combination.
• 12. The Norinco ammunition produced a large muzzle flash with all 3 shots with this rifle when it lacked a flash suppressor. The A1 and Phantom A1 were only partially successful in reducing muzzle flash. The A2 flash suppressor prevented 2 out of 3 flashes and the Phantom A2 only prevented 1 out of 3 flashes. Both Vortex flash suppressors were completely effective with this rifle and ammunition combination.

Phase 2 Tests

The ‘C J 93’ Norinco ammunition was used in combination with a Stag Arms 18-inch AR-15 to evaluate the flash suppressing capabilities of the 3-prong flash suppressor that came as original equipment on very early M16s. These results were compared to the current A1 “birdcage” flash suppressor and two types of Vortex suppressors. These tests were carried out in Forensic Science Service’s range using a black drop cloth behind the muzzle area of the rifle. A CED chronograph with infrared detectors was used to record the velocity values of each shot measured 10 feet downrange. The camera-to-muzzle distance for these tests was 3.5 feet and the aperture changed to f/6.3 due to the shorter standoff distance.

The two types of Vortex flash suppressors totally negated any muzzle flash whereas the 3-prong and A1 suppressors were reasonably effective, allowing only a small amount of flash to occur.

Summary

This work provides a method and some photographic parameters that will allow the reader to carry out and document muzzle flash tests. Some representative examples of muzzle flash, muzzle flash suppressors and muzzle flash suppression by these devices have been provided in the numerous figures contained in this article.

Special thanks are extended to David Fisher of Fisher Enterprises, Tempe, AZ for his assistance and the use of his Bushmaster XM15E2S.

Ever since the change over from the 7.62x51mm to the current 5.56x45mm there has been controversy between two fundamental schools of thought on what a military cartridge should be. The United States military can be summed up in one word: tradition. In the 1960s, that tradition clouded the vision that a new dawn of small arms development in both concept, mechanics and ammunition had come. Still entrenched in the “one shot, one kill” mentality, our soldiers were sent into combat in Vietnam with the M14 which many considered to be an inferior weapon to the AK47 assault rifle that the enemy used. The enemy were able to lay controlled large volume of automatic fire on positions which, in a meeting engagement, will win you a fight. Our soldiers were equipped with a heavy recoil rifle that was impossible to control on fully-automatic. The accuracy was of no use because the enemy could not be seen.

With much trepidation, the military adopted the AR-15 rifle destined to become the M16/M16A1. A new age of small caliber high velocity cartridges gave way to providing an individual soldier with firepower he had never had before. The 5.56x45mm cartridge utilizing a .224 diameter 55-grain full metal jacketed bullet proved to be a great asset to the American fighting man with the ability to have a lightweight rifle that was completely controllable on fully-automatic fire and the soldier could carry more than twice the combat load with an M16 than he could with the heavy M14 rifle.

The Third Generation M16A2 and M855 Ball

With the product improvements of the M16A2 the weapon system was enhanced. Due to the heavier 62-grain bullet, 1 turn in 7 inch rifling twist and new fully adjustable rear sight, both penetration and long range accuracy were enhanced. However, the culprit of the future problems with ammunition terminal performance would come from the ammunition, the M855 Ball.

The M855 Ball is a three piece bullet consisting of a copper jacket, lead plug and a steel penetrator core in the tip. This bullet was designed for a machine gun, not a rifle. With the onset of the Global War on Terrorism, terminal deficiencies were found using M855 Ball, particularly in M4 carbines, when striking thin, malnourished, Taliban and Iraqi soldiers. There was a serious inconsistency in at what point the bullet would yaw and splinter. Some lots of ammunition would penetrate only slightly within inches and yaw and splinter. Others would go straight through and never yaw nor splinter. This caused serous knockdown problems particularly with the decreased velocity of 14.5 inch carbine barrel.

A solution put forth by the United States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) was the creation of a new and improved 5.56x45mm cartridge that would increase long range accuracy and terminal performance with consistency. Accuracy is seriously degraded in the M16A2/A4/M4 due to the inherent characteristics of the M855 bullet. The penetrator core degrades accuracy and if not manufactured properly, the center of gravity will be off causing the bullet to become a “flyer.” Additionally, in the area of terminal performance, there was no consistency from lot to lot on what exactly it would do upon hitting a human target.

The answer was the Mk 262 MOD 1 cartridge that SOCOM adopted. This is a Sierra 77-grain open tip match bullet loaded by Black Hills. This is undoubtedly the most effective 5.56x45mm military cartridge in the world manufactured to match grade specifications with combat reliability. The long range accuracy was drastically increased and its terminal performance enhanced. This new projectile works well regardless of the type of target and performs considerably better on human targets in all known distances and conditions. This round is used almost exclusively by SOCOM operators in their M4A1 carbines and Mk12 rifles. This solution satisfied most of the SOCOM operators: except for one.

The 6.8x43mm REM SPC

The 5th Special Forces, particularly MSG Steve Holland, felt that there was still room for improvement. The concept was not original. The U.S. military experimented with the possibility of the 6mm caliber projectile being the ideal compromise of accuracy, range and terminal performance. In the late 1970s the concept was abandoned in favor of the 5.56x45mm battle rifle.

With the assistance of the U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit, Holland came up with a concept for a 6mm cartridge that could be fired in the M4 platform. The starting point was the .30 Remington cartridge which is merely a rimless .30-30 Win. round. It was trimmed and resized to accept a 6.8mm projectile. This concept, along with the hand-loaded experimental ammunition and CAD drawings went to Remington Arms. Remington wanted to aid in the Global War on Terrorism so they took on the task of developing the ammunition.

The 6.8mm REM SPC cartridge has been mostly a myth for the last few years due to the fact it has been developed quietly and kept proprietary. No ammunition has been made as of this writing in large quantities due to the fact the ammunition is being perfected before it will be shipped. Remington has reported three small runs of ammunition including ball and match grade ammunition. Hornady has also produced some loads in this new caliber.

The Firearms

Prototype rifles were manufactured by Precision Reflex, Inc. (PRI). Dave Dunlap assembled upper receivers with free floating handguards or A.R.M.S., Inc. SIR systems and the OPSINC silencer and muzzle break. Dunlap also was charged with designing the magazine which is different from the standard 5.56x45mm magazine. Currently, PRI has been the only producer of 6.8x43mm Rem SPC magazines. PRI also produces complete upper receivers chambered in the 6.8x43mm Rem SPC cartridge.

The Barrett M648

At the 2004 SHOT Show, Ronnie Barrett unveiled a new product line: his M648. This company, dedicated to .50 BMG caliber specialized weapons, introduced the first production 6.8x43mm Rem SPC firearm and has taken the lead on this project. While the cartridge is still technically under development (to be more correct would be to say “tweaked”), Barrett has teamed up with Peter Forras to work with Remington to optimize the weapon and cartridge. Forras has spent much time down at Remington working with them to perfect the 6.8x43mm cartridge.

The rifle has been based on the standard M16-platform. Barrett offers the rifle in both commercial and law enforcement/military configurations. The “bells and whistles” are the same for both versions, the only real difference is the use of selective fire, flash suppressors, bayonet lugs and telescopic stock on the law enforcement/military models.

The weapon as offered uses a mid-length gas system developed by Mark Westrom of ArmaLite, Inc. This mid length gas system changes the location of the gas port by placing it further forward than the carbine and slightly behind the rifle. This gives two major advantages: reliability and durability. By putting more distance between the bolt carrier and gas port, lower port pressures are created resulting in the bolt assembly’s velocity being slower. This increases reliability in extraction as well as extending the life of the bolt and some of the trigger components.

The barrel is manufactured by Fred Fedderson. This 1 turn in 10 inch twist barrel is chrome plated and is currently available in 16 inch length only. Barrett has plans on offering 12 and 20 inch barrels in the near future. The commercial version has a muzzle check similar to the one used by ArmaLite, Inc. The law enforcement/military versions use the standard M16-style muzzle break/compensator

The M648 gas block utilizes a folding front sight assembly. This assembly was designed by Barrett. On the law enforcement/military version, there is a threaded collet on the edge of the gas bock to install the silencer.

The Mid-Length SIR System

The A.R.M.S. Inc. SIR (Selective Integrated Rail) system developed by Richard Swan is the solution for many problems associated with military use of this type of weapon system. The SIR system is a free-floating handguard assembly that attaches to the carrying handle by a sleeve that goes on top of the rail (thus protecting it) as well as directly to the barrel nut. This give an extended top rail that runs the entire length of the upper receiver to the front sight assembly. There are four Mil-Std 1913 rails that enable optics, laser, flashlights and whatever other accessories that may be needed for the rifle with no effect on the barrel and its performance.

Free floating a military weapon has many benefits. First would be accuracy. With nothing impeding on the harmonics of the barrel, better uniform accuracy is achieved. Additionally, the barrel remains cooler as there is significantly better air circulation enabling the weapon to fire longer on full automatic fire. Another benefit, particularly with a hot barrel, pulling down on a vertical fore grip will not cause the barrel to bend or droop. The SIR system may also have a M203 grenade launcher attached to it. All the current models of the M648 feature the A.R.M.S. Inc. SIR system as well as the ARMS #40 L emergency flip-up backup sight.

The Bolt

The bolt carrier is standard M16/AR-15. The difference lies in the bolt itself. The bolt was designed by Chris Barrett and is manufactured by Lewis Machine & Tool (LMT). The bolt uses the trademark dual extractor spring “lobster tail” extractor manufactured by LMT as it is more durable and reliable. The bolt has other similarities to the LMT Enhanced bolt but Barrett made some changes in materials and specifications specifically for the M648. The bolt has a nickel plating on it.

Configurations

The M648 comes as a full weapon with fixed rifle stock as well as selective fire carbine lower receiver with the telescopic buttstock. The system is also sold as an upgrade or a conversion kit which will include the entire upper receiver assembly and magazine. The conversions can be obtained with either selective fire bolt carriers or semiautomatic only. It should be noted that when putting a conversion on a standard selective fire carbine lower receiver, the “H” buffer should be used. This is the buffer with two steel weights and one tungsten. If the standard three steel weight buffer is used the carbine may experience bolt carrier bounce resulting in light strikes on full automatic. This is not an issue with the full length rifle selective fire lower receiver. Semiautomatic guns can use either due to the bolt group will have sufficient time to lock before the next shot is fired. There has been some discussion about Barrett eventually coming out with a piston driven mechanism for this weapon system.

Shooting Impressions

The rifle received for testing was a law enforcement/military upper receiver with a standard semiautomatic only lower receiver. The author’s own Colt M4 full automatic carbine lower was used for full automatic testing. The semi-automatic only lower receiver was equipped with an LMT two-stage match grade trigger. The optics used were the M68 Aim Point Comp II, EOTech holographic sight as well as the standard backup sights. Approximately 700 rounds were fired in total in both semiautomatic for accuracy as well as fully automatic for functionality. The magazine used was a PRI made 28-round steel magazine. The ammunition was manufactured by Remington.

Fully-automatic tests were conducted in close quarter battle conditions. Targets ranged from 5 to 25 meters. The cyclic rate was about the same as the standard M4 carbine and recoil was really not that much more. There was no problem controlling the weapon. The EOTech sight made shooting easier allowing both eyes to remain open increasing speed and accuracy. By adjusting the brightness of the sight, it was useful for both close tactical work as well as short range sniping.

Conclusions

The 6.8mm Rem SPC is without a doubt an improvement over the existing 5.56x45mm for military use. But the question is, how much better? The cartridge unfortunately has a very steep uphill battle ahead of it once the military community gets a hold of it. The weapon itself is not an issue. The M16-based design is well proven. But in order for SOCOM in particular to adopt such a cartridge for use will be a gigantic undertaking. First and foremost it has to be more than better, it will have to be drastically better and offer a large advantage. Second, and perhaps the most critical, will be logistics. The cartridge will be at best used by SOCOM operators and them alone. From a logistical standpoint, adding a new cartridge into inventory, in particular one nobody else in the service uses, can cause serious problems. Once SOCOM operators are deployed they become part of the unit they are assigned and along with that goes their supply. Having non-compatible ammunition can put the operators at risk given they do not have re-supply specific to them.

The Barrett M648 and 6.8x43mm Rem SPC ammunition performed flawlessly and accurately. Barrett has not been too quick to go into production due to the fact they have waited until the development of the rifle and ammunition was completed insuring their customers get a final production weapon and not a semi-prototype. As of this writing, after more than three years of advertising and manufacturing of barrels to fire this new cartridge, the ammunition has yet to be completed and put into full production. This weapon and cartridge will undoubtedly find a following in law enforcement and commercial shooters and competitors. As far as the military use of this weapons system, only time will tell.

“The service grade M14 is not something less than something else. It is a beauty, a work of art in and of its own. It’s a very elegant system; the way it works, all of the parts, the geometry. The way they all work together is magnificent.” W. Clint McKee, Fulton Armory

Out of some 1.3 million M14 rifles that the Department of Defense made and acquired before pulling the production plug in 1964 and switching GIs over to the M16, we’re told the NFA registry lists only about one hundred in civilian hands. Prices in excess of fifteen thousand dollars confront those who covet a selective fire original.

But savvy shooters know about the light and fast firing M14’s thoroughly documented uncontrollability in full auto. Uncle Sam sure did and the vast majority of those issued by the Army and Marine Corps were fitted with a distinctive “button” lock on the selector, mandating deliberate semiautomatic fire. Only a small percentage of soldiers got rock ‘n roll Fourteens and most of these went to the two designated “automatic riflemen” in each infantry squad. Even with lots of special training and rifles equipped with sturdy bipods, chunky pistol grip stocks and clamp-on muzzle stabilizers, most M14 automatic riflemen couldn’t come near the effectiveness of their BAR-toting predecessors.

With this in mind, most Fourteen fanciers would probably do best to choose the practical path and buy one in semiauto. A half dozen firms offer these at list prices ranging from around $700 for the Communist Chinese knockoffs to three times that for top quality American made rifles. SAR wanted to know what you get near the high end of the scale; so we called Clint McKee.

Fulton Armory

W. Clinton McKee is Fulton Armory’s owner and driving force, a self-taught master gun maker with more than 20 years experience building the big four of 20th Century US military rifles; the M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, M14, and M16. He’s an amiable and modest fellow with a laid back demeanor. But there is also, we found, an intensity and remarkable depth of knowledge in discussions involving most any aspect of small arms from the grand sweep of history to precisely machining helical cuts.

McKee said he was a long time fan of SAR and would be pleased to send us one of his favorites, the GI look-alike M14 Service Rifle, adding, “I truly love that rifle. It’s why I started this place. In the beginning it’s all I did, all the company did.” Only thing though, he cautioned, it would take several weeks as he personally builds every Fourteen and was very busy with rifles already promised to loyal customers. We admire that and agreed to go to the back of the line.

When our turn finally came around and the M14 arrived at our favorite local gun store, initial inspection showed that McKee had added a few of the recommended options to the basic model listed in his catalog at just under $1,800. With the new mil-spec Criterion (Krieger) barrel featuring hard chromed chamber and bore, new-made walnut stock and dummy selector, the sample rifle we got carried the impressive price tag of $2,055. This set up the obvious question…

Get What You Pay For?

We had found Fulton, McKee and his Fourteens through word of mouth from respected sources like colleague and internationally known gun expert Charlie Cutshaw, as well as a serious amount of comparison shopping. All factors considered, his rifles seemed likely to be good value for the price when weighing considerations like authenticity, durability, reliability, accuracy, and customer service. We also liked the idea that his solidly established 18 year old company was still small enough for buyers to deal directly with the owner and chief gunsmith.

Fulton’s enviable reputation is firmly grounded on several factors that set it apart from the competition. First, there is a mountain of original GI parts in the enormous warehouse and shop facility that enables McKee to continue to build what are arguably the most authentic M14s for private ownership this side of the NFA registry. While others are slapping in more and more aftermarket components of uneven quality, Fulton has the real stuff, most everything in brand new condition. The same holds true for M1 rifles and carbines, as well as AR-15/M16s. Want GI? Get Fulton.

Then, there is McKee himself; a seasoned veteran of nearly a quarter century in the military surplus firearms business. Call Fulton to order a Fourteen or other rifle and you’re likely to talk at length with McKee. He’ll gently ask about what you want and why, listening closely and mulling over the answers.

“Because we build every rifle one at a time, every one can be different. A customer will call and ask for a Peerless, our top of the line match rifle. When we talk to him about it we might find that he carried an M14 in the Marine Corps and wants one to look at on his wall and carry to the range once in awhile. Maybe the ideal for him is a combination of Service Rifle with some match parts. He pays less but he gets more.”

From Service grade to Peerless, all Fulton Fourteens are shaped by the hands of Clint McKee. The president of the company builds your rifle himself, putting many years of experience to work. He inspects and qualifies the receiver, hand laps the GI bolt for perfect fit and function, installs and headspaces the barrel, selects and assembles your Fourteen from first class parts, then test fires it. That’s real quality control and craftsmanship. Got a problem after taking delivery? Call the boss himself and talk it over. Money back guarantee.

A third major factor in Fulton’s fine reputation is the proprietary M14 receiver that McKee designed, driven by many years at a workbench building semiautomatic Fourteens on receivers made by other people. He says that some receivers were good enough and a few were pretty good, but none had both the consistent quality and mechanical characteristics that he knew were needed.

Determined to remedy this situation, he began a long and frustrating search for someone to make the relatively small runs of an M14 receiver that would meet his high standards of strength, form and function, at a price that would still be affordable for his customers. And, by the way, just using GI blueprints and leaving off the shaft for the selector assembly wasn’t going to cut it.

“This is where some companies have gone wrong,” McKee explained to SAR during our later visit to Fulton, “it’s not an M14 and you can’t make it exactly the same.”

As one specific example among many in the wealth of engineering insights McKee provided in a highly detailed explanation that followed, he pointed to the prominent right side ledge on Fulton’s receiver, twice as thick as that of the GI version. “This was the first thing we had to do in designing a good semiautomatic receiver,” he said. “It supports the operating rod so it won’t roll away. In turn, this keeps the bolt roller captured in the op rod cam slot so it doesn’t get destroyed.” The long search for the right receiver maker kept leading back to Armscorp, just a few miles up the road from Fulton’s Savage, Maryland, location. They were well known for precision manufacture of receivers for FALs and other rifles, one of which was an M14.

McKee says that years of badgering Armscorp owner Jack Friese finally paid off. He persuaded his old friend and former business partner (another whole story) to begin producing a significantly modified version exclusively for Fulton Armory. No small task in itself because, he says, “The M14 is second only among the world’s modern military rifles to the M1 Garand receiver in difficulty of manufacture.”

This arduous process took more than 18 months of trial and error, tweaking and tuning before McKee was satisfied. The Fulton Armory M14 receiver made its public debut at the National Matches in 2003 to critical acclaim and has gone on to competition honors and commercial success. Technical details deserve a whole feature of their own but essential elements include use of the same super tough 8620 ordnance steel used in original government receiver forgings. 90 percent of machining operations are carried out by CNC equipment and the rest in specially built fixtures. All this ensures that essential geometric precision in tricky things like locking lug helical cuts is properly executed. Heat treatment with carburization follows, surface hardening the receivers to 50-55 on the Rockwell C scale.

McKee says that he personally inspects every receiver, first with a practiced eye, then with precision measuring tools. Those that pass are deep cleaned, bead blasted, and hot dipped in IRCOLUBE, a specially formulated mil-spec manganese phosphate solution. In addition to a beautiful deep semi-gloss black finish for excellent corrosion resistance, this high-tech update on traditional “Parkerizing” is said to have molecular level lubricating properties. This minimizes wear and assists functioning under extreme operational and environmental conditions.

The Sample for SAR

The M14 Service Rifle Fulton sent us certainly looked impressive from muzzle to butt with machined steel in deep black finish and beautiful hardwood furniture. Just like the first ones fresh off government production lines in 1960, it had that elegant barrel and distinctive flash suppressor with bayonet lug, genuine walnut first model contoured stock, switchable fire selector, 20-round box magazine, OD green web sling, and hinged buttplate.

Its weight, balance and configuration provided silent testimony to the genius of John Garand and the engineers who followed in his footsteps at the original Springfield Armory (the historic one in Massachusetts). After all, it has been said often and with great authority that the M14 is essentially a “product improved” upgrade of Garand’s incomparable M1.

But one small issue – its receiver had a slight but noticeable surface ripple in a dime sized area on the left side above the bolt stop. Closer inspection showed this to be only a mild exterior blemish but it was enough to catch the eye of the gun shop staffers who have seen a fair number of the competitors’ Fourteens.

A photo of the blemish was emailed to Fulton and this sparked a three way conversation between me, McKee and his long time associate Walt Kuleck. We soon got plenty of evidence that many of Uncle Sam’s originals would win no beauty contests and most of the prettiest commercial receivers were dimensionally flawed. However, McKee knew that really wasn’t the point. “In the inspection process the receiver’s geometry, integrity and mechanical function are the most important things to us. I didn’t notice those casting marks then or later when I built that rifle. This is very rare and usually the bead blasting and phosphating takes care of it. But, we know that appearance can also be a factor and any customer who asks for a replacement will get it.”

This Is My Rifle

Not long afterward we were out pumping 7.62mm NATO slugs at the local gun club range, a well designed facility with a distinctly military appearance. Our shooter for the session came from the Virginia Army National Guard’s Service Rifle Team and – although they use rack grade M16A2 assault rifles – did a pretty good job as a first time shooter with the bigger battle rifle. Despite nippy temperatures in the high 50’s, a vicious crosswind and 30 year old surplus ball ammo, he managed to consistently print respectable groups at 100 meters from the bench with sandbag rest; and never failed to bong the gong at 200 meters from the other shooting positions.

Not content with the tired old “guy shoots from bench” photo routine, we kicked it up a notch by uniforming our rifleman as a Marine recruit undergoing BRM (Basic Rifle Marksmanship) at Parris Island circa 1962. Leathernecks from way before then till now will recognize the iconic shooting jacket and the use of approved shooting positions from manuals of the period. All this, we figured, put the weapon in its natural element with a US military service that genuinely and consistently reveres the art and science of riflery.

Heavy rain cut short our plans for hours of M14 marksmanship fun but, in the time we had, McKee’s rifle dutifully digested about 200 rounds of three different kinds of US and foreign surplus ball ammo. There was no hint of a hiccup in slow and fast fire starting at the comfortable bench with sandbags then moving out onto the gritty berm. Although everything soon started getting not only cold but wet, the rifle didn’t seem to mind and we left rather pleased with the whole experience.

Airborne All The Way

Phase 2 of the operation was to take the rifle out into the field with a reenactor portraying a member of the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division in 1964. This was not too long before the elite “All Americans” became the first major unit ordered to switch to M16s. Since the test rifle had Fulton’s excellent reproduction/non-functioning selector switch, the paratrooper would be a designated automatic rifleman.

This allowed us to put the rifle through a bit of the same kind of use it would get in the normal course of combat training. We used 1960’s period Army field and technical manuals as a guide, clamping on the bipod and settling in behind it in prone, folding the bipod and trying assault positions, reaching into the mag pouch to do a fast reload and field stripping it for cleaning.

Muzzle mounted accessories are high on the list for many GI rifle enthusiasts and the Fulton Fourteen’s original GI style flash suppressor with all-important bayonet lug proved irresistible. There was no problem clamping on anything in the inventory; bayonet, muzzle stabilizer, blank adaptor, and grenade launcher. Don’t take this for granted with some competitor Fourteens that have cheap repops with the wrong interior and exterior dimensions, or metallurgical flaws that have been known to cause breakage and blow offs.

Now that the smoke has cleared from live fire range tests, backyard blank blasting, fun time grenade launching, and a personal visit to the Fulton shop, the cost to benefit ratio of the Fulton M14 Service Rifle can be objectively computed. SAR agrees with GUN TESTS and plenty of others: Buy it. Shoot it often. Keep it for life. Pass it on to your grandkids.

Enhanced Battle Rifle

The M14 story comes up to date with a quick mention of two Fourteens that soldier on today in the Global War on Terror. The Marines have a bunch of Designated Marksman Rifles and the Army is fielding Enhanced Battle Rifles, both types custom built from original GI surplus selective fire rifles from Anniston Army Depot using commercial stocks and other components. By amazing coincidence, Fulton EBR kits (originally developed by Sage International and US Special Operations Command for Navy SEALs as the Mark 14) are now being snapped up on official US military purchase orders. One of these rifles can be seen on the cover of this issue of Small Arms Review.

By the Book

McKee and Walt Kuleck, collaborators on THE M1 GARAND COMPLETE ASSEMBLY GUIDE and another for AR-15 rifles, both from Scott Duff Publications, are nearing completion of one on the M14. It will explain and show in exacting detail all the ins and outs of various Fourteens from original government models thru all the aftermarket clones. It’s a book that all prospective buyers or current owners of any M14 need to have.

Fulton Armory is conveniently located off Interstate 95 between Washington, DC and Baltimore at 8725 Bollman Place #1, Savage, MD 20763. Telephone (301) 490-9485. Go on-line to www.fulton-armory.com for a comprehensive product catalog featuring M14s, Garands, M1 Carbines and AR-15s, plus parts, accessories, service, books, tools, and gauges. Don’t miss the links to FAQs, in-depth information, discussion boards, and much more. Maybe by the time this feature appears in print there will also be information on the AR-10 type rifle McKee is planning to offer.

Special Thanks from SAR to:

We would like to give special thanks to DeGoff’s Guns, Mechanicsville, VA, for handling the rifle transfer, Sergeant Brandon Pritchard for portraying a Marine “boot” rifleman, Hanover Rifle and Pistol Club for the test range, Chesterfield Armament, Chesterfield, VA, for the GI M14 in comparison photos, “Little Joe” Cusumano for the big box full of original GI accessories, Richard Newman, Jr. for the grenade launcher and Nick Bruce for portraying the 82nd Airborne automatic rifleman and grenadier.

(Editor’s Note: Robert Bruce’s extensive profile of Marine Scout Snipers (SAR May 2005, Vol. 8 No. 8) sparked requests for a similar look at precision shooters of the Army and other services. Unlike the Corps, which is publicly proud of its snipers, the Army is a bit squeamish about the subject. However, the Army’s apparent PC prejudice on the subject was pretty much limited to the Pentagon. The closer SAR’s inquiries got to the front lines the more enthusiastic the responses were, enabling a more complete picture of the essential and escalating contributions of snipers, sharpshooters and other precision marksmen in Central Command’s area of operations. What follows is mostly about the Army’s unsung heroes plus an update on what some Marines have been up to. – Robert G. Segel)

“Snipers are the most sophisticated and reliable source of human intelligence in my AO (area of operations) that I have at my disposal as an infantry commander. Their ability to depict complex situations accurately and to articulate them sensibly in a timely manner makes it a whole lot easier for me to finish off the bad guys and enable the good guys. Having competent sniper teams is an incredible overall combat force multiplier. Especially when you throw in a thousand meter surgical shot. That creates nightmares for our current enemy threat.” US Army Captain Keith J. Haviland, Commander, A Co. (Killer Company) 1st Bn., 184th Inf. Regt., 4th BCT, 3rd ID. May 2005, Iraq

Nightmares, indeed, and plenty of them as the US military and its allies operating against the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan urgently field more and more snipers, sharpshooters and other precision markspersons.

The nature of the conflict in these and other countries in Central Command’s AO has evolved into a struggle to eliminate the small percentage of extremist elements while minimizing casualties among the general population where they hide. Despite the increasing precision of various “smart” weapons including bombs, artillery and mortar munitions, collateral damage is still too often unacceptably high.

This challenge has been met in many instances by sharply increasing the number and frequency of heavily armed patrols as well as targeted house-to-house searches and raids. They are guided by intelligence supplied in part by sympathetic locals and tactical assets like the little Dragon Eye and Raven surveillance UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles).

But, as Captain Haviland so clearly stated, many infantry company and battalion commanders have come to rely most heavily on the real-time observations and deadly accuracy of their own specially trained hunter-shooter teams.

Hide, Observe, Report, Shoot

In addition to fieldcraft and high precision riflery, a significant amount of time is devoted to surveillance and intelligence reporting skills in the formal sniper schools run by the Army and Marine Corps. This training emphasizes the importance of careful observation of enemy activity and frequent radio transmission of clear and concise facts back to the chain-of-command.

Thus, the sniper team – shooter, spotter and often a team leader as well – becomes the commander’s eyes and ears well forward of his unit. In urban warfare this usually means the team moves out covertly into the upper part of a building then remains hidden while scanning a specific sector for an extended period of time. Mission taskings may include reporting of suspicious activity such as placement of IEDs (improvised explosive devices), movement and gatherings of likely insurgents, and spotting mortar positions.

While strict rules of engagement will vary according to the situation and location, most often the team must request and receive higher level permission before taking a shot. Also, when appropriate, the team may be called upon to call for and adjust artillery or air strikes.

Not to be overlooked is the force-multiplier and morale contribution of sniper teams providing security overwatch for friendly patrols as well as static guard posts. Many a GI has been spared as overly eager terrorist insurgents get dispatched with surgical precision when they raise a rifle or RPG (rocket propelled grenade) to fire from a window or alley.

Not All Are Snipers

While all precision shooters are valuable to the tactical situation, not all are genuine “snipers.” This distinguished name is best reserved for those who have successfully completed formal schooling by their respective services, resulting in award of the sniper MOS (military occupational specialty) 8541 to Marines or ASI (additional identifier) B4 in the Army.

For the most part these men are assigned in the role of sniper and armed with top-of-the-line bolt action Remington 7.62mm rifles like the Army’s M24 and Marine Corps’ M40, or semiauto .50 caliber Barretts.

Army Honors Barrett M107

The Vice Chief of Staff of the Army has recognized the Barrett M107 Cal. .50 Long Range Sniper Rifle as one of the Top Ten Greatest Inventions of 2004.

“Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom after action reports have identified the M107 as a top performer and one of the most useful pieces of equipment for the urban fight – particularly for our light fighters. Soldiers and their leaders had nothing but praise for the accuracy, target effect and tactical advantage provided by this weapon.”

Ronnie Barrett’s remarkable .50 caliber sniper rifles have rapidly made their way from Special Operations Command into widespread issue throughout the US Armed Forces and those of many allied nations.

The Army recently gave the M107 “full materiel release” status, signifying that rigorous testing and evaluation has determined that it is completely safe, operationally suitable and logistically supportable.

The M107, developed and made by Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Inc. of Murfreesboro, Tennessee as the M82, was procured as a Soldier Enhancement Program to meet urgent operational needs in the Global War on Terror.

It is also known to the Marine Corps as the M82 series Special Application Scoped Rifle (SASR).

Corporal Torres and the Barrett .50 cal. 1,200 Meter Shot

3rd Brigade Reconnaissance Troop plays major role in Fallujah Offensive. 1st Infantry Division News, Fallujah, Iraq, December 2004.

Once in position and looking west down into the city, the scouts used their Long Range Advanced Scout Surveillance System (LRAS3) – a device that uses thermal imaging to register heat signatures – to call for fire on targets deep into the city in preparation for the main push.

Later in the day (8 Nov.) the troops began receiving sniper fire. As Spc. James Taylor scanned the city through the LRASS, he spotted another sniper in a window about 1,200 meters out.

Corporal Omar Torres, an infantryman and sniper from the 2nd Battalion, 2nd Infantry Scout Platoon, joined the men on the road, bringing with him his .50 caliber M107 sniper rifle. With Taylor acting as his spotter, he sent several rounds into the building.

“Oh man, you nailed him,” shouted Taylor who was still watching through the LRASS. “That was so cool, he just exploded!”

Sharpshooters and Designated Marksmen

Because the demand far outstrips the supply of these “real” snipers, worthy shooters with somewhat lesser degrees of schooling and proficiency are also deserving of membership in the precision riflery fraternity. Depending on variables including the marksman’s branch of service, duty assignment and specific weapon, there is much latitude in what they are called. Hair splitters are invited to weigh in but SAR finds it convenient to use two broad categories.

We’ll call the first category of semi-snipers “Sharpshooters/Designated Marksmen,” who are expert shooters given some advanced instruction and then assigned the role as an additional duty. They are usually identified by the distinctive scoped 7.62mm rifle with its protruding box magazine they proudly carry.

The M14 Rides Again

GI’s armed with accurized M14 rifles are taking a greater role in combat action in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are a number of reasons for dusting off these 1950’s era semiautomatic battle rifles but it’s fair to say this is mostly because they’re available and they do the job.

Replaced in the mid-1960s by the little M16, plenty of these 7.62mm NATO caliber warhorses remain in storage at Anniston Army Depot and, with a bit of tweaking, “Fourteens” way out range and out punch any version of the 5.56mm M16 family.

The Marine Corps has long embraced this rework – carefully done at its famous facility on Quantico – as the Designated Marksman Rifle. Specially trained shooters in FAST (Fleet Anti Terrorism Security) companies get most of these and praise their effectiveness against multiple and moving targets out to 600 meters and sometimes more.

Although modified Fourteens served with distinction in the Vietnam War as the M21 Sniper Rifle, the Army has only recently rediscovered it for this role. In the last couple of years hundreds have been pulled out of cosmoline, tuned up, and rushed out to the field in an admirable but apparently less than fully official manner. Despite Department of Defense news photos and stories featuring the Fourteen in Southwest Asia, the Army is strangely quiet about its very cost-effective recycling of a proven battle rifle. What’s up with this?

On the M14

SAR believes somebody ought to get a medal for responding to urgent requests from the field to overcome the Sixteen’s sniping deficiencies by quickly fielding surplus Fourteens. Inexplicably, we can’t find evidence of any such recognition.

Our requests for information on issue of modified M14 rifles started at the Pentagon and got routed in all manner of directions with no luck. Continued polite pressing through supplementary channels finally yielded a response from a knowledgeable source in the Infantry Center at Fort Benning. Some relevant excerpts:

SAR: Is the proper nomenclature Designated Marksman Rifle?

Army: There is no nomenclature for a modified M14 as this is not a formal Army program, but rather a unit-specific effort.

SAR: What is the basis of issue; how many per unit and who gets them?

Army: Zero. Some units have received depot surplus M14s to augment their authorized weapons but there is no formalized or standardized basis of issue, nor are all units authorized to have M14s – it is a capability provided for a limited time on a case-by-case basis.

SAR: What is the rationale for fielding these vs. the M24?

Army: All units authorized the M24 have their allocated quantity. Those units in receipt of M14s have not received them in lieu of M24 sniper rifles.

SAR: Where are the Designated Marksmen being trained and to what standards?

Army: Designated Marksmen are trained as part of marksmanship sustainment training at the individual unit level, according to standards established in Chapter 7 of FM3-22.9, Rifle Marksmanship.

Squad Designated Marksman

Not to be confused with those in the previous category, Squad Designated Marksmen are members of Army and Marine rifle squads who carry specially modified 5.56mm M16A4 rifles or M4A1 carbines. Telescopic sights and bipods are the most obvious indicators of this special status but the luckiest ones carry weapons with match grade trigger groups and heavy barrels.

They usually get extra training to go along with this high-speed gun gear and are expected to put this to good use in two very important ways. First, the day scopes – usually 4 power ACOGs – enable better identification of threats among friendlies. Then, when the need arises to apply 5.56mm persuasion, the accuracy package plus well honed shooting skills equals higher likelihood of finishing the job without collateral damage.

The Marine Corps has two versions of what they call the SAM-R (Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle), one made at Quantico’s Precision Weapons Section to match standards and the other less formally assembled by deploying Expeditionary Units. The essentials are the same for both, M16A4 with 4 power scope and bipod, and are said to easily do the job out to 400 meters and more.

USAMU Supports Squad Designated Marksmen

“It’s the same rifle, just fitted and better adjusted. Almost like NASCAR, all the improvements are under the hood.” Lieutenant Colonel David Ludwig, USAMU Commander

An excellent feature on the United States Army Marksmanship Unit in the Spring 2005 issue of Infantry Bugler magazine (National Infantry Assn.) detailed some extraordinary assistance at the request of the 3rd Infantry Division as it prepared for deployment to Iraq.

AMU’s expert in-house armorers, with skills honed in support of the Army’s finest competition shooters, took 240 of the division’s M16A4 rifles and fine tuned them for high performance shooting. Sporting a free-floated barrel, competition trigger group, bipod and optical sight, the resulting weapons were capable of putting 20 rounds of special M262 ammo in rapid fire inside the 10 ring at 600 yards.

3rd ID Squad Designated Marksmen also got an AMU tune up, learning from some of the world’s best shooters how to get the most out of their new rifles. The program of instruction for SDMs may be found in FM 3-22.9.

Stryker Brigade Snipers in Iraq

Troubled by the lack of recognition in news releases and other elements on the Army’s official website www.army.mil, SAR sent a request through Pentagon channels to the 25th Infantry Division, deployed in Northern Iraq. The response was immediate and enthusiastic. Some excerpts:

• Major Mark Bieger is the Battalion Operations Officer for 1st Battalion, 24th Infantry Regiment deployed in the 1st Brigade (Stryker Brigade Combat Team), 25th Infantry Division in Northern Iraq. “Snipers have been critical to successful operations in fighting the insurgency in Mosul, Iraq. The sniper provides two critical advantages: precision, long-range direct fires and covert surveillance. In an urban environment, the sniper’s unique capabilities cannot be matched with other, lesser-trained soldiers, technology or alternate tactic, technique or procedure. The snipers of this battalion are absolutely necessary and an invaluable piece of the organization.”
• Captain Chris Bachl is a Stryker Infantry Company Commander of A Company, 1st Battalion, 5th Infantry Regiment deployed in Northern Iraq.
  
  On Sniper Effectiveness in Iraq: “The seven man sniper squad (2 x three man sniper teams + 1 Squad leader) are used in a full array of operations in support of company and battalion targeting operations. Common operational uses include covert stay behind ambushes, cache/terrain of interest observation, counter IED, Iraqi Army patrol overwatch, and counter mortar/counter rocket and COP/Hard site security. They truly operate over a full spectrum of operations to include both lethal and non-lethal roles. One critical role they play involves the gathering of information and intel as they conduct observation and surveillance. My company snipers were very adept at pinpointing enemy actions at a distance using their advanced optics. Their spot reports translated into critical real time information (sensor to shooter link) that platoon’s were able to act on instantly using their digital capabilities.”

• One example: “While providing observation and counter reconnaissance in support of a platoon maneuvering forward from a COP the sniper team spotted ‘suspicious activity.’ After developing the situation and further observation, they observed military aged males gathering at a house at a distance of 600 meters from the combat outpost. The sniper team was able to then vector the maneuver platoon to the house while the spotter and sniper continued to maintain eyes on the situation. Once the platoon was in sight, the gathering began to disperse, some picked up RPGs and AK 47’s and started firing at the approaching platoon. The sniper team was able to isolate them with precision fires allowing the platoon to maneuver closer to the building.”
  
• Captain Kevin Saatkamp is an Infantry Stryker company commander in the 3rd Battalion, 21st Infantry Regiment deployed to Northern Iraq.
  
  “Snipers fulfill a critical role in the urban insurgency. The benefits of the organic company sniper, unique to the Stryker Brigade, add a tremendous precision fire asset to those who need it most: the infantryman on the ground. Consisting of a 3-man element; the sniper team provides not only the ability to “reach out and touch someone,” but also the ability to observe targets covertly without a large signature. The largest challenge to the sniper in Mosul is the difficult and varied terrain. One mission the team may be placed in a 3-story building, the next in an open field. Leaving behind a sniper team in an area that just received contact has proved especially effective to US forces. Although not always employed, the sniper can provide an insight into the neighborhood that a normal dismounted patrol can’t. In short, the company sniper team is a tremendous combat multiplier to the Stryker company and battalions.”

Marine Sniper Receives Silver Star By Lance Corporal Ray Lewis

“Under fire for twelve hours at a time with rounds landing inches from his head, sniper Sergeant John E. Place volleyed with such lethal response that insurgents wouldn’t poke their head out their windows.”

His exploits in Operation Iraqi Freedom II as a sniper team leader with Company E, 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, earned Place a Silver Star, awarded at Camp Pendleton, California, on June 23rd 2005. He is currently assigned to 1st Marine Division’s Marksmanship Training Unit.

Sniping for Allah

While it is authoritatively said that most “sniper fire” reported by US and allied forces comes from conventional small arms in the hands of marksmen of average skill, it would be naïve to think that there aren’t real snipers among the diverse ranks of the insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq.

An undisguised propaganda piece filed by Baghdad correspondent Hala Jabar appeared in the 20 February 2005 issue of Britain’s Sunday Times, fawningly profiling an insurgent sniper who we are led to believe must be an Islamic version of legendary Marine sniper Carlos Hathcock. “Abu Othman” – not his real name – is said to be a star among the embittered Sunni Muslims who were the biggest losers when their benefactor Saddam Hussein was deposed.

Supposedly self-taught from internet research, computer shooting games, Hollywood sniper movies, and hours of Dragunov rifle shooting out in the desert, Abu is credited with killing over forty Americans – including some GI snipers – along with numerous Iraqi “collaborators.”

Under the heading of “Know Your Enemy,” here’s one from SAR that provides a sobering look into the bizarre internet world of insurgents and their many sympathizers plus a link directly to the Sunday Times’ story: http://abutamam.blogspot.com/2005/02/snipers-and-there-are-many-on-both.html

Future Sniping

Army snipers – and maybe their Marine brothers – can look forward to receiving a fast shooting new 7.62mm sniper rifle in the next year or so. Program Manager Soldier Weapons is expected to soon announce the results of an extensive competition for the XM110 Semi Automatic Sniper System, essentially a beefed-up and tuned up M16 along the lines of the Navy SEAL’s MK11 Mod 0 (Knight’s SR-25).

Also, Ronnie Barrett hasn’t rested on his M107 .50 caliber laurels. Joint Services Small Arms Program is well along with developmental work and safety testing of his 25mm high velocity version called the XM 109 Anti-Materiel Payload Rifle. Insiders report this awesome weapon has already seen “operational evaluation” overseas.

Adopt a Sniper

Despite the best efforts of many on Uncle Sam’s team to get the latest and best guns and gear to his warfighters, bureaucrats who control purse strings and supply lines too often consider golf courses and day care centers to be more important.

This unconscionable situation – made worse by the rapid increase in the numbers of precision marksmen of all types – means that too many shooters must do without and others having to operate with obsolete, damaged or worn out equipment.

Brian Sain and a bunch of other law enforcement precision shooting professionals have organized a direct support effort for their GI counterparts in the Global War on Terror. For more information on how you can help with this noble and necessary work, visit them on the web at www.americansnipers.org

Websites

The internet has most everything Abu Othman and the rest of us need to know about precision shooting in GWOT. SAR recommends “The number one starting place for tactical marksmen” that starts right off with six full pages of direct links in three columns each. Visit this site at: www.sniperworld.com

M24 Technical Specifications

Caliber: 7.62x51mm NATO (ammo is special M118 Long Range)
Overall Length: 43 inches
Barrel: 24 inches, twist is 1 turn in 11.2 inches
Weight: 12.1 pounds
Operation: Manual, bolt action
Feed: Internal 5-round magazine
Sights: Standard day optic is 10 power Leupold M3A Ultra

The Army’s Unofficial Designated Marksman Rifle (M14)

Caliber: 7.62x51mm NATO
Overall Length: 44.14 inches
Barrel: 22 inches
Weight: 10.8 pounds combat ready
System of operation: Gas, semiautomatic
Feed: Detachable 20-round box magazine
Sights: Usually Leupold variable power day optics

M16A4 SAM-R Technical Specifications

Caliber: 5.56×45 mm (NATO SS109 and US M262)
Overall Length: 39.6 inches
Barrel: 20 inches, twist is 1 turn in 7 inches
Weight: 7.5 pounds
Operation: Direct gas, semiautomatic
Feed: Detachable 20- and 30- round box magazines
Sights: Trijicon ACOG 4x and Leupold TS-30A2 3 to 9x

It should surprise no one who is in any way attuned to the complex relationships of men and their machines that heated controversy remains even today between proponents of the M14 and those of the M16. Both rifles, and the very different cartridges they fire, have admirable characteristics and unfortunate flaws. Both were well suited for the terrain, conditions, tactics and troops they were originally intended for. Neither was the perfect rifle, but which was “Numba One” in Vietnam?

The M14

During the “Cold War” which followed the stalemate in Korea, America stepped up its search for a suitably modernized shoulder weapon to replace the venerable but obsolescent M1. Ideally, the resulting rifle was supposed to be agreed upon and adopted by all sixteen nations forming the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) that sought to prevent the Soviet Union and its allies from further spreading Godless Communism.

For all sorts of reasons that have filled innumerable books and fascinated students of military history and armament, that didn’t happen. A dozen years after the end of WWII, during which most of the rest of NATO had happily chosen the Belgian FAL, America’s soldiers and marines got the home-grown M14, a product of Springfield Armory (the government arsenal, not the current commercial firm). This, after a bait-and-switch trick where our allies had grudgingly adopted the US 7.62 x 51mm T65E3 cartridge, essentially a shortened – thus less powerful – version of the combat classic US .30-06 (7.62 x 63mm) round.

For all intents and purposes, the new M14 was a product-improved M1 rifle characterized by lighter weight, better balance, increased on-board ammunition supply, and selective-fire capability. The rifle also boasted greater controllability and accuracy in semiauto fire than its predecessor; largely due to the reduced recoil of its new cartridge at no significant penalty in range and knockdown power.

Sturdily built using traditional manufacturing methods with machined steel and hardwood, the manly-looking M14 was plenty tough for grenade launching, bayonet fighting and standing up to the routine abuse that soldiers inflict even in peacetime. All in all, it was an effective, serviceable rifle for the kind of warfare that would likely ensue if the Soviet Union and its allies decided to steamroll westward.

Full Auto Follies

Unfortunately, the “Fourteen” was relatively expensive, a bit tricky to manufacture, and had a few problems in the reliability area despite such refinements as a roller cam on the right bolt locking lug and hard-chromed bore. However, this wasn’t nearly as much to be concerned with as the rifle’s near-uncontrollability in full auto fire; arguably the M14’s only significant new feature vs. the old M1. (Magazine capacity notwithstanding).

The Army’s best attempts at curing the problem included addition of a heavy barrel, sturdy folding bipod, sophisticated muzzle brake, and yes, even a nicely sculpted new wooden stock with pistol grips fore and aft. Alas, the resulting M14E2 (later designated M14A1) squad automatic rifle version remained clearly inferior to the BAR, a genuine embarrassment.

Both the standard M14 and the tricked-up A1 models were in general issue throughout the Army and Marine Corps when the first American ground combat units of both services were sent to Vietnam in 1965. Not to worry, though, as early combat reports rated the hard-hitting, long-ranging Fourteen as acceptably effective and reliable. So far, so good, but it wasn’t long before soldiers and marines were ordered to exchange their big .30 caliber rifles for little .22’s.

SALVO, SPIW, ARPA and AR-15

The story is far too big, juicy and convoluted to recount here, but the whole time the Army was struggling to field and then fix the M14, it was spending obscene amounts of money somewhere way out in left field. Projects known by the evocative acronyms SALVO and SPIW, were decades-long experimentation with all sorts of radical, high-tech rifles and ammo with an eye toward significantly improving the combat effectiveness of its Nuclear Age infantrymen. Didn’t work.

What did work – at least well enough at the time – was handed to the Army on a silver platter by the upstart firm of ArmaLite in partnership with time-honored Colt’s Patent Firearms Company. Making a very long story short, an innovative NATO standard caliber rifle, designed by the gifted Eugene Stoner, had been scaled down at Colt to very effectively shoot a high-velocity varmint cartridge that had become wildly popular with sportsmen and hunters. Stamped on the side of the magazine well of receivers on the first limited production run of the new 5.56 x 45 mm rifles was the designation “ARMALITE AR15, Cal. .223, Model 01.”

Tests in Saigon and stateside by the Army’s own Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) in 1961-62, showed the AR-15 to be outstanding in virtually every comparison to existing US shoulder weapons. In particular, “its semi-automatic firing accuracy is comparable to that of the M1 rifle, while its automatic firing accuracy is considered superior to that of the Browning Automatic Rifle.” Strong stuff.

At about this same time the M14 rifle production and fielding program collapsed from a multitude of problems and the Ordnance establishment could no longer hold back the rising tide of support for the AR-15. The Army reluctantly placed an order for some 85,000 Colt rifles, now officially designated M16, with first deliveries scheduled for early 1964. A modified version designated M16E1, featuring a spring plunger to force the bolt closed if needed, quickly followed.

The first units equipped from this and subsequent orders included USAF security police, Army Special Forces and Airborne, Navy Special Operations, and MAAG advisers in Vietnam. Conspicuously absent from this list are the ARVN who had served so conveniently as the reason for considering the AR-15 in the first place.

Dirty Secrets

As fighting in Vietnam heated up in scale and intensity with arrival of more and more American units freshly armed with M16 rifles and mounting aggressive operations against the omnipresent Viet Cong, things began to go terribly wrong. Sporadic reports early on of serious stoppages and gross malfunctions of the M16 rifle began flooding in by the end of ’65. The most common stoppage was failure to extract fired cartridge cases, typically caused by a heavily carbonized and rust-pitted chamber. News reporters picked up the alarm and soon the American public became justifiably outraged over stories of GIs dying face down in the mud because of hopelessly jammed rifles.

Subsequent investigation showed combat failures of the M16E1 were partially the fault of inevitable “bugs” in the design of specific parts, sloppy manufacture, inadequate inspection, hasty fielding without adequate training, and the astonishing lack of specialized cleaning equipment needed for field maintenance! But the single most damning factor in the M16’s sorry combat performance at the time was bad ammo; the result of an unholy alliance of cost-cutting and corner-cutting.

Sadly, not only was the ammo left essentially as it was, but it took many months before sufficient numbers of adequate cleaning tools reached the front line troops. No excuse in the world justifies this outrage that borders on criminal negligence.

Product Improvements

Making the best of a bad situation, Colt’s engineers came up with a number of changes, two of which were most significant; an improved buffer, and hard-chroming the chamber. The first helped to solve problems of parts wear and breakage due to excessive full auto cyclic rate, and the second drastically reduced instances of corroded chambers leading to extraction failures. These modifications, along with regular and thorough cleaning gave newly fielded M16A1’s a quantum leap in reliability and things got decidedly better after 1967.

But, by this time nearly irreparable damage had been done to the reputation of the M16 both among combat troops in Vietnam and the American public. In contrast, the enemy’s AK-47/PRC Type 56 assault rifle had grown in folklore into what many considered the world’s most reliable, accurate and deadly shoulder weapon. Certainly not the most accurate, but that was the reputation it was gaining.

Back from the Dead

On the other hand, for those who properly employed the Sixteen, cleaning it often and lubricating it correctly, the “Black Rifle” proved more than a match for Kalashnikov’s AK. Its 5.56mm 55 grain bullet shot fast and flat, tumbling on entry to cause catastrophic wounds and shock-induced death. Its semiauto accuracy and full auto controllability were decidedly superior to that of the AK. It was nearly 3 lbs. lighter, and considerably more ammo could be carried for the same overall weight.

For many veterans and other RKI’s, there is little doubt that the compact, light, and fast-firing M16 was and is a better weapon for jungle combat than the longer, heavier, and barely controllable in full auto M14. Although its 5.56mm cartridge is certainly not nearly as capable of heavy brush penetration as the big and comparatively slow US 7.62 x 54 mm and the Soviet/VC/NVA 7.62 x 39 mm, it produces far less recoil — a critical factor in full auto accuracy — and its wounding/killing potential is in some ways superior to both rivals.

Standard A

The “experimental” designation was dropped on 26 May 1967 when Colt’s XM16E1 became the “US Rifle, 5.56mm, M16A1,” officially replacing the big M14 as “Standard A” throughout the Army. By the end of 1967 enough rifles had made it to Vietnam to arm all of the Army and Marine Corps’ ground combat units. Finally, by December 1968, 600,000 additional M16’s had been delivered into the hands of our Vietnamese partners.

This soon began to have a noticeable effect on the battlefield. In particular, intelligence analysis after the 1968 Tet Offensive showed the NVA to be particularly shaken by the effective firepower of both US and ARVN units now fully equipped with M16’s. Captured M16’s became coveted items for the VC, who called it the “Black Rifle.” Then, it was no cause for amusement among some US troops who had earlier disparaged the Sixteen as inferior to the enemy AK, to now be on the receiving end of 5.56mm fire.

M14 Rifle Technical Specifications

Caliber: 7.62 x 51 mm NATO Standard (.30 caliber)
Weight: 10.1 lbs. loaded
Overall length: 44.3 in.
Feed: 20 round detachable box magazine
Operation: Gas piston
Cyclic rate: 750 rpm
Muzzle velocity: 2800 fps
Maximum range: 3725 meters
Effective range: 460 meters

M16A1 Rifle Technical Specifications

Caliber: 5.56 x 45mm (.223 caliber)
Weight: 7.6 lbs. loaded
Overall length: 39 in.
Feed: 20 round detachable box magazine
Operation: Direct gas
Cyclic rate: 750 rpm
Muzzle velocity: 3250 fps
Maximum range: 2653 meters
Effective range: 460 meters
Primary Reference Sources

U.S. Rifle M14, Collector Grade Pubs. 1988
The Black Rifle: M16 Retrospective, Collector Grade Pubs., 1987
Personal Firepower (Illustrated History of Vietnam War Series), Bantam Books, 1988