Trained with the M1 in Army Basic and the M14 in Army Advanced Infantry Training in 1963. Admittedly, fired many more rounds with the M14 in both semi-Auto and auto. Both M1 and M14 were very accurate out to 300 yards. Did not Fire beyond that range in Basic with the M1. Fired out to 400 yards in AIT with the M14. Hit very,very few times at that range. Cannot blame the rifle. I am not a skilled rifleman at that distance. When firing in a prone position I very much favored the M1. The magazine with the M14 made me less stable in that position. However, reloading fewer times and having 20 rounds was a distinct advantage. Not hearing the ping at the 8 round clip when I was concentrating on a down range target meant I would at times not realize I needed to reload the M14 when the 20 round magazine emptied. My reload speed was about the same after a few weeks (then months, then 2 years) intensive practice. I never counted my shots. I just seemed to know when it was time to reload. Really disliked the M14 on auto. Just touching the trigger fired 3 rounds. If firing from the shoulder my third shot was well over my aiming point, even with the bipod model. Waste of ammunition. I just liked the M1 over the M14 overall. I spent 2 years and 6 months in Germany in an Infantry unit all with the M14. Very good weapon but still preferred the M1 - personal choice.
Good summary and points made regarding both rifles especially when shooting prone. Best practice with a semi is to reload with one in the pipe which gives the M14 the advantage there. Still I agree with your preference for the M1.
Anything past 300m is very difficult to see with naked eye unless there is some clear color difference between your target and the foreground. The army’s longest qual distance today is 300m. Yards is no longer used.
Я конечно не являюсь профессиональным коллекционером или любителем оружия, но тем не менее, ваш канал меня очень заинтересовал. Спасибо вам за вашу краткость и простую подачу.
Carred the M14 for 20 months in combat in Nam, it never let me down, even when I was up to my neck in the mud of a stinken rice paddy, what more could you ask for! Oh I am a retired marine Msgt.
Marine Corps! I salute you! What do you think of the troops today? Be honest. My old man was Marine Corps for 30 years. He's turning in his grave at what has happened to todays military.
а мне представляется наоборот. Из М-1 стреляй, слушай, вставляй пачку, стреляй. Посчитайте количество операций при перезарядке. Кроме того с собой носишь только патроны. в пачке. Дополнительного веса в виде пустых магазинов не носишь. Пиздюлей за утрату в бою пустого магазина не получаешь.
I was a Marine from '62--'66. I trained and qualified at PI with the M-14, and later in Fleet. I didn't have to qualify with the M-1, but carried it in ITR at Geiger; no trouble hitting what I aimed at on the "John Wayne" courses. I preferred the M-14, especially when I was an AR man in a fire team; 20 rounds v 8. Big difference.
If I had to choose between the M1 Garand and the M14… it’s a draw for me because each rifle has its own favored characteristics. The M1 Garand is the favorite rifle of Ian McCollum from Forgotten Weapons for its history and the M1 being the candid inspiration for the Kalashnikov AK. The M14 on the flip side is what I would use for skirmishes because of the advantage of using the modern detachable magazine therefore not worrying about getting the Garand Thumb in the heat of battle. So it looks like the M14 is the short answer, and with the long answer being both of them good in their own ways.
не думаю, что съёмный магазин для той же винтовки преимущество в бою. Появилась дополнительная операция при перезарядке и необходимость носить с собой пустые магазины. Лучше бы увеличили размер пачки до 10 патронов и доработали бы винтовку.
@@Андрей-э6ъ1ь Twenty rounds ALWAYS beats 10 -even for precision shooters. Longer active engagement times. If this wasn't the case AR's wouldn't come with 30 round mags.
Да? М-1: Стреляю, слышу "дзинь!", вставляю новую пачку, стреляю. М-14 : Стреляю, не стреляю, снимаю и прячу магазиг, достаю и ставлю полный, снимаю затвор с затворной задержки. стреляю. Зачем надо было вводить в процесс стрельбы дополнительные операции? М-1 - лучшая самозарядная винтовка времён второй мировой. М-14 - херня как все остальные.
The development brought on by WW2 is absolutely staggering. The M1 Garand in the late 1930s was the bleeding edge of infantry small arms tech. The M14 designed in the early 1950s was obsolete before it was even finished.
I used an M14 when I was in the service. It served me well through a few years of fighting insurgents. I also handled an M1, though not in combat. I have been in armed engagements with rebels who have used the M1 among other weapons against us. Both are equally lethal, although the M14 has more rounds in a single mag load.
I was trained on the M1 Garand back in 1962 and made marksman at 200 yards. I would pick the M1 over the M14 any day, every time, although the M-14 has more rounds and loads better. Wish I had both today.
In combat I would rather have the Garand. I own both. The Garand's balance is more front heavy which I prefer and the enbloc loading design is faster than mag changes.
I would prefer the M14, specifically because any magazine related malfunction (99% of malfunctions) is FAR harder to clear in a Garand than an M14 where you can swap and throw away the mag
@@superfamilyallosauridae6505 Были такие случаи? Мне представляется, что вероятность такого ничтожна мала.. Кроме того пустые магазины надо носить с собой, да и весит один магазин больше, чем три пустых пачки (обоймы), которые, к тому же, выбрасываются. А за утрату пустого магазина полагается взыскание от начальства.
The one advantage of the Garand that is overlooked is that you can lie down prone and shoot. The box mag on the M14 won't let you do that exactly and forces you to elevate your head. The other advantage which the military apparently favored then is that you don't have to worry about losing your box mag or reloading it. The enbloc clips were never reused in combat. Box mags could be expendable, but I wouldn't throw it away unless I was standing next to a crate full of loaded ones.
I was in the Italian Armed Forces from '98-00. We used the M-14 as our basic training rifle and for ceremonies. It's a bit heavy, but it's a great, high powered rifle with a lot kick and fairly accurate too
Italian army has never adopted the m14. I was in the army as well in 1995 and we still where using m1 garand for not operative corps. We also had some Beretta BM59 (quite similar to M14) and they were really lovely to shoot and to manage.
I have not had any experience with the M1 Garand, but I have fired the M 14 numerous times back when I served as a Gunners Mate in US Navy. The M14 was very accurate at 200 yards; a great weapon in my opinion.
I would say the M1 is the better rifle overall. Officially, the Garand is an inch shorter than the M14 and just so happens to have a longer barrel which is good. The lack of a protruding magazine happens to also be a positive if you are trying to store it quickly or crawl with it in a tight spot. The felt recoil is about the same since the M14 is more unbalanced as well. The M14 was such a pos that the war torn Italians made a better version of the M14 out of a modified Garand. Having John Garand help design the "successor" would have helped the rifle to not be shit. The M16 should have immediately replaced the rifle.
@@arthurspearman7914 you could carry much-much more ammo in 30 carbine ---Eddie Murphy used one with pretty good success,and was used extensively in the pacific--i own one along with dozens of other rifles and would not hesitate to pick it up for personal defense
@@jimjessie2704 Yes, he did...after he became an officer. The M1 carbine was mainly a replacement for the old 1911A1 .45 caliber pistol. The carbine had longer accurate range then the .45 had/has which was the key reason for it. As to being used in the Pacific...different terrain...jungle vs open fields...which means shorter engagement ranges. Even in Mountain warfare you spend a lot of time fighting at shorter ranges. So, a carbine works better there.
@@arthurspearman7914 the 30 carbine murphy used to eliminate several germans with is on display in military museum with a bullet hole thru the stock --he took out that enemy shortly afterward--haven't seen it personally but my son who is a ranger based in ft benning has and i believe that is where it is
@@jimjessie2704 jim....I did NOT say that he didn't use it effectively. I said that the M1 Carbine was what officers and others were issued instead of being given a PISTOL. What do you not understand about the difference between the two? Would you rather be issued a Colt 1911A1 or a M1 Carbine? The first is a one round man stopper. But...most people are not able to hit a target at 50yds with one. Or would you rather have a carbine that is "Capable" of hitting a man size target at 200yds? If you say the first...I have a bridge to sell you. Period...end of discussion.
I had the M14 in boot camp, so I will always be partial to it. The only category the M1 had the advantage was being a little bit lighter. But the added fire power of the M14 gives it the edge. And it is a select-fire weapon as well.
I carried the M-14 when I was in Vietnam, it's a kickass weapon. The M1 Garand is also a beautiful weapon but when the shell has been expelled it makes a very distinctive sound that alerts the enemy that you're empty. Not to mention that the M-14 holds more rounds than the Garand.
I had a six-month experience in using M14 and about a 1.75 year experience on M1. Both of them are very powerful and easy to be operated. We like both of them although M14 is fully automatic and M1 is semi-automatic
Having qualified with both rifles during my time in the military (1965-1968), I liked the M-14 the best. Eight rounds vs. twenty rounds was a big plus. (We also had an adapter that allowed us to make the M-14 fully automatic. However, it was impossible - at least for me- to hold the M-14 steady on fully automatic).
I was issued both in the Marine Corps. The main difference between the two is that the m14 had 20 round magazines and was capable of firing fully automatic. They are both very good weapons.
The M14 was only issued with one mag,the loading process is thorough the top with stripper clips,it’s easier to carry stripper clips than loaded mags, even today you load the M16 mags with stripper clips, who wants to carry a bunch of loaded mags,when stripper clips are a lot easier,and carry more ammo My opinion they got it right with the M1 The only magazine weapon in history that I can think off that the operator carried multiple magazines was the BAR
Own both and for fun id pick Garand for fight its M14. M14 can safely use a wider variety of ammo and has larger capacity. M14 also can easily be topped off with strip clips or scoped for longer range.
The M-14 with the 20 round mag. The downside of the 14 is the 20 round mag. It gets in the way sometimes when trying to rest the Rifle! I was issued the 14 in 68. I liked everything about it except the weight!
I’m always leery of the M1’s potential for “Garand thumb” when inserting the enbloc clip. Plus, the M14 mag is easily topped up via the stripper clip slot. Also, 10-20 rounds vs 8 rounds, no brainer, in my humble opinion.
You need to set up a comparison between the Italian BM-59 (Italian modified M1rifles with detachable 20 rd box magazines). It may be a better comparison. Other sugested comparisons are (1) the US M1 rifle and the Italian BM-59 as well as the Italian BM-59 & the M-14 series.
Both are winners as was the United States Military for having two outstanding weapons. I am both a M1 Garand fan and owner as well as a M14 fan and owner.
Have never had the opportunity to shoot an M1 Garand but I did with an M1A (the civilian version of the M-14) and greatly enjoyed it. We were taught to zero at 300 and move back from there and the course of fire was usually 500/600/800 yards and the occasional 900/1000 thrown in to frustrate us. Target bulls eyes sure are small at that range. Figuratively, that is. I imagine that I won't break cover as much changing a mag as I would inserting a clip but then, I haven't had the opportunity. They're both exceptional weapons. As to that myth that the M1 inspired the AK-47: dream on. Clearly Kalashnikov cribbed off the Stg 44 right down to the intermediate round used on that the first true assault rifle. That they almost look identical stands as more proof of the design that the AK fixed any teething problems on. Just wanted to throw that out there.
The M14 would have been a better rifle during WWII. Being magazine feed could have provided a huge benefit over an internal 8 round clip. It wouldn't have made that ping when the M1 ran out.
When someone steps on my Lawn I come out with the Garand on the left arm and M14 on my right! I’ve never seen someone crap their pants so fast! Sometimes it’s the Amazon boy but wait he’s use to crappin his pants because they don’t give the employees enough breaks!
Of the two...I would take the Garand. When firing....Clips. already loaded, in pockets of bandileers versus stripper clips , mag adapter running rounds into a magazine. M1a has one edge, topping the mag. Garand has the " dump" the clip up out to put in a full clip.
I served 17 years in the united states army and I have fired all standard issue weapons of the army. Hands down the M-14 in my opinion is the primary weapon I would want to carry. But I give serious props to the m-1 grand. M-1 carbine was ok but no stopping power as it was .30 caliber.
I fired expert with the M1, and also took second place trophy in the Ninth Coast Guard District rifle competition in 1969. Mastering the sling is key to consistent 300 yard plus bullseyes. I have both M1s and M1As in my gun safes…. If I saw leftists coming over the hill, I’d choose the M1.
m14 has 15 rounds and m1 garand has 8, most of people probably would like to use m14 but i still prefeer m1 garand cuz of it's way to reload is just perfect and the recoil looks easier to hold on than m14. M1 Garand wins
imo garand bc ammo size makes more sense and its shorter, so its more portable. afaik firefights do not take place at sniper like distances, so a rifle with a longer barrel for more range would not be needed by most infantry. unfortunately ive heard it tends to jam more, especially on the 8th shot, and the ping tends to give away depletion to enemies. and i dont like that weird loading system. normal magazines make more sense (but i guess one advantage is that its easier to use on cover bc the magazine cant get in the way)
I am fortunate in owning an actual M14 military issue, have fired it quite a few times and I am a huge fan of it so I don't know if I would take it hunting I do love the grand though it is a beautiful gun.
Hey Dude When Are You Guys Gonna Upload Another Video Of You Guys Shooting The M1 Garand Semi-Automatic Rifle Like I Know You Did Part 1 and Part 2 But When Are You Guys Gonna Make An M1 Garand Shooting In the New Format.
@GunsOfTheWorId Thanks Dude I'm So Glad You Appreciate My Support From Me Being A British Subscriber Who's Been Watching Your Videos 4 Over a Year You American Gun Collectors Always Have The Right The Own Old Guns Both In Semi-Automatic & Fully-Automatic Mode Like The M1903 Springfield Rifle The M1 Garand The M1 Carbine The M1897 Trench Gun The M1928A1 Thompson And Of course The Colt M1911A1 Pistol. Keep Up The Good Work And Remember The Stay Awesome And Have a Nice Day.
i am a fan of the m14 however at the same time i think both the m1 Garand and the m14 are both winners in my opinion.
Согласен с Вами 🤝🗿
In USMC I qualified with both. Got Marksman each time. Both fine weapons.
Trained with the M1 in Army Basic and the M14 in Army Advanced Infantry Training in 1963. Admittedly, fired many more rounds with the M14 in both semi-Auto and auto. Both M1 and M14 were very accurate out to 300 yards. Did not Fire beyond that range in Basic with the M1. Fired out to 400 yards in AIT with the M14. Hit very,very few times at that range. Cannot blame the rifle. I am not a skilled rifleman at that distance. When firing in a prone position I very much favored the M1. The magazine with the M14 made me less stable in that position. However, reloading fewer times and having 20 rounds was a distinct advantage. Not hearing the ping at the 8 round clip when I was concentrating on a down range target meant I would at times not realize I needed to reload the M14 when the 20 round magazine emptied. My reload speed was about the same after a few weeks (then months, then 2 years) intensive practice. I never counted my shots. I just seemed to know when it was time to reload. Really disliked the M14 on auto. Just touching the trigger fired 3 rounds. If firing from the shoulder my third shot was well over my aiming point, even with the bipod model. Waste of ammunition. I just liked the M1 over the M14 overall. I spent 2 years and 6 months in Germany in an Infantry unit all with the M14. Very good weapon but still preferred the M1 - personal choice.
Thank you for your service!
Good summary and points made regarding both rifles especially when shooting prone. Best practice with a semi is to reload with one in the pipe which gives the M14 the advantage there. Still I agree with your preference for the M1.
Anything past 300m is very difficult to see with naked eye unless there is some clear color difference between your target and the foreground. The army’s longest qual distance today is 300m. Yards is no longer used.
@@DontUputThatEvilOnMe😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
The M-14s fully automatic cyclic rate of fire is 750 rounds per minute. It's essentially uncontrollable on full auto.
“In my not so humble opinion, the M1 Garand is the greatest battle implement ever devised.”
- General George S. Patton
@@mikearayro3375 lay off the crack pipe
@@mikearayro3375
Cringe…
Every AK is an upside down M1.
@@mikearayro3375 no, it's AVT-40
@@mikearayro3375 Ew
Can't go wrong with either of these classics
Точно сказано 🤝🗿
Both are great rifles for their time. The M14 had rock 'n roll, if you could control the muzzle.
Love both of them, being a vet, would rather carry the M14
Thank u 4 your service
@@g-money7652 you’re welcome
And compare to m16? Still m14?
@@ggyy311 depends on the deployment
@@russellroach1219 Roger that
Я конечно не являюсь профессиональным коллекционером или любителем оружия, но тем не менее, ваш канал меня очень заинтересовал. Спасибо вам за вашу краткость и простую подачу.
Carred the M14 for 20 months in combat in Nam, it never let me down, even when I was up to my neck in the mud of a stinken rice paddy, what more could you ask for! Oh I am a retired marine Msgt.
Thank you for your service!
Marine Corps! I salute you!
What do you think of the troops today?
Be honest.
My old man was Marine Corps for 30 years.
He's turning in his grave at what has happened to todays military.
😅😅😅😅😅😅😂😂😂😂
M1: Handsome weapon.
M14: Functional weapon.
Winner: M1 just for lookin' so good!
Pinging good too
а мне представляется наоборот. Из М-1 стреляй, слушай, вставляй пачку, стреляй. Посчитайте количество операций при перезарядке. Кроме того с собой носишь только патроны. в пачке. Дополнительного веса в виде пустых магазинов не носишь. Пиздюлей за утрату в бою пустого магазина не получаешь.
@@Андрей-э6ъ1ь That's true, also.
World at War vs Black Ops
Man…!
오버워치
Grass
I know right 😂😂
Both great rifles. M14 would be the winner for me. Caliber, 20rd box magazine.
Calibers are almost identical...the mag brings it home...but don't get me wrong, I love my M1 just as much
Mini-14 vs M1 Carbine
No contest. Mini 14.
As much as I love the M1 Carbine, the Mini-14 is the guy she tells you not to worry about in this case 🥲
The box magazine is nice, but that “p’ting!” can’t be beat.
Hell yeah
Well it was since it is no longer in service.
@@paleoph6168 Да! А пустой магазин надо таскать с собой. Потеряешь хоть один - сержант тебе глаз на жопу натянет.
Until you run out of follow-up ammo.
I was a Marine from '62--'66. I trained and qualified at PI with the M-14, and later in Fleet. I didn't have to qualify with the M-1, but carried it in ITR at Geiger; no trouble hitting what I aimed at on the "John Wayne" courses. I preferred the M-14, especially when I was an AR man in a fire team; 20 rounds v 8. Big difference.
If I had to choose between the M1 Garand and the M14… it’s a draw for me because each rifle has its own favored characteristics. The M1 Garand is the favorite rifle of Ian McCollum from Forgotten Weapons for its history and the M1 being the candid inspiration for the Kalashnikov AK. The M14 on the flip side is what I would use for skirmishes because of the advantage of using the modern detachable magazine therefore not worrying about getting the Garand Thumb in the heat of battle. So it looks like the M14 is the short answer, and with the long answer being both of them good in their own ways.
не думаю, что съёмный магазин для той же винтовки преимущество в бою. Появилась дополнительная операция при перезарядке и необходимость носить с собой пустые магазины. Лучше бы увеличили размер пачки до 10 патронов и доработали бы винтовку.
@@Андрей-э6ъ1ь Twenty rounds ALWAYS beats 10 -even for precision shooters. Longer active engagement times. If this wasn't the case AR's wouldn't come with 30 round mags.
Probably the M14 the performance is the same but the loading process seems easier and has more rounds
Да? М-1: Стреляю, слышу "дзинь!", вставляю новую пачку, стреляю.
М-14 : Стреляю, не стреляю, снимаю и прячу магазиг, достаю и ставлю полный, снимаю затвор с затворной задержки. стреляю.
Зачем надо было вводить в процесс стрельбы дополнительные операции?
М-1 - лучшая самозарядная винтовка времён второй мировой. М-14 - херня как все остальные.
@@Андрей-э6ъ1ь If reloading a mag is that hard for you, lets pray you don't end up in Ukraine.
@@bubrub5564 За меня молиться не надо. Я сам о себе позабочусь. Молись лучше за себя.
@@bubrub5564so you wanna go to Ukraine?
@@korronnyswirus2138 And you came to that conclusion how?
M14 is the winner to me.
The development brought on by WW2 is absolutely staggering. The M1 Garand in the late 1930s was the bleeding edge of infantry small arms tech. The M14 designed in the early 1950s was obsolete before it was even finished.
I used an M14 when I was in the service. It served me well through a few years of fighting insurgents. I also handled an M1, though not in combat. I have been in armed engagements with rebels who have used the M1 among other weapons against us. Both are equally lethal, although the M14 has more rounds in a single mag load.
I’ll take the “Band of Brothers” model thank you. Love the empty ping sound.
They BOTH WON they're both OUTSTANDING weapons.
M1 vs M14 vs M1A Scout Squad vs M1A SOCOM 16...."Bang"
I was trained on the M1 Garand back in 1962 and made marksman at 200 yards. I would pick the M1 over the M14 any day, every time, although the M-14 has more rounds and loads better. Wish I had both today.
Question do you think you can do the weapons from the movie Gangster Squad
Simply adding a magazine can take you a long way
In combat I would rather have the Garand. I own both. The Garand's balance is more front heavy which I prefer and the enbloc loading design is faster than mag changes.
When loading the M1 Garand… watch out for the infamous GARAND THUMB.
Make every shot count.
I would prefer the M14, specifically because any magazine related malfunction (99% of malfunctions) is FAR harder to clear in a Garand than an M14 where you can swap and throw away the mag
@@superfamilyallosauridae6505 Были такие случаи? Мне представляется, что вероятность такого ничтожна мала.. Кроме того пустые магазины надо носить с собой, да и весит один магазин больше, чем три пустых пачки (обоймы), которые, к тому же, выбрасываются. А за утрату пустого магазина полагается взыскание от начальства.
Most folks forget about stripper clips
The one advantage of the Garand that is overlooked is that you can lie down prone and shoot. The box mag on the M14 won't let you do that exactly and forces you to elevate your head. The other advantage which the military apparently favored then is that you don't have to worry about losing your box mag or reloading it. The enbloc clips were never reused in combat. Box mags could be expendable, but I wouldn't throw it away unless I was standing next to a crate full of loaded ones.
This guy is definitely good at it if there was an zombie apocalypse
I was in the Italian Armed Forces from '98-00. We used the M-14 as our basic training rifle and for ceremonies. It's a bit heavy, but it's a great, high powered rifle with a lot kick and fairly accurate too
Italian army has never adopted the m14. I was in the army as well in 1995 and we still where using m1 garand for not operative corps. We also had some Beretta BM59 (quite similar to M14) and they were really lovely to shoot and to manage.
By any chance do you have an extra RSC 1917 clips you'd be willing to sell??
M1 garand was used by un forces during the korean war and our korean uses it too
얀늉
@@길천사 안뇽
If the M1 Garand married the BAR, the offspring would be the M14.
I have not had any experience with the M1 Garand, but I have fired the M 14 numerous times back when I served as a Gunners Mate in US Navy. The M14 was very accurate at 200 yards; a great weapon in my opinion.
The thing that makes the M-1 Garant is its slickness. No protruding mag. As the Winchester. I trained with the M-14 loved it.
Apples and oranges there's no comparison. You get the job done with an M14.
I would say the M1 is the better rifle overall. Officially, the Garand is an inch shorter than the M14 and just so happens to have a longer barrel which is good. The lack of a protruding magazine happens to also be a positive if you are trying to store it quickly or crawl with it in a tight spot. The felt recoil is about the same since the M14 is more unbalanced as well. The M14 was such a pos that the war torn Italians made a better version of the M14 out of a modified Garand. Having John Garand help design the "successor" would have helped the rifle to not be shit. The M16 should have immediately replaced the rifle.
Can’t speak for the Garand but I used to own a Springfield National Match M14. Won a Silver Medal on the 800 metre range. Lovely rifle.
To me it always seems the M1 Garand has a little more "Ummpphh..." power than the 306 M1a M14 . That's just me.
M1 garand vs m1 carbine
There is a big difference there my friend. M1A1 is a "Battle Rifle". M1 carbine is a replacement for a pistol. You are talking Apples and Oranges.
@@arthurspearman7914 you could carry much-much more ammo in 30 carbine ---Eddie Murphy used one with pretty good success,and was used extensively in the pacific--i own one along with dozens of other rifles and would not hesitate to pick it up for personal defense
@@jimjessie2704 Yes, he did...after he became an officer. The M1 carbine was mainly a replacement for the old 1911A1 .45 caliber pistol. The carbine had longer accurate range then the .45 had/has which was the key reason for it.
As to being used in the Pacific...different terrain...jungle vs open fields...which means shorter engagement ranges. Even in Mountain warfare you spend a lot of time fighting at shorter ranges. So, a carbine works better there.
@@arthurspearman7914 the 30 carbine murphy used to eliminate several germans with is on display in military museum with a bullet hole thru the stock --he took out that enemy shortly afterward--haven't seen it personally but my son who is a ranger based in ft benning has and i believe that is where it is
@@jimjessie2704 jim....I did NOT say that he didn't use it effectively. I said that the M1 Carbine was what officers and others were issued instead of being given a PISTOL. What do you not understand about the difference between the two?
Would you rather be issued a Colt 1911A1 or a M1 Carbine? The first is a one round man stopper. But...most people are not able to hit a target at 50yds with one. Or would you rather have a carbine that is "Capable" of hitting a man size target at 200yds? If you say the first...I have a bridge to sell you. Period...end of discussion.
I had the M14 in boot camp, so I will always be partial to it. The only category the M1 had the advantage was being a little bit lighter. But the added fire power of the M14 gives it the edge. And it is a select-fire weapon as well.
I carried the M-14 when I was in Vietnam, it's a kickass weapon. The M1 Garand is also a beautiful weapon but when the shell has been expelled it makes a very distinctive sound that alerts the enemy that you're empty. Not to mention that the M-14 holds more rounds than the Garand.
I had a six-month experience in using M14 and about a 1.75 year experience on M1.
Both of them are very powerful and easy to be operated. We like both of them although M14 is fully automatic and M1 is semi-automatic
M1 for fun and satisfying pings
M14 for better ammo capacity
Having qualified with both rifles during my time in the military (1965-1968), I liked the M-14 the best. Eight rounds vs. twenty rounds was a big plus. (We also had an adapter that allowed us to make the M-14 fully automatic. However, it was impossible - at least for me- to hold the M-14 steady on fully automatic).
I was issued both in the Marine Corps. The main difference between the two is that the m14 had 20 round magazines and was capable of firing fully automatic. They are both very good weapons.
The M14 was only issued with one mag,the loading process is thorough the top with stripper clips,it’s easier to carry stripper clips than loaded mags, even today you load the M16 mags with stripper clips, who wants to carry a bunch of loaded mags,when stripper clips are a lot easier,and carry more ammo
My opinion they got it right with the M1
The only magazine weapon in history that I can think off that the operator carried multiple magazines was the BAR
Mauser 98k & Springfield 1903, please
Own both and for fun id pick Garand for fight its M14. M14 can safely use a wider variety of ammo and has larger capacity. M14 also can easily be topped off with strip clips or scoped for longer range.
Single shot lang nsmsn kc garand pero malakas anim na garand sabay sabay kayumbas ng machine gun ..Ang m14 may atomatik yan .
the sound of this videos are amazing, i was wondering if could use them in a videogame i am making
Qualified on both. Loved both. Firing on full automatic with the 14 was a wild ride. Loved it.
M14 from boot camp sept 65 thru Vietnam Apr 67,,never failed me. Usmc
The Garand will always be number one in my book. Better cartridge for one thing. Hands down!
Yo, The 2 weapons looks like Matches on Outside Range for Backyard.
The M-14 with the 20 round mag. The downside of the 14 is the 20 round mag. It gets in the way sometimes when trying to rest the Rifle! I was issued the 14 in 68. I liked everything about it except the weight!
I would love to see an M-14 vs HK G-3 comparison, and of course a G-3 vs FAL. I have confidence that you probably own both!😂
I’m always leery of the M1’s potential for “Garand thumb” when inserting the enbloc clip. Plus, the M14 mag is easily topped up via the stripper clip slot. Also, 10-20 rounds vs 8 rounds, no brainer, in my humble opinion.
Hey, I have a request! How about the MP5 vs the AK74u SMG’s?
Saya mengagumi M1 karena terbukti di medan perang... Bravo M1.
You need to set up a comparison between the Italian BM-59 (Italian modified M1rifles with detachable 20 rd box magazines). It may be a better comparison. Other sugested comparisons are (1) the US M1 rifle and the Italian BM-59 as well as the Italian BM-59 & the M-14 series.
I used the M-14 in the Marine Corps but the M-1 would have been so much cooler.
Both are winners as was the United States Military for having two outstanding weapons. I am both a M1 Garand fan and owner as well as a M14 fan and owner.
I used a 14 in the Navy... outstanding weapon!
The Two Legend different Era of War
Makes sense considering the m14 is essentially an m1 modified for selectable automatic fire
Have never had the opportunity to shoot an M1 Garand but I did with an M1A (the civilian version of the M-14) and greatly enjoyed it. We were taught to zero at 300 and move back from there and the course of fire was usually 500/600/800 yards and the occasional 900/1000 thrown in to frustrate us. Target bulls eyes sure are small at that range. Figuratively, that is. I imagine that I won't break cover as much changing a mag as I would inserting a clip but then, I haven't had the opportunity. They're both exceptional weapons. As to that myth that the M1 inspired the AK-47: dream on. Clearly Kalashnikov cribbed off the Stg 44 right down to the intermediate round used on that the first true assault rifle. That they almost look identical stands as more proof of the design that the AK fixed any teething problems on. Just wanted to throw that out there.
All m1a front sight wiggles
M1 garand sets grooves
The M14 would have been a better rifle during WWII. Being magazine feed could have provided a huge benefit over an internal 8 round clip. It wouldn't have made that ping when the M1 ran out.
Were do you get the World War 2 weapons i always wanted to shoot World War 2 weapons
When someone steps on my Lawn I come out with the Garand on the left arm and M14 on my right! I’ve never seen someone crap their pants so fast! Sometimes it’s the Amazon boy but wait he’s use to crappin his pants because they don’t give the employees enough breaks!
They are good guns. The difference is only the impact. M1 garand has a good impact.
Of the two...I would take the Garand. When firing....Clips. already loaded, in pockets of bandileers versus stripper clips , mag adapter running rounds into a magazine. M1a has one edge, topping the mag. Garand has the " dump" the clip up out to put in a full clip.
I served 17 years in the united states army and I have fired all standard issue weapons of the army. Hands down the M-14 in my opinion is the primary weapon I would want to carry. But I give serious props to the m-1 grand. M-1 carbine was ok but no stopping power as it was .30 caliber.
M14 operates fine in semi automatic function, it’s when they tried to make it full auto that problems began
I fired expert with the M1, and also took second place trophy in the Ninth Coast Guard District rifle competition in 1969. Mastering the sling is key to consistent 300 yard plus bullseyes. I have both M1s and M1As in my gun safes…. If I saw leftists coming over the hill, I’d choose the M1.
m14 has 15 rounds and m1 garand has 8, most of people probably would like to use m14 but i still prefeer m1 garand cuz of it's way to reload is just perfect and the recoil looks easier to hold on than m14. M1 Garand wins
using both M1 and M14 in my basic training a way long ago. love both and M1 is still my favorite then
If you are going to perform a realistic ballistic penetration test, you do not use coke bottles, you use ballistic gelatin.
Great Job....congrats...
M14 , simply because it has a mag of 20 rds . But both amazing rifles .
imo garand bc ammo size makes more sense and its shorter, so its more portable. afaik firefights do not take place at sniper like distances, so a rifle with a longer barrel for more range would not be needed by most infantry. unfortunately ive heard it tends to jam more, especially on the 8th shot, and the ping tends to give away depletion to enemies. and i dont like that weird loading system. normal magazines make more sense (but i guess one advantage is that its easier to use on cover bc the magazine cant get in the way)
I own both, i love both!!! If i could only chose one if have a nervous break down trying to decide.
308 preferred.... good day sammy
I am fortunate in owning an actual M14 military issue, have fired it quite a few times and I am a huge fan of it so I don't know if I would take it hunting I do love the grand though it is a beautiful gun.
I trained on the M-14 in Basic .I scored expert . I love it .
They are the same except that M14 magazine load is more convenient. M1 if you are careless in loading you end up with a Garand thumb!
30-06 is a hell of a cartridge, had to be Man to carry that M1 around with ya WW2 😮
We had in the Navy 1973 M1 garands in 308
If you look at the body shape you can see a similarity between both rifles
Had the M1 in basic and loved it. Had the M14 in AIT and hated it.
Winner 🙄 coin toss. They were both awesome war weapons of their time.
...THE M-14 WAS THE FINEST INFANTRY RIFLE EVER MADE...jmo
Carried both but really liked the M-1 the best.
Hey Dude When Are You Guys Gonna Upload Another Video Of You Guys Shooting The M1 Garand Semi-Automatic Rifle Like I Know You Did Part 1 and Part 2 But When Are You Guys Gonna Make An M1 Garand Shooting In the New Format.
@GunsOfTheWorId Thanks Dude I'm So Glad You Appreciate My Support From Me Being A British Subscriber Who's Been Watching Your Videos 4 Over a Year You American Gun Collectors Always Have The Right The Own Old Guns Both In
Semi-Automatic & Fully-Automatic Mode Like The M1903 Springfield Rifle The M1 Garand The M1 Carbine The M1897 Trench Gun The M1928A1 Thompson
And Of course The Colt M1911A1 Pistol.
Keep Up The Good Work And Remember The Stay Awesome And Have a Nice Day.
What gets me, is the difference between the Patton quote, and what the feather weight rifle carriers say about them...
Guess who's opinion I trust?
Both the same but I like the M1 and I like the sound better.
In my opinion, the only advantage that the m 14 has over the m 1 garand is the magazine capacity
since I have both,, 30.06 ammo is cheaper than .308 ammo!! my choice--- M-1 GARAND!!
No the 30-06 isn't lmao. There's no way, you liar.
This is the best rifle of the 2nd World War
Wouldn’t a better comparison be the BAR vs M14
Same sights, same ballistics. Practical difference is basically mag capacity.