Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The M14 Enhanced Battle Rifle
American Rifleman ^ | 2/24/11 | Maj. John Plaster, U.S. Army (Ret.)

Posted on 03/08/2011 11:47:32 AM PST by King_Corey

The M14 Enhanced Battle Rifle The changing nature of the war in Afghanistan led to the re-issue of the 7.62x51 mm NATO M14 rifle. By Maj. John Plaster, U.S. Army (Ret.) Not long after U.S. forces invaded Afghanistan, al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies came to realize that America’s 5.56x45 mm NATO infantry rifles lost most of their lethality beyond 500 meters. Demonstrating their adaptability, the insurgents exploited Afghanistan’s sprawling valleys and distant mountainsides to seek engagements beyond the M16’s and M4’s effective ranges.

This is borne out by U.S. Army data, which reveals that more than half of the war’s small arms engagements are now beyond 500 meters, with the enemy employing heavier weapons and then withdrawing before air support or artillery fire can arrive.

One solution, military planners could see, was employing a more capable cartridge already in the system: the 7.62x51 mm NATO. Today’s standard U.S. sniper cartridge, the 175-grain, M118 Long Range load, delivers four times the foot-pounds of energy as the standard 62-grain, 5.56 mm round at extended ranges. In other words, at 600 meters the 7.62 mm round packs about as much energy—1,000 ft.-lbs.—as the 5.56 mm round at 100 meters.

Although M14 rifles were pulled from depot storage, fitted with scopes, shipped to Afghanistan and issued to Army and Marine designated riflemen, the guns proved less than ideal for today’s warfare. First, their fixed stocks could not be adjusted to fit the length-of-pull needed for today’s body armor. And second, the 40-year-old rifles could not accommodate modern accessories such as lasers, night vision scopes and lights, which require MIL STD 1913 Picatinny rails. Fortunately, a solution had already been developed by the U.S. Navy’s Surface Warfare Center at Crane, Ind.

The SEAL CQB Rifle One year before the 2001 terrorist attacks, U.S. Navy SEALs had gone to Crane to request an updated version of the 42-year-old M14. Great believers in the M14’s reliability and the 7.62x51 mm NATO cartridge’s lethality, they wanted a shortened version with a pistol grip and adjustable-length buttstock for close-quarters use.

The design task fell to David Armstrong, an accomplished small arms engineer who previously had developed the well-received SOPMOD (Special Operations Peculiar Modification System) for the M4 carbine. A mechanical engineer, machinist and recreational shooter, Armstrong began by searching for an off-the-shelf collapsible buttstock.

After trying several, he chose a Sage Int’l collapsible, pistol-grip stock made for the Remington Model 870 shotgun. The telescoping design offered five lengths of pull, in 1-inch increments, that worked well with body armor. Armstrong connected the Sage buttstock to the forward section of a modified M14 fiberglass stock. He also replaced the rifle’s standard 22-inch barrel with an 18-inch unit, reducing its overall length by nearly 10 inches, to 35 inches.

The fiberglass stock, however, did not satisfy him. “The [M14] design has always been tough to beat for reliability, but required laborsome bedding and tuning for best accuracy,” he explained. Earlier sniper versions of the M14, especially the M21 Sniper System, which used a resin-impregnated stock with epoxy bedding, proved so temperamental that snipers were instructed not to remove the action from the stock while cleaning it.

Armstrong took the bold step of designing his own chassis stock, machined from aircraft-grade aluminum. Not only would this be more rigid than fiberglass, but it would include an aluminum bedding block and an assortment of Picatinny rails for optical and illumination accessories. The result was a true “drop-in” stock, requiring no bedding or special fitting. “This stock floats the gas system through a replacement operating rod guide screwed to the rigid stock fore-end and a simple spacer replacing the front band,” he said. He also modified the Sage buttstock’s cheek rest to give it 2 inches of vertical adjustment in 1/4-inch increments.

In addition to installing quad Picatinny rails around the fore-end, he attached a short-rail scope mount that replaced the M14’s stripper clip guide. The final additions were a more effective flash suppressor, three ambidextrous 1 1/4-inch sling slot locations, and a Harris Engineering S-LM Series S bipod. Patented to the U.S. Navy with Armstrong as its inventor, the chassis stock is now produced under license by Sage Int’l in Oscoda, Mich.

“Simply adding the chassis stock system cut the group size of a basic M14 in half without the need for glass-bedding,” he reports. Firing five-shot groups with M118 ammunition at 600 yards, Naval technicians at Crane recorded 2 to 2.5 minute-of-angle (m.o.a.) extreme spreads—meaning 12 to 18-inch groups. Standard M80 ball ammunition shot nearly as well.

The EBR & EMR When the U.S. Army and Marine Corps later sought modernized M14s, Armstrong merely switched the Navy’s Mk. 14 Mod 0 rifle’s short barrel for a full-length 22-inch version to create the Army’s Enhanced Battle Rifle (EBR) and the Marine’s M39 Enhanced Marksman’s Rifle (EMR). These versions measure 38.5 inches overall, with the stocks collapsed, and 45 inches when fully extended.

Although 3 pounds heavier than the standard M14, the EBR and EMR compare favorably to America’s current 7.62 mm sniping platforms, such as the Army’s M24 and M110, and the Marine Corps’ M40A3. The Army is issuing two EBRs per infantry squad, while the Marines have placed the EMR at platoon-level.

The Army EBR is fitted with a Leupold 3.5–10X scope, and the USMC’s EMR optic is the Schmidt & Bender M8541 Scout Sniper Day Scope, the same scope used by Marine snipers. Thus equipped, these designated riflemen have the ability to engage enemy personnel to 800 meters.

Each service is now building its own rifles, with Navy Mk. 14 Model 0’s being produced at the Crane facility, while Army rifles are assembled at Rock Island Arsenal, Ill., and the USMC version at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va.

Some 5,000 EBRs have been produced at Rock Island Arsenal, with funding for another 1,200. A further 2,000 Sage stocks have reportedly been sold directly to military units and individuals for conversion of M14s. Still more rifles issued to Marines and SEALs suggest that perhaps 10,000 of these modernized M14s are now in service.

Firing The EBR Thanks to Fulton Armory of Savage, Md., I was able to test fire a platform nearly identical to the EBR. Available to civilian shooters, this semi-automatic-only rifle incorporates Fulton’s own M14 Receiver, installed on the same Sage Int’l chassis stock that David Armstrong designed.

Examining the rifle in my shop, I found that its military two-stage trigger broke cleanly at 3 pounds, 7.5 ounces—about perfect for me. For test-firing, I mounted a Bushnell Elite 6500 4.5–30X Tactical Scope, which was a simple task with the rifle’s Picatinny rails.

Ergonomics had concerned me because of the stock’s square edges. Nonetheless, I found its balance and heft surprisingly good with the center-of-balance at the magazine well. Having trained on the M14 in the 1960s, I already appreciated the reliability of its gas piston and operating rod system, and the action’s resistance to sand and carbon buildup. Of course, I experienced no stoppages or malfunctions of any kind.

Weighing 14 pounds with a scope, a bipod and a loaded 20-round magazine, this weight plus the straight-line stock resulted in a mild recoil “push,” making it very comfortable to fire. This also assisted target reacquisition for follow-up shots.

The basic difference between the military EBR and Fulton Armory’s version is a National Match barrel—and that really showed on the range. Accuracy with the Fulton Armory EBR was impressive. Firing off sandbags at 100 yards, my Federal Gold Medal Match, .308 Win., 168-grain ammunition punched a three-round group measuring 0.721 inches. Switching to the U.S. military’s load specifically designed for sniping—the 175-grain, M118 Long Range round—the rifle fired even better, scoring a 0.50-inch three-round group.

In the hands of a trained marksman, the EBR—especially with a National Match barrel—is more than capable of dealing with insurgents to 800 meters and beyond. Perhaps the Taliban and its allies have proven adaptable; but, as demonstrated by these 21st century M14s, so have we.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: army; banglist; m14; rifle
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-155 next last
Maj. John Plaster, U.S. Army (Ret.)

Wrote "The Ultimate Sniper" book

Very credible source.

1 posted on 03/08/2011 11:47:40 AM PST by King_Corey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

7.62x51 is .308, isn’t it?


2 posted on 03/08/2011 11:50:37 AM PST by WayneS (Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. -- James Madison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey
I like it!


3 posted on 03/08/2011 11:51:00 AM PST by humblegunner (Blogger Overlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

Why is there no da*n picture?

I hope McNamara burns in hell for taking away the M14 from our troops during JFK-LBJ’s Vietnam War.


4 posted on 03/08/2011 11:51:01 AM PST by Frantzie (HD TV - Total Brain-washing now in High Def. 3-D Coming soon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

Springfield makes Scout & SOCOM versions of the M14 that have mounting rails. Why was it necessary to ship the troops 50 year old weapons?


5 posted on 03/08/2011 11:51:26 AM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

I prefer the old Garand.


6 posted on 03/08/2011 11:51:51 AM PST by ZULU (No nation which ever attempted to tolerate Islam, escaped total Islamization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey
SOCOM is adopting the Mk17 SCAR 7.62 NATO for special ops use:


7 posted on 03/08/2011 11:53:24 AM PST by PapaBear3625 ("It is only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything" -- Fight Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Hopefully they’re just modding the old.

If not, may as well go with the 7.62 SCAR from FN.


8 posted on 03/08/2011 11:53:49 AM PST by WOBBLY BOB ( "I don't want the majority if we don't stand for something"- Jim Demint)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

How about a modified M1 with a magazine and a 30-06 round? I would think they would reach out and touch someone too.


9 posted on 03/08/2011 11:54:41 AM PST by Bringbackthedraft (I see a dark cloud coming over the horizon, and its reminiscent of 1939.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

Could this be love...?


10 posted on 03/08/2011 11:54:53 AM PST by papertyger (Progressives: excusing hate by accusing hate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

AMEN my brother. A wonderful rifle. And Clinton gave them away. They need them in Afghanistan.


11 posted on 03/08/2011 11:55:03 AM PST by 70th Division (I love my country but fear my government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey
I thought there was another design selected from Knights Armaments for the 7.62x51 mm requirement?
12 posted on 03/08/2011 11:55:14 AM PST by ThinkingBuddha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

Oh Evil Black Rifle, how I love thee.


13 posted on 03/08/2011 11:55:43 AM PST by wastedyears (It has nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

I hope she can kiss, cause she ain’t much to look at....


14 posted on 03/08/2011 11:57:11 AM PST by papertyger (Progressives: excusing hate by accusing hate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

15 posted on 03/08/2011 11:57:13 AM PST by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

I went through IOBC with this guy in the summer of 1975.

He was prior service and had spent quite a bit of time in Nam.


16 posted on 03/08/2011 11:57:26 AM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: harpseal; TexasCowboy; nunya bidness; AAABEST; Travis McGee; Squantos; wku man; SLB; ...
Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!
17 posted on 03/08/2011 11:57:45 AM PST by Joe Brower (Sheep have three speeds: "graze", "stampede" and "cower".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

“Why was it necessary to ship the troops 50 year old weapons?”

Maybe because of the extended range over M16/M4 so we can reach out to enemy combatants. Also maybe due to .5 MOA accuracy. Other than that not much...


18 posted on 03/08/2011 11:57:53 AM PST by Max_850
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bringbackthedraft

“How about a modified M1 with a magazine and a 30-06 round?”

That’s pretty much called an M-14. In the bullet weights used, the 308 Win (7.62X51) is basically identical to a 30/06 but in a shorter cartridge.


19 posted on 03/08/2011 11:58:18 AM PST by headstamp 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey
7.62 = .30
I have been told for years that the 30-06 was woefully out dated.
Damn. The more things change, the more things stay the same.
20 posted on 03/08/2011 11:59:04 AM PST by Tupelo (The Boudicca from Wasilla supporter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

Humping a 14 pound rifle up a mountain ain’t a picnic. I guess when you need something and have to go to 40 year old stuff in a warehouse somebody isn’t funding the right things. But hey, training for the demise of DADT is well funded I be. What a way to run a war.


21 posted on 03/08/2011 12:00:51 PM PST by dblshot (Insanity - electing the same people over and over and expecting different results.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

Standard military thinking, pick weapon because it is more effective at x range, and then the shorten the damn barrel to decrease the range.


22 posted on 03/08/2011 12:00:57 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Our guys used to take the M1 carbine when we flew. First thing a newbie did was grab one from one of the White Mice running around. Never jammed, always worked. Not like the Matte Matel specials they issued.


23 posted on 03/08/2011 12:01:08 PM PST by ReverendJames (Only A Painter Or A Liberal Can Change Black To White.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: skeeter
Why was it necessary to ship the troops 50 year old weapons?

Because they still work.

Do you know what year the B-52 Bomber entered service?

24 posted on 03/08/2011 12:03:07 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

WOW! That don’t look like MY M-14 I humped around with!...............


25 posted on 03/08/2011 12:03:45 PM PST by Red Badger (How can anyone look at the situation in Libya and be for gun control is beyond stupid. It's suicide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

I was just thinking that if they really are having fights over 500 yds, maybe the old 1903 Springfield in 30-06 might just be a good rifle for maybe half the troops with the rest using something in .308.

Of course a scoped modern bolt action hunting rifle also would seem to make sense for limited use.


26 posted on 03/08/2011 12:04:01 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: skeeter
Why was it necessary to ship the troops 50 year old weapons?

Because "New and Improved" isn't necessarily.

27 posted on 03/08/2011 12:04:38 PM PST by Not now, Not ever! (Girlfriend suggested I use pelosi in place of swear words, A good idea, I think)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears
Eddie Approves.

How he gets those magazines inserted halfway down the barrel I'll never know.

28 posted on 03/08/2011 12:05:24 PM PST by humblegunner (Blogger Overlord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

When Col Jeff Cooper was shown a $3,000 gold plated presentation wall hanging version of the M-16 he replied;

“Why would we want a commemorative version of a rifle we never wanted in the first place?”


29 posted on 03/08/2011 12:06:03 PM PST by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2

It is the same cartridge, you can run a 30/06 in a 308 die and make a 308 after you trim the neck. Same for 270, 243, 25/06, all based on 30/06 brass. Some other wildcats as well.


30 posted on 03/08/2011 12:06:03 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

That M14 looks nothing like the M14 that I first had when I was in Vietnam (thet is, before they took it away from me and gave me that POS M16).


31 posted on 03/08/2011 12:06:30 PM PST by BuffaloJack (Obama did not learn incompetence; he was born to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

Essentially yes. The M1-A (semi-auto only)is the civilian version of the M-14 and will chamber and digest either ammo marked as 7.65 X 51 or .308 although I am told that the commercial .308 ammo (Win, Rem, Federal, etc. is loaded to higher chamber pressures. I’ve used both kinds and never had a problem.

The M1-A is a sweetheart to shoot. It has probably the best factory trigger I’ve ever shot and the weight and gas operation make recoil very easy to deal with. The only thing I don’t like is the factory scope mount puts the scope up too high to get a good cheek weld. But the thing sure does shoot! I can consistently put rounds in a 12” circle at 400 yards off of a rest. And this is a standard model, not the match grade.


32 posted on 03/08/2011 12:06:38 PM PST by technically right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Do realize how old the M-2 .50 cal MG design is? Still the best heavy MG in the world.


33 posted on 03/08/2011 12:07:31 PM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
The problem with the old weapons were their inability to mount optics. Thats an improvement I can understand.

Springfield already has a solution, there is little reason to design a completely new weapon.

34 posted on 03/08/2011 12:08:50 PM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
They actually use the 300 Winchester mag for the reach out and touch someone, when the fifty is not available.
35 posted on 03/08/2011 12:09:19 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan

LOL, older than me.


36 posted on 03/08/2011 12:11:10 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Gonna say. My M14 1960s version sure didn't look like that.
37 posted on 03/08/2011 12:11:14 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
I hope McNamara burns in hell for taking away the M14 from our troops during JFK-LBJ’s Vietnam War.
Sorry, but the M-14 was heavy, cumbersome, had a hell of a recoil, a limited rate of fire, and the ammo was heavy too.
The M-16 was made for places like VN ... smaller, lightweight, no recoil to speak of, and you could fire semi-auto or full "rock & roll" with the flick of a switch. Most importantly, you could get boo-koo rounds on target real quick to establish a base of fire.
That the early M-16s had some real problems doesn't mean the M-14 was better. In fact, for over 40 years now, the M-16 has essentially been the weapon of choice for the US military.
38 posted on 03/08/2011 12:14:16 PM PST by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

I LIKE THIS ONE!.......................


39 posted on 03/08/2011 12:16:32 PM PST by Red Badger (How can anyone look at the situation in Libya and be for gun control is beyond stupid. It's suicide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Yep. 260 Rem, 280 Rem, 7mm/08 etc.

All the same cartridge head/rim specs. 308 can go into a shorter action.


40 posted on 03/08/2011 12:19:39 PM PST by headstamp 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

I’m wondering if they return to the M-16A2, which would give them the lethality beyound 500 because it has a longer barrel; then give a couple squad members the M-14 like the Marine Corps is doing.


41 posted on 03/08/2011 12:20:01 PM PST by Salvavida (The restoration of the U.S.A. starts with filling the pews at every Bible-believing church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bringbackthedraft
How about a modified M1 with a magazine and a 30-06 round?

That would be...an M14.

42 posted on 03/08/2011 12:20:44 PM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: King_Corey

Interesting article which deals with an issue I’m struggling with right now.

Do I build a sweet AR15 or do I just go out and buy an Armalite AR10 or a Panther .308?

Any thoughts?


43 posted on 03/08/2011 12:21:59 PM PST by Obadiah (If you were going to shoot a mime, would you use a silencer?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter
Springfield already has a solution, there is little reason to design a completely new weapon.

Actually there are a couple of really good reasons to do just that. Personally I lean towards a highly accurized version of the original AR-10 platform myself. This would accomplish several things.

First our guys would have the advantage of the heavier and more powerful 7.62 NATO cartridge thus extending their lethal range by a factor of nearly 2.

Secondly training time would be drastically reduced. All of the controls are placed identically to the current M16/M4 platform. Scout/sniper recruits are essentially 'pre-trained' on the platform. All they need to do is learn the ballistics of the heavier round.

Third they're not carrying something 'differen't on the battlefield. A weapon that looks identical to the M16 at first glance doesn't scream "I'm the sniper! SHOOT ME FIRST!" at the bad guys.

Then there's the weight differential between this rifle and the M4. Now I don't know if you've ever humped a 65 pound ruck around for days on end. I have and believe me you feel every frigging ounce. Anything that saves weight is a God send to leg, line infantry guys.

So that's 4 pretty good reasons IMO to look at a new weapon system for the 7.62 platform.

L

44 posted on 03/08/2011 12:22:58 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner

Yes please.


45 posted on 03/08/2011 12:25:32 PM PST by Dr. Sheldon Cooper (The truth can indeed be a finger-down-the-throat for those unprepared to hear it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2

There is a couple more but I keep drawing a blank. One of the Thompson contender rounds was a shorten 308, loaded with a 357 bullet wasn’t it.


46 posted on 03/08/2011 12:27:30 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2
“How about a modified M1 with a magazine and a 30-06 round?”

How much and how many can i buy? The neat thing about the 30.06 is that not only will it “reach out and touch someone” it will also reach trough and touch ‘em. Ma’ Deuce is really good at that.

47 posted on 03/08/2011 12:33:13 PM PST by fella (.He that followeth after vain persons shall have poverty enough." Pv.28:19')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Obadiah
Do I build a sweet AR15 or do I just go out and buy an Armalite AR10 or a Panther .308?

You have to ask yourself what's the most likely scenario you'll be facing? If you're looking at SHTF type stuff beyond 600 yards, well the decision is pretty much made.

If you think that isn't very likely given your location, situation, etc. then the Mforgery may be the way to go. Do a "needs analysis" before you buy anything, then select the weapon that fulfills most or all of those needs.

L

48 posted on 03/08/2011 12:34:30 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

The M1—30 06—has always been one hell of a weapon. I have an AR 15, 5.56 and it’s a nice weapon. But no comparison to the punch of the M1.


49 posted on 03/08/2011 12:35:02 PM PST by Oldpuppymax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

I’m glad you agree that shipping them the old M14s was a crappy idea:)


50 posted on 03/08/2011 12:36:18 PM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-155 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson