03-12-2012, 01:51 AM
Odd that you don't mention some other relevant matters at the time.
The AR10 was not a true competitor in the competition that resulted in the M14 being selected as they were more concept demonstrators than pre-production rifles.
At the time NATO was seeking to standardise on ONE rifle and ONE cartridge. The US, UK and France had very different ideas about the nature of future war and the soldiers role in it. The 'other' rifle the M14 competed against was the Belgian FN-FAL which was subsequently adopted by pretty much everbody else (except the frogs and the swiss). The US Army competition was really won on the basis that the M14 did not require significant retooling of the factory and could therefore be made 'cheaper'. History tells us that those assertions were not true and the factory was significantly rebuilt to manufacture the M14 which arrived so many years late and over budget. Truth of the matter is that it was an obsolete design when the competition was run, the FAL was a better design for a battle rifle, just as the SR25 type rifle is the next generation after that (although the design needs a gas piston IMHO). The FN SCAR is the most recent design.
The FAL was actually designed around smaller rounds, the 280 Brit cartridge was a stretch, the 7.62x51 took the design to the limits.
I've used the AR10, the FAL an M1A and a G3 enough to be quite familiar with them all. I feel that the FAL was by far the best battle rifle, but the M1A was a better rifle for punching paper. Real experience from the 1960s to the 1990s suggests that the FAL was the best rifle for a soldier across the world, probably why it has been nicknamed the "right arm of freedom". Interestingly I noted several of them in the footage from Libya last year. Early AR10s didn't work that well at all, particularly after a few days in the field. The SR25 type rifles borrow alot of the developmental changes that went into the AR15 and are both similar and very different to the original AR10.
It is a pity the US went with the M14 as that choice certainly created an opportunity for the 5.56 cartridge and we have been cursed with it ever since.
The AR10 was not a true competitor in the competition that resulted in the M14 being selected as they were more concept demonstrators than pre-production rifles.
At the time NATO was seeking to standardise on ONE rifle and ONE cartridge. The US, UK and France had very different ideas about the nature of future war and the soldiers role in it. The 'other' rifle the M14 competed against was the Belgian FN-FAL which was subsequently adopted by pretty much everbody else (except the frogs and the swiss). The US Army competition was really won on the basis that the M14 did not require significant retooling of the factory and could therefore be made 'cheaper'. History tells us that those assertions were not true and the factory was significantly rebuilt to manufacture the M14 which arrived so many years late and over budget. Truth of the matter is that it was an obsolete design when the competition was run, the FAL was a better design for a battle rifle, just as the SR25 type rifle is the next generation after that (although the design needs a gas piston IMHO). The FN SCAR is the most recent design.
The FAL was actually designed around smaller rounds, the 280 Brit cartridge was a stretch, the 7.62x51 took the design to the limits.
I've used the AR10, the FAL an M1A and a G3 enough to be quite familiar with them all. I feel that the FAL was by far the best battle rifle, but the M1A was a better rifle for punching paper. Real experience from the 1960s to the 1990s suggests that the FAL was the best rifle for a soldier across the world, probably why it has been nicknamed the "right arm of freedom". Interestingly I noted several of them in the footage from Libya last year. Early AR10s didn't work that well at all, particularly after a few days in the field. The SR25 type rifles borrow alot of the developmental changes that went into the AR15 and are both similar and very different to the original AR10.
It is a pity the US went with the M14 as that choice certainly created an opportunity for the 5.56 cartridge and we have been cursed with it ever since.