Navy XM25 questions!! - Page 3 - M14 Forum

M14 Forum


Navy XM25 questions!!

This is a discussion on Navy XM25 questions!! within the The M14 forums, part of the M14 M1A Forum category; Originally Posted by Random Guy Yes, its hard to say, and I'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty confident that this circa 1992(?) picture of ...


Go Back   M14 Forum > M14 M1A Forum > The M14

23Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Moderator Tools Display Modes

Old May 15th, 2017, 05:36 AM   #31
Scout Sniper
 
Majikani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: South Florida, or offshore GOM
Posts: 793

Awards Showcase

Quote:
Originally Posted by Random Guy View Post
Yes, its hard to say, and I'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty confident that this circa 1992(?) picture of Tom Kapp with an XM25 is of the Harris 1A2-L Ultralight 9-13" smooth leg, non-swivel...as the US Army had these as standard issued items via the 1988 M24 SWS program, and thus Tom Kapp/US Army SF had ready access to these by the early 1990s. (I could be wrong, but it looks a little too high to be the shorter 6-9" version - note the amount of daylight/space under the magazine...and the suppressor looks to be a good 12" or more inches off the table)...

...so we can at least deduct that bipod studs were on the suppressed M25s as circa 1992, right? (The 1991 picture by Max Crace is just a detailed drawing, I think of a picture, but the bipod shown comports with my understanding of what Harris offered in that era. Had Harris offered the shorter benchrest height bipod back in 1988 I think the Army would have chosen it over the taller 9-13" version given its lower profile). My 2cts.

Sure, if I get a chance I'll ask Harris via email when their benchrest bipods came out, but I am under the impression it was the 200Xs...but that's just a guess based on their advertisements over time.
Okay, a little more convincing. I still think the bipod would have been more of an availability / preference / mission dictated item than a build designation However if short bipods weren't available yet then that would end the discussion right there!

Thanks from XM25Ren
Majikani is offline  
Remove Ads
Old May 15th, 2017, 07:01 AM   #32
Grunt
 
Random Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: No. VA
Posts: 113
Quote:
do we know in fact if the first SSR riflre were rear lugged,i heard they were?
And I noticed the stock was grey,when did they move to the Tan Mcmillans that ive seen pics of?
Forceman: Funny you should ask about the lugged topic and Navy M25/M14 SSR rifles....I am using a rear lugged SAI receiver for my Navy M25 replica with a 1993 USN barrel, and initially I thought it would be an incorrect configuration for my tribute rifle, but I was okay with that. However, a careful reading of Lee Emerson's latest book, M14 Rifle History and Development, Fifth Edition, Vol 1 (2016), page 184, revealed some interesting information, presumably based on interview(s) of former Navy/Crane employee(s):

Quote:
The M14 SSR rifles were built by the Naval Surface Center (Crane, IN). Initially, the receivers were double lugged but the front lug was prone to cracking. Later, rear lugged match M14 rifles were utilized. The final M14 SSR configuration had a non-lugged receiver. M14 SSR rifles were built with bedded McMillan M1A or M3A stocks. The U.S. Navy SEALs used the M14 SSR until at least 2000. In May 2000, the U.S. Navy awarded a sole source contract to Knight's Armament Company for 300 SR-25 rifles built to its specifications. The Navy version of the SR-25 was adopted as the Mk 11 Mod 0.
So it appears that the Navy used some of their match-prepared receivers for the initial builds, presumably in the early 1990s. (So for my project, I guess its at least conceivable that a 1993 era Navy M25 could have used a rear lugged receiver..;-). I doubt they had a lot of spare match lugged receivers as these things were custom-made with welded-on lugs and carefully threaded for torque screws - but apparently they used them for the early builds. Unfortunately Emerson's research doesn't reveal what years and what volumes constituted the early M25/SSR rifles builds, but I doubt it was more than 200 or 300 rifles. (I state that figure based on the volume of SR-25 rifles ordered as replacements in 2000).

As previously noted, the original M14 SSR designation seems to have occurred in the summer of 1996 based on presumably the concurrent release of the official Operator's Manual, and Emerson's research states that non-lugged receivers were used for the "final" configuration, so my guess is that only non-lugged M14 receivers were used beginning in 1996 for the Navy M14 SSR rifles. (I will speculate that the Crane guys may have used up their small supply of lugged M14 receivers from the Navy team rifles in the early 1990s, and for the 1996 and later M14 SSR rifles, they started using their more plentiful supply of "rack grade" M14s, which were obviously non-lugged.)

FWIW, the Navy has an NSN for almost everything, including both double-lugged and rear-lugged receivers. For example:

Quote:
M14 Rifle Group A (Port Security)
NSN: 1005-LL-H18-7614 (NSN issued by the U. S. Navy)
U. S. Navy issue, double lugged receiver, fiberglass stock, heavyweight match grade barrel

M14 Rifle Group B (Match Rifle)
NSN: 1005-LL-H18-7615 (NSN issued by the U. S. Navy)
U. S. Navy issue, rear lugged receiver, wood or fiberglass stock, heavyweight match grade barrel
...just an fyi. (BTW, to the best of my knowledge the US Army never used a lugged receiver for their M25 rifles.)

Regarding the question about the tan stocks typically seen on M14 SSR rifles, I don't know when the Navy ordered the tan stocks. I guess someone at McMillan familiar with the military orders might know the era, or someone who worked at Crane, IN who built the M14 SSR rifles might also have that knowledge, but I don't know. (My speculation would be around the war in Iraq circa 2003-2010, but that's just a guess).


Last edited by Random Guy; May 15th, 2017 at 11:03 AM. Reason: typos
Random Guy is offline  
Reply

  M14 Forum > M14 M1A Forum > The M14

Moderator Tools
Display Modes


Similar M14 Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Info for Vets: VA Hospital Questions..." CCKen Veterans Affairs 2 April 9th, 2010 08:39 AM



Top Gun Sites Top Sites List