M14 Forum banner

New gas system or not?

  • I would definitely like that and see it as a next step.

    Votes: 25 22.7%
  • I like the M14/M1A gas system the way it is.

    Votes: 54 49.1%
  • I would like it without the barrel change.

    Votes: 31 28.2%

Advancements on the M14 gas system,....

4K views 46 replies 23 participants last post by  Lionseye 
#1 · (Edited)
Would you buy a new designed gas system that was a one piece machined frontband and cylinder combined and got rid of needing tools to remove the piston by the use of a locking spring plug?

What if it required a new barrel too that removed the current barrel spline, gas lock design from the equation so the new gas system could be simply pinned in place like other rifle gas systems?

Would you be interested in it having a fold down hooded frontsight or a dovetail designed into the top of the cylinder?


It seems to me this is one of the next steps in taking the great M14 design that has proven itself so resilient and expandable with even more potential new stock designs even further into the future for a long time to come. DI5
 
#2 ·
Great Ideas



I appreciate your concepts in the pursuit of perfection, both in performance and maintenance. Personally, I like the first and third concepts, less the second because my rifles would have to be extensively modified.
 
#3 ·
I appreciate your concepts in the pursuit of perfection, both in performance and maintenance. Personally, I like the first and third concepts, less the second because my rifles would have to be extensively modified.

Thanks.
I have been going over ideas on it for a bit now, but the current design needs to tighten down the gas cylinder at the top with the gas lock and threading which leaves a small wall to be dealt with when using a spring locking plug in replacement as the gas plug on the current design holds and locks the gas lock in place. It would be better to just get rid of it to open up more room for design. GI6
 
#4 ·
I'd like to see the gas system re-designed, especially if it meant no tools to get to the gas piston. The barrel could be changed, but then any M14-type weapon wouldn't be able to be easily upgraded with the new parts.

I like the SEI front sight gas lock as an upgrade, but a rail on the top of the gas system would would be nice if it allowed you to use other after-market back-up sights.

We are currently waiting for the extended mag releases from Sadlak, have SEI's front sight gas lock, direct-connect flash hider, extended bolt stop and tool steel hammer and trigger pins. Not to include the different stock systems currently available. Easy access to the gas system without tools (like the FN FAL) would be a plus.

I'm all for upgrades, but in my opinion if we stray too far from the original design of the M14 we might be better served with a different or newly designed weapons system.
 
#5 ·
I'm all for upgrades, but in my opinion if we stray too far from the original design of the M14 we might be better served with a different or newly designed weapons system.



For people that feel that way for their needs and platform desires there certainly are and are going to be other weapons designs.GI7

The M14/M1A action though is one that is a very unique in how it's expandable well beyond other platforms that simply attach new furniture and accessory to there receivers where the M14 action can literally be dropped completely into new full length stock designs capable of vast expansion in modular change well beyond anything else out there in it's caliber and capability of fire.

I think it's one of the best firearm choices a person can make and as well as that capability of expansion, its receiver is likely to be one of the last of it's kind made of extremely strong carbon steel that lasts for hundreds of thousands of rounds and is still in use due to these points in the worlds top military today.

The gas system and the need for tools for maintenance is one point that still holds it back in modern maintainence standards.
Changing that will make bring it even farther into being one of the best weapons there is and has ever been period, for a long time to come.DI5
 
#6 ·
I'm all for it. I'd love to see something that tamed the recoil down like the LaFrance M14s (an M60 gas system I think?) did and made muzzle rise very minimal. Those fortunate enough to have NFA rifles would surely take an interest in a new remedy.

With the interest in shorter barrels, something that could work well with a 16-22" barrel would be ideal. And as for new barrels, if the cost of a new barrel could be kept at or below the cost of a USGI it wouldn't hurt my feelings. USGI barrel surplus could then go for replacement parts on my vietnam replica rifles and use the new stuff on my race gun.
 
#7 ·
Well so far it looks very close. Almost 50/50.

It seems similar to the way it's always kind of been. You have progressive M14 enthusiasts who like the new stock and accessories for example and you have your traditionalist that like it to be classic and traditional.
Whether it's exactly that I'm just making a hypothesis, but things have always seemed that way to me.GI6

There always room for both for the different desires and tastes of different people I'd say.
Thank you to all who have put thoughts in and will.



Arex762, the 16 inch barrel will always be on the short end of the stick with how tight in room it leave things needing to fit it all in for standard stock but I think it could be possible using the existing usgi design barrel with there gas lock threads using a nut that could be tightened down and held in place by a set screw for a longer barrel and to use a direct connect flash suppressor that tightens down the gas system the same and is held in place with a set screw also. Both would leave the plug area free to use a spring locking plug that would be removable by hand without any tools. DI5


(The spindle valve which is pretty much unnecessary anymore could be left out also.)
 
#8 ·
I guess that I would fall somewhere in between personally. I have always preffered the org. stock design, but in a USGI syn. I do prefer any upgrades that make the platform more reliable, and easy to maintain however.
If it's a pure traditional style, or a super extreme style, it's all fun to look at.
We are livin in good times bro!
 
#9 ·
I guess that I would fall somewhere in between personally. I have always preffered the org. stock design, but in a USGI syn. I do prefer any upgrades that make the platform more reliable, and easy to maintain however.
If it's a pure traditional style, or a super extreme style, it's all fun to look at.
We are livin in good times bro!

It's awful nice to have choices.GI6
 
#12 ·
I enjoy the rifle in its historical military configuration and context, same way I would enjoy a 1968 Pymouth Road Runner with its original 383 or 426 hemi engine in it.....

sure there are lots of things that can be done to either to goose up the performance or handling...but from my geezer perspective something is lost in the translation

I do not regard the M14 to be strategically relevant in the future of the military...tactically relevant? yes...but long-term it is sun-downing

and in my experience with vintage weaponry and numerous restorations of post-WW2 British motorcycles....folks pay more for as-sold original arsenal/showroom configurations....

and I never buy or own anything without an eye toward its potential longterm resale value...nothing is forever
 
#13 ·
I think it would be fun to build an M14 with as many Ti parts as possible. You probably couldn't mess with the parts that actually move during cycling without messing up the timing but all the other parts that could be R&R'd w/Ti might shed 16-24oz. on an 18" rifle.

It's probably cost prohibitive and I don't know if Ti could be made into the many shapes, etc., I'm no metal expert...or M14 expert for that matter.

Just thinking out loud...trying not to hurt myself!
 
#14 ·
I love my rifle...

...that being said, I would like anything that makes the platform easier to maintain, and tool-less is a good thing. I think there are few drawbacks to the M14 platform -- but there are a few IMHO:

1: Outdated cleaning kit in the stock -- there is no reason to use or even own a cleaning kit that can damage the accuracy of a weapon. I like history and and all, but not in this case.

2: For a weapon that breaks down so easily (my AR friends always look a bit puzzled that it just comes apartICONSMILE) it is amusingly time-consuming to work on certain aspects of the weapon -- specifically the gas system, trigger group, and the flash hider/muzzle brake. There have to be ways to improve accesibility without modifying the basic design or requiring platform wide modifications (such as a barrel swap).

A good example of an improvement to the M14 design seen recently would be the enlarged magazine release shown here on these forums a while back. It was a upgrade you could use if you want, without any other changes needed for the platform. The 25 round CMI magazine is another good example. Something similar for the gas system would be a great option.

My 1.3 cents,
Ret
 
#15 ·
I'm one of those guys that would, and have, put a masterpiece like the M14 in a "Gee Wiz" Troy or Sage stock. And I own a Socom, which some here, consider blasphemous.

However I would be wary of straying too radically far from the original design. At some point, it becomes time to leave well enough alone. Remember the M14 is already an improved M1... of course that turned out pretty good, didn't it.GI6
 
#16 ·
Well, it stills is very much 50/50 but the majority interested seem to prefer to keep the original barrel thread and spline design which is understandable and would make the system easiest to change out to.

It just leaves working in the space provided to do a easy to remove with no tools gas plug design while still locking the cylinder in place by use of the threading the gas lock now uses.

Titanium is an interesting thought but part of how the M14 handles recoil and muzzle rise is by how much the gas system weighs for it's part.

Thank you all for putting in posts and those voting. DI5
 
#17 ·
I still dont see any alternative options as a bad thing for anyone, IMHO. Things like this only make this platform more versatile than before, and give all involved more options...

Example : I prefer the traditional type synthetic stock over any of the pistol grip types with all the rails, but I am happy to see that they are out there for this platform, and it only opens more options when it comes down to it. This is what livin in the good ole USA is all about. This will in no way affect a traditionalist, who prefers to maintain the closest thing that one can to an org. M14 U.S. rifle. In alot of ways, it shows that this platform can be utilized for specific tasks that were unheard of a few yrs. ago.
This is comin from a guy who has used the org. M14 rifle to tangle with bad guys in a foreign land.

IMO........... this is the perfect platform to enhance, as it is so capable in it's org. configuration.
 
#18 ·
Your exactly right Fragout2000, more options are always good and even with one in a gas system for the M14 that didn't need tools to take it apart to maintain it, that doesn't mean a person has to use it.
As we have seen and see there are lots of different tastes and outlooks of what someone wants to have and use their M14/M1A for.
This would just be another, but it's another that I think would catch on more in time as more people saw they didn't need their gas wrench and combi tool anymore.

If it comes about in time where the military is still using M14's does anyone really think that the military wouldn't be interested in it even if it was on a small scale with unit to unit purchase?
One thing that has always seemed a common occurrence is when the military starts using something, there is a line of followers.DI5

The M14 while a highly capable and expandable platform, is one of the last in military use weapons that needs tools to perform regular field maintainence. Even when it's less in use in the military some of those M14's in stock will probably continue to be loaned out to police agencies.
It may hurt those in business a little who make tools, but not so much if they put some effort into the game to make another gas system that doesn't need them.

Hint, hint Sadlak, Smith .....Springfield.

This is partly my point here, as to stir minds to working on it who have the capability now to get it done were I necessarily don't as I'm working towards on a few different things with making certain parts for the M14 as one of them, but not the only one and a new gas system will take a large investment to final product.

If I didn't want to stir that interest in the idea and spread the thought to others in the business as I've done before, I surely wouldn't have made a thread about it in a open public forum for M14 enthusiasts and those who work directly on them and there parts for a business.GI7



LionseyeDI5
 
#19 ·
I tend to view these types of rifles with their intended purpose in mind. The biggest problem with the M14 gas system is not that it requires a tool to take apart but that the gas plug can loosen so people tend to overtighten it. I see little advantage to a tooless gas system mod that involves a major parts change. For one thing I would not trust it without a govt type testing program to prove its long term usability. The only mod I would be interested in is a simple modification to the plug and what I would like to see is a locking device to keep it from loosening and maybe a slot or flip out lever. The M14 gas system does not require a lot of maintance to keep up and running. Its not likely you will have to brake it down in combat to keep it operational and when you do need to clean it a tool should be available with your cleaning equipment. Which brings up a point, I really like the Otis sniper kits but a 3/8" wrench that fit in one of them would be nice.

IMO the biggest single improvement to the M14 that makes it a better battle rife to date is the extended bolt release. Don't get me wrong, I think the new stocks and scope mounts are useful but not everyone gets or need them. The EBR a simple parts change out allows you to reenter the fight quicker when need be and can and IMO should be installed on every M14 deployed whether stock or tricked out. If the CMI 25 round mag proves out that will be a good thing, I have to reserve judement on the extended mag release as I have no experience with it but that could be worthwhile.

M.
 
#20 ·
This is an interesting question and discussion. I think it’s worth taking the M14 in a new direction. If you limit yourself to existing parts, you’re limiting your potential for improvement. I recall seeing a picture in one of Peter Senich’s books where Rock Island Arsenal built up a true heavy barreled M14 with oversized stock, heavy barrel and completely different gas system in order to maximize accuracy. Radically different.

So I believe a new barrel is in order. Maybe something with a larger overall diameter event to the muzzle, threaded for 5/8”-24 tpi and the gas system would be pinned or clamped on like you proposed.

I’d like to see an evolution in this platform, sounds exciting.

Al
 
#21 ·
It seems to me that a pinned on gas system would be an accuracy enhancement. If the system pins into the same place, then the pressure on it should stay the same, unlike witht the gas plug/lock, where one must try to tighten it to the same torque every time.

That and the possiblity of a bbl that can carry a heavy contour to the crown would be a great improvement IMO.

Of course, I doubt if many would go for these mods, so the price would probably be restrictive.
 
#22 ·
The pinning of the gas cylinder would be a much more consistent and stable way of holding it to the barrel I feel, but it still comes to the point of how many would want to adopt it when it would required a complete barrel change also and would limit the barrel choices till the aftermarket kicked in on it,....in what detail it did and when.

The gas lock design of the M14 is certainly an older, more complicated way of going about it which is why it's not used that I can see in modern firearms design.

People don't necessarily take well to change quickly and it can be done both ways that's for sure.
With other firearms advancements coming heavier into play like the use of salt bath nitriding a new barrel and cylinder pinned would last quite a while.DI5

http://www.burlingtoneng.com/wear_resistance.html

I'd like to see Springfield actually start offering it as a complete treatment for M1A's.
 
#24 ·
Reply

I like the system the way it is. I added the Schuster adjustable gas valve awhile ago and find that provides all the adventure that I need. If a person was happy with one basic load parameter, even the Schuster would not be needed. But reloading is half the fun! That's a "fault" of me, not the M-14 gas system.
Greg T.
 
#25 ·
Poll closed

Poll was closed I did not get to vote, but I still get to post.

In the spirit of American ingenuity, change it, make a new one, try and make a better one. The market will let the manufacturer know if it is better. I'm not so sure on all of that let the Uncle Sam test it out. If people using them and paying for them like them they will buy them. If not then his buisness will go away.

Keep moving forward or you'll fall behind. Yes the M14 has historical value, but anynew manufactured parts are not historically correct. So if you are going to make new parts anyway, see if you can make em better.

IMHO. . . the best update to the m14 platform is LRB's M25. The integral scope rail is an excellent idea.

cz
 
#26 ·
I'm sorry, I completely forgot and overlooked that I had put a time limit on the poll.
Votes may be a no go anymore, but thoughts are still appreciated.

"In the spirit of American ingenuity, change it, make a new one, try and make a better one."

That says alot right there and I completely agree. DI5




( Moderators: If you could reopen the poll if possible I'd appreciate it)GI6
 
#28 ·
I would like to see a system that came apart without tools, I dont think I would want to change barrels, but I would consider it if the barrels were good quality and chrome lined. I like the idea of using taper pins, I think that so long as the rsystem didnt limit any options other than the barrel availability then it would be good to go.
 
#29 ·
Well I see the trigger guard clamping sytem to be a convenient and neat idea that Garand had and suitible to a combat rifle to take down with minimal amount of tools......

BUT (there's always a but isn't there)

At least on the garand M1 rifle the little trunions on the trigger guard wear away to D shapes and you get stock compression in natural wood causing a lack of clamping power. For long term consistency w/o uncle sugar's maint. capabilities for vast amount of spare stocks and machined parts, I'd almost rather see a redesign to incorporate a pair of screws like a typical mauser pattern rifle.

As far as an overhaul on the design of the gas system, I'm sure a better mouse trap can be made but just like my desire for a change of the traditional garand clamping setup, it just wouldn't be an m14. That being said, I'd shoot it!

nut
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top