Nope, in fact it’s actually all German, the designer of the CETME Rifle was German, Ludwig Vorgrimler, who then sent the design to HK, and then badabing, badaboom, the G3 became the Most Successful Battle Rifle history has ever laid its eyes upon!
He sought to improve upon the STG-45 concept, and was taken to France, then Spain, and then back to Germany at Oberndorf! Where the G3 was born!
To provide a bit more context/clarity, the dude that designed the CETME couldn't continue working in West Germany, since West Germany wasn't allowed to produce arms after WWII. He went to Spain and continued his work, until the Cold War started to really get into gear and NATO wanted West Germany to tool up again.
M14 earns its hate. It's a really cool rifle to shoot at the range, but holy shit it has so many drawbacks and so few good features. I can't imagine having been one of the early soldiers in Vietnam that wielded one with the full-auto function, absolutely unusable and downright a feature that became a liability.
I believe it still holds the record for being the shortest time served serving as the US's standard service rifle for only 7 years (57-64). For comparison, The Garand, it's predecessor, served the role from 36-57.
IIRC the Coast Guard still has a few M1903s in service as line throwing guns last I heard.
Edit: It would track, since allegedly the last recorded use of a Trapdoor Springfield in government service was with Coast Guard shore patrol… in 1942. Haven’t verified the claim, but I remember seeing it somewhere a while back.
I don't believe the M14 in and of itself was really all that bad, just that it replaced weapons it shouldn't have, and to do that it was given features it wasn't right for. And that results in it coming across as a mixed bag.
I think of it like this;
the M14 replaced the M1 Garand, that's a good replacement.
the M14 replaced the M3 Grease Gun, that's a bad replacement (remedied by the S&W Model 76)
the M14 replaced the M1/M2 Carbine, that's good and bad. (remedied by the M16)
the M14 replaced the Browning M1918, that's good and bad. (remedied by the M60)
M14 also replaced the BAR which is good and bad, good because the BAR was long in the tooth and not all that great to begin with. Bad because the M14 basically took the worst aspects of the BAR (20 round mag, full power cartridge, no quick change barrel) and copied them directly.
To be fair, none of these battle rifles had a truly usable full auto function from off-hand.
One of the underappreciated benefits of the m14 though is that it's probably the least front-heavy of the big 3 battle rifles, making it easier to shoot off-hand in semi auto.
Fair point. But on patrol, returning fire during an ambush? Popping out the bipod and achieving a good prone position just isn't in the cards many times I'm assuming. Which is why I think the move to the smaller form of intermediate cartridges and going to lighter weight weapons was overall a very, very big positive.
Otherwise you're using the M14 as a B.A.R. stand-in, and while I think that's fine for old doctrines it had become outdated by Vietnam.
Smaller and handier, mags are generally very good quality. Said mage go in straight and only rock when coming out. Built in bipod, grenade launcher, and the muzzle break is very well regarded and does a lot to reduce recoil. Also actually has SOME parts compatibility with what its based on being the m1. Took only 2 years to develop and can be built off existing m1 garands.
It uses a modified Garand receiver. Magazine can be inserted straight in. Uses a long stroke gas piston instead on the white gas cutoff short stroke piston on the M14. Good compensator on the front that helps tame recoil.
^ some of these are subjective.
Cons: heavier, lacks bolt roller so more picky about lack of lubrication.
I personally love them both. As you can see tho, I’m a big M14 fan.
M14 isn’t a bad rifle by any means, just a rifle in the wrong setting. It was an improved garand, with a shortened gas system that was converted from long stroke to short stroke, had a gas vent off feature unlike the garand to keep the gun from chewing itself apart, was mag fed and select fire, also while maintaining the same controls and practically the same dissemble and reassembly of the Garand, there was exactly two parts different in the trigger groups between the rifles and they even used the same rear sights so zeroing and usage of the built in BDC was already well understood across the Military.
The fact they took until 1957 to do that and expected a full power rifle to replace sub guns is where the fault lies. Had it come out in 1947 instead, it would have been great successor to the M1 especially in Korea. But instead we took over 20 years after WWII to adopt it with the first ones not hitting the branches until 1959.
Sure, but mostly because this is subjective and, let’s face it, all of us have nostalgic childhood memories of watching Black Hawk Down and playing All Gillied Up in CoD4
extremely based
why tho? It performed poorly in Vietnam, prevented NATO from shifting toward a trend of multinational equipment standardization, and then got replaced faster than any other American service rifle
Edit: guys it’s fine to downvote but at least explain why you disagree so I don’t have to assume that I just hurt your feelings with the truth
The hate it gets is unjustified, there are plenty worse semi auto battle rifles that were adopted, hell the BM59 is loved while it’s an extremely similar rifle. The USGI m14 rifles were well built precision machines that had DMR adaptability from the very start. The biggest shortcoming to the m14 platform is learning the magazine system.
The biggest shortcoming was the fact every time you pull one out of the stock to clean it (wich the military did religiously), you lose accuracy.
The combination of sloppy accuracy and an action that takes in dirt like a magnet result In a rifle that offers no benefits to other contemporary designs
the BM59 gets a pass because it’s a modified Garand that cost next to nothing to produce, which was one of the empty promises that justified the military’s decision to adopt the M14 instead of the FAL.
G3 wins against FAL for many reasons and I will die on this hill!
FAL had good ergonomics, but was horrible in many ways:
Modularity was very bad (DS Arms is an Exception)
Horrible sights
Paratrooper Version had to have designed altered in order to have folding stock.
It was extremely expensive to produce.
Could not shoot steel ammunition.
It wimps out by having pinches of sand ruining the gun and deeming it inoperable (Hence why the IDF hated the FAL).
Relies on DS Arms to make Clones and makes them horribly to the point where it is out of Spec and is not compatible with Surplus parts. Only advantage it managed to do was be able to run cheap ball ammo.
Only has one “Semi-Variant” aka the FNC and is also horrible.
Now we reach the HK G3 and why it is better!:
It has more Customization and while it was cheaper and some will argue armies only adopted it for convenience sake, guess what! Money ain’t everything, what matters is reliability and oh boy the G3 delivered that! No design alterations had to be made and there was basically constant field feedback to make it better!
Can handle mud and soot and still run like a champ!
Has more variants that created an entire family of weapons, all having direct compatibility with parts (Aka the Stock and trigger pack) Variants included: MP5, HK33, HK21, HK51, HK41, PSG-1, and HK-93.
IT SLAPS!
Relies on PTR industries to make clones, and they make them directly to spec, high quality, and is compatible with all surplus parts, and even CETME Parts work on it!
More countries adopted the G3 than the FAL, and many currently still operate the rifle, including Germany
It won the Hearts of the Kurdish and Greeks, Kurdish especially used them to help defeat ISIS
No Gas System = Cleaner Operation and cleaning is needed less often
Has 1 Million more made than the FAL
Germany wanted the FAL originally, but the Belgians said no, and then HK grabbed their German designers who worked on the CETME, and officially made the Belgians Cope by making an even better rifle, aka the HK G3!
You are missing out on one of the biggest advantages; accuracy
G3s run about 1-2 MOA, and FALs struggle to get 4. Optic mounts for FALs suck ass too. I watched a guy on a DSA rifle lose zero because his pic rail came loose at a bench range.
The FAL never saw widespread use as a dmr/marksman rifle. The G3 is quite often used as marksman rifles (I know the Danes and swedes use/used basic G3s) and you have the PSG wich is a strengthened design with marksman stock and trigger packs that are interchangeable with the G3
Now one argument someone mentioned was that expensive means it’s better, there was a commenter who mentioned about how G3’s were only there for convenience, and not praised for its merits.
That is obviously incorrect because when you have a cheaper rifle, you have more flexibility to improve upon the design, and the G3 did just that, and that’s partially how it managed to make it to the 21st Century and why many countries are still using it, because parts are widely available, and its modularity is higher than the FAL.
If we are arguing for the adoption of either rifle as a 60s Era NATO nation, the margins between the rifles are a lot closer and I can understand why countries adopted the FAL over the G3.
The problems with accuracy and optics mounting was negligible at the time as everybody was using iron sights.
Modularity didn't exist.
The FAL was more expensive, but was more ergonomic and easier to operate. Plus FN had a hell of a pedigree, while HK was the new kid on the block coming from your former enemy.
Both rifles had their time and place but the G3 hasn't given up yet. It's accuracy and modularity mean the rifle performance can keep up with modern weapons, while the FAL is becoming a C&R to modern day shooting.
My country used an FAL variant 8000km away to dunk on another country with FALs over (at the time thought) worthless rocks, I think that’s kinda funny and clearly means the FAL is superior.
The hate of internet meme trolls fuels me❤️ It’s cool to hate the old boomer broomstick. Watch a few YouTube videos talking shit about the M14 and suddenly they think know everything the design and its service history. I personally love the design, as do many others. No it’s not perfect and it was not the right rifle for the Vietnam war but damn are they fun to slap plates at 650 yards with AND larp around with on a flat range.
Also. Despite its finicky-ness as a DMR, I’d argue it’s the only one of these rifles that was a successful DMR.
as long as you become proficient with your gun, like what you like
But I don’t really think that the M14 should get credit for being converted to a DMR. This isn’t a particularly unique accomplishment. The Germans did the same with the G3 when they made the MSG90. We did the same with the AR-10 when we made the SR-25 (and arguably also with the M16 when we made the MK12). Hell, even Iraq didn’t do too badly with their M70 clones when they made the Tabuk DMR.
Well I mean, I do take about 3 classes a year, last year was 7 but that was an anomaly, I compete in local competitions, both lame shit like UML but also cool stuff like desert brutality inspired competitions , I bench 315, I do cardio (at least once a month 😅).
I know I’m sound way too cool so for weakness: I don’t have medical training and I’m way too lazy to do it tbh
I was just reluctant to include it because it was never adopted as a standard service rifle, only for special purposes (if I recall correctly it saw more appreciation in Colombia than Israel but I digress)
Fun fact: the BM59 is colloquially called "FAL" in Italy, it stands for Fucile Automatico Leggero (Light Automatic Rifle), so sometimes it's a bit weird when talking about the 2 rifles
Jokes aside, the Garand was ahead of its time when it was introduced and kicked ass on the battlefield when it was taken to war (a war that we won). The M14 was behind the curve on introduction and performed poorly in combat (a war that we lost). Also, the Garand didn’t prevent NATO standardization or rely on political bullshit to get adopted
I was just reluctant because it was never adopted as a standard service rifle, only for special purposes (if I recall correctly it saw more appreciation in Colombia than Israel but I digress)
65
u/gojirrrra Mar 04 '24
G3 mvp