|
|
Post by Walshy on Oct 20, 2011 17:37:15 GMT -5
Sorry if I posted this in the wrong section feel free to move if needed. But I am currently in high interest for a full metal M14.(full size, not the soc16 size) Has to be full metal, and the full size. Feel free to post whatever you would like.I need as many opinions as possible
|
|
|
|
Post by Dagger on Oct 20, 2011 19:27:31 GMT -5
I would say most likely a G&G one If i'm not mistaken there pretty good.
|
|
|
|
Post by M.S.-ARC on Oct 20, 2011 19:48:21 GMT -5
I would say most likely a G&G one If i'm not mistaken there pretty good. Have you had first hand experience with a few different M14's before? |
|
|
|
Post by hoggie on Oct 20, 2011 21:07:11 GMT -5
I've held a G&G Veteran M14, a CYMA M14, and a Tokyo Marui M14 so far. In all honesty, you're not going to find yourself a full metal M14 that works well internally. I've heard rumors, not 100% certain, that the Classic Army one is full metal? Not sure. The most solid M14 i've held if the Tokyo Marui, closely followed by the G&G.
G&G is a solid, easy to work on gearbox if you plan on working on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dynamo on Oct 20, 2011 21:19:22 GMT -5
I've held a G&G Veteran M14, a CYMA M14, and a Tokyo Marui M14 so far. In all honesty, you're not going to find yourself a full metal M14 that works well internally. I've heard rumors, not 100% certain, that the Classic Army one is full metal? Not sure. The most solid M14 i've held if the Tokyo Marui, closely followed by the G&G. G&G is a solid, easy to work on gearbox if you plan on working on it. Just keep in mind that the G&G M14 mags are proprietary to their new design - which (through research of my own) is quite nice. |
|
|
|
Post by Dagger on Oct 21, 2011 11:07:00 GMT -5
I would say most likely a G&G one If i'm not mistaken there pretty good. Have you had first hand experience with a few different M14's before? Some, I've owned a cmya one and I've seen a g&g one to compare to it seamed to out preform it range wise. But that's about all I can help with. |
|
|
|
Post by Thor on Oct 21, 2011 14:19:18 GMT -5
Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but isn't the receiver on the TM M14's metal? How much more metal are you looking for?
In my opinion you really can't do much better than the TM M14. I've seen some that were built up into absolute beasts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walshy on Oct 21, 2011 19:52:30 GMT -5
I'm mainly looking for the metal receiver, and yeah sooner or later putting a hotter spring, tight-bore, motor, hop-up, etc etc. Are the G&G M14 mags super touchy like their Combat Machines? I have a Combat Machine and, no matter what brand of m4 mag I use in it they don't like to feed all that well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dynamo on Oct 21, 2011 19:55:42 GMT -5
I'm mainly looking for the metal receiver, and yeah sooner or later putting a hotter spring, tight-bore, motor, hop-up, etc etc. Are the G&G M14 mags super touchy like their Combat Machines? I have a Combat Machine and, no matter what brand of m4 mag I use in it they don't like to feed all that well. I couldn't tell you from any personal experience with them...but I'm assuming since they are proprietary, they probably work very well with their counterparts. |
|
|
|
Post by Myers on Oct 22, 2011 13:32:18 GMT -5
Where are you even going to find a "full metal" M14? If I'm not mistaken most real M14 bodies are wood aren't they? The TM M14 has just about as much metal as you can get, and it's a beast.
|
|
|
|
Post by Timm on Oct 23, 2011 0:54:15 GMT -5
If he wanted full metal, go for an EBR.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gimpalong on Oct 23, 2011 8:47:22 GMT -5
This thread is so full of junk.
A caveat: I'm not an expert on M14 replicas. I have owned two CYMAs (a SOCOM and full length) in the past. Most of the following was picked up by a thorough reading of many, many M14 related threads over the years. Feel free to issue corrections or to clarify in areas where I may have been unclear.
First of all, what do you mean by "full metal" M14?
By "full metal" are you asking for the most accurate M14 reproduction? As far as I know, every M14 on the market from the ACM KART all the way up to the G&G Veteran have metal (of varying quality) receivers. To clarify, the charging handle, ejection port, rear sight, etc are metal of some kind. The barrel, front sight post, butt plate and trigger assembly are also metal on (as far as I know) every M14 replica.
Only a few M14s (really only one), however, have both a metal receiver AND a real wood stock. A few years ago, ACM companies were dropping AGM, KART and CYMA M14s into wooden bodies and selling them for a mark-up. None of these rifles were sold by retailers in the United States. Several companies produced wood kits for the TM M14, but no one (aside from custom shops, maybe) sold TM M14s fitted in real wood in the United States. You basically had to buy the wooden stock and drop whatever internals you had into it.
Currently, the only truly full metal M14 is the G&G Veteran which has a metal receiver (like every other M14) AND a real wood body (advertised as real walnut).
So, your choices for an M14 are:
KART
AGM
CYMA
TM
CA
G&G
G&P (TM internals in G&P bodies, no "basic" M14 produced, just the EBR and other more specific variants).
WE (Gas only)
The KART and the AGM are poor replicas for various reasons (hybrid gearboxes, very poor QC, etc). The KART version was briefly rebranded by Echo 1 and sold as their full length and SOCOM version for a period before Echo 1 switched to using the CYMA full length and SOCOM version as their standard M14 rebrand. The way you can tell an early KART/Echo 1 rebrand (at least on the SOCOM version) is that the gun shipped with a scope mount and did NOT have the mounting rail up near the heat shield. The Cyma/Echo 1 rebrand is a faithful reproduction of the TM SOCOM version and does have the heatshield scope mount.
The TM is basically the industry standard. Lots off reviews of these around. A pretty solid benchmark for quality given the high QC that TM's traditionally have. Can be found for relatively cheap, used on various forums.
The CYMA is a direct clone of the TM and can use TM internals and magazines. Lower quality internals and poorer QC. My experience with CYMA M14s was not bad, but I never dug around on the rifles' insides. Bought them and sold them pretty quickly.
CA M14s are clones of the G&G and use G&G-style proprietary magazines. I have not heard much about these. The little that I have heard has been sort of "meh." They do make a "scout" version which is pretty interesting.
G&G produced the first airsoft M14 (if you ignore the Airsoft Club version that only had very limited production). The G&G M14 went through several different versions each of which had various issues that needed to be addressed. The first G&G M14s were, according to all reports I've seen, utterly atrocious. Lots of internal problems. This may have resulted from G&G trying to (and succeeding in) beat TM's M14 to market. Currently, G&G makes several full length and SOCOM models at various price points with the G&G M14 Veteran being at the top. Again, the G&G Veteran has a full metal receiver AND a real wooden stock. All G&G M14s use proprietary magazines of the kind first produced by G&G, but also used by CA in their M14s.
My suggestion to you is to search around and read reviews on the various models. You also need to take into account your finances and determine whether you are going to buy an ACM M14 or spring for something higher end (TM, CA, G&G). You also need to consider whether you want an M14 based on the TM Version Seven internals (TM, CYMA) or the G&G (and CA) internals. TM style magazines or G&G style magazines?
Hope this helps.
|
|
