M14 and M14A receivers were heat-treated using the carburizing process by a firm in Santa Ana, California, followed by finish machining on a CNC machine at Federal Ordnance in South El Monte. Federal Ordnance M14 and M14A receivers were heat-treated and carburized according to USGI M14 requirements.
Check and make sure it is not built with Chicom parts from one of the Polytech or Norinco M14s that got trapped by the 89 bush ban and turned into a kit. A friend bought one thinking it would be like the two our shooting/camping buddies had bought that were built up all or near all GI. This rifle was VERY,VERY unreliable irregardless of the ammo we fed through it. Friend took it to a guy who was suppose to be big in HP and he said the rifle was flat out dangerous to fire due to head space issues and the fact that the bolt/op rod and rec. Were not interfacing correctly. The jams were all associated with the rifle failing to go into battery.
I don't know if this gets into all of the issues about the chicom parts being soft, not in spec and what not. The two fellows we went camping with had two Fed. Rifles that ran like clock work but they were almost if not totally all GI parts. I have heard some people question Fed. Made rifles irregardless of the parts because I believe the recievers in some lots were not in tight spec or some such which with a mix of Chicom parts might have been the problem with my friends rifle. Last edited by catsnguns; at 10:03 PM. Reason: spelling.
If you are interested in the rifle ask to take it apart and look for drawing numbers on all the critical parts. That was the first thing I noticed on my friends rifle was the absence of a drawing number on the bolt. Dead give away more than likely.
Trigger housing should have hammer and I think 'floor plate' marked quiet visibly? The bolt and barrel should also have one and the barrel markings should be visible if you lock the bolt back and look at the part of the barrel now exposed by the withdrawn op rod. They might be commercial made but I believe most of the reputable makers of the commercial barrels have their tubes stamped in the military manner.
GI and the price is right maybe buy it but if she has chicom parts run. Ask them why they are wanting to sell the rifle that might be a dead give away. Here's an article on the Chinese problem from it seems to be that the bolts are dimensionally incorrect while the receivers are good. Chinese M14 Rifles Norinco M14S with Fulton Armory Upgrade Package by Clint McKee - Clint, tell us about the Chinese M14S I'd be happy to go through this. Here's the scoop: 1. The locking lug helix (surface contour) of the Chinese bolt does not agree/match the locking lug helix of the receiver.
Thus, the bolt locking lug surfaces only partially contact the receiver locking lug surfaces. As you fire the rifle, the bolt will 'collapse' back onto the locking lugs of the receiver until 'enough' surface contact is engaged to stop the rearward force caused by the 50,000 PSI or so that is produced on each firing. As the bolt moves rearward, headspace is lost. Often/mostly/always massive headspace loss occurs. I have seen Chinese bolts that close & move back & forth with a field gauge. I have witnessed headspace readings estimated (no gauge long enough to be certain) at greater than 20 thous. Bolt's will also 'collapse' when receiver locking lugs are not correct (commercial receivers sometimes have poor locking lug surfaces which is why we at Fulton Armory always hand lap every bolt to every commercial receiver to ensure excellent engagement before we install/set headspace), though they move rearward more slowly due to better heat treat & steel.
The fact that the Chinese bolts are very soft, amplifies the problem. BTW, the locking lug helix of the Chinese receiver does agree/match the helix of the G.I.
M14 bolts quite nicely. I have never had to hand lap a G.I. Bolt for more than say, 15-20 minutes to get a beautiful engagement. It's quite odd. It's as though someone ground on the Chinese bolt lugs with a handtool.
The Chinese bolt is 'too long' as it relates to the firing pin bridge of the receiver, which retracts the firing pin on loading. As the Chinese bolt moves reward, the firing pin tail also moves reward. So much so that the firing pin bridge does not effectively/at all retract the firing pin! I have seen Chinese rifles where the firing pin did not retract at all. This is quite dangerous. Add to this bolt 'geometry' problem the fact that the trigger & sears, & hammers are also way too soft (hammer fall will occur) one can see the train wreck ahead.
Final comments: A. One thousand rounds through an M14 is nothing. I have customers who do this in a month. The whole point of possessing fine military rifles is that their design, properly executed, provides for a durability & reliability virtually unknown in commercial products. That a rifle has not failed catastrophically, nor a wing fallen off, is hardly a measure of acceptability, safety or serviceability. The vast majority of Chinese M14's that come into our shop have excessive headspace, among other maladies.
A very few have had too tight a headspace, which is quite odd. Fulton Armory builds Service and Competition Grade rifles on Polytech and Norinco receivers from customer-supplied rifles. The result is a superlative M14-type rifle with a forged receiver, as close to GI as you can get. Note to Walt: The barrel must be replaced to allow for a G.I. Bolt to fit, and even then, the receiver needs relieving to safely accept the bolt! THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT POINT! Also, the Hammer, Trigger & Sear need to be replaced.
Our package should be done all at once, or not at all. You would not believe the horrendous examples that come into the shop that were 'worked on' by the local 'Gunsmith,' trying to fit the G.I. One needs to know what to grind, and even more importantly, what not to grind. You really would not believe it. You're too trusting to believe what I've seen, Walt -Clint McKee A postscript from Kirk Hays: Having owned several of the Chinese M14S rifles, and having a set of M14 receiver gauges available to me, I have independently confirmed what Clint says about the receiver geometries. The Chinese receivers are dimensionally as good as TRW rifles in the collection of a friend. The finish on the Norinco receivers is rough on non-functional surfaces - they are ugly, and Polytech receivers are only slightly better.
John Kepler has inside information that the DCM was actually looking at using Chinese receivers for providing M14 rifles to Service Rifle competitors, and access to a steel analysis done on the recievers, showing it to be 5100 steel, which is a very good alloy for receivers, but a bit difficult to work.Kirk Hays More on the Chinese bolts from Clint: The Chinese bolts have a great deal more problems than just the heat treating. Incidentally, whether a part is cast or forged has nothing to do with whether they need to be heat treated. These bolts could be transmutated into Kryptonite, but they will still be dangerously substandard.
The problems include: The bolt's locking lugs are cut wrong!The helixial angles are dead wrong, and thusly, they do NOT properly contact the opposing receiver's locking lugs. A very bad condition, as headspace will be lost over time. Sometimes, in only a few hundred rounds! The bolt sits very far back and away from the barrel mouth, and thus, provides very poor support to the cartridge case at its base. Bear in mind, this has nothing to do with headspace (this condition can exist even with proper headspace). The 'closer' a bolt fits to the barrel mouth, the better the support of the case.
Over the years, improperly manufactured barrels have shown us what can happen, even with proper headspace, when the cartridge's base is not properly supported: total case failure with catastrophic results. In the Chinese rifle example, it's the bolt sitting too far back on a proper barrel!
Next, because the bolt sits so far back in the receiver, the firing pin tail (which exits at the rear of the bolt body) is also too far rearward and thusly, the firing pin is not properly retracted by the receiver's firing pin bridge. If you ever have an opportunity to examine a Chinese rifle, remove the op rod, and take notice of how far the bolt can move back & fro, while in battery. In many of these rifles, it's scary.
Naturally, how far it will move will depend on how many rounds have been fired and just how bad the bolt was originally. So, IMHO, forget spending a bunch, or a little, money on 'heat treating' the Chinese bolts. Bear in mind that the information in the Fulton Armory material is quite biased toward buying a Fulton Armory rifle. Their products are great, and they are reputable folks, but the material is a bit exaggerated. I have not been very impressed with any Fed Ord products (have looked at M14s, O3A3 receivers, and others).
I would stick with Springfield, Fulton, LRB, Armscorp or other known makers. A better cheap alternative would be to find a like new Chinese M14, shoot it until the headspace gets bad, and have Warbird do a USGI bolt replacement. The barrels, op rods, and other parts except for the rear sight are fine. I have had two of these that never needed a bolt replacement.
Last edited by BillP; at 09:03 AM.
The machining (or lack there of) around the oprod track in the receiver shows some of the issues these rifles had with their cast receivers, but overall if it runs and you are happy it probably doesn't matter much. It might have a shorter life than say a better quality LRB receiver but at the price you paid who's going to complain? I had one years ago, it was a decent shooter and was made from mostly USGI parts, later I heard they switched to Chinese but still as a good shooting representation of a M14 they do OK. For $600 the parts are worth that. These Federal Ordnance rifles are an interesting chapter in M1A production. The following is excerpted from From M14 Rifle History and Development Fifth Edition by Lee Emerson copyright 2012: '.Federal Ordnance began production of its M14 type rifles by 1984 and ended in late 1991. Federal Ordnance was not able to compete with the price of imported Chinese M14 rifles so production was halted.
After the first fifty, M14 receivers were machined on one CNC machining center with several fixture set ups. All receivers were machined from castings of AISI 8620 alloy steel. Except for the first fifty receivers, the castings were supplied by Electro Crisol Metal, S.A. The M14 receivers were manufactured at a leased building one block up on Potrero Avenue. Heat treating was subcontracted to a vendor in El Monte, CA. Federal Ordnance M14 type receivers were heat treated and carburized according to USGI drawing F7790189. A company in Santa Ana, CA finished the receivers with a phosphate coating.
Assembly of the Federal Ordnance M14 rifles was performed at a leased warehouse just west of 1443 Potrero Avenue. Each M14 was proof fired before assembly and function tested with three rounds as a complete rifle before packaging. Finished M14 rifles were stored on the first floor at 1443 Potrero Avenue.
The total number of complete M14 rifles assembled by Federal Ordnance was more than 13,000. Based on information available, total M14 receiver production did not exceed 16,000. The Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price for a Federal Ordnance M14A in 1988 was $629.00 and its M14SA listed for $700.00 in 1991.
The rifles were sold with a one year parts and labor warranty. Each Federal Ordnance M14 type rifle sold was accompanied by a factory inspection tag, warranty registration card, a copy of U. Army FM 23-8 and a fourteen page booklet on firearms safety and care. The safety booklet was written by Federal Ordnance, Inc.
The factory inspection tag included the following information about each rifle: date, stock number, a description, caliber, and signature fields for checking of headspace, test firing and inspection. USGI M14 accessories such as magazines, magazine pouches, slings and cleaning kits were available from Federal Ordnance. Federal Ordnance built two types of M14 rifles, one with USGI parts and one with Chinese parts. Model numbers M14 and M14A were designed to accept USGI bolts and barrels.
Otherwise, the receiver was manufactured to mate with Chinese bolts and barrels. USGI parts were used extensively in Federal Ordnance rifles through at least serial number 8877. The USGI parts were taken off USGI M14 rifles imported from Israel. By serial number 9279, if not earlier, Chinese and Taiwanese reproduction parts were used to assemble its rifles. For example, Federal Ordnance M14SA serial number 502XX was assembled at the factory on September 13, 1991 with Chinese manufacture bolt, operating rod, firing mechanism and barrel. Chinese and Taiwanese M14 parts were purchased from U. Receivers with serial numbers above 60XXX have engraved heel markings.
The model number changed from M14A to M14SA between serial numbers 9139 and 9279. Four digit serial number Federal Ordnance receivers observed were marked on the side with the letter F inside a circle. This marking was sometimes lightly stamped. The circle F marking has not been observed on serial numbers above 10000. Federal Ordnance sold complete rifles as well as stripped receivers. Federal Ordnance sold a few M14 rifles to walk-in retail customers and through Shotgun News advertisements but most were sold to firearms distributors. Some fiberglass stocks on Federal Ordnance M14 rifles appear to have been commercial manufacture of unknown origin.
The original owner of Federal Ordnance M14SA serial number 22XX reported that the synthetic stock never had a selector cutout or USGI markings inside the magazine well. Further, the Federal Ordnance stock had a slightly rough finish.
The butt plate was glossy black color instead of phosphate coated. Federal Ordnance M14 rifles were also sold with refinished wood, new walnut and USGI synthetic stocks. This is an interesting observation from the Fulton Armory Website - from their reciever page: As to strength: Why did Fulton Armory select machining from a casting as our method? About 10 years ago a customer sent in a Federal Ordnance M14 that had “blown up” for us to perform a tech inspection. Shooter was okay. Federal Ordnance, now defunct, produced thousands of a very poor quality receivers (poor geometry, but good material & good heat treat), that was machined from a casting and had digested one of those infamous CBC 75.308 cartridges that produces “in excess of 140,000 copper units” of chamber pressure (nominal is 50,000). This CBC 75 ammo blew up, and continues to blow up, any and every rifle that see’s that 140,000 CUP.
Here’s the interesting part: The receiver held. There was a partial crack in the receiver below the right locking lug of the receiver, but it did not detach or fail. The locking lugs of the receiver were untouched, the locking lugs of the TRW bolt had been impressed into the receiver’s lugs by something like 10,000ths of an inch; huge depressions in both the right & left bolt lugs. The bolt held. The barrel was in perfect shape. So, what “blew up”?
The case failed, released the gasses into the mag well, peeled the bottom of the bolt away, inflated the magazine and blew the stock apart. A poorly machined cast receiver, even with poor geometry, but with proper heat treat & proper material, is vastly stronger than the rest of the system. About 20 years ago we inspected an original USGI forged M14 receiver that had blown apart into 4 pieces on the firing line at The National Matches, Camp Perry, OH. Shooter was knocked out, but fine otherwise.
So, why did the USGI M14 blow apart in 4 pieces? Bad receiver?
No (good geometry, good material, good heat treat). No (issue LC). Bad assembly techniques? No (well built rifle). The barrel failed due to bad lot of steel.
The heavy match barrel had split from the chamber mouth down to the heavy oversize op rod guide. When the barrel split open wide at the receiver ring it introduced lateral forces to the receiver ring, and split it apart like an axe splitting firewood.
M14 receiver rings are not designed to take chamber pressures nor lateral forces, no matter how they are made. These, and many other failures over the decades demonstrated to us, in a very hands on way, the same thing Col. Hatcher found in his destructive testing of the M1 Garand receiver: That J.C. Garand’s receiver design is so remarkably strong that inevitably some other part of the rifle system will fail long before the receiver, providing it has good geometry, good material and good heat treat. Cast, forged or billet.
So, to keep the receiver costs affordable for all of our customers, we chose to cast & machine, while spending a whole lot of time and care in assuring the quality of the machined geometries, correct 8620 alloy steel, and proper heat treat for case & core. The finest M14 receiver available, at any price. I used to be a regular customer at Fed Ord in El Monte in the 1980s. I had a friend there in the armorers shop and he kept me clued in on good deals.
Most of the M14 clones were good but occasionally some of them as well as some of their rebuild Garands, like their tankers and BM59s had loose threads in the receivers due to mismatching barrels with them. Look for silver solder edges to see if they locked them in since they were not torque tight. He rebuilt me a Broomhandle with a 9mm barrel and it worked great. By the pictures this is a good one.
I used to be a regular customer at Fed Ord in El Monte in the 1980s. I had a friend there in the armorers shop and he kept me clued in on good deals. Most of the M14 clones were good but occasionally some of them as well as some of their rebuild Garands, like their tankers and BM59s had loose threads in the receivers due to mismatching barrels with them. Look for silver solder edges to see if they locked them in since they were not torque tight. He rebuilt me a Broomhandle with a 9mm barrel and it worked great. By the pictures this is a good one.I had a beater Broomhandle worked into a 9mm by them also, beautiful pistol.
I sold it later but wish I had kept it. I bought a bunch of C&R firearms from them while they were open, loved that store! Nice looking rifle, you did great!