Did the Marines shoot NM Garands

[StockDoc]

Did the Marine shoot NM Garands or did they shoot Garands that were modified to their specifications for matches?:icon_scratch:

[Phil McGrath]

Yea, they fired NM M1 Garand. I guess the major difference was they were carefully/better assembled. Prior too the move too Quantico I'm pretty sure West coast rifles were built at Barstow Ca and East coast rifles were done at both Philadelphia and Albany Ga. When the big shop closed in Phillie, the East and West coast shops were consolidated at Quantico.

[StockDoc]

Thanks, Phil

[2111]

The guy that could give you the best information regarding M.C. match rifles would be Gus Fisher. Gus use to post quite a bit on this forum, though I haven't seen a post from him in quite some time. Gus was a 2112 MOS ( Rifle and Pistol Team Repairman), (RTE Armorer) and has a wealth of knowledge regarding Marine Corps match rifles. He spent 23 years as a RET Armorer ending his service in 1997 as Shop Chief of the RET Shop. In 1974 Gus went through OJT at the Rifle Team Equipment Repair Shop at Quantico. He states that "in those days we rebuilt and built new replacement NM M14's on the order of about 1,100 rifles per year for the Division's and Marine Corps Matches." I would think that in the late 1950's and early 1960's the RTE Armorers were doing much the same with the M1.

[Phil McGrath]

The guy that could give you the best information regarding M.C. match rifles would be Gus Fisher. Gus use to post quite a bit on this forum, though I haven't seen a post from him in quite some time. Gus was a 2112 MOS ( Rifle and Pistol Team Repairman), (RTE Armorer) and has a wealth of knowledge regarding Marine Corps match rifles. He spent 23 years as a RET Armorer ending his service in 1997 as Shop Chief of the RET Shop. In 1974 Gus went through OJT at the Rifle Team Equipment Repair Shop at Quantico. He states that "in those days we rebuilt and built new replacement NM M14's on the order of about 1,100 rifles per year for the Division's and Marine Corps Matches." I would think that in the late 1950's and early 1960's the RTE Armorers were doing much the same with the M1.

I asked Gus along time ago about the Marine NM build centers, and that's what he passed on too me.

[Griff Murphey]

I can tell you that my friends who were 4th Recon USMCR team shooters in San Antonio '67-'71 mainly shot match M-14s but still had some match M-1s. They were all still '06 unlike the AF. I recall one of the shooters was separating from his wife and she took all of his guns including his Marine Corps ones which put him in a difficult position but the FBI reclaimed all of them including his personal ones. I remember that Col. Bill Dickman shot an M-1 quite a bit, maybe out of nostalgia.

I could not tell you if they were straight NM or not but I do remember they had shiny urethane type stock finishes

[Phil McGrath]

I can tell you that my friends who were 4th Recon USMCR team shooters in San Antonio '67-'71 mainly shot match M-14s but still had some match M-1s. They were all still '06 unlike the AF. I recall one of the shooters was separating from his wife and she took all of his guns including his Marine Corps ones which put him in a difficult position but the FBI reclaimed all of them including his personal ones. I remember that Col. Bill Dickman shot an M-1 quite a bit, maybe out of nostalgia.

I could not tell you if they were straight NM or not but I do remember they had shiny urethane type stock finishes

Talk about nostalgia, Col. Walsh continued too fire the 03 for some time after the M1 came along as well.

[StockDoc]

this is good stuff-thanks

[Cosine26]

I would wonder if the USMC rifle teams used SA built NMM1's regularly. I would expect them to have used RTE Center USMC prepped Rifles. These rifles, while excellent and accurate, are not NMM1's by definition.
The USMC was ,I believe, the first service branch to start Post WWII competitive rifle shooting and were the first to start working on turning the M1 into a Match Grade rifle. I believe that they gave their first demonstration on improving M1 accuracy to representatives of the US Army in 1948. According to Gus Fisher (previously mentioned) the USMC armorers developed their own techniques which they considered to be better than the efforts of SA.
During the period that the M1 was the "service" rifle, the army, the navy and the USMC all developed there own techniques and many "Match Conditioned" rifles were produced-but they were not NMM1's by definition.
IMHO

[JimF]

. . . . . During the period that the M1 was the "service" rifle, the army, the navy and the USMC all developed there own techniques and many "Match Conditioned" rifles were produced-but the were not NMM1's by definition.
IMHO

Quite right, Cosine . . . .

And one of their own improvements that I encompassed in my "accurized service grade" M1 a long time ago, was to peen the splines of the barrel in such a way as to make the rear ring of the gas cylinder contact the barrel ONLY at the six o'clock position . . . sort of tilting it UP at the rear!

This was a development by the Navy! --Jim

[Phil McGrath]

The 360* clearance was a Navy trick by Charlie Frazier and Don McCoy, and per Gus the Marine style was gas cylinder contact at 4-8 o'clock.

[Phil McGrath]

I would wonder if the USMC rifle teams used SA built NMM1's regularly.

I doubt it, SA NM rifles would have been made available too civilians first, Service Rifle Teams supplied there own equipment. However if a Service Member chose too go too the Nationals on there own they would have drawn a rifle and been issued ammo on the line just like anyone else.

[2111]

30282Phil, I have wondered about the AFPG rifles as some of them also have the NM stamp near the AFPG. Do you think these could have been NM rifles rebuilt by the Air Force or maybe the A.F. armorers had NM stamps. Gus did mention in one of his posts that the "Marine Corps Rifle Team Armorers also had "N" and "M" stamps" and that they would " apply the stamp to barrels that were not so marked, but otherwise met the NM criteria from air gaging." He may have been talking about the M14 as this was not specified in his post.

[Phil McGrath]

30282Phil, I have wondered about the AFPG rifles as some of them also have the NM stamp near the AFPG. Do you think these could have been NM rifles rebuilt by the Air Force or maybe the A.F. armorers had NM stamps. Gus did mention in one of his posts that the "Marine Corps Rifle Team Armorers also had "N" and "M" stamps" and that they would " apply the stamp to barrels that were not so marked, but otherwise met the NM criteria from air gaging." He may have been talking about the M14 as this was not specified in his post.

Gus was from the M14 generation when it really started too take off and hit high gear, with that said I know he knows his way around the Garand and as a Jr 2112 at the time he would still have had direct contact with more than a few of the Marine NM M1 shooters, from back in the day. Remember it took the Commandant of the Corps too put his foot down and tell the Marines the M14 was the current Service Rifle and that is what your going too shoot in Competition. Springfield Armory closed in Apr 68 completely bringing a end too there NM support. I'm sure there were still plenty of M1 barrels, both std. 65 and NM marked 65's and the newer 77's still new in inventory too be had. After SA closed everything was cleaned out and shipped too Rock Island and that's where the NM comptroller was moved too as well.

Remember Match shooters are a hard headed bunch, the Marines had a rifle that was known too give predictable accuracy in the M1, it had been well sorted out at this point in time. But like anything NEW that comes along the NM M14 wasn't well received and they really had too start over with what worked and what didn't for rifle's accuracy development. Gus has said, it took a few years for the M14 too catch up too the M1 in the accuracy department. The Marine's never caught up too the Navy's 7.62mm M1 until they went too double lugged M14's then it became a shooter's contest of skill. Same story can be said today as was the switch from the 03 too the M1, the M1 too the M14, and the M14 too the M16. History repeating itself over and over.

Is it possible that the Service Rifle teams marked there STD. barrels NM after gauging? I think so if and when they had the time too do so, it sped up the build process when the barrel was graded too some extent and was pronounced "Good to Go" ready too install. The Navy and AFPG rifles that I've seen when the CMP first brought them out at the Phoenix Garand Games were not all marked with the NM but all the AFPG stamp, the AFPG used smaller letters on there barrels and there was a good mix and match of barrels used. Nothing was wasted some were the std. 65 barrels, NM 65 barrels, 77 barrels a few 3/66 Navy barrels with AFPG stamped between the G/C rings as well. There was also a few with the rare Rock Island 7.62mm barrels some AFPG stamps were clear too see and read others were faintly done and not so easy. Also of note, not all of the AFPG had the polished underside of the chamber either, some were done and others not, same deal for the ball and detent rear sight. The Navy MkII Mod1 rifles didn't have any added markings on there rifles that they were not born with this was for both A and B grade rifles and contrary too popular belief not all of the A grade MkII Mod 1 NM rifles had Fuller Plast done too there stocks either.

My own personal opinion of the Navy MkII Mod 1 NM rifles that are marked with the A or B in the stocks pistol grip is that the stock was delivered too the Navy from Marine stores at Albany or Barstow's rebuild centers, the only physical difference between the A and B grade was the fitting of the hooded rear aperture. As many O-66 and O-67 rebuild rifles have the same A or B in there stocks pistol grip as well too denote what rebuild center it was done at... Coincidence?

According too Gus, all Service Rifle teams had at one time or another budget issues and sometimes parts just couldn't be had. This would explain how Navy 3/66 barrels were discovered on AFPG rifles and why the A.F. later went with there own 7.62mm barrel from Rock Island. The trade and barter system at work. Remember SA made the 3/66 barrel on a limited run for the Navy's NM program. SA had sent all there machinery too Rock Island for long term storage and the A.F. didn't get there own 7.62mm tube until after June 1969.

Sorry for the long winded post.

P.s. Here is some trivia for you, What Man was the only shooter too shoot a perfect score at Camp Perry, ever? and it wasn't with a rat gun.

[StockDoc]

What is a "rat gun"?

[Phil McGrath]

What is a "rat gun"?

AR/15-M16

[2111]

Gus was from the M14 generation when it really started too take off and hit high gear, with that said I know he knows his way around the Garand and as a Jr 2112 at the time he would still have had direct contact with more than a few of the Marine NM M1 shooters, from back in the day. Remember it took the Commandant of the Corps too put his foot down and tell the Marines the M14 was the current Service Rifle and that is what your going too shoot in Competition. Springfield Armory closed in Apr 68 completely bringing a end too there NM support. I'm sure there were still plenty of M1 barrels, both std. 65 and NM marked 65's and the newer 77's still new in inventory too be had. After SA closed everything was cleaned out and shipped too Rock Island and that's where the NM comptroller was moved too as well.

Remember Match shooters are a hard headed bunch, the Marines had a rifle that was known too give predictable accuracy in the M1, it had been well sorted out at this point in time. But like anything NEW that comes along the NM M14 wasn't well received and they really had too start over with what worked and what didn't for rifle's accuracy development. Gus has said, it took a few years for the M14 too catch up too the M1 in the accuracy department. The Marine's never caught up too the Navy's 7.62mm M1 until they went too double lugged M14's then it became a shooter's contest of skill. Same story can be said today as was the switch from the 03 too the M1, the M1 too the M14, and the M14 too the M16. History repeating itself over and over.

Is it possible that the Service Rifle teams marked there STD. barrels NM after gauging? I think so if and when they had the time too do so, it sped up the build process when the barrel was graded too some extent and was pronounced "Good to Go" ready too install. The Navy and AFPG rifles that I've seen when the CMP first brought them out at the Phoenix Garand Games were not all marked with the NM but all the AFPG stamp, the AFPG used smaller letters on there barrels and there was a good mix and match of barrels used. Nothing was wasted some were the std. 65 barrels, NM 65 barrels, 77 barrels a few 3/66 Navy barrels with AFPG stamped between the G/C rings as well. There was also a few with the rare Rock Island 7.62mm barrels some AFPG stamps were clear too see and read others were faintly done and not so easy. Also of note, not all of the AFPG had the polished underside of the chamber either, some were done and others not, same deal for the ball and detent rear sight. The Navy MkII Mod1 rifles didn't have any added markings on there rifles that they were not born with this was for both A and B grade rifles and contrary too popular belief not all of the A grade MkII Mod 1 NM rifles had Fuller Plast done too there stocks either.

My own personal opinion of the Navy MkII Mod 1 NM rifles that are marked with the A or B in the stocks pistol grip is that the stock was delivered too the Navy from Marine stores at Albany or Barstow's rebuild centers, the only physical difference between the A and B grade was the fitting of the hooded rear aperture. As many O-66 and O-67 rebuild rifles have the same A or B in there stocks pistol grip as well too denote what rebuild center it was done at... Coincidence?

According too Gus, all Service Rifle teams had at one time or another budget issues and sometimes parts just couldn't be had. This would explain how Navy 3/66 barrels were discovered on AFPG rifles and why the A.F. later went with there own 7.62mm barrel from Rock Island. The trade and barter system at work. Remember SA made the 3/66 barrel on a limited run for the Navy's NM program. SA had sent all there machinery too Rock Island for long term storage and the A.F. didn't get there own 7.62mm tube until after June 1969.

Sorry for the long winded post.

P.s. Here is some trivia for you, What Man was the only shooter too shoot a perfect score at Camp Perry, ever? and it wasn't with a rat gun.


Thanks Phil, very informative. Wish I had the answer to your "trivia" question, but without looking it up I have no idea. Thanks again, Joe

[Phil McGrath]

Thanks Phil, very informative. Wish I had the answer to your "trivia" question, but without looking it up I have no idea. Thanks again, Joe

The only person too fire a perfect score at Camp Perry during the Nationals was Michael Pietroforte USMC and he did so twice. The first time was in 1958 firing the M1 and the second time was done with the M14. I want too say 65 or 66 could have been as late as 1967 but I would have too dig threw my old PS Mag collection too be 100% correct. This was done with wood stocks and long before medium or heavy weight barrels, ammo was issued on the line. .30cal National Match for the NM M1 or M118NM for the NM M14. Service Rifle team shooters had no choice too fire Service Rifles.


P.S., I found the article the second time was in 1966 with the NM M14.

[2111]

As I was an armorer at the Camp Lejeune Rifle Range in 1958 I should have recognized the name but it has been a long while. I did a Google search to see where he was stationed in 58 and whatever else I could find about him. I came across this and thought you might find it interesting though it goes back to 2013. http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6197849

[Phil McGrath]

As I was an armorer at the Camp Lejeune Rifle Range in 1958 I should have recognized the name but it has been a long while. I did a Google search to see where he was stationed in 58 and whatever else I could find about him. I came across this and thought you might find it interesting though it goes back to 2013. http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6197849

Thanks, the article I have didn't state his V-count.

[StockDoc]

As I was an armorer at the Camp Lejeune Rifle Range in 1958 I should have recognized the name but it has been a long while. I did a Google search to see where he was stationed in 58 and whatever else I could find about him. I came across this and thought you might find it interesting though it goes back to 2013. http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6197849

Interesting read, thanks

[Cosine26]

Hi Phil,
What year was the match in which Michael Pietroforte USMC fired the only perfect score at the Nationals and what was the match/score?
(OK Phil, you forced me to look it up!)

In 1958 T/Sgt Michael Pietroforte, USMC won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of a 250-23V using the M1 Rifle.

In 1966 T/Sgt Michael Pietroforte, USMU won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of 250-26V using the M14 Rifle. (By this time the Commandant of the USMC decreed that the USMC would use the M14 in competition).
.

In 1963 M/Sgt. M.W. Fields, USA won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of 250-30V. This also made him the winner of High Regular Service, High Infantryman, and High Army. In 1963 only the M1 rifle was eligible as the service rifle.


In 1964 Sgt. B.E. Smith USAF won National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a 250-26V firing an M1. With that score he was Match Winner, High Regular Service, and High Air Force. There were two scores of 249-26V fired with the M14 and one with the M1 in the same match. (Match possible 250-50V)
I believe that 1964 was the first year in which the M14 was fired extensively in the National Matches (except for a limited trial in 1963).
Rifles fired were:
ARMY-M14
NAVY-M1 (except for the National Trophy Infantry Match-M14)
USAF -M1
USCG-M14
USMC-M14 (except that individuals who had a strong preference could fire the M1. )
Odds favored the M14 as there were about 1600 M14's to 600 M1's.

1965 Sgt. G. Murdock USMC won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a 250-33V. With that score he was also High Marine. G/Sgt M. Pietroforte was his team mate on the USMC
Crimson Rifle Team along with LCpl. C.N. Hathcock
After 1967 the matches had switched to the SR,& MR target and the Army stopped supporting the National Matches..

[Phil McGrath]

Hi Phil,
What year was the match in which Michael Pietroforte USMC fired the only perfect score at the Nationals and what was the match/score?
(OK Phil, you forced me to look it up!)

In 1958 T/Sgt Michael Pietroforte, USMC won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of a 250-23V using the M1 Rifle.

In 1966 T/Sgt Michael Pietroforte, USMU won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of 250-26V using the M14 Rifle. (By this time the Commandant of the USMC decreed that the USMC would use the M14 in competition).
.

In 1963 M/Sgt. M.W. Fields, USA won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of 250-30V. This also made him the winner of High Regular Service, High Infantryman, and High Army. In 1963 only the M1 rifle was eligible as the service rifle.


In 1964 Sgt. B.E. Smith USAF won National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a 250-26V firing an M1. With that score he was Match Winner, High Regular Service, and High Air Force. There were two scores of 249-26V fired with the M14 and one with the M1 in the same match. (Match possible 250-50V)
I believe that 1964 was the first year in which the M14 was fired extensively in the National Matches (except for a limited trial in 1963).
Rifles fired were:
ARMY-M14
NAVY-M1 (except for the National Trophy Infantry Match-M14)
USAF -M1
USCG-M14
USMC-M14 (except that individuals who had a strong preference could fire the M1. )
Odds favored the M14 as there were about 1600 M14's to 600 M1's.
After 1967 the matches had switched to the SR,& MR target and the Army stopped supporting the National Matches..


All this time I have thought there has been only one person and he has done it twice with different rifles. I think its also important too say as well that the old Targets were the 5V but ammo was issued at the Matches. Another factor this also predates heavy barrels, synthetic stocks and modern bedding.

[Griff Murphey]

Just a quick funny. A fellow bar supporter at Camp Hansen in 1975 was CWO ("Gunner") Robert D. Embese. We talked a lot about shooting and he once mentioned Gunner (he finished as a CWO) Petreforte.

When I was at Camp Pendleton in 1976 we took retirees as space-available dental patients. One day I had Ret. Gunner Petreforte as a patient. I immediately turned to him and said, "You're Gunner Petreforte... The first man to clean the NMC with the Service Rifle!"

He was very surprised that his Navy dentist knew - or cared - about his achievement! To me he was a rock star.

[StockDoc]

That is quite an achievement to use a Garand and shoot so well. Good story

[Cosine26]

National Trophy Individual Rifle Match Details
The NTIRM was a very demanding match. Here are some of the details from the time period covered by the four preceding victories.
1. The Match was the standard 50 shot NMC- no sighting shots allowed.
a. The 200 yard RF was fired by going from standing with the rifle loaded and locked to sitting or kneeling and firing 10 shots in 50 seconds not the 60 seconds presently allowed.
b. The 300 yard RF was fired by going from standing with the rifle loaded and locked to prone and firing 10 shots in 60 seconds not the presently allowed 70 seconds.
c. All four matches were fired using cloth coats - no leather jackets. There is a picture of the USMC team from the 1966 match in the American Rifleman for October 166 which shows them wearing cloth jackets.
d. During each stage of the NMC a shooter using the M1 was required to load from the belt- even in slow fire. This requirement was eliminated with the M14.
e. The targets were the military A & B targets.
The A target used at 200 and 300 had a 12 inch FIVE ring and a FOUR inch V ring. (The early A target had a Six inch V ring but I do not believe that they were used at the Nationals.)
The B target had a Twenty inch Five ring and a Twelve inch V ring.
e. Ammunition was issued at the firing line and though it was close to regular MATCH ammo it was NM and slightly different.
2. For the 1958 match:
a. The M1 was not glass bedded and had one minute sight adjustments in both windage and elevation. A thinner front sight (0.62) and a reduced size aperture (0.059) was authorized in 1958.
b. The ammo used was FA 58 NM which had a mean radius (MR) of 3.4 Inches at 600 yards
c. There were no SLEDS or two round clips authorized.
3. For the 1963 and the 1964 Match:
a. The M1 had reached the epitomic of its performance and had the benefit of the 1/2 minute sight (W &E) with a choice of apertures.
b. Ammo for the 1963 match was M72 Lake City NM with a MR of 2.3 inches at 600 yards.
c. Ammo for the 1964 was M72 LC 64 NM with an MR of 2.2 inches at 600 Yards.
3. For the 1966 Match:
a. The rifle was the NM M14 which had the benefit of the experience of accurizing the M1 and two years of experience with the M14.
b. Ammo was M118 LC 66 NM with a 600 yard MR of 1.73 Inches.

[Herschel]

I fired at Camp Perry for 4 or five years starting in 1958. This was when the M1 was the service rifle. I don't recall ever having have to load from the belt in slow fire. This includes firing in the EIC match. It was so much easier to shoot a clean on the old targets. You could have a ragged group and still have them all in the five ring.

[Cosine26]

Hi Herschel
I would agree with you except for an an unfortunate experience a fellow club member of mine had in a Leg Match. We were firing on the old Dona Ana range in New Mexico in the summer of 1961. I remember because we were both using rebuilt club rifles that had been glass bedded and had NM sights. The rear sight had 1/2 minutes windage clicks but the elevation was a full minute with the 595 aperture. (I had not yet bought my 62 NM M1.) The rules read "Must reload form the belt, so you must have an ammo belt." Ammunition was being issued from clips as the sponsor had no boxed ammo. The correct number of loose rounds were handed to you for each relay. Everything went well until we reached the 600 yard line. Even thought the match started at 0700, when firing the second relay on the 600 yard line, it was noon thereabouts and the temperature was hovering about 100 degrees in the shade and there was no shade for twenty miles.
When we were issued the ammo, I put mine in my belt and kept it there for I did not want is sitting out soaking up the sun. My buddy put his in his belt but laid it out in front of him. I kept my belt on with the ammo in the pockets so I could shield it from the sun with my body. My buddy shot a fairly decent score 246/247 with a decent V count . We were sure that he had "legged".
When the match bulletin arrived he was marked "Disqualified". We contacted the Referee and he was informed - "You removed your ammo belt, so you were disqualified."
Neither of us ever took the chance again.

[Roadkingtrax]

Wonder how the field would look today, if issued ammo was the rule of the day still.

[2111]

1956 Marine Corps Team @ Camp Perry.

30367

[cplnorton]

I've been talking to Roland Beavers through email. He was a RTE armorer in the 50's and probably built these rifles as I think there was only like 12 of those guys in the whole Corps. He's talking about joining the forum here. If he does he would probably have some valueable insight to this as I'm sure he was involved in the program.

[StockDoc]

I definitely think something is being lost with the new technology. Yes, I heard about the wood catching fire, and other short comings, but there is some romance to a Steel and wood rifle/handgun.

[Phil McGrath]

I've been talking to Roland Beavers through email. He was a RTE armorer in the 50's and probably built these rifles as I think there was only like 12 of those guys in the whole Corps. He's talking about joining the forum here. If he does he would probably have some valueable insight to this as I'm sure he was involved in the program.


With Gus Fisher being MIA, that wouldn't be a bad idea.

[Cosine26]

Another name has been added to those who have fired a perfect score in the National Trophy Individual Match originally posted under "Did Marine Use NM M1;s'. Original list was published on 03/20/2015 by me'

Hi Phil,
What year was the match in which Michael Pietroforte USMC fired the only perfect score at the Nationals and what was the match/score?
(OK Phil, you forced me to look it up!)

In 1958 T/Sgt Michael Pietroforte, USMC won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of a 250-23V using the M1 Rifle.

In 1966 T/Sgt Michael Pietroforte, USMU won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of 250-26V using the M14 Rifle. (By this time the Commandant of the USMC decreed that the USMC would use the M14 in competition).
.

In 1963 M/Sgt. M.W. Fields, USA won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a score of 250-30V. This also made him the winner of High Regular Service, High Infantryman, and High Army. In 1963 only the M1 rifle was eligible as the service rifle.


In 1964 Sgt. B.E. Smith USAF won National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a 250-26V firing an M1. With that score he was Match Winner, High Regular Service, and High Air Force. There were two scores of 249-26V fired with the M14 and one with the M1 in the same match. (Match possible 250-50V)
I believe that 1964 was the first year in which the M14 was fired extensively in the National Matches (except for a limited trial in 1963).
Rifles fired were:
ARMY-M14
NAVY-M1 (except for the National Trophy Infantry Match-M14)
USAF -M1
USCG-M14
USMC-M14 (except that individuals who had a strong preference could fire the M1. )
Odds favored the M14 as there were about 1600 M14's to 600 M1's.

1965 Sgt. G. Murdock USMC won the National Trophy Individual Rifle Match with a 250-33V. With that score he was also High Marine. G/Sgt M. Pietroforte was his team mate on the USMC (Added Name)
Crimson Rifle Team along with LCpl. C.N. Hathcock
After 1967 the matches had switched to the SR,& MR target and the Army stopped supporting the National Matches..
FWIW

[bd1]

Great info to have. Thank you!

[Phil McGrath]

Thanks for the update.