User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 2:53:02 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the M14 is one of the sexiest rifles out there but the reality is that it’s looks are about all it’s got going. There are eternal truths in life. For example attractive women don’t have to try hard (m14). Ugly things (ak47, fal, etc) have to try real hard. Tall skinny girls look good in their way, shorter thicker ones can look good in a different way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 2:54:21 PM EDT
[#2]
FAL
the M14 should have been built like the BM-59. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 2:54:35 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think it is "obvious" the 14 is more accurate. Match grade M1As are more accurate, but for rack grade rifles it is more a tie. It takes a lot of work to keep M1As shooting well. I know in the UK they used to shoot FALs out at 1,000 yards, not sure what they did to make them accurate or how much success they had. I forget if he has a Parker Hale barrel, or if he had Lothar Walther make him one. His flash suppressor was reamed out like on the NM M-14s (although this was done in part because there was some sort of issue with it being off-center). He bedded the frame lock lug on the receiver within the trigger housing using bedding compound. On top of that he built up the mating surfaces of the trigger housing with weld and then filed down until the action would just close, and also got a frame lock that was a tight fit as well. This eliminated all play between the upper and lower. Trigger job to eliminate creep and lighten the pull a bit (sadly, there is a limit to the safe trigger pull on the FAL; not much under 6 lbs). He also built up the rear sight base and filed down to eliminate play between the base and the aperture so that it wouldn't wobble. Unlike a lot of guys trying to maximize accuracy, he did not custom fit the bolt and carrier to eliminate play (some find this can deal with the vertical stringing encountered in a good percentage of FALs). He did, however, have a headspace as tight as feasible, IIRC. And he also made quality handloads that were tailored (as far as seating depth goes) to that specific rifle and tested different powder and bullet combinations to see what his rifle liked best, and stuck with that. The result were groups that were well below 2 MOA, and sometimes right at or below 1 MOA. A FAL off of the rack isn't going to do that, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 2:59:44 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FAL M-14 should have |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 2:59:52 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:00:32 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M14>FAL |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:01:30 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One of the guys on the FAL Files from Italy does service rifle competitions with his L1A1 out there and has actually placed or won with it. With sufficient work he was able to get groups that hovered around either side of 1 MOA while shooting with irons at 300m. I forget if he has a Parker Hale barrel, or if he had Lothar Walther make him one. His flash suppressor was reamed out like on the NM M-14s (although this was done in part because there was some sort of issue with it being off-center). He bedded the frame lock lug on the receiver within the trigger housing using bedding compound. On top of that he built up the mating surfaces of the trigger housing with weld and then filed down until the action would just close, and also got a frame lock that was a tight fit as well. This eliminated all play between the upper and lower. Trigger job to eliminate creep and lighten the pull a bit (sadly, there is a limit to the safe trigger pull on the FAL; not much under 6 lbs). He also built up the rear sight base and filed down to eliminate play between the base and the aperture so that it wouldn't wobble. Unlike a lot of guys trying to maximize accuracy, he did not custom fit the bolt and carrier to eliminate play (some find this can deal with the vertical stringing encountered in a good percentage of FALs). He did, however, have a headspace as tight as feasible, IIRC. And he also made quality handloads that were tailored (as far as seating depth goes) to that specific rifle and tested different powder and bullet combinations to see what his rifle liked best, and stuck with that. The result were groups that were well below 2 MOA, and sometimes right at or below 1 MOA. A FAL off of the rack isn't going to do that, though. The headspace is super tight I also welded up and filed to fit the locking lug in the lower to eliminate play; mine had a TON I also noticed welded up my sight a bit and filed to fit to make it very tight There is no wobble between the receivers |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:02:42 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FAL for days |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:02:46 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Okay. But I’m not a lone civilian and if I am then I am not going to be in that scenario. If so, I find another gun. This nation sends people to hellholes with SR-25s. How is it that my ass back on the block is catching all these doomsday scenarios worse off than they would be. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:10:00 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well first off here’s what we know: America made oodles of M14s. No client states wanted to buy them. FALs were Commonwealth and cost Commonwealth riches and were sourced mainly from Belgium. Pricey to make but not prohibitively so. Africa made some. G3s were stamped sheet metal and could be made by anybody who could make them to spec. Arguably more prolific as a lot were/are made in SWA. There were fewer AR-10s because they required people who could work with legit Aluminum. That narrowed it down quite a bit. Not “buying”. Able to make. The Dutch had more success and West Germany was interested but more expensive. But the ones that have survived the years of intermittent production are still better off than the other three https://i1.wp.com/silahreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Screen-Shot-2017-10-01-at-20.23.56.png?resize=643%2C510 On paper, all three were more “successful” solely because more were made. In trials, the AR-10 came in second to the FAL for some countries. Not sure why. It'd be interesting to see. I know production issues also made countries that were interested shy away from it. Conversely, in the one country that had soldiers that got to use the AR-10, FAL, and G-3, those soldiers seemed to prefer the rifles in that order. Portugal would have bought more AR-10s and only didn't for political reasons (Dutch decided to adopt an anti-colonial policy that barred arms sales to colonial powers, as I recall; I think this was the death blow for the AR-10 commercially, since the Portuguese were by far the biggest buyer). I think all of the G-3s in southern Africa were Portuguese-made (outside of the CETME trials rifles made for South Africa; I think their ranking put the FAL as #1, AR-10 #2, CETME #3, and SIG 510 #4). Portugal sold or gave a lot of its G-3s to Rhodesia and South Africa (which would include South West Africa back then) when they pulled out of Africa after the Leftist coup in Portugal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:13:31 PM EDT
[#11]
Depends. They can both be optimized to suit with modern upgrades. Stock Full sized FAL V Full sized M14?
I think the sights and safety location of the M1A is better in every way. I think the FAL has better balance and ergonomics that make recoil managment easier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:16:02 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Except you’re wrong. Wikipedia isn’t a scholarly source. Taiwan was doing Taiwan. And explain all the M14s going to Anniston. A lot of the Asian M14s were meant to be sold commercially to boomercore Americans who “knew dat Mattel made gun was a piece of shit I tell ya hwut” Big wow, America’s permanent Aircraft Carrier in the South China Sea used an M14. It’s not like Israel literally said “Naw we’re good. We don’t need M14s” or anything You stated that "No client states wanted to buy them" - I gave you an example that directly disproved that statement and your response is to act like Taiwan doesn't count for undefined reasons while creating a strawman that Norinco civilian rifles made in mainland China are the same thing as Taiwan military production. Oh, and Israel did use the M14 so you're wrong there as well. https://m14forum.com/m14/198417-idf-m14-sniper-rifles.html (does this source meet your level of scholarly approval?) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:19:33 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I found his lack of comment on the FAL odd. Perhaps I missed it, but I read a bunch of his stuff back in the day. Early on it made sense due to the lack of FALs on the market in the early '80s. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I recall Jeff Cooper saying that it was a rare G-3 that could have its trigger successfully made excellent by event the most qualified G-3 'smith. Luckily for him, he had one of those few. He seemed to really like his HK-91, as well as his BM-59. His stated go-to rifle for fighting was his BM-59 (his appears to be the Golden State Arms licensed version, which is kinda like a Tanker Garand) in Tappan's book, but I'm not sure he had the HK, yet, at that point. His HK ended up with a reflex sight on it in his later years, as well as different irons (Williams, I think), interestingly. I do recall him stating that if he were to buy rifles to equip a small military force they would be G-3s. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:20:41 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FAL is easier for basic field strip. Detail strip sucks and requires the use of tooling. FAL sights aren't the best. FAL was easier to field with optics (moreso now due to DSA railed upper). M-14 slightly harder to field strip, but not extremely difficult. Detail strip is easy with the use of the basic combo tool. M-14 sights superior, but not well relegated to optics. The M-14 should have been fielded in 1947. Beretta took 9 months to convert their M-1 Garand machinery to produce the arguably superior to both M-14/FAL rifle the BM-59. US Army Ordnance dicked around for almost 2 decades before coming up with the M-14. People tend to measure all of these rifles through the prism of today's ergonomics, etc., and that's wrong. The M14 would have been a good rifle immediately post-WWII. But Ordnance screwed the pooch by taking another 10 years to field it. Beretta's method (and results) are a complete embarrassment to the Ordnance Corps and Rene Studler. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:25:26 PM EDT
[#15]
Having owned and shot both, I will say that the FAL is more "modern" with the pistol grip type stock.
Recoil is about equal, as is muzzle jump. (The FAL still has a bit of drop to the stock, resulting in some jump on recoil.) Sights are better on the M14 by virtue of being easier to adjust. Safety location is better on the FAL. Magazine removal/insertion is a tie. BOTH ARE WAY TOO LONG, especially the FAL is equipped with the Model 50.00 style flash hider. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:28:31 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Depends. They can both be optimized to suit with modern upgrades. Stock Full sized FAL V Full sized M14? I think the sights and safety location of the M1A is better in every way. I think the FAL has better balance and ergonomics that make recoil managment easier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:40:25 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're a lone civilian. Shit has HTF (or not). You have a case head failure. Have you seen the difference between what happens in such an event between steel rifles and enclosed aluminum ones? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Some of you are seriously on dope. AR-10 was hugely successful in many places of heavy fighting with less than ideal ammo where few white men dared to tread. It’s ALWAYS been successful aside from Eagle Arms and Knights Armament, the only real revisions were made in the early 70s. Its only drawback was the odd for its era charging handle. The only issues it had were outright sabotage. Anyone else who just used it and kept it lubed had few problems if any. A lot of this “muh M14” “muh FAL” and “muh G3” boils down to fashion statements and emotions or wanting to be different. Why do I want a gun with wood, more moving parts, and a lot of personality with the gas valve when I can have something that is accurate, lightweight, and works? Even 50 years ago AR-10 was the right answer. Gimme a break with the wolf talk on muh Cold War and muh Rhodesia Have you seen the difference between what happens in such an event between steel rifles and enclosed aluminum ones? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:43:23 PM EDT
[#18]
I know a dude who did a couple years in Nam w/a LRRP Co and several years in both Rhodesia and S.Africa with the RLI and 44 Pathfinder respectively. He’s got time on both in the shit and he says FAL all day long.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:43:37 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
An extended safety makes the FAL selector work like an M-16 selector. DSA sells them. I use them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Depends. They can both be optimized to suit with modern upgrades. Stock Full sized FAL V Full sized M14? I think the sights and safety location of the M1A is better in every way. I think the FAL has better balance and ergonomics that make recoil managment easier. I like the M-1/m-14/mini-14 safety better than the M-16/AR-15. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:50:19 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My most recent purchase of M80 ball was $8.30 a box. M855 purchased the same day was $7 a box. Prices online for equivalent ammo for M855 didn't really get much lower than that. It'd be nice if ammo of either type was still as cheap as it was back when I was in high school. I could swear I was paying $40 for 200-round cans of Aussie 7.62mm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 3:54:46 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I haven’t. What happens? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 4:00:02 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Speaking generally, fal top cover blown off. Fal and m1a mag guts blown out. AR comes apart along stress points of the receiver. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I haven’t. What happens? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 4:12:34 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is there a significant difference? In either case, the gun's out of commission until you get it back home, right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I haven’t. What happens? Here is a FAL that was shot repeatedly with no locking shoulder in place. Every one was a case head failure. (and multiple magazine failures  )
 Attached FileDon't home build your guns, kids, even if you are a cop and think you know firearms. 
ETA: I've had case head failure in M1a, and 1911s and seen one and the results of another in FAL . All required a new mag inserted and would continue to function correctly. Steel handguns compared to plastic fantastic is the same story. What will destroy a glock will blow the mag out of a 1911. (and the grip panels if they're just wood. I purposely had aluminum grips on the one I was hot rodding) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 4:15:45 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's not magic. Pressure is released in the path of the least resistance. The mag and top cover of fal and (mag) of the M1a let go long before damage to the receiver. The M1a recoil spring guide/magazine front catch can shear but not as likely as not. The AR is enclosed with aluminum. That pressure is going to go somewhere. Here is a FAL that was shot repeatedly with no locking shoulder in place. Every one was a case head failure. (and multiple magazine failures )
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/206831/IMG_20150824_132303272_zpsknqky0gm_jpg-1314143.JPG Don't home build your guns, kids, even if you are a cop and think you know firearms. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I haven’t. What happens? Here is a FAL that was shot repeatedly with no locking shoulder in place. Every one was a case head failure. (and multiple magazine failures )
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/206831/IMG_20150824_132303272_zpsknqky0gm_jpg-1314143.JPG Don't home build your guns, kids, even if you are a cop and think you know firearms. I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, this is the first I've heard that AR case head failures being a significant problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 4:31:32 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup, with modern optimization the FAL can be very nice. I like the M-1/m-14/mini-14 safety better than the M-16/AR-15. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 4:39:28 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I like my M1A better than my FAL, but I wouldn't kick either of them out of the safe for no reason. An M14 would carry nicer than a metric FAL. That cocking handle would get annoying in the belt and gear SLR wins there. Both have Achilles heels but nothing that didn’t meet battle rifle standards of the day. Now when you look at them and want them updated with glass  , night vision etc.........just get a modern rifle.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 4:49:23 PM EDT
[#27]
G3 > FAL > M14
Fact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 5:09:42 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
G3 > FAL > M14 Fact.  Also, it's about damn time you showed up-I was wondering where the hell you were. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 5:11:42 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FAL is easier for basic field strip. Detail strip sucks and requires the use of tooling. FAL sights aren't the best. FAL was easier to field with optics (moreso now due to DSA railed upper). 
FAL, hands down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 5:27:23 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Speaking generally, fal top cover blown off. Fal and m1a mag guts blown out. AR comes apart along stress points of the receiver. The latter being super easy to do on a FAL, for obvious reasons, vs a 14. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 5:44:21 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When AR15s began to stomp M1As at the 600 yard line, I took notice. M1As don't own distance, one of the reason "battle rifles" were pushed in the 80s. Since FALs can't compete in Service Rifle, their lack of success doesn't mean anything. The Brits (and other English speaking nations) used FALs in their version of Highpower, it might be interesting to compare their results to ours with M1As. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I have no idea. How is that relevant? Since FALs can't compete in Service Rifle, their lack of success doesn't mean anything. The Brits (and other English speaking nations) used FALs in their version of Highpower, it might be interesting to compare their results to ours with M1As. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 5:52:35 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
G3 > FAL > M14 Fact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 6:01:18 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I measured and the fixed stock has the same LOP. For some reason I had always thought the para stock as about an inch shorter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I really want a FAL Para Congo. Im a small guy though, and even for me the para stock seems a wee bit short |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 6:50:20 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Been running my yearly FAL match for like 18 years. We have had two case head separations and both rifles were able to continue once the chamber was cleared and bbl was verified to be clear. The latter being super easy to do on a FAL, for obvious reasons, vs a 14. Aluminum and polymer are strong enough under normal circumstance. Sometimes you don't get normal circumstance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:01:04 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Depends which country’s fixed stock. I had a box of FAL parts I sold for fp1201. The stocks varied in length. Easily an inch from one nations to another. One reason why I like the Brit guns is semi custom stock lengths. I like the S length in summer and the Arctic stock for winter clothes. One advantage to the FAL that you couldn’t get with the M14. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I really want a FAL Para Congo. Im a small guy though, and even for me the para stock seems a wee bit short |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:02:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wanted to like the FAL it's the first rifle I bought when I turned 18 but century arms ruined it for me. Edit: I currently have an M1A At the same time, I love the balance and feel of the M-14 (M1A). |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:04:14 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. They’re both not light machine guns. 7.62 NATO doesn't do well in sub 10 pound all purpose rifles. So eliminating that which they share equally they both are serviceable service rifles of the era. An M14 would carry nicer than a metric FAL. That cocking handle would get annoying in the belt and gear SLR wins there. Both have Achilles heels but nothing that didn’t meet battle rifle standards of the day. Now when you look at them and want them updated with glass , night vision etc.........just get a modern rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:08:56 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: An extended safety makes the FAL selector work like an M-16 selector. DSA sells them. I use them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:21:37 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Been running my yearly FAL match for like 18 years. We have had two case head separations and both rifles were able to continue once the chamber was cleared and bbl was verified to be clear. The latter being super easy to do on a FAL, for obvious reasons, vs a 14. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Speaking generally, fal top cover blown off. Fal and m1a mag guts blown out. AR comes apart along stress points of the receiver. The latter being super easy to do on a FAL, for obvious reasons, vs a 14. Never did have the magazine blown out or otherwise have a kaboom, though. Top cover is the charger guide style, so I suspect it would not be affected by that sort of thing. I just put in the broken case extractor, popped the thing out, checked the barrel, and moved on. Stopped using the stuff in anything but the FR-8 once I got better ammo (sadly, I bought over 1,000 rounds from this lot trying to get as much ammo as I could before restrictions on ammo acquisition took effect here). In-between, I did find one gas setting where it'd cycle alright and would not get any separations. The first time I had no tool, so that really sucked. Rifle was down for the rest of the shooting trip. I keep a broken case extractor in the grip now, just in case. That kind of issue will take your rifle out, whatever kind it is, if you can't get the broken/stuck case out by more improvised means. I'm going to get one for the AR I'm building, too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:26:03 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unless you're left-handed, in my case I find the M14/M1A much easier to operate without all kinds of contortions. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Primarily ergonomics and manual of arms, imo. If you consider them equal in combat accuracy and reliability then the FAL wins simply by being pistol gripped, thumb selector, left side charging handle and folding stock capable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:27:58 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Having owned and shot both, I will say that the FAL is more "modern" with the pistol grip type stock. Recoil is about equal, as is muzzle jump. (The FAL still has a bit of drop to the stock, resulting in some jump on recoil.) Sights are better on the M14 by virtue of being easier to adjust. Safety location is better on the FAL. Magazine removal/insertion is a tie. BOTH ARE WAY TOO LONG, especially the FAL is equipped with the Model 50.00 style flash hider. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:32:48 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don’t discount kinetic energy. Yea going through a camouflage shirt and they’re even. Beyond that no. A supersonic 77 gr at 600 would go right through someone. So would a supersonic 168 gr, it would make a slightly larger hole, but that's about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:34:11 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I like the fixed cocking handle better. Faster and easier to use (but I also tend to use it to release the bolt instead of the BHO). I've never found an issue with it interfering with gear or being uncomfortable, not even hiking for miles with the rifle with LBE and ruck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:35:14 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I got a bad lot of Malaysian ball ammo which was giving me case head separations and blowing back gas and soot into the receiver regardless (I think the powder was defective; also grouped horribly and inconsistently, on par with Tula Ammo). Ammo from the same lot was causing the same issues in other people's rifles, including FALs and an M1A. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:42:47 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FAL the M14 should have been built like the BM-59. The US attempted to perfect the Garand. While a fine rifle, it had serious flaws and was not perfectible. The BM-59 program was superior in a large number of ways: faster, cheaper, made use of existing parts and tooling, the resulting rifle was likely superior with smoother recoil impulse and therefore more controllable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:43:47 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One of the guys on the FAL Files from Italy does service rifle competitions with his L1A1 out there and has actually placed or won with it. With sufficient work he was able to get groups that hovered around either side of 1 MOA while shooting with irons at 300m. I forget if he has a Parker Hale barrel, or if he had Lothar Walther make him one. His flash suppressor was reamed out like on the NM M-14s (although this was done in part because there was some sort of issue with it being off-center). He bedded the frame lock lug on the receiver within the trigger housing using bedding compound. On top of that he built up the mating surfaces of the trigger housing with weld and then filed down until the action would just close, and also got a frame lock that was a tight fit as well. This eliminated all play between the upper and lower. Trigger job to eliminate creep and lighten the pull a bit (sadly, there is a limit to the safe trigger pull on the FAL; not much under 6 lbs). He also built up the rear sight base and filed down to eliminate play between the base and the aperture so that it wouldn't wobble. Unlike a lot of guys trying to maximize accuracy, he did not custom fit the bolt and carrier to eliminate play (some find this can deal with the vertical stringing encountered in a good percentage of FALs). He did, however, have a headspace as tight as feasible, IIRC. And he also made quality handloads that were tailored (as far as seating depth goes) to that specific rifle and tested different powder and bullet combinations to see what his rifle liked best, and stuck with that. The result were groups that were well below 2 MOA, and sometimes right at or below 1 MOA. A FAL off of the rack isn't going to do that, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:47:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My most recent purchase of M80 ball was $8.30 a box. M855 purchased the same day was $7 a box. Prices online for equivalent ammo for M855 didn't really get much lower than that. It'd be nice if ammo of either type was still as cheap as it was back when I was in high school. I could swear I was paying $40 for 200-round cans of Aussie 7.62mm. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I want a 16" FAL with a railed top cover and ACR/ACR style stock. 
I don't want to spend the $$ to feed it.  It'd be nice if ammo of either type was still as cheap as it was back when I was in high school. I could swear I was paying $40 for 200-round cans of Aussie 7.62mm. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:53:30 PM EDT
[#48]
If one was demonstrably better than the other I would not own both.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:55:17 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's not magic. Pressure is released in the path of the least resistance. The mag and top cover of fal and (mag) of the M1a let go long before damage to the receiver. The M1a recoil spring guide/magazine front catch can shear but not as likely as not. The AR is enclosed with aluminum. That pressure is going to go somewhere. Here is a FAL that was shot repeatedly with no locking shoulder in place. Every one was a case head failure. (and multiple magazine failures )
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/206831/IMG_20150824_132303272_zpsknqky0gm_jpg-1314143.JPG Don't home build your guns, kids, even if you are a cop and think you know firearms.
ETA: I've had case head failure in M1a, and 1911s and seen one and the results of another in FAL . All required a new mag inserted and would continue to function correctly. Steel handguns compared to plastic fantastic is the same story. What will destroy a glock will blow the mag out of a 1911. (and the grip panels if they're just wood. I purposely had aluminum grips on the one I was hot rodding) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2020 7:58:26 PM EDT
[#50]
I love shooting both, but given current prices/quality it doesn't make sense not to just do something like a Larue kit or any other quality "AR10".
I still regret not buying one of the $899 Imbel FALs when AIM still had them though.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
