Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 7/4/2003 2:04:08 PM EDT

I have decided to add a .308 rifle to my little arsenal, but I can't decide which to purchase. Both have widely available parts, and are combat-proven.

I once owned a Century-Arms L1A1, but sold it quickly without really giving it a complete run through. I have never fired or worked with an M14 type rifle.

So please, your opinions are welcome. I am kind of leaning toward the FAL right now, because mags are cheaper, and I have heard some good comments on them over the years. Thanks for your input in advance.
Link Posted: 7/4/2003 2:35:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/4/2003 2:36:48 PM EDT by Lumpy196]
FAL

Excellent ergonomics (with the exception of a somewhat awkward safety).
CHEAP magazines.
Good adaptability to scope mounting with the DSA mount.
Military proven reliability.
Decent accuracy.
Excellent parts availability.
Mediocre iron sights.


M1A/M14
Good ergonomics.
Military proven reliability.
Excellent accuracy with the potential of improvement.
Excellent iron sights.
Limited consistancy with mounting optics, even with the best mounts.
Good parts availability, though GI parts are becoming more scarce and rising in price.
Fairly expensive magazines.

That said, I love both and wouldnt regret the purchase of either.

Link Posted: 7/4/2003 5:34:03 PM EDT
I have both, prefer the FAL

Easier to work on

Parts are plentiful and cheap

Mags are plentiful and cheap

True EBR, pistol grip versus a standard rifle stock

Utter reliability
Link Posted: 7/4/2003 5:37:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/4/2003 5:39:49 PM EDT by ShamusMcOI]
M1A.

I've owned an FAL, and traded it ofr an M1A after spending an afternoon shooting them side by side.

The M1A IMO is more ergonomic, has better sites, recoils less, points more naturaly, has better balance, is lighter (at least it seems that way to me), and is more accurate.


Even reliablity wise, I've seen both have malfunctions. But have seen FAL's jam more often.

To me the only plus on the FAL are cheap mags.

For me in a .308 battle rifle, I'll take the M1A and bite the bullet on mags.

Link Posted: 7/4/2003 9:36:32 PM EDT
The FAL is called "the right arm of the free world" for a reason. It's as bullet-proof a design as the AK. IMO, aside frome the original FNs, the best FAL on the planet, is produced by DSA. If you want to be happy, buy one of those, and skip the Century gun.
Link Posted: 7/4/2003 10:23:22 PM EDT
Lighten up Robar, I have a Century and it has NEVER missed a beat!
Link Posted: 7/4/2003 10:57:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/6/2003 9:56:53 AM EDT by Wave]
Link Posted: 7/5/2003 7:00:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/5/2003 7:03:12 AM EDT by Sparsky]
I don't own an FAL, yet, but I have shot them. They are nice, reliable, and fun bump guns. I love my M1A though. It just has a certian sex apeal to me. That and people always come up to me on the range to ask about the M1A. I also know a few people that have nice FAL's but after shooting the M1A say, "I got to get one of these."
Link Posted: 7/5/2003 7:43:13 AM EDT
Part of me wants an AR10, kinda sorta, but the mags are so freakin expensive. I like the carbine over the standard rifle. And somehow I just can't justify $1,200.
Link Posted: 7/5/2003 4:57:03 PM EDT
www.dsarms.com
www.entreprise.com

cant go wrong with either!
Link Posted: 7/5/2003 4:59:13 PM EDT
Ar10 mag conversions are $30, that aint bad , ya just "need" some preban m14 mags to convert with. All that missing from the Armalite factory conversion kit is a mag spring and a floor plate, you need to cut the top half loop off the spring to make the whole affair work. HTH
Link Posted: 7/5/2003 8:03:30 PM EDT
M1A. I've shot both (side by side), but only owned an M1A, and I agree with ShamusMcOI on all points. Besides, an M1A just has that "look" and "feel" that is only matched by its' big brother, the M1.
Link Posted: 7/5/2003 8:07:36 PM EDT
I'm building an FAL, and have a M1A.

sure FAL parts are cheaper and more plentiful, but I like the handle and feel of the M1A.

the sights are superior on the M1A, IMHO.
Link Posted: 7/5/2003 10:04:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 7IDL:
the sights are superior on the M1A, IMHO.



Forget your opinion, it's the fact jack!

The sights on an M1A or an M1 may very well be the best battle rifle sights ever used..

In reality it probably doesn't matter which you get (first). I say first because once you have one you will want the other. Then a variant of the first and a variant of the second.

I've got my M1A and I'm hoarding my pennies for an FAL now.
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 8:42:54 AM EDT
I've owned & shot a couple of FALs. They're lacking a bit in design, IMO, of such things as an empty mag lock open, etc.

Accuracy on them is iffy, at best. The M1A should be shooting rings around virtually any FAL.

Having said that, I'd suggest you get an AR-10. The AR-10 is a whole level higher in accuracy over either the M1A or the FAL.

My .o2
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 8:55:22 AM EDT
Bob, what the hell are you talking about? The FAL locks open, the L1A1 Commonwealth inch pattern guns had this feature removed. It can be made to lock back by changing out one part or placing a roll pin where the Brits ground the lock back feature off.
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 9:08:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BobCole:
I've owned & shot a couple of FALs. They're lacking a bit in design, IMO, of such things as an empty mag lock open, etc.

Accuracy on them is iffy, at best. The M1A should be shooting rings around virtually any FAL.

Having said that, I'd suggest you get an AR-10. The AR-10 is a whole level higher in accuracy over either the M1A or the FAL.

My .o2



My FAL locks open just fine on an empty mag. I also prefer having the cocking handle on the left side of the weapon. I can charge the weapon without losing my firing grip. In fact, all functions on the FAL were designed to be performed with the left hand for just this reason. I can flip the safety and engage the magazine release with my right thumb and forefinger respectively, though. I also like the adjustable gas system of the FAL. You can minimize recoil and wear while still getting perfect function. If the gas system gets too fouled, just increase the gas. The FAL was a very well thought out design.
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 9:22:28 AM EDT
FWIW, I recently built a FAL for a co-worker using a Coonan receiver and an excellent DSA STG kit. He took it to the range for test firing, along with his match M1A, which he had worked up handloads for. Using his M1A handloads in the FAL on a 100 yd range, he repeatedly had about a 3/4" tighter group than the M1A . This was with those crappy FAL irons (I agree with that). He couldn't believe a $600 parts gun was outshooting his M1A. Neither could I, but there it is.

I don't have a lot of experience with the M-14, but there is no question the sights are superior, IMO. In all other areas the rifles seem closely matched. I do like the FAL better, though.


Jim
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 9:36:07 AM EDT
i bought an FAL (love it)earlier this year and now i am saving up for a M1a.

Buy both
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 9:51:03 AM EDT
FAL!!! STG58!!!

Love that gun.
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 11:22:06 AM EDT

Thanks for your comments. I may rethink my stance and go with an M1A, if I can find some stuff to sell.

I remember that I didn't like the sights on my FAL very much, because I was used to putting my nose up against the charging handle on an M16, and didn't have a good reference point for eye placement on the FAL. I know now just how important good sights are.

Hopefully I can offset the cost of M1A mags by shopping on ebay.

Link Posted: 7/6/2003 11:54:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/6/2003 11:55:47 AM EDT by Gunbert]
I love my FAL. If the sights are the biggest complaint you have about the FAL, DSA sells a replacement rear sight that is exactly like the AR A2. Here's a link.

DSA A2 rear sight


Me personally, I like the FAL sights. It hits what I point it at, and that's all I care about.
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 2:24:50 PM EDT
I can't comment on the M1A but I love my Fal.
It's a carbine built from an STG58 kit from DSA and Imbel reciever.
Sexy as hell and it shoots very nice groups.
I heard alot of complaints about the sights but they work fine for me.
The FAL keeps it simple and is easy to clean.
Link Posted: 7/6/2003 9:16:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
Bob, what the hell are you talking about? The FAL locks open, the L1A1 Commonwealth inch pattern guns had this feature removed. It can be made to lock back by changing out one part or placing a roll pin where the Brits ground the lock back feature off.



Every FAL I've seen at the range did not have any sort of empty mag lock-back. They did a **manual** lock but not mag activated.

My G3 was the same way as was my L1A1, as you described.
Link Posted: 7/7/2003 4:12:58 AM EDT
No problem Bob, its like a $10 fix. Just call Tapco and order the bolt hold open for a metric receiver with the pin to hold open after the last round, they will know what you are talking about. Swap out the part and your's will lock open like mine.
Link Posted: 7/7/2003 5:27:41 AM EDT
Im a M14/M1A freak. I love them.I bought a factory one and had one built and I built the other.Its a bit more personal with me being my father carried one and my father inlaw carried one in the Marine Corps while on Vacation in a little place called VietNam . So Im attracted to them in a different way. Im haveing a STG 58 built on a Coonan by M&M in Atlanta right now. I have no real experiance with the FAL.Just shot a cousins a couple of time and see people with them at the range.They seem to be a great rifle. I think both rifle are excellent. WarDawg
Link Posted: 7/7/2003 11:12:31 AM EDT
I have one of each. They are both fine rifles, but you are comparing apples and oranges, IMHO.

As several posters have well stated the main differences, I won't repeat all of that.

But the rifles are two different things. The FAL is a tough, well-wrung-out battle rifle. Not exceptionally accurate, but plenty good enough for battle use. I enjoy burning up cheap ammo and bouncing empty cans around. We say it is Minute-of-Paint-Can accurate.

The M1A is a precision instrument. Mine has a National Match barrel and NM sights. It is a true 1 MOA rifle. The mags are expensive at around $45 each for USGA mags. Don't waste your money on cheap ones. It is a fine rifle and I sure enjoy shooting mine.

So the only answer is simple...get an FAL first as it is cheaper, then start saving your money for an M1A. That's what I did.
Link Posted: 7/8/2003 1:52:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/8/2003 1:57:06 PM EDT by marvl]
Boston T. Party makes an in-depth comparison of all major MBRs in his "Boston's Gun Bible," including the FAL, AR10, HK91, Garand, M1A, etc. His conclusion is that the M1A is the best choice. His methodology seems reasonable to me. Most of us don't have the means to do a side-by-side comparison of all of them, so I have to give some credence to his opinion.

BTW, I was happy to see he rated the Garand highly.
Link Posted: 7/10/2003 10:08:37 AM EDT
It sounds like many of you have shot cheap, POS Fals...If your going to compare a Fal to a M1A then you should go dollar to dollar. then guage your decision accordingly.

I was considering both... I bought a new DSA SA 58. Very nice rifle. I am extremely happy with it.
Link Posted: 7/12/2003 7:16:22 AM EDT
I have owned FALs for over 15yrs.
There is NO difference in accuracy in a rack-grade M1A and
a rack-grade FAL.
I have even out shot standard M1As in matches with my
Springfield SAR-48. (believe it or not).

The M1a is a good range or match rifle.
The FAL is a better drag around in the bush,
works every time rifle.

How many countries adopted the FAL ? 93
How many countries adopted the M-14 ? 1

Kinda answers the question by itself.
Top Top