Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/16/2005 1:18:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/16/2005 1:18:12 PM EDT by KevinB]
I resently posted about an AR-10 vs. a M1A as a BATTLE RIFLE, poll says M1A's clearly have the upper hand. Alot of peaple mentioned a FAL as a viable option - - so how bout it folks! ! !

remember the oprative words here are BATTLE RIFLE.
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 8:47:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/16/2005 8:48:01 AM EDT by WIZZO_ARAKM14]

IMO, the FAL has crappy ergo's and the sites could be better.


EDIT: IBTL, wrong forum
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 8:47:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/16/2005 8:49:54 AM EDT by Darkest2000]
FALs are great, cheap mags and cheap replacement parts (milspec parts at that), and very user friendly, I think the only shortend of the FAL is that you won't ever get the accuracy of an M1A from a FAL.

I love M1As but the price of them are getting out of hand, and having milspec (USGI) parts means even more $$$$. Mags cost 5 times as much.

While you're at it, why not look into the G3 as well. A weapon designed with a very different principle in mind. different operating system as well.
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 8:54:52 AM EDT
IBTL, this is the wrong section.
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 9:43:36 AM EDT
Ask yourself which has been in 'battle' more and proven itself time and time again...
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 9:26:13 AM EDT
We got a forum for each of the battle rifles you listed

M1A [http://www.ar15.com/forums/forum.html?b=6&f=6

FAL www.ar15.com/forums/forum.html?b=6&f=7

AR10 www.ar15.com/forums/forum.html?b=3&f=62

Also an HK battle rifle forum at www.ar15.com/forums/forum.html?b=6&f=9

Or you could just go to the Armory and ask in general firearms discussion
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 1:15:21 PM EDT
I'll stick with my .308 Garand.
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 1:43:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By WhiteRabbit:
I resently posted about an AR-10 vs. a M1A as a BATTLE RIFLE, poll says M1A's clearly have the upper hand. Alot of peaple mentioned a FAL as a viable option - - so how bout it folks! ! !

remember the oprative words here are BATTLE RIFLE.

Actually the FAL is winning right now 6 to 5.
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 2:14:23 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 3:42:36 PM EDT
And the answer is:

Link Posted: 9/16/2005 3:47:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JohnRippert:
I'll stick with my .308 Garand.

WTF is it with you dinosaurs....just HAVE to wave that 2X4 around any chance you get.
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 10:26:27 PM EDT
FAL for me, thanks....

- georgestrings
Link Posted: 9/16/2005 11:04:28 PM EDT
I have an M14/S (M1A), 2 M 14s and a select fire FN/FAL. hing
Guess that means that I favor the FN/FAL! Sarge
Link Posted: 9/17/2005 5:44:30 AM EDT
I vote M14/M1A... My FAL has let me down. My M14's ...NEVER.... ... While I find the FAL a good rifle... The M14 just is my cup of TEA.....WarDawg
Link Posted: 9/17/2005 4:02:25 PM EDT
FAL for me.
Link Posted: 9/17/2005 5:20:54 PM EDT
Any of the current gen of Battle Rifles are good. The Ar10, M1A, FAL and HK91's. The mag prices are the best that I can recall and there is a lot of 7.62x51 ammo out there. You can scope each and everyone of these rifle.

So what is the best of these rifles? I would have to say it is the one you currently own and shoot.

I currently have a M-21 and a PTR91 and I like both
Link Posted: 9/18/2005 7:07:58 AM EDT
Can't go wrong with a good speciman of either. What fits and works better for you is the right answer here.

My 2 cents:

I like the M1A better because it has 1)better sights, 2)better trigger, 3)works better than my DSA did with a sling. (DSA sling attached to barrel and pulled my shots low left when tightly slung). To me, these are all really important attributes as I do just about zero shooting from a bench.

My M1As are actually better than my DSA in terms of reliability. My DSA didn't like some magazines. A handful of FTF over the couple years I owned it, and I tended to download the mags to 18 rounds to reduce issues. I have shot my M1As much more the past couple of years and they flat out work great from 90F+ to ~zero temps. (that would be WAY below freezing for you southern boys).

Ergonomics are a tossup. This (and optics mounting) is the only place where an AR10 excels.

I have seen a few guys compete with FALS in CMP matches. Few have done well. Boardmember goodorbit and his brother can shoot a FAL pretty damned well, and are the exceptions.
Link Posted: 9/19/2005 5:26:29 AM EDT
I think it depends on which of them fits YOU and your "rifle personality" the best.

The FAL and the M1A are BOTH "battle proven" rifles, reliable enough to trust with your life when drug around in "the mud and the blood and the beer".

They are both "minute of bad guy" accurate, and both use the "correct" .308 round.

Small "nit pick" differences between them, M1A trigger a bit better than the FAL,, FAL ergo better than M1A,, etc, etc.

eeny, meeny mieny, moe

I chose the FAL
Your Mileage may Vary.

Link Posted: 9/19/2005 5:58:36 AM EDT

I can beat many many people on CQB courses with my tricked out 16" FAL. Of course it has none of the defects losers leave on their cheapy FALs. Everyone that fires it wants it.

It all comes down to a good (outstanding in my case) trigger, extended inch type safety, and a DSA scope mount. It does not sound like much, but most people never put in the $150 (plus high end scope) it takes to turn the FAL into an M4 ass kicker. Those that do choose FAL.
Top Top