Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 6/10/2002 9:05:16 AM EST
Which one is superior?

Link Posted: 6/10/2002 9:17:33 AM EST
Superior in what way? Cost? Reliability? Accuracy? Price of accessories?
Link Posted: 6/10/2002 9:20:41 AM EST
New fal mags cost about a fraction of what the AR10 mags are commanding.  If you like blasting, like I do, and are willing to sacrifice just a little bit of accuracy, go with the fal.
Link Posted: 6/10/2002 9:22:35 AM EST
Link Posted: 6/10/2002 9:29:16 AM EST
Forget cost. If you could have just one, and $$$ was no object...

What are the pros and cons?

as an Optics Platform?



Link Posted: 6/10/2002 10:48:44 AM EST
Link Posted: 6/10/2002 11:34:58 AM EST
I owned an AR-10 and currently own an FAL.

Here's my .02...

The AR10 was extremely accurate. The FAL is very accurate. The AR10 mags are stupid expensive. FAL mags are $5-10.00. My AR10 would never hold open the bolt on the last round(small point, but annoying). FAL parts are plentiful and cheap. DSA parts are awesome.

The 2-stage trigger on the AR is great. The trigger on my FAL is heavy.

The DSA scope mount is killer. I'm saving up for their 24" bull upper.

I have a Bushnell Holosite mounted on the DSA scope mount. This combo is more than accurate enough for hunting, 200-300 yrd blasting and crooks hopping over by back fence.

The Armalite AR10 is a great rifle, but the FAL fits my budget and gets the job done.

Hope this helps...
Link Posted: 6/10/2002 1:07:18 PM EST
Link Posted: 6/10/2002 3:23:14 PM EST

While the DSA mount is well-regarded, consider the new, Gen III scope mount from Tapco.  


IIRC, all other FAL scope mounts preclude the use of iron sights, at least on the metric models such as the StG 58.  Also much cheaper than the alternatives that don't offer as much.

I have not had problems using the irons on my STG58A and the DSA mount.
Link Posted: 6/10/2002 4:05:07 PM EST
Link Posted: 6/10/2002 6:46:05 PM EST

Forget cost. If you could have just one, and $$$ was no object...

What are the pros and cons?

as an Optics Platform?



The FAL is so different from the AR-10 and the SR-25 that it is hard for me to compare.
If you look just at the AR-10 and the SR-25 and cost is no object then pick the SR-25 as you'll get about .1 or .2 moa better. On average.  Supposedly.
I've owned SR-25's and currently own (2) AR-10's and trust me if cost does matter pick the AR-10 - flattop.
With today's vast array of scopes I simply don't shoot with iron sights any more. I also don't want to limit myself to a carry-handle mounted scope so mine are flattops.  
I don't believe the FAL scope mount to be as stable as those mounts available for the AR-10A4 and AR-10(T).

Now should we be talking about a real FN FAL such as the FN 50.00 L.A.R. Match..............
The select fire version of the 50.00 Match may very well be the finest battlefield rifle manufactured to date.  With this rifle I would be willing to put up with a few  mount questions.
Link Posted: 6/11/2002 5:23:38 AM EST
M1A,oh my bad its not on the list.Go Fal dude!
Link Posted: 6/11/2002 5:34:32 AM EST
I have the FAL, a few AR's (but not an AR-10), an M1A, and a Garand.

For me the operating controls are best on the AR series of rifles. Simple, positive, big, and easy to find. I do spend more time behind the AR type controls...

The FAL's - especially the magazine release are tiny and stiff on my DSA rifle. They can all be operated with the left hand which is nice.

The M1A has to have the magazines tipped into place rather than slammed like the AR. I like it's safety modeled after the Garand's. The bolt release is too small for me.

The M1 Garand is similar to the M1A but has to use stripper clips to load 8 rounds at a time. Not that 8 rounds at a time isn't enough it just seems sort of under gunned with all the 20, 30 and even 40 round magazine fed rifles.
Link Posted: 6/11/2002 3:10:03 PM EST

Std height sights, or optional tall sights?
Either way, apparently I was misinformed.

Regardless, DSA's Extreme Duty Scope mount is nearly $100 compared to the Tapco's $40.

No question it's an excellent scope mount.  IMHO it's not worth the price differential. YMMV.

Standard height, and it was $60.

However, the one I have has 8 mounting screws, and not 12.  Don't know what the difference is between the models.

I like the mount, but it's a pain to remove when cleaning.
Link Posted: 6/12/2002 6:59:14 AM EST

Which one is superior? Why?

Hey Cincinnatus, if your user name is based on the township of that name, you aren't that far from me. If you want to check out an AR10 and an SA58 in the flesh, email me.
Link Posted: 6/12/2002 7:45:02 AM EST
I'm a recovering FALer but have switched to an AR. For my money, in .308, the DSA SA58 is the superior weapon for all of the reasons listed above.  I can live with a slightly larger group for the huge advantage of inexpensive and available parts and mags over the other two options.
Link Posted: 6/14/2002 5:49:32 AM EST
A recent article in Guns Magazine (August 2002) by David Fortier involved putting 5,000 rounds of Black Hills .308 and 5,000 rounds Malaysian milsurp through a new DSA carbine with the full length gas system in less than 10 hours during January in Maine, temp ~20 degrees F. Here is what happened.

Initial sight in, 10 rds of Black Hills into a group of 2 7/8 inches. Headspace measured and recorded at 1.630. The gun was then shot with a group of shooters putting 5 full 20 round mags through the gun, rapid fire. After every 300-400 rounds, the gun was allowed to cool off for a "minute or so."  

First problem, round 2,782. The handguard pin on DSA's new handguard rail system broke. Solution? Inserting a galvanized nail and bending it to keep it in place.

Second problem, round 3,203, the mil spec Steyr gas reulator failed. Rifle could still be fired as a "straight pull." Regulator was replaced with a new "Heavy Duty" DSA regulator. If you are familiar with a DSA/FAL gas system, this is a fast easy part to replace-twist out the old, put in the new.

The last of the 5,000 rds of Black hills were shot up. Rifle was inspected-no problems. No cleaning or lube. On to the milsurp.

The milsurp ammo had hard primers, and occasionally required a second strike. They tested the ammo in 3 other FALs (non DSA) which also required a few second strikes. Oh, the joys of milsurp.

Day 1 (~7 hours of shooting) ended with 7,900 rounds down the pipe.

The rifle was inspected. Headspace had increased to 1.631. Some obvious wear on bolt/carrier was observed. Gun was wiped down and lightly lubed. Barrel not touched.
Link Posted: 6/14/2002 5:57:31 AM EST
DAY 2: Rifle printed a 4 inch group at 50 yds. No surprise, the barrel took a beating.

Next, the rifle was tossed in the snow with no magazine inserted. The shooter would go over, pick up the gun, lock and load, and shoot 100 rounds through the gun. This process was repeated over and over. Within 2 hours, the remaining 2,100 were sent down range.

During the test, 4 stoppages were observed that were attributed to the rifle/ammunition. The rifle was run with the barrel white hot, in snow and mud, and kept on running. The only real parts breakage was the gas regulator.

I would love to see ArmaLite provide an AR10 for a similar comparison.

Which gun is "better?" You be the judge. As for me, if toughness and reliability is the main concern, I'll take my DSA carbine any day of the week over my AR10.
Link Posted: 6/14/2002 7:22:41 AM EST
I had an AR10-A2 (close to the AR10-T) and a ARS FAL (close to the DSA) and I preferred the FAL to the AR-10. M<y AR-10 was problem prone and the $85 mags never really worked 100%. These were Armalite converted bodies. The chamber had to be re-polished at the factory because of stuck cases and the bolt was recalled and replaced. The accuracy with the factory match trigger and a Nikon Monarch 4x12 scope was only as good as the FAL with the military trigger and the iron sights, not good enough for me considering the lack of reliablity. Those $85 mags were nothing but trouble. I never felt comfortable enough to shoot it in an IPSC rifle match, the FAL did just fine.

Link Posted: 6/14/2002 8:32:43 AM EST
I love the AR10T!  Once I got it, I had no need of my FAL.  I sold it!  

Without question the AR10T is the best out of the box shooter that I have ever had.  Five round, 1\2 inch groups at 100 yards.  

As for the Mags, buy the conversion kits for 30 dollars.  

Link Posted: 6/14/2002 8:55:37 AM EST
I don't know if you are aware of this or not, but if you go to the DSA website and click on the "Magazine Articles" section of their web page, DSA has numerous articles that have been written about their rifles.

One of the magazine articles that were written was by "Gun Test" and they comparted the Armalite AR-10 to the Knights SR-25 to the DSA SA58 carbine.  The DSA SA58 was Gun Test's pick of the 3 rifles tested.

I've got both a DSA SA58 Standard and a DSA STG58A w/ 18" barrel and both rifles were worth every cent that I spent on them, just my .02.

Good Luck,
Link Posted: 6/14/2002 9:18:19 AM EST

Regardless, DSA's Extreme Duty Scope mount is nearly $100 compared to the Tapco's $40.


DSA mount $68+shipping

I've seen them for $60 a gun shows.
Link Posted: 6/14/2002 9:34:12 AM EST


The 2-stage trigger on the AR is great. The trigger on my FAL is heavy.


He can significantly improve a FAL trigger & even puts AR A2 rear sights on FAL's

I used to own a AR10A2 rifle & an M1A.
I now own 2 DSA FAL's.

I think the AR has better ergonomics, a better optics platform & is the more accurate design WHEN it's working.  My AR10 always had extraction problems even after the bolt recall & the "enhanced" extractor.  The magazines where problematic & expensive too.
 IMHO the .308 just has too much gas volume & pressure for the gas impingement design.

If you want reliability get the DSA FAL.
The plentiful & cheap magazines are a pluswww.tapco.com
Unlike the AR10, the FAL eats any kind of ammo I feed it.  Minor adjustments of the gas system are occasionally required.

 An M1A or HK91 are other good rifles to consider BUT I would pick any of those 3 over the AR10.

If your looking for a tackdriver that will primarily be used at the range then maybe an AR10T. I wouldn't bet my life on one though.
Link Posted: 6/15/2002 8:24:35 PM EST
I have an AR-10A2(L.E.O. model) and a FAL built by a local smith. I like these two rifles better than my HK-91 and the M1A. My AR-10 has been nothing short of reliable with surplus ammo, in fact that's all that it has seen.I have two factory mags and seven converts.I just opened and put together four of the converts today,so I don't know how they function.All of the magazines that I have used has functioned  as well as any standard USGI M14 mag. With that I trust my AR-10 but I would LOVE to see some type of torture test just to see how it stacks up against the FAL.
I doubt that I'll ever be using any of my rifles for anything other than shooting paper.So as to which can sustain the most abuse in a short amount of time is kind of moot to me.I sure won't be doing anything like that with any of my rifles.The one thing that I know is that my AR-10 goes bang everytime as does my FAL.The AR is easier for me to shoot and it shoots better than the FAL.I'll have to admit the cheap mags and and parts for the FAL does make it very appealing.I for one would not spend $1,200 for a DSA when you could find a prestine kit and send it off to a good smith.If I were on a budget than a kit FAL would be the route I'd take.If I'm going to spend $1,200 than I get an AR-10.
Link Posted: 6/15/2002 9:19:08 PM EST
I have a STG58, AR10 and two M1As.

I love all three of them.

The AR10 is the best scope platform but the least reliable.  Shoots great and looks cool.

The STG58 is a great reliable shooter with cheap mags, however I don't like the ergonomics of the guns.  That left handed charging handle sucks. Maybe the Europeans like it but I don't. Also, it is heavy.

The M1A is the most ergonomic.  It just feels like a great American gun.  Hard to explain.  I feel most comfortable shooting it.  Probably stems from the fact I learned to use one in basic training in 1966.  My impression is that if I can see a target, I can hit it with my M1A.

I I had to go to 308 war I would grab one of the M1As and dozen of those damned $50 mags.
Link Posted: 6/16/2002 1:41:54 AM EST
Forget cost. If you could have just one, and $$$ was no object...
SR-25 MK 11 Mod 0

What are the pros and cons? 1/2 MOA. $7800.

as an Optics Platform? Excellent

Reliability? Excellent

Options/accessories? Included.
Link Posted: 6/16/2002 5:18:56 AM EST
My initial "gun lust" was prompted after shooting an Canadian FN.  After 8 years of searching and counting my pennies, I got me a "cherry" Argentine FN.  All I can say is that is shoots everytime that I pull the trigger and every time that I take it to the range, people line-up asking if they hold or shoot it.  I've shot an AR-10 before and it was a bit more accurate (AR-10T), but the accessories were too expensive and it had extractor problems or seemed to be picky about what ammo was fed through it.  Eventually, I'll probably end up with an AR-10, but I'll never get rid of my Argie FN!
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! 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.

By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top