Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/1/2004 1:21:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/1/2004 9:18:20 AM EST by M4SS109]
which would you take for overall accuracy and reliability?
what setup/specs would you take them in?
which is the best without money being a factor and which is best money being a factor?

I like the M14/M1A
Its more accurate and reliable IMHO.
The spacing around the bolt makes it less likely to jam and is self cleaning - kinda like the AK.
Link Posted: 8/1/2004 3:37:49 PM EST
This just my OPINION. I think the G3 would be the most reliable rifle. The G3 or M14 would be neck in neck on accuracy. The FAL handles really well. The M14 is very reliable But so is the other two . I personally like the M14 just a wee bit more but would grab or be glad to carry either of the other two. ALL THREE are VERY GOOD RIFLES.
#1 . M14
#2. FAL
#3. G3

But like to state that they are all so close to being even it hardly can't be measured. WarDawg
Link Posted: 8/1/2004 6:27:58 PM EST
i say m1a, fal, and then the others fall in line behind that
Link Posted: 8/1/2004 6:35:15 PM EST
I like them all just leave the AR 15 at home

Link Posted: 8/2/2004 9:48:38 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/2/2004 1:41:54 PM EST
Here is my list:
#1 HK91 (G3)
#2 FAL
#3 M1A
I have two HK91s and two DSA FALs and one Springfield M1A. I am a die hard HK fan so I vote for the G3. It will never jam and it is very accurate. I use one HK 91 for deer hunting. The major draw back for the G3 is the trigger, it is about 9 or 10 pounds. I have a Williams Set Trigger and the pull is 4 pound and 2 with the set trigger.
The DSAs are great rifles, I like the gas system and there is no kick, and the mags are cheap, and they are very accurate.
The Springfield is a great rifle, but I think that it is more of a bench rifle then a battle/hunting rifle. The trigger is great, and the M1A shoots great, but I just not a M1A fan like the HK91 or DSA.
But I think any .308 battle rifle is a good choice.
Link Posted: 8/2/2004 3:13:27 PM EST
#1 (Not listed) AR-10
#2 G-3
#3 FAL
#4 M14

Technically, the roller action should be the most accurate of the named 3, beaten out only by the AR system.

Of the remaining 2, I'd put the FAL ahead for better ergonomics & wear-tolerance (eg you don't have to worry about stock/bedding wear on a 'modern' design, but the M1A's wood 'sporter' stock is both less ergonomic (no pistol grip, stock sits well below the axis of recoil), and subject to wearing out (eg needing re-bedding). Plus, wood is affected more by weather conditions than synthetics, leading to possible zeroing issues as the stock expands/contracts...

Link Posted: 8/3/2004 12:51:28 PM EST
The AR10 has the same flaws as the AR15 in the wooded environment it will jam just like an AR/M16. Therefore its not the most reliable. This is due to the tight space around the bolt and breach. The FAL and HK91/G3 also have this problem. The M14/M1As bolt has alot of space like the AK47. This and the accuracy of the M14/M1A make it the best battle rifle IMHO.

Link Posted: 8/4/2004 12:10:40 AM EST
While I am partial to the M14 type. Not only is it an American rifle, but I feel its more reliable because of the open action. The G3 and FAL actions are hidden inside the receiver, leaving room for more dirt and such to jam things up.

But if you are intrested in a SHTF type I would go with a G3 clone. One reason is that the G3 is about the only common issue 7.62 rifle still in use with different Nation's militaries. All the FAL users have pretty much replaced theirs, and even countries that were given M14s dont even issue them out.
Link Posted: 8/4/2004 1:54:47 AM EST
1. FAL
2. G3
3. M14
Link Posted: 8/4/2004 9:19:21 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/4/2004 9:19:58 AM EST by SP10]
1. M1A. Better sights, trigger, accuracy. Mine are exceedingly reliable. A rifleman's rifle. Get an all USGI gun, including the barrel and USGI synthetic stock.

2. Fal is second choice-wish it had a better trigger and SIGHTS. My DSA has a serious flaw. Slinging it tight pulls the shot low left. I happen to like shooting field positions with a sling at >300 yds. This takes my DSA out of the picture, but it is a very nice shooter otherwise.

3. HK91. Crappy trigger and ergonomics (to me). They are reliable and accurate. I sold my safe queen Greek SAR8 to buy another M1A. The guy I sold it to LOVES it!

ANY of the 3 are good guns, and have pros and cons. I wouldn't feel undergunned with either, but far and away prefer the M1A.

AR10? HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHHA ho. Not ready for prime time. Yet, anyways. Reliability is still an issue. A few minutes on the AR10 boards will amply demonstrate that. Shivan started a "Do you trust your AR10" thread. Read it. There is also a similar M1A and FAL thread.
Link Posted: 8/4/2004 9:31:47 AM EST
The G3 has a blow-back operating system that is very forgiving with regards to the ammo
being used. The bore is polygonal and chromed which will least forever. Very simple operating system. Great sights. (Wish I owned one!)

The FAL (I own an IMBEL) has and adjustable gas system, and a very prolific reputation
(Weapon of 75-100 countries at one time) Great trigger, pivot opening for cleaning. Reputation
for accuracy. Cut-rifled barrel, chromed. I don't really like the sights on mine. (They vary greatly.)

M14 has a rotaty bolt. Semi-pistol grip (I don't like that for one handed handling, sling-assisted.)
Great when they're great; Bad when they're bad. New production from Springfield has bad reputation, unfortunately....

I's say:

1) G3
2) Fal
3) M1A


Link Posted: 8/4/2004 4:12:26 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/5/2004 3:06:32 AM EST by RABID]
As far as reliability and egonomics go, I'd take my FAL first, but I wouldn't feel undergunned with the M1A. I never had the chance to fire a HK though
Link Posted: 8/6/2004 9:09:55 AM EST
I personally like the G3, first time I shot one I could not believe how little recoil there was. I think putting a poll at the top of this post would help.
Link Posted: 8/7/2004 4:12:46 AM EST
The FAL probably would be the best all around. That's an objective statement as I don't like the FAL, but I won't ignore the facts. The M14/M1A is a "nicer" rifle and CAN be more accurate, but the accuracy isn't reliable. One needs to do a lot of mods and be careful of the effect of the cas system and they way it ppresses or pulls on the barrel, affecting accuracy. Any rifle whose accuracy is affected by putting grease on the bottom of the gas system face plate, or putting on a bipod is not reliably accurate, even if the firing is reliable.

The G3 and derivatives theoretically could be more reliable as it eliminates the gas system parts, though there are a lot of other small parts with the bolt assembly, and in the trigger assembly. The Germans like complex mechanisms. Accuracy is fair in terms of spread, but that stays roughly the same, which in my book counts as reliable accuracy - when I shoot it, it will go where I aim, even if in a 4 MOA circle.

What do I use? An AR10. Sort of a compromise. It's accurate, and the parts are reliable (it's an Armalite). One can argue about the effect of dirt or the gas blowback.
Link Posted: 8/7/2004 5:50:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By rjroberts:
The M14/M1A is a "nicer" rifle and CAN be more accurate, but the accuracy isn't reliable.



Are you talking match or field accuracy? Big difference. From what I have observed so far this summer, I can pick up my M1A standard rifle, uncleaned, change from my synthetic to wood stock-as a friend is painting my USGI stock for me, and then easily hit my letarget Q plates at ranges of 200 to ~325 yds offhand with iron sights and a sling. Port ammo. That is accurate enough for me in a rifle that has maybe 2000 rounds through in my hands it since I bought it used last fall, and an unknown number before that. I have had a total of one failure to extract on a subzero winter day befrore I knew how to "properly" clean and lube the rifle. None since, and no voodoo in cleaning and lubing. A bedded match M1A, from what I read, IS another type of animal.

Whatever works for you, and if it performs up to its intentioned use, is what counts.
Link Posted: 8/7/2004 6:59:12 AM EST
I don't want to put words in RJs mouth, but I think he means that the accuracy available from an M1A (i.e. Match grade) degrades over time as the bedding wears out. Also that the gas system is finicky and requires precise lube and all.

Versus the type of accuracy an AR platform offers out of the box no smithing better than the best M1A in a Match Grade rifle. I notice the ARs are cleaning house in match comp everywhere now.

I think this is what he means.
Link Posted: 8/7/2004 7:46:03 AM EST
For an all around great rifle, Nothing can compare to the M14/M1A. But, each person is different and while one rifle feels good to one, it may not to another. All rifles mentioned are great rifles though.
Link Posted: 8/7/2004 4:52:02 PM EST
I'm partial to the FAL. So...FAL.
Link Posted: 8/7/2004 8:04:29 PM EST
1) M14/M1A
2) G3
3) FAL

All of them are excellent rifles.

The M14/M1A is the best because of the sights. The most important quality of a rifle is reach, and good sights are essential to precision shooting. I know that a lot of people argue that typical combat ranges are 300 meters and under. This may or may not be true, but either way if you wanted to/had to, you could hit something past the effective range of an AK or AR with a MBR- the reverse is not true in any realistic respect.

This is not to say that the FAL and the G3 rifles are inaccurate- they are very accurate.
But the M14's sights are the best I have seen of the ones listed.

Someone brought up the AR10- a good point and by all accounts that I have read, a good choice, too. I have no practical experience with AR10's and I cannot say one way or the other.

Link Posted: 8/8/2004 1:14:18 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/11/2004 1:25:25 PM EST
I wouldnt carry the AR10. Although I like my M4 I would still rather have an M1A if I wanted 308 range not an AR10. The action is too tight and will jam with a little bit of dirt around the bolt. The M1A is in general more accurate and reliable than the others above IMHO.
Link Posted: 8/11/2004 1:36:53 PM EST

FAL
Link Posted: 8/13/2004 12:50:52 PM EST
Reliability is a heck of a lot more important than accuracy when speaking in terms of battlerifles and we all know which one is the most reliable ........FAL!
Link Posted: 8/13/2004 2:52:43 PM EST
just put some dirt in the action of an FAL then do it in an m14 and you'll see.
the FAL will jam due to the tight space between the bolt and receiver
the M14 is self cleaning every time you cycle the action

as far as accuracy M14 hands down
no one uses FALs for competition matches

come on guys be honest - an FAL is a nice rifle but a the M14 is far more superior

Link Posted: 8/13/2004 6:41:53 PM EST
None other than an FAL can go from this.....


To this......


To this.......


Reliable, as accurate as you could ever want and available in ALL sorts of configurations.

I love FAL's.
Link Posted: 8/13/2004 7:20:44 PM EST

Originally Posted By M4SS109:
the FAL will jam due to the tight space between the bolt and receiver



well DUH!! Thats why you clean it whenever it rains!!!



Link Posted: 8/14/2004 12:35:38 PM EST
If you want to see something far better check out;

http://troyind.com/sopmod_m14.htm

http://www.fulton-armory.com/

look at the M14 on these web sites

Admit it the M14 is far better. Thats why our military uses it and not the FAL or G3. Its more reliable and accurate.
Link Posted: 8/14/2004 12:56:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By M4SS109:
If you want to see something far better check out;

http://troyind.com/sopmod_m14.htm

http://www.fulton-armory.com/

look at the M14 on these web sites

Admit it the M14 is far better. Thats why our military uses it and not the FAL or G3. Its more reliable and accurate.




Very nice, except the stock looks like it came off of a mini 14.

BTW I believe the M1A was ultimately chosen over the FAL because it was American made, not because it was inferior.

Link Posted: 8/14/2004 3:56:06 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/14/2004 4:01:44 PM EST by M4SS109]
Our special forces will use what ever they want because its better and gets the job done with the best results. For example our SWAT and SEAL teams use MP5s, HKUSP pistols, Glocks and they are not made in the USA. How come they dont use Special Weapon SW5s and Smith & Wesson pistols. I'll tell you why - because the are inferior.

BTW putting an FAL in a puddle of water isnt like getting sand or mud in the action. Try it with an M14 then cycle the action a few times. Any dirt or sand that got into the action falls out unlike the closed space of an FAL or G3.

One thing you cant say about the FAL is that its more accurate than an M14. Just ask yourself how many FALs you saw at a rifle match. Not many!
Link Posted: 8/14/2004 3:57:52 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/14/2004 7:00:00 PM EST
I think there is much to be said of the ergonomics of the G3. I find it easier to handle and a good overall system.

But +1 on the fact that all three of these rifles are fantastic!


- BUCC_Guy
Link Posted: 8/17/2004 11:38:54 PM EST
M4SS109, the primary reason the M14 was chosen over the FAL was becasue top brass believed all the remaining manufacturing equipment from the Garand could be easily (cheaply) converted to produce the M14, thats it (besides the fact that back then in a less globalized world, they wanted a domestic product). Of coarse this idea did not pan out and so the military opted for a new system, which later became (through MacNamera's pressure) the M16. But the reality is the FAL out performed the M14 in the Gov trials during the '50s, back then it was the T48.

You can get an FAL filled with dirt where the action is difficult to cycle, then guess what?...You just turn up the gas in the adjustable gas system (borrowed from the BAR ) and get it rockin and rollin...why do you think it is known as the right arm of the free world...

DSA FAL, my next large purchase.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:10:23 AM EST
This is a tough call. I know my brain and pocket book tell me to get the FAL but my heart says to go with the M1a...
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 7:07:45 AM EST
The SEAL teams can have what ever they want to use to get the job done well. They can use AK47s or any other weapons including the FAL. For example they use the HKMP5s which are not made in the USA. Their choice of 308 semi-auto rifle is the M14.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 2:36:17 PM EST
"Admit it the M14 is far better. Thats why our military uses it and not the FAL or G3. Its more reliable and accurate."


Obviously someone who doesn't know what he's talking about - the M14 IS NOT more reliable than the FAL, and only marginally more accurate - and there's not enough accuracy difference between the two to matter in most real world situations...

BTW, our military ALSO uses that crappy Beretta pistol, too - 'nuff said!!!


- georgestrings
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 2:47:34 PM EST
yes our standard enlisted men use the crapy M9 but when it comes to special forces they use the best. M14 and sig226 among others but not the FAL. So if you are going to talk about the best talk about what our special forces use not the standard military BS weapons.

Link Posted: 8/18/2004 3:12:52 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
#1 (Not listed) AR-10
#2 G-3
#3 FAL
#4 M14

Technically, the roller action should be the most accurate of the named 3, beaten out only by the AR system.

Of the remaining 2, I'd put the FAL ahead for better ergonomics & wear-tolerance (eg you don't have to worry about stock/bedding wear on a 'modern' design, but the M1A's wood 'sporter' stock is both less ergonomic (no pistol grip, stock sits well below the axis of recoil), and subject to wearing out (eg needing re-bedding). Plus, wood is affected more by weather conditions than synthetics, leading to possible zeroing issues as the stock expands/contracts...




I don't agree about the ergonomics. In Highpower it is generally accepted that the '14 has better ergonomics than the AR. That is why ARs are fired offhand with the stock so high (sometimes sitting on the shoulder). The AR gets away with that due to the minimal recoil of the 5.56 round.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 3:14:05 PM EST

Originally Posted By davidp14:
Reliability is a heck of a lot more important than accuracy when speaking in terms of battlerifles and we all know which one is the most reliable ........FAL!



No, I think that would be G-3.

The FAL has a bad rep in the sand, and during development had issues in cold climates.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 12:48:28 PM EST
I heard that Isreal built the Galil bcause the FAL jamed too much

Link Posted: 8/19/2004 6:23:09 PM EST
keep your semi autos. a good man with a scoped bolt gun will put the hurt on any one of them. my older bro is a sniper in the army. through his first tour in the 82nd he went from the m4, m4-203. 249,240.then sniper school.after selection he deployed to afganistan (early on) and alternated with the 762 bolt gun and the berrett 50. he said by far the 762 bolt gun is the best weapon around
Link Posted: 8/20/2004 2:24:48 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 12:41:15 PM EST by M4SS109]
even a sniper need a partner to spot for him
that partner needs a battle rifle that can shoot more than 1 shot in case the shtf.

just hope he doesnt get surronded by a few enemy guys - kinda hard to shoot your way out with a bolt gun
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:06:36 PM EST
My metric FAL's have been fitted with inch pattern bolts and carriers with sand-cuts , so as to channel debries away from the sides of the bolt and rec. and thus making the sand/ dirt issue almost a moot point.
It's a 600 meter battle rifle, the FAL does its job very well, and in a SHTF scenario I would definately grab it. Think about it, are you really going to let guys armed with AK's and M-4 clones get close enough to use their weapons or "pick and choose " from far off then change positions and start all over again , or wait till you are within their effective range ?
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 3:04:06 PM EST
Im not comparing the 308s to 223 or 762x39
Im comparing 308 to 308 and specifically the M14 and FAL

Thus far more people and our specialforces feel that the M14 is superior to the FAL.
That doenst mean the FAL isnt a good rifle but it isnt as good as the M14

M14 wins!

Link Posted: 8/23/2004 5:59:17 PM EST
Sorry for the second part of my previous post, I was typing out loud while talking to my son who was sitting by my side last night reading the posts with me .
The real reason that Israeli troops had so many problems whith their FAL's is that they were very slack in the cleaning of any of their weapons. They have gotten better since they adopted the M-16 series rifle through our equipment procurement program that is part of our yearly aid package to that country.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 6:00:13 PM EST
Most fire fights occur within 200 yards. The AR15 and AKs are more than enough power for those ranges. On the other hand if your in Afganistan where long range shooting is needed you should take a 308. And the M14 is better than the FAL especially with that type of environment.
Link Posted: 8/24/2004 6:42:09 PM EST

Originally Posted By georgestrings:
"Admit it the M14 is far better. Thats why our military uses it and not the FAL or G3. Its more reliable and accurate."


Obviously someone who doesn't know what he's talking about - the M14 IS NOT more reliable than the FAL, and only marginally more accurate - and there's not enough accuracy difference between the two to matter in most real world situations...

BTW, our military ALSO uses that crappy Beretta pistol, too - 'nuff said!!!


- georgestrings



George I have FAL's and M14's..... ( civilian semi's ) .Im fond of all of them. BUT I see no where that the M14 isn't as reliable as a FAL. Im not argueing one over the other.I think both are very good weapons. But the FAL isn't anymore reliable than the M14 IMO. WarDawg
Link Posted: 8/25/2004 7:48:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By M4SS109:
Most fire fights occur within 200 yards. The AR15 and AKs are more than enough power for those ranges. On the other hand if your in Afganistan where long range shooting is needed you should take a 308. And the M14 is better than the FAL especially with that type of environment.



Ok we get the fucking point. You like the M14.

Sad thing is, the FAL did better in the .308 rifle trials. The ONLY reason the M14 was chosen was because of the location of manufacture, and of course some people in high places were pushing for it.

I personally dont know which is superior. I honestly think of them as equals. I'd feel more than adequate with either.

Link Posted: 8/26/2004 4:59:53 AM EST
You FAL guys always state that its because of location, but its not. I guess you can say that if it makes you feel better, but really our special forces can get FALs if they thought they are better and they dont.
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 3:29:59 PM EST
I'm no expert, but I'd say that the M1A is more prone to parts breakage(op rod, for example) than the FAL is - ESPECIALLY those being currently made... Also, I believe the FAL is less "finicky" in regards to lubrication... Then there's the issue of bedding(changes in, or how long it lasts)... Tell you what: If you took a brand new, top of the line SA M1A, and a brand new, top of the line DSA SA-58, and shot them both equally, I would bet that the M1A would break something 1st, and that the FAL would also tolerate not being cleaned for a higher round count...

Now, I'll readily admit that the M1A has better sights and trigger - but the FAL's sights and trigger will get the job done, no problem... And lastly, I think that $45 mags are outrageous...


- georgestrings
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 4:24:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By georgestrings:
I'm no expert, but I'd say that the M1A is more prone to parts breakage(op rod, for example) than the FAL is - ESPECIALLY those being currently made... Also, I believe the FAL is less "finicky" in regards to lubrication... Then there's the issue of bedding(changes in, or how long it lasts)... Tell you what: If you took a brand new, top of the line SA M1A, and a brand new, top of the line DSA SA-58, and shot them both equally, I would bet that the M1A would break something 1st, and that the FAL would also tolerate not being cleaned for a higher round count...

Now, I'll readily admit that the M1A has better sights and trigger - but the FAL's sights and trigger will get the job done, no problem... And lastly, I think that $45 mags are outrageous...


- georgestrings




Pretty much sums it up.

M4SS109...are you currently SF? Do you really have any clue what they are using? I certainly don't, and would love to know how you do. I love the M1A. I'd love to own one. But if I had to take one, it would be an FAL. Its very user friendly, and not at all finicky. The sights aren't nearly as nice as the M1A, but aside from that...M1A's are great, assuming you have everything they require to run properly in the field.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top