User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 3:57:27 PM EDT
[#1]
Garand....simple and inexpensive.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 3:57:43 PM EDT
[#2]
M14
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 3:58:07 PM EDT
[#3]
For me, FAL
IBTP |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 3:58:26 PM EDT
[#4]
Garand.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 3:58:44 PM EDT
[#5]
converted saiga in .308 with the 20rnd mags comming soon
 second choice is a FAL. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 3:59:00 PM EDT
[#6]
I don't think you'll ever get a common consensus on this. I'd be happy with a quality FAL or M1A/M14 though. I have never cared for the G3.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:00:59 PM EDT
[#7]
Dead tie for me between the M1A/M14 and the FN FAL.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:02:04 PM EDT
[#8]
HK 91
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:04:10 PM EDT
[#9]
".......i don't want no teenage queeb......i just want my M-14(M1A)....."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:06:28 PM EDT
[#10]
m1a of course
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:09:04 PM EDT
[#11]
SCAR H
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:10:59 PM EDT
[#12]
HK91/G3
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:13:56 PM EDT
[#13]
Whoopee! I made it in before the M1A Koolaid drinkers. You know them as the:
"My M1A has to be better because I paid so much more for it" crowd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:18:49 PM EDT
[#14]
the cast m1a ? people say it's better, better than what? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:21:11 PM EDT
[#15]
"Battle Rifle?"
FAL. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:21:32 PM EDT
[#16]
No, actually my M1A is better because it tested just as relaible as the FAL and is an American in Invention, Design and Construction!!
BTW, What do you call an Fal with the bolt stuck froma failure to feed until you can disassemble it to fix it? Answer: A CLUB!! What do you call a M1A with the same problem? a quick immediate action drill and return to fire!! Sorry something to be said for a nice design that the bolt opens to a nice wide ejection port!! BTW, even though i do own a Ar-15, I have the same problem with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:28:24 PM EDT
[#17]
First choice would be a FAL, no doubt about it. Second choice would be the M1A/M14, built from real GI parts. YMMV....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:28:35 PM EDT
[#18]
M1A: overhyped, overpriced, over bling-ed.
Garand was made by the millions. It did not have to have a special barrel, special sights, special this or special that to be the bestus rifle in the world. The Garand was mass produced and hugely dependable. An out-of-the-box M1A, assuming it works, still needs a tremendous level of tweeking to make it shoot as well as it is advertised. The M1A costs twice as much as a Garand (compared equally and adjusted for today's dollars). The Garand was not dependent on an expensive mag. Oh, and the Garand actually saw battle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:34:41 PM EDT
[#19]
Garand indeed!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:35:39 PM EDT
[#20]
I love my Garand, but my new FAL build has been super fun to shoot.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:36:07 PM EDT
[#21]
M14
God's right hand.  Seriously, great sights, good ergonomics, easy to handle and damnned reliable What's not to like? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:36:55 PM EDT
[#22]
M14 all the way.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:39:12 PM EDT
[#23]
the M14 saw battle for almost ten years in vietnam, on through service with the navy and SEALs for 30 more years, and now is seeing service in battle once again in afghanistan and iraq. id have to say it has quite a bit more combat experience at this point than the garand. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:40:13 PM EDT
[#24]
Ahh, Thursday again!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:42:32 PM EDT
[#25]
do you mean springers m1a, the cast version of the m14? nothing that is cast that takes the same specs as a forged piece of metal will be good enouph, ruger may be cast but they were designed that way, thats why their bulky |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:45:21 PM EDT
[#26]
FAL, ymmv.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:55:48 PM EDT
[#27]
Right now, for price, parts , mags and buildability it's FAL hands down. I own two M1A's simply because I prefer the platform. Plus, they're similar to the M1.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:56:26 PM EDT
[#28]
The FAL and the M14 have both seen a lot of battle. In fact, both are still seeing battle to this day. I do need a Garand though....
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 4:59:05 PM EDT
[#29]
I love these threads.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:00:15 PM EDT
[#30]
M14, hands down
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:01:23 PM EDT
[#31]
Semi auto: FN FAL
Select fire: HK G3 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:02:18 PM EDT
[#32]
M1A. Its the only .308 I got.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:02:37 PM EDT
[#33]
Ever shot a real G3? Especially on full auto? It is where it puts FALs and M14s to shame. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:04:12 PM EDT
[#34]
What is the mule climb like on a F/A G3? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:04:21 PM EDT
[#35]
1. FN-fal
2. M1A 3. SIG AMT 4. HK91 5. Valmet |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:04:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Actually, the M14 is not on the list. The only rifle on that list that is a real battle rifle, the Garand and then only if it is actual USGI surplus. I guess you could say it's 7.62........7.62x63 if I recall.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:21:53 PM EDT
[#37]
The M-14. I have never encountered a rifle that points so well, and matches my preferences as far as being ambidextrous. I LOVE the sharp front sight post on it, and I love the way the rifle balances in standing.
Disassembling it is a wonderful thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:23:53 PM EDT
[#38]
the fal was used by alot of countries, so was the HK. The org AR10 was bought by at least two countirs that used them in war so how do you come to the conclusion that the Garand was the only battle rifle on the list? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 5:34:29 PM EDT
[#39]
The ignorance here is so strong that I have to believe this post is in jest. I dunno about G3s, but I know FALs and M14s have seen much battle. Garands need as much tweaking as M1As to be superaccurate. A rack-grade Garand will be no more accurate than a rack-grade M1A. With some minor tweaking, either will outshoot anything but maybe the AR10. M14 mags are not expensive because of their design but because of their scarcity. For the record: The M14 is a product-improved Garand. I have one of each; both are outstanding and I wouldn't feel undergunned with either. And, having owned an FAL, I'd be happy with one of them too. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 6:12:10 PM EDT
[#40]
Unless the FAL, the HK, or the AR10 are actually surplus military, none of them are a real battle rifle except for the Garand and only then if it is USGI. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 6:24:36 PM EDT
[#41]
Uhhhhh..... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 7:19:03 PM EDT
[#42]
My FAL was used in combat, and the definition of what your calling a battle rifle is not what a battle rifle is, but a rifle thats been in battle. This is a battle rifle LINK |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 7:24:19 PM EDT
[#43]
the m1a is not a m14, its a cast copy that wasn't done very well. Now a real forged m14 reciever is another story |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 7:26:09 PM EDT
[#44]
my first choice
 second choice  3rd choice  if FAiLs are so great, why dont i ever see them at the ranges? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 9:08:06 PM EDT
[#45]
Actually controllable, unlike the M14 and FAL. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 9:13:46 PM EDT
[#46]
I see them at quite a few ranges here in Northern VA.... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 9:26:01 PM EDT
[#47]
Oh yeah, Wikipedia is a real authoritative source. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 9:28:27 PM EDT
[#48]
I see FAL's fairly often at my range, probably as often as I see M1A's. I own one and probably take it to the range once every 3 or 4 trips out. For me it's a toss up, FAL or M1A. I won't include any of the G3 because I've never had the pleasure of shooting one. And while I love the Garand, it's lack of a detachable box magazine, small capacity and no tactical reloads takes it out of consideration for me. But it's still a fine rifle. So are the bolt action Springfields, Enfields, Mosin's and Mausers, and I own at least one of each. Damn fine rifles, but not my top choice for a battle rifle. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 9:32:09 PM EDT
[#49]
Hands down, the M14
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2006 10:07:21 PM EDT
[#50]
I have owned several FAL's as well as an M1A and a semi-auto M-14. Both are fine rifles and each design has it's strong points.
In my opinion the only real advantage to the M14 design is the superior fixed sights. My current FAL has the Falcon Arms Trigger Pull Reduction kit and the trigger is very good now. So I think that helps make up for the FAL sights only being adequate. Plus the FAL is easier to scope using an ARMS or DSA mount. I use an Aimpoint or a Nikon 4x on mine so the sights are not an issue for me, but they are good enough if you don't have a scope. I think the main reson the FAL is better than a M14/M1A is that it's easier to clean and maintain. Try changing a firing pin on a M1A at the range, with minimal tools, what a pain in the ass! The same job on an FAL only takes about one minute and no tools other than the tip of a bullet. Well that's my 2 cents worth, Flyer |
|
|
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.
