Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/25/2002 11:52:32 AM EDT
This weekend I am looking to purchase a DSA58FAL or an AR-10. I would like any advice you folks have about one vs. the other? I am particulary interested in Left Hand use and long term (5-10 years) costs. I plan on putting about 200-300 rounds a month through them. Thanks for your input.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 12:13:56 PM EDT
At the risk of heresey, I hate the AR10. I can't think of a single area where it beats teh FAL. For the FAL: 1. Mags, accessories and parets are cheaper. 2. More reliable, more acurate. 3. Rifle is cheaper. I just don't think the .308 is a good AR config (yes I know the original Stoner was a .308). I think FN makes a better .308 than any AR in .308. And I think all AR .223s are better than any FN config in .223 Also what part of Fl are you in? I'm in S. Fla.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 12:16:04 PM EDT
AR-10 preceeded the AR-15 of course [:)] I'd get a FAL. All the reasons AUG listed are good. The ergonomics are a bit different, but you'll get used to them pretty quick.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 12:23:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/25/2002 12:26:17 PM EDT by ED_P]
Just my opinon, I would choose the FAL for 2 reasons. 1. From what I've read here, the AR-10 seems to be having some problems (though they seem mainly related to many bad mag conversions, not the gun itself), and mags are expensive M1-A mags to start with. You can get 4-5 new, perfectly functioning FAL mags for the price of one converted AR-10 mag. I'd rather get a new mag meant for a gun then a cobbled up, made to fit mag, that raisies failure concerns. If new AR-10 20 rounders were widely available, I would feel different on this. 2. Especially if I already owned an AR in .223, I would find it far more enjoyable to own a gun with a vastly different construction and operating system, rather than a slightly larger clone with pretty similiar parts and function. Much more enjoyable to shoot, take apart and fiddle with, re-assemble, etc...
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 12:28:31 PM EDT
If you want a precision rifle with good optics, get the AR10. If you want it for any other reason, get the FAL. AR10s are very accurate, and lend themselves to optics mounts well. In order to put good optics on a FAL, you have to add a bulky topcover. IMO, unless you are in dire need of a tackdriver, get the FAL.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 12:29:42 PM EDT
Get the AR-10... I have had ZERO probs with mine. An FAL more accurate then an AR-10? What planet are you from?[;D] Tony
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 12:39:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By freshhoarse: Get the AR-10... I have had ZERO probs with mine. An FAL more accurate then an AR-10? What planet are you from?[;D] Tony
View Quote
Standard FAL vs Standard AR10, I've seen the FAL outperform. That CAI and Hesse FAL crap can't outshoot a BB gun.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 12:39:43 PM EDT
Thanks for the info. Ahhh...decisions, decisions... SteyrAUG, I am in Pseudo-South FL. St. Lucie County to be slightly more specific. And I will be attending our local gun show this weekend.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 1:00:06 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 1:12:13 PM EDT
If you go with the FAL, you'll get a good gun AND save enough in mags to buy a new AR upper. [:)]
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 1:13:11 PM EDT
Last week I picked up my AR10A4C. It functions fine, accurate, feels great. The only down side I see is the upper finish, it looks like shit. Let me rephrase that remark, it is not just the finish, it is the metal alloy that the finish has been applied. Looks like Micky Mouse had the job of quality control when this puppy went through the sytem.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 1:21:46 PM EDT
DSA FAL!!! how much are 20 round AR-10 mags? I know 20 round FAL mags can be had for $5 my century(imbel or argie) can post sub 1" groups on a good day, when my chi is aligned with the rifle. my steyr stg-58 is even better.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 1:28:30 PM EDT
Never owned an FAL. Shot a couple. Own a custom AR10. The "what planet" question is a good question with out a good answer yet. My '10 is probably the most accurate rifle in my (do I dare say it?) arsenal. Heavy metal parts clanking together, hanging on the barrel, does, IMHO, limit the accuracy potential of a weapon. Then there is the ergonomics issue. Pop 2 pins and add a new upper and I have a completely different rifle. As for magazines, buy the Chinese cheapos and the conversion kits and they cost you a little over $50.00. At $10 a wack for FALs it definitely has an advantage there. Look at the tricked out FALS (accuracy enhanced ones) and they will wash cost wise. Nice thing about the '10 is I can re-barrel, install after market triggers, etc. Lots of optional stuff available out there. If you can tare down a '15 you can do it to a '10.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 1:33:41 PM EDT
I'll be the first to say it: [size=6]Get BOTH![/size=6]
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 2:00:26 PM EDT
I have owned both and here's my .02... AR10 negatives: Mags and parts are STUPID expensive. No adjustable gas system. Bolt would never stay open after last round. AR10 positives: Bad-assed looks. Very accurate. Muzzle break caused ball caps to blow-off range lane neighbors. FAL negatives: None I can think of. FAL positives: Cheap mags and parts. Adjustable gas system. Bad-assed looks. All gun functions capable of being done with left hand while right stays on trigger.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 2:15:49 PM EDT
having shot both i liked the fal for fun and cheapness but the ar10 for Accuracy. course the fal i shot was also FULL AUTO [:D]
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 2:52:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/25/2002 3:37:12 PM EDT by Halfcocked]
Originally Posted By GummyBear1: I have owned both and here's my .02... AR10 negatives: Mags and parts are STUPID expensive. No adjustable gas system. Bolt would never stay open after last round. AR10 positives: Bad-assed looks. Very accurate. Muzzle break caused ball caps to blow-off range lane neighbors. FAL negatives: None I can think of. FAL positives: Cheap mags and parts. Adjustable gas system. Bad-assed looks. All gun functions capable of being done with left hand while right stays on trigger.
View Quote
For an adjustable gas block Google search Mike Orwan. Bolt would never stay open after last round. I've never had a problem with mine (that wasn't caused by operater error). Also all the after market triggers are easily installed. I currently have the Stoner in mine. I would rate this trigger right up there with the MK. I started with the Armalite match/2 stage but for a trigger that doesn't have to meet a 4.5 lb min pull this one is nice. How manny after market FAL triggers are there anyway?
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 3:42:18 PM EDT
Parts are stupid expensive. Some of the parts are inter changeable with the '15. There are many after market suppliers that make stuff for the '10 out there. Yes some of it's pricey. What do you want a fine fillet, or a hamburger.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 3:51:33 PM EDT
I don't own an FAL, so my experience with that type of rifle is limited. My AR-10 is acurate and has never in three thousand + rounds given me a lick of trouble. Well, it failed to feed once. Dry and dirty, wasn't suprised. The only complaint I have is the carbine upper I want for it is not in the budget right now. The full length upper with a scope and bipod makes for a rather heavy rifle as well. I guess that would be two complaints. An advantage I see in the 10 is the fact that the manual of arms is exactly like the 15. Makes for less fadiddling with mag changes and safety operation.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 4:56:41 PM EDT
I have 1500 rounds through my AR-10. Never had a need for an adjustable gas system. Bolt only failed to stay open once... I had failed to lock the mag completely in place. After 500 rounds without cleaning and firing surplus ammo I began to have failures to extract. Once clean, no more problem. Thanks to the ATF the mags are expensive. If money is an issue just get a flat top FAL. OH yeah, there isn't one. Good luck deciding! Planerench out.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 5:09:30 PM EDT
I have owned an FAL. And now own several AR10s. I think you can see my choice. Get the one that suites you best, and don't look back!
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 6:44:12 PM EDT
Just an [i]opinion[/i] from someone who's spent way too much time and money on this hobby... [b][red]FAL[/red]![/b] It's really a no-brainer. [^]
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 8:35:39 PM EDT
Well, the FAL supporters took an early lead, but the AR-10 is making it's presence known near the end. Thanks again for the information. I'd prefer too much info over too little info.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 10:45:04 PM EDT
I've got both,a STG58 with Imbel receiver and a AR10A4 with S.S. barrel.For accuracy the AR10 wins hands down.With mil surplus Hirtenberger I can shoot 1moa with the AR10.I can't do that with the FAL.Parts and mags are obviously much cheaper with the FAL.The AR10 is a MUCH better optics platform.Reliability?I've never had a problem with either one.This is a 12 of one,dozen of another question.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 11:39:09 PM EDT
[b]DSA FAL[/b]
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 4:59:11 AM EDT
There is a reason the FAL was adopted by almost 100 countries, and the AR-10, was adopted by ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 5:09:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Bigdude: There is a reason the FAL was adopted by almost 100 countries, and the AR-10, was adopted by ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
View Quote
Could it be the same reason more countries use the AK instead of an AR? Hell, at one time every nation in the world used the same type firearm and eventually they moved on to something better. The muzzle loader. The Sudanese used the '10 (original) didn't they.
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 5:21:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/26/2002 5:25:17 AM EDT by GreyGhost]
Originally Posted By Bigdude: There is a reason the FAL was adopted by almost 100 countries, and the AR-10, was adopted by ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
View Quote
That's misleading and not the whole story.It had 2 strikes against it as soon as it was designed. 1.It came out after the M14,FAL and G3.It was designed by a small company that couldn't immediately start producing 10,000 AR10's a month.Also if your country has just bought 500,000 FAL's you're not interested in looking at another design. 2.When the AR10 was designed was when the Army was looking at downsizing to the 5.56. So you're looking at a weapon that came out after the big 3,couldn't be immediately mass produced,and was the wrong caliber when the 5.56 push began. This says nothing about the quality of the weapon,it's all about timing. P.S. What's the most common military rifle today and what design is it based on?It's not the AK,FAL or G3.
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 5:32:18 AM EDT
If the FAL is so good, how come the SEALs and the SF bodyguards for Karzai are going to the AR-10??
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 5:47:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/26/2002 5:50:09 AM EDT by Code39]
It's all about optics!!! [img]http://pages.prodigy.net/labradorx3/public_html/ar10.jpg[/img] [img]http://pages.prodigy.net/labradorx3/public_html/ar102.jpg[/img] [img]http://pages.prodigy.net/labradorx3/public_html/optics.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 3:58:24 PM EDT
If it's all about optics then get a bolt gun. Much cheaper than either and will always shoot better than either. IMO, the AR10 guys are adept at justifying the inflated cost of their rifle. The FAL is a better, cheaper and more robust rifle overall. Above all, the AR gas system sucks. Even when you upsize it to handle a real cartridge's power and pressure. The FAL is a "Battle Rifle" that is, a sturdy, reliable weapon for the individual soldier. One that is capable of hitting man-sized targets at 600 meters with open sights. The AR10 is a precision rifle that happens to load itself. With all the accompanying increases in cost and flaws. Shoot 500rds through each and tell me which one works better. D. www.azexarms.com
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 6:06:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Gadsen: If it's all about optics then get a bolt gun. Much cheaper than either and will always shoot better than either. IMO, the AR10 guys are adept at justifying the inflated cost of their rifle. The FAL is a better, cheaper and more robust rifle overall. Above all, the AR gas system sucks. Even when you upsize it to handle a real cartridge's power and pressure. The FAL is a "Battle Rifle" that is, a sturdy, reliable weapon for the individual soldier. One that is capable of hitting man-sized targets at 600 meters with open sights. The AR10 is a precision rifle that happens to load itself. With all the accompanying increases in cost and flaws. Shoot 500rds through each and tell me which one works better. D. www.azexarms.com
View Quote
D. Thank you for looking at and identifying the problem with my DSA58...Which I got during the raffle prize drawing at the BRC...Dang straight $100.00 for the raffle tickets = one sweet Rifle. I'm a big fan of 7x62.51...Hence my moniker...A real live working Springfield M1A-A1!!! Now to the question at hand...I do indeed like the Stoner concept(and will some day own an AR-10)However, I still prefer the FAL & Sprinfield systems...Yes, I know they are distinct and different...But these are tried and true "Battle Rifles"...And BTW...M14 mags are sooooooo spendy!!! I like the cheaper metric FAL mags price tag!!!
Link Posted: 10/27/2002 5:03:08 AM EDT
Well, I am off to support my local gun show. Thank you all for your input. I will be handling both types while there and seeing if one of them fits me better than the other and I will make my decision from there. I'll keep you posted. [b]Thanks again![/b]
Link Posted: 10/27/2002 6:33:48 AM EDT
Forgive me as I did NOT attend college BUT... The author of this thread asked for input about the DSA58AL and or the AR-10. Nothing about bolt action rifles!!! IMHO the AR-10 Kicks ASS! However, I only bought it because I have a little penis[BD]
Top Top