Quoted: I'm partial to the FAL.  So...FAL.

Quoted: 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.

Glad to see someone didnt think I was making that up.   Also see 9/04 issue of American Rifleman p.94 paragraph 2.

Its fairly common knowledge that the FAL, or, T44 as it was called then, TIED with the M14.

Quoted: 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

George I can't argue with your post here. You are most likely correct  with the rifles and manufactor you mentioned. I am talking about MILITARY RIFLE to Military RIFLE.  Not civilain  to civilian. I should have been more clear on that. My apology . I too would take a DSA over a current manufactored SA M1A.  Now put a LBR reciver rifle put together with USGI parts, and it will run side by side with any TOP QUALITY FAL .IMO. M14 doesn't have a OP rod Breaking problem. Im sure there are some that have broke. But Ive never heard of a USGI rod Breaking.  The bedding is only on Match rifles. Not Field grade. The synthetic stock takes care of all that. Quality rifle to quality rifle, they come out about equal. Blake Stevens Book " Garand to the M14 " gives all the test both rifles went through. T44 & T48 . Gives results and shows the scores. from my memory it was decided it was a draw ( Tie ). So being a tie it was decided it would be easier to  convert over to the M14 being it was an improved Garand action. And it also was Home Grown. If they would have chose the FAL they would have did equally as well.
Now to address the SF guys as far as the U.S. ARMY is concerned. I can't speak for every group but my cousin has served in 7th group and 20th group. According to him they don't get to pick and choose like alot of us would like to think they do. Peace time Army anyhow. The M14 is in the system and can be had. It is a very good support rifle. The SEALS  and ARMY SOG use it well in that role. A very good rifle. IMO WarDawg    

dont see any FALs in long range shooting matches
but do see M1As
I wonder why