Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
Armory Sponsor
2/10/2004 8:07:01 AM EDT
Now, I may be wrong but the only way to mount optics on a FAL seems to be some top cover arrangement.  As I understand it they have fixed the wobble problem with screws and you can now get one that allows you to remove the bolt without having to remove the cover - its been a few years since I mounted a scope on a FAL and gave up in disgust.  But my question is: Why doesnt someone make a side rail type mount with a weaver adapter similar to the AK/SVD set up?  I'm at work and my FAL is at home in the back of the safe so I cant look to see if there's enough metal for a mount on the left side, but if there's not what about mounting on the right side of the receiver?  It would seem that this system would get rid of the top cover, screw, bolt mess.

Just thought Id share some random thoughts rather than work ;)

2/10/2004 8:18:45 AM EDT
[#1]
There are scope mounts that mount to the side of the receiver but, the receiver must be drilled into.
2/10/2004 8:27:31 AM EDT
[#2]
I mounted a Leupold Vari-X II in ARMS rings on the ARMS rail, which replaces the dust cover.  It slides on just like the dust cover, but is very tight.  I was skeptical at first, but the mount has proven to be very solid.  I can detach the rings or remove the rail cover and have only realized a very slight loss of zero some of the time.  Most of the time if there is a loss, its negligible.
2/10/2004 9:04:49 AM EDT
[#3]
Not to steal the thread, but which is best:  ARMS, DSA, or Tapco 4th gen?  Are any not satisfactory?

Also, does the dust cover, if replaced, count as an American part?  
2/10/2004 10:07:07 AM EDT
[#4]
I'm partial to the ARMS mount as well.  Very stable and trim.  The DSA works great as well and you can remove the bolt and carrier without removing the cover.  I find it a bit bulky though.

No Catsmeat, the cover doesn't help with parts count.  The BATF doesn't list that as an evil foreign part so replacing it doesn't help.
2/11/2004 4:56:44 AM EDT
[#5]
Like the AK, when this weapon was designed it was not designed for optics. The FAL was designed to be a robust weapon of battle, not a precision scoped weapon. I shoot 1" at 100yds with the irons. I don't think a scope would help me. I was taught as a young kid to shoot through irons and now as long as the eyes hold out, I actually shoot better through sights. I have only used scopes in limited situations. I never understand why guys mount optics on FALs but heck, they are lots of fun to play with. My buddies with scoped FALs have had good and bad experiences with all mounts listed.
2/11/2004 12:02:26 PM EDT
[#6]
I've also got a ARMS mount for my Springfield Armory SAR-48 Bush rifle.  Have mounted a Leupold M8 3x and once shot a deer at 300m (trying for a handgun hunt but last 10mins of the day, 3 deer at 300).  Has always held its zero.
2/12/2004 12:52:47 PM EDT
[#7]
I'm with you about irons - I prefer them but advancing age and too much one handed net surfing have taken a toll on the eyes (and liver, joints, brain, etc.).  I find the red dots are keeping me in the game though as well as the low powered glass.  I was just wondering if anybody had tried it.  Ive got a DSA carbine that needs some form of optic.  Maybe I just need to add a siderail mount to my list of projects...
2/12/2004 4:50:14 PM EDT
[#8]
Tapco's scope mounts are made by Leapers. I like the ARMS mounts the best. I've had no problems with the ARMS mount, but a respected gunsmith said they eventually become loose.
2/24/2004 11:41:16 AM EDT
[#9]
http://pic1.picturetrail.com/VOL133/1636060/3137746/45988586.jpg

This works for me.
2/24/2004 5:50:20 PM EDT
[#10]
The best mount I have ever found was by a company called US Armament.  They are no longer in business which is to bad because they had a solid one piece mount that did not use screws.  I am glad I bought one even if it did cost me $75.  

Armory Sponsor