Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/25/2006 9:03:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/25/2006 9:04:39 PM EDT by mike1972]
How do you feel your FAL stacks up against the AR10 & the M1a....

Posted this in the other sections too.... I am looking for input from all.... I will be getting a 308 SHTF rifle..... I want to know what everybody says about this one.

Also, how much do you lose energy wise out of a short barrel 308, such as a cqc carbine type. Is the loss minimal, or is it too much of a trade off?

ETA: I have searched & searched all the threads about this one.... I am looking for an actual owners opinion... Even though I know it may be a bit biased. I am looking for all good & negative comments about any & all of the above stated rifles.
Link Posted: 3/25/2006 9:13:22 PM EDT
I own an FAL and an M1A. Both short barrel. I don't think I am giving much up at all. THey will knock the gong at 300 pretty seriously if you do your part. I won't be 'engaging' anyone at long range, and the ease of movement makes me really like the short 308's. I like both, so won't be much help. Like everyone else says, the sights on the M1 are better, the mags for the FAL are cheaper. I don't know that I like the feel of one over the other. Neither is too difficult to field strip and clean.

Get both!!
Link Posted: 3/25/2006 9:29:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DocGP:
I own an FAL and an M1A. Both short barrel. I don't think I am giving much up at all. THey will knock the gong at 300 pretty seriously if you do your part. I won't be 'engaging' anyone at long range, and the ease of movement makes me really like the short 308's. I like both, so won't be much help. Like everyone else says, the sights on the M1 are better, the mags for the FAL are cheaper. I don't know that I like the feel of one over the other. Neither is too difficult to field strip and clean.

Get both!!



LOL, I wish I could get both lol.... I was pretty much thinking the same thing as far as a short barreled version. I think that in urban SHTF a shorter gun would be a better trade off than a longer barrel one... After all, like you said, I doubt there would be much need to engage at distances out past what a short barrel 308 would be capable of.... It would only need good COM accuracy at far distances.
Link Posted: 3/25/2006 9:32:18 PM EDT
I would like any length bbl. M1A , with a fiberglass stock fo this situation
Link Posted: 3/25/2006 9:52:36 PM EDT
Get a DSA Fal , you will NOT regret it
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 3:22:18 AM EDT
After checking out the DSA website, I must say those FALs they have are niceeeeeee!

Also noticed that the Rock River Arms 308 is coming out & it uses the same mags as the FAL... Mag interchangability between the two would be a good thing.... Its looking like the DSA FAL or the RRA 308... (then if money ever permits, I can get both someday )
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 3:54:07 AM EDT
WTF http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=6&t=196624
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 5:32:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/26/2006 5:34:39 AM EDT by vmpglenn]
FAL all the way, bro.

Proven, flexible gas piston system, easy to add scopes and accessories if needed, LOP options (Kaiserworks lower, ACE receiver block both take standard CAR collapsible stocks), less expensive overall, better ergonomics, super cheap mags, will function just fine with cheap milsurp ammo, and on and on.

The M1A, however, will most likely be more accurate - the FAL is a battle rifle, not a DMR or sniper rifle. It will take more work to make a FAL work like an SPR than an M1A. But out to 300m, you'll hit what you're aiming at.

The FAL was adopted as the standard battle rifle by something like 70 countries. How many adopted the M14/M1A? And you can't tell me it was all politics...

ETA: AR10 is still direct impingement, and will require more cleaning than either a FAL or M1A, on the whole. HOWEVER, you can't beat the AR for ergonomics/human engineering factors. IMHO, this isn't enough to tip the balance away from the FAL.
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 5:47:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By vmpglenn:
FAL all the way, bro.

Proven, flexible gas piston system, easy to add scopes and accessories if needed, LOP options (Kaiserworks lower, ACE receiver block both take standard CAR collapsible stocks), less expensive overall, better ergonomics, super cheap mags, will function just fine with cheap milsurp ammo, and on and on.

The M1A, however, will most likely be more accurate - the FAL is a battle rifle, not a DMR or sniper rifle. It will take more work to make a FAL work like an SPR than an M1A. But out to 300m, you'll hit what you're aiming at.

The FAL was adopted as the standard battle rifle by something like 70 countries. How many adopted the M14/M1A? And you can't tell me it was all politics...

ETA: AR10 is still direct impingement, and will require more cleaning than either a FAL or M1A, on the whole. HOWEVER, you can't beat the AR for ergonomics/human engineering factors. IMHO, this isn't enough to tip the balance away from the FAL.



Thanks vmpglenn.... After doing the research it looks like the FAL really is the best platform as far as durability & rock solid design.... And since it would be used for range fun & SHTF, I dont think sniper precision is needed... As long as it can make man size hits at around 300 yrds. thats good enough.
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 7:02:09 AM EDT
The only downside of the FAL in my opinion is accurancy due to the trigger and this applys only to precission shooting measured in sub-MOA incriments. As a .308 SHTF rifle it is wonderful! Due to the weight of .308 ammo, you will be limited as to how much you can hump around. 10 twenty round FAL mags are mighty heavy compared to 10 twenty round 5.56mm mags.

Regards,
Gary
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 7:17:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/26/2006 7:17:50 AM EDT by mike1972]

Originally Posted By LastDefender:
The only downside of the FAL in my opinion is accurancy due to the trigger and this applys only to precission shooting measured in sub-MOA incriments. As a .308 SHTF rifle it is wonderful! Due to the weight of .308 ammo, you will be limited as to how much you can hump around. 10 twenty round FAL mags are mighty heavy compared to 10 twenty round 5.56mm mags.

Regards,
Gary



LastDefender, very true... I was thinking the AR10 & FAL would be good for buggin in & the AR15 would be good for buggin out....

Ya know what.... That just made me think of a sad thing.... If any of us ever have to bug out.... We would end up leaving some pretty nice & expensive stuff behind... It would be too hard to carry all your guns and ammo for all of em too

Only way you could do it if you had lots of guns would be to arm others... And most of the people I know that I would be willing to arm live atleast 20 minutes away by car
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 8:24:48 AM EDT
Mike,

You bing up a very good but painful point

Gary
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 3:06:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/26/2006 3:06:56 PM EDT by myitinaw]
I prefer the FAL having used both.
But I'd refer you to Bostons Gun Bible
for more detailed and useful information.
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 4:10:11 PM EDT
FAL all the way. Never had an AR-10. The three M1A's were not impressive.
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 4:46:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mike1972:
How do you feel your FAL stacks up against the AR10 & the M1a....

Posted this in the other sections too.... I am looking for input from all.... I will be getting a 308 SHTF rifle..... I want to know what everybody says about this one.

Also, how much do you lose energy wise out of a short barrel 308, such as a cqc carbine type. Is the loss minimal, or is it too much of a trade off?

ETA: I have searched & searched all the threads about this one.... I am looking for an actual owners opinion... Even though I know it may be a bit biased. I am looking for all good & negative comments about any & all of the above stated rifles.



What, you aren't going to consider a JLD PTR91? G3 mags are going for a $1 apiece all day long, and most like the new guns. Other than the furniture, trigger pull seems to be the only gripe on these.
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 6:29:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/26/2006 6:30:55 PM EDT by Hawkeye]
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 6:30:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/26/2006 6:54:08 PM EDT by BB]
I've owned an Armalite AR10A1C, M1A/M24 and I currently have a DSA StG58CP FAL.
If you can get a reliable AR10, that rifle would be hard to beat. AR ergonomics, accuracy and accessories, in 7.62NATO would be a wonderful thing. I could never get the one I had to run as reliably as my FAL so I gave up. In my opinion reliablity trumps accuracy in a SHTF rifle.
The M1A was sweet; extremely accurate but it was expensive across the board, mags, scope mounts, GI replacement parts, etc..and heavy. The standard model is more in line with the FAL in weight though, and it was a sweet shooter.
The FAL is my choice because none of mine have ever failed/malfunctioned and are accurate enough for me (2-3MOA with good surplus). The inexpensive but high-quality parts/mags make the FAL an easy choice.
I'm going to acquire a JLD PTR91 and see what those are about next

I prefer my 762NATO battle rifles with barrels at least 18" long. The 100 or so extra FPS can't hurt; neither does the longer sight radius.

<<<----------Post 1919
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 11:37:25 PM EDT
I like both the AR-10 and the M14/M1A, but my first choice, given the circumstances that you lay out, would be the FAL...

Hell, my first choice would be the FAL anyway...



Forrest

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 12:25:23 AM EDT
FAL hands down. Why? M1A mags cost a fuckton more, it aint worth it.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 9:20:51 AM EDT
I have already made the journey you are pondering.
The M1A was the first stop. The rifle was very accurate , but it did not work for my purposes. I wanted something that I could scope and have faith in across the desert floor and in the mountains, yet be able to quickly remove the optics and use the iron sights if needed. Mounting optics required way too much dedication, meaning that once it was a scoped rifle , that was it.
So I tried an HK 91 variant. I will never badmouth HK products, but clones are a crapshoot and I crapped out. Too bad, because I had high hopes.
I tried a couple of AR10s that belong to friends, and I really like them. But in a SHTF scenario, I am worried about maintenance/parts/repair upkeep issues. They haven't been around for that long (yes, I know Eugene designed them first, but they had been shelved for a long time before Armalite realized they could sell again).
So I ended up with a PARA FAL. It is an Imbel home build, with standard gas system, 16" DSA Barrel, Phantom Flash Hider, Imbel folder assembly, DSA PARA scope mount.
For optics I have a Trijicon Compact ACOG, 3x amber + reticle on a LaRue MiniDOS mount. It releases quick and even has a sight channel that I can use as a rudimentary peep sight without even removing the mount. The FAL is legendary for it's reliability, the guy down the street has a pile of spare parts in his garage, magazines are dirt cheap and reliable. It's not the most accurate rifle I have ever owned or fired, but I am not looking for clover leafs. I want a rifle that I can run from TEOTWAWKI to Armaggedon and not worry about. When you spend a little time on the FAL files, you'll begin to appreciate the robustness of the design. Check the rusty crap FALs the Liberians have, read the tale of ole' dirty, marvel that you ever lived without a FAL.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 11:31:25 PM EDT
Of the systems that you mentioned, I own an M1A and 4 FALs. I got into FALs after I sold an M1A due to financial obligations. After that sh*tstorm subsided, I wanted another M1A to replace it. While watching the movie HEAT (yes, I know), I got curious about the rifle that Val Kilmer used in the drive in movie scene. I began doing internet searches and that is when I found FALFILES. I did not even know that FALs existed until then. When I discovered the ease with which an FAL could be be built and the damned near give away prices of kits ( at the time, TAPCO was selling IMBEL and G1 kits for $100), I got heavy into FALs. I built my first and was hooked. 7 more FALs followed. I have kept 4 of these and have been more than satisfied with their performance. Two of my FALs have StG 58 front ends and they shoot as accurately as my M1A.

The two things about FALs that I do not like are the silly rear sights (WTF was Duidonne thinking anyway) and the selector.

The pistol grip of the FAL makes them easier to manipulate than the M1A. Doing tactical mag changes are much easier with the FAL and if I have a bolt related malfunction ( broken firing pin or extractor) , I can swap bolt/carrier assemblies in seconds and be back in business. ( Standard models. A para model would take a bit longer)
In the current market, spare parts for a FAL are comparatively inexpensive. Try buying a complete parts kit for an M1A for $350. Excellent condition StG58 kits can still be had for that price and you have everything except an upper receiver.
Mags for an F A L are also plentiful and cheap. 5 or 6 FAL mags for the price of 1 M14 mag.
So, the only advantage that an M1A has over an FAL are the sights. When considering what you want the rifle for, then this advantage disappears.

Link Posted: 3/28/2006 12:40:52 AM EDT
huh? Kilmer used a g3/hk 91, correct?
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 11:06:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By christ0ph:
huh? Kilmer used a g3/hk 91, correct?



Correct. The FAL was used by Tom Sizemore in the armored car robbery earlier in the movie. Used to execute the armored car guards.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 12:31:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SrBenelli:

Originally Posted By christ0ph:
huh? Kilmer used a g3/hk 91, correct?



Correct. The FAL was used by Tom Sizemore in the armored car robbery earlier in the movie. Used to execute the armored car guards.



Sizemore? I thought that was the dirty long haired dude that killed the guard, because the rest of the gang got pissed off and wanted to off him for that
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 10:53:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By christ0ph:
huh? Kilmer used a g3/hk 91, correct?



Please re read my post. I never stated that Kilmer used an FAL.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 2:50:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By christ0ph:

Originally Posted By SrBenelli:

Originally Posted By christ0ph:
huh? Kilmer used a g3/hk 91, correct?



Correct. The FAL was used by Tom Sizemore in the armored car robbery earlier in the movie. Used to execute the armored car guards.



Sizemore? I thought that was the dirty long haired dude that killed the guard, because the rest of the gang got pissed off and wanted to off him for that



"Dirty longhaired dude" offed the first guard for "eyeballing" him. Sizemore offs the other to "clean up" the mess that resulted......and used an FAL.
Kilmer used an HK-91 in the drive-in.
Pachino used an FNC in the bank shoot out.
Sizemore used a Galil ARM in said shoot out.

......................'cmon people! This is HEAT were talkin' about! The "official" movie of ARF.com!
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 4:30:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 4:33:32 AM EDT by BB]
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 2:25:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 2:28:44 PM EDT by Jaybo]

Originally Posted By whs78:

Originally Posted By mike1972:
How do you feel your FAL stacks up against the AR10 & the M1a....

Posted this in the other sections too.... I am looking for input from all.... I will be getting a 308 SHTF rifle..... I want to know what everybody says about this one.

Also, how much do you lose energy wise out of a short barrel 308, such as a cqc carbine type. Is the loss minimal, or is it too much of a trade off?

ETA: I have searched & searched all the threads about this one.... I am looking for an actual owners opinion... Even though I know it may be a bit biased. I am looking for all good & negative comments about any & all of the above stated rifles.



What, you aren't going to consider a JLD PTR91? G3 mags are going for a $1 apiece all day long, and most like the new guns. Other than the furniture, trigger pull seems to be the only gripe on these.



Where are those prices?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 3:21:47 PM EDT
I think the M1A is a better rifle for a soldier, meaning that you'll be able to keep it clean, etc. But for a SHTF situation, where you wont know how long it may be before your next cleaning session, get then FAL. They're simpler than the AK. And hit a lot harder, too.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:02:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By kingfish:
I think the M1A is a better rifle for a soldier, meaning that you'll be able to keep it clean, etc. But for a SHTF situation, where you wont know how long it may be before your next cleaning session, get then FAL. They're simpler than the AK. And hit a lot harder, too.



Actually, as one who carried an M14 in the Army, I have to say that the FAL is much easier to keep clean compared to the M14 (and the M14 isn't bad...).

So, another reason for the FAL...



Forrest
Link Posted: 3/30/2006 10:08:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/30/2006 10:10:00 AM EDT by GroundFire201]
I have the M1A and the only thing I didnt like about it is that it was difficult to mount optics on it.
The receiver rails sit too far forward and are too high. You will need an adjustable cheek rest and a SAGE stock would be best, but I still think mounting optics is difficult.

If you get an FAL get the Para FAL in 16 or 18 inch. If you dont like the sights just use it with an Aimpoint or ACOG or ELCAN or IOR etc... You may also want to switch the front sight with one with cross hairs. 4 inches on a barrel doesn't make much of a difference other then making it more mobile.

For the money the best battle rifle around is the DSA Para STG58 (Australian) IMHO. I just placed an order for one.

DSA PARA STG58
Link Posted: 3/30/2006 10:23:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/30/2006 10:23:29 AM EDT by BB]

Originally Posted By GroundFire201:
I have the M1A and the only thing I didnt like about it is that it was difficult to mount optics on it.
The receiver rails sit too far forward and are too high. You will need an adjustable cheek rest and a SAGE stock would be best, but I still think mounting optics is difficult.

If you get an FAL get the Para FAL in 16 or 18 inch. If you dont like the sights just use it with an Aimpoint or ACOG or ELCAN or IOR etc... You may also want to switch the front sight with one with cross hairs. 4 inches on a barrel doesn't make much of a difference other then making it more mobile.

For the money the best battle rifle around is the DSA Para STG58 (Austrian) IMHO. I just placed an order for one.

DSA PARA STG58



Fixed it for you :-)
Top Top