Armory Sponsor
Posted: 1/14/2007 11:29:15 AM EDT
|
I've been lurking on the board and I can see the basic characteristics, but what constitutes a FAL? Is there a web site somewhere I could read up on? These look like something I would like to play around with. Thanks. jdm |
|
The finest rifle the world has ever known. It is the epitome of everything a battle rifle should be. It is a work of the machinist's art. It is a true rifleman's rifle. It is accurate. It is reliable. It is handsome. It is ergonomic. It has everything one needs and none of the bullshit one dosen't. Yeah, I kind of like 'em. 
|
 B.S.
BLAH, BLAH,BLAH . It is not a RIFLEMANS rifle . The sights are JUNK. |
You came into the FAL forum to bash the FAL?    I like the sights on the FAL better than any other rifle I own. I shoot my FAL more accurately than any other rifle I own. Oh, and the last line of my post was meant to indicate that the above was my experience and my opinion. The winking icon would indicate that it was kind of tongue-in-cheek as well. Apparently you didn't pick up on that. But since you're so busy stirring up trouble like an infantile 12 year old with a bad additude, perhaps you might want to insult my mother, just for good measure you know. |
I currently own 2 FALs, and have no problems with either. The sights are fine for a battle rifle, not the best, but definately servicable. Mine currently wears an ACOG, and is capable of MOA accuracy, which is more than acceptable. If you do not think it is a good rifle, that is fine, but do not try to tell guys who have owned them and shot them for over 20 years, like I have, what is what about them. Go shoot your Glock Regards, Scott |
Please...... mine looks like a rat chewed on it by the ejection port. I should have adjusted the ejector but at this point I dont care. It's got a half-moon of bare metal there. |
|
It's easier to mount good optics on a FAL so that makes up for the less than perfect fixed sights, which are still good enough anyway. While it may be true that the M1/M14/M1A designs are more representitive of a "rifleman's rifle", if I had to go in harms way with a 7.62 NATO rifle it would be a version of the FAL for sure, with the G3/HK91 a close second place. Here's the acid test: Take a FAL, a M14 and a G3. Replace the firing pin in each one and then see which design you would prefer to depend on in less than perfect conditions. I've owned all three designs over the years and I always come back to the FAL. I have an Imbel FAL now that's close to perfection and I doubt I'll ever part with it. Flyer |
I love used looking FALs, it shows charecter! 
|
|
Cool! I see now what you are talking about. I hate safe queens, and I own none. I like a rifle that looks like someone pulled the trigger every now and again. I may snap one for ya'll this weekend. |
I know that I will during this coming week... Probably both an Imbel and a StG-58... Something else that hasn't been mentioned is that the FAL is much easier to clean than other 7.62mm NATO battle rifles, although the AR-10 comes close...  Forrest |
Yours hAs got scArs too, NICE  ThAnks for the pics. HUNTER. |
Armory Sponsor