These are my only two choices for a .308 semi here in the PRK. No scope, no aftermarket crap, right out of the box, which do you think is better? Why?

Best bang for the buck is the FAL.  I just happen to prefer the M1A.  It is expensive, and the mags are very expensive.

Both are great rifles but the FAL doesn't work too well with out the pistol grip. DSA is either selling or planing on selling a FAL here that uses a semi fixed 10 round mag and loads from stripper clips in exchange to use the pistol grip.
The M1A does have better sights and trigger pull on it compared to the FAL. I think the FAL has much cheaper spare and more plentiful spare parts though.
I have both but prefer the M1A because of the sights and trigger.

FAL. A "bullet proof" weapon, and would have been the choice of the U.S. military over the M14 but for POLITICS!

Admittedly may not be as accurate as an [i]accurized[/i] M1A. But niether is it maintenance intensive, won't become "unbedded", and mags are very cheap. A plain jane FAL shooting mil surplus ammo is just as accurate as a Springfield Armory base model M1A, and a shit load better than most of the chinese clones. If you get one in Kali just leave the pistol grip off until you go shooting in Nevada. Once the DOJ adds it to the AW list you can put the P grip back on and take it shooting in CA (if you register it that is [:(]

I have been shooting M1A's for some time now so I admit I may be just a little biased, but here goes anyway. I just took my beautiful new Imbel FAL/STG58 to the range to fire it for reliability and function.  The good news is that that functioned flawlessly.  Mine even has a decent trigger.  It was really fun to shoot and I'm looking forward to testing it for accuracy next time out.

BAD news is that after only 3 mags of normal semi auto fire the damn thing was too hot to hold!  (It doesn't have a metal fore end it has a plastic one) How can a weapon with the reputation of being the "right arm of the free world", become almost unusable after a mere 60 rounds?

I've asked the same question on the FAL Files board and it seems that they are almost resigned to the fact. It was even seriously suggested that I shoot it with a glove. (reminds me of changing that M-60 barrel, something I don't miss about the green machine)

I may try a wooden fore end to see if it helps but then I'd have to give up the neat bi-pod which was one of the reasons I bought it to start with. (That and the cheap mags.)

Anyway the short of it is I'll be keeping my M1A as my "over the hill weapon".  The only thing I burn with it is ammo.

Rocketman

I could have sworn there was a Saiga 308 floating around without a pistol grip.

I agree that a base M1a is no more accurate than a FAL. Money is always an issue and the FAL is a good value. If you want accuracy in the 2.5-3.0 moa range than get the FAL. As for me, I rather spend the $ and get an accurized M1A that shoots well under MOA.

FAL all the way, in reality there no question, the M1A/M14 is a nice rifle but the FAL is a battle rifle.