OK Shooters,

Put on your thinking cap and asbestos underware for this exercise.

I am a little "Over Extended" firearms wise, and I'm looking to consolidate.

Knowing the combined experiences of the AR15.com Hive Mind can always be counted upon to share with others who ask, here goes the question.

Rate the Rifles in Order of What You Would Keep and WHY.

My thinking on the rifles

G-3 / 91s -  I have PTR-KFP Carbine with Paratrooper Stock

Pros - Successful Military Design, Simple to Operate, Solid Sights, Built Like a rock - Little to break, Dependable shooter. Magazines as inexpensive as $2.00 a mag. Modular design makes changing stocks, grips ect easier.

Cons - Heavy, more challenging to scope, no last shot hold open, Trigger needs "Bill Springfield tuning"

M-1A / M-14S (I have two Poly M-14/S)

Pros - Most adjustable sights, 22" bbl, Least Expensive to purchase, Last Shot Bolt Holdopen

Cons - Have to take out of stock to clean (affect zero?), difficult to scope well without expensive mounts $$$, more maintenance intensive (Gas Gun), Magazines far and away most expensive, have heard of problems in some guns require replacing bolts?

FAL / STG58 (I have an STG58 kit on IMBEL receiver)

Pros - Successful Military Design, Simple to operate, Last Shot Bolt Holdopen, Inexpensive Mags.

Cons - Built with Used parts, Bipod on bbl (affect accuracy?),  rear sight wobbly side to side (affect accuracy), scope mounting?? Feels L-O-N-G.

Anyway,  I'd appreciate your sharing your rankings of the rifles above based on your experiences with the guns and WHY you would rank them in the order that you did - Specific Reasons clearly stated are a good thing!

Thanks!

BIGGER_HAMMER

Out of the 3 if I absolutly could only have one it would be the FAL, M1A & G3 in that order. My reasons for the FAL as #1 would be pistol grip, in para configuration it is comforatable unlike the G3, cheap mags, reciever is forged compared to stamped of the G3, last round bolt hold open, easy to clean/take apart. You list built with used parts as a con but look at how M14 USGi parts are sought after. They all three are a proven military desighn all still in use somewhere in the world. Personally I think the G# is the easiest to scope with the B & T low mount. The FAL in the carbine version feels no longet to me than any of the others. I rank the G# last because of no bolt hold open. If it was not for that I may rate it second. Though you can get a pistol grip stock for the M14 and then I may rate it first.

Too much to think about.

I'd have someone build one rifle between the two chi coms and sell the others to finance . You'd have a hatfull of spares from a mostly cannabized left over . If you like it short have a "scout type thing built .

I'm not an HK or FAL fan , you can get parts from freds for an m1A OR build it into one of these Crazy Horses.....? JMHO

sights on the HK and FAL just suck plus I like the ambi saftey on the M1a . And the sights that dont suck .

well?

Personally, I like them all!

Well, if you absolutely "have to thin the herd a bit," I would get rid of the M14Ss.  They are good rifles, but personally, the 2 others are more modern.  Unless of course you have a sentimental attachment to the M14Ss, which is the only USA "big-bore" battle rifle, even though they were made in the PRC.

What I am about to say is definitely unlikely to be repeated by anyone else. But I always did march to the beat of my own drummer...

Get rid of that FAL! The gun world already has enough FAL and Glock cultists... er... I mean loyalists (I call them the "ugly gun lovers club" ). Keep the PTR for CQB duties and because they're pretty cool for a foreign style of gun. And keep the two M14's because they are works of art that double as firesticks and can take care of things at longer distances than the PTR. Oh... and trade that FAL for a good 1911 to go with your M14's!

Sell the Fal and G3. Build one M14 as a long range boomer and the other as an 18 in. fast mover.

Cons - Have to take out of stock to clean (affect zero?), difficult to scope well without expensive mounts $$$, more maintenance intensive (Gas Gun), Magazines far and away most expensive, have heard of problems in some guns require replacing bolts?


I'll address some of your cons.Removing the M14 from it's stock is a non-issue if it is not glass bedded if it is bedded(a match or sniper rifle)then it should be removed as infrequently as possible but most maintenance doesn't require the stock be removed anyway..The mounts are pricey but not outrageus and the M14 has superb iron sights and trigger,you'd be suprised what you can do with one.I would hardly call the M14 maintenance intensive,grease it,swab out the bore,put a drop of Hoppes in the gas system now and then and clean the gas system occasionally.Magazines can be had from Armalite for 25 bucks and Taiwanese Type 57 mags work great and their selling for 12 to 15 bucks.Also,the M14 can be fed by stripper clip.Mags aren't as cheap as the Fal or G3 but they are still relatively inexpensive and are very robust.The problems with the Chicom bolt boils down to it being too soft and headspace long.This does not appear to apply to all chicoms as some people report extensive use with no appreciable change in headspace but the general consensus is to change out the chinese bolt for a U.S.G.I. as a precaution.

That's my .02. But hey,if you decide to sell the Poly's let me know,.