Quoted: Big Garand fan here but Patton never shot a FAL.
|
That's true, so we'll never know, for sure, what he thought about the FAL.
The FAL's a great battle rifle, no doubt about it.
That said, one could argue that an as-issued Garand was, and is a more desirable choice than the FAL.
Here's why. In comparison with the FAL, the Garand has:
Better sights, and longer sight radius. Much better protected rear sight, too.
Better trigger.
Stronger buttstock (sometimes an impact weapon)
Can always mount a bayonet.
Can use a sling as a shooting aid, thus tightening groups considerably.
Has a op rod handle that allows the shooter positive control of both chambering and extraction.
Always has its cleaning gear stowed in the butt trap, so it's always with the rifle when its needed.
Has a longer barrel, thus increasing range and reducing muzzle flash.
That's just an as-issued M1. If you want to allow more-or-less customary modifications, we can discuss the merits of the National Match M1 over its FAL counterpart, if any.
No; we'll never know what Patton might have said about the FAL. But him being an officer who knew his men and their equipment down to the last detail, he might
still have chosen an M1, given the choice.
Not meant as a flame, but just wanted to point out a thing or two.