PDA

View Full Version : M1A Vs. FAL


Heat
April 10, 2008, 20:50
Im presently a FAL owner, Entreprise receiver STG 58 --have approx 25 mags--plently of .308..trouble is Im not at all happy with accuracy and I hear the FAL has nearly twice as many parts..vs M1A
I've always liked the M1A configuration but the initial price was beyond my means at the time..now Im thinking of switching, what would be the best course..I understand the plain jane M1A goes for around $1300 and mags are roughly 5/$100 for type 57
Opinions on what to do?
Which is more reliable?

W.E.G.
April 10, 2008, 21:02
Both guns are very reliable.

Particular specimens of either can be better or worse.

Mounting a scope *properly* on an M1A is more expensive and more difficult than a FAL.

For what I use either of those rifles for, the accuracy of either is more than adequate.

I really hate the way the M1A op-rod is removed.
You'll never get an M1A bolt disassembled without a special tool.

I prefer the FAL because it looks cooler.
Not that the M14 is uncool.
Just that the FAL is cooler.

wolfsburgbob
April 10, 2008, 21:22
One (or more) of each is the only answer.

:wink:

(Chicken or the Egg?,...Chicken or the Egg?)

Oswald2001
April 10, 2008, 21:30
For irons sights, pick which one you like best. They are both excellent.

A lot of people say the iron sights of the M1A are the most accurate, but, my eyes have gotten older on me. :shades:

So, sometimes more 'blocky' sights can be a plus.




For a scope....M1A.

Ben Rogers
April 10, 2008, 21:55
Interestingly, I posted this same question when I first came to the forum and created a firestorm. While the fireworks were pretty and some people complained about the loud booms, I found much of it very informative.

Here's what I've gathered:

FAL reliability tends to be better than M14s (specific model dependent, of course)

M14 accurancy tends to be better than FALs (specific model dependent, of course)

My Marine friends scoff at the FAL because it doesn't make neat little 2" groups at 500 meters. However, I don't have the eyesight to make neat little 2" groups at 500 meters, so for me, the point is moot.

When I tell them that the FALs get 2" groups at 100 meters, they laugh at me and show me their 1/2" groups at 100 meters.

However, their guns cost $3500+ (more these days) to get that kind of accuracy. Scopes cost more. Magazines cost more. Hell, it costs $2 to look at one and $3 to smell the burned powder after they're fired!

(That last sentence was a joke.) ;)

I just bought my first FAL (hasn't even arrived yet). My total investment with three different folks has been less than a grand and I will have a FAL, 10 20-round mags, 1 10-round mag, some hand loaded ammo, a scope mount, a bayonet with sheath and a few other nifty little items.

10 Mags for an M14 (of a quality I will accept) would cost me over $400.

Brand new, Austrian mags with witness holes from a vendor on this board are $9.50. Brand new. High quality.

So, my buddy says, "Since you're the only one with a FAL in the group, you'll need to have at least 25 more mags (50 total)." So, I think, "Less than $250 and I'm STILL cheaper than your gun cost you *BY ITSELF*."

I listened to the M14 lovers on the forum. I listened to the FAL lovers on the form. I went with the FAL for economy and *my specific needs*.

If you have a need to put 2" groups at 500 meters, you need a high-quality M14 that will cost you over $3500 *just for the gun*.

If you're happy with 2" groups at 100 meters, then you're in luck! You can find good quality FALs for the $700 - $1000 price points (in fact, there's a great one in the Marketplace right now for $950 (http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=230068)).

And you can find inexpensive magazines, inexpensive scope mounts, inexpensive everything.

That being said, I think the M14 is a fine weapon and when I happen to have a spare $5000, I'll probably get one. :) (There is an M14 that is comparable to the FAL capabilities--2" groups at 100 meters--on another forum for sale (http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?t=38803).)

jbrooks
April 10, 2008, 22:20
I recall the previous thread, hopefully this one will stay civil for a while.

Emotions run deep between the two schools of thought. last time some folks got all wrapped around the axle about the FAL/M14 tests in the '50s, and then the discussion moved to the M14 receiver lasting 400,000 rounds compared to the FAL 80,000 rounds.

All that is of ZERO importance at this juncture. Nobody is going to spend the tens of thousands of dollars in ammo to run their rifle to the grave.

So we can keep it practical:

I have both, and have fired thousands of rounds thru both. May SAI M14 (pre-'94) has had ZERO failures of any kind. With the exception of a broken firing pin in my FAL (FP came from a military bolt of unknown history) my FAL has been flawless.

The FAL is far easier to strip than the M14 clone. Bolt comes apart in seconds.

I have yet to scope my M1A, because all you have to do is read the M14 Forum and see how many different mounts people buy and try before they get it right. At 200 bucks and more a pop, that's a lot of money to spend on a scope mount just to see if it fits. The FAL is trivial to mount a scope, the DSA mounts are completely adequate and rigid.

From the M14 Forum, you can read numerous threads about scope mounts interfering with shell ejection and causing jams, from the shell catching on the mount. I don’t need a jam. So folks say “Just change out ejector springs until it works”. Balderdash! Each time you change out the spring, you need to rip the bolt apart. L

M14 parts are getting astronomical in price. $250.00 for a used USGI op rod. $200 fro a USGI trigger group. $200 for a USGI bolt.


So, keeping the discuaaion practical, I prefer the FAL. I mean a good, factory or DSA FAL, or an exceptional kit rifle.


:bow: :bow:

JWB

hagar
April 10, 2008, 22:44
I can tell you from personal experience that I have shot my STG FAL shooting Portuguese surplus against customized NM M1A's shooting match ammo at 500 yards, and the M1A's lost. No, I did not win the match, it was another guy shooting a DSA FAL.

Ask Moses about his experience, he clobbers M1A's on a regular basis in the drop 8 match. I have yet to see an M1A even PLACE in the first 3.

I have both, and I find the M1A finicky, constantly needing tweeking and sight adjustments and tightening. I have not touched the sights on my STG in years, and they are dead on every time I shoot it. Shooting groups is not the only measure.

John Crusher
April 10, 2008, 22:46
I am glad Ben Rogers spoke up about his decision after the last firestorm. I have a standing offer for him to come over and shoot with me (when kids and time allow). I have a PolyM14 and a M1A standard as well as my lovely Brit FAL and even a PTR-91 to throw into the mix. My FAL is my favorite as far as a real shooter. It just feels right. My M1A (02) standard was a disappointment when I bought an Armscorp mount and ended up having to put a leapers (coulda saved $$ there). The Poly receiver was a perfect fit for the Armscorp mount. I put a SWFA ss10X42M on the Poly and it is my DMR so it has its place. All in all the one I would keep is the FAL and the one I am considering getting rid of (I want a Metric FAL) is my M1A.

Ssarge
April 10, 2008, 23:01
Originally posted by W.E.G.
You'll never get an M1A bolt disassembled without a special tool.


Gary, I can disassemble an M14 bolt either with the standard combo tool or a fired 30.06 piece of brass stuck in the chamber. Nothing special about that.

1stSSPZ
April 11, 2008, 05:54
I am a big fan of both and own both. Luckily, I am able to also shoot both quite a bit. Jusr made Master shooting a NM M1A in highpower. My take on it?

One way range: M1A

Two way range: FAL

http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member1028.png (http://militarysignatures.com)

Survey Punk
April 11, 2008, 06:18
Originally posted by Ssarge


Gary, I can disassemble an M14 bolt either with the standard combo tool or a fired 30.06 piece of brass stuck in the chamber. Nothing special about that.


Ditto.

JB

2barearms
April 11, 2008, 06:28
The AR got me to the M14 and it got me to the FAL. I built my first FAL in
2002. However it was the initial cost that drove the FAL build and the
avaiability of cheap kits. I have a custom built all DSA 16" FAL with every
bell and whistle and it cost as much as any of my tack driver M14s and is
pretty accurate too. The notion that you have to spend $3,500 to have a
nice accurate M14 is just not true, Mine don't even come close to that figure
and they will do quite well at the range. It's going to cost more for either
platform to have a more accurate rifle built and your personal taste and the
ergonomics of both have to be weighed. I read Boston's Gun Bible before
I went at it and he has an extensive detailed blow by blow of both rifles.
His book basicly boils down to the M14 but both in my opinion are treated
as equals. Kind of a different issue the M14 would be 50 years old right
about now also. The FAL is too, can't remeber the exact year it was officially
deployed.

The Mag issue was more of a problem during the AWB because of the limited
number of GI M14 Mags. Today there are way more choices and although not
cheap they are available. The M14 is striiper clip fed standard also. For the
cost of a DSA dust cover mount you can now get a Bassett Machine Single
Point Mount that can be installed and removed without taking the stripper
clip guide out and returns to within 1/2 minute of angle. FAL's are great
M14s are great so by both.

jbrooks
April 11, 2008, 07:20
Originally posted by Ssarge


Gary, I can disassemble an M14 bolt either with the standard combo tool or a fired 30.06 piece of brass stuck in the chamber. Nothing special about that.

DISASSEMBLY of the M-14 bolt is a piece of cake! :cool: :cool: Mine even did it all by itself a couple times, before I replaced the extractor with a USGI one.

re-assembly is not so easy. Even with the 30-06 case, you gotta watch out for that pesky firing pin dropping out the back. You have to take the action out of the stock. A little easier then, but certainly not quick.


JWB

hagar
April 11, 2008, 07:23
This thread is going nowhere, just like the other 9999 M1A vs FAL threads on this boards. If you want to buy an M1A, go hang out on jouster.com or m14.com.

jbrooks
April 11, 2008, 08:42
Originally posted by Heat
...and I hear the FAL has nearly twice as many parts..vs M1A

I've heard this before, but I'm not sure how they are counted. I suppose if you count every pin and spring in the trigger group of the M14, along with the major components, you will come up with a pretty large number. If you count the pins and innards of the FAL ejector block, it's probably also a pretty large number.

But if you count just the parts that actually move or do something during the firing cycle, and thus subject to wear, I believe it's probably a wash.

FAL Bolt: Extractor, extractor spring, firing pin, FP spring, FP retaining pin: 5 total. NO Ejector in the FAL Bolt. It's fixed to the ejector block, so doesn't move and is always there. The cartridge case WILL eject in the FAL if the bolt goes back far enough. If your M1A ejector spring goes bad during a cycle, you will have an inoperable rifle. Not likely, but Possible.

M1A Bolt: Extractor, extractor spring, ejector plunger, ejector spring, firing pin : total: 5

I do like the positive hammer-locking safety on the M1A. The M1A MAY be a shade more "safe" than the FAL.

JWB

captk
April 11, 2008, 08:46
I have both, 2 FAL's and 2 M14 Clones (M1A). I like shooting both but have shot the FAL's much more since I only recently acquired the M14's. My eyes are not what they once were and I was able to get a front aperture sight for the M14 combined with the NM rear sight allows for much better groupings. This is really a comment on the sights rather then the rifles. I would be quite pleased with a 2" group from any rifle. I have found that I shoot better with front and rear aperture sights like the mojo's I used on mausers. If someone would come up with an aperture front sight for the FAL I'd be all set.
Cleaning the FAL is much easier also.
Ken

Seaweed
April 11, 2008, 11:59
M1A bolt disassembly is so easy I have had some disassemble themselves. Damn lazy FAL won't do that.

I still like the M14 types better. Long ago when my uncle gave me lots of free ammo to play with we sorta bonded...

jbrooks
April 11, 2008, 12:23
Originally posted by Seaweed
M1A bolt disassembly is so easy I have had some disassemble themselves. Damn lazy FAL won't do that.

I still like the M14 types better. Long ago when my uncle gave me lots of free ammo to play with we sorta bonded...
You too??

Yea, my uncle gave me lots of free ammo too. So much of it some folks tossed cans of it away... Darn, I sure wish I had all that now... :devil: :devil:

A few years ago my brother and I went back to Ft. Benning (after almost 40 years) , out past Sand Hill, to the ranges. Walking around in the tall grass, we found some old bandos (empty) , a bunch of caved-in foxholes... nothing else but memories...

JWB

Groucho
April 11, 2008, 13:50
I have both. I like them both. I shoot them both (but not together). Either one is a good rifle. They do what they were designed to do.

Get one of each. Then get an LAR 8 from Rock River. You can never have too many .308 rifles.

Groucho

EricCartmanR1
April 11, 2008, 14:04
I like sticks, stones, bicycles, push mowers and M14s....

but I also like 1GHZ CPU's, Electronic Fuel Injected Cars, Plasma TV's, and FALs.

Depends on my mood I guess.

Vityaz
April 11, 2008, 16:36
:rolleyes: :fal:

Andrewsky
April 11, 2008, 16:37
FAL>M14

:tongue:

Andrewsky
April 11, 2008, 16:50
Originally posted by EricCartmanR1
I like sticks, stones, bicycles, push mowers and M14s....

but I also like 1GHZ CPU's, Electronic Fuel Injected Cars, Plasma TV's, and FALs.

Depends on my mood I guess.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Everything you mention in the second part is prone to failure. Or FAiLure.:confused:

jbrooks
April 11, 2008, 17:24
Originally posted by Andrewsky


I'm not sure what you're saying. Everything you mention in the second part is prone to failure. Or FAiLure.:confused:

I think he's drawing the comparison between the archaic/crude and the more modern, sophisticated.

:love:

JWB

Oswald2001
April 11, 2008, 18:00
I can't imagine why the animosity.

THEY ARE BOTH GREAT RIFLES.

I have shot both and ended up buying an M1A because I didn't want to spend the money to buy 2 rifles.

Now, I wish I would have bought the FAL.


Trouble is...if I had bought the FAL...I would have wished that I had bought an M1A. :D



The truth is that BOTH rifles are plenty robust and more accurate than most shooters...including me.


If you bolted an M1A and an FAL down to mechanical rests, the M1A would likely be A LITTLE more accurate.

But, who's gonna be shooting from a mechanical rest when it counts?


There is such a thing a PRACTICAL reliability and PRACTICAL accuracy.


I find that BOTH rifles are essentially equal in terms of PRACTICAL use.





"Can't we all just get along?"

-- Rodney King :cool:

Ben Rogers
April 11, 2008, 18:56
I should clarify that much of my attitudes about M1A/M14 is colored by my closer friendship with an ex-Marine sniper.

In his mind, the only M1A/M14 worthy of the name is from a specific place, made entirely of forged steel and tweaked to specific performance. He expects 2" groups at 500 meters to be average accuracy (in other words, "expected of all decent firearms") and 2" groups at 800 - 1000 meters to be "above standard".

Thus, he scoffs at me when I tell him that I'm happy with 2" groups at 100 meters.

farmer-dave
April 11, 2008, 19:32
As for cost of the m1a, I bought my polytech for 450 and my brother bought a springfield supermatch for 1600 back before the awb. I've just ordered my first dsa stg and it will cost me around 1100, of course 12 + years have passed.

Vityaz
April 11, 2008, 19:39
Serious question here...

What kind of condition are the cheap FAL mags in?

Ben Rogers
April 11, 2008, 19:45
I was quoted brand new, Austrian mags with witness holes (so you can see how many rounds are left in them--you may know that, I didn't! :D) for $9.50 if you buy more than ten and $10 if you buy under ten.

That quote came from someone on this forum, by the way.

If you want, you can also get premium, Israeli, brand new mags for $12.

And, if you get on on a bulk buy like they had in February on here, they were going for $6.50.

And these are good, solid, quality mags. Not knock offs. (Basically, mags are so cheap for the FAL that there's no market in making knock-offs like there are with the M14 which has a basic, decent mag price as about $35 for "bargain basement" USGI quality.)

"Cheap" FAL mags are $4 and are rusty, dented, etc. Oh, they still work! They just look ugly. :)

As for the prices for FALs, there are some on Gunbroker for the $700 range (Imbels) and an Imbel in the Marketplace for $950. You can get FrankenFALs (cobbled together from various parts) in the $500 - $600 range.

Vityaz
April 11, 2008, 19:54
Not trying to hijack this thread or anything, but what kind of accuracy are the higher priced DSA rifles capable of?

panzer
April 11, 2008, 20:13
My experiences are as follows, and are mine alone. So many variables.....

My ARS built STG58 was made on a DSA type 1 with a new ( remember 2001?) Styer kit. seriously, not even wear marks on the hammer. It would beat my Match prepped M1A until it got hot, then it tends to string a little. My M1A was good to me. I could score In the 470's at the full course any day with ball ammo I got from the AF... I do like the M1A sights better, but you had to really take the time to set them to get the best out of them. I am a huge fan of sling/position shooting, so its better in that regard. Neither have ever had a malfunction that was not my fault. ( hand in the way on the M1, ran the gas too low on the STG.) FAL is easier to maintain, clean and modify. M14 can be made accurate beyond most semi's but it does cost alot. FAL you can get lucky, or spend alot as well. Ergonomics the FAL is only bested by MAYBE an AR... Maybe. depends on your hand size. I am at the right size that either one is just as good or bad as the other. HK's give me fits though. I do not posses Gorilla hands. I have had 3 AR's in my life, got rid of all but one, and it never gets fired. Ever. SO FAL gets back on top again. I sold my M1A years ago in the divorce nightmare, many of you guys may remember me going on a selling spree. I was able to buy my STG back, thank God, and I had a chance at the M1a, but Honestly, didn't pursue it very hard. The Love was just not there. I go to the range weekly with a friend that has an EBR type M1a and 2 parts kits waiting on receivers, he loves the M1a. Last week, the STG and a Rhodie came out. 500 yd man size hits all day with either... the M1's total? 0 FAL? too many to count. The last 2 FALS I bought cost less than $700 combined. Each one runs and is an ugly whore of a rifle, but they run, and run and run and have some history. After the first mag from the Rhodie, My M1A die hard buddie said he needed to build one of these....

I had an M1A longer than an FAL, shot alot with both, but here I am, right now, with enough funds to get just about anything I want and the safe count is as follows.... M1A=0 FAL=7
Even if an M1a fell into my lap for $500 right now, I would only get it to trade it for a Izzy LB, as its the only type I like I do not have.

So thats just my story. Either are wonderful, if not Beautiful rifles. Anyone with a $3500 + M1A that doubts the $400 Rhodie has to brag and poke fun to convince himself he did the right thing.. Because the FAL is in his mind truly more appealing, but he dare not speak it..... Because then it becomes real ;)

panzer
April 11, 2008, 20:17
Originally posted by Vityaz
Not trying to hijack this thread or anything, but what kind of accuracy are the higher priced DSA rifles capable of?

That can go anywhere and it really does depend on the rifle/ammo. My STG from above with GA Arms 165 Nosler BT was a sub moa rifle. like 3/4 MOA, iron sighted. A scope would help it I am sure. . And its very hard to repeat that due to sight limitations and my abilities. Very Hard. with SA it was a 2 moa. LC and just about everything else was 2.5 MOA or so. That old ammo man tarnished mixed ball would keep 5 inches for a mag at 100 as well. I am not as good as I used to be, but it sure the hell is ;)

shlomo
April 11, 2008, 20:19
Originally posted by Ben Rogers


In his mind, the only M1A/M14 worthy of the name is from a specific place, made entirely of forged steel and tweaked to specific performance. He expects 2" groups at 500 meters to be average accuracy (in other words, "expected of all decent firearms") and 2" groups at 800 - 1000 meters to be "above standard".

Just out curiosity, Ben, have you ever been there when this guy shot a 2" group of more than two or three shots at 800 to 1,000 yards? I mean, witnessed it personally? Quarter-minute accuracy is somewhat above national record level with ANY kind of service rifle.

Heck, in 2006, a guy made a benchrest national record of just under 8" for ten shots at 1000 yards. This, mind you, was with a bench gun with a $2000 moonscope on it, and not with an autoloading service rifle.

Not sayin' it ain't so-- just askin if you've ever actually seen him do it.

dabullfrog
April 11, 2008, 20:29
Originally posted by shlomo


Just out curiosity, Ben, have you ever been there when this guy shot a 2" group of more than two or three shots at 800 to 1,000 yards? I mean, witnessed it personally? Quarter-minute accuracy is somewhat above national record level with ANY kind of service rifle.

Heck, in 2006, a guy made a benchrest national record of just under 8" for ten shots at 1000 yards. This, mind you, was with a bench gun with a $2000 moonscope on it, and not with an autoloading service rifle.

Not sayin' it ain't so-- just askin if you've ever actually seen him do it.

I was thinking the same thing Shlomo. I'm calling bull on this one.

This kind of claim gets hashed out regularly over on the snipers hide and is beaten down as bull by guys who really do shoot on 2 way ranges at long distance.

panzer
April 11, 2008, 20:37
Me too. When I was on the 2 way range, I never grouped the M60. Tracer burnout was a good indicator of about 900 yds. Now I have a 240H, and I am sure it will not put a 2 inch 3 round group at 800 yds, but I bet 3 of the 200 will be closer... ;)

Ben Rogers
April 11, 2008, 20:48
We have very different ideas of "acceptable accuracy". He scoffs at my acceptance of "inferior" weapons and scopes. He doesn't think that a scope under $1000 is "worth the money".

shlomo
April 11, 2008, 21:20
Okay, Ben, that's what I wanted to know. I'm willing to take your word for it, but you are right about the fact that he should compete. Of course, neither service rifle nor NRA highpower will allow the scope, but still--regardess of what you can see, that is remarkable intrinisc accuracy for a gas gun.

If you were impressed, you should be. That is world-class accuracy.

EricCartmanR1
April 11, 2008, 21:27
I don't want to be a hater, and I know there are some amazing shooters out there, but to me this is highly unlikely, especially for an M14 platform gun. Even a precision bolt gun I would have a hard time believing this.

Post pics or something. Hell let me meet the guy so I can shake his hand.

JohnnyReb
April 11, 2008, 22:47
You guys have all seen my pretty pictures. I like both but I shoot much better with a pistol grip. My FAL to M14 ratio will soon be down to 6:3. OMFG !!! :eek:

IanMor
April 11, 2008, 23:54
Had M1As, Competed with them, they were a PITA. Down the road with them. I might get a service grade LRB arms someday because they are forged and machined. As a stock service rifle I think they are a fine rifle.

I humbly, but firmly believe the FAL is hands down the finer rifle. If you don't like the sifhts, there are ways to fix that. I see someone is building a lower that takes AR A2 style rear sights. Pretty cool. For a fairly ingenious individual, there is quite a bit that can be done with the front sight too. PLENTY of after market gear-queer bait to hook you in to spend your money on.

Rifle for rifle, in brand new service condition, tough call, but make mine a FAL please.

Vityaz
April 12, 2008, 00:21
Ben, not trying to call you a liar, but the world record group for 1000 yards is about 1.75" if I remember right.
That was with a benchrest rifle.

I really don't see how an M14/M1A can be that accurate.

Andrewsky
April 12, 2008, 00:39
Yes, an M1A can't be that accurate.

And all my earlier kidding aside, both rifles have their advantages and disadvantages.

You're not going to be "screwed" in "shtf" if you have a FAL and not an M14 or an M14 and not a FAL.

On an unrelated note, I think the M14 shines in the traditional main battle rifle role (iron sights, light barrel). My M1A Standard weighs around 9 pounds unloaded. I'm not so sure I'd like a 15 pound (loaded) National Match M1A with a scope.

brunop
April 12, 2008, 02:35
Originally posted by Vityaz
Not trying to hijack this thread or anything, but what kind of accuracy are the higher priced DSA rifles capable of?

I've built rifles, shot with board members, and posted targets of FALs that shoot better than 1.5 MOA off the bench.

My only DSA is a para carbine tac (rail front end), and it shoots 1.5 with good ammo.

Show me the guy and the FAL that is shooting 1 MOA or better, and I'll show you someone that is fortunate, as well as good.

panzer
April 12, 2008, 06:16
I am going to say I'm fortunate... ;) I only used to be good....( lets go with decent, good might be excessive) not so much now :( but that was with only one load. I was very fortunate to have had that experience. And it was fired off the magazine.

Also FWIW, the FGMM was worse in my old M1A than The GA Arms 165 Noslers. And only slightly better than ball. The moral of the story is every rifle has a favorite, you just have to find it.

Oswald2001
April 12, 2008, 09:04
2" at 500+ yards is BS.

If you are looking for ultimate precision...use a bolt gun.

IanMor
April 12, 2008, 09:58
I'm glad you all are having so much fun calling the guy a liar, but it makes you look like persistent assholes. We all have seen some phenominal shots. We all have made some phenominal shots. Me, 1500 yards with a Leoupold MK IV scoped M1A into a mail box, a woodchuck with iron sights at 900 yards with an '03 Springfield. Am I lying? I'm sure there will be no shortage of chumps that will tell me I am.

Here's the deal, YOU weren't there. YOU dont know his buddy. There are world class shooters all over the place that for whatever reason wont compete. Where I come from 2 inches at 500 yards isn't that uncommon. We hunt woodchucks out here. My old shooting buddy could call his shots on woodchucks to 700 yards all day long. WITH ANY RIFLE HE WAS USING, auto or bolt.

So, lets have a little civility. If the guy is spinning yarns, let him, it really does no harm. However, constantly calling into question his honor is not harmless. Again, you were not there.

Thanks for hearing me out, have a great day

Vityaz
April 12, 2008, 12:35
Originally posted by IanMor
I'm glad you all are having so much fun calling the guy a liar, but it makes you look like persistent assholes. We all have seen some phenominal shots. We all have made some phenominal shots. Me, 1500 yards with a Leoupold MK IV scoped M1A into a mail box, a woodchuck with iron sights at 900 yards with an '03 Springfield. Am I lying? I'm sure there will be no shortage of chumps that will tell me I am.

Here's the deal, YOU weren't there. YOU dont know his buddy. There are world class shooters all over the place that for whatever reason wont compete. Where I come from 2 inches at 500 yards isn't that uncommon. We hunt woodchucks out here. My old shooting buddy could call his shots on woodchucks to 700 yards all day long. WITH ANY RIFLE HE WAS USING, auto or bolt.

So, lets have a little civility. If the guy is spinning yarns, let him, it really does no harm. However, constantly calling into question his honor is not harmless. Again, you were not there.

Thanks for hearing me out, have a great day
I'm not calling him a liar.
To my knowledge there's not an M14 type rifle out there that can outshoot most benchrest rifles.
2-3" groups is a little strange, considering he shot the same size groups at 800 yards that he did at 500.

I will concede to you that I was not there, but it does sound more than a little unlikely to me.

jbrooks
April 12, 2008, 13:18
Originally posted by IanMor
My old shooting buddy could call his shots on woodchucks to 700 yards all day long. WITH ANY RIFLE HE WAS USING, auto or bolt.


No doubt. "Walking" in rounds, like artillery fire, is a technique. But doping the wind and mirage, at unknown distances, in a real situation, where the first round has to count, is a different story. This is the realm of the military Sniper, and they use neither the FAL nor the M14. I'm talking sniper, NOT DMR.

All of us have made those "good shots" occasionally. But Consistently placing 5 shots into a 2" hole at 500 yards from the get-go is another story. I can get 2 shots to go into the same hole sometimes. But Consistency is important, and more than just 3 or 4 shot groups is the key.

But this is digressing a little. The M14 and FAL are Battle Rifles, not match rifles. iIn the role of a Battle Rifle, you want to put a human target down at some distance with the First Shot", not walk them in like we can on some clueless woodchuck.

So practically speaking, both the FAL and M14 are in the same ballpark as far as accuracy goes. If you want to punch holes in papaer, get a match bolt rifle.

JWB

wolfsburgbob
April 12, 2008, 15:08
Originally posted by Oswald2001
2" at 500+ yards is BS.

If you are looking for ultimate precision...use a bolt gun.

Oswald2001,

After your inflamitory statements about a respected member of the Firearms Industry and your tearse rebuttals given to the good moderators on The AK Files, (you know the ones that almost lead to your being "removed" from that board), I respectfully submit that you take a more gentle and respectful approach here on "The Mother Board".

It is not nice to call "BS", when you may be wrong, and besides that, you are leaving a trail.

In late 2006,..on Gunco.net you admit,..."I am NOT a builder....."

http://www.gunco.net/forums/377225-post67.html

Then you attack Mark Graham's manufacturing expertise?.....

http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showpost.php?p=265563&postcount=351

Not good.

IanMor
April 12, 2008, 16:24
Thank you Wolfsburgbob. A little civility is all I really was asking for. It is bad form to assault a person's credibility and honor on something so trivial as a story he's telling. If it is about business and you have proof of falsehoods, by all means, let us know.

I can believe the guy's story. I have known some down right spooky people, and I have made some great shots (speaking only about the ones that don't require artillery techniques, of course). This world is a strange place. No need going and hurting feelings without need to.

wolfsburgbob
April 12, 2008, 16:58
Yes.

Being near and having been to Camp Perry many times, I know that "spookiness" is common. If someone told me they've shot 2" at 600 yards, I'd say nothing.

Some NM shooters are so damned good I wouldn't even mention that I have SHOT a Service Rifle, when in their presence.

Serious men. Serious abilities.

Ssarge
April 12, 2008, 17:47
Hell, I shot 3, 3 round zero groups at 1200 meters that measured no more than 2.5" across. And this was with a 105mm tank gun using target practice sabot, not as accurate as service ammo in old training tanks at Ft. Knox.
I dropped HEP-T rounds through the loaders hatch of M47 tank target hulks at 1700+ meters with no problem out of an M60A3 in Germany. Again, knowing what I was doing and a good tight zero.
Same thing can be correlated to a rifle. Amazing shot's can be done by people that know the rifle inside out over people that just sling rounds down range. Some people have a "feel" for the rifle or tank or whatever as well and can wring the maximum performance out of it.

sjm
April 12, 2008, 18:48
I have shot both the M14 and L1A1 on pigs and donkeys here in Australia used by the military in US and Australia and I would say the M14 is more accurate at longer ranges than the L1A1 so if you want a long range rifle go the M14 but if you want a battle rifle with acceptable groupings go the FAL/L1A1,

I have not shot a M1A or the US kit FN's only as issued M14 and L1A1

Just get both!

sjm
:fal:

Heat
April 12, 2008, 20:22
I certainly appreciate all the feedback on this thread, didnt want to start a pissing contest and I'm glad to see that its been more informative than confrontational...I am on my 2nd FAL now, Entreprise Arms STG 58..I love the little bastard..easy to clean, operate, dissasemble and I have it stocked with enough mags and ammo to 'make a difference'--I have always wanted the M1A and will buy one when finance's allow, like a man once said 'You cant have enough .308's'--only the absence of 'Mr. Green' slows me down--I had a DSA scope mount on it for awhile but found that this rifle is more comfortable for me to use with open sights. I leave the scope to the bolt gun..for those FAR out there shots! Aside for a few ejection problems in the begining (due to gas problems, the rifles, not mine) it shoots/digest all the ammo I feed it (when I reload I use the RCBS Small base sizer)
I think the thing I like about this rifle and the M1A are the big, robust chunks of steel which are the receivers..nothing wimpy about either
I did notice someone mentioned that the M1A receiver is supposed to last 400k rounds? and that the FAL is built for around 80k..I doubt I'll ever reach either figure, no matter how much I reload--or even if the bottom falls out of the MILSURP prices--but both figure seem reassuring
Speaking of Milsurp, has any more info come out about Mexican .308 ever coming on the market as I understand they are switching to the .223 as their main battle rifle? I would gladly sample some of their ammo!

Andrewsky
April 12, 2008, 20:34
Originally posted by Heat

Speaking of Milsurp, has any more info come out about Mexican .308 ever coming on the market as I understand they are switching to the .223 as their main battle rifle? I would gladly sample some of their ammo!

I don't know, but I imagine it would be very cheap to ship it over the border.

Vityaz
April 12, 2008, 20:41
Originally posted by Andrewsky


I don't know, but I imagine it would be very cheap to ship it over the border.
We have a border with Mexico?
As in a real border?

Anyways, on the original topic...
Either one works.
I just prefer my M1A. :shades:

moses
April 13, 2008, 01:01
What are the most common mods done to an M1A to make it more accurate?

I have both and respect both but I would choose the FAL first, but would feel safe with my M1A too, just would say a little prayer that the M1A extractor wouldn't fly off at an inopportune moment.

Ben Rogers
April 13, 2008, 01:21
My ex-Marine friend likes the M1A for more than just accuracy. I was out with him a lot today and we talked about other reasons.

Basically, if SHTF it's highly unlikely that we'll be invaded by a country that uses FALs. More than likely, it will be a breakdown of civilization that will involve more USGI materials available. (i.e. the Humvees won't have spare FAL mags in them, but they might have spare M14 mags)

Of course, I point out that the AR15 is the better choice in that situation, but he scoffs at me for that point. ;)

moses
April 13, 2008, 05:58
But if ya bought 200 FAL mags when they were $3 per you won't have to scrounge in Humvee's for spare mags

Oswald2001
April 13, 2008, 08:56
Dupe

Oswald2001
April 13, 2008, 08:57
The only SHTF situation in which I have been personally involved was the LA riots.

2 blocks from where I lived there was a couple hundred ghetto dwelling scum bags looting and burning stores.

And yes, some of them were armed.



There was NO possibility of 'resupply' from stores, Humvees or anything else.

IF Humvees were around, there weren't given ANYTHING to civilians...except threatening looks.

AND the guys in Humvees were carrying M-16's.



When the SHTF, you will only have what you have ALREADY prepared ahead of time.

It won't matter if you have an FAL, M1A, 30 30, .243, 32ACP, .380, 7mm 08 or anything else.



When the SHTF,....when push REALLY comes to shove...your 'friends' and 'neighbors' are as likely to shoot you as anyone else.

Don't count on any help from anyone.


The only mag or ammo problem you will have is the mags and ammo you didn't put away BEFORE the need arose.


Therefore, FAL or M1A makes no difference in regards to mags or ammo.

USMCGrunt
April 13, 2008, 08:57
Ben, just a quick FYI here, there are "prior Mairnes" and "former Marines" but no "ex-Marines" outside of Lee Harvey Oswald and Senator Murtha! We won't claim either one of those SOBs.
As far as the M-14/FAL debate goes, just get both, I did and I'm not getting rid of either type. The FALs have been cheaper (built back when cheap parts kits were available), easier to work with and with some, pretty ergonomic. The selector lever on the inch rifles were fine but the levers on the metric rifles were harder to use. The M-14s were a lot more expensive (hence my 4:7 M-14/FAL ratio) and magazines will never be as cheap as FAL mags. However, they have been more accurate than the FAL with better sights and triggers to make the job easier. I still want to make a DMR out of a FAL to see if I can get it to match the performance of my M-14 based DMR but with the 3/4 MOA groups my M-14DMR will shoot, it's going to be a tough road for the FAL to try to match so this challenge should be a fun one. :)
Really, you aren't going to go wrong with either design and it all comes down to a matter of what do you really prefer. Like better sights and triggers with an edge in accuracy, you might want to look closer at the M14. Want a simpler design where a pistol grip is standard or maybe you're on a budget, especially when it comes to magazines then you might want to look a little closer at the FAL. In either case, both are uber-reliable and will get the job done. Really, don't you owe it to youself to own both of them? :]

kalliste
April 13, 2008, 09:35
I've used both and I love them both.

The one real advantage the M14 has over the FAL, IMHO, is if you're tied up in a sling the M14 is much easier to work. Plus, unless you set the FAL up for the shooting sling, sling pressure will play hell with your zero.

If you don't plan on big use of the shooting sling then whichever is most comfortable for you.

The most comfortable, for me, rifle I ever fired was an Artillerie Inrichtingen AR10. I don't know why, it just seemed to be perfect for me (not so with the M16). I really disliked the G3, in contrast, just because it wasn't comfortable for me.

Come the Zombie Apocalypse I'd want an L1A1 because it's what I've used the most... unless I was #1 on the GPMG that is...

Chief351
April 13, 2008, 10:35
Originally posted by kalliste
I've used both and I love them both.

The one real advantage the M14 has over the FAL, IMHO, is if you're tied up in a sling the M14 is much easier to work. Plus, unless you set the FAL up for the shooting sling, sling pressure will play hell with your zero.

If you don't plan on big use of the shooting sling then whichever is most comfortable for you.

The most comfortable, for me, rifle I ever fired was an Artillerie Inrichtingen AR10. I don't know why, it just seemed to be perfect for me (not so with the M16). I really disliked the G3, in contrast, just because it wasn't comfortable for me.

Come the Zombie Apocalypse I'd want an L1A1 because it's what I've used the most... unless I was #1 on the GPMG that is...

I agree with a lot of this post.

I don't have an M1A, but I do have a couple of M1's. I also have a FAL that I built back in 1999 - 2000 that I love dearly - there's no substitute for assembling a rifle from a pile of mis-matched parts and getting it running!

My take is this:

The FAL has a better gas system in terms of simplicity, ease of disassembly and cleaning, and adjustablity. The M1 (Don't really know about the M1A for sure.) has a more "powerful", i.e. enough gas to make it work all the time, gas system, but is hampered by it's long and crooked op rod.

The chief ergonomic problem with the FAL is the charging handle being on the left side. Obviously meant to be operated from a bipod. Sucks in any sling-supported position.

The M1 and M1A has sights that are absolutely the best set of irons ever put on any rifle, bar none.

The M1 and M1A are worlds better when shot from sling-supported positions.

The M1 and M1A have really great triggers, right out of the box.

These last three advantages are, in my opinion, a result of the unique American heritage of marksmanship. Look at WWII training manuals and firearms operations manuals. The typical European soldier was taught to not mess with his sights - that was an armorer's responsibility - and the sling was purely intended to be a carrying strap. The U.S. trooper was taught how to zero his M1, and to use a hasty sling in standing, and a loop sling in sitting, kneeling, and prone. (Sadly, this has gone out of style in the U.S. Army, although the Marine Corps is still teaching it right.)

So, if I were to design a perfect rifle, I'd tweak the FAL design (terrific field stripping) with a rotating bolt (Maybe. This gives up the easy re-barreling during rebuilds and makes it a machine-shop operation.), a free-float handguard system that allows use of sling-supported positions, move the charging handle to the right side of the receiver, and graft on M1 sights.

Ben Rogers
April 13, 2008, 12:34
Originally posted by USMCGrunt
Ben, just a quick FYI here, there are "prior Mairnes" and "former Marines" but no "ex-Marines" outside of Lee Harvey Oswald and Senator Murtha! We won't claim either one of those SOBs.

Yeah. I apologize. He's a "Marine who is no longer on the active roles." :)

I picked up some genuine Marine boots the other day and he was strongly adamant that I needed to scrape off the Marine Corp emblem on them. As much as he likes me and as good a friend as I am, I have not "earned the right to wear the emblem." It was fair. I scraped it off. :)

jbrooks
April 13, 2008, 14:50
Originally posted by Ben Rogers


I picked up some genuine Marine boots the other day and he was strongly adamant that I needed to scrape off the Marine Corp emblem on them. As much as he likes me and as good a friend as I am, I have not "earned the right to wear the emblem." It was fair. I scraped it off. :)
HA!!

Yea, I was at Marine Corps Station Miramar (San Diego) ("Used to be "Miramar Naval Air Station") a couple years ago, and saw those cool Gyrene boots at the Clothing Sales Store. (I'm retired USAF, so I don't know all the Gyrene lingo). I was going to buy a pair, but I thought, No, I really can't say I was a Marine after all, so I passed. Turns out he Army now has basically the same boot without the logo, so I picked up a pair of those.

For all the friendly inter-service bickering that goes on, we all have a deep abiding respect for the Marines, whether we say it or not. We all understand they are on the pointy end of the spear.

Some of them even shoot pretty well.... :bigangel:

JWB

W.E.G.
April 13, 2008, 15:52
Originally posted by wolfsburgbob
Yes.

Being near and having been to Camp Perry many times, I know that "spookiness" is common. If someone told me they've shot 2" at 600 yards, I'd say nothing.

Some NM shooters are so damned good I wouldn't even mention that I have SHOT a Service Rifle, when in their presence.

Serious men. Serious abilities.

I was standing in the butts today, lecturing a kid about the perils of using the one-inch spotter for marking targets when shooters were shooting slow-fire prone at 200 yards. I explained how the bullet will make the target practically explode when the spindle is struck with a bullet. I was extolling the virtue of using golf tees for spotters during that course of fire.

The lad looked at me with an obvious look of doubt. The older guy next to me then began to talk about how hard it is to see golf tees at 200 yards through a spotting scope.

So, I'm thinking "WTF" ...I'll just shut up let what happens happen. About 10 minutes later, KA-POW!!!... the one-inch spotter spindle exploded on Mr. "I don't like golf tees'" target. Ripped the living shit out of the target. I winked at the kid, and raised an eybrow. He just stood there with the OMFG look.

Eventually Mr. No-Tees got his target fixed, and had to use golf tees to mark the target, 'cause his one-inch spotter was blown all to hell. Shooter shoots a shot in the seven-ring. The he shoots a ten. Then Mr. No Tees says, "He'll probably shoot the golf tee now."

And that is exactly what happened.

Yeah, somebody who can hit a golf tee twice in a row with iron sights at 200 yards can probably shoot a two-inch group at 500 or 600 yards... except when he's shooting sevens.

Ben Rogers
April 13, 2008, 17:07
In my group of guys who are planning to stick together during SHTF situations, the other two have M14s and I have a FAL. They'll be able to exchange mags and parts, I'll be the only one with a FAL. If the situation deteriorates further, then they may be more likely to find parts and mags. I will probably not be able to find any extras (unless I happen upon another Filer...).

My point with him, however, is that if the situation devolves that far, the AR-15 is a better candidate because ammo, parts and mags will be much more likely to be available.

However, I'm still setting up with 25 mags (loaded) for each rifle plus a few thousand loose rounds.

For the FAL, I'll probably go with 50 mags.

Temp
April 13, 2008, 17:15
Originally posted by W.E.G.


I was standing in the butts today, lecturing a kid about the perils of using the one-inch spotter for marking targets when shooters were shooting slow-fire prone at 200 yards. I explained how the bullet will make the target practically explode when the spindle is struck with a bullet. I was extolling the virtue of using golf tees for spotters during that course of fire.

The lad looked at me with an obvious look of doubt. The older guy next to me then began to talk about how hard it is to see golf tees at 200 yards through a spotting scope.

So, I'm thinking "WTF" ...I'll just shut up let what happens happen. About 10 minutes later, KA-POW!!!... the one-inch spotter spindle exploded on Mr. "I don't like golf tees'" target. Ripped the living shit out of the target. I winked at the kid, and raised an eybrow. He just stood there with the OMFG look.

Eventually Mr. No-Tees got his target fixed, and had to use golf tees to mark the target, 'cause his one-inch spotter was blown all to hell. Shooter shoots a shot in the seven-ring. The he shoots a ten. Then Mr. No Tees says, "He'll probably shoot the golf tee now."

And that is exactly what happened.

Yeah, somebody who can hit a golf tee twice in a row with iron sights at 200 yards can probably shoot a two-inch group at 500 or 600 yards... except when he's shooting sevens.

People who engage in long distance shooting soon develop a different criteria concering what constitutes impressive accuracy.

I used to be a "fair to middlin" shot with a 10" TC Contender back when I played the silhouette game,.. but there was a few guys I competed against who were a bit unbelievable.

One of them was a past national IHMSA champion in the unlimited class.

Using a custom Remington HP-100 handrifle in 7mm International,.. (open sights, 14" barrel) I saw him go 5 for 5 on the rimfire sized targets at 150 meters and 4 for 5 at 200.

The rimfire sized targets are roughly 3.5 inches square.

jbrooks
April 13, 2008, 23:22
Oh, yes, I forget...

One more thing abouot the M14... I forgot to include in the Bolt Parts Count above: That pesky little bolt roller.

The m1 garand doesn't have the bolt roller, the M14 does. That little booger can deform/break/dismount at an inopportune time, also. It needs special tools for replacement. Usually not a problem, but it is another moving part.:(

JWB

JohnnyReb
April 14, 2008, 19:44
Originally posted by moses
What are the most common mods done to an M1A to make it more accurate?

I have both and respect both but I would choose the FAL first, but would feel safe with my M1A too, just would say a little prayer that the M1A extractor wouldn't fly off at an inopportune moment.

1. Unitize and shim the gas cylinder with the front band.

2. Ream the flash hider.

3. NM op rod guide.

4. NM sights.

Edited for spelling because I'm not running on all 5 cylingers.

hagar
April 14, 2008, 20:34
This was mine, second sitting sighting shot at 200 yards, and I called it. Why? Because the guy who was pulling for me, did it to me 3 times in offhand. He is one of those unreal shooters, shot a 199/200 standing. Nerves got him, the last shot was a 9! He destroyed the spotter on me 3 times, and I had to change out the whole target twice. I promised him I was going to pay him back. This blew a big gaping hole through the X-ring in the target!:tongue:

I'm not any great shakes as a shooter, but I have shot with some who can lay claim to that.

http://img701.mytextgraphics.com/photolava/2008/04/15/dsc00698-ff1sqkrc.jpeg

JohnnyReb
April 14, 2008, 21:30
Originally posted by kalliste


WTF bro?

That picture is like flaming horror castration next to nipple orgasm supreme!

cart
April 14, 2008, 22:35
hey, who's got the new izzy and steyr mags for sale previously mentioned in this thread?

Cava3r4
April 14, 2008, 23:07
if you are going to shoot an over the course nra match.... use the m1a
if you are going into combat at less then 400 yards ..... use the FAL
thats my take on it.
HTH
Bob

wolfsburgbob
April 15, 2008, 05:44
M-14s (M-1A), FAL, M-14s (M-1A), FAL, M-14s (M-1A), FAL, M-14s (M-1A), FAL, M-14s (M-1A), FAL, M-14s (M-1A), FAL, M-14s (M-1A), FAL, M-14s (M-1A), FAL.

Get both.

:wink:

PS,..Just stay the F away from those goofy HK/CETME pieces of junk.

wolfsburgbob
April 15, 2008, 05:49
Originally posted by JohnnyReb


WTF bro?

That picture is like flaming horror castration next to nipple orgasm supreme!

JR,...I agree.

A pair of Queens. (Check the smile,...I think Hillary "likes it", when the LIGHTS are ON!)

The Queen Lesbian and self proclaimed "New" Annie Oakley,... with Luke's mommy, Queen Padme' Amadala

http://www.zombietime.com/really_truly_hillary_gallery/Hillary62.jpg

http://www.popstarsplus.com/images/NataliePortmanPicture.jpg

EricCartmanR1
April 15, 2008, 11:29
Lets bump this thread up.

Pat Rogers on the M14:

I carried an M14 in combat, and i went Distinguished and High Master with an M14. It required 4 seperate rifles to ensure that i had one that would work.
These guns are more high maintenance then a JAP.Skim bedding at least once per season. Complete rebuild after the season. Op Rods breaking because they feel like it.
Any work done to an M14 is like polishing the proverbial turd.
No matter what you do to it, it is an M14. It was mediocre in the 50's, and is mediocre now.
It has average accuracy for a gun of that era- 4-6moa or better. When tweaked, i have had some that could hold .5 moa for a short period of time.After that.......
All of mine were built by RTE/ PWS- they knew the gun. They worked constantly on the Team guns because they needed it to keep running.
I do not miss them.
Not one f$$$g bit.


:p :D :fal:

kalliste
April 15, 2008, 12:02
Originally posted by JohnnyReb
WTF bro?
http://www.zombietime.com/really_truly_hillary_gallery/Hillary62.jpg
That picture is like flaming horror castration next to nipple orgasm supreme!
Yeah, creepy isn't it? It's a genuine, un-retouched picture.
http://www.zombietime.com/really_truly_hillary_gallery/

But back to the M14 / FAL issue. I only ever used an M14 on a range so I can't comment on its durability. I carried L1A1s around and abused them mightily and they handled it well. The plastic stocks were notably tougher than the wooden tho, the wood buttstocks broke pretty easy when someone took any kind of serious fall with their rifle. Apart from the magazines, which you must take great care of, the problem they seemed to suffer a bit was the gas tube coming loose. If it's your own one and you maintain it properly I don't see that as a problem. Did see a few bolts fall apart (extractors break off and take a bit of bolt with them) so maybe having a spare headspaced bolt wouldn't go amiss.

win308
April 15, 2008, 20:11
I've owned 2 Imbel "kit" built guns on Imbel receivers and one DSA built gun with DSA parts. I've sold all three. The barrels are thin and the hand guards attach about mid way down the barrel. Shot placement depends on how you hold the gun....where you put pressure on the hand guards. Rest the front end on sand bags, the group goes here....pick the gun up off the bench and hold with your hand, the group goes there. Pick the rifle up and shoot off hand, the group moves again. And God forbid if you sling up tight to hold the rifle into your shoulder, cause the group just went left and low. To be fair, a light barreled AR-15 does the same thing....that's why they shoot H-Bars in match competition.

Second, you got that FAL trigger. Very positive....but never can be accused of being 2-stage or a National Match trigger.

Third, no real "charging" handle or op rod handle. If, for any reason, the bolt carrier fails to go fully forward, you can't push the bolt home. When my mags were topped up with full 20 rounds, sometimes the upward magazine spring pressure was enough to place just enough drag on the bolt as it closed....that it didn't close, and thus would not fire. As long as I never put more than 14 or 15 rounds in a mag, the bolt closed every time. But you can't slam the bolt carrier that last quarter inch if it doesn't close.

So, grouping that is never predictable, rough trigger, and not totally reliable with full mags was enough to cure me of owning an FAL. Fortunately, I have 2 heavy match Camp Perry style M-1As left over from the 80s when I shot Hi-Power (all GI parts) and one M-1A from the 90s (also replaced all the cast parts with GI parts) glassed into a light fiberglass GI stock with a heavy Douglas barrel.

Back in the middle 80s, a vendor on commercial row was selling USGI M-14 mags just in from Israel for $4.00 each.....I bought 50 of them, so I have enough to last me awhile. If I had to buy them at todays prices, I don't know if I could afford an M-1A.

Just as a matter of interest, I purchased my 2 heavy M-1As from Glen Nelson. He used to build 20 or so every year for the "Springfield Armory" team to shoot at Perry, then he would sell them after the matches. I got them for $600 each, used, but with only one week's wear and tare.

Gosh I miss the "old days" when the DCM gave away ammo, brass was free to pick up, 168 Match Kings were 11 cents each....and you could afford to buy a good rifle. Maybe Hillary will bring it all back (she used to be a shooter too, I just heard it on the news).

Heat
April 15, 2008, 20:31
" Maybe Hillary will bring it all back (she used to be a shooter too, I just heard it on the news).":uhoh: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I have to agree with the trigger issue with FAL's--the other problems I have not experienced with my FAL---if I do I will simply sell it and buy another CMP Garand with 2-3 cases of ammo and be done with it...as is I have just finished the paperwork for my first CMP service grade Garand and once it is notorized tomorrow it is going in the mail!:bow:

Vityaz
April 15, 2008, 20:43
Did this thread just take a turn in favor of the M1A/M14?!

Heat
April 15, 2008, 20:45
Originally posted by wolfsburgbob


JR,...I agree.

A pair of Queens. (Check the smile,...I think Hillary "likes it", when the LIGHTS are ON!)

The Queen Lesbian and self proclaimed "New" Annie Oakley,... with Luke's mommy, Queen Padme' Amadala

http://www.zombietime.com/really_truly_hillary_gallery/Hillary62.jpg

http://www.popstarsplus.com/images/NataliePortmanPicture.jpg
Padme is 'Nipple-ishish':p

voortrekker
April 15, 2008, 21:18
As an owner of both the FAL and M1A, I would like to comment.

First, both are outstanding MBRs.

For iron sights, I pick the M1A.

Why? The M1A has the better sight adjustment configuration hands down. Importantly, the rear sight is found on the receiver. Whereas the FAL the rear sight is located on the lower receiver counterpart, there is always possibility with the FAL that the upper and lower receiver groups will get loose, thus not remain a constant.

To adjust windage in the FAL you need a screw driver, and with this adjustment, it is simply still a guess.

Not with the M1A. With the M1A, one click will equal 1 MOA everytime for elevation, for windage.

If you are lucky enough to know how to use a sling, the M1A will out shine the FAL.

I have shot both with a sling. Standing, sitting, prone. Each rifle at least a thousand rounds using a sling.

The FAL has it's front sling swivel mount on its barrel. This is bad for accuracy.

Whereas, the M1A has its front sling swivel mounted on the forestock = good, CONSISTENT accuracy.

This is a very good example :

I shot my FAL mounted with an ACOG( brand new barrel, built by ARS) from the bench and from prone. These two postions shot twice one month apart. I used the same ammo.

From the bench at 25 meters I basically had all rounds in the same hole, from prone I almost had the same groups, BUT shooting prone with a tight sling, the FAL shot 2 inches low every time! It's the freaking front sling swivel dang it!

The good news is, both shooting positions were consistent and accurate.

The other thing I noticed willst shooting the FAL with a sling, especially prone, is the hand guards get seriously slippery when your hands start sweating. It then becomes a constant battle with NPOA. Very bad and a terrible waste of ammo.

So, I hit on two points regarding the FAL and M1A, 1) sight system and 2) using a sling

In my mind the M1A wins with respect to these two factors.

Let's carry on to other factors we want in our beloved MBRs.

Reliablity. Yeaaah. That's important.

The FAL and M1A both get great honors here.

In my hands, I would give them equal reliability. They are both serious work horses. Both will serve their owners very, very well in this respect.

Break down and cleaning in the field, they are both pretty easy to accomplish this. Maybe the FAL is a somewhat easier.

Safety, I really like the safety on the FAL, especially if you get the up grade from DSA. Simply, PERFECT! Way better than the M1A. But the M1A safety isn't really terrible. Ha, ha! think about the AK safety, good grief.

Front sights, I like the the NM M1A front sight much more than the FAL. It's thinner = better for iron sights. The FAL front sight is round, the M1A is square = better front sight picture.

Charging handle, FAL on the left, M1A on the right, my thoughts are just learn your rifle and get good with it. Having a charging handle on the left will still work if your a righty. You just gotta practice with it. Plain and simple.

"But what if my rifle is filthy and the round won't chamber?"

Use your brain and keep your rifle clean.

The M1A, unlike the FAL, has the ability of forward assist on the charging handle, if this gives you confidence, all the merrier.

Mag change, the M1A wins, period. Done it with both rifle under time. M1A wins, mega wins. LOTTERY wins. How did I learn this? Appleseed.

So, which is better? The FAL or the M1A?

I can't answer that for YOU.

You cannot go wrong with either. Especially RIGHT NOW in the time that we are both living.

From my personal experience, with both rifles that I absolutley love to shoot.

For iron sights, I go with the M1A.

For optics, I'd go with the FAL, but would prefer a bolt rifle for optics. And I would not use it with a sling.

If I had at mininum about $1700 FRN, I'd buy a M1A with all USGI guts <that's VERY important. Don't go out and buy one of Springfield Armory's new M1As, their parts break, read up, I KNOW.

If you can't afford a good reliable M1A with USGI guts, I would not hesitate to buy a well made FAL.

The fact is, the FAL and the M1A are very, very, very good MBRs.

So long has you do your part to take care of them, they both will make you very happy.

Inas far as 1" groups this and that, forget that crap.

All you need is 4 MOA( 4" at 100 yards), if you can do this, which you can if you want to, you can hit a 20" target at 500 yards all day long with iron sights.

You can do this with the FAL and the M1A.


Good luck!

panzer
April 15, 2008, 22:09
All you need is 4 MOA( 4" at 100 yards), if you can do this, which you can if you want to, you can hit a 20" target at 500 yards all day long with iron sights.

You can do this with the FAL and the M1A

Man makes a good point.... :beer:

ftierson
April 15, 2008, 22:45
Originally posted by Groucho
I have both. I like them both. I shoot them both (but not together). Either one is a good rifle. They do what they were designed to do.

Get one of each. Then get an LAR 8 from Rock River. You can never have too many .308 rifles.

Not a bad idea...

Where do I sign up for one...?

:)

Forrest

hansel
April 17, 2008, 20:45
I have been building M1A's for my HP shooting for many years. Getting the M14 rifle to shoot is an exercise in strict attention to detail. First of all you can't take a rack grade and throw all the NM mods and a bedding job on it and expect it to shoot accurately...

You have to start with a Med or better weight NM barrel, and then hand fit a stock so that it will not cause problems when you bed it. 90% of bedding problems occur before you ever mix the epoxy, during the prep stage.

I personally Use a USGI synthetic stock and heavily modify the forend and fill the selector hole. My match modified Stocks are more rigid than a Super-match stock. Then I use Devcon Plastic steel and bed the Stock utilizing the Coat hanger technique.

I also do ALL the other NM mods on all of my match guns.

Finally, The ONLY way to make a NM prepped rifle shoot to it's potential is to use Match grade ammo in it. I built a 1 MOA rifle and the guy complained that he couldn't get it to shoot better than 2.5 MOA...I had tested it with handloaded 175gr SMK's...He was shooting Surplus Ball ammo that was 2.5 MOA ammo at best.

I would also let you know I can't shoot to the potential of my rifles...but I know of several individuals who can...The groups they get with regular monotony is incredible to say the least...I certainly wouldn't stand 1000 meters away from them and feel safe. One of them was an ARMY sniper and now works for another governmental agency that has need of incredible long range shooters. He owns one of my M1A's that I built up for him and I would hate to have to compete with him...his only shooting is at work and when he hunts...he doesn't brag and certainly won't compete.

BTW...I also Own and treasure and Original FN FAL mod 50.00...I have an aimpoint on it and it is a fantastic MBR.

Hansel

gunplumber
April 17, 2008, 21:30
its a good argument.

WEG - that thing on the end of a .30 cleaning rod is for M1/M14 bolt disassembly - it chambers like a cartridge, and turning the unit with a cleaning rod pops out the extractor and allows bolt to disassemble

I've built "target" FALs that hover around 1 MOA and M1As that can do slightly better. Some FALs, on occasion, with a favorable shooter and good handloads, have occasionally shot around .75 MOA, but not consistently.

I like the WWII M1 standard of extreme spread of 40 rounds. That to me is more important than anyone's best three round group of the day. My friend shot a can out of the air with his .45 Colt, then spent the next hour trying to do it again.

As a $1000-$1200 stand alone gun, I think the FAL is a better battle rifle. But add another $1000 and a scope will make for a more accurate (statistically, not always) M1A than $1000 and a scope on a FAL. The cost is in durability. The same steps used toward accurizing an M1A make it less durable

IanMor
April 17, 2008, 22:25
here it is real simple like;

FAL, exceptionally fine battle rifle.

M14, exceptionally fine battle rifle

FAL, not so much in the match department

M14, exceptionally fine match rifle

M1A, NOT a battle rifle

M1A can be an exceptionally fine match rifle if you get the right one.

It all depends on what you want to do with it.

I can't shoot match anymore. I prefer the FAL head and shoulders above the M1A, but I still love the M1A.

get both, but get this one first :fal:

brunop
April 17, 2008, 23:47
Originally posted by gunplumber

...I've built "target" FALs that hover around 1 MOA ...

:evil, gleeful hand-rubbing:

I can't wait.

Mandaree36
April 18, 2008, 01:32
I always have to laugh when I read the doomsday prepared, but especially those thinking any weapon other than an AR is the way to go.

You think 50 mags and a few thousand rounds will see you through. Let me tell you if it all went to hell the most available round would be the 5.56 - same with mags and parts.

Let us not forget in a true bugout...are you gonna be lugging around several thousand rounds of 308 and fifty mags...

I don't think so...

And yes I have 2 FALS and 3 M1A's.....but I would reach for my AR if I had to shit and get.

That aside buy an AR for SHTF.....buy an FAL or M1A for backup? Curiousity satisfying?....

I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...

IanMor
April 18, 2008, 06:57
Yeah, your right Mandee, those POS .308s wont be any good after society breaks down. I might as well sell those clunkers.

jbrooks
April 18, 2008, 07:37
OK,

I'll even go so far as to dump all those mags and just have a case or 2 of pre-loaded, disposable M1 garand clips and my truck-grade M1. :angel: :angel:

No need to baby those valuable mags. Face it, the Mags are what makes the modern rifles tick. They are the most important component, period. At some point, even with a stash of loaded mags, yer gonna run out. Those loaded en blocs are always there.

JWB

wolfsburgbob
April 18, 2008, 08:39
Originally posted by Mandaree36


SMACK!........



Good too see you,..."over here".

:wink:

Mandaree36
April 18, 2008, 10:24
Hey bob!!!

I see my plan is working...

Now for part two...

Since we have established those .308's, ammo, mags are worthless....

Simply PM me and I will dispose of them for you.

:biggrin: :biggrin:

But really for shtf....go with a weapon you can "acquire" parts, ammo and mags for.

Using shtf as a scenario for which rifle is better makes no sense.

Sides....we all know the M1A is the top dog!:wink:

wolfsburgbob
April 18, 2008, 10:42
Originally posted by Mandaree36


But really for shtf....go with a weapon you can "acquire" parts, ammo and mags for.



..or maybe a weapon that doesn't need parts,..like,..a Kalishnikov?

Ooooops!

:eek:

FAL GRUNT
April 18, 2008, 14:20
Took the words out of my mouth Bob! :)

.223 AK? :eek: is that allowed?

I have to agree with all those guys that say there are people who are amazingly accurate and they don't compete. My grandfather is 76 and he out shoots me with out even trying.

I did shoot a clay bird, in the air, from a thrower, with a .22LR Winchester Model 74 :) What does that win me?

I need to shoot with some of you guys. The one time I shot 200yds I was happy to get a group. If I get more practice :) i'll probably get better.

-myers

2barearms
April 18, 2008, 19:31
While the BOBs are shooting at Zombies with ARFs I'll be the one at the
roadblock with the 18" Smith Enterprise M14. I love my FALs but a newly
built FAL IMHO is an untested liability. Most of us here don't have a place
where you can truly test your rifle for reliability. The same scenario happens
when you go to a shooting range that requires you to unload your SHTF
Pistol that you carry day in day out, if you can't pull and shoot it you really
don't know jack about your gun. The FAL has a lot of surface in the mag well
and the feed lips on new mags that need to wear in that make the rifle
the wonder that it is. I've heard many here complain about malfuntions and most
were new rifles or like new builds. I've only had a couple M14s that gave me
any grief after being built and in one case it was the edge of the chamber
shaving brass and the other was my fault, and over tightened Gas Cyl Lock.

There's nothing to adjust on an M14 either.

You take what works best for you when the time comes and be prepared.

jbrooks
April 18, 2008, 20:23
I'm sure any New-Built rifle, of any kind, is a possible liability. Nobody should seriously consider a rifle for SHTF or any self-defense unless it has been fired and tested for several hundred rounds.

The civilian M14 clones have their problems, too, as we all know from our membership on M14forum.com.

We'll be manning our roadblock with a Barrett M81A1... :shades: :shades: Luv those fiddycals...

JWB

wolfsburgbob
April 18, 2008, 21:44
Originally posted by jbrooks


We'll be manning our roadblock with a Barrett M81A1... :shades: :shades: Luv those fiddycals...

JWB

If'n your baby gets hungry.... (http://70.84.217.219/cgi-bin/store/agora.cgi/agora.cgi?cart_id=1609347.2917*zj7sY3&product=.50_BMG_AMMUNITION&cart_id=1609347.2917*Eu6XX8)

:wink:

PS,...Very "special" FAL Files member pricing available upon request.

Renegade04
April 25, 2008, 11:38
As a multiple FAL owner (4) and a new M1A owner, I have to say that I like them equally. My initial impression of the M1A was favorable. It shoots very much like my Garand. Very solid and smooth. As a MBR though, I think the FAL is better suited. I do prefer the iron sights of the M1A over the FALs. I would be hard pressed to have one or the other. I say both are warranted.

Loaded M1A
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m8/jamesrea_2006/DSC00448.jpg

L1A1-F1 (PNG) copy
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m8/jamesrea_2006/DSC00456.jpg

G1 (DSA Type 1 receiver)
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m8/jamesrea_2006/DSC00431.jpg

Imbel (Imbel GL receiver)
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m8/jamesrea_2006/DSC00434.jpg

DSA SA58
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m8/jamesrea_2006/025_25.jpg

PTR-91KP
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m8/jamesrea_2006/028_28.jpg

voortrekker
April 29, 2008, 21:17
Originally posted by gunplumber
The same steps used toward accurizing an M1A make it less durable

True, true.





Get out and shoot your rifle people.

Despise the bench with utter fury.

The bench is not your friend.

It will steal your true capacity as a practical U.S. Rifleman.

Shoot all of your rifles.

BUT pick one that you believe in, it doesn't matter whether it's a FAL, M1A, AR-15, SKS or your Grandpa's Winchester 30/30!


Learn how to shoot "your" rifle!



Your goal should be 4" at 100yards. 4 MOA

Your goal should be 1" at 25 meters(33yards)

This be done with iron sights.

If you can do this(you can), this will translate without a doubt to all rounds hitting a 20" target at 500 yards and known sight adjustments.

All of you can accomplish this.

This is the Rifleman's Quarter Mile.

Own it!

Your Grandfather did it with his M1 Garand.

You can too.

Make it happen!

Ben Rogers
April 29, 2008, 22:53
Originally posted by voortrekker
Get out and shoot your rifle people.

Despise the bench with utter fury.

The bench is not your friend.

It will steal your true capacity as a practical U.S. Rifleman.

Shoot all of your rifles.

BUT pick one that you believe in, it doesn't matter whether it's a FAL, M1A, AR-15, SKS or your Grandpa's Winchester 30/30!


Learn how to shoot "your" rifle!



Your goal should be 4" at 100yards. 4 MOA

Your goal should be 1" at 25 meters(33yards)

This be done with iron sights.

If you can do this(you can), this will translate without a doubt to all rounds hitting a 20" target at 500 yards and known sight adjustments.

All of you can accomplish this.

This is the Rifleman's Quarter Mile.

Own it!

Your Grandfather did it with his M1 Garand.

You can too.

Make it happen!

Good advice should always come in bold! :)

Rivitman
April 30, 2008, 12:42
I Own both.

The fal has it's merits for sure, chief being ergonomics. I still prefer the M-1A for no particular reason I can justify. Maybe jus cus I'm an Amer'kin and the heft and substantial feel of the M-1A suit my red meat eating soul a bit better.

Accuracy?
Not a factor. Every firearm I own can outshoot the shooter. I never saw the need to spend money on match grade anything.

There. I just potentially saved you big money with that comment. In the Army I shot expert with a rattletrap M-16, and if I can take down 38 out of 40 popups from 50 to 300 meters with that POS, any standard, rack grade rifel is quite sufficient to my purposes.

If you want to pay fro mere bragging rights, or are legitimatly trying to give yourself an edge punching paper in competition, hey I have no problem with that.

I'd rather buy ammo, or optics, or beer than a hair of MOA.

As to the fal vs M-1a? Buy the one you like. Better yet, one of each. You will be well served wither way.

And if you don't own a garand, get one. You need one, trust me. For shooting fun, it beats the FAL AND the M-1A IMO.

jbrooks
April 30, 2008, 14:32
Originally posted by Rivitman
I
...And if you don't own a garand, get one. You need one, trust me. For shooting fun, it beats the FAL AND the M-1A IMO.

Absolutely!:beer: :beer: :beer:

Finest rifle yet. No arguments there. Ergonomic, handy, powerful, battle tested... it just oozes history. A rifleman with a Garand is indeed an awesome adversary... what more can you want?

JWB

kingfish
May 11, 2008, 21:03
If you want to sit at a bench and shoot great groups, buy an M14 type rifle. If SHTF is your outlook, buy a FAL . Either way, do whatever your gut tells you, you cant make a bad choice.

WarDawg
May 13, 2008, 22:08
I own two ea FALs. An Tony Marshburn built STG 58 on a DC reciever. And a ARS built Izzy clone Imbeal kit on an Imbeal receiver. Both are top notch and nice. I have 4 M14's. SAI ( Loaded model) . An HRA kit on an Armscorp receiver, HRA kit on a Norinco receiver built by SEI , and an Winnie on a LRB receiver. All these rifles are great . But I would rather carry the M14. It's just my preference. WarDawg

EricCartmanR1
May 14, 2008, 22:48
Originally posted by WarDawg
I own two ea FALs. An Tony Marshburn built STG 58 on a DC reciever. And a ARS built Izzy clone Imbeal kit on an Imbeal receiver. Both are top notch and nice. I have 4 M14's. SAI ( Loaded model) . An HRA kit on an Armscorp receiver, HRA kit on a Norinco receiver built by SEI , and an Winnie on a LRB receiver. All these rifles are great . But I would rather carry the M14. It's just my preference. WarDawg

that's good it is because of guys like you is why even Rosanne Barr can find a man.

WarDawg
May 15, 2008, 10:00
Originally posted by EricCartmanR1


that's good it is because of guys like you is why even Rosanne Barr can find a man.

Who is Rosanne Barr ?

EricCartmanR1
May 15, 2008, 10:04
Originally posted by WarDawg


Who is Rosanne Barr ?

Oh I forgot, in certain places like China and Kentucky you guys don't have TV's.

She is this big woman that is not really appealing to most, but appeals to some, that is why she is able to get a man. She is like an M14 in that she is not that all appealing, but will always be able to find somone that loves her.

brunop
May 15, 2008, 11:37
Holy shit, Cartman! Totally uncalled for, but I have to admit I'm laughing.

Is it possible to troll your own thread (?), because I think you just did it.

And Roseanne Barr is not worthy of being compared to an M14/M1A. But you are right - it takes all kinds.

Peace.

Edited to add: I'm glad this thread is still alive. I'm like that dog coming back to its vomit...

WarDawg
May 15, 2008, 17:31
Originally posted by brunop
Holy shit, Cartman! Totally uncalled for, but I have to admit I'm laughing.

Is it possible to troll your own thread (?), because I think you just did it.

And Roseanne Barr is not worthy of being compared to an M14/M1A. But you are right - it takes all kinds.

Peace.

Edited to add: I'm glad this thread is still alive. I'm like that dog coming back to its vomit...


Brunop I don't give these internet champions a second thought. Hey it's the internet. I found out who Roseanne Barr was. Whoooooooooo, that was ugly.......
:biggrin: ;) Fat women need loven too....... :p WarDawg

WarDawg
May 15, 2008, 17:38
Originally posted by hagar
I can tell you from personal experience that I have shot my STG FAL shooting Portuguese surplus against customized NM M1A's shooting match ammo at 500 yards, and the M1A's lost. No, I did not win the match, it was another guy shooting a DSA FAL.

Ask Moses about his experience, he clobbers M1A's on a regular basis in the drop 8 match. I have yet to see an M1A even PLACE in the first 3.

I have both, and I find the M1A finicky, constantly needing tweeking and sight adjustments and tightening. I have not touched the sights on my STG in years, and they are dead on every time I shoot it. Shooting groups is not the only measure.



Hagar , can't argue the results with anything Moses shoots. But we also have to remember that an AK won the last drop eight and the field was full of FAL's and AR's and a M14's and maybe a G3 or two. If you look at the consistence top 8 shooters out of the 40 person pack , you could hand them any style rifle and I don't think the top eight would change. You did an oustanding job in the SNIPER event if I remember correctly with your AR15. Didn't you win it ??? Hope to see you there in JUNE. Cheers WarDawg

WarDawg
May 15, 2008, 17:41
Originally posted by EricCartmanR1


Oh I forgot, in certain places like China and Kentucky you guys don't have TV's.

She is this big woman that is not really appealing to most, but appeals to some, that is why she is able to get a man. She is like an M14 in that she is not that all appealing, but will always be able to find somone that loves her.

Honestly Eric I have very little time for TV. A couple hours a week. And yes it's either the History or Military channels. Sit coms and Reality shows never. But I do like watching the UFC and similar Full contact fight shows.Cheers WarDawg

EricCartmanR1
May 15, 2008, 17:50
Originally posted by WarDawg


Honestly Eric I have very little time for TV. A couple hours a week. And yes it's either the History or Military channels. Sit coms and Reality shows never. But I do like watching the UFC and similar Full contact fight shows.Cheers WarDawg

no worries, I more than make up for you lack of TV with all the TV that I watch... so it all balances out :shades: But seriously, how can anyone not know who Rosanne is?

And thanks for calling me an "Internet Champion" All this time I thought I was an "Internet Loser" seems like I am always playing catchup.

WarDawg
May 15, 2008, 20:18
Originally posted by EricCartmanR1


no worries, I more than make up for you lack of TV with all the TV that I watch... so it all balances out :shades: But seriously, how can anyone not know who Rosanne is?

And thanks for calling me an "Internet Champion" All this time I thought I was an "Internet Loser" seems like I am always playing catchup.



I never watched anything she played in. But when my wife described her to me I remember the baseball game incident with her screwing up the National anthem.

Ya know what they say about arguing over the internet........
:bigangel:

wpsuth
May 14, 2010, 21:09
Allow me, please, to say, again:

H&K 91. Real thing, no clones.

Okay. You guys can have your thread back now. Again.

Kyrottimus
June 08, 2010, 01:16
Originally posted by Mandaree36
But really for shtf....go with a weapon you can "acquire" parts, ammo and mags for.

If the shtf fer realz (yes, I just said "fer realz"), I'd go with the rifle least likely to need any replacement parts.

The AK. simple. effective. multi-role. Nothing really that'll break to replace. No gas rings. No cracking / failing bolt lugs. No bolt cam pin, DI Gas tube or gas port throat erosion, etc.

As I recall there is an original AKM in the Bulgarian factory in which it built with all original parts with over 250k rounds through it (and counting). Yes, the bore is shot out smooth at that point but it keeps tickin' like a swiss watch.

just my $.02

The rest of the EBR's listed are good and fill their roles and uses well to each suited by their owners. However, if I could only have one weapon in a situation with a lot of unknowns (such as a major disastor / SHTF uber-mode), I'd grab that mix of stamped and forged shootin' iron so fast it'd make your head spin and projectile vomit pea soup.

:biggrin:

lowprone
July 18, 2011, 23:02
I know this is The FAL Forums but if you had to pick only one semi automatic
battle rifle that would have to preform all your firearms needs what would
you pick, a FAL any mfg , or a M1A any mfg, and why?
I mean really did you ever use either one in some country's military and run
to failure? Which has best intrinsic accuracy, ergonomics, gas system
dependability, balance, which one can be used and abused and keep running?

Topbanana
July 18, 2011, 23:26
I would choose a Prussian Needle Gun...

Dude, seriously.

metalreptile
July 19, 2011, 04:25
Just try both, see which you like best, buy which ever one that is. Apples & oranges. Six one way, half a dozen the other.
In other words, here we go again...:rolleyes:

2barearms
July 19, 2011, 05:41
The standard M1A (Springfield Armory) built rifles are ok, I would not
bet my life on one of them though. Some here would argue that they
have FALs that will ding the gong at 6oo yds, this of course is probably
not the case with most Century Built rifles. beyond the accuracy/dependability
issue is whether or not you would want to tote either one around for any
length of time, if you're curious drag one out of the ole safe sling her up
and walk the next gun show with it around your neck and let us know how
you did, they are both heavy, some can take it some can't. I'd say the
best FALs are built from OEM parts or Original Armory built rifles. The Custom
built M14's I have are hands down the most accurate iron sight rifles I own.

Your mileage may vary (I also have 9 very nice FALs).

Ctguy
July 19, 2011, 06:49
Its a personal choice... Shoot both and see what fits better for you. For ease of parts availability and low cost the FAL wins hands down...

Andy the Aussie
July 20, 2011, 03:07
Placing your life on the line L1A1....punching holes in targets M14. I owned both (M14 not M1A) and handled literally 1000s of L1A1s. So on that experience I base my decision. Yours may be different.

Wolf1952
July 20, 2011, 03:21
I have both. I picked up my M1A in 2000 and got my StG58 in 2001. Loveum both. I would rather carry the Fal. About two pounds lighter than the M1A. When I want to go and drive tacks I take the M1A, but if just going to play the Fal takes the cake.

STGThndr
July 20, 2011, 04:54
Either would do... I love the M14/M1A. I trust and enjoy the various FALs I have carried. The 14 is making something of a come-back in the mohammadan war.
Personally have my gitty-up go pack with an H&K91.
You might consider an full size AR-15 (20" bbl).
kl

4 brigada
July 20, 2011, 07:04
I have both, and for me they both serve different functions. My custom Super Match M1A I use for High Power Service Match. This rifle by itself is MOA or better, with precision handloaded ammo . My FAL is at best 1.5 MOAmish with any ammo, will function, flawlessly under any conditions. They both have same magazine capacity, FAL wins in ergonomics and reliabilty. As was stated on this in many other forums, use will develop muscle memory, that will in turn make what ever rifle become "Old Hat". It will become more than second nature, better than automatic. That means smooth, smooth is fast and fast is deadly. BTW if the OP is interested my "Old Hat" is a FAL, 21 inch Para.

kev
July 20, 2011, 11:32
I have both. I actually prefer the ergonomics of the M14. I much prefer the sights and trigger of the M14. Also prefer the simplicity(it has half as many parts)and the accuracy of the M14. The FAL is still the better choice.

The FAL is much cheaper(for a good one), as are the mags, and the PARTS! It's also more user friendly, being easier to strip, clean, and repair.

The M14 kills the FAL as a range rifle with a dozen minor advantages that don't add up to much once both are taken into the field. I want a rifle I can affordably maintain, and I like being able to have a good FAL and a backup as opposed to just one M14 for the price.

Colosseum
July 20, 2011, 12:40
Since none of us are ever going to be facing down hordes of enemy soldiers and tanks with our civilian-purchased FALs/M1As, I choose the FAL simply because it's cooler.

W.E.G.
July 20, 2011, 14:08
Originally posted by lowprone on July 19, 2011 00:02
I know this is The FAL Forums but if you had to pick only one semi automatic
battle rifle that would have to preform all your firearms needs what would
you pick, a FAL any mfg , or a M1A any mfg, and why?
I mean really did you ever use either one in some country's military and run
to failure? Which has best intrinsic accuracy, ergonomics, gas system
dependability, balance, which one can be used and abused and keep running?

merged threads

4 brigada
July 20, 2011, 14:42
I would choose a Prussian Needle Gun...

Dude, Really?

The Chassepot '66 is better. No gas venting, higher muzzle velocity, smaller caliber Jeez! :biggrin:

STGThndr
July 20, 2011, 19:28
Coloseum sez:
Since none of us are ever going to be facing down hordes of enemy soldiers and tanks with our civilian-purchased FALs/M1As
I sez: Who SEZ we won't be?. And who SEZ we would be using FAL or 14?
Everbody KNOWS that the AK will out shoot and outlast EITHER system. Then again there is the MAUSER, the greatest battle-rifle ever devised... I have a Mauser that has been in use since 1910. OK, it's a Swede, but still.. I stumbled into this room using the HK91 and tho my eyes have been opened to other possibilities, I still think of the H&K as the likely "go to" rifle.

MAINER
July 21, 2011, 08:32
Originally posted by W.E.G.


merged threads

Oh, good grief. Thanks for 'xplaining that, thought it was that deja-vu thing all over again! :uhoh:

ac7120
July 21, 2011, 15:54
I have an early M1-A, a DSA FAL, and an L1A1. I love each of these rifles, and they all shoot very well. The trigger pull on the M1-A is the best, then the L1A1, and lastly is the FAL, but if it hit the fan, I'd grab the FAL. Just another opinion which really doesn't matter.

A square 10
July 21, 2011, 20:32
at this moment in time i like having the choice - its not about which to own - its about which do i shoot , and yes i do shoot them all ,

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/FN-FAL008.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/FN-FAL003-1.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/mikesrifles2042.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/mikesrifles002.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/mikesrifles003.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/mikesrifles2001-3.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/mikesrifles007.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/mikesrifles008.jpg

A square 10
July 21, 2011, 20:32
sorry about the double post , i did not intend to take up extra band space

STGThndr
July 21, 2011, 21:54
My main regret in life has been that there is neither the time, money, nor ability to give each of my rifles the due justice they deserve! Life being what it is, they will likely outlast my shuffling human husk....

aardq
July 26, 2011, 19:59
Others have said it here, but the best rifle is the one you have the most confidence in your ability to shoot well. To learn that, shoot both, and not just a few rounds. Borrow rifles if you can.

If you think that both are equal in your hands, then take the FAL, because they field strip is easier and faster. The M-14 strips nicely, the M1-A doesn't because of the relocated dismount notch on the receiver.

Just another .02 worth.

Dan

gauraprema
July 27, 2011, 09:11
I know this is a fal/m1a talk but im finding the hk91 to be very accurate and a eater of any ammo i feed it.Yes the fal has a slimmer feel and the m1a is accurate as heck but this hk has got me hooked.Im getting from prone 2 moa,kneeling 3 to 4 and from standing(depending on how long I stand)3 moa at 100.Consistintly.Now when I attach the weitzler on claw mount the groups drop by 1 or 2 depending on prone or kneeling or standing.Last week my hits were touching from prone.Rifle is a little jerky but I worked that out with the breathing.Mind you I was taking my time and its so humid now that after 1 hour I was soaking wet but my hits were touching.

Super B
July 31, 2011, 05:11
I'd be inclined to agree. My JLD PTR91 is about as accurate as my M1A with open sights (+- 2" at 100 yds) However, my M1a now wears a 6x scope.

As an added bonus, mags for the PTR91 are cheap and plentiful. The other thing I like about it is it is modular. You can change configurations on it like changing the clothes on a Barbie doll.

All that being said, my FAL is still my fave, followed by the 91, with the M1A third.

IanMor
July 31, 2011, 10:20
The only genuine complaint about the HK91 and it's clones, it doesnt fit me right. Every time I fire one it feels like Mike Tyson is punching me in the cheekbone.. . Something about it. I dont know enough about the system to know if there is a way to solve this (ie, new furniture). It's got other idiosyncracies, but they are tolerable, but the one, not so much. For me anyways.

They are as reliable as a rock though. The few I have shot seem quite accurate.

g3fal
July 31, 2011, 17:25
Both are good weapons. Just pick the one you like and get good with it!

phillyray
August 01, 2011, 16:54
I have all three (M1A, G3, FAL) and I prefer the FAL type rifle generally speaking.

snpr41
August 01, 2011, 21:09
Originally posted by 4 brigada
all you dudes; really
not much difference here - both have needle firing pins which have to pass thru the nasty black powder to strike the primer in the base of the bullet & both are prone to breakage. Both have leather seals that are prone to give the shooter a face full of black nastiness when they shrink or wear. Not much to choose here;huh? Yes there is --the 1847 Dreyse is way prettier -- it was brass-bound.





Dude, Really?

The Chassepot '66 is better. No gas venting, higher muzzle velocity, smaller caliber Jeez! :biggrin:

Anarchist
August 07, 2011, 10:22
:rofl:
Its the best cause I have one & I say so
:rofl:

These posts are always so funny :rofl:

Dave Hume
August 08, 2011, 23:20
Originally posted by Ben Rogers
I should clarify that much of my attitudes about M1A/M14 is colored by my closer friendship with an ex-Marine sniper.

In his mind, the only M1A/M14 worthy of the name is from a specific place, made entirely of forged steel and tweaked to specific performance. He expects 2" groups at 500 meters to be average accuracy (in other words, "expected of all decent firearms") and 2" groups at 800 - 1000 meters to be "above standard".


Yeah....I've heard about guys like that.

I like to ask them if they can duplicate it, on demand, under field conditions, under pressure, and at unknown ranges, after running out to 200 yds. and then running back..then firing 10 shots in 60 seconds.

Just the criteria I use when I hear about the 'accuracy' question.

Just sayin'...

I don't go for the "USMC scout sniper as God" routine after I've beat them in the past in service rifle matches.

IRONWORKER
August 09, 2011, 13:02
IMO a FAL is superior to a M14 in just about every way except for accuracy but i still love my M14!!

Hebrew Battle Rifle
August 12, 2011, 12:36
Good grief. I have already said that it is the FNFAL. Weren't you listening?