Teach me a bit about STANAG / Hensoldt

[pistolero1911]

First off, I am an iron sight user, with little knowledge of optics for the FAL. I have acquired an Argentine STANAG mount Para top cover, which I would like to use on my 21" barreled ParaFAL. Don't know much about what kind of optics would have been mounted on it, so.....

What would be a correct scope for it?

Could a Hensoldt ZF 24 with a H&K G3 claw mount be adapted for use with the FAL?

What scope would you recommend and why?

[Andy2205]

The short answer, the ZF24 scope will fit on the Argentine mount. So will the earlier straight tube models of the Hensoldt scopes.

I first used an Argentine mount with a Steiner scope which is the same as the older Hensoldts. I eventually replaced my Argentine mount with a more correct Belgian mount and the Steiner was replaced with a ZF24.

So in short, if it mates to the claw mount, it will mate to your Argentine mount.

[pistolero1911]

Thanks Andy,

I am considering one of the Hensoldt scopes, either the ZF24, Z24 or Z1 for my Para, nice to know that any of them will fit the Argie mount.

[Andy2205]

This is not mine, but it shows a Steiner scope on the Belgain mount.

https://www.gunsamerica.com/UserImag...wm_1547900.jpg

I've read that the Argy mounts were actually used for night vision gear. Never had that actually confirmed by anyone.

[J. Armstrong]

Good advice above about what is historically correct or useable.

If you are looking to actively use the optics, there are much better modern options available, however.

[pistolero1911]

I am looking for an historically accurate but useable sight and mount.

This would be for the occasional paper/steel target threat.

But I will ask, what would you recommend for modern optics for the FAL, something that I could use with a DSA rail mount, and be combat proven /reliable?

[J. Armstrong]

Originally Posted by pistolero1911

I am looking for an historically accurate but useable sight and mount.

This would be for the occasional paper/steel target threat.

But I will ask, what would you recommend for modern optics for the FAL, something that I could use with a DSA rail mount, and be combat proven /reliable?

Absolutely understand the attraction of historical correctness.

For a "social" rifle, I like the now nearly unobtanium Grenadier Precision cover. The DSA is heavier than I like but properly installed is rock solid and probably advisable if you were to elect a large, heavy scope.

I prefer a lower power scope, preferably a 1-4x or so. At the lowest power it is much like a red dot in speed of acquisition and field of view, yet allows bumping up the power if a longer range shot presents itself. I personally can't imagine a practical need for more than 4x, but that's JMHO. Pick a scope with enough eye relief to clear the rear sight and you can use a low mount or rings ( I prefer QD so I can revert to irons quickly in case od scope failure ) and avoid needing a cheekpiece in order to get a good cheekweld. I am also of the opinion that while paying big bucks for a scope is painful, a quality optic is at lest as critical as a quality firearm. If your rifle fails, you will likely know it. A scope that goes out of zero or has a wandering zero may not be obvious until too late. Pay once, cry once, as they say !

I have tried the Millet DMS, ( heavy and I'm not convinced it will tolerate 7.62 recoil. Worked fine, though ) Trijicon Accupoint, Leupold AR, a little Leupold 2.5x EER and all were fine within their design parameters and cleared the rear sight nicely. Currently using Accupoints on both my SCAR and on my next favorite, my FAL mutt.

[J. Armstrong]

Originally Posted by pistolero1911

I am looking for an historically accurate but useable sight and mount.

This would be for the occasional paper/steel target threat.

But I will ask, what would you recommend for modern optics for the FAL, something that I could use with a DSA rail mount, and be combat proven /reliable?

Absolutely understand the attraction of historical correctness.

For a "social" rifle, I like the now nearly unobtanium Grenadier Precision cover. The DSA is heavier than I like but properly installed is rock solid and probably advisable if you were to select a large, heavy scope. It WILL mar the receiver sides if that is an issue for you.

I prefer a lower power scope, preferably a 1-4x or so. At the lowest power it is much like a red dot in speed of acquisition and field of view, yet allows bumping up the power if a longer range shot presents itself. I personally can't imagine a practical need for more than 4x, but that's JMHO. Pick a scope with enough eye relief to clear the rear sight and you can use a low mount or rings ( I prefer QD so I can revert to irons quickly in case od scope failure ) and avoid needing a cheekpiece in order to get a good cheekweld. I am also of the opinion that while paying big bucks for a scope is painful, a quality optic is at lest as critical as a quality firearm. If your rifle fails, you will likely know it. A scope that goes out of zero or has a wandering zero may not be obvious until too late. Pay once, cry once, as they say !

I have tried the Millet DMS, ( heavy and I'm not convinced it will tolerate 7.62 recoil. Worked fine, though ) Trijicon Accupoint, Leupold AR, a little Leupold 2.5x EER and all were fine within their design parameters and cleared the rear sight nicely. Currently using Accupoints on both my SCAR and on my next favorite, my FAL mutt. The SCAR uses an ADM QD mount, the FAL uses plain old QD rings. Both work equally well for me, but I don't swap optics around much or remove/reinstall so I can't comment on their comparative repeatability.

[Andy2205]

The Hensoldts were 4x optics with a tube on the smaller size. They are drop compensated for the 7.62x51 round.

Check out some of these scopes from the Samplelist. I've purchased more than a couple of scopes there and they are good to go. You can save a few bucks by buying the demos. These are a few in the mid range of prices. You can go down to a couple of hundred or up to a couple of grand.

https://samplelist.com/swfa-ss-hd-1-...-b-178642.html
https://samplelist.com/sig-sauer-1-6...-b-178581.html
https://samplelist.com/trijicon-1-4x...-demo-c-2.html
https://samplelist.com/ior-1-1-4x26-...pe-demo-b.html

If you poke around, you can find Stanag to Picatinny adapters.

[pistolero1911]

Thanks for the recommendations, y'all have spent my fun $$ for the next several months.

[J. Armstrong]

e were lonely in the poorhouse........

[hansellhd]

http://www.mg-42.net/index.htm



https://www.opticsplanet.com/steiner...iflescope.html

This is another good 1x4 scope. I have one and like it.

[Combloc]

Schweet!!

[hansellhd]

Originally Posted by J. Armstrong

Absolutely understand the attraction of historical correctness.

For a "social" rifle, I like the now nearly unobtanium Grenadier Precision cover. The DSA is heavier than I like but properly installed is rock solid and probably advisable if you were to elect a large, heavy scope.

I prefer a lower power scope, preferably a 1-4x or so. At the lowest power it is much like a red dot in speed of acquisition and field of view, yet allows bumping up the power if a longer range shot presents itself. I personally can't imagine a practical need for more than 4x, but that's JMHO. Pick a scope with enough eye relief to clear the rear sight and you can use a low mount or rings ( I prefer QD so I can revert to irons quickly in case od scope failure ) and avoid needing a cheekpiece in order to get a good cheekweld. I am also of the opinion that while paying big bucks for a scope is painful, a quality optic is at lest as critical as a quality firearm. If your rifle fails, you will likely know it. A scope that goes out of zero or has a wandering zero may not be obvious until too late. Pay once, cry once, as they say !

I have tried the Millet DMS, ( heavy and I'm not convinced it will tolerate 7.62 recoil. Worked fine, though ) Trijicon Accupoint, Leupold AR, a little Leupold 2.5x EER and all were fine within their design parameters and cleared the rear sight nicely. Currently using Accupoints on both my SCAR and on my next favorite, my FAL mutt.

I have an old Millet DMS-1 on a PTR91 with about 2000 rounds through it, the scope is still GTG. I would say it meets the test.



I like Millet scopes, good value for the money.

[hkshooter]

I had a DMS-1 on an FAL. It performed well and was a good value, had no problems with it. I bought it used, actually. Then sold it here to Huey who AFAIK still uses it with no issues. I swapped it out in favor of a smaller and lighter Leupold VX-R.