I'm trying to decide on which to get first. For M14 I'm looking at Springfield Armory's M1A... And looking at DSA for a FAL.

Which is more reliable and sturdy? Strengths and weaknesses of each???

Service life?

I want a sorta SHTF rifle that I can plink with and not have to worry about parts wearing away prematurely.

I think the M14 will shoulder more naturally because it lacks that pistol grip.

And mags for the FAL would be a lot cheaper.

Please help me decide, I can only earn for one right now!

Thanks!

you cant go wrong with either, they both are great weapons.

I have shot both and they are IMO equals, they have some small differences, but the trade offs involved make them roughly the same in the long run, whe I was shooting the M1 seemed a litle more accurate at long ranges, the FAL was quicker on target. I like the M1 a little more because I'm a sucker for the M-14

I have owned both. In the FAL I liked the Para-Fal best, but I like the M1A, best overall. Look at the M1A scout rifle. Very handy.

I've had both as well, and still have an L1A1 FAL. When comparing the military issue rifles, I didn't find any real accuracy differences, and preferred the ergonomics of the FN. Once you start tricking them out for accuracy shooting though, the sheer volume of information and accessories available for the M1A1/M14 series comes to the fore. In the handy STHF rifle category, check out the BM59 para clones. Very nice rifles for their purpose. - Dan

They're both in factory form about equal in accuracy. I own both and personally the FAL wins out. Its cheap to buy parts for,mags are everywhere and I've got close to 5000 rounds through one without a glitch. If I was going to buy an M1A,I would buy an older one assembled from USGI parts instead of the cast shit that springfield is currently using. Springfield has chosen to rest on their name and I don't believe they turn out anywhere near the product they used to.The USGI forged parts are drying up. The M1 mags are an investment in themselves. Hopefully this will change in september when the AWB sunsets. Mags will be cheaper.

I know you didn't ask,but the AR10 series of rifles is a real good rifle. The ar system offers accuracy and with an AR configuration scope mounting is simple and you can use open sights. The AR10 uses most of the same parts as the ar15's do,and there are tons of parts out there cheap. Bushmaster is also offering a lower that accepts cheap FAL mags.

I would get your FAL first,if you can't wait. Then wait till september and see if the BAN dies out. Then buy an AR10.Our don't buy and wait and see what september brings.

Why is the length of pull so dang long on the FALs???

I looked DSA and it was something like 14.5 inches!

Would it look funny if I reduce it to... lets say... 13"???


I want one like this but black and different butt stock.

I wouldn't screw with the FAL. I have a war time M-14, and it blowes the pants off anything out there. You can literally pour sand and mud in the action, drop it in a lake, pull the thing out and shoot like a mo-fo. It is one hell of an ugly looking thing, but many a vietnam vet will tell you they rock. I had one guy go so far and tell me that the M-14 was kicking ass until the US Gov. decided to go to the M-16. Lots of jams, lots of problems.
If you looking for a reliable, bomb proof, accurate (you can walk it into targets over 600 yards w/open sights very easily), and vintage rifle, the M-14 is it.

MG

RMK has a point, the AR10 is very nice, though its heavy as hell IMO, also the AR 10 uses the same mags as the M-14 so the price has risen in the past few years with more and more 10's being built, so the FAL is getting to be a better and better deal...

Coolguy,

I have owned and operated both a M14 (not M1A) and a FAL. The FAL, with sand cuts, is far more reliable than the M14. Both rifles are tough, jam resistant platforms, but the M14 is not as tough as the FAL. The operating system of the FAL is tuneable, the M14 isn't. The M14 can be damaged by high pressure loads far easier than the FAL. The FAL is easier to control in full auto fire, not that either are really controllable. The FAL is far, far easier to field strip and repair than the M14.

The DS Arms SA 58 is a top notch rifle, particularly the bull barrelled version you have posted a picture of. That rifle is every bit the match of the M1A Supermatch rifle in accuracy, but at 2/3 the price. Scope mounting is also more reliable with the FAL than it will ever be with the M14.

Having said all that, I think you should strive to purchase both. That way you too can enjoy the experience of discovering which rifle is better.

Scott

HK 91 nough said

Now I have read all of the stuff on the FAL vs M14
and here is the real skinny.
G.I. issue rifle and ammo the M-14 is a tiny bit more accurate.
The FAL will be a little cheaper. (most likely)
You could go on and on about this and that but what makes the M-14 the winner hands down no bull is,
The M-14 uses a twisting extraction like the AK-47, M-1 ect. THe FAL uses straight line extraction.
The M-14 has a handle on the bolt.
Thats all folks!

Just an afterthought - the FN FAL was sold to many countries all round the world. How many bought the M14?

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

FAL FAL FAL!!!! If you want to shoot matchs get the M1A, for everything else the FAL kicks ass! Parts and mags are dirt cheap for the FAL, it's got better ergonomics, and lot's more custom options. Over 90 countries adopted the FAL!

At a little under 600 dollars for a new reciever,barrel and surplus parts,you can have a FAL,that will easily shoot 1-1/2 groups.

One of the shooting magazines a few years back,ran 5000 rounds through a surplus FAL,without cleaning and they never had a glitch. They even threw it into water and then continued to fire it. Obviously there isn't any problems with feeding or extraction. Most problems that do occur with any of these type rifles,is the case of shit ammo.

Unless you can get your hands on a M14 from polytech or norinco,which are hard to come by,since the ban on imports. You're going to pay at least $1100 for a new SA,you might be able to find something used,but they still bring more then a used FAL.

I really like M14's,but they were nothing but a crutch,that allowed the US to field a weapon in 7.62 nato that had a detachable mag . Much consideration was given to converting the millions of surplus garands to detachable mags. But this was deemed unfeasable.

What is so great 'bout the H&K 91?

Scott

It's a 1500 dollar cetme.

Gentlmen,



That was my thinking too. I was just interested in Humbargers opinion. To be frank, it has been so long since I owned a H&K91 that I have trouble remembering too aweful much about it. That lack of memory recall alone, tells me that there was nothing special about it, IMO. I do recall not liking the proximity of the rear sight to my eye, but I cannot not sure if that is a real memory or a phantom.



Scott

The FAL sounds great!

I will see how much money I have left after buying a car this summer to decide whether I should get a new DSA or just put together a FAL from kits...

Is it hard to put one together? I have very little knowledge about those things...

Thanks!

Hey all,

While I don't have any experience with the FN series, I have friends who do and really like the style. I've had an HK 91- sold it and bought an AR-10T with a lothar Walther bbl. I went from a kicking 3" gun to a smooth as silk 1/2 moa rifle. No comparison. I've also got the M1-A bush rifle and Polytech M-14S. I do like that style as well, but mounting optics is problematic. You need to add a cheekpiece or change stocks for a proper cheek weld. The bush rifle/ carbine actually, is handy as they get for an Iron sighted carbine. My .02$

CG, no not really. You do need some specialized tools though. Action wrench, barrel vise, recoil spring guide/screwdrive for installing the buttstock (I made mine), pin punches, hammer, depth micrometers, etc. Probably will need an assortment of locking shoulders, too, unless you get lucky.

If I were you I would just buy an already assembled DS Arms.

Scott

I'd go with ohiorapidfire,they provide a surplus fal for less then you'll pay for a kit. If you're going to spend the kind of money needed to buy a DSA,save and buy a bushmaster AR,that will accept fal mags.

RMK,

Good advise with regard to Ohio Rapid Fire. Mentioning the Bushmaster AR in the same post as you spoke of a GOOD battle rifle. The AR platform doesn't even make for good fence posts!

Scott

Ya I know the AR is awful. I've got an M4 that has right at 1000 rounds through it without cleaning,and hasn't had the slightest problem functioning. This is with wolf ammo also. You know the really clean quality stuff.


I really like the FAL,but for mounting optics and accuracy and even enough reliability. I'll take the AR platform any day.

Your M4 needs to have a serious talk with my AR15 about reliability! Of course, if this discussion took place your M4 may discover that my AR15 has it right and then you would be up the proverbial creek! So perhaps it is best if we just keep them seperated.

To be honest, I have never had an issue with scope mounting and accuracy with a properly set-up FAL platform rifle. The rifles I have personally worked with were easily the match of most AR15's tweaked for accuracy, in that they shot well below MOA. In reality, the FAL rifles were better than the AR15 at long range since the 168 BTHP bucks wind far better than the little 0.224 bullet does. One thing is for certain though, the AR15 is a hell of a lot lighter than any FAL variant!

The M14 is a nightmare to mount optics on reliably, though!

Scott

I have no questions as to the superiority of the .308 round. Thats why the M4 has a fast twist barrel and the goverment has done everything to use heavy bullets,trying to make it into a .308.

When I said the AR platform,I was talking about a .308 version or AR-10. I've had an AR 10,easily stomp the FAL in accuracy and reliability has been 100%. I like the FAL,because its cheap and i can beat on it without caring.

RMK

Quote:

---

I like the FAL,because its cheap and i can beat on it without caring.

---

Me too! They are touch SOB rifles, that is for certain.

Not much experience with the AR10. Did have an informal shoot off against one once, and it wasn't too impressive (3" - 3.5" groups at ~ 150 yards) of course that could have been the shooter. My FAL was just as good. In hindsight it is too bad he and I did not switch rifles and see what happened, may have been far different.

Scott

That HK will be out last after any old FN!

The hell ya say.

FAL vs M1A point by point.

Trigger: Love the NM M14, don't know how DSA trigger is.
Mag Release: Same position on both. FAL is smaller, harder on the thumb.
Optics: Frustrated with M14. Scope axis too high, comb too low.
Iron sights: M1/M14 have greatest stock iron sight ever.
Looks: FAL will always be the most graceful battle rifle ever.
Handling: FAL. I could shoot my FAL one handed, not too accurately, but one handed. Can't even point an M14 one handed.
Charging handle: Toss-up. Left-sided FAL handle means firing hand doesn't move. M14 handle can be used as forward assist.
Bolt release: FAL. It is down by the magazine, not up by the rear sight.
Take-down: FAL. Push one lever, bolt comes out (and falls on floor, DOH!)
Gas system: FAL is adjustable?. Mine was so stiff it required mechanical assistance.

48 countries can't be too wrong.

I miss my FAL. (Stupid PRK)

They just gave them away. - Dan

Thats no shit. The american goverment gave the M14 away for free,that why all those haitian assholes are carrying them now.