Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Fusil Automatique Leger......

  1. #1
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default Fusil Automatique Leger......

    Well after only 9 short months my new FAL has arrived. It is a DSArms American made 18" carbine. Standard sights with what is called a speed trigger (lighter and smother), ordered with their scope mount top cover and green duracoated furniture. Since it is O.D Green in color it is at least 15 % less lethal than the standard issue Evil Black Rifle. I'm still negotiating with the FBI over a release date but hopefully by the weekend I'll have it in hand. I also have a shipment of magazines coming both 20 and 25 rounders. Now if I could just find a few rounds of ammo.

    Just wondered if anyone else is a FAL fan. I have always considered this design among the best of battle rifles. I would prefer it over the AR-10 or the M14. Not to take anything away form those designs but ther FAL has many features to make it a more effective weapon for the serious warrior. The gas adjustable system, the low profile sights, (keeps the users head down), the non shooting hand operates the charging handle, magazine and bolt release while the shooting hand stays in a shooting grip and the shooter stays in contact with the weapon. All these features make for a more efficient delivery of effective fire. The refinements of the modern FAL make it more reliable and accurate than ever before. No direct impingement gas into the action to over heat parts or foul mechanisms, yet much easier to strip (break open) to clear and clean than the M14/M1A rifle. I believe it to be the best of the post WWII designs and in an effective caliber, the 7.62x51, 308 Winchester. What could be better?
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    What could be better?
    The M1A of course

    Not to take anything away form those designs but ther FAL has many features to make it a more effective weapon for the serious warrior.
    This debte has been going on since I had my first FAL back in the early 80s...and I have had and shot them all from sear cut 50.00s, to full auto Izzys and Howco Paratroopers. I bought a FAL from Dave, the owner of DS Arms, when he was still driving a truck for the Illinois Dept of Transportation.....here is my take:

    The gas adjustable system
    Unecessary for the "serious warrior". IIRC, that was designed for the Third World market where ammo may be spotty and training is non existence. I have run my M1A so dirty that our armourer yelled at me, it still went bang.

    the low profile sights, (keeps the users head down)
    No real difference between the platforms

    the non shooting hand operates the charging handle, magazine and bolt release while the shooting hand stays in a shooting grip and the shooter stays in contact with the weapon
    And you cant do that with an M1A?

    yet much easier to strip (break open) to clear and clean than the M14/M1A rifle.
    Thats the only advantage, if you can call it that.

    Now of course, if the FAL was so good, it would be in first line service with a real army somewhere....as opposed to the M14, which is confined to the US Army

    by the way if any of you FAL fans love 'em, I have a DSA SA58 shorty right here in 99% shape that needs a new home

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Murphy View Post
    What could be better?
    While I appreciate my DSA FAL, I personally prefer the HK G3 as a 308 battle rifle.

  4. #4

    Default

    Bingo!!!! ++1 for you seant.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    I personally prefer the HK G3 as a 308 battle rifle.
    I need to post this, y'all may have seen it

    In a world of compromises, some people put the bullets in the magazine backwards…But it doesn’t matter, because our gun is on the cover of the Rainbow Six video games. Look how cool that SEAL coming out of the water looks… If you buy a $2,000 SOCOM, you will be that cool of an operator too. And chicks will dig you. At HK, we stuck a piston on an AR15, just like a bunch of other companies have done, dating back to about 1969. However ours is better, because we refuse to sell it to civilians. Because you suck, and we hate you.
    Our XM8 is the greatest rifle ever developed. It may melt, and it doesn’t fit any accessories known to man, but that is your fault. If you were a real operator, you would love it. Once again, look at Rainbow Six, that G36 sure is cool isn’t it? Yeah, you know you want one.And by the way, check out our new HK45. We decided that humans don’t need to release the magazine with their thumbs. If you were a really manly teutonic operator, you would be able to reach the controls. Plus we’ve fired 100,000,000 rounds through one with zero malfunctions, and that was while it was buried in a lake of molten lava, on the moon. If you don’t believe us, it is because you aren’t a real operator.
    By the way, our cheap, mass-produced, stamped sheet metal guns like the G3 and MP5 are the bestest things ever, and totally worth asinine scalpers prices, but note that cheap, mass-produced, stamped sheet metal guns from other countries are commie garbage. Not that it matters, because you’re civilians, so we won’t sell them to you anyway. Because you suck, and we hate you, but we know you’ll be back. We can beat you down like a trailer park wife, but you’ll come back, you always do.
    Buy our stuff.
    Sincerely
    HK Marketing Department HK. Because you suck. And we hate you.




  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    On a Starship
    Posts
    34

    Default FALs vs....

    Gotta love the M14/M1A fans... they are true zealots and don't realize a superior firearm (FN-FAL) when it is in front of them.


    The only advantages the M1A has over the FAL: 1. Better trigger. 2. Better sights.


    The FAL was ADOPTED by over 100 countries of the world. The M14/M1A was only used by the USA and GIVEN to US "satellites": Israel, Panama, Korea, etc. No other country adopted it. The last rifles were finally given away by President Clinton.


    Sure, the M14/M1A is an excellent rifle. Fact is, the FN-FAL is a superior firearm.


    The only reason the M14 is still in service with the US military is to augment the M16/M4 family. All the M14s were retrieved from "cold storage) and never were expected to be used again.


    Kirk out.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    Gotta love the M14/M1A fans... they are true zealots and don't realize a superior firearm (FN-FAL) when it is in front of them.

    LOL.....look Im a fanboy. Ok Kirk, how many of each have you owned or shot

    The only advantages the M1A has over the FAL: 1. Better trigger. 2. Better sights.
    More ergonomical safety for most folks. Easier depot maintenance too IIRC. Better balance. All things being equal, more accurate.

    The FAL was ADOPTED by over 100 countries of the world. The M14/M1A was only used by the USA
    The M14 was designed as a rifle for the US military. The FAL was designed as a rifle for export as was typical of Eurpoean arms makers. Leaving England and Oz out, claiming that the rifle is superior because Paraguay, Fiji and Nigeria adopted it is disingenuous.

    Dont get me wrong, I like the FAL. I think the true 50.63 or a close clone is far better than the SOCOM or the Scout simply because of balance and ergonomics...but in terms of full size MBRs the FAL is in second place...although its far better than the .308 AR abortions.

    I wont talk about the G3

  8. #8
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    After owning and shooting a pile of these kinds of things is years past the only gripe I have with the M1A is that its a heavy beast but most .308 autoloaders are to some degree.

    The FAL never really fit me well and fitting the roller lock into a HK91 gave me a fit. I must not be "Teutonic" enough. But I'm not an operator either- I just shoot stuff a bit.

    I've not played with the AR-10 type rifles much but then again I don't care for the Stoner design in general. A bigger hole won't really help me with the that.

    I do agree that the number of countries that adopt a weapon is somewhat meaningless as for most of the 20th century the American dollar was strong and US labor rates high compared to a lot of European countries. We also didn't do a lot of satelite manufacturing compared to European weapons makers either.

    I think the M14 didn't get more popular because 1) it was expensive to make in America and sell abroad and 2.) we wouldn't let them be built in Spain, or Portugal or hammered out on a rock in Pakistan...

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wildalaska View Post
    LOL.....look Im a fanboy. Ok Kirk, how many of each have you owned or shot



    More ergonomical safety for most folks. Easier depot maintenance too IIRC. Better balance. All things being equal, more accurate.



    The M14 was designed as a rifle for the US military. The FAL was designed as a rifle for export as was typical of Eurpoean arms makers. Leaving England and Oz out, claiming that the rifle is superior because Paraguay, Fiji and Nigeria adopted it is disingenuous.

    Dont get me wrong, I like the FAL. I think the true 50.63 or a close clone is far better than the SOCOM or the Scout simply because of balance and ergonomics...but in terms of full size MBRs the FAL is in second place...although its far better than the .308 AR abortions.

    I wont talk about the G3
    I guess I would consider getting an M1A.....if I could only find a dealer who could hook me up with a smoking deal.

  10. #10
    Member 2dawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    642

    Default FAL vs...

    I love the DSA FAL (SA58), I have 2 in different configs. Three things I find problematic, this comming from a lefty shooter. 1) The mag feed, I prefer the AR style as it's faster, jam the mag in, unload, hit the button and it drops out. The FAL design leaves somthing to be desired. Like the AK it rocks in and out and the release lever being on the right side of the magwell makes it tough for the "left hand" trigger finger to reach. Un-like the AK which gives ample room for leftys to hit the release lever, then use the fresh mag to knock the empty mag out, reload. Combat reloads takes a bit more thought to complete with a FAL. 2) As a lefty shooter the cocking handle is on the wrong side , though I think still better than the AR. 3) The bolt release is difficult to operate without changing your shooting position, much prefer the M1A/AR in this reguard. Easy fix, use the cocking handle.
    I am sure these small issues I have noticed, which amounts to really just splitting hairs, are non existant to a right handed shooter. As it is accuracy is on par with the rest, reliability is second to none IMO, and I see no reason to switch to a different platform.

    Keep yer powder dry,
    Joe

  11. #11
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    I guess I should respond and try to defend my position on this rifle. First, 2dawgs is right it is not a lefty rifle, but your left thumb is the magazine release and your left thumb is the bolt catch/release. The mag well is cut away to help a blind man feel the correct position with the left hand and the charging handle is operated by the left hand. this leaves the right hand to stay in shooting position with the right thumb for the fire control lever and the trigger.

    As to it being designed for a cheap export rifle because that's the way of the Europeans, this, were it true, would be because the Europeans only need about six rifles, the market is the 60,000,000 of the world. It not only was adapted by about a hundred countries it was well proven in at least a dozen wars that lasted at least a decade each. There is nothing cheap about the design or construction of the FN FAL. It had its share of growing pains in the early years but less so than the M16 family. It is a quick and easy design to clear and clean in the field without loosing tiny parts in the mud which will disable lesser weapons.

    I spent ten years in the Navy and the M14 was the primary rifle and it was used rather extensively by yours truly and in both combat and safe civilian competition. It is an M1 Garand with a detachable magazine and a piston gas system. It is not a new design and it is not a design for the U. S. Military exclusively, it was just a quick remodel of the famous M1 Garand rifle. It's wooden stock and its add on side saddle scope mount are not capable of taking the punishment the FAL will take and therefore is not a suitable gun for the DM role. It is also much more difficult to control in full auto fire than the FAL design. I am loyal to the rifle but having used in in rugged environments along with the FAL and it's derivatives as well as the AK 47, the Type 56, the M16A1, A2, A3, and A4, (XM-177-E2)before there was an M4 and the Stoner package in all it's variants. From this I conclude there is only one rifle I would want to carry again in the same conditions. At least half this decision is based on the caliber, I only want the 7.62x51/308 but the rest is based on the rifles available for the cartridge and never having used the actual AR-10 in rugged combat environments, won't comment except to say I don't like the direct gas impingement system of the Stoner design but with a piston and operating rod, I'd evaluate it further. The things that are difficult to reach/control on the AR platform (charging handle, magazine release) when belly down in the mud, are fixed with the FAL design. Further, having taken incoming fire while behind the M14, M16, AK-47 and the FAL, I will still say, the sighting profile of the FAL, in a light weight rifle (not the heavy bipod version) is far superior to the heads up M-16. We need only hang around SE Asia in the 1960's to know why the fox hole shooting position was developed. Hands and arms above the head, full magazine full rock and roll. It is not aimed, effective fire. The FAL is a better design for controlled, aimed fire in a combat environment. As for the fire selector (safety) position, it is properly positioned at the shooting hand thumb. This is proven as a world wide ideal location for all guns designed since 1947 and many before. The redesign of the AK-47 in the Gallil and the Valmet both went to that ambidexterous shooting thumb/trigger finger fire selector and the newer AK-74 (seventy-four, 5.45x39, favored by Osama Bin Laden) uses the shooting thumb/trigger finger fire selector.

    Looking back at the design of the M14 rifle we can easily see why we got what we got. Politics always play apart but there is more to this design. In WWII one of the very useful rifles was the BAR. Twenty round detachable box magazine, full auto capable. The M1 Garand effective aimed fire by trained soldiers. Powerful, accurate but not enough firepower for a quick developing combat situations and less effective cover fire or supressing fire. The concept of one rifle capable of all those roles was desired. The hybred design of the BAR and the Garand became known as the M14. Even the cartridge ballistics duplicate the WWII M-2 Ball round of the 30 Gov't, '06. Fundementally the design is sound but does not lends its self to upgrades without major retrofit. Springfield has done a lot because of some military demand an lots of civillian demand to configure the rifle in more appealling terms with the 16" SOCOM, the 18" Scout, the 20" Standard and the 24" match version. This giving the only real advantage of the M14 over the FAL and that being generally more accurate than the FAL's reputation. I do think that FAL accuracy is improved here recently with better barrels and closer fitting parts.

    So the real debate here is between the three candidates which fire the 7.62x51 round and they include the American designed M14/M1-A, the German/Belgium/Austrian designed FAL and the American (Stoner) designed AR-10 (The original designation of the Eugene Stoner designed, Armalite Division of the Fairchild Corporation, M-XX rifle to be sold to the US first and World second, of the 1950's)

    Cast your vote.
    Last edited by Murphy; 09-18-2009 at 19:29.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  12. #12
    Member 2dawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    642

    Talking

    Murphy, no need to defend your position from me, I'm with you, I'ma FAL fan. I use a grip pod/ bi pod on my DSA light weight carbine, when shooting prone this frees up my right hand to run the controls. When shooting off hand, my left hand never leaves the hand grip, the right hand runs all the controls (reach around from underneath). Works for me.

    For the sake of argument I feel the HK91 should be added in the vote as it was also designed, I believe, as an MBR as well.
    My vote...DSA FAL.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    It's wooden stock and its add on side saddle scope mount are not capable of taking the punishment the FAL will take and therefore is not a suitable gun for the DM role.
    Gee, one of our gungirl's hubby, who is a Scout Sniper in Afghanistan after doing it Iraq, loves his M1A as reliable and accurate.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    2,146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wildalaska View Post
    The M1A of course

    This debte has been going on since I had my first FAL back in the early 80s...and I have had and shot them all from sear cut 50.00s, to full auto Izzys and Howco Paratroopers. I bought a FAL from Dave, the owner of DS Arms, when he was still driving a truck for the Illinois Dept of Transportation.....here is my take:

    Unecessary for the "serious warrior". IIRC, that was designed for the Third World market where ammo may be spotty and training is non existence. I have run my M1A so dirty that our armourer yelled at me, it still went bang.

    No real difference between the platforms

    And you cant do that with an M1A?

    Thats the only advantage, if you can call it that.

    Now of course, if the FAL was so good, it would be in first line service with a real army somewhere....as opposed to the M14, which is confined to the US Army

    by the way if any of you FAL fans love 'em, I have a DSA SA58 shorty right here in 99% shape that needs a new home
    Oh please, and you represent yourself as knowing about firearms?

    I will forgive the ignorance, but as a professional, go educate yourself and learn the FAL was the most used battle rifle, used by more countries than the m16 and Kalishnikov, and would have been the U.S. battle rifle if the jealous cretins running the show during the trials between the m14 and t-48 hadn't blatantly rigged the tests using handbuilt m-14's and tests set up without knowledge of the FAL's engineers. Typical US "not made here syndrome".
    Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Albert Einstein

    Better living through chemistry (I'm a chemist)

    You can piddle with the puppies, or run with the wolves...

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nitroman View Post
    Oh please, and you represent yourself as knowing about firearms?

    I will forgive the ignorance, but as a professional, go educate yourself and learn the FAL was the most used battle rifle, used by more countries than the m16 and Kalishnikov, and would have been the U.S. battle rifle if the jealous cretins running the show during the trials between the m14 and t-48 hadn't blatantly rigged the tests using handbuilt m-14's and tests set up without knowledge of the FAL's engineers. Typical US "not made here syndrome".


    Ad hominems
    are the last refuge of the scoundrel and the mark of one who has lost the argument. My points about the usage of FALs in armies have been made
    Join my ignore list, along with your childish avatar

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    2,146

    Default

    And I specifically came back here to apologize for my harsh reply. I still will apologize for my harsh reply.

    I apologize for my reply being harsh. I too have suffered people not liking the rifle simply due to it being an EBR, not having wood somwhere (can be instantly rectified but I likes my bipod), and some other functional characteristics.

    Thank you, whoever you are, for implying I am a scoundrel. I have never been called that. I like it.
    Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Albert Einstein

    Better living through chemistry (I'm a chemist)

    You can piddle with the puppies, or run with the wolves...

  17. #17
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Tsk! Tsk! Well it is certainly an interesting tit for tat and there is good discussion.

    There is no doubt the M14 and its upswing M21 have been used successfully. I just never found the sope mounting system to be rugged enough for dependable first shot long hits day after day, back when I could shoot. I used a different rifle in four countries but, never an F.A.L. as a long range precision rifle. It likely would not pass muster either, to be fair. Todays serious Snipers do not use the M14 or the 7.62 caliber where shots are long. Some units still cling to the cartridge in several platforms.

    This discussion is not about the long line shooters tools but what has been generally considered a Main Battle Rifle (MBR). and the M14 certainly qualifies well as does the AR-10 of today and the F.A.L. Others as well to include the HK-91 in its preban configurations and certain others less familiar to us.

    When the U.S. Army test the T-48 and the M14 to be, the strongest push was to stay with a full power cartridge. Thus the requirement to modify the original rifle to handle the 7.62 cartridge. The FN rifles original concept was as a Sturmgewehr. All the world raced to the intermediate cartridge with selective fire capability. The U.S. believed battle field tactics had not changed enough to warrant anything but an upgraded battle rifle with the full power round. A detachable magazine with selective fire capability from a well proven platform satisfied the requirement. I believe the British 7x40 caliber in the FN designed rifle would have been the right way to go as a competitor for the Ak-47, but that isn't the path chosen because of politics in the US and England with the Nato cartridge acceptance as the 7.62x51. I honestly think it was too hard to give up the Garand rifle that had served so well for the past decade. It did facilitate an easy transition to a rifle that was the official rifle for the very shortest time of any US military rifle. I also think if we (the US military) had accepted the Stoner design, and modified it to a piston driven system we would have been well ahead of the game in the 1950's. But I wasn't consulted.

    I do like the 7.62x51/308 Winchester cartridge. It is decisive in the field and has greater effective range than any general issue rifle today, both in accuracy and in terminal performance. It is however difficult to control in auto fire. With the right training and practice we can deliver accurate bust fire but rifles as light as ten pounds are difficult for even Rambo to shoot well when auto fire is selected. There was, post WWII, a prevailing belief that full auto capability would be a part of the new soldiers repertoire in future battles. The US was a bit behind that curve.

    The M14 rifle was used in limited capacity beyond its official issue date. I believe some units kept in because of the caliber more than anything else and made what ever changes necessary to meet their needs. I have seen first hand the modifications of this rifle and it has been very useful. It was never used in diversified fields of battle except on limited basis and there was never any driving energy or budget to make it a better battle rifle, we had the M16. For this reason I think the F.A.L. and its many configurations became a much better rifle. It was used extensively in harsh environments for over forty years, it had it's problems and since so many were in use, there was energy and money to fix any failures. The evolution of the F.A.L. has made it into a very effective MBR. It is now at a time when all the world is with lesser cartridges and selective fire capability. The truth be known, the MBR F.A.L. has fought the worlds best assault rifles and held its own in many lands. Because we dropped the M14 fifteen minutes after we fought so hard to get it, it was never given the world wide field trials of the FN-F.A.L. This rifle still today would make the transition back to the intermediate cartridge with controllable full auto capability in a short compact soldiers rifle and do everything better than the Ak's or the M-4. We could make it for the 1.6" long 308 case necked down to .264 caliber. Similar to the 6.5 BR. It will have the recoil of the 7.62x39 and the range capability of match loads in the 308. It would send 129 grain bullets out at 2650 fps from a 16" barrel. It will weigh less than 8 pounds in a one meter length full stocked version. Folding stock, short barrel versions will meet other needs. This is where we should have gone but here again I wasn't consulted.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    Todays serious Snipers do not use the M14 or the 7.62 caliber where shots are long.
    I beg to differ, unless you consider 800 meters to be short range

    It was used extensively in harsh environments for over forty years, it had it's problems and since so many were in use, there was energy and money to fix any failures.
    The FAL has been obsolete in first rate armies since the 80s.

  19. #19

    Default Almost

    In Desert Storm the Brits Enfield bullpup became a PIA in the sand. Their response was to warehouse the Enfields and issue FAL rifles. That was in the 90's.
    " Americans will never need the 2nd Amendment, until the government tries to take it away."

    On the road of life..... Pot holes keep things interesting !

  20. #20
    Member 2dawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    642

    Default

    Also the FAL- OSW is in use today (in small numbers) in Iraq and the Stan by some SOCOM units in SBR config.

    Curious Murphy, which model did you get? Good god man, we need details.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •