Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Cetme and FAL's or similar semi 308's

  1. #1
    Member sniper3083006's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fort Riley
    Posts
    271

    Default Cetme and FAL's or similar semi 308's

    I am considering buying one of these and would like some help with a few questions.
    1. What brand/manufacturer is a good one to go with?
    2. How accurate generally speaking are these rifles 300 yards and under?
    3. Which is the better of the 2 Cetme or FAL
    4. is there an option for mounting a scope, reddot or holo sight
    I know HK makes the 91 but that is a tad outta my price range and I would like to get a semi 308 so these two types are in my ballpark spending range
    Last edited by sniper3083006; 01-04-2011 at 13:48. Reason: change betting to buying

  2. #2
    Member Vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fairbanks most the time, Ancorage some of the time,& on the road Kicking Anti's all the time
    Posts
    8,989

    Default

    L1A1 hands down. look for Israeli one if you can
    "If you are on a continuous search to be offended, you will always find what you are looking for; even when it isn't there."

    meet on face book here

  3. #3
    Member gunbugs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    1,382

    Default

    Get a DSA Fal. The problem with CETME's and many of the "surplus" FAL's is they are built on new receivers with pretty worn out parts from cut up machine guns. The Century Arms and Hesse guns especially seem to be the worst. At least with a DSA, you've got a good, useable warranty that you will probably never have to use. Plus the guns are assembled by folks who know what they are doing. The FAL as a rifle is WAY better than the HK type rifles. But I'm not an HK "tweaker".
    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind."

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    2,145

    Default

    FAL. Go here: www.falfiles.com a website dedicated to the FAL. You do not necessarily need to buy from DSA. To be compliant, the FAL needs seven (7), US made parts. These are usually, but not always: receiver, cocking handle, gas piston, hammer, trigger, sear and pistol grip. Some will go with a US made floorplate on the mags so they don't have to change the original grip.

    The parts aren't worn out. Barrels can be so-so due to lack of maintenance, but it is rare to find a crappy barrel.

    Hesse and Century Arms are the joints that lead to the coining of the phrase "Angry Beavers" meaning hack jobs, by hack 'smiths being paid by the piece. You can find a very fine FAL on the Files for under a thousand.

    As for accuracy, well, these are battle rifles, but you should expect 1" to 1.5" groups at 100 yards using good factory ammo. If you make your own to work with the rifle, you can shrink those down. The best would be to have Kreiger make a barrel for you using a tight chamber, as the military chambers are for the 7.62x51 NATO which is slightly larger to take ammo that's not in the best of shape.

    The FAL is far and away the most popular of the rifles due to ergonomics and simplicity of operation. Parts are virtually everywhere as this was the most popular rifle in history ever. 90 countries used the FN-FAL, and if it hadn't been for the criminal acts of members of the DOD, we'd have had it too instead of the M-14. The L1A1 is the British designation, and takes a "Inch" magazine, as do the Aussie (SLR), and Canadian (C1A1). Everything else is "Metric". The difference is the tit on the front of the magazine that locks into its corresponding recess in the receiver is small on the metric and large on the inch. You can use metric mags in an inch rifle, but not vica-versa. Since you can build these rifles for around $700, most people have more than a few in all flavors.
    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...

  5. #5

    Default

    Northern Security in Anchorage is a dealer for DSA Fal's if you wanted to look at any locally.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    54

    Default

    I've owned both the HK and the FAL in the past.

    The HK beat the side of my face with the combat lean I was taught for shooting and I'd end up with a puffly chipmunk cheek from when I fired it... I got rid of it and won't own another.

    I've owned 2 FAL's in my time, one was a real FN-FAL that shot 6 inch groups out of the box (it went away) and the 2nd was a pre ban Springfield SAR-48 with a 16 inch barrel. That rifle was handy, accurate and I'm sad I let it go when I had to raise money to buy a house.

    DSA makes a nice product, but if you need to stay close to the $1000 mark, you can get one of the DSA "made with parts" rifles that they offer, either the Imbel FAL or the STG58 FAL. I would avoid the chop shop FAL's like the plauge as the few hundred you save won't net you a nice rifle.

    You might look around at the 7.62 AR's out there as the AR platform was made as the AR-10 first in 7.62 and not as the 5.56. There are AR clones in 7.62 now that can be had for $1000.

    Back in the early 1980 I had quite the self loading rifle collection but sold them to buy a house and then the GCA of 86 changed the market. I've owned and shot a number of products in my time and would say the DSA "parts" rifles would be a quality bang for the buck.

    I hope this helps.

    Yours,

    David Teague

  7. #7
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    931

    Default

    I'd say neither the less expensive FAL nor 91 type rifles... for a very good firearm that's plenty accurate and dependable at a great price - go with an AK Saiga - just sayin'

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Richardson View Post
    I'd say neither the less expensive FAL nor 91 type rifles... for a very good firearm that's plenty accurate and dependable at a great price - go with an AK Saiga - just sayin'
    Hi Brian,

    How accurate is a Saiga? The old mil spec for a AK47-AKM was about 6 inches at 100 meters, more than ok for the mass fire tactics of the Soviet military but rather lousy for the single shooter.

    Cheers,

    David

  9. #9
    Member .338-06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,045

    Default

    Dave, my Saiga .308 shoots about 2-4 moa from the bench. I haven't tweeked it at all, but I've got the feeling it can do better.
    I may be slow, but I get where I'm going!

  10. #10
    Member tyrex13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage/Soldotna
    Posts
    1,176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sniper3083006 View Post
    I am considering buying one of these and would like some help with a few questions.
    1. What brand/manufacturer is a good one to go with? DS Arms www.dsarms.com
    2. How accurate generally speaking are these rifles 300 yards and under? You can expect 2 MOA give or take 1 MOA
    3. Which is the better of the 2 Cetme or FAL FAL
    4. is there an option for mounting a scope, reddot or holo sight You can, but why?? The FAL is the ultimate KISS 7.62 battle rifle.
    I know HK makes the 91 but that is a tad outta my price range and I would like to get a semi 308 so these two types are in my ballpark spending range
    See answers above. Get a metric FAL from DSA. Northern Security seems pretty high on their prices. I would order direct and have somebody like 7.62 Precision do a $10 transfer for you.

  11. #11
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Teague View Post
    Hi Brian,

    How accurate is a Saiga? The old mil spec for a AK47-AKM was about 6 inches at 100 meters, more than ok for the mass fire tactics of the Soviet military but rather lousy for the single shooter.

    Cheers,

    David

    Hello David, the .308 WIN SAIGA in both carbine and full-length barrel configurations are honest 2" in at 100M guns with just about anything you feed 'em.

    For example: I routinely get 1.5" groups at 100 yrds. using 150 grain Federal Powershock soft-points. This is often the tight grouping of all 8 rounds from the Magazine.

    The Saiga in .308 WIN is no slouch on accuracy, simplicity, dependability, and ruggedness... I'd take it anywhere/anytime and find it 100% no-hype praiseworthy. This is a new factory gun; not your ordinary mil-surplus put-together AK.

    Best accuracy/performance for me is when using South African 147-150 grain military surplus ammunition running very often at sub MOA.

  12. #12

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

    Default

    SIG is coming out with a new 308 that may be worth a look, until then I would stick with an M1A.

    I went through my FAL phase as a youngster, having all sorts of goodies like Sear Cuts and Howco folders. In fact I bough a Howco from Dave Selveggio (sp) waaay back when he was still driving truck for the Illinois DOT before he became the famous DSA He makes a nice FAL and we move a bunch of them, but Im an M1A guy at heart

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wildalaska View Post
    SIG is coming out with a new 308 that may be worth a look, until then I would stick with an M1A.
    I'm not sure the letters S I G and the dollar sign $ and numerals 1 0 0 0 go together. Just sayin.

  15. #15
    New member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Valley of the scum,AZ
    Posts
    4

    Default

    My stupid question is which one of these .308 monsters work well in sub-zero?? I know the Swedish and Norweigans both used the G3 (HK91) to good effect but the Canadians used the C1 (FN FAL).
    I have all 3 but my FAL is IMBEL m444 clone,my HK is a SAR8 on a Greek reciever and a plain vanilla standard M1A. ALL have given stellar svc.....

  16. #16
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Askari View Post
    My stupid question is which one of these .308 monsters work well in sub-zero?? I know the Swedish and Norweigans both used the G3 (HK91) to good effect but the Canadians used the C1 (FN FAL).
    I have all 3 but my FAL is IMBEL m444 clone,my HK is a SAR8 on a Greek reciever and a plain vanilla standard M1A. ALL have given stellar svc.....
    'Cold' is a hard answer... there is cold and colder - sometimes dry - often times mixed with wet and wetter. I've had some experience with the basic rifles (not necessarily specified models) you are asking about. Interesting to note, the FAL lost (for whatever be the reasons) to the G3 in German field trials of the day. Side note, so did the AR-10!

    I'll say the HK-91 is the best design of those listed in your inquiry. I'll also relate all have their strengths and weaknesses. Not saying one is bad or good - just feel based on my relatively limited justifications that the HK gets the nod in extreme cold conditions. I'm not talking military use, auto fire, life and limb. I'm more addressing the one gun to depend on in the field.

    Here's why:

    a.) In the cold, I feel both size and heft play a major role in the successes of making a robust and dependable rifle in 7.62x51.
    b.) With delayed roller-block action (recoil operated), for frigid conditions the design is not dependent on propellant gasses; so the burn rate and residual powder have nearly no effects, plus the 7.62x51 being a higher intensity battle rifle cartridge is perfectly mated for reliability.
    c.) Cold Alaska conditions almost always involve getting into lower light and flat light situations. I'm gonna add here that I feel HK-91 rifles have the best in terms of practical, acquirable iron sights of any you mentioned for Alaska cold dead of winter.

    You did not mention what I would use:
    I'd go with a new high-quality AK-pattern rifle in .308 like Valmet m78, Galil, Saiga, Zastava M90, etc. and avoid many of the kit specials out there. I understand the newest PTR-91 is well made and would like to try one.

  17. #17
    Member tyrex13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage/Soldotna
    Posts
    1,176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Richardson View Post
    'Cold' is a hard answer... there is cold and colder - sometimes dry - often times mixed with wet and wetter. I've had some experience with the basic rifles (not necessarily specified models) you are asking about. Interesting to note, the FAL lost (for whatever be the reasons) to the G3 in German field trials of the day. Side note, so did the AR-10!

    I'll say the HK-91 is the best design of those listed in your inquiry. I'll also relate all have their strengths and weaknesses. Not saying one is bad or good - just feel based on my relatively limited justifications that the HK gets the nod in extreme cold conditions. I'm not talking military use, auto fire, life and limb. I'm more addressing the one gun to depend on in the field.

    Here's why:

    a.) In the cold, I feel both size and heft play a major role in the successes of making a robust and dependable rifle in 7.62x51.
    b.) With delayed roller-block action (recoil operated), for frigid conditions the design is not dependent on propellant gasses; so the burn rate and residual powder have nearly no effects, plus the 7.62x51 being a higher intensity battle rifle cartridge is perfectly mated for reliability.
    c.) Cold Alaska conditions almost always involve getting into lower light and flat light situations. I'm gonna add here that I feel HK-91 rifles have the best in terms of practical, acquirable iron sights of any you mentioned for Alaska cold dead of winter.

    You did not mention what I would use:
    I'd go with a new high-quality AK-pattern rifle in .308 like Valmet m78, Galil, Saiga, Zastava M90, etc. and avoid many of the kit specials out there. I understand the newest PTR-91 is well made and would like to try one.
    The German design beat out the Belgian and US design in the German Trials??

    <----------- My shocked face

    The FAL served in something like 60 nations militaries. The design is robust and simple. If it doesn't work, you can simply turn the gas up.

    The G3/HK91 does have better sights than a stock FAL, but I think the M1A sights are the best.

  18. #18
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    931

    Default

    The G3 beat out a bunch of 'em like SIG's entry, FN FAL, Garand M14. Many countries did come to the same conclusions on a 7.62x51 battle rifle. It was really the big switch to 'assault' rifles in 5.56x45 and 7.62x39 that placed all these bigger guns on the back-burners of priority or put them in the hands of so many others worldwide.

    If your shooting in good conditions... I'll agree that the M14 with standard and NM sights holds an edge at longer ranges -- just not in low light, flat light, for rapid acquisition, and keeping free of ice or snow or frozen crud in the frigid cold conditions.

    I also think if you look at Finland, Norway, Sweden... all where primarily in favor of the G3 or their licensed copies.

    Only exception in these far northern countries was the eventual switch to a carbine more assault type rifle. Sweden used a modified 'Swede version' of FNC, because it had to be better adapted to the frigid conditions --- this was in 5.56x45 and not for 7.62x51.

    For conversation sake, Fins (innovative, skilled, with leading edge on high technology, and a country that loves it's guns) went with improving and modernizing Kalashnikov pattern rifles in 7.62x51, 7.62x39, plus produced exports in 5.56x45.

  19. #19
    Member AKDoug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Talkeetna
    Posts
    5,714

    Default

    My HK91 was stone cold reliable. Thousands of rounds down range in all weather conditions including down to -30F. I hardly cleaned the thing and thoroughly abused it. Those "dial up" rear sights worked great. I could smoke that steel plate at 300 yards at Birchwood all day long back in the early 90's. It was just big and heavy. The cash offer I got due to Feinstein was just too much to pass up.
    Bunny Boots and Bearcats: Utility Sled Mayhem

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
  •