[saturno_v]

I like them both.
I think the CETME is a bit less expensive...what is a fair price for a CETME in good condition??? And a FN FAL?? And a H&K G3??

Any advantages/disadvantages of a CETME versus the FN FAL and the G3???

Thank you for your advice!!!

P.S.

Later on I could get a Dragunov too...what is the lest expensive but still reliable option for this rifle???

Thanks!!

[Rugerlvr]

Um, M1?

[saturno_v]

I forgot...

I may consider an M-14 too but my understanding is that these are quite pricey...any "cheap" option for this rifle??/

Sorry not interested in an M1 Garand...Thye tend to be very expensive and I like the "assault rifle" style anyway....

[Rugerlvr]

I'm sorry, but a Service Grade M1 from the CMP is less than $600. If that's expensive, then you ain't buying a lot of guns.

You will not find a more accurate, fun to shoot, and beautiful weapon on the market. (YMMV) :D

[USSR]

Any advantages/disadvantages of a CETME versus the FN FAL and the G3???

IMHO, the advantage goes to the FAL over the CETME and the G3, what with it's adjustable gas operation and lower recoil.

Don

http://ussr.clarityconnect.com/FAL1.jpg

[stubbicatt]

I like the PTR91.

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j187/stubbicatt/PTR%2091/P1010639.jpg

...with 22 long rifle converter...

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j187/stubbicatt/PTR%2091/IMG_0441.jpg

Versatile, and fun!

[Z-Michigan]

FN-FAL - coming from someone who has a PTR-91 (which is basically a G3/HK91).

I found the balance and fit of the FN-FAL to be better for me. And if you reload, the HK/CETME design is pretty hard on brass.

[redneckrepairs]

Years ago i owned both the HK 91 and 93. They were fine rifles but at the time accessory's were pretty non existent, and the HK scope mount would have run me nearly 1/3 of the price i paid either rifle Mags at the time came from HK and seemd similarly overpriced.
I currently have a FAL and love it . It is reliable with anything i have been able to stick in the mag , as or more accurate than i am with the iron sights , and... If your inclination is towards personalizing a rifle well IMHO the FAL takes a second seat only to the AR platform as a " Barbie doll for big boys " . By that i mean there is more stuff out there than you can shake a stick at to bolt onto/change out on the rifle to either ruin it or truly make it just what you want depending on if your ideas agree with me or not lol . Spare parts and mags are cheap and plenty full nowadays, with the only main choice being if you want an inch pattern or metric pattern rifle to start out with .

[Vaarok]

FAL, ninety countries can't be wrong, and it's not some sheetmetal ergonomic abomination.

[hankdatank1362]

AK47s are .30 caliber! ;)

Sorry.. I couldn't help it. Have you considered an AR-10?

[H2O MAN]

Save your pennies and buy an M14 clone when you have the $

[FuzzyBunny]

G3 or HK mags are the cheapest of the lot.
I bought 100 mags for about $100 a few months ago.

I like the ruggedness of the HK G3 and PTR-91.
They do dent the brass and sometimes the lead nose rounds will get a little shaved off as the round chambers. I own some Hks in 91 and 93 models and love them.

I also want to add a PTR-91 and FAL to my mix, in that order.
An M1A would be nice to add to my collection as I like the .308 round.

I have passed on many ARs. I just don't need another .223.

In short, all the .308s you listed are good firearms and you can't really go wrong with any of them. Determine your needs and go for the model that fits best. The HK/G3 is a heavy beast if you plan a 50 mile march.

ps. Forgot to add. The HK trigger needs work to be improved. I dunno about the PTR-91 but the HK trigger is real heavy!

[Ash]

H2O, you do realize the M14 or its derivatives were not in the list. As a battle rifle, the FAL is better than the CETME and its offspring. You will spend less for an FAL than the M14 or its derivatives, including the Chicom stuff. Base line FAL is better than the Chinese stuff, and if you want to upgrade, the M14's parts are insanely expensive. Ever price an entire M14 trigger group?

A DSA FAL can be had for the price of a Chicom on the used market (which is apples to apples as the Chicom stuff hasn't been imported in almost a decade) and the DSA will be as a whole much better. And Imbel FAL's are great. Original military parts are far cheaper for FAL's.

Chicoms have decent receivers, but many of the other parts aren't so great (like the stock, bolt, and useless muzzle device).

Ash

[silverlance]

FAL. That isn't even a question, and it's not because we manufacture these.

You get:

1. superior ergonomics
2. superior construction (no sheet metal)
3. ease of disassembly and cleaning (as opposed the M1A, which must be cleaned from the muzzle... the FAL has a takedown lever)
4. reliability - the rifle is designed to work despite any condition
5. availability of parts and magazines, all over the world
6. adjustable gas system - fire nearly any ammunition that you can acquire

That's just some of the highlights.

We manufacture our FAL rifles on our own receivers built on metric Imbel kits, here in California. For THR members we will ship the rifle for free. For more information: www.entreprise.com

kevin(at)entreprise.com

kev

[H2O MAN]

Ash H2O, you do realize the M14 or its derivatives were not in the list.

Ash, you must have missed this post by saturno_v ... it clearly states that the M14 may be considered.

saturno_v I forgot...

I may consider an M-14 too but my understanding is that these are quite pricey...



Chinese M14s have excellent receivers that are as close as one can get to USGI.
Their 1-piece forged op rods are just like USGI TRW forged 1-piece op rods.
Their trigger groups and chrome lined barrels are also excellent.

If one is willing to spend the money to have the M14 balanced and blue printed you will end up with a superior battle rifle.
It's not cheap, but it is well worth the investment.

[Ash]

That is a matter of opinion. For the amount of money to get the silk purse, you can have a better FAL.

Ash

[H2O MAN]

So you admit that you missed his post concerning the M14... that's cool :)

[jackdanson]

Cheap? Saiga .308, half the cost even if you convert it. Had one, mad at myself for trading it in.

[Ash]

Ah, so this again :rolleyes:

H2O, you like Chinese M14 copies.

At least, you like some of the parts.

The bolt is pure junk. As is the stock. The muzzle device is useless and serves no better function than a hood ornament. The rear sight parts are often junk, and often the rear sight detents are too shallow to be of any use. The barrels are not that great, but passable - sometimes. Sometimes they are utter junk. Sometimes they are pretty good. In short, they are a crap-shoot.

In other words, the rifle itself is junk. There are good parts on it, but the Chinese M14 is, as a sum, not a good rifle and about as good a choice as a Hesse FAL. Indeed, Hesse FAL's have a higher percentage of good parts over junk when compared with a Chicom. With the Chicom, you have stone soup. There is a nugget of something good there, but you have to do so much work to have it a great rifle, that there is very little Chinese left there. Yeah, some guys will have had excellent results with Chicom m14's bone stock. I had great results with a Hesse one time. Most, however, aren't all that hot.

For the amount of work involved, it ain't worth it.

And, more so, the OP said "I may consider an M-14 too but my understanding is that these are quite pricey...any "cheap" option for this rifle??"

You failed to offer something cheap because there is nothing cheap with the M14, ESPECIALLY the Chinese version. But none of the "clones" or commercial copies are cheap. For the price of the Chicom by itself you can almost have a DSA FAL (on the used market you can equal them out). One for one there is no comparison, the Chicom is junk compared with the DSA. One for one the Chicom is junk compared with the Imbel at $200 less.

To get the Chicom up to speed, you can have two Imbels or a far superior DSA. In other words, dollar for dollar, a Chicom can never match a good FAL.

And, as a general rule, the FAL will be better, dollar for dollar, than the CETME derivatives, though the PTR-91 and H&K originals are fine rifles, the latter being rather pricey for what you get, though.

Ash

[RockyMtnTactical]

I like the FAL. :)

[H2O MAN]

Ash

H2O, you like Chinese M14 copies.

At least, you like some of the parts.

The bolt is pure junk. As is the stock.
The muzzle device is useless and serves no better function than a hood ornament.
The rear sight parts are often junk, and often the rear sight detents are too shallow to be of any use.
The barrels are not that great, but passable - sometimes. Sometimes they are utter junk.
Sometimes they are pretty good. In short, they are a crap-shoot.

In other words, the rifle itself is junk.

Ash, you seem to know quite a bit about the FAL, but you have
much to learn when it comes to the Poly Tech & Norinco M14s.
Most, if not all of the negative information that you and others
post about the Chinese M14 is nothing more than internet BS !!

Except for the very first examples that were imported into
the US, Chinese M14s are good to go right out of the box.

The bolts are fine.
The Chu wood stocks are fine - optional stocks are available.
The faux flash suppressor sucks, but it was required to comply with the AWB - options exist.
The rear sights are fine - USGI can be better.
The barrels are as good as standard USGI barrels.
The forged receivers are as close as one can get to USGI.
The 1-piece forged op rods are just like USGI TRW forged 1-piece op rods.
The trigger groups are fine and respond well to NM mods as do USGI TGs.

Chinese M14s can still be purchased for about $700 or $800, but prices are climbing.

Please keep posting what you know about the FAL because
I don't know as much about them as I would like to. Thanks!

[Robert]

I'd go with the FAL... It aint the right arm of the free world for nothing. I love mine.

[HGUNHNTR]

I absolutely love my PTR-91, it shoots very well, has very mild recoil for a .308, looks great, and makes me smile whenever I put her in my ;)hands.

[Ash]

by Clint McKee

Clint, tell us about the Chinese M14S

I'd be happy to go through this. Here's the scoop:

1. The locking lug helix (surface contour) of the Chinese bolt does not agree/match the locking lug helix of the receiver. Thus, the bolt locking lug surfaces only partially contact the receiver locking lug surfaces. As you fire the rifle, the bolt will "collapse" back onto the locking lugs of the receiver until "enough" surface contact is engaged to stop the rearward force caused by the 50,000 PSI or so that is produced on each firing. As the bolt moves rearward, headspace is lost. Often/mostly/always massive headspace loss occurs. I have seen Chinese bolts that close & move back & forth with a field gauge. I have witnessed headspace readings estimated (no gauge long enough to be certain) at greater than 20 thous. beyond Go. G.I. bolt's will also "collapse" when receiver locking lugs are not correct (commercial receivers sometimes have poor locking lug surfaces which is why we at Fulton Armory always hand lap every bolt to every commercial receiver to ensure excellent engagement before we install/set headspace), though they move rearward more slowly due to better heat treat & steel. The fact that the Chinese bolts are very soft, amplifies the problem. BTW, the locking lug helix of the Chinese receiver does agree/match the helix of the G.I. M14 bolts quite nicely. I have never had to hand lap a G.I. bolt for more than say, 15-20 minutes to get a beautiful engagement. It's quite odd. It's as though someone ground on the Chinese bolt lugs with a handtool.

2. The Chinese bolt is "too long" as it relates to the firing pin bridge of the receiver, which retracts the firing pin on loading. As the Chinese bolt moves reward, the firing pin tail also moves reward. So much so that the firing pin bridge does not effectively/at all retract the firing pin! I have seen Chinese rifles where the firing pin did not retract at all. This is quite dangerous. Add to this bolt "geometry" problem the fact that the trigger & sears, & hammers are also way too soft (hammer fall will occur) one can see the train wreck ahead.
Click HERE for more on the Chinese bolt.

Final comments:

A. One thousand rounds through an M14 is nothing. I have customers who do this in a month. The whole point of possessing fine military rifles is that their design, properly executed, provides for a durability & reliability virtually unknown in commercial products.

B. That a rifle has not failed catastrophically, nor a wing fallen off, is hardly a measure of acceptability, safety or serviceability.

C. The vast majority of Chinese M14's that come into our shop have excessive headspace, among other maladies. A very few have had too tight a headspace, which is quite odd.

Fulton Armory builds Service and Competition Grade rifles on Polytech and Norinco receivers from customer-supplied rifles. The result is a superlative M14-type rifle with a forged receiver, as close to GI as you can get.

Note to Walt: The barrel must be replaced to allow for a G.I. bolt to fit, and even then, the receiver needs relieving to safely accept the bolt! THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT POINT! Also, the Hammer, Trigger & Sear need to be replaced.

Our package should be done all at once, or not at all. You would not believe the horrendous examples that come into the shop that were "worked on" by the local "Gunsmith," trying to fit the G.I. bolt. One needs to know what to grind, and even more importantly, what not to grind. You really would not believe it. You're too trusting to believe what I've seen, Walt

--Clint McKee
A postscript from Kirk Hays:

Having owned several of the Chinese M14S rifles, and having a set of M14 receiver gauges available to me, I have independently confirmed what Clint says about the receiver geometries. The Chinese receivers are dimensionally as good as TRW rifles in the collection of a friend. Period.

The finish on the Norinco receivers is rough on non-functional surfaces - they are ugly, and Polytech receivers are only slightly better.

John Kepler has inside information that the DCM was actually looking at using Chinese receivers for providing M14 rifles to Service Rifle competitors, and access to a steel analysis done on the recievers, showing it to be 5100 steel, which is a very good alloy for receivers, but a bit difficult to work.

--Kirk Hays

More on the Chinese bolts from Clint:

The Chinese bolts have a great deal more problems than just the heat treating. Incidentally, whether a part is cast or forged has nothing to do with whether they need to be heat treated. These bolts could be transmutated into Kryptonite, but they will still be dangerously substandard.

The problems include:

The bolt's locking lugs are cut wrong !The helixial angles are dead wrong, and thusly, they do NOT properly contact the opposing receiver's locking lugs. A very bad condition, as headspace will be lost over time. Sometimes, in only a few hundred rounds! The bolt sits very far back and away from the barrel mouth, and thus, provides very poor support to the cartridge case at its base. Bear in mind, this has nothing to do with headspace (this condition can exist even with proper headspace). The "closer" a bolt fits to the barrel mouth, the better the support of the case. Over the years, improperly manufactured barrels have shown us what can happen, even with proper headspace, when the cartridge's base is not properly supported: total case failure with catastrophic results. In the Chinese rifle example, it's the bolt sitting too far back on a proper barrel!

Next, because the bolt sits so far back in the receiver, the firing pin tail (which exits at the rear of the bolt body) is also too far rearward and thusly, the firing pin is not properly retracted by the receiver's firing pin bridge.

If you ever have an opportunity to examine a Chinese rifle, remove the op rod, and take notice of how far the bolt can move back & fro, while in battery. In many of these rifles, it's scary. Naturally, how far it will move will depend on how many rounds have been fired and just how bad the bolt was originally.

So, IMHO, forget spending a bunch, or a little, money on "heat treating" the Chinese bolts.

--Clint McKee

As to the rest, Aquaman, I was very big into M14's in the 1990's, and my very first one was a Norinco with the bobbed nose (no muzzle device).

Mine, newly imported, had bad headspace. The locking lugs on the bolt showed they were not making solid contact with the receiver as well. The detents on the rear sight wings were too shallow and would not hold the rear sight adjustment consistently. The barrel was decent and I had no complaints about the oprod. The stock was little better than a 2x4 and the trigger group had way too much slop. The hammer would not even strike the rear of the bolt solidly.

That rifle set me back $400 at the time. It was not worth it.

And that, my friend, backs up Clint's experiences. Personal experience, there, personal. It was better than a Federal Ordnance M14, but marginally. Considering the prices that Chicoms and even FedOrds go for these days, there is NO WAY they can compete, dollar for dollar, with an FAL. I can get a better FAL for less than a stock Chicom.

In other words, in response to the OP's question, there is no good cheap alternative in the M14 world when compared with the CETME derivatives or the FAL's.

Ash

[AndyC]

FAL for me.

[Gator]

1) M1A
2) FAL

I put the M1A first because it is more accurate than the FAL, and has a nicer trigger and sights, but they are both fine rifles. FAL mags are less expensive.

[H2O MAN]

;) LOL Asher!! . . . I knew your source of information just by the wording.

Clint had and still has an agenda to sell USGI bolt conversions, new
barrels and rebuilds for Fulton Armory.

Most of what Clint said back then has been verified as pure BS !!

When folks use the wrong gauges - the head space is said to be bad.
When folks use the correct gauges - the head space is fine.


You just confirmed that most, if not all of the negative information
concerning the Chinese M14 is nothing more than internet BS !!


Also, I have not compared the M14 to the FAL in any of my post.
All I did was respond to the OP when the M14 was named as a consideration.

[Ash]

Ah, didn't read did you? Check out the last several paragraphs.

They are what we call "personal experience." You know, the real thing. You know, concrete personal hands own experience.

Or are you blind to these things?

Ash

[H2O MAN]

Your imagination is getting the best of you... let it go.


Again, Clint's claims are BS !!
He was selling parts and services for Fulton Armory - nothing more.

Except for the very first examples that were imported into
the US, Chinese M14s are good to go right out of the box.

The bolts are fine.
The Chu wood stocks are fine - optional stocks are available.
The faux flash suppressor sucks, but it was required to comply with the AWB - options exist.
The rear sights are fine - USGI can be better.
The barrels are as good as standard USGI barrels.
The forged receivers are as close as one can get to USGI.
The 1-piece forged op rods are just like USGI TRW forged 1-piece op rods.
The trigger groups are fine and respond well to NM mods as do USGI TGs.





BTW, the Chinese barrel does not have to be replaced when a USGI bolt is installed.

[Ash]

Few things shall
A fellow argue
Now that the discussion has run its course
But I can say that the OP's question
Of which this entire discussion should have been about,
Yet is now veered away, is answered. I have my experiences. That is enough.

Ash

[H2O MAN]

Works for me :)

Do you mind if I PM you sometime for suggestions on owning an FAL?
I would be looking for something refined and modernized.

I could just start a new thread ...:uhoh:

[saturno_v]

Guys i already own an AK-47...a MAK-90..

[stubbicatt]

Somehow I see some of you guys with a silly sticker in the back window of your pickup trucks with Calvin urinating on whatever FAL, G3, M1a or Chinese M1a or what-have-you.

Seems sort of silly to me.

To the original poster, go to the gunstore, hold them, shoulder them, see which you like best and go with that. In the end what any of us thinks is pertinent only to what WE EACH hold, shoulder, and like the best.

:)

[Ash]

:rolleyes:

[klover]

bet you can't let go:)

[powermad]

http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m178/powermad69/P1000782.jpg

I have about $1300 in mine.
rec 200
kit 180
___________
380
tools
gage 35
pin gages 50
timing 50
wrench/vice 125
files 75
_______
335
para
complete lower 300
carrier/spring kit 180
_______
480

922 BS 100
____________
1295

Still need to refinish it. But I am getting a group together to split up the cost and it should run about $30 ea to park and spray em with moly resin.

FAL's are accurate enough unmolested.
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m178/powermad69/Guns/P1000666.jpg

[LKB3rd]

Cheap? Saiga .308, half the cost even if you convert it. Had one, mad at myself for trading it in.

I have one too and it is a fine rifle. I converted mine with an old school wood stock conversion, with an RSA FCG, mojo peep sight, for (hmm lol never worked out the prices b4) around $700 bucks total. This was a full conversion with the goal of doing everything possible exactly how I wanted it.
Anyway, especially with a "basic" conversion, which is more like $500 total they are a fine rifle and an excellent value.

[Robert14]

If you must go with one of the ones you listed - get a GOOD FAL. Preferred coures of action, save up for a GOOD M1A.