Reliability of M1A? and the FAL?

[thaddeus]

I have become disgruntled at the unreliability of my AR's. I give up, I think the design sucks and is internally flawed. I cannot trust my life to the AR design even when well cared for and shot at a range, let alone in dirty chaotic combat.
I am trying out M1A's and FAL's (SA58).

How is the reliability of the M1A design?

And how about the FAL?



thanks

 

[SodaPop]

Pay attention to who manufactured the firearm. DSarms and Springfield Armory are the best. Everything else is a risk.

Both are reliable designs that are often ruined by poor assemble.

 

[critter]

I have an AR15 (Colt H-bar) and a M1 A (Fed Ord receiver, military parts). Neither have EVER had a failure of any kind-that was not MAGAZINE related.

It can be done. Get a good one!

 

[standingbear]

i have a stg fal,austrian parts on an imbel receiver.paid around 450 for it(its a century arms gun)have enjoyed this gun alot,replaced the gas piston with a dsa piston and was well again-saved some money by upgrading here and there with dsa parts.mags are very cheap.never had a m1a-i hear mixed reviews about them and just never had enough money to try one out for myself.

 

[thaddeus]

To clarify, I am talking about a Springfield Loaded M1A and a DSArms SA58.


I feel confident that the thread will drift along the lines of my next comment, but I have owned a great variety of AR's from most all manfacturers, and I have come to the conclusion that the design is a poor design for reliability. Even just at the range, with a clean gun and good conditions, at any time a slight fumble in the feeding process causes a malfunction, some of which are very tough to fix. This is coupled with the fact that it is a weak gun, easy to break or bend. At this time I do not feel that I can trust my life to this design, when there are more reliable designs out there.

 

[DMK]

FALS have decent mags available for really, really cheap. M1As do not.

 

[SodaPop]

Everyone I know that hates AR's loves FAL's.

 

[Stephen Ewing]

A Springfield can be expected to function very reliably, and a DSA just as much so. I have both in my safe, and can not badmouth either for anything. I prefer a couple things about the FAL (ergonomics, fieldstripping) but it is not a militant preference.

Then again, my distaste for the AR is more theoretical than militant, too.

Steve

 

[Blain]

The only combat rifle more rugged/reliable than the M14 is the AK!!!!

 

[Destructo6]

If those are your two choices, you would be well served by either. Now, it's just a matter of preference.

 

[Jack19]

thaddeus, what kind of AR are you shooting?

 

[telewinz]

I have the Imbel FAL and the Armscorp M-14, I prefere the FAL as a better design but both our 2 of my top-notch rifles. I like my SP-1 but it has always had more malfunctions than any other semi-auto centerfire rifle.

 

[Nando Aqui]

Consider the HK91?

I have a DSA SA58 and I really like it. I had to fiddle with the gas adjustment so it would eject Black Hills ammo reliably, but it is OK now. On the other hand, it never had any problems with Portuguese surplus .308 - Besides, I decided to use the Black Hills only on my Rem 700P.

I also have a Heckler and Koch HK91. It has always digested every type and brand of ammo with ZERO problems.

The bolt of the HK91 is more difficult to learn to disassemble, but once you know the trick, it can be done extremely easily and fast. No tools (even a screwdriver) are required to disassemble the HK, including hand guards and scope mount, (original and ARMS claw mounts).

The only thing I don't like about the HK is that the bolt does not stay open on the last round. But if soldiers all around the world get by without this feature, which not all military rifles have, then I can as well.

Accuracy-wise, with the Port ammo, from the bipod and just my shoulder for back support, and shooting relatively quickly: the SA58 is about 2 MOA, and the HK91 is 2-1/2. When I take my time, I can knock off about 1/2 MOA from either.

Costs (approximate): HK91=1850-2100, M1A=1500=1700?, SA58=1350-1550, Cetme=300-400.

If I didn't know what the circumstances were, and I were forced to grab just one, it would be the HK91.

Although I do not own a Cetme, I have friends who do and claim that they are very reliable, and their accuracy is acceptable. Caveat: there are many 'sources' for Cetmes.

Alex

BUT - - If my wife had to grab just one rifle, she would take our Colt AR15 HBAR; and that's fine with me too!

 

[curt]

My M1A has been back to springfield twice and fulton armory once (not their vault) for problems related to the use of non-GI parts or poor machinging on the reciever. My opinion is that given some time and a bit of ammo downrange it can be a reliable weapon but i would never trust a M1A right out of the box (or any gun for that matter) with my life.

My FAL i built and it seems to be a robust design and fairly reliable once you discount some tuning i had to do.

My ARs including some i built are very reliable. If i had to grab a longarm out of my safe right now and fight with it, i would grab one of my ARs.

I have experienced and have seen others experience problems with every reliable firearm there is. Go to the troubleshooting areas of any active forum dedicated to any firearem and you'll see plenty of problems. IMO nothing can be relied upon until proven and a problem with a firearm doesn't mean its a POS, just means that there's a problem with the shooter/gun system that i need to fix. All 3 of these designs have proven themselves in war so the basic design is good. It remains to be seen whether any given sample of any chosen type will prove sufficiently reliable.

 

[Keith]

I have a FAl built on a G1 "kit". Other than the few required US parts it's all built on a mixed bag of 50 year old used Belgian parts which have seen long service in the Turkish army.

The only change I made is to drill out the gas port to 7/64ths, which is the standard introduced some time after this rifle was produced. After that one change (which took all of ten minutes), it functions flawlessly. This is a sound design, parts and accessories are plentiful and cheap and it's simple enough that even a guy like me can build one from the ground up.

I actually prefer the looks and the ergonomics of the M1A/M14 because it has more classic lines (to my eyes), but I don't think the design is quite as good as the FAL. For example, the FAL allows you to adjust the gas system down to reliably function with even the worst old ammo you might run across. And as mentioned earlier, the design is so simple and easy to strip, maintain and replace parts that you could keep one running forever without ever paying a dime to a gunsmith.

Keith

 

[twoblink]

At the risk of hijacking this thread and making it into a "I hate AR design" thread..

I have an M1A, love it to death, from Springfield. The fit and finish sucks, but it's very accurate.

FAL's. I hate the sights, but reliable, and magazines are hella cheap compared to M1A's.

That said; AR15's have a horrible design. It takes craps where it eats. That's not a formula for reliability when you fire a lot of rounds..

 

[Onslaught]

AR's... you either LOVE 'em or you HATE 'em...

Personally, I LOVE mine. It has fired hundreds of rounds per range trip without any malfunctions, and quite frequently, has gone back into the safe without cleaning... In fact, I've had my AR for 10 years now, and even with the original 11.5" barrel, it has never malfunctioned once.

I understand the "craps where it eats" thing, but every single pistol I own uses it's own gasses directly to blow back the slide without some fancy piston, and I don't consider them to be "poor designs". I wonder how many of those "unreliable" AR's were either parts guns or Hesse arms, or some other cheap AR clone...

I've never met a Bushmaster owner that didn't LOVE theirs either.

I had a Springfield M1A, but it went back to Springfield for a "slam-fire", and afterwards, I just didn't trust it... If I get another .308, it will be an FAL.

 

[alcmaeon]

I gotta Jump In here

I bought a Springfield Armory M1A in December. I shot it once, 50 rds, no problem. I took it out the second time and on the 109th round (109 total includes the original 50) the bolt popped apart. I wrote a thread on this if you look in the archives under my handle.

Long story short, this problem seems to be happing a lot to SA M1As-as I did some research into it I found lots of people who had had this happen. When I sent it back to SA they were great, polite and decent turnaround on the rifle. They informed me that they had NO GI bolts and so I have the original bolt the rifle came with. However, this should never have happned in the first place on a $1200 rifle.

Maybe try Fulton Armory instead of SA.

 

[MolonLabe416]

I've purchased several FAL's from Mark Graham at ArizonaResponseSystems.com

Highly recommended.

I'm trying to like the AR. I'm doing better. Really.

 

[JPM70535]

I have a Colt Ar15 Preban and I have never had a malfunction during repeated range visits. It happily digested all the factory and reloaded ammo I fed it. In fairness to others who seem to have an inordinate amount of malfunctions, mine is a COLT!

 

[BHP9]

M1A Is a reliable rifle if built up with quality G.I. forged parts. I perfer it to my FN Fal and here is why.

The M1a's gas system will work with just about anything. LIght cast bullet loads , match loads and military loads. Just never reload it with a slow burning power. This of course pertains to any gas operated rifle.

The FN' gas system can be a nightmare:

1. The gas system must constantly be adjusted to the loads you are shooting and at the range with a variety of loads it is often a big pain in the butt. Shifting from cast bullet loads to match loads to military loads requires a constant adjustment of the gas system. Doing this is time consuming and wastes ammo. Extraction is very erratic even with a properly adjusted gas system which still results in one case being dropped at your feet and the next being thrown 20 feet away.

And when the FN's gas system ages then the fun really begins. Short tube guns often break their solder connections on the gas tube resulting in malfunctions of the weapon.

Long tube guns often leak even when new. They are not soldered. When they begin to leak bad enough they too malfunction.

As was stated in other posts it also depends who put the FAL together. Plenty of bargain basement thrown together FAL's do not work very well. Put together right they work and put together with quality parts they work at least for awhile. You get what you pay for. Pay less for a put together FAL and do not expect much in terms of reliablity unless you happen to get lucky and get a good one. Pay more like buying a DSA with quality parts and workmanship and you can expect the weapon to work for a long time.

 

[JShirley]

Thad!

Great to see you, man. As a matter of fact, I was just arranging with a gunshop today to get my FrankNFAL shipped up to me in WA. It's a G1 built on an Imbel receiver, with a fold-down charging handle and "inch" selector.

I believe the M1A probably has better sights, but that the FN is the better overall design.

The M16a4 I used in ITB was very accurate, but did not like sand. If you want a range gun that takes forever to clean well, the M16/AR15 family could be just the ticket. If you want a sturdy and reliable weapon, get a FN/STG-58/G1/L1 or AK clone.

Oh, yeah- the STG-58 from DSA should be cheaper, too.

Peace (how's your training going?)

John

 

[JShirley]

BHP: you shoot cast bullet loads in a military autoloader? Then you shoot match loads?

Would you help me understand why?

 

[BHP9]

BHP: you shoot cast bullet loads in a military autoloader? Then you shoot match loads? Would you help me understand why?

The answer is quite simple if one is familiar with shooting cast bullets. Cast bullets must not be shot after shooting jacketed bullets. Why? Because the rifling picks up copper fouling when shooting jacketed bullets first. When you then shoot cast bullets after shooting jackted bullets accuracy is not top notch and the gun may pick up leading. When using good quality cast bullet loads made of pure lynotype metal (tin not burned out of it) and when using a good lube like alox 50/50 and when also using gas checks you get about zero leading as long as the bore is not suffering from the effects of rust or pitting.

This is why you shoot cast bullets first.

If your gun is a real barrel leader then it is not advisable to shoot jacketed bullets after cast bullets untill you clean the lead deposits out of it. I have fired some military guns with damaged bores with lead bullets and still got almost zero leading. It all depends on the rifle and the quality of the cast bullets that you use as to how much if any leading you will get.

I might also add the bullet must fit the bore in cast bullet shooting. Shooting an undersize bullet will also result in leading.

 

[JShirley]

I seem to not have inquired well.

My question was not meant to be "why would you shoot cast bullets before jacketed ones", but rather: why would you shoot cast bullets in an expensive military autoloader (for which ammunition is plentiful and inexpensive)? If you find such a rationale, why would you then shoot match bullets? If your purpose is to drive out leading, wouldn't you just shoot regular FMJ? Especially if you're obstensibly shooting lead to lower your costs anyway?