Colt M4 6920 vs. DSA FAL Para

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nother vote for the FAL.

The M4 is fine and will do most of what a civilian shooter needs to accomplish, but in the grand scheme of things, the 7.62mm MBR is really the most firepower a civilian can get their hands on without NFA paperwork.

If it is just a range gun, either will do. But for serious use, smart money is on the 7.62. The chances of ever needing its advantages in power, penetration, or range is astronomically low--probably about the same as getting struck by lightening, twice--but if you ever need it, you'll be glad you have it.

Even the AK seems weak and uninteresting to me since I got my M1A. Once you experience a battle rifle, there's no going back. At least there wasn't for me.
 
Depends on what you want the rifle for -- Obama-proof investment? Range gun? Home defense? etc.

The chances of ever needing its advantages in power, penetration, or range is astronomically low--probably about the same as getting struck by lightening, twice--but if you ever need it, you'll be glad you have it.
Click to expand...

And the chances that the slower handling time, smaller basic load of ammo carried and in the gun, and all the other liabilities of 7.62x51 as a service rifle cartridge will get you killed are also low . . . but they're still there.
 
All I can think of is the little ditty Sgt. Hartman sang in Full Metal Jacket... "This is my rifle [FAL], this is my gun [AR]... This one's for fighting [FAL], this one's for fun [AR]"!
 
Buy an M1A. 7.62x51mm is a great round for civilians, so that eliminates the AR. The M1A is just as reliable, if not moreso than the FAL, and is more of a rifleman's rifle.
 
I prefer the AR15, that is what I would choose. FAL's are nice, but AR15's are best (IMO).

Depends on you though. Only you can make the choice of what will be best for YOU.
 
I own both, get the LE6920.

The DSA SA58 Para is a great rifle, but it’s also selling for about $500 more than the LE6920. The surplus ammo for 7.62 has just about dried up and what’s left is expensive. I reload and it’s still much cheaper to load .223 than .308. I flat out shoot the 6920 much more than my Para.

Also, IF you’re going to do any sort of formal training the AR is a much better option. The Para even with the lightweight lower weighs a couple pounds more than the 6920. By the time you outfit both rifles similarly the FAL is close to 10lbs unloaded. Between the weight and recoil, the FAL makes for a long day at a class.

Chuck
 
I owned a LE 6920 and sold it to fund M14 items and more 7.62x39 ammo.

Reasons...

Ammo for the AR is expensive.
I have plenty of 7.62x51 NATO surplus ammo for my M14s, but I'm not currently shooting any of it.
My 7.62x39 AK is cheap to feed and it gets shot relatively often.




Do you own an AK?
 
And the chances that the slower handling time, smaller basic load of ammo carried and in the gun, and all the other liabilities of 7.62x51 as a service rifle cartridge will get you killed are also low . . . but they're still there.
Click to expand...

Umm :uhoh:

Not to put too fine a point on observing the obvious, but he isn't talking about a service rifle. That is a completely different discussion. He's talking about a rifle for himself, not for the armed services. And for an individual lacking the support and manpower that makes the 5.56 work as a service cartridge, the 7.62x51 makes a lot more sense than the 5.56.

The OP doesn't have M240s, M2HBs, Mk 19s, and Cobra gunships standing by to take care of things his basic rifle isn't capable of, nor does he have a squad of motivated warriors providing suppressive fire as he flanks the enemy position. The needs of the civilian are much more similar to that of the police marksmen than of the Marine Corp or Army Rangers and as such, a civilian needs to be much more concerned about first round effectiveness than of things like ammunition load out. Since modern expanding ammunition for the 7.62x51 has somewhere around 80% of the permanent wound cavity and tissue displacement of a load of 12 gauge 00 buckshot, it makes a lot of sense compared to the 5.56mm. A civilian in any situation he or she is going to encounter is going to have to account for every round he or she fires. This means suppressive fire is moot and firing a hammer pair instead of a single round doubles the chances of litigation following an errant round.
 
I love this.

"Which rifle, A or B, should I get?"

"PICK C!!! PICK C!!!!! DO NOT THINK PICK C!!!"

I would go with the FAL.
 
Considering you are looking for something that is going to be an Obama-proof "investment", I'd take the AR.

The FAL, while a fine rifle, is going to stay exactly what it is forever. It will never change from its current configuration.

The AR can be built into just about anything. If the 5.56 isn't powerful enough for you (and I find this to be a dubious concept especially in the realm of civilian self defense) you can drop on an upper in 6.8, or 6.5...

You can drop on an LMT piston MRP in the caliber of your choice if you don't like the DI gas system....

You can drop on a .50bmg upper if it really floats your boat.

Obama would have to get through a more restrictive ban than the last one to keep you from doing this stuff. The FAL doesn't have that kind of flexibility. If the purchase is based on possible future political moves, I'd buy into the more flexible system.
 
Both have their + and -. I wouldn't stand in front of either of them. In the real world the critical factor WILL BE the individual who is committed and motivated to doing what is necessary in a time of extreme danger and stress. In other words the most effective weapon is one that is manned by a person who is lucid of mind and will not hesitate at the moment of truth. IMHO
 
Tim, don't kid yourself. the FAL has no advantage over the AR, in terms of practical use or collectability with or without an obana.

For someone in God Bless America, you might want to think about training, not just hardware.

The colt 6920 is as worry-free as you can get, and you can use it in any of the quality carbine classes out there. You will get a suboptimal training experience if you bring a FAL.

Seriously, you should consider that there are a *^%-ton of english-speaking professionals USING the AR/m4 at the moment. When you put things into large-scale with people who communicate, you start to learn things. important things.

That base of knowledge does not exist in the US or probably anywhere for DSA FALs. It doesn't matter how many internet posters have a beautiful specimen in their safe; it doesn't generate quality operational experience. That doesn't mean some goober won't give you twice what you paid for it after the obana, if that's all you want.

I won't bore you with the litany of ergonomical advantages the AR has over the FAL, but the cost of ammo is important. I'm sure you've already checked and found you can buy LC 5.56 for about the same price as wolf 7.62. not to mention, you can get 22lr conversions for the AR and shoot all day for $14.

Quality AR mags are plentiful.
Spare and replacement parts are much more plentiful.
Quality aftermarket parts are ubiquitous.

I'm not saying the FAL is a "bad" gun, or that DSA doesn't make a quality product.

Think of it like this... Honda made 16+ million civics that ten million people drive every day. Winnebago makes what? 10s of thousands of vehicles that people drive twice a year? I'm not saying a winnebago is dog doo. I'm just saying a rational person, especially anyone with an engineering background, would not expect one of those mfg or surrounding industries to have worked the bugs out as well or be as efficient as the other.


And I'm not just talking about the military (as if that weren't enough). Go to any tactical rifle or 3gun match. If you want to learn how to run a FAL efficiently, you're going to have to figure it out yourself.
 
I could argue that the difference between cover and concealment is the difference between 7.62x51 and 5.56x45. Someone posted a link to a video not long ago on this topic. It was surprising what SS109 penetrators out of M16's and Fn machine gun wouldn't penetrate until auto-fire hammered through, while 7.62 ball punched right on in. Truth is, it's a personal choice. I own both a FN-FAL and an AR-15. I like the FAL better. Course I'm 6'4" and 225lbs. A 10lb rifle isn't a stretch for me. YMMV.

John
 
Seriously, you should consider that there are a *^%-ton of english-speaking professionals USING the AR/m4 at the moment. When you put things into large-scale with people who communicate, you start to learn things. important things.

That base of knowledge does not exist in the US or probably anywhere for DSA FALs.
Click to expand...

There is some FAL specific instruction out there from Team Spartan (who, I think, have some relationship with DSA), among others. (Judging by the amount of 7.62x51 brass on the ground in South Hill, VA, I'm pretty certain Larry Vickers would allow FALs - or other 308 rifles -- in his classes with prior arrangement/coordination, for instance.)

But, admittedly, intensive training with 7.62x51 compared to 5.56mm is A) prohibitively expensive for most compared to 5.56mm or AK ammo and B) thoroughly unfun on the shoulder after a while.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
DSA FAL para scope mount?
Replies
6
Views
396
powermad
P
D
  • Locked
question about FN-FAL vs DS Arms SA58 FAL para
Replies
19
Views
12K
Chuck R.
Chuck R.
A
  • Locked
Question on the Length of the DSA SA58 FAL PARA
Replies
0
Views
519
Anthony
A
T
  • Locked
DSA FAL Para 18"....what extras?
Replies
22
Views
2K
kfranz
K
R
  • Locked
bcm ar-15 vs dsa para elite
Replies
11
Views
533
Revolver Ocelot
R
Back
Top