Advice on Mini SA58 FAL OSW vs SIG 556?

[PERRK]

Thinking about crossing over from AK land and picking up one of these:

http://www.dsarms.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SA58OSWNFA

Anyone run one of these DSA FALs? How comfortable are they to shoot (e.g., is it just like any old FAL or did DSA improve it)?

I've gotta admit my first choice was a SIG 556 but after handling one this morning I was very disappointed with the hardware (it's no 551, that's for sure). Are there replacement parts out yet to revert a 556 into a 551?

Would really appreciate your advice. I tried to search the forums yet it keeps timing out on my ancient computer.

Thanks.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Seems like a long way to go for a .308 SBR to me.

Also you are comparing Apples to Oranges; the DSA is in .308 and the Sig is 5.56. Whole different world.

Don't forget to add $200 to the price for the Tax Stamp.

As for making the Sig 556 more like the 551, there isn't much out yet though there are rumors of aftermarket parts coming.

 

[geojap]

I've owned a DSA SA-58, as well as an Imbel para carbine. I own a Sig 556 now. The Sig is definitely lighter, more accurate, and has a nicer trigger. You can buy Sig 551 handguards from Switzerland. Magpul Pmags work wonderfully well in the 556. You can replace the Sig 556 stock with an Ace or Magpul stock if you like.

The DSA FALs are very fine rifles. The fit and finish is about the best I've seen on any semi-auto rifle. They function like clockwork. Parts for FALs are more readily available and they are easier to work on yourself (WECSOGing).

Just decide which design is more your style. They are both top-notch rifles that you can't go wrong with, in my opinion. So the choice really comes down to design preference. The FAL handles more like a brute since it hits harder, has a stiffer trigger, is bigger and heavier. The Sig 556 is a lighter, handier, more accurate rifle that has a dream trigger, and shoots a lighter round. I have never heard of a Sig 556 having reliability problems, but I have seen FALs survive incredible torture tests and still function (see "Old Dirty" on the FalFiles). The caliber difference may play a big part in your decision.

Personally, I decided that I would rather focus on the 7.62x39 and .223 calibers, so the .308 had to go. I sold my two FALs and kept my two AKMs and bought a Sig 556.

 

[iamkris]

I'd agree that the two rifles you are comparing are VERY different. What are you trying to do with it?

The SIG is appropriate for closer range, high reliability, good ergonomics, not worried about punching through cover, lighter weight, low recoil.

The OSW (by the way, you know that's an SBR, right? With that short barrel, you are penalizing the .308 down to near 7.62x39mm levels) is close and long range, good at punching through cover, high reliability, good ergonomics, heavier, greater muzzle blast/recoil. If you want the 308 punch, you'd probably be better served by a Para FAL...as you can see from the pic below, they favorably compare to AKs and ARs in length.

 

[PERRK]

Thank you men. You're all right of course and I do realize the two rifles are very different. I should have said that my comparison was only based on my $2k-per rifle budget.

The purpose of the new rifle is to try something a bit more complex with the hopes of retaining ultra high reliability. S&W Model 327 TRR8's and 7.62x39 AK's are about as exotic as anything I've ever run.

I really appreciate the advice and you've all truly helped me make a good decision. I'm going to try and find a couple of SIGs.

Thanks again.

 

[PERRK]

....

 

[Nightcrawler]

I love the FAL design, and DSA rifles in particular, BUT...

I wouldn't go for the 11" or 13" OSW for my first FAL. It's a specialized weapon. A 16" or 18" serves better as a general purpose rifle, and there's no $200.00 tax to deal with (we're already talking about a rifle that'll likely run over $1,500.00; save some money for ammo!).

Now, I've handled the Sig 556 quite a bit, though I've not yet been able to shoot one. If I were going to get a .223, that'd be the way I'd go. My first action would be to change out the stock tube and buttstock for something like a CTR stock from MagPul. My second action would be to find a way to replace the handguards, if possible.

The folding back up iron sights on the Sig are rather crude, and it doesn't seem like you can mount any better folding BUIS intended for AR-15s (the sight plane heights are different). If you're going to mount a solid, reliable optic on the rifle, though, it's not so much of an issue.

FWIW. Either way, come back with pictures when you get your rifle.

 

[geojap]

I'm going to try and find a couple of SIGs.

Buds Gun shop in Kentucky has them for $1200. I bought mine from them. They have rather remarkable and superior service. Mine was delivered to my FFL in Texas in 2 days.

Buds also offers a line of credit, like a credit card, which is incredibly evil. My FFL actually buys firearms from Buds sometimes, because Buds price is sometimes cheaper than my FFL's wholesaler's price.

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/index.php

 

[geojap]

If I were going to get a .223, that'd be the way I'd go. My first action would be to change out the stock tube and buttstock for something like a CTR stock from MagPul. My second action would be to find a way to replace the handguards, if possible.

The folding back up iron sights on the Sig are rather crude, and it doesn't seem like you can mount any better folding BUIS intended for AR-15s (the sight plane heights are different). If you're going to mount a solid, reliable optic on the rifle, though, it's not so much of an issue.

On my 556, I am going to get some 551 handguards from Switzerland after I get back from vacation in January. The 551 handguards are lighter than the 556 handguards by 1/2 pound. If you don't need all the tactical rails and such on the 556 handguards, I see no reason to not get the lighter 551 handguards.

The 556 stock has never bothered me all that much. It does its job well. The only reason I would feel compelled to replace it is if I was sure I would get a significant reduction in weight. I'm not actually sure what the 556 tube and stock weighs. The Magpul CTR weighs .8 pounds, so I wonder if the Sig stocks weighs considerably more.

In my opinion, the front BUIS that you see on mine below are crap. Sig should have never put them on the rifle.

I decided to put a Sightron 1.25-5x20 scope on mine. Here it is in its current configuration with a Blue Force - Larry Vickers sling. I have not bought the Sig 551 handguards yet.

 

[Father Knows Best]

Actually, that SA58 OSW isn't just a SBR, it's select fire. DSA may make you one in semiauto only (I don't know), but the link you posted is to a select fire version. Unless you're a licensed SOT dealer with a demo letter for that model, you can't buy it.

FWIW, however, I have handled and shot one of those (select fire). It's owned by a dealer in Georgia (and it's for sale, by the way, if you're qualified to purchase it). It's a nightmare. The muzzle flash and noise is God-awful. It's fun for impressing your friends, but I don't see much point to it. If you want a CQB weapon, the 5.56x45 or even 7.62x39 are much better cartridges to build one around than the 7.62x51.

I do have a SA58, but mine is the Para carbine version (16.25" barrel, short flash hider, folding stock). I love it, but I'd never go shorter than a 16" barrel on a FAL. In fact, if I had it to do all over again, I'd have an 18" barrel on my SA58.

 

[woodybrighton]

short barreled 7.62nato weapons are fun once even more fun if you get somebody else to fire the beast.
but as something to spend your own cash on
nah
if you need or want a short barrel weapon go 5.56mm or russian
762 nato/.308 better shot out of full length barrels

 

[iamkris]

Actually, that SA58 OSW isn't just a SBR, it's select fire. DSA may make you one in semiauto only (I don't know),

I thought that also, but looks like they're making a semi version now...for folks that want lots of muzzle blast and velocity loss. It is cool looking though...I suppose that means something to the folks on arfcom.

 

[HorseSoldier]

What NightCrawler and a couple others have said -- it sounds like you'd be much better served with a 16" barreled carbine on the FAL side of things.

As for the comparison of one or the other, both are quality firearms (though some early Sigs had some teething issues -- no idea what serial number range on them bears watching/checking carefully). With the 556 using STANAG M16 mags, it's kind of a wash between the two as far as that goes. There's more aftermarket stuff out there for the FAL, if that matters.

If it comes down to an issue of cool factor, I'd say toss a coin, basically. I'd personally lean towards the FAL on that matter, but it's purely a subjective issue.

 

[Greg Bell]

Two different, equally great choices.

I would look into either a 16 inch DSA or maybe even and M1A Scout in 18 inch barrel and skip the hassle on the SBR. I have played with a semi OSW and it was neat but LOUD!! Of course, nothing compares to blasting with a full auto HK51 indoors. That will damn near sterilize you.

The 556 is also excellent. If you get the optics ready model you can put regular AR goodies on it. I run mine with a Larue Rear/ Samson front BUIS and an Aimpoint on a Larue cantilever. I also have an X300 mounted on the factory handguard, which I think is a pretty good setup, although a 551 front with a piece of rail mounted for a light might also be nice. IF you are going to run a magnified optic I would buy the current one with factory BUIS. A lot of folks don't care for it, but it is really only there as a true emergency back up.

The M4 stock on the 556 is fugly but really lightweight. Obviously, the UBR looks the best on the 556 but I think an A1 or Sully stock would be a better replacement than the magpul (IMHO).

 

[Wes Janson]

*shudders*

The HK51 is bad enough outdoors, I really don't ever want to be around to hear it on an indoor range.

 

[Nightcrawler]

I don't think of the 11" FAL as useless. I think of it as a specialized weapon. Say, for whatever reason, you need to suppress your FAL rifle. There are plenty of reasons to do so, from stealth to hearing protection.

Well, .308 suppressors are long. The AAC model, for instance, is eight and three-quarters inches long and weighs twenty-two ounces.

Bolt that onto an 18" FAL and you have a weapon that's 46+" long and muzzle heavy.

Now, take that same suppressor and put it on an 11" OSW. You're looking at an overall length of about 38 or 39". That's about the same length as your typical fighting shotgun, so it'll generally be handy enough for close-quarters stuff. The suppressor will also save your hearing and give you a bit of a velocity boost as well.

 

[Greg Bell]

And, if you were cooking up subsonic ammo, then the 11 inch barrel starts to make a lot of sense. I wouldn't want to be charged with figuring out how to stabilize the bullet though. But hey, If you are clearing houses with the thing, accuracy concerns are minimal.

 

[Evil Monkey]

Now, take that same suppressor and put it on an 11" OSW. You're looking at an overall length of about 38 or 39". That's about the same length as your typical fighting shotgun, so it'll generally be handy enough for close-quarters stuff. The suppressor will also save your hearing and give you a bit of a velocity boost as well.

But still, why use a 308 in the first place???

There is no reason why a short barreled 308 should be used as a dedicated CQB weapon........no reason at all.

It's heavier, lesser rounds per mag, muzzle blast is atrocious, what's the point?

 

[Greg Bell]

Wouldn't a subsonic .308 be much more effective than a subsonic .223?

 

[goon]

Indeed it would but a supersonic .308 beats both.

 

[Nightcrawler]

There is no reason why a short barreled 308 should be used as a dedicated CQB weapon........no reason at all.

If you say so.

Wouldn't a subsonic .308 be much more effective than a subsonic .223?

180-grain bullet at 1000-1100 fps vs. a 62-77 grain bullet at the same velocity. Um...basically, the difference between a hot .22 and a very light .357. One is preferable to the other, in my opinion. Both are pretty sad, ballistically, as far as rifles go, but unless you're going to get into the specialized medium/big bores with huge subsonic rounds (like the Russian 9x39mm and custom-house subsonic .50 calibers) it's the best you're going to get.

Subsonic would only be used if stealth is required. Otherwise you're just handicapping yourself. A suppressed rifle (assuming a high quality can) with standard ammo sounds about like a non-suppressed .22; not great for your ears, especially indoors (or when fired from a vehicle! ), but a world of difference compared to your standard short barreled centerfire.

Off thread topic, but...take something like the old .44 Automag, chamber it in a carbine with a 10-12" barrel, integrally suppressed. Load it with a 300, 325-grain slug doing 1,050 feet per second at the muzzle. Nice quiet thumper for whatever may need a thumpin'. Hell, you could even do it in a 16" levergun with standard rimmed .44 Magnum ammo and a custom suppressor.

 

[Evil Monkey]

Wouldn't a subsonic .308 be much more effective than a subsonic .223?

Yeah you have a point there. The real question is, can such a weapon also fire full power 308? Because if it cannot, there are much better options than any 308 based subsonic ammo/weapon system.

The Russians used to use a suppressed 7.62mm AK with heavier subsonic ammo. They decided 7.62mm wasn't enough and developed a 9x39mm subsonic which would still be as lethal as possible just by the sheer mass of the bullet yet because of it being subsonic, it is very quiet coming out of a suppressor.

At least the Russians wanted this configuration for silenced sniping applications for special forces. I believe they are issued 1 or 2 per squad. There was always at least one guy in the squad that had a silenced weapon for taking out guards or dogs. Older pictures show a suppressed AK while more recent pictures show VSK's and VSS 9x39mm's.

SO what's a subsonic 308 good for unless it's for a 300meter silenced squad weapon? If the application is CQB fighting, I'd say a short barreled (or bullpup) 5.56x45mm or 7.62x39mm is the way to go. You want less noise? Use a suppressor.

 

[LoadedDrum]

There is a guy on another forum who turned his 556 into a 551 clone for about $3K. Most of that was the 551 lower.

 

[Grayrider]

The OSW sells quite well to certain military and other professional communities who want a .308 caliber weapon in a very short length for CQB use. Much as one often sees SEAL teams using the Mk18 even when not engaged in CQB work, I am sure some OSW users elect to use the weapon for more general use. The barrel length is not a huge issue as it remains quite accurate and effective, albeit with some loss of velocity as one would expect. One still has the advantage of the heavy .308 caliber bullet, and the ability to interchange ammunition with other weapons in the caliber. Of course the use of suppressors is also a major reason for the OSW's existance, providing a more compact package overall as pointed out above. Ultimately the OSW exists because there is a demand, much as 16" battle rifles exist due to demand. Certain customers feel that shorter length is worth any loss of velocity. DSA has been able to produce as short an FAL as needed, with no impact on reliability or major degradation of accuracy.

As to the Sig 556, I own one of those. A great rifle really, coming from a person who loves the FAL and AK. It is a nice blend of the best features of both, along with some handy aspects of the AR platform thrown in that may offend Sig purists but certainly are helpful to an American shooter. After all there are many quality magazine choices for the AR platform now, as well as stock furniture that will fit the Sig. One can also add a front sight that will properly align with an AR rear BUIS. Personally I feel the Sig factory BUIS are acceptable as they are for emergency use only, but I agree they are not adequate as a full featured iron sight solution. I mount a Trijicon Reflex II on mine, so am not that concerned about optics failure. As for shooting, it seems accurate enough. I find the recoil very mild, rivaled only by the Krebs KTR-03V and certain ARs with competition muzzle brakes in my experience. The trigger pull is exceptional for stock factory. I like the control arrangement a lot as I shoot left handed, so much like the AK can keep my shooting hand on the grip while my free hand works the charging handle and mag catch. Ambi-safeties help me a great deal, and I can hit the bolt release with my trigger finger. The forearm is a bit fat. I like it enough but may acquire green Sig 551 furniture and add a green CTR to change the feel a bit. I also hear Sig may offer furniture stateside, so might do that if it is affordable. A Phantom flash hider would also be a nice add. I certainly cannot fault this as a 5.56 caliber rifle choice.

As some have pointed out, you perhaps should decide on caliber then platform here. I would also suggest looking at our 16" and 18" barrel lengths just to save you the tax stamp, although that is not a major hassle. I likely will do an OSW next when my turn in line comes around. Why not have one while I can? Who knows what we will be able to buy after November.



John

 

[Nightcrawler]

One last note, lest we drift too far off into thread veer. There are a great many activities that have little or nothing to do with battle, close-quarters or otherwise, during which a long weapon is a general pain in the ass.

From my own personal experience?

-Squeezing in and out of an armored vehicle, Humvee, or Chevy Trailblazer in a hurry
-Delivering chow to your crew
-Conducting a full cabin/engine compartment/undercarriage vehicle search
-Doing your paperwork
-Using a porta-potty
-Going up and down narrow stairs
-Lifting things
-Opening/closing a heavy steel arm-bar all day
-Administering first aid
-Manuvering through a shoulder-to-shoulder crowd
-Writing on a clipboard
-Standing in line
-Running your line main of det-cord
-Using a picket-pounder
-Stringing concertina wire
-Climbing ladders

...Among others. And no, none of these activities excuses you from having to carry your weapon. Nor do you have the opportunity to swtich out to a more ideally-suited weapon when the situation changes; you gotta run whatcha brung, as some wisened old sages once told me.