Ak vs. FAL

[evan price]

Evan, I would like a FAL if I could get one, I'm not knocking them or you as a person, but, well the guy asked, and that's a pretty damned good example of an entire military which switched from FALs to a type of AK.

And he specifically mentioned reliability, which the Israelis specifically complained about. They never said FALs were junk, unless you can provide a reference for your statement. They simply felt that the rifle did not meet their needs. Funny thing, but the UK and Australia figured out the same thing, except not experiencing total war meant they took longer to reach the same conclusion.

Actually, the Aussies and Canadians and British switched because NATO standardized on 5.56 infantry weapons because the tactics of infantry battle changed from individual riflemen to squad support. 5.56 is lighter and easier to pack out. That's why the NATO troopies dropped FALs. They are heavy. The ammo is heavy. Armalite rifles are, well, light. Pretty much EVERY major army in the world dropped big, heavy, .30 caliber MBRs in favor of lighter weapons. Which is why there are so many FAL, CETME,& AK kits floating around. The US dropped the M14 in favor of the M16. The decision was made that the .223 was more controllable in FA and the lighter loadout let the troops carry more rounds per pound.

Also you left out hit probability - maybe the thread starter wants to waste ammo, and wonders which rifle he could fire the fastest and still hit the target. You could probably tell him, just how many hits you can make on a target for the same time it takes you for each FAL hit.

If you just want to "fire fast" buy an AR and bullet-hose all you want for cheap. Since we are in the US and not likely to have full auto weapons anytime soon, riflemen are usually going to line up on target, AIM, and shoot individual rounds. If FA is not a consideration, the .308 target-reacquisition (which personally I have no problems with) is completely out of the equation. Personally, I can drop pop cans out at the 100-yard backstop on the rifle range and pretty much fire at will and hit them every time. The heavy FAL soaks up the .308's recoil, the heavy bolt and gas piston smooths everything out.
However, I can do the same thing with an AK or .308 Galil @100yds too, so it's a moot point.
If you're talking bump firing or something, what's the point? All noise and fury.

And you forgot the cost of the ammunition, in your cost calculation. Imo that's the #1 or #2 criteria in any firearm, no ammo = just some fancy plumbing.

Yep, the AK ammo temporarily right now is cheaper than .308, since surplus has dried up. However if you plan to RELOAD ammo and not buy factory it's a moot point.

 

[SeNNebogen]

I have heard alot of really good things about FALs. As far far as reliability, I've heard them called "oversized AKs"

If cost is not really your concern, and since you want to go out to 300 meters or yards, which is where an AK will get kinda sketchy with 7.62x39 go with a FAL.

If I only had one rifle myself and picking between the two I would go with the FAL. Bigger bullets

 

[Titanvk56]

Get one of each...that's what I did!

I like them both but my FAL gets more time at the range, it is really fun to shoot. The only negative thing about the FAL is the weight, so I would probably choose the AK in a combat situation.

 

[Jenrick]

Thanks for all the replies, everyone as always enlightening.

So basically both the FAL and the AK are reliable to a fault, and it's up to the end user on which is easier to maintain.

Ergonomics seem evenly split as well. I know how the safety/dust cover on an AK works, how does a FAL's work?

As noted the 7.62x39 doesn't reach out to 300yds as well as .308. How does the 5.45 do in that department (I'm not very familar with that round at all)? My understanding of it was that it was designed in response to the nato 5.56 meaning it probably has most/all of the same issues as the 5.56 at range.

More and more info to mull over before I buy something.

-Jenrick

 

[Plink]

I own a couple of each. It'd be a hard decision. The AK has reliability in it's corner and is a breeze to maintain. Realistically, that's about all it has. The FAL is more accurate and more powerful. That comes at a cost though. It's also bigger and heavier. As much as I love my FALs, if I had to grab a gun and go, it'd be the AK. If I was staying put and defending, I'd choose the FAL. I bought both because I couldn't decide either. They're both very different guns, each with their own strengths and weaknesses.

 

[BigSoundRacing]

This past winter I went through the decision process for a go to rifle. Had to be functional, reliable, ammo available, work in an urban environment as well as the desert. Every place I looked the FAL was on top of the short list, followed by AK. After reading stories about equipment and round challenges in Iraq, I decided to go with the FAL.

In January I ordered a DSA SA58, I pick it up Friday afternoon. Old school battle rifle with a bit of modern day manufacturing.

Be safe, BSR

 

[evan price]

Let me say this, from previous posts, I am not saying AK's or Galils are a bad choice, they are fine rifles, but every rifle is different and some people prefer different things.

FAL workings:

You have an upper receiver which contains the chamber, bolt carrier and the mag, and the lower receiver which has the trigger & FCG parts. The upper and lower are held together in the middle by a hinge pin and at the rear by a take-down lock. There is a control lever on the left side rear of the lower, move it, it opens the take-down lock, and the rifle splits in half at the hinge pin. Dust cover (assuming it's original and not a scope mount) just slides to the rear to remove. So does bolt/carrier- grab the rat-tail and pull the bolt carrier assembly out. To remove the gas piston & remove the gas plug on the front of the gas tube, use a bullet to push in the lock pin, turn it, it pulls out. Pull out gas piston & spring. That's it.

There is a gas regulator at the front of the gas tube to let you custom tailor the force acting on the action for weak or strong ammo loads. Or you can put the gas piston in upside down (the grenade launcher position) and that turns the FAL into a single shot action. This is great if you want to recover ALL of your brass.

On the left side of the lower above the trigger is the safety. Up is safe, down is fire, around forward again was the rock-n-roll setting that won't work with a semi-only receiver and no safety sear. I can work the safety from safe to fire and back again with my right (trigger) hand thumb without taking finger off trigger.

Also left side is the action charging handle. And the bolt release and mag release are convenient to the left hand, so you can keep the rifle on target with right hand on pistol grip keeping it into your shoulder, remove mag, insert new mag (mag well is non-symmetrical, longer on right side so you can load left handed), release bolt hold-open, put left hand back on handguard, keep firing.

 

[Jenrick]

Evan, thanks very good write up.

I think at the moment I'm just gonna have to go find an AK and a FAL and go try them myself.

Thanks all,

-Jenrick

 

[BRASSM]

Reach Out and Touch.......

I've owned both AK's and FAL's and shot both for over thirty years. I'm not going to make a comparison because it's been done. so far basically I agree with everything said. I'll be quite honest the AK's are lighter more compact and easier to strip, they will operate when my AR will not. If I had to run around with a long arm in my car just in case I'll take the AK, If I have to involuntarily attend a serious social encounter I'll take the FAL. I have an FAL with a scope, it takes the fur pajamas off of the prarrie dogs. I prefer the 7.62x51 to the 7.62x39, speaking as a reloader.