Another FAL post

[g-nome]

Boober noober FAL questions:

DSA builds the STG58?

What parts are in the STG58? Are they all Steyr?

What does STG stand for? What about the SA in SA58?

What are the different configurations? Like; a G1? What’s that mean? And what is meant by an L1A1, etc?

Are U.S. parts or Steyr parts better?

Okay .308/7.62x51 snap caps. Are they interchangeable or should you use one or the other?

Thanks, I appreciate any input anyone might have.

 

[Raygun]

Boober noober FAL questions:

DSA builds the STG58?

Yes. (STG58 was the Austrian military's designation for the FN FAL.)

What parts are in the STG58? Are they all Steyr?

No. The upper receiver and a few other parts are made by DSA in order to comply with BATFE import regulations.

What does STG stand for? What about the SA in SA58?

STG = sturmgewehr = assault rifle.
SA = I would assume it means "semi automatic"

What are the different configurations? Like; a G1? What’s that mean? And what is meant by an L1A1, etc?

G1 (Gewehr 1 = Rifle 1) is the designation the West German bundeswehr gave the FN FAL when they were testing for a new infantry rifle in the early 1950's (a slightly modified CETME Modelo B was subsequently adopted as the G3 because FN would not give Germany a manufacturing license for the FAL). DSA's G1 is a semi-auto copy of that rifle.

L1A1 was the Commonwealth designation for the FN FAL, which was produced under license for their military forces in England, Australia and Canada. Parts between the L1A1 and the FAL are generally not interchangable as different systems of measurement were use to manufacture them (FAL = metric, L1A1 = English).

Are U.S. parts or Steyr parts better?

I don't own one (yet) so I don't have an answer for you here, but Steyr did make their rifles under license, thus to spec, so I don't see why they wouldn't be top quality. I believe some of the parts for the cheaper "STG58" rifles are used, but are QC'd and refinished.

Okay .308/7.62x51 snap caps. Are they interchangeable or should you use one or the other?

For the purposes of a snap cap, they're interchangeable.

Thanks, I appreciate any input anyone might have.

No prob.

 

[Deer Hunter]

I have a question, you stated that the DSA FAL uses the Metric system? The current production models? So if I were to order one from DSA, it would only accept metric parts?

 

[g-nome]

Thanks a lot raygun I appreciate it.

Few more things:

Metric and inch . . . Which configuration is metric which is inch? Are there any positives/negatives to one or the other?

Any advantages/disadvantages between the G1, L1A1, etc? Or is it personal preference as to what configuration you want (like if you're biased toward one setup).

So that also means you must use a particular mag for whatever configuration you go for?

So other than the receiver and the 'few other parts' on a DSA STG58 are the rest of the parts Steyr?

Thanks again

 

[Raygun]

I have a question, you stated that the DSA FAL uses the Metric system? The current production models? So if I were to order one from DSA, it would only accept metric parts?

Yes, DSA's current production rifles are metric. It's best to use only metric parts for metric rifles, though some parts may be interchangable. Unfortunately I'm not up enough on the FAL to tell you which ones, but there are other people here that know better than I do. Until they say something, I suggest only metric parts for metric rifles (and inch parts for inch rifles).

Thanks a lot raygun I appreciate it.

You're welcome.

Few more things:

Metric and inch . . . Which configuration is metric which is inch? Are there any positives/negatives to one or the other?

Anything that's marked "L1A1" is going to be inch pattern. Everything else is very likely to be metric.

Given that far more metric FALs were made, as well as the fact that DSA and a few other companies stock and/or manufacture parts for metric rifles, metric parts are generally easier to find, so there's an availability advantage for metric parts.

Other than that, I don't know if there are any positives or negatives between the two. I've had limited experience with both types (one an L1A1 Sporter and the other a Century FAL (I think); neither top-quality) and I don't recall a whole lot of difference between the two as far as accuracy, reliability and such goes. I'm sure someone with more detailed info will come along with more info for you.

Any advantages/disadvantages between the G1, L1A1, etc? Or is it personal preference as to what configuration you want (like if you're biased toward one setup).

Well, the L1A1 and G1 really aren't all that different as far as I am aware. The G1 copy that DSA makes is part of their "collector" series, thus is relatively expensive and marketed more toward collectors than people who are planning on using the thing a lot. Judging by the rifles I've seen and the vast majority of comments from owners I've read or heard, DSA makes solid, high-quality rifles. Any "new" L1A1 you see available today is likely to be of questionable quality.

So that also means you must use a particular mag for whatever configuration you go for?

IIRC, metric rifles can only use metric magazines, but inch rifles can use either inch or metric magazines. (Do not quote me on that; Fact check anyone?) Either way, I'd say go with the mag that's made for the rifle. Again, metrics are much more common.

So other than the receiver and the 'few other parts' on a DSA STG58 are the rest of the parts Steyr?

I can't give you a definitive answer here, but that's the impression I get from their literature. Some minor parts may be outsourced as far as I know. At any rate, quality control is DSA's responsibility and from what I understand, they sell top-notch rifles. They certainly make the best-looking FALs I've seen.

 

[hso]

Inch rifles only use inch mags and inch mags are much more expensive than metric mags.

There's quite a lot of interchangability between FAL/L1A1 rifles and there's plenty of Century frankenfals out there that run just fine. You do have to be careful of gas nuts and blocks, barrels and receivers, and anything that's threaded, but most parts swap back and forth.

As far as functional differences between the L1A1 and the metric FALs, there aren't any. I've got a frankenfal and purist metrics and even a mutant 5.56 and they all go BANG.

DSA is a benchmark company for FALs.

Check falfiles.com for more than you ever wanted to know about FALs.

 

[g-nome]

YOW!!! TTTHHAANKKSSS!!!!

Never had such luck with all questions being answered and so thouroughly.

 

[Raygun]

Inch rifles only use inch mags and inch mags are much more expensive than metric mags.

Really? I thought I read somewhere that whichever pattern had the bigger mag well could use either magazine. I thought the inch pattern was the bigger of the two, but I certainly could be wrong about that.

EDIT: From here:

To clear up the perennial confusion on inch versus metric magazines: If your rifle is an *early* Century International ("CAI") Sporter, then it can accept only METRIC magazines, not inch pattern. The early Century Sporters were basically an inch pattern parts kit built on a metric receiver--not a C1A1 inch pattern receiver. The latest CAI receivers have an "inch" magazine cut and the cut for the side-folding cocking handle, as well as the grooves
for the legs on the rear of the dust-cover.

Austrian Stg-58 rifles accept metric magazines, only
Belgian FN rifles accept metric magazines, only
Israeli FN rifles accept metric magazines, only
Brazilian FN (SAR-48/SAR-4800) rifles accept metric magazines, only
Argentine FN (FM-LSR) rifles take metric magazines, only

Australian L1A1 rifles will accept inch OR metric magazines
British L1A1 rifles will accept inch OR metric magazines
Canadian C1A1 rifles will accept inch OR metric magazines
Indian ("RFI -Ishapore") 1A1 rifles will accept inch OR metric magazines

(Note the exception to the above listing is that even though the receivers for early production Century L1A1 Sporters are made in Canada, they were inch L1A1 kits built on METRIC receivers, and hence accept only metric magazines. The later CAI Sporters will accept either metric or inch magazines.)

The general rule is that inch pattern receivers can accept EITHER inch OR metric
magazines. However, when they are used in an inch gun, metric magazines do wobble a bit. This is because the front locking lug doesn't engage. They normally work fine, however.

As far as functional differences between the L1A1 and the metric FALs, there aren't any.

The only functional difference I can think of is the folding cocking handle on the L1A1, and that's pretty minor.

 

[rfurtkamp]

Any advantages/disadvantages between the G1, L1A1, etc? Or is it personal preference as to what configuration you want (like if you're biased toward one setup).

If you want a bipod, it's G1 or STG58 generally. I wish I had more G1s around - most of my FALs are 58-based kit builds.

I have three L1A1 pattern guns as well. I vastly, vastly, prefer the British magazine release and safety lever, but also vastly prefer the bipod option and cheap metric mags.

I should add I like the L1A1 fold-down rear sight better for some things as well - it's exceedingly handy with scopes.