Any thoughts on why the FAL rifle...

Status
Not open for further replies.

camslam

Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
741
Location
Chilling Out in the Valley of The Sun
Anybody have an opinion on why FAL rifles aren't that popular in the U.S.?

I have benn narrowing down my options for a .308 battle type rifle and it seems that for whatever reason FAL's are tough to find, they aren't owned by many people that I know, and the only one I have seen carried in a gun store (DSA SA58) was at Cabela's a while back.

Most of the talk is usually centered around AR's or AK's and I just wondered why these reliable battle tested rifles don't get much love.
 
I think they just are not in the popular culture much. I am getting a DS arms stg-58 soon, but I did not know what a FAL was until I did some research on battle rifles a while back. The military has the M-16, so people want the knock off, and you see AK-47s in the movies all the time.... When is last time you saw a FAL in a movie? I think the answer really is that simple, and dumb.
 
I own a DSA SA58. It's a great main battle rifle. It's been used by over 80 countries as their main military rifle. It's accurate, dependable and simple to maintain and operate. It also has great ergonomics. If you have an opportunity to try one, you'll be impressed.
 
Had the US gone with them as the T-47 back around 1957, they would have become very popular here. The fact was that we had a long, long tradition of building battle rifles with target rifle characteristics from he 1903 onwards, and the Garand continued that and those same genes went into the M14.

The FAL never seems to have had the trigger or the sights to deliver that kind of performance--although the need for long range target accuracy has been dubious for a long time now. As a battle rifle there is very little wrong with it. I carried one around in company with some Australians once, saw them used quite effectively in competition by the Canadian Princess Pats, and have shot them a little.

Were I not amply supplied with Garands and Garand-based rifles, I would certainly own and shoot an FAL. Still might, someday.
 
They were never domestically manufactured until DSA set up shop, and they weren't imported in the same numbers that the HK91s were back in the day.

Basically, I think they're still just largely uknown here. *shrug*
 
Just because your group of friends does not own a FAL does not mean they are not "popular". I do not know how you define "popular" but gun nuts have been raving about FALs since the G Model came into the US since the early '60s.

Many different brands of FALs have been imported and made in the USA for decades now. Could it be that you did not see one because the weapons sell so quickly?

The FAL is like any other weapon, it has pluses and it has minuses. The subjective becomes objective.
 
I built mine in 1998, and love it. Most of my friends have more than one each, and a local shop has 2 or 3 on the shelf, so they are popular around here. Here's mine:

DuracoatFAL001.gif

DuracoatFAL002.gif
 
why are we getting so huffy about his saying they're not popular? i think by saying "unpopular" he means uncommon, not disliked . fact is, you don't see them around alot. i don't know anyone that has one, and i don't know anyone that KNOWS anyone that has one. i've NEVER seen one at the rifle/pistol club on fort benning. yet me all of my gun buddys would LOVE an FN, but unfortunately they cost a friggin' mint and ammo is outrageous. it ain't rocket surgery !! :neener:
 
Because it's not a US weapon and wasn't used in major war against the US.

It's also never gotten major screen time in a US movie or TV series. When the TV news talks about "assualt rifles", the AR's and AK's get the profile shots behind the talking head.

I don't know what you mean about costing a mint. You can build a FAL for well under $1000 and can buy a DSA for about that much as well. Not much different then building a decent AR.

Folks go with what they know. The majority of gun owners don't know a lot about guns. "Gun nuts" like the folks who join on line forums don't make up the majority of the gun owning population. :)

FAL Files has less then 30k members, a large # of which are NOT in the US. AR15.com has over 4x the number of members.
 
No they are not popular at all. New sales are way down. Just like Garand, SMLE, Mosin all of them have hardly any new sales at all. People just don't like them anymore.
 
There's lots of them out there.

I owned one in the late 1990s, built on an Imbel receiver and British L1A1 kit.

Their time in the light has been relatively short here in the U.S., and availability has been spotty at best with all the bans and changes in ATF import rules, especially compared to other platforms like the M1 Garand, AR, AK, SKS, M1A/M14, etc.

It's not that they're unpopular with gun owners, they're just not that numerous or otherwise readily available, so they take a back seat in those respects.
 
Thanks for all of the replies regarding this question.

I should have used the word "uncommon" instead of unpopular.

It seems that most everything I have read about these rifles and the reason I will be getting one is that they are very reliable. It sounds like if you go with a DSA Arms FAL you are going to get a great rifle. The only knock I have heard about FAL's in general is accuracy compared to an AR-10 platform, but otherwise most people have had nothing but good to say about them.

I was just curious why they are so "uncommon" as I mentioned before, very few people or gun shops have them. (At least where I am from)
 
The old NATO battle rifle

FAL's are great rifles but they're pretty heavy.

I'm surprised to see people comparing AR's and AK's to them. The .308 is a SERIOUS cartridge compared to those two weapons. That said a FAL is a true battle rifle and doesn't lend itself too well to CQB or "house cleaning."

I had always heard that the FAL fell out of favor for military use due to the weight of the ammo and the amount of .223 or similar ammo that could be carried as compared to .308. Also something like an AR is much easier for a novice to shoot.

I think the Israeli military used to carry the Galil .308 and they decided a short-barrel .223 Galil was versatile as you could use it for CQB. The power of a rifle in the size of a submachine gun.
 
DS makes some nice ones :D

fal_dsa_sa58osw.jpg
 
Keep in mind that an StG-58 (with the issue 21+ inch barrel) without it's bipod doesn't weigh much more than the current issue 20 inch M16A2 (and it's AR15A2 brother)...

And if you replace the issue StG-58 flash suppressor with a shorter and lighter one, the difference is even less...

Just to keep weight in prespective...

Forrest
 
Whether you use the term "uncommon" or "not popular", they're both relative. Uncommon compared to what? Less popular than what? The poster answered those questions by mentioning the AR-15 and AK-47. I would generally agree that you see a LOT more AR's and AK's than you do FAL's. Why? Several reasons. The AR and AK, of course, use intermediate cartridges, so they are often easier to shoot. The FAL and other "main battle rifles" like the AR-10, G3/HK91 and M14/M1A use full power cartridges that are more expensive and much harder on the shoulder and ears over long sessions. Thus, they're less fun for plinking. The main battle rifles also tend to be heavier and more expensive than the AR-15 and AK-47.

I suspect that the most important factor, however, is media exposure. Because the AR-15 looks like the M16, which we all know has been the U.S. military's primary rifle for 40 years now, and because lots of police departments use it, too, you see AR-15's or M16's all over the TV and movies. People want what they see and hear about. The same goes for AK-47 for similar reasons. It is a legendary rifle that you see in ALL the movies, and the morons on TV never miss a chance to bash the evil, all-powerful AK-47. Again, people want they see and hear about, so there has always been a lot of interest in the AK (how ironic -- the more the media scream about the "evil" AK-47, the more demand for them they create!). And the AR-15 and AK complement each other nicely. Whether it was the Cold War of Russia/Warsaw Pact vs. USA/NATO, or the modern world of the US vs Islamofascist terrorism, the principal weapons are the same -- the AR-15/M16 on the side of the west and freedom, and the AK-47 on the side of our enemies. People like simple stories with clear good guys and bad guys, and you don't get much more "good" vs. "bad" in popular culture than the M16 vs. the AK-47.

As far as main battle rifles go, however, the FAL is VERY popular and reasonably common. It may not be quite as common as the G3/HK91/CETME/PTR-91 or the M14/M1A, but I still see a lot of them. In fact, I see a lot more of them than I do AR-10's. I have a FAL (DSA SA58 Para Congo) and I would never part with it.
 
FAL's are great rifles but they're pretty heavy.

I just got a DSA SA58 Para 16"...I don't know if it actually lighter or if it is just better weight distribution but it feels more handy, compact and just as/more light than my M4-gery. I also have a DSA StG58A 21" full size rifle...it is heavy but no more so than any other rifle of comparable power. Ever pick up an AR10? It's a beast (plus, the 2 that I've known have been very unreliable. I've never had a non-ammo related FTF in my FAL).

SA58CP.gif
 
Yes, there were some 5.56 FALs imported prior to the ban, SAR 4800 I believe was the designation but I could be wrong. I think I've seen pics of them in service with the Brazilians, on UN duty.

Numerous "custom" FALs are out there in various calibers, from 5.56 to 7.62x39 (why you'd do that, I don't know), also 7mm08, .243 and a few others. Mainly it's a do it yourself proposition, or you find a smith with the experience to build one, as I did with my 5.56 FAL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top