Any thoughts on why the FAL rifle...

[DMK]

Yea, uncommon is a better word. Most people around here are unfamiliar with them and don't have an opinion either way. In fact, I've never seen another one in person other than the two I own and built.

It wasn't and isn't made here (except for DSA, but even they started out with surplus parts). It didn't serve here. We didn't fight any counties equipped with it as their primary service weapon. You don't read about it in U.S. history. You don't see it in many movies. So it's pretty much obscure to those outside the cult following (ie. Internet forums).

Even outside the US, who still makes FALs? The only current manufacturers I can think of are DSA (USA) and Imbel (Brazil).


ARs are popular because the Govt and police use them. Same with Sigs and H&K to a lesser extent. AKs are popular because our enemies used them and because of the media attention they get.


I don't care if they are popular or not. I love the FAL. I know where to get parts. I know how to fix 'em. Don't need nobody else to care.

 

[FourTeeFive]

FAL weight

Maybe I'm wrong on them being heavy. I owned one years ago and it seemed much heavier than an AR15. Mine did have wood furniture so that could have been a big part of it.

 

[DMK]

Im curious, did they ever make a scaled down FAL in x39 or 5.56?

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.

Imbel in Brazil makes the MD-2/MD-3 Assault rifle. It's basically a 5.56 FAL with a rotating bolt and M16 magazines.

 

[Ravenslair]

CQB version

"...That said a FAL is a true battle rifle and doesn't lend itself too well to CQB or "house cleaning.""

DSA has a new shorty. Not sure what the weight is, but I would argue this would work pretty well in close quarters. All in all though, you are correct in that the FAL is truly a battle rifle first and foremost.

 

[RobTzu]

@Gunfixr...man that is a beauty, I am very very jealous!

 

[ramis]

When is last time you saw a FAL in a movie?

Reign of Fire

 

[Heavy Metal Hero]

When is last time you saw a FAL in a movie?

Babel.....I think.

 

[Andrewsky]

The reason it isn't common is because it is not as aesthetically pleasing as the M1A, AR-15, AK-47, or '91.

Right now the only battle rifle I have is an M1A SOCOM. Needless to say, I'll probably be ordering one of those DSA 16" Carbines if an Anti-American liberal Democrat Communist gets elected in '08.

 

[hank327]

There are several reasons the FAL is not more popular here, but I'll just touch on
a couple that I think are the most important. The first reason is that it never served as the service rifle of the US military. Had the FAL been the US service rifle, we would have T-48 replicas in place of the M1As that are out there. The second and a very significant reason is cost. Back in the 70's and 80's during the heyday of military style rifles, the FAL was a very expensive rifle. For the most of that time, FN was the only source for FALs in the US. I lusted after a FN FAL, but the $1250.00 price tag in 1982 dollars kept me at bay. I ended up with an HK-91 for $700.00 instead. As I recall Colt AR-15s were going for about $600.00 and when AKs started coming in they were in about the same price range. I know Springfield Armory started bringing in Imbel FALs, but they were rather costly as well and weren't available for too long before the Assault Weapons Ban killed them off. It was only when FAL part kits started becoming available that the FAL became as widely spread as it is now.

So I think it was a combination of relative unfamiliariaty with the rifle and a high cost that kept the FAL from becoming a more widely used rifle here in the US. The rifle itself is a fine battle rifle, in fact my dream rifle is finally getting one of the Lithgow L1A1s that were imported just before the AWB took effect.

 

[MisterPX]

What's keeping the FAL "uncommon", right now, is the same thing keeping Cetme's and M1A's "uncommon" right now, ammo prices. When ammo was 15 cents a pop, I saw a lot of 308 guns around, now that cheap ammo's dried up, I don't see too many out anymore.

 

[DMK]

The reason it isn't common is because it is not as aesthetically pleasing as the M1A, AR-15, AK-47, or '91.

Not as aesthetically pleasing as the AK?

The FAL is an elegant thing of beauty

The AK is a farm implement

 

[Gunfixr]

Thank you Rob Tzu. As far as uncommon goes, when 7.62x51 was the NATO standard, 92 or 93 countries had some variant of the FAL as their standard rifle. While no one is really using a 7.62 version anymore, and most countries have liquidated their stocks that were kept as backups (this is where the kits come from), there are still plenty of them in third world countries fighting everyday, and they can be seen on the news. We tested them, but adopted the M14 instead. While the M14 has slightly better accuracy, the FAL has better reliability and ergonomics. It has been proven in nearly every environment the world has to offer. True, the news always shows the AK or AR, so many people don't recognize the FAL. Having handled and fired the HK91, the FAL, and the M1A, I liked the FAL the best, and it is my rifle.

 

[GunTech]

I've owned many FALs, as have my friends. It's a superb battle rifle. Trigger and sights suck, but this is not an issue if you aren't expecting superb accuracy. Why are they uncommon? Probably price has a lot to do with it. For the money you spend you can get an M1A that will outshoot it nine ways from sunday. Most people expect to get an accurate shooter when they spend $1500. There aren't as many after market items as there are for the AR and M1As either, nor many gunsmiths that can work on them.

For the average guy, the FAL ends up being a $1500 plinker. There's a small market for that sort of rifle.

 

[AndyC]

Nowadays one can buy an FAL kit for around $200, get a DSA receiver for about $450 (or less, if you know where to buy) - that and about $100 worth of 922r-compliance parts, a few visits to falfiles and www.wecsog.org, find someone in your area with a receiver-wrench - yep, very doable

 

[0007]

DMK -
"...a farm implement..."

 

[m.p.driver]

They were popular ten years ago when tables at the gun shows had ten or fifteen lined up,british and izzy parts on an imbel receiver,ahh!! the memories.Now with the ban on import of parts and receivers you have to go DSA,somewhat of a step up from $400 for a heavy barrel izzy.Thank god i was a late night lurker at tapco's website when they would run clearance discounts.All i know is i would grab my FAL first

 

[cameron.personal]

FALs rock, ignorance is no excuse!

 

[GunTech]

Before attempting to build an FN from parts, you better know about headspacing. It's not as trivial as some people think. There are a number of different headspace pins, and if you don't have the right one for your barrel and receiver at the least you will have case head separations.

I've had to fix two FALs that were kitchen table built due to faulty headspace. Do not try to build one from parts unless you know what you are doing and have the right gauges and heaspce pins.

 

[MudPuppy]

That's true of building ANY firearm (as opposed to the assembly of AR types).

Red Rock Armament (i think?) is making a 223 FAL (but on an aluminum rec, so do your homework) and of course there was the FNC.

I think they'd be more popular and we'd have seen a lot of imports in the 90's if the Government had'd been so protective of our safety and Molan Labe'd us. Until the molan labe'ing stops, they'll continue to be rare and pricy.

I did see a guy at the last carbine shoot with a fal. Our stick had nothing but mouse guns, except for his fal and my ak. We were slower, but louder and cooler.

 

[Janos Dracwlya]

When is last time you saw a FAL in a movie?

Sahara - Steve Zahn took one with a scope off of one of the bad guys.

It's funny that in places like THR, almost everybody knows at least a little about the FAL, but out there in the real world, even a lot of gun folks don't. When I started shooting 3Gun at my local gun club three years back, I got a lot of stares when I brought out the FAL, though a few of the members knew what it was. Nobody else that I know of around here has one. It's definitely one of those guns that gets you a lot of attention at the range - even a lot of folks who know what it is have never (or rarely or not any time recently) seen one for real.

I love my FAL - I got a Century/Imbel rifle without having heard about the problems they sometimes have and got lucky in getting a good one. It's a much better shot than I am, though I have slowly gotten a lot better.

Owing to the lack of surplus ammunition, and the recoil which slows down follow-up shots in competition, it's been relegated to the safe for now and I put together an A1-style AR-15 to take it's place when I compete.

 

[Gunfixr]

Yeah, the cool factoris way up there, and they get a lot of attention at the range. I shot mine at a 3-gun shoot, and several were impressed that a gun that big could be maneuvered and fired that fast. This was before I shortened it to its current length and it had wood furniture on it, a lot heavier. The trigger is not that hard to correct, proper stoning and it's pretty good. There's not a lot to do with the sights unless you swap out the rear completely or go optics. Pretty much accepted accuracy with the FAL is 3" at 100yds. The M14s accuracy was accepted at 4", but is usually better and lends itself to much better, easier than the FAL platform. Compared to the AKs standard of 6", this looks pretty good. It is a battle rifle, though, not a sniper rifle, made for minute of man at longer distances. The main thing is that when you have a battle rifle, what is considered cover to assault rifles is mostly now only concealment, they are hard to hide from.

Definately on the headspace. Just slapping a barrel on a receiver and putting the shoulder that came with the kit in can be dangerous. There are 45 different shoulders in the standard configurations, 15 standard, 15 oversize, and 15 undersize. The 15 standard cover the vast majority of rifles, the others are for out-of-spec or worn receivers. This is one of the nice things about the FAL, if the receiver opens up a little from hard use, it can be reheadspaced by simply remeasuring and changing the locking shoulder, making the FAL a long life receiver.

 

[DMK]

Before attempting to build an FN from parts, you better know about headspacing. It's not as trivial as some people think. There are a number of different headspace pins, and if you don't have the right one for your barrel and receiver at the least you will have case head separations.

I've had to fix two FALs that were kitchen table built due to faulty headspace. Do not try to build one from parts unless you know what you are doing and have the right gauges and heaspce pins.

Not to discount what you are saying, because it's excellent advice. However, if you can't figure out how to headspace a rifle, you shouldn't be building anything. It's not rocket science. The AR is the only rifle you you could get away with it and that's only because the bolt locks in the barrel.

Just slapping a barrel on a receiver and putting the shoulder that came with the kit in can be dangerous.

And incredibly stupid.

The FAL isn't especially hard to build. It just requires patience, know how and proper tools. Like anything. I stripped two parts kits down, sent the barrels off for work, refinished some parts, bought new replacements for others, left them in pieces, in boxes for about two years and then (having completely forgotten what parts go where), assembled them in my garage with no previous experience or instructions other than what I could find on Falfiles.com. However, I did order good tools, gauges and I did a lot of research on headspacing (and that whole debate on setback). I used a pin gauge, ordered the correct size locking shoulder and even after almost a thousand rounds, both guns headspace perfectly. The only problems I had were with barrel timing (like one degree off) and a out of spec gas piston (US 9.22r part). Both were easily fixed.

 

[gunnie]

hollywood VS history VS worthiness

lotsa info on above questions here:

http://www.answers.com/topic/fn-fal

many calibers/models were made on this system. it wasn't a .308/7.62X51 when first offered. springfield armory sold a .243 FAL, but custom making one would be MUCH cheaper than what same would cost. IF you could find one for sale.

it IS odd that the military is now looking into the caliber and velocity ranges that the brits had favored for FAL production.

see: http://world.guns.ru/assault/as24f-e.htm

the FAL triggers are horrible, as required by the nation's armies that adopted these. as a once-apon-a-time nation of shooters, the US has long leaned toward much better triggers than other nations. i have modified the trigger return springs on many FAL system rifles with ease for an acceptable +/- 4lb trigger pull. this breaches the gap between OEM garand and M-14 USABLE accuracy, and FAL intrinsic accuracy. after these mods, i find the FAL superior in that department.

had the FAL been selected in the biased army weapons tests, circa '50's, no doubt the original thread might read "why is the M-14 system so unpopular?". bear in mind that the FAL, the AR-10 and the HK 91 weapon systems lost out to the M-14 in these tests?!?! the M-14 went on to earn the reputation of being the shortest lived battle rifle in US military history.
it was also the swan song for the armory, as robert mcnamara closed it in an attempt to level the playing field for a product worthiness based system of procurement.

springfield armory {govt organization, not company} was facing the axe, due to an inherent trait of self preservation and procurement corruption, much like todays military/political/industrial driven contract award system. they were also nearly fully tooled up already for the modified garand bolt system used in the M-14.

gunnie

 

[HorseSoldier]

The reason it isn't common is because it is not as aesthetically pleasing as the M1A, AR-15, AK-47, or '91.

Long and lean with predatory lines. I'd say the FAL looks better than an M14 clone (which just screams "obsolete" in its Garand derived standard form - if you want classic wood stocks, etc., just shoot a Garand, if you want a battle rifle get something with a pistol grip) or, honestly, an AR prior to the flat tops and the removal of the silly carry handle.

 

[nemoaz]

had the FAL been selected in the biased army weapons tests, circa '50's, no doubt the original thread might read "why is the M-14 system so unpopular?".

Had the FAL been selected as the US weapon, there wouldn't have been an M14/M1A as no other country had interest in the weapon system. The only folks that use it got it for free from the US.