FAL for Home Defense?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The M14 was the least successful general-issue rifle in US history. :)

The M1 Garand was designed in a lighter caliber...as was the FN FAL. Billions of dollars wasted in materials, and eventual conversion from battle rifles to assault rifles, that would have been unnecessary if the rifles had been made in their original chamberings.
 
According to these velocity numbers, you loose less than 200 fps from cutting 7" off the end of the barrel.

9 in barrel, 125 gr OTM - 2,030 ft/s
16 in barrel, 125 gr OTM - 2,215 ft/s
Click to expand...

Wow, I didn't realize the lighter faster loads did so well out of a short barrel, thanks for the post!
 
Those advocate using the FAL indoor, can i use my Garand as well? No problem with overpenetration ? If Clint Eastwood uses it in his last film in 2008, why not?
 
My only thought would be to look at the shorter 11 or 13 inch barrels. I think the 16" FAL would be very good for home defense with the correct ammo of course. Adding a suppressor would just make it too big.
 
"a rather nonsensical objection", he says, offering as proof things I have not suggested..
Click to expand...

Except that you said it was "too heavy" and that is your reason for not using it for home defense. It's a nonsensical objection because weight is about the last factor I would consider in a home defense setting. It's not like it has to be carried far. Maybe your nightstand tips over easily.
 
My only thought would be to look at the shorter 11 or 13 inch barrels. I think the 16" FAL would be very good for home defense with the correct ammo of course. Adding a suppressor would just make it too big.
Click to expand...

Ever shot a .308 with a short barrel? I shot a 14.5" braked .308 a couple years ago, and it was an attitude-adjusting experience. OUTDOORS. I can't imagine what it would be like to shoot an 11" or 13" .308 indoors.
 
nathan said:
Those advocate using the FAL indoor, can i use my Garand as well? No problem with overpenetration ? If Clint Eastwood uses it in his last film in 2008, why not?
Click to expand...

Well, nathan, if you've gotten this far into the thread and cannot absorb the info that has been presented about the actual penetration depth of the RRLP http://www.ssarmory.com/7.62x51_ammunition_150gr_barnes_rrlp_fb_frangible.aspx and the 110 grain TAP http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Misc_Images/DocGKR/308_TAP_comparison.jpg then I don't think you should be using your Garand for anything besides punching paper.
 
Z-Michigan said:
Ever shot a .308 with a short barrel? I shot a 14.5" braked .308 a couple years ago, and it was an attitude-adjusting experience. OUTDOORS. I can't imagine what it would be like to shoot an 11" or 13" .308 indoors.
Click to expand...

Was it one of the brakes that directs the gasses forward, out to the sides, or back at you?

The brake on my Imbel kit based FAL does a pretty good job of directing the gasses forward.
There are other options on the market that work even better at pushing the gasses out front.

A pair of these would help too...
http://www.midwayusa.com/find?newcategorydimensionid=10184&
 
No one puts on ear muffs before they deal with an intruder. No one cares about the volume of a rifle or pistol going off indoors when dealing with an intruder. Preservation of life, not hearing, is the goal.
 
There is a moderator on here that has a signature line that reads something to the effect of "Let's be informed rather than opinionated." and in the spirit of that sentiment I'll post these links here.

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballistic_Gel_Experiments/BARNES/Barnes_Ballistic_Gel_Data_Methodology.pdf

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Ballistic_Gel_Experiments/BARNES/Barnes_7.62x51_140gr_RRLP.pdf


Can we please stop this "Over Penetration" fixation?
It's just plain not a valid argument against the 308 for home defense, with proper ammo. in the magazine.
 
fireside44 said:
No one puts on ear muffs before they deal with an intruder. No one cares about the volume of a rifle or pistol going off indoors when dealing with an intruder. Preservation of life, not hearing, is the goal.
Click to expand...

I do.

Grab gun, put on ear muffs, grab flashlight and go see what's up.

I've done it three times in the past two years.

Why? I've shot rifles and pistols without hearing protection and I know better.


You can speak for yourself but please don't say that no one else does...
 
Z-Michigan said:
Ever shot a .308 with a short barrel? I shot a 14.5" braked .308 a couple years ago, and it was an attitude-adjusting experience. OUTDOORS. I can't imagine what it would be like to shoot an 11" or 13" .308 indoors.
Click to expand...

We are talking about a suppressed rifle. :) But no, I've only shot 308 with 16" barrels. And for that matter a 20" braked 308 is no fun to be next to.
 
So....

Just how loud is a FAL indoors?

I dunno. I looked for the info but my google fu didn't come through.

I did find this though.
http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia_gunfirenoise.shtml

A 12 gauge with an 18" barrel came in at 161.50 DB.
A 30.06 with the same 18" barrel came in at 163.2 DB.


I think it's safe to say that a 16" barrel/carbine length FAL with out a muzzle brake is going to be just a little bit louder than a 12 gauge.

Wear your hearing protection and you'll be just fine.


Muzzle brakes=bad.
 
The M14 was the least successful general-issue rifle in US history.

The M1 Garand was designed in a lighter caliber...as was the FN FAL. Billions of dollars wasted in materials, and eventual conversion from battle rifles to assault rifles, that would have been unnecessary if the rifles had been made in their original chamberings.
Click to expand...
I disagree -- I carried an M1 rifle on my first tour in Viet Nam (borrowed from the ARVN infantry battalion I advised) and an M14 (sniper rifle, pre-M21) on my second tour.

The M14, due to its superior power and penetration was highly successful in battle -- but not so successful in Washington.

I have never shot the .276 Pederson, but have fired a lot of .30 Cal and 7.62 rounds in combat, and wouldn't want anything less powerful if I had a choice.
 
I believe the Krag was less-successful. The m14 was a battle rifle that was replaced by an assault rifle as nations reduced the power of their arms. The Krag was a full-power smokeless repeater replaced by a full-power smokeless repeater. The M14 was replaced because of a change in tactical deployment of small arms. The Krag was replaced because it was inferior to other arms carried by other nations.

The 276 Pedersen wasn't an intermediate round, it was just not as potent as the 30-06. However, we were in a pickle one way or the other. Had we gone 276, we would have had to junk or modify every BAR and Browning Machine gun currently in inventory, plus every Springfield and all the ammo we had in inventory. During the Great Depression, we were in no position to do that. And frankly, it was better spending the money on P38's, B17's, and building the USS North Carolina and Washington.

Now, had we gone with an intermediate with the M14, there may not have been an M16.
 
The M1A is a excellent, accurate, SEMI-automatic rifle. As a full auto rifle, M14,
it will eat you alive.

Even the E2 stocked gun was too much for me full auto.

I wouldn't feel under gunned with a 120 grain .280" bullet at about 2800-3100 fps, either.

Point is, the FAL is a great gun, second greatest gun for me, in a great caliber.
Why mess with success?

I understand if you are being invaded by rodents how one might want a .223.
:evil:

Seriously: would anyone fault the Swiss 7.5 as a battle cartridge, pretty much ideal for all?
 
I personally wouldn't mainly because if you have to use it you will never see it again. At least in the area I live at lot of nice firearms and well to be honest even some of the lower end ones never find themselves in the owner hands after it goes to police custody. I wouldn't use any weapon that is not easily replaceable.
 
I wouldnt use my FAL or FN49. I would grab my Mosin Nagant M44, short, no need to call LEO (they can hear the blast), no need for a flashlight and in a real emergency, the bajonet comes in handy. ;):D

seriously, i once fired my marlin 336 indoors (muzzle out the window) without hearing protection: never again

I have about 15 long guns in the save and for home defence i use my H&K USP9 with 3x15 rounds of ammo.

But don't let this withold U to buy a FAL, by all means

have fun

Peter
 
The M1A is a excellent, accurate, SEMI-automatic rifle. As a full auto rifle, M14,
it will eat you alive.

Even the E2 stocked gun was too much for me full auto.
Click to expand...
Full auto fire from a hand-held weapon is pretty much worthless in combat. Full auto fire from the M14, in any configuration, is idiocy.
 
+1 Vern. I had an A1 lower on the rifle I carried on my last deployment and that switch was never put all the way back.
 
Here's the run down on my thoughts so far:

-If I went with the FAL for home defense, I would most likely have the barrel shortened to NFA length and add a suppressor. This should take care of any noise/flash concerns, along with bringing it down to about the size of a typical 20" barreled shotgun.

-I'm confident that .308 is enough to stop a badguy, but I am still concerned about overpenetration. If I miss (depending on ammo) it could cause collateral damage. That said, I do have a brick walled house, and some of these low penetration and fragmenting loads show promise.

So overpenetration in case of a miss is my only real concern. Having a brick house, and using fragmenting/low penetration loads, what do yall think?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

E
  • Locked
FAL or AR
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
BP Hunter
BP Hunter
N
  • Locked
FAL conversions to 7.62x39
Replies
20
Views
3K
GunTech
G
B
  • Locked
Teach me about FALs
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
FN/form
F
B
  • Locked
.308 For Home Defense?
2 3
Replies
58
Views
3K
FIVETWOSEVEN
FIVETWOSEVEN
W
  • Locked
battle rifle for home protection?
Replies
21
Views
915
Jeff White
J
Back
Top