G3 vs. FAL

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dancitizen, I have to ask; have you carried one in combat (or even shot one?)

The G3 has horrible ergonomics; the stocks, trigger, and bolt release are awful (as are scoping options)
Recoil is decidedly not controllable, same as all other 308 autos (ejection is also far more violent)
With its trigger pack, no one has any business calling the G3 "simple" (the bolt assy isn't exactly a simple affair, either)

Neutral fact
 
Yeah, what was all that pure fact nonsense?

This is my opinion

As far as ergonomics go, the G3 isn't all that great, the selector switch is hard to reach(they make extended switches to help with that) the charging handle is a little awkward, but other than that, what makes it so bad? There are more than a few different stock options out there, so its not like you can't customize the gun to fit you to a certain extent.

I'll go ahead and say the G3 is fairly simple, looking at the trigger box I don't see anything magical, and the bolt is pretty straightforward as well. All pretty easy to take apart and work on yourself too I might add.

Highly subjective opinion.
 
The trigger has a good few extra parts compared to other designs (semi conversion is a legal minefield, too), to say nothing of the pivoting ejector. It works great, but let's just say it is a blessing the thing is contained in a removable/swappable unit ;)

TCB
 
Shoot what you like - Free Choice is great

Between the two I chose FAL (STG58C). Feels great, shoots great, rugged, tougher than nails, readily available mags (in the 1990's) accurate, and battle proven during the Cold War era.

The newer AR-10 .308's are really nice now though!

Whatever gun you get learn to use it well!
 
All right, I will admit a tiny bit of opinion may have slipped in there.

It is difficult to remain entirely objective when comparing the fantastic G3 with the engineering shame that is the FAL.

Ergonomics? No comparison, the G3 fits like an honored older brother to the STG 44, which set the bar pretty high as far as ergonomics.

Whereas the FAL designers must have done it more like:

"It is unnecessarily long with an 18" barrel, it feels front heavy"
"Screw it, let's make the barrel even longer, than hang a really long flash hider"
"Yes, grand idea"

As to my personal experience...

I'm not sure what to do at this juncture. I am not in the habit of getting into too much personal detail on the interwebs. I find it a little strange that folks would ask where and when a person would have used the G3 in combat, considering it is insanely common rifle, 5th most common combat rifle IIRC. It has seen service in all of Africa, most of South and Central America, all of the Middle East. Being over 50 and not originally being from the USA, pretty much every soldier I know is at least functionally familiar with the G3, and most have carried it at one point or another.
 
The Israelis got rid of FALs and went to a "cleaned up" AK clone (Galil which is a modified Finnish Valmet which is in turn an AK redesigned for better ergonomics) due to FAL being long, heavy, uncontrollable in full auto, and fickle in sandy conditions. They later traded Galils for M16 but AFAIK this was primarily a financial decision.

I don't know much about G3 but it seems unlike FAL, it can actually be used in full auto.

If I were to buy one for personal use, I'd want a FAL just because I really like the looks and it's one great piece of history, being carried by many western and developing nations and used in many conflicts.

If I were to equip an army and could only chose between these two, probably G3 (as long as $$$ was not a problem) but only if it really is more controllable in full auto - this is something that I heard but not sure if it's true.
 
Let me start by saying I have not used the G3 in combat. or the FN FAL LAR SLR whatever.

I do not have a lot of experience with FN FALs and my first experience involver road hard for 12-13 years and put up wet C1 rifles. I was underwhelmed by them. They were beaten up loose and just not nice. The Canadian troopers that had them also had a low opinion of them. Theu really liked our M-16A1 rifles, .....but I think it was just the light weaight that mostly appealed to them. They did say the thought the M-16A1 s more acurte and easier to shoot than their beat up old C1s.

Flash forward to when Springfield Armory was importing Brasilian FN FALs in semi auto only. I was impressed at the difference in the rifles. I had one on loan for a few weeks and shot it a good bit and I liked it.

Still I felt like the designers must have thumbs with an extra joint to reach the safety without letting go of the pistol grip and they were long. But I liked the rifle and would have been happy to keep it.

I shot the G3 a good bit more erning my Shutzen Snur from the Bundeswehr three times and just fam firing them every chance I got and military competitions were I carried them on times 20k marches. Unlike some folks I thought they kicked more than some other 7.62 Nato weapons. Maybe the stock was a bit short for me. It was a good serviceable rifle and more than accurate enough for what it was, a Battle rifle. It also seemed to have more hard edges than the FAL though that may have been a function of me having far more time to bump into the corners of the G3. Apperently though Europeans have really long thumbs though for the folks down in Oberdorf am Dachau made the safety so I had to let go of the pistol grip to flip it off or on also.

I have shot a number of civilian HKs as well both the HK51 in Europe and the 91 in the US I understand the 91s have a different mag release or some such but don't recall any differences.

I would have a hard time choosing between the two if you offered to give me either for free. Buying it myself if they were the same price I think I would go with the FN if it was a good one and the HK was decent.

On the other hand if I had more choices I would pick up an M-1A and be done with it.

So there it is.

Oh one last thing, in the 70's some of the German Gun Geeks I talked with that were police or military (hey, they all had national service) that were old enough to have used the "G1" , The German FN FAL, thought it a better rifle than the G3 and as late as 1982 the Hesse state police retained G1s. Interesting I thought.

-kBob
 
I have both a DSA and a CETME. The CETME needs steel cased ammo or it jams, not really a problem. The DSA is better quality and I put a scope on it. IMHO the DSA is of much better quality. The CETME is a import and the stock was shorter and narrower that made it uncomfortable to shoot. I replaced the butt stock with HK made stuff and it's better.
 
Last edited:
I don't know much about G3 but it seems unlike FAL, it can actually be used in full auto.
Click to expand...

Any 7.62 NATO in FA is a handful and a half. Ironically, one of the most controllable is the early AR-10, which is fully 2 lbs lighter than the G3, FAL or M14, and has a higher rate of fire. The straight-line muzzle-to-buttstock layout of the Stoner design just works.

Having said that, the FAL is certainly not uncontrollable in FA:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15eYvEvLzdI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBu-zTvnk5s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvlsrgL_Plg
 
The safety of the FAL and the G3 are designed to be released as the rifle is being carried muzzle down in front of the shooter. The safety can be manipulated without removing the hand from the pistol grip when the selector switch is used while the FAL or G3 is in the muzzle down position
 
I've always seen them as pretty much equal.

Both very widely adopted by numerous countries around the globe and both were fairly unergonomic by today's standards.

Both were also fairly hard to manage when shooting F/A.
 
There is no 'VS' involved. Troopies use what they're issued. Battle rifles, HK's and FN's included, are selected primarily for political reasons(ditto for M-14's and M16 variants). Nothing whatever to do with the quality of the rifle involved. The G3 was selected by the Germans because FN wouldn't let 'em make their own. So they bought out Cetme and gave the licence to HK. Other countries adopted and build it because it's much simpler and cheaper to manufacture than the FAL or M-14.
"...a stable top cover to mount a scope..." No scopes needed or wanted on a battle rifle.
"...never carried one in combat..." Very few here have carried so much as a stick in combat.
 
I'll weigh in, as I own examples of the FAL, PTR91 (G3 clone), and the M1A and M1 Garand. This is for semi-auto versions of course. All are reliable and battle accurate, so it boils down to the "extras." All of them suck for installing optics. All have great aesthetics.

Best: Two way tie - FAL and M1A.

FAL has the best ergos of all, and the safety/fire switch is in the perfect position just like the AR15 platform. Good trigger. I love the reciprocating left-side charging handle. Adjustable gas system is cool and an advantage. I like the mag changes and mag well. For me, this weapon just fits the best. Knocks against it: The carry handle is useless. And there are many poor copies, and confusing makers/models.

M1A has awesome ergos, and I do like the "rifle" feel of the weapon. Also, I like the safety lever in the trigger mag well (easy to use and feel it's position). Good trigger. The sights are awesome. And there are great aftermarket upgrades, even entire stocks that offer a pistol grip style stock if you prefer that. The mag changes are fast and easy. Drawback is the right-side charging handle.

Runner up: M1 Garand. Marginally nudged out by the advantages of the 20 round box detachable mags, and lighter .308 caliber (which in my mind is the perfect battle round).

Least desirable:
For me, the PTR91 ergos aren't very good. Seems front heavy for starters. Fair trigger, nothing special. The cheap plastic stock and forearm needed replacement as they were totally unacceptable junk. The charging handle is too awkward to use quickly and easily. The safety lever is too far forward to rapidly use without removing your pistol grip hand for anyone with normal sized hands. The sights are the worst of all of the weapons in my view. Not precise enough.
 
FAL has the best ergos of all, and the safety/fire switch is in the perfect position just like the AR15 platform. I love the reciprocating left-side charging handle.
Click to expand...

Which model FALs have reciprocating CHs?

BSW
 
MachIVshooter said:
There is a reason gas operation is the standard, while roller delayed is limited to the CETME and some derivatives by HK (and the CZ-52 pistol).

Greater felt recoil, difficulty setting/maintaining headspace and cracked rollers are just a couple of the drawbacks.
Click to expand...
The recoil comment is what I don't understand and I hear it a lot. When I shoot a FAL, it always feels like it's beating the crap out of me. OTOH, I can shoot my G3 all afternoon w/o noticing any abuse whatsoever.
 
Well, these opinions are all very interesting, but...

Friends don't let friends shoot (let alone own) G3s. Just sayin.
Keith
 
Jackal said:
I dont understand people saying the G3 has more recoil. My PTR91 is the softest shooting semi auto /308 I've ever used. Lighter recoil than M1A, Fal, Vepr, etc. I'm recoil sensitive too. It recoils on par with a 7.62x39 AK.
Click to expand...
Yes! That's been my experience as well.
 
Having spent considerable time shooting and maintaining the FAL and G3 at Fort Bragg’s JFKSWC, I am not too fond of either in comparison to other choices. Forced to make a choice I prefer the FAL. Having experience with the ergonomics, reliability, durability, and accuracy of the FAL, G3, M1, and M14, I think in this class of weaponry the MAS 49/56 is a far better choice but that debate is for a different thread.
 
Last edited:
FAL has the best ergos of all, and the safety/fire switch is in the perfect position just like the AR15 platform. I love the reciprocating left-side charging handle.
Click to expand...
Which model FALs have reciprocating CHs?
Click to expand...

I was wondering the same thing.

I have always felt the reciprocating CH on the SCAR was a major step backwards for FN. But then, I consider the SCAR in general to be inferior to the FAL or .308 AR.
 
The sights are the worst of all of the weapons in my view. Not precise enough.
Click to expand...

Funny thing is the sights are my favorite feature of the rifle, so much so I've put as set on my AUG. Never met anyone else who liked them though, so I may be a little off, who knows...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Century Cetme vs. Century FAL
Replies
15
Views
3K
Treylis
T
D
  • Locked
G3/FAL questions
Replies
7
Views
558
stubbicatt
S
S
  • Locked
I want to get a military semi-auto rifle in .30 cal...FN FAL, CETME or H&K G3??
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Robert14
R
4
  • Locked
FAL Vs. G3 variants
Replies
2
Views
1K
natedog
N
Z
  • Locked
FAL or G3
2 3
Replies
61
Views
6K
Frankl03
Frankl03
Back
Top