HD/SHTF/Plinker Fal or Carbon 15

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Foxtrot427

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
512
I am trying to decide between a cheaper FAL or a Professional Ordnance Carbon 15 97s for a SHTF, HD, and plinking use. Apparently bushmaster even keeps the professional ordnance C15s under warranty. However, I would probably bet a FAL would last longer in a harsh watery, muddy, or sandy environment were a C15 may not do so great. I know carbon fiber is a very tough material in my automotive experience though. Also, in HD, the .223 is probably the better way to go. Not only that, but the carbon 15 is lighter and probably easier to handle CQ than even a 16in bbl fal. Though it couldnt reach out so far (of course really Im not looking at being able to tackdrive at 400yd).

So they both have pros and cons. C15s being lightweight, better HD cartridge, better CQ maneuverability but also less reliable (though its not like in a SHTF situation where that matters most, I cant find other AR parts), and more complicated, and with a lower range. They both can be found in a similar price range. $600-700. Which sounds betters for what I need?
 
I built both (FAL and AR-15). I find the AR gets shot a lot more. It's more accurate, lighter recoiling, has better sights, has more ergonomic controls, and is generally more fun to shoot.

Having built both from parts and having had both torn down to the smallest spring and screw, strewn across my work bench, I wouldn't say the AR is more complicated than the FAL. Both are super easy to strip and clean. The AR's bolt may have a few more parts, but it's easy to clean and reassemble. The AR's extractor is certainly easier to take apart and clean. The FAL does have wider clearances, but it's adjustable, piston gas system is more complex.

While the feeling of a handy 30 caliber battle rifle loaded with 155gr TAP gives me the warm fuzzies as a SHTF weapon, I feel that with 75gr. TAP, 5.56 is a more appropriate round for HD/SD/general property protection. And since the rifle is easier to shoot accurately, it's my 1st choice.

If you're concerned about the reliability of the Carbon 15, get a standard 20" (or 16" midlength gas system) A2 type AR with a chrome lined Govt. profile barrel. I've never been a fan of the CAR gas system.
 
Thanks alot! I apreciate the info. Im not worried about the C15s reliability specifically. Just how ARs arent famous for being dunked in sand and still being able to shoot like new. But I have confidence that it will suit my needs. Especially if bushmaster still backs them. And with all the ARs out there, if I need to, I can find a piece off of another one in a SHTF thing. Plus there ammo is cheaper and more available. I think the C15 is the better choice for now. But I will still get a FAL later.
 
FAL no question.

I have "real" AR15s and they would be fine IMO, but I have handled and shot several Carbon 15s and NONE have ever worked right and this is with proper GI Magazines. I have no exp. with the Bushmaster buyout and subsequent production of Carbon 15s but the PO stuff left a plenty bad taste in my mouth.

FALS work without question in most cases and that is the most important thing IMHO.

Chris
 
I'd look at a standard AR rather than the Carbon 15, personally. That said, in AR versus FAL, I'd think the following (YMMV of course).

Plinking -- Pretty much whichever round or weapon you prefer. I don't see any real decisive advantage to either for recreational use beyond someone's personal preference.

Home Defense -- The FAL is too large for easy manuevering in confined spaces like inside a building (can be fixed by getting something like a DSA Para FAL with 16.25" or 18" barrel). The .308 round thumps harder, but .223 is plenty lethal at CQC ranges, and follow up shots are much faster if you're dealing with multiple targets or one round does not put them down (which can and does happen with .308 as well as with .223).

There's a reason why the sorts of elite units that can pick the tools they want primarily, almost exclusively, use 5.56mm rifles for CQB/CQC in lieu of 7.62x51mm weapons.

SHTF Scenario -- Both weapons are pretty rugged, in my experience. If you're in a mobile SHTF sort of scenario, the extra ammo you can carry for the AR is nice, otherwise I'd say it's pretty much a toss up.

One thing to bear in mind is that the FAL may require adjustment of the gas system when you change ammunition brands/loadings/etc (both mine get quirky when switching from mil-surplus ball to higher quality loads). If your SHTF scenario involves having a good supply of 7.62mm ammo on hand and such, no big deal. If you're having to use odds and ends found or scrounged up it could be a problem. Adjusting the gas tube is not hard, but it's not something to be doing in the middle of a gun fight at CQC ranges.
 
hmm. I am sure if it was SHTF I might have to make a few trips. But distances I could cover in a day. Im sure toteing around a 3lb carbon fiber AR would be easier and Id still have room for more rounds. I head carbon 15s are hit or miss. SOmetimes pitting is an issue with older pro ordnance models. Ill see if I can find one to handle before I buy.
 
If i had the money, a nifty FAL---but half my guns are .308 anyhow.

Here's an idea to really get conversations going--add a poll:D . Everyone loves polls. Especially political phone polls, right in the middle of supper:fire: .
 
Last edited:
HorseSoldier brings up a good point about the FAL in a TEOTWAWKI/SHTF situation.

If your cache of ammo has run dry and you're shooting found or looted rounds you're bound to have some odds and ends. The FAL's adjustable gas system can potentially cause problems in this scenario. A mag loaded with odds and ends may not reliably fire through your weapon.

This is a moot point for ARs and AKs.
 
Didn't 93 countries or some insane number like that adopt the FAL? I am just curious as to how big of an issue the adjustable gas port really is in the grand scheme of things. I have no experience with the FAL, which is why I ask, but it would seem like once you have it adjusted for something in the area of regular mil surp, it would be pretty care free. If it was really that big of an issue, and the gas port was really going to need adjustment when switching between most ammunition types, I doubt it would have earned the title "right arm of the free world."
 
Why not just get an AK? You sound like you really want an AK instead of the FAL or Carbon-15.

P.S.

You can get AKs in 223 so scrounging ammo later during the SHTF would be easy.

-Bill
 
Well its just that Ive always wanted an AR or Fal. And unless I got a VEPR or a Saiga (w/ pg conversion) I may have to settle for less accuracy. But I dont wanna get into the AK/AR thing haha. I also wanted to go American made. I know most FALs arent american but I may of gotten a DSA though I dont have anywhere near the $1000+ for one. I am also considering an AR-180B but they seem to cost more and more and are much more rare so in a bug out situation, uh oh.
 
If your cache of ammo has run dry and you're shooting found or looted rounds you're bound to have some odds and ends. The FAL's adjustable gas system can potentially cause problems in this scenario. A mag loaded with odds and ends may not reliably fire through your weapon
Click to expand...

Only an issue if you fail to take action. Knowing that you "might" encounter trouble from mixed ammo, you can always crank the gas open in advance...
 
Last edited:
Agreed. The whole point of adjustable gas is to allow the user to 'dial down' the system so that it functions reliably with the least amount of force delivered to the piston/bolt/carrier, thus making the weapon last a lot longer. Recall the procedure for adjusting the gas in the first place:

1. Dial it down until you see failures.
2. Back it off one setting.
3. Confirm that it work on this setting.
4. Back it off one more setting.
5. Go shooting.
6. For combat, back it off one more setting.

Nothing says that if you have a magazine full of crap ammo, you can't back it off another setting, or even wide open. Sure, your weapon will wear more quickly, but it will almost certainly cycle every round. If it won't, chances are that whatever other weapon you would have loaded them into would have choked, too.

As to what the original poster asked...

...it's a tossup. They're very different guns. One is a light handy carbine, one is a full on battle rifle, and the uses given run the gamut of shooting. It's like asking if you would prefer a Mazda Miata or a Ford F350 as your only vehicle.

I'll give the most annoying answer ever:

Get both. :D

Seriously, though. They do very different things, and each one excels at something the other does not. Both can "do it all", kindasorta, but neither one is best at everything.

Mike
 
I own AR, FAL, AK, etc. The FAL and AK tip the scale on reliability, but AR15s
are lighter --and quicker on follow-up shots (beats out the AK, too, on that).
We could debate all day on which is the more effective round at this or that
range...blah...blah...They'll all kill door-nail dead for HD purposes which is
usually at spitting distance. Quite frankly I'd go for the handgun or shotty.

SHTF is a whole different ballgame and we've had similar threads about
that here ad nauseum. If I was sitting in a house with a lot of open space
around me, I'd use the FAL. If I wanted something I could carry around all
day outside as I cut wood, checked a perimeter, etc, I'd could use either
the AR or AK. If I wanted something that I could easily accessorize and
scope out with reasonable accuracy while still being lighter than the FAL,
the M4gery would get the nod over the AK.

If I had to bug out through heavy brush, splash through a few ditches and
not have to wonder if it will still go bang afterward, the AK wins....or maybe
my mossberg if my eyesite goes to cr@p after the world falls apart.
Remember, the old guy with the shotgun who moves quietly and is patient
when the chips are down can have just as much edge as young Mr Highspeed
with the tricked out EBR.

Hopefully, I can sit at home on top of my pile of well-defended canned food
and chocolates as Old Buckshot and Mr Highspeed meet and greet outside
my wire :neener:
 
Nothing says that if you have a magazine full of crap ammo, you can't back it off another setting, or even wide open. Sure, your weapon will wear more quickly, but it will almost certainly cycle every round. If it won't, chances are that whatever other weapon you would have loaded them into would have choked, too.
Click to expand...

I kinda figured that was the case.

As always, an grain of prevention is worth 147 gr of cure :)
 
Hmm the carbon 15 seems a little smarter as its more likely to use the rifle for HD rather than SHTF and the carbon 15 gets the nod in HD. But Id still like it to be able to take some punishment. How heavy are 16in bbl. FALs anyway?
 
They're certainly heavier, but the weight is not prohibitive. I don't have the exact figures. My ninjafied cruiser shotgun is one heavy SOB, too, and I clear buidlins with it all of the time. Would I rather have a featherweight AR? Probably. But does the heavy shotty work perfectly well? Yep.

Mike
 
DS Arms has a "tactical" serious with a 16 inch barreled FAL carbine. They list it at 8 1/4 pounds, which if I am not mistaken, is actually lighter than current issue military M16s. The problem there is that the barrel fluting and shortened gas system, and the word tactical, all add expense, and the rifle comes with an MSRP of $1595. But then, DS Arms is supposed to make some really good stuff and their standard rifle bears the same price tag.
 
How heavy are 16in bbl. FALs anyway
Click to expand...

Both of mine weigh an ounce or three short of 9 1/2 pounds. Both have slings and stock mounted mag pouchs. I suspect I could drop that a bit if I had non-US made stock and handguards.

Full length version weighs close to 10 1/2 lbs. with the sling, pouch, and scope mount sans optics.
 
Didn't 93 countries or some insane number like that adopt the FAL? I am just curious as to how big of an issue the adjustable gas port really is in the grand scheme of things. I have no experience with the FAL, which is why I ask, but it would seem like once you have it adjusted for something in the area of regular mil surp, it would be pretty care free. If it was really that big of an issue, and the gas port was really going to need adjustment when switching between most ammunition types, I doubt it would have earned the title "right arm of the free world."
Click to expand...

Why would it impact on the rifle's military reputation at all? Dial it in for M80 ball or its foreign mil-spec equivalent and it will blast away all day. Dial it in for heavier/lighter, stronger/weaker loads, and it will blast away all day with that ammunition as well. Both my FALs will hiccup if set up for suplus NATO 7.62 and then I switch to rounds with heavier bullets, however. This is not a scenario that your average Joe in any nation that used the FAL would likely ever encounter.

And don't get me wrong, the FAL is one of the finest military service rifles ever built, in my opinion. But it does have a design quirk that might mean more in civilian SHTF/survival situation than it would in military service.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Thoughts on a complete rewrite...
2 3
Replies
73
Views
9K
Robert
Robert
Back
Top