Is the M14 Superior to the FN FAL

Status
Not open for further replies.
The only jame I've ever had with my DSA was when I switched to South African ammo.

It's under-powered; halfway through the magazine, the bolt got stuck halfway to the rear and the case didn't eject.

With the bolt halfway back, I couldn't crack the rifle open to take it apart. I didn't want to kick the bolt back, as I didn't know the cause of the malfunction.

Turns out that with the lesser powered ammo, the gas setting I had it at wasn't enough to extract; with the FAL, you adjust the gas setting to the minimum needed for reliable cycling. I could've cleared it just by kicking the charging handle to the rear and cranking up the gas.

The AK is so reliable because it has a very over-powered gas system. A brilliantly simple design. If you want, you can just tune the FAL gas system so that maximum gas pressure is being sent through it, mimicing the AK's overpowered system.

Also note that the Para FALs don't have the rattail in the stock.
 
You got me thinking so I simulated a jam with my FAL. It is still possible to open the action and remove the top cover with the rattail up to halfway into the buffer tube. Mor than halfway though and you can't get the cover off. I'm not sure what would cause it to jam that far open but I guess anything is possible.

My FAL has never choked on me. The only malfunction I have ever had with my M1A was when I lent it to a friend to shoot a match. He somehow managed to dismount the op rod during a rapid fire stage.

I have 1 or 2 stovepipes with my AK (SA93). I have had a number of jams with AR15s. The worst is when the case gets jammed between the gas tube and the receiver. That one requires tools and a fair amount of swearing! :cuss:
 
Dunno.

You should have both. :D

As to which is more accurate, sure, the M14 could be more accurate than the FN-FAL in semi-auto mode. But the FN-FAL in single shot (pogo stick) mode is akin to a bolt action.
 
If you want an extremely thorough testing of all the MBR's I'd suggest Boston's Gun Bible.
Click to expand...
Where may we find this fine write-up?

It's under-powered; halfway through the magazine, the bolt got stuck halfway to the rear and the case didn't eject.
Click to expand...

THAT (and your other reports with the AK system) is why I so firmly believe that every closed-top rifle should be designed so renegade fired cases don't have any corners to hide in and get smooshed into. Turn your beloved AR over with the bolt locked back and drop either an empty or a disposable dummy round through the ejection port. Drop the bolt. Tell us what happens.

The ones I saw that with did it because of bad mags that popped the round out early. The locking lugs wedged under the rear of the case, and the gas tube grabbed onto the front of the cartridge. It was not pretty.

Turn your M14-system rifle over and try that. Oh. It just falls away, or at worst, will do a live-round stovepipe. That was caused by my USGI mag with a missing 1/4-inch on the right front feedlip. Anyone want to buy that preban regular-cap mag???

That jam cleared in an instant.
 
Turn your beloved AR over with the bolt locked back and drop either an empty or a disposable dummy round through the ejection port. Drop the bolt. Tell us what happens.
Click to expand...

Are you talking to me? I don't own an AR-15. I've seen the jam of which you speak on an M16A1, however.

If having a closed-top reciever is a design flaw, however, there are a LOT of flawed designs out there.
 
Don't take it personal, Nightcrawler--I'm talking to anyone who has the ability to try it out.

Sounds like you know I speak truth. How long did it take to clear the one you saw in the M16A1 platform?

As far as design flaws, perhaps the AK system is the least defective closed design, because you can at least get the thing opened up. Even a round crammed between the op rod and the top cover itself is likely to be overcome with a bit of muscle--and the release action for the top cover is in the favorable direction of away from the friction.
 
At one time I had both a pre-ban M1A and a SA SAR-48 (actually an IMBEL made FAL). I still have the SAR-48.

I found both rifles to be equally reliable. The accuracy edge went to the M1A and I felt like that was due to the sights. However the difference was very small. I shoot my FAL regularly at 100-300 yds and hit steel targets of all sizes until bored. I even got to spend some time last weekend with my FAL at a steel target at 400yds. The plate was about 12"x18". From the prone position, I hit it 4 out of 6 with shots timed similar to what you would do for highpower rapid fire.

The things I like about the FAL are:

1) cheap mags - I have paid as little as $3 each (just a couple months ago) for used aluminum mags. Most of my mags have less than $6 each invested.

2) spare parts available everywhere - and cheap

3) reliable - never had a failure that wasn't a result of either me reloading worn out brass (case separations) or my one bad mag

4) very easy to maintain

Just to be fair, you need to ask this same question over on Battlerifles.com. These guys are mostly M14/M1A fans and most are very knowledgeable, polite, and eager to share info.
 
The only jame I've ever had with my DSA was when I switched to South African ammo.
Click to expand...
Ah, the underpowered problem. I'm going to test some reduced load in the M1A again soon if there's ever an afternoon above 50 degrees.... I'll let you know how it goes. Anyone with an FN system is free to duplicate the loads I'll be testing, for trial in their adjustable gas vent gun.

How much would the M1A shooters pay for a gizmo to adapt their mag wells to accept FN mags? I really like those cheap FAL mags.

Still no buyers for my gen-yoo-ine GEE-EYE M14 mag with the bad feed lip?
 
Is the M14 Superior to the FN FAL
Click to expand...


Yes.



Those who comment that the FAL won all of its initial trials are wrong. The FAL failed, HORRIBLY I might add, in the cold and artic tests. Also, know that the FAL did better against the PROTOTYPE M14s. Once the M14 was fully developed it won the tests and was adapted.

The M14 is a very effective design and battle proven rifle. The open reciever device is not because you canb just take out the mag and quickly clear all debri, it all drops out. The only really negative thing about the design is that with the selector cut out, you can get foriegn materia into your trigger group, which is not a good situation.
 
Grump: Boston's Gun Bible is the name of a book. About the best price I've seen is from Fred's M14 stocks. It's about $5 less than retail.

Also, wouldn't a para-FAL w/ a Tapco stripper clip top cover and the Israeli H-Bar charging handle mods solve all those problems?
 
Blain,

Did I mention that I found what animal 00 buckshot is devastating on? Squirrel at 5 feet. 25 feet, you have to shoot them again! :what:
 
Blain said: "Those who comment that the FAL won all of its initial trials are wrong. The FAL failed, HORRIBLY I might add, in the cold and artic tests."

I'll be sure to pass this along to the Canadians who used theirs in sub zero cold for years.

We are arguing about two of the finest rifles ever created. It is hard to pick a real winner. Find the one you like better and go with it.
 
Reduced load:

30.7 gr. of 748, Lyman 311xxx whatever--the 165-gr spitzer, gas checked. WSR primers and Federal Brass.

They all functioned in an M1A (accuracy was terrible--alloy too soft for 1950 fps), locking the bolt back when single-loaded and feeding flawlessly.

Try that with any FAL and any 160-170-gr lead bullet and tell me how its gas system handles it. How many rounds did you fire to get your answer?
 
I have a question Grump. Does it really matter if inaccurate lead loads, that must be loaded into the chamber by hand, won't function in a FAL? :p
 
Feanaro:

Okay, maybe the post isn't that clear--single-loaded, they locked the bolt back, which EQUALS FULL-STROKE CYCLING OF THE GAS SYSTEM!!! Isn't that how you adjust the FAL's gas system?

Then I loaded some in the mag, and they fed flawlessly to the end of the mag, and locked back the bolt AGAIN on the last round.

Accuracy is another issue--I got 3 MOA with similar reduced loads using 147-gr FMJBTs almost a year ago when testing an FAL gun and an M1A side-by-side. That particular lead bullet has a known tendency to not do so well above 1400-1600 fps.

So, the question remains--can YOUR FAL system rifle even have a ghost of a chance of functioning with loads so under-powered, the 147-gr FMJBT is below 2200 fps? Try my posted load using an Oregon Trail hard-cast bullet and see what the accuracy is.

Oh, and tell me if YOUR FAL rifle can function with 165-gr lead bullets at 1950 fps, even after all fiddling with the gas system is done.
 
I don't know about that particular load, but MY FAL has and will shoot 110gr, 125gr, 147gr, 168gr, 175gr, and 190gr without a problem whatsoever.

If you know you'll be shooting all these different bullets you can adjust your gas to the weakest of the loads and it'll never fail on any of them. If you set your gas according to the FN manual, it'll be very unlikely you'll have to change it anyway, unless of course you try and shoot a 30 carbine round in there.......
 
So, the question remains--can YOUR FAL system rifle even have a ghost of a chance of functioning with loads so under-powered, the 147-gr FMJBT is below 2200 fps?
Click to expand...

It's likely that any 7.62 NATO semi-auto will function just fine with full-power factory loads from 110-gr to 220 gr. My point is that everyone seems to discount FAL jams with underpowered junk surplus ammo as aberrations beyond the debate over reliability. I've personally seen an M1A's self-adjusting gas system feed reduced loads with NATO-spec bullets that would NOT function in a fully-closed-vent FAL.

So, is the FAL design superior because its manually-adjustable gas system fails where the M14 gas system keeps on ticking? Ohhh, I'm rude!!:evil:
 
Post ahead which appears to be a flame but isn't. :D

Wasn't there an issue with M1A bedding? I seem to recall discussions about bedding going bad which had nothng to do with parts failures.

What's "DSA?"

Jaywalker
 
Bedding should only be an issue with match prepared M14/M1As. Since the point is better MBR, then match accuracy preparations are not a concern.
 
A few notes:
DSA stands for DS Arms (www.dsarms.com).
My DSA SA58 shoots Portugese surplus at around 2200 fps with it's 16" barrel. No extraction/ejection problems with plenty left to adjust on my gas reg.
Who shoots non-jacketed .308 Winchester in 165gr at only 1950 fps in a semi? Might as well be shooting 7.62x39 (or 30-30).
Hell, my gun will even shoot that Indian junk (albeit only a few rounds were put through- that stuff scares me)!
Gas reg also lets you shoot HOT loads too without battering your receiver. Oh, a new alloy DSA lower receiver (the part that the bolt recoils against, but mainly it's just a trigger housing) can be replaced for $99. Besides, mine has over 4000 rounds on it with no noticable wear. I like M-14's but I can't stand an investment cast receiver (Springfield or Fulton Armory) for a design that was meant to be forged.
Point of all this is that if you get a QUALITY FAL (DSA) and not a build with used parts on a crummy Type 3 receiver you are going to get a great gun. Same goes for a QUALITY M14 (Fulton Armory). Still don't like the cast receiver or the $40 magazines however.....
 
tell me if YOUR FAL rifle can function with 165-gr lead bullets at 1950 fps, even after all fiddling with the gas system is done.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm pretty sure these rounds will be everywhere when The End Times come, and TSHTF. And you can kill elephants with them, if you're out of buckshot, after you've demolished the Evil Alien Overlord.
 
Well, I'm not going to be shooting unjacketed bullets in my FAL, but my Imbel on Imbel parts kit FAL shoots the underpowered SA ammo just fine. Accuracy isn't so nice with the SA and it shoots high at 100 yards, but it doesn't jam.

FWIW, the SA ammo is not NATO ammo.

Has anyone chronoed the SA stuff? I'd be interested to find out just how underpowered it is...
 
I've seen more cobbled together, POS FALs then I've seen cobbled together POS M14s so I believe many on the M14 side are comparing a quality Springfield M14 to some piece of junk FAL from CenturyArms.

A quality FAL is every bit as good a rifle as a quality M14 (and vise versa).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Teach me about FALs
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
FN/form
F
C
  • Locked
So Tell Me About The FN FAL
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
keederdag
K
H
  • Locked
6.8x51/.277 Fury?
2 3
Replies
65
Views
2K
Robert
Robert
M
  • Locked
My Thoughts on the FN FAL
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
8K
salt&battery
S
L
  • Locked
AR15 or FAL??
Replies
21
Views
658
elmerfudd
E
Back
Top