Looking for New battle rifle

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tcrocker

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2005
Messages
430
I'm looking at getting a new battle rifle. I'm not looking for a AR just don't care for them.I was in the Army didn't like them then although I have had one of one form or another every year after the Army:confused:. But eny way I have a M1 like it, now I'm thinking about a FAL, CETME, or a PTR 91. Other than price what is the difference and which would be the best to buy? I'm going to use it for a range gun and a well they screwed us now rifle.
 
Use the search function. This topic comes up about as often as .45 ACP vs 9mm and 1911 vs Glock. There are literally dozens of threads on exactly the question you just asked.

Here is just one I answered just a few weeks back

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=482655&highlight=fal+m1a

Other than price what is the difference and which would be the best to buy?
Click to expand...

You will also see that it comes down to personal preference. They are all good rifles and there is no "best". It's like asking "what is best...blondes, brunettes, redheads". All comes down to personal preference.

...and by the way, the answer is clearly FAL. But not just any FAL...either original Belgian or DSA. Don't waste your time otherwise.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here's a cut and paste answer

Cold War Battle Rifles

d6ykz.jpg

M1A
Pro
Reliable design
Full power cartridge
Very comfortable (for most) stock
Can be quite accurate
Great sights
Safety is convenient location in trigger guard
Con
Scope mounting is awkward over the receiver
Field stripping has lots of part/not straightforward
Can't be cleaned from chamber side with a rod
Expensive mags

FAL
Pro
Reliable design
Full power cartridge
Extremely good ergonomics
Cheap mags
Extraordinarily easy to break down, field strip, clean
Adjustable gas system
Con
Sights are adequate but better A2 style sights exist
Triggers not known to be great but they can be improved
Not quite as accurate but certainly within battle rifle specs

HK91/G3/PTR91
Pro
Reliable design
Full power cartridge
Cheap mags
Somewhat easy to break down, field strip, clean
Can be accurate
Con
Sights are adequate
No bolt hold open
Abysmal ergonomics - safety selector is near impossible to reach, cocking handle is in terrible place, mag release is hard to reach
Triggers are absolutely horrible but they can be improved
 
Last edited:
I love my FAL. The ergonomics can not be beat. Throw the SAW pistol grip and extended selector switch form DSA on it and enjoy. They are not tack drivers, but then again then were never designed to be. DSA is the top of the line in new made FAL rifles, mine was built on a DSA Type 1 upper. Stay away from Hesse or Century. I had a Century FAL once, had. Anything one an Imbel receiver should be ok. FAL mags are still inexpensive where I am and plentiful to boot.
 
Dare I resist?....

Nope. Get the one that fits your needs best. The one you hold and works well for you. Any will do the job admirably. Each has design points and design shortcomings.

For a range gun, you might be better served by a bolt actioned rifle with a nice scope. Surely will be more economical to buy, and perhaps more economical to feed.
 
chock up another vote for the FAL.

I have a century arns with imbel reciever and I love it. Got mine for 600 at a local pawn shop just upgrade your dust cover. To one from DSA and puta light power scope on it and shoot away.
 
I picked the PTR 91 over the FAL. I have owned both. The FAL I owned was a nice one built on a DSA receiver. The PTR is more accurate and easier to scope. Also its kind of quirky with the charging handle way forward on the left side. The PTR has a very solid feel to it. Just my 2 cents.
 
I've got to replace the three bolt-action MBRs that were stolen from me before I buy a FAL. (A MAS-36, an 03-A3, and a Mauser, BTW). Restoring the collection comes first.

I kinda like the M1a, but Dad's ghost would come after me if I didn't get a Garand first. He was a firm believer in the M1 and carried that rifle (or a BAR) through the length and width of Korea.

-And I will never buy a new German rifle. Battlefield pick-ups are OK, but my family just has too big a grudge against the nation of Germany to ever support it directly.
 
I used to own a PTR 91. It was a nice rifle and accurate. Given how milsurp .308 is drying up, I traded it for a 1911. That rifle mangled brass like nothing I have ever seen. I have since found out there are people who reload it, but it STILL worried me. Because of the action, all the brass looked like it had pressure problems. I think it would be difficult to determine whether you had an actual pressure problem if you were reloading for it. If you get into reloading, that should be a consideration. If not, it was a great rifle, cheap mags and accurate.

I am suprised you didn't include an M1A. That would be MY choice, but it is your dime.:D
 
I did that analysis in the '70's. Then, the M16 was not a contender, the FN FAL and M1A too expensive. I bought an HK91 for $160 - cheaper than a Rem 700.

Ammo in NATO bulk packs ran .25 a round, what could be wrong with that? Well, over time, I hunted with the HK and served in the USAR for 22 years. Things changed.

Is is now a recognized fact by at least most first and second tier governments that intermediate assault rifles are the answer to combat, both tactically and logistically. I've used a main battle rifle long enough to see why - heavy, relatively higher recoil, ammo that is now expensive, and simply a bigger resource than actually needed. The intermediate caliber rifles offer just as much lethality at ranges actually shot, have little recoil, and ammo costs can be cheaper. They are smaller, lighter, easier to handle, allow manuever in tight confines such as vehicles and buildings, and are the platform for modern optics and lights.

The surplus designs of 50 years ago don't offer the best combination of features and uses. They are anachronisms passing into history. Good stuff for a range or day out hunting, but not the best.

Since the AR was not on the short list for purchase, I won't recommend it. I was no fan at all the last 30 years - but that was largely due to my perception of the caliber. I reconsidered when I discovered the 6.8 SPC, the #1 alternative chosen by buyers looking for more power.

I also discovered I can build an AR with the features I like, not what is offered by major makers or the government. And some of those features are reasonably priced. You can have a side charger on the left, piston, angonize over a dozen stocks of different design, add a quad rail or none at all. Barrels can be had from 24 to 16 inches and less if you get with the BATF and do the paperwork - silencer, too. The market continues to expand with more products every year.

Did I like the M16A2? Not so much. Preferred side charging, a smaller grip, a smooth narrow handguard, an adjustable length stock with real cheek weld, flattop, and iron sights. In a caliber I can expect results from.

I can build it and get the best of all choices I've seen or used.
 
I don't know about you, but I've got a hankerin' for one of these

attachment.php
 
I'm looking for one, too. Cost is an issue for me though, so I'm thinking of pulling the trigger on a CETME - they are currently running at $499, http://www.jgsales.com/product_info.php/products_id/2657 which is far cheaper than anything else out there right now.

I am fully aware that buying one is a crapshoot - but paying $1100+ for a PTR91 or even a cheaper DSA built STG58 FAL (as opposed to SA58) is just a bit too rich for my blood (well, actually, the wifes....), so I reckon I'm going to go for the CETME, cross my fingers and see how we go.

If I was considering a FAL, I'd be looking more towards an Imbel kit built on an Entreprise receiver - not a bad deal at the mo, $799 from Atlantic Tactical, http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/storeproduct618.aspx and apparently Entreprise are now building their receivers from blueprints not reverse engineered and offering a long warranty (lifetime on receiver) - so seems like a good deal to me.

My reasons for a G3 variant over a FAL (other than the very low price) is that it is easier to change out the butt stock for a folder, magazines are dirt cheap, and also that I am very familiar with the platform. If it needs a bit of tinkering to get it smooth, that's something I can handle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Advice on a MODERN battle rifle
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
artherd
A
S
  • Locked
Thoughts on the PTR-91
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
waterhouse
W
M
  • Locked
Good Quality FAL under $1000
Replies
3
Views
860
The Wiry Irishman
T
amprecon
  • Locked
  • Poll
Which Battle Rifle?
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
BA110N Man
B
T
  • Locked
357/38 Rifles???
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
shiftyer1
S
Back
Top