M1A v. AR10 v. FAL

Status
Not open for further replies.
I also fall into the M1A camp. Having used one for some years now with absolute reliability.As with many AR10s mine is accessorized too, with parts commonly avaliable and suitable to make it more comparable with me, so I guess the no accessory thing is not really a big thing. Heavier than an AR10?
I replaced the beautiful wood with a synthetic ' accessory ' stock, removed the flip up buttplate and it lost lots of weight, so perhaps the heavier argument is losing some traction.
Using an A.R.M.S 18 picitiney mount, which is easy enough to install let's me use any optic I desire, and additionally, I didnt have to pony up for backup sights on my rifle, as it comes equipped with arguably the best aperture sights on a clone military rifle, with the QD bases, their avaliable almost instantly, and are above the optics mount for a great sight picture, even with a modest cheek riser, that also holds some spare rounds.
I'm not going to bash AR based 7.62 rifles, I'm sure they will go bang as desired, just not my thing and only having handled an FAL have no comment on this foriegn design.
Its really your duck, your going to have to quack it yourself insofar as to what you want, just providing my take an a really nice rifle.
 
Just as a side note What To Look For When Selecting a FN FAL is worth reading on the subject or FAL rifles and their parts. All FAL rifles are not created equal and for that matter neither are all AR 10 type rifles. My AR 10 which I posted earlier is an older version made by Armalite and started as an AR10(T) with a short barrel. I added the 26" heavy barrel it is pictured with. My rifle also uses the M1A (M14) similar type magazines. Because that rifle is about 25 plus years old when I got it the selection was very limited unlike today where there are plenty of manufacturers. When considering a rifle consider parts available and details like magazine cost and availability.

Ron
 
In ascending order and why and I have owed all , still do except the SCAR with enough experience with them:
M14: yes nostalgic for us early VN vets and earlier. Is hard to get a 1moa accuracy unless tuned to the hilt which has some field drawbacks but if shot a few thousand rounds after Smith enterprise brings it to National Match specs or better then it is a reliable and easy handling 1.5 minute rifle not too picky with 140-200 grain bullets .
http://www.smithenterprise.com/

The FNFAL, Too me this is an Browning Automatic Rifle and used as semi auto is no draw back . They are stone reliable if created properly like Arizona Response Systems are. My two were both built by them,: a Imbel reciever New Austrian Steyr kit on one and an Austrailian Para Kit on an Imbel . The Steye with it's 2x Aimpoint M2 can get under 2 moa with the German Military Ball sold in battlepacks . The L1a gets 3moa with a military Trilux with the same . ammo.The exude field reliablitity and easy maintain and are physically rugged..
https://www.arizonaresponsesystems.com/

The AR10: It is by far more accurate, my "light" Ar 10 with 18" Criterian barrel and 4.5-14x Leupold is a sub 1 MOA gun with the same Geco German Ball ammo and is rugged and supportable in the forseeble future. The trigger is by far the best of the bunch if a good aftermarket is installed. , simply superior IMHO . I buit my own with AERO M5e1 Upper and lower system and top quality parts, also have a 22" heavy Barreled 6.5 Creedmore one they is really accurate !!



Now also consider the HK 91: Reliable to the highest degree, but tears up the brass and launches it to the moon ! I made one shoot at the PST sniper standard and that is 1moa with Geco military ball . I still have one which has around 20,000 rounds thru it since new in 1979. I won regional early Practical rifle matches with it before trying the "in " M1a in 80s. I have it stashed safely and securely in my remote property . Semper Fi !

The FN SCAR 7.62 has an excellent reputation and the 20S model SCAR is reported to be a sub MOA gun and the are reliable . The 20S model is heavy but the standard light rifles are not for a .308 battle rifle. I really would buy a 17S and a 20 S if I only could own two rifles ! I would be able to always keep one running and the 20 S seem very good !
https://fnamerica.com/products/fn-scar-series/fn-scar-20s/
 
Last edited:
Yeah a lot of FALs are parts guns.
But not all parts guns were assembled with old/used parts.
And you can get a brand spanking new FAL.........they just cost more.
 
I’ve owned all three plus a couple SCAR-17s. The only one of the bunch I still own are the LR-308s.

I’ve got some nostalgic connection to the M1A and I’ve owned a few of them because of that. None of them stuck around. Mounting optics was a pain in the butt. Cheek weld sucked. Parts were impossible to find locally. Everything on them is expensive. There’s no way to make them as light as the large framed ARs.

The FAL was cool, but just not my cup of tea. If I liked iron sights I might have kept it.

The SCARs were cool. Super reliable, decently accurate and had the cool factor, but they are harsh on optics and aren’t really as lightweight as they initially feel. Spent a lot of money trying to make it the perfect semi-auto 308, but in the end, it just never really felt right.

I own quite a few LR-308s now from Falkor and Aero Precision. I have a lightweight M5 build that is lighter than my SCAR ever was and more accurate.
 
Mosin77 said:
I’ve shot an AR in .308, never the other two. I have handled FALs and M1As. At one point I had a serious jones for a .30 cal
battle rifle, however, and did a ton of research. Conclusions were as follows. They’re all great and so the best one depends on what you want it for.


Survival/a good gun to use for modern warfare, and you are currently based in the USA? AR10-type all the way. Modularity, optics (an essential in today’s combat) potentially lighter weight, better ergos, easy and broad parts availability, affordability, etc etc. From a spec sheet standpoint it’s simply the best platform today. Cross-shop with FN SCAR-17S.

A gun for the range, fondling, plinking, enjoyment, certain types of competition: take your pick of M1A or FAL, depending on whether you want to have the Vietnam vibe or the Falklands vibe. Either will be kinda pricey today, combat accurate (edge to M1A) and shines with the iron sights they were designed to use. FAL is probably “better,” but not if better-than-combat accuracy matters a lot.

Any of the 3 will serve for survival/emergency use in a pinch, so the question becomes, are you a tactical guy or a walnut and steel guy, or somewhere in between?
Click to expand...

For me the FAL IS a Vietnam vibe. That’s what the Aussie ASAS guys who introduced me to Fosters oil cans carried.
 
Last edited:
For me the FAL IS a Vietnam vibe. That’s what the Aussie ASAS guys who introduced me to Fosters oil cans carried.
 
FAL torture test on you tube. Can those other rifles take that? Look at that video before commenting.
 
My friend has the M1A.
We hit clay pigeons all day long from 50-80 yards across the little gully. I like it.

My Large frame AR (I like that) is what I built using Aero Precision as my starting point. Still not getting it to cycle reliably... Rings the 9” 300 yard gong every time. As noted above, you need to make sure you get all your parts correct as there are different patterns. But once you do, well, you ave a fine rifle

I have never touched an FAL.

Greg
 
the aussies gave me 9mm ammo for a swedish K i got after the last owner didn,t need it. i to have a soft spot for the m-14 and it took awhile to get used to the m-16.
 
I have all three - the FAL is genuine FN from Belgium. It has the harshest recoil.

M1A is okay. I like how the stock feels in my hands.

Both the FAL and M1A are not optimized for mounting optics.

AR308? Mine feels like a .22 when I shoot it. I've got it tuned just right.

If I had it to do all over again I wouldn't bother with the FAL or M1A.
 
desidog: you unwashed, unbeliever, using a true Russian gun! :cool: Your gun will break and disintegrate any day now.

The guy who bought one of my pair of Sig P6 has a Belgian FAL. For my lefty hand shooting, the takedown lever seems to be in the wrong place. But very cool gun.
 
I trained on the M-14 in BCT in 1967, hence that would be my choice. Neanderthal that I am I still prefer iron sights-at 71. The gas system of the M-14/M1A can be disassembled and cleaned, that of the AR platform cannot, IMHO that makes you too dependent on specific powders.
 
BLACKHAWKNJ said:
The gas system of the M-14/M1A can be disassembled and cleaned, that of the AR platform cannot, IMHO that makes you too dependent on specific powders.
Click to expand...

I clean the gas systems of my AR’s all the time.

Two pins, upper comes off. Pull BCG out of upper, remove cotter pin and firing pin. Remove cam key and bolt. Clean the gas system which consists of tail of bolt, carrier raceway, gas rings, pipette the gas tube and bolt tail, re-lube and reassemble.

About as easy as it gets. There’s other things I clean as well but the above is the gas system of a DI AR.
 
Last edited:
As far as battle rifles go I've had or have....

HK91
CETME
FNFAL
M1a
Ruger SR762
Saiga 308

The HK, CETME and FNFAL are gone. Just couldn't get past the stamped sheet metal receivers and mediocre accuracy.

Still have...
the M1a (which is shot high power comp with) It's my sentimental favorite
and the Ruger is a piston driven AR10. I actually won it in a drawing. It is the most accurate, versatile and practical.
and The Saiga was cheap back in the day and surprisingly accurate.

If I had to keep just one, it would be the Ruger.
 
mac66 said:
The HK, CETME and FNFAL are gone. Just couldn't get past the stamped sheet metal receivers and mediocre accuracy.
Click to expand...

just for clarification FN FAL’s have a milled receiver. But maybe that comment was made for the HK and CETME and the mediocre accuracy was for the FAL.

Agreed, the FAL will not be able to keep up with an AR10 in the accuracy department but all are more than capable for battle rifle accuracy.

The AR platform has a lot going for it enabling great accuracy. Eugene Stoner was a genius, no doubt about it.
 
BreechFace said:
just for clarification FN FAL’s have a milled receiver. But maybe that comment was made for the HK and CETME and the mediocre accuracy was for the FAL.

Agreed, the FAL will not be able to keep up with an AR10 in the accuracy department but all are more than capable for battle rifle accuracy.

The AR platform has a lot going for it enabling great accuracy. Eugene Stoner was a genius, no doubt about it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I meant. :)
 
I have all three. I prefer my 308 AR for precise shooting with glass. My fal is a fun gun and my M1A is for open sight shooting when I want to be precise with them. They all fill a need for me and I will keep them all.
 
I'd like a FAL some day when I have more money than God, but casual interest and a $1500+ price tag means it's way down the list for me.

None of the Garand, M1A or AR10 ever did it for me. Shooting a Garand is on my bucket list but I'm not in a hurry to own one.
 
For me, the FAL has one glaring fault not shared by the other two.....that completely unprotected rear sight just hanging out in the breeze. It is a pretty rugged looking thing, I will admit, but...... Beyond that, I love the thing. I have not owned one but I have shot a couple. Sweet guns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Armalite AR-10 Carbine Vs. M1A Scout Squad
2
Replies
25
Views
6K
H2O MAN
H
Mr.Revolverguy
  • Locked
M1A VS AR10 HISTORIC VS PRESENT
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
d2wing
d2wing
A
  • Locked
Psa ar10
Replies
11
Views
1K
Lord Teapot
L
A
  • Locked
Got the .308 Bug
2 3
Replies
53
Views
3K
Mr. Rowdy
M
Zundfolge
  • Locked
So why NOT an AR-10?
Replies
17
Views
2K
EBRDude
E
Back
Top