Noobie Handled an FAL for 1st time: FAL vs. HK91

[hartzpad]

I just handled an FAL in a local shop for the first time today and I was impressed! Much better balance than any .308 HK I have shot (all are very front heavy), it was pretty light too. It was a Pacific Armament Imbel FAL, 21" barrel w/ pinned muzzle brake, very short wood buttstock (too short), and cheap, flimsy plastic handguard that flexed when I gripped it.

I LOVE the bolt hold open and bolt release, the charging handle is the most ergonomic that I have used (way better location than HK's and AR's) and the mags are much quicker and easier to change than HK mags.

I have to say that HK's have the advantage in the sights department, the FAL's peep sight is too large and there is no other smaller/long-range aperature. Also, I could turn the gas valve adjuster (knurled ring on gas block behind front sight) very easily by hand, is that normal? Seems like it could easily get knocked out of place and cause a malfunction.

Overall, I am now looking for a 16" or 18" barrel Imbel FAL as my next purchase, I love .308's!!! I still love HK's, but I think the FAL has the slight overall advantage with the mag release, bolt hold open/bolt release and better balance.

 

[thatguy]

I have both and like them both. Maybe prefer the FAL just a tad. They do feel different with the FAL (to me, at least) feeling somewhat slimmer and handier.

Either will do the job.

 

[DMK]

I really like the egonomics of the controls on the FAL also. I built the two I have so I made them just the way I like them with a slightly wider safety, a slightly wider mag release and folding charging handle.

I also agree about the rear peep being two large. One of mine is scoped, so I consider the rear peep just a BUIS, but on the other I put on a hooded peep sight with a smaller arperture that DSA sells. It made a big difference in group sizes.

DSA makes some really nice FALs too.

And yes, the gas adjust is normally pretty easy to turn. There's a spring that keeps it from from turning on it's own.

 

[iamkris]

You pretty much nailed the advantages of the FAL...I have one and love it. That said, hard to go wrong with the HK rifle.

Make a request (or do a search) for posts by Father Knows Best. He's a good advocate for the HK91/G3/PTR series.

 

[Father Knows Best]

You pretty much nailed the advantages of the FAL...I have one and love it. That said, hard to go wrong with the HK rifle.

Make a request (or do a search) for posts by Father Knows Best. He's a good advocate for the HK91/G3/PTR series.

Ask and ye shall receive...

I'll never try to convince someone that the FAL's ergonomics aren't superior to the G3. They are, but the G3's ergonomics aren't as bad as some people would have you believe. There are other advantages of the FAL that you mentioned, including the last shot bolt hold-open and the better mag release, and typically a better trigger from the factory. My FAL is also softer shooting than my PTR-91 (semi-auto G3 clone).

The G3/91 is still an excellent rifle, however, with its own advantages, including better accuracy and plentiful cheap mags. My recommendation is not to try and decide which one is better for you -- do what I did and get one of each!

 

[hartzpad]

Ask and ye shall receive...

I'll never try to convince someone that the FAL's ergonomics aren't superior to the G3. They are, but the G3's ergonomics aren't as bad as some people would have you believe. There are other advantages of the FAL that you mentioned, including the last shot bolt hold-open and the better mag release, and typically a better trigger from the factory. My FAL is also softer shooting than my PTR-91 (semi-auto G3 clone).

The G3/91 is still an excellent rifle, however, with its own advantages, including better accuracy and plentiful cheap mags. My recommendation is not to try and decide which one is better for you -- do what I did and get one of each!

I owned a Hesse built HK G3 clone for a few years, I liked it, but the FAL seems to be better. If I could get both, I would get a JLD PTR-91K too.

 

[Dave R]

I shopped CETME (a G3 predecessor) vs. FAL pretty hard, and wound up with the CETME. I liked its balance and feel better. And I liked the wood...I guess its personal taste.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Have owned and shot 1000s of rds through both and prefer the FAL.
There are plenty of places to get different stocks and a better peep.
As cheap as the parts sets are, you could get an entire set as a
spare.

 

[PAC 762]

I always thought HK91 fans were the guys who never shot an FAL. I always found FAL's to be more ergonomic, better handling, more accurate, and more "solid". I also seem to be that rare person who LOVES the sites on my STG58. It just seems like I can hit anything as quick as I can swing the barrel with an FAL.

My understanding was that the G3 was adopted only for economic reasons.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Long ago when I bought my FAL, it was between the FAL and HK-91 (SAR-48 and SAR-3) for me also. I decided on the FAL for a variety of reasons, and when I went to pick it up, it was sitting next to a beautiful SA M1A. Kee-ripes, these gun show people certainly know how to throw a wrench in the works. After I drooled over the M1A for a while, I still ended up with my beloved SAR-48. I've never been sorry.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Are any of you lefties? Or having experience with both, which do you think would be easier for a lefty? I have very limited experience handling both and no experience shooting either but from what I have seen of the designs, the FAL might be a little easier. But like I said I have so little experience that I am going to refrain from passing judgement. I just know my next rifle is going to be a battle rifle clone and was leaning towards a 18-19 inch barreled DS Arms FAL. Also considering several versions of the PTR-91. This isn't a purchase for the immediate future but while we are talking FALs and HK91s, I thought I'd get some more opinions on which ones are more lefty friendly.

 

[Gordon]

With the personal reccomendation of Mel Tappan and Col. Cooper I got my HK-91 in the late 70's for the astronomical sum of $650. I put a factory bipod, scope mount on it with a Schmidt and Bender 1.5-6x scope for another $700. Now I suffered thru 5 years of training/practical rifle competetion until Williams put a great trigger on it and I started doing better.It NEVER malfed in 8,000+ rounds at which point the accuracy started throwing a flier every once in a while. Boy was it heavy though! So in the mid 80's I got a national match M1-A made with all GI parts. I didn't scope it because I liked the NM sights and my eyes were still better than 20-20. The M1A was, somewhat finicky if it wasn't perfectly clean or I used weird ammo with an occasional malf every few hundred rounds, it seemed as accurate as the scoped HK-91 was and comfortably lighter. I put an Israeli reconditioned ANPVS-2 on it in the early 90s and 'retired' it to second line duty. To replace it I had bought a Steyr stamped FNFAL like new but used in 1989 because they were to be banned. The trigger was less than satisfactory as was the original HK-91(I also had 'accumulated' an HK-93 colapsable in the mid 80's and I really like it-still do!)and it wasn't as accurate as the HK or the M1A with the same Lake City Ball load I use as a comparison.The gun had a good feel to it though and by 93 or so I put together a new L1A1 kit which also was so-so. In 1998 I found Arizona Response System and had them go thru both guns (and put a shorter barrel on them) along with a couple build ups for friends. WOW a great trigger and the Steyr seems to be 1.5 MOA accurate to 400 meters with it's 2lb trigger and 8 power scope. The L1A1 does about 2.5moa to same range-unscoped. I haven't had a Malf with either gun in 3500+ rounds total so far . Ergonomically they ARE better than anything I own, including the hot rod CQB AR's, just a little too heavy for real close in work.I like the FNFAL better than the HK system!