Acolyte
Member
Hi all, what height QRW rings should I get for a FAL with the DSA scope mount?
Low, med, high?
This is my stock:
Low, med, high?
This is my stock:
QRW rings on FAL?
- Thread starter Acolyte
- Start date
- Status
Acolyte
Member
whoops, fergot to mention this is with a Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40mm.
Bwana John
Member
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2004
- Messages
- 2,960
No matter what rings you get with that humpback stock they will be too high.
Get the lowest rings that will allow the oblective lens to be mounted without touching the rifle.
The Austrian StG 58 stock is a little higher and will fit on the rifle fine. Tapeing a piece of closed cell foam on top of that will bring your cheek up to the correct height.
I have found that the FAL is a great battle rifle, and I love what it can do with open sights.
Trying to jury-rig mount a scope on one just irritated me. :banghead:
Get the lowest rings that will allow the oblective lens to be mounted without touching the rifle.
The Austrian StG 58 stock is a little higher and will fit on the rifle fine. Tapeing a piece of closed cell foam on top of that will bring your cheek up to the correct height.
I have found that the FAL is a great battle rifle, and I love what it can do with open sights.
Trying to jury-rig mount a scope on one just irritated me. :banghead:
Last edited:
Stinkyshoe
Member
I use a Leupold Vx-2 3-9x40 on my fal. I have in mounted on the DSA heavy mount. I selected the rings based on getting the check weld closest to being like using L1a1 flip ups (because that is my preference for opens) I don't remember for sure if it was low of mediums, but I did have to take the DSA mount to the grinder to get the scope mounted low enough. I believe I use lows.
Nightcrawler
Member
On mine, with a Bushnell 3-9x40, I found that Leupold medium-high QR rings placed it perfectly.
On my carbine, I've shortened the humpback stock by replacing the buttpad with a steel buttplate (and having the edges of the stock ground a bit to fit). It shortens the LOP by an inch, and with your cheek further forward it's actually higher up on the stock. A Trijicon Tri-Power in an ARMS throw-lever ring was perfect for me, actually.
Get the lowest rings that you can. If your cheek weld still isn't desirable, get one of those neoprene cheek-pads that can be quickly removed. Bolting or duct-taping the cheek-riser onto the stock will make it difficult to remove, and negates the advantage of the quick-release rings because with that set-up you can't really use the iron sights.
On my carbine, I've shortened the humpback stock by replacing the buttpad with a steel buttplate (and having the edges of the stock ground a bit to fit). It shortens the LOP by an inch, and with your cheek further forward it's actually higher up on the stock. A Trijicon Tri-Power in an ARMS throw-lever ring was perfect for me, actually.
Get the lowest rings that you can. If your cheek weld still isn't desirable, get one of those neoprene cheek-pads that can be quickly removed. Bolting or duct-taping the cheek-riser onto the stock will make it difficult to remove, and negates the advantage of the quick-release rings because with that set-up you can't really use the iron sights.
Acolyte
Member
Hmmm, I may have to rethink this. 
I superimposed an Israeli stock on mine, and I think I lined up the front edge plumb ... is this correct that it'd be that much higher than my current stock?
I superimposed an Israeli stock on mine, and I think I lined up the front edge plumb ... is this correct that it'd be that much higher than my current stock?
mr. e
Member
I mounted a Burris 3x9x32 Short Mag scope on my DSA mount using their Burris medium QD rings. It cleared the mount OK, but doesn't clear the rear sight. Fortunately, I can mount it right in front of the sight and the eye relief is good.
- Status
