AR,AK,FAL, or M1A?
- Thread starter Lars
- Start date
Wow, lots of information needed to answer your question. First off, what do you intend to use the gun for? Competition? Plinking? Hunting? Home defense? Possible survival situation? SHTF scenario?
For competition, the only choices are the M1A or a DCM-legal AR15.
If plinking, an AK is a cheap plinker with cheap mags and ammo available.
If you're hunting, get the M1A for deer or the AR if you are hunting smaller game such as varmints.
For home defense (say if you live out in the sticks) I would reccomend the AR as you can more easily put accessories which are condusive to night fighting on the gun and you can also get ammo that won't penetrate as much through building material.
For survival/SHTF, it depends on where you live. I live in a part of my state where clear long shots are very rare and urban street fighting or very close quarters in the woods would be the scenario, so I choose an AR. If you live on the plains, or somewhere with longer ranges being a distinct possibility (say 400-1000 yards) I would reccomend the FAL, as it is easier to field strip than the M1A and has much cheaper magazines.
Hope this helps.
For competition, the only choices are the M1A or a DCM-legal AR15.
If plinking, an AK is a cheap plinker with cheap mags and ammo available.
If you're hunting, get the M1A for deer or the AR if you are hunting smaller game such as varmints.
For home defense (say if you live out in the sticks) I would reccomend the AR as you can more easily put accessories which are condusive to night fighting on the gun and you can also get ammo that won't penetrate as much through building material.
For survival/SHTF, it depends on where you live. I live in a part of my state where clear long shots are very rare and urban street fighting or very close quarters in the woods would be the scenario, so I choose an AR. If you live on the plains, or somewhere with longer ranges being a distinct possibility (say 400-1000 yards) I would reccomend the FAL, as it is easier to field strip than the M1A and has much cheaper magazines.
Hope this helps.
I bet if you did a search on this topic you could read for days. 
RikWriter asks some valid questions, it all depends on what you want to do with it.
The following are my personal opinions, which most folks around here know aren't worth much.
AR: I have the most experience with this gun. They are handy, accurate, and usually reliable. There are literally tons of aftermarket parts. An AR can be configured any which way imaginable. I have a Bushmaster and I love it, however, they can malfunction, I recently lost a little faith in the design when my gun started to have a bunch of really weird malfunctions. We figured it out eventually, my gun was being jammed up by a tiny little brass shaving that had worked its way into the ejector spring. But they are usually really good guns. The accuracy of most of these is excellent, and it has the best handling features. Good sights, lots of different mounts, float tubes, bipods, flash lights, whatever you want to do with it. The .223 is a flat shooting round, but not as versitile as the other calibers you mentioned. (You can't always hunt deer sized game with it, depends on your state). But every gun nut needs one.
AK: I've had a hard time with these because they are usually stocked for people much smaller than myself, so I'm probably a little biased against them. I will however say that I have never seen one jam or malfunction. Ammo is the cheapest. Sights don't tend to be as good as the AR, and I've never seen one that was as accurate as the AR. The safety is not as quick or as easy to access. You can get good quality AKs for a lot less than an AR. Personally I want one just to have. You may want to check out the Vepr, it is a new .308 AK, and is of better finish and consturction than any AK I have ever seen.
FAL: These is the Mack Daddy of battle rifles, and will most likely be my next rifle purchase. Controls are easy to use, recoil is mild for a .308. Reliability is excellent, easy to field strip, mags are dirt cheap. Rear sight is a little rough. Be carefull with these, there are many different kinds out there, originally I thought FALs sucked because I had only shot a few that were cheap parts guns (US receivers with imported parts), that malfunctioned every couple of rounds. Then I had the chance to use another forum members good FAL, and I was hooked. It was the main battle rifle of 90 some odd countries, that speaks for itself.
M1A: Really cool gun. I would stick with the Springfields, but a buddy of mine picked up one of the original Norincos, and it has been excellent. But the ChiCom guns I have seen since haven't been as nice as his. If you are planning on shooting competition, this would probably be the way to go. Recoil is a little stiffer than the FAL (probably due to the standard style stock). Have played around with a loaded model a little bit, and it had great iron sights. Mags cost more than the FAL (about $35-$50). Besides that I don't have very much experience with these, but a lot of experienced shooters who I trust swear by them. It looks the most PC if that is of any value to you.
I started out with the AR, but as time has gone on, I think I need something bigger, as in .308. But it all depends on what you are going to use it for.
Then to make things even more confusing, there is also the mighty M1 Garand, and the G3 series. And the Bushmaster Bullpup, but I don't know jack about any of these guns.
By the way I think this is the longest post I have ever had.
RikWriter asks some valid questions, it all depends on what you want to do with it.
The following are my personal opinions, which most folks around here know aren't worth much.
AR: I have the most experience with this gun. They are handy, accurate, and usually reliable. There are literally tons of aftermarket parts. An AR can be configured any which way imaginable. I have a Bushmaster and I love it, however, they can malfunction, I recently lost a little faith in the design when my gun started to have a bunch of really weird malfunctions. We figured it out eventually, my gun was being jammed up by a tiny little brass shaving that had worked its way into the ejector spring. But they are usually really good guns. The accuracy of most of these is excellent, and it has the best handling features. Good sights, lots of different mounts, float tubes, bipods, flash lights, whatever you want to do with it. The .223 is a flat shooting round, but not as versitile as the other calibers you mentioned. (You can't always hunt deer sized game with it, depends on your state). But every gun nut needs one.
AK: I've had a hard time with these because they are usually stocked for people much smaller than myself, so I'm probably a little biased against them. I will however say that I have never seen one jam or malfunction. Ammo is the cheapest. Sights don't tend to be as good as the AR, and I've never seen one that was as accurate as the AR. The safety is not as quick or as easy to access. You can get good quality AKs for a lot less than an AR. Personally I want one just to have. You may want to check out the Vepr, it is a new .308 AK, and is of better finish and consturction than any AK I have ever seen.
FAL: These is the Mack Daddy of battle rifles, and will most likely be my next rifle purchase. Controls are easy to use, recoil is mild for a .308. Reliability is excellent, easy to field strip, mags are dirt cheap. Rear sight is a little rough. Be carefull with these, there are many different kinds out there, originally I thought FALs sucked because I had only shot a few that were cheap parts guns (US receivers with imported parts), that malfunctioned every couple of rounds. Then I had the chance to use another forum members good FAL, and I was hooked. It was the main battle rifle of 90 some odd countries, that speaks for itself.
M1A: Really cool gun. I would stick with the Springfields, but a buddy of mine picked up one of the original Norincos, and it has been excellent. But the ChiCom guns I have seen since haven't been as nice as his. If you are planning on shooting competition, this would probably be the way to go. Recoil is a little stiffer than the FAL (probably due to the standard style stock). Have played around with a loaded model a little bit, and it had great iron sights. Mags cost more than the FAL (about $35-$50). Besides that I don't have very much experience with these, but a lot of experienced shooters who I trust swear by them. It looks the most PC if that is of any value to you.
I started out with the AR, but as time has gone on, I think I need something bigger, as in .308. But it all depends on what you are going to use it for.
Then to make things even more confusing, there is also the mighty M1 Garand, and the G3 series. And the Bushmaster Bullpup, but I don't know jack about any of these guns.
By the way I think this is the longest post I have ever had.
Correia said:
>>AK: I've had a hard time with these because they are usually stocked for people much smaller than myself, so I'm probably a little biased against them. I will however say that I have never seen one jam or malfunction.<<
Well, their reliability is legendary, but I have seen them jam. Saw one jam 4 times this weekend as a matter of fact. And the reason was:
>>Ammo is the cheapest. <<
Yep. And there is a lot of really crappy military surplus out there right now in every caliber. I learned that the hard way during a shoot at the Ocala National Forest range this weekend. My all Colt preban M4 which had NEVER jammed (unless you count the time a round blew its primer, and I don't) began jamming like an SOB on that Wolff 55 grain Russian 223 after I shot about 1300 rounds of other stuff through it in two days without a jam.
And my AR10, which had gone 850 rounds with one jam, started ripping the rims off cases and double feeding after 3 magazines of the Cavim surplus 308.
It was my friend's SLR95 that had the 4 jams after shooting some of the Wolff 7.62 x39s.
>>AK: I've had a hard time with these because they are usually stocked for people much smaller than myself, so I'm probably a little biased against them. I will however say that I have never seen one jam or malfunction.<<
Well, their reliability is legendary, but I have seen them jam. Saw one jam 4 times this weekend as a matter of fact. And the reason was:
>>Ammo is the cheapest. <<
Yep. And there is a lot of really crappy military surplus out there right now in every caliber. I learned that the hard way during a shoot at the Ocala National Forest range this weekend. My all Colt preban M4 which had NEVER jammed (unless you count the time a round blew its primer, and I don't) began jamming like an SOB on that Wolff 55 grain Russian 223 after I shot about 1300 rounds of other stuff through it in two days without a jam.
And my AR10, which had gone 850 rounds with one jam, started ripping the rims off cases and double feeding after 3 magazines of the Cavim surplus 308.
It was my friend's SLR95 that had the 4 jams after shooting some of the Wolff 7.62 x39s.
RikWriter, yes, I've heard nothing but complaints about the wolf ammo, especially when used in an AR. It is hard on your extractor, and the lacquor (sp?) will build up in your chamber and cause malfunctions. And the only .308 that I have shot Cavim through is my Ishipore, I don't think it is possible to hurt it.
(If any of you are wondering why I'm typing this at 3:20 in the morning, its a long story).
(If any of you are wondering why I'm typing this at 3:20 in the morning, its a long story).
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
BUY THE FAL!
Thanks for all the info! I would really like something that I could hunt with. I'm leaning toward the Fal or M1A. I shot DCM a few times when I was in high school and enjoyed it alot, but I have a 4 year old son that I have most of the time that cuts into my ability to do most competive shooting. I like the Fal's but don't know much about them. I know that DSA's are good, but I can't seem to spend that much for one. Springfields are more but seem worth the money. Also a major requirement is that it has to shoot less than 1MOA for a class that I want to take. A remington 700 Police light tatical in 308 might be an option also. Once again thanks for your time and opions.
Destructo6
New member
Actually, the CETME is the original, the HK is a modified CETME. Although similar, the parts interchangeability is very low, so getting real CETME parts in the future is highly questionable. I also question the care that Century puts into assembling their rifles; it's often an angry beaver proposition.
A follow up to Correia's comment:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I bet if you did a search on this topic you could read for days.[/quote]
He's absolutely right. Just to start:
AR-15.com
AK-47.net
The FAL Files
Who's got something similar for M-1?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I bet if you did a search on this topic you could read for days.[/quote]
He's absolutely right. Just to start:
AR-15.com
AK-47.net
The FAL Files
Who's got something similar for M-1?
Destructo6
New member
My vote would be for the FAL, then the AK. They're both very simple, there are many inexpensive parts available, and they're easy to clean. The FAL has better ergonomics, a few more features, and more power.
That's weird about the Wolf ammo. I'm finishing up 1000rnds of Wolf .223 (mainly 64 grain) right now and haven't experienced a single malfunction. I'd previously had a ton of trouble with the Israeli 55gr .223 and PMC .223.
That's weird about the Wolf ammo. I'm finishing up 1000rnds of Wolf .223 (mainly 64 grain) right now and haven't experienced a single malfunction. I'd previously had a ton of trouble with the Israeli 55gr .223 and PMC .223.