Nodakmarine
New member
I own both a pre-ban M-14 bush rifle with folding stock and a FN-FAL 50.63 Para-FAL. I don't have an AR-10...yet, you said the HK-91 and Cetme are out and the VEPR never turned my crank enough to buy one but given the choices between these two rifles, I give the slight edge to the M-14. The sights are better with more adjustable range and windage than the FAL and even the standard FAL sights with it's slide adjustment leaves a bit to be desired. The flash suppressor is FAR better than the flash suppressor/muzzle brake on the para-FAL. If you are looking at the G-series flash suppressor or the long L1A1 suppressor, then things even up a bit but then you also have a longer length than it already is. Speaking of length, both rifles have 18 inch barrels but the M-14 with the standard length flash suppressor is close to the same length as the para and a bit shorter if I use the cut off prong flash suppressor on my M-14. The FAL is a little easier to strip than the M-14 but the M-14 is still pretty simple too. Both have folding stocks that lock up solid as a rock but the folding buttplate of the M-14 is a little more streamlined if you want to fold it in too. Yes, mags are cheaper for the FAL and if you get a FAL these days, stock up on them. Bush has already hinted that he wouldn't support importation of high cap mags so if there ever is a bill sent to him banning imported mags, I'd look for him to sign it and magazine prices to ride. Right now M-14 mags aren't as badly priced as they're made out to be. Cole Distributing has them for about $31 so no, they're not as cheap as AK or FAL mags, but they aren't in the same leauge as a lot of other mags like the AUG, Galil or Ruger mini-14 factory mags either. Myself, I like both of them but if I had to grab one of them, it would be the M-14 bush rifle.