FAL operation?

H

Higgins

New member
I understand the FAL uses a tip-to-lock bolt, as opposed to a rotating bolt with locking lugs like most gas-operated semi-auto rifles.

But how exactly does the FAL bolt mechanism work. None of the gun shops around me has any FAL's to "investigate" for myself and I'm not going to buy one just to figure out how it operates.

Anyone who could elighten me as to the basic idea/function behind the tip-to-lock bolt on the FAL (and/or the SKS while I'm at it) would be much appreciated. Thanks.

By the way, I've read that the FAL is obsolete as a battle rifle. Why so?
 
From W.H.B. Smith's Small Arms of the World

(11th Edition, page 144):

The operation is the standard gas system whose reliability has long been established for this type of weapon. Part of the gases following the bullet down the barrel pass through the port into the forward section of the gas cylinder. A gas regulator, previously adjusted, provides sufficient gas to satisfactorily operate the piston, which is driven back to function the mechanism. Remaining gas passes to the open air through holes in the gas cylinder.

The piston, acting on the tappet principle, is driven to the rear in its tube on top of the barrel. It strikes the bolt carrier and pushes it to the rear.

Ramps machined into the bolt carrier engage a cam on the bolt after the bullet has emerged from the barrel and the pressure has dropped to safe limits. The bolt is cam lifted out of engagement with its locking shoulder in the receiver - this unlocks the action.

The bolt carrier and bolt now travel together to the rear. They ride down the hammer to cock it.

During rearward motion of the bolt, the extractor has carried the empty case out of the chamber with it. The case strikes the ejector and is thrown out of the right side of the gun.

After the piston tappet strikes the bolt carrier and imparts the necessary impetus to it, during which travel the spring around the piston has been compressed, the spring operates to return the piston to forward (battery) position. The return spring within the butt is fully compressed during rearward movement of the bolt and carrier in standard fashion. At the end of the recoil stroke, the compressed spring reasserts itself and working through it connecting rod thrusts the bolt and carrier forward. The bolt strips a cartridge from the magazine and chambers it and stops against the face of the barrel. The bolt carrier, which still has continuing movement under thrust from the recoil spring guide and spring, works through the cam and ramps to force the rear locking end of the bolt down its locking recess in the receiver. At the end of the mvoement of the carrier, it is resting against the receiver above the line of the chamber where it is in line with the rear end of the piston tappet. The extractor of course, snaps over the cannelure of the cartridge as the bolt chambers the cartridge.

(So, go out & buy a copy!) Test is at noon.
 
Gary, you are to be commended. Iffen ya transcribed that by hand yore to be dubble commended. Thanx.

Sam.....
 
Higgins, you wrote:

"By the way, I've read that the FAL is obsolete as a battle rifle. Why so?"

Just where did you read this??... and who wrote it?? Musta' been a .223 (or 5.45) lover. :) One of these guys who thinks that unless a projectile exits the muzzle at 3k fps +, or does not come from a 30 round magazine, it's too old to be a useful appliance, regardless of downrange performance.

I would certainly not consider myself poorly equipped if I found myself in a SHTF scene and the only thing I had was my FAL. I WOULD however, feel a bit sorry for whoever it is that thinks they can, (1) engage me on equal terms at long range with their "modern" .22 caliber whiz bang special with the 30 round magazine, or (2) engage me from behind trees or sheet metal obstacles and think they are under good cover from .30 cal projectiles.

Don't know who would consider the FAL "obsolete", but the same people would also have to consider the HK-G3, M-14, and Galil .308 (among many others) to be over the hill. I would not want to be on the receiving end of ANY of those fine weapons.

And speaking of "old & over the hill".... gimme' a Garand any day of the week.

Swampy
 
If you're wondering how a tiping bolt can lock into lugs at the chamber face, like an AR or Garand, it doesn't.

The rear of the bolt engages what's known as a "locking shoulder" that is 1.5 inches or so behind the chamber face. Headspace is also set by the locking shoulder by using a different sized version. You can see the head of the locking shoulder by observing an ovalish deally on the side of the receiver.
 
Okay. Thanks to all who replied. Destructo6's explanation helped clear things up.

So, my next question then is: which is more reliable/durable? The rotating bolt method of the AK/AR/etc... or the tip-to-lock method of the FAL/SKS? Seems like the tip-to-lock is simpler and would be easier to manufacture. So what is the benefit of rotating bolt vs. tip-to-lock bolt? Why is one better than the other?
 
Higgins,

Which car is more reliable, Ford or Chevy??

Which plane turned better, the Spit 1-A or the Bf109-E??

Which horse is faster, the roan or the bay....????

Do you put the toilet paper on the roll so that the end comes from behind... or over the top???

Different design concepts to reach the same end result. One does not have to necessarily be "better" than the other, though I'm sure that, like the above examples, there will be much debate ensuing. :)

Both locking designs work and work well......

Swampy
 
Hmmmph!:mad: All that typing and Destructo6 says it clearly in a few words - and he didn't spell delee rite. :o

As to which action is better, I'll withhold my opinion until our learned colleague, Destructo6 has his say. Then I get to jump all over his back. ;)
 
I'm pretty stoked that you thought that was a good explanation.

Ford.
Spit 1-A
no idea
over the top and I'm a folder to boot (maybe we should have a poll?)

I don't really have a preference for either one. They both seem to work very well and that's what counts. It still amazes me that they do what they do, a marvel of art and engineering.
 
The rotating bolt is ideally suited for the current design philosophy in military rifles, that is, stamped sheet metal (or polymer with steel inserts) receivers with locking recesses located in barrel extensions.

I doubt if you'll ever see another tilting bolt design produced, so in that sense one might say that it is obsolete.
 
Some things to consider when we say one is better than the other.

Production cost? Given the available technology and level of skill of your workforce, which is easier to produce in the quickest amount of time?

Service Life? Considering the training of your troops and the knowledge and skill of your armorers, which is easier to maintain in under field conditions?

Can't say with absolute certainty that one is better than another. It depends...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top