is the FN/FAL still around?

Current Operators of the FN-FAL:

attachment.php


Current Operators of the M14:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • World_operators_of_the_FN_FAL.jpg
    World_operators_of_the_FN_FAL.jpg
    146.6 KB · Views: 304
  • M14_Rifle_Users.jpg
    M14_Rifle_Users.jpg
    133 KB · Views: 294
If you -decide- to accept the fairly heavy trigger of a typical metric FAL (the Aussie L1A1 is better)

not to mention the current price of .308 Plinking ammo, you might find the rifles’ character to be interesting.

I’ll take a reliable FAL with iron sights any day over an AR-15 (with a red dot) only partly because of the more powerful .308 chambering.
 
From my experience with the demilitarized semi only version that I own; no bump stock is needed, hold it limply enough and try to slowly squeeze off a shot, it’s gonna bump fire haha.
I like that patch, I shouldn’t, but oddly I do.
 
This linked forum is just for the 'Metric-pattern' FALs. So many topics and contributors, plus "Stickies". Many guys are builders.

The FAL specialist gun smith Mark Graham:cool: (who recently repaired my "Century L1A1 Sporter") known as "Gunplumber" participates in some discussions.

A separate forum has numerous topics for the "Inch-pattern' (Commonwealth) rifles. The vast majority of people who would be on TheFiringLine probably went to FALfiles years ago.

https://www.falfiles.com/forum/the-fn-files.150/
 
Last edited:
FAL with iron sights
Click to expand...

Iron sights are highly under-rated. We did the same mission without optics for half of my career. They take more training but are just as fast when used properly. Training with Irons is much more useful too as irons will highlight any shooter flaws for you.
 
stuckinthe60s: Good sense of humor you have. But any problem can be resolved by the best pros, such as Mark Graham of ARS;------ this is for any lurkers' :Dbenefit.------

Mark Graham's charge, to me, was quite reasonable. His twenty five years of FAL experience corrects any operating issues, checks/& if needed corrects headspace (or builds an Entire rifle from a Complete parts kit you send him...), test fires the FAL, sends you the Test Target.

Because the popularity of his work, the turnaround time was three months:D. Go to somebody far Less experienced and you might be waiting six months to a year.

Here is some random feedback about him and one other specialist FAL gun smith:cool: :

https://www.falfiles.com/threads/who’s-a-good-fal-builder.480965/
 
Last edited:
davidsog:

Exactly. Mark’s insistence on in-spec, correct work even inspired some improvements with rifles manufactured by DSA. His discoveries of flaws in their Older upper receivers etc (and shoddy magazines) has caused them numerous embarrassments; and years ago their bad press by Mark resulted in a physical threat, or the suggestion of a threat, by a DSA manager.

And he knows a Ranger who climbed Pointe Du Hoc in Normandy and withstood German attacks for three days with very limited ammo.

My family took a tour of Normandy.
 
Last edited:
My third FAL, an "ARS" StG on Imbel, built by Mark Graham should ship in a few days.

There is another "ARS" build on the Marketplace of FALfiles: "Imbel on Coonan".
MG never used an inferior upper receiver. The only reason I didn't consider it is because I already have an Imbel FAL.

The seller "packingvol", who lives in east TN, has documentation to verify who assembled & tested his.
 
Here I have a L1a1 on a imbal receiver all BSA parts but the receiver and also a springfield M1a that is all winchester out of the receiver and my idea is the M-14 clone is worth being a tomato stake.
 
radom:
You said that your M1A “...is worth being a tomato stake”.

Is the rifle not reliable, or it's not as accurate as you had hoped?
 
Last edited:
It just does not do as well as the L1A1 staying on target in recoil. I did over say the deal but the FAL is a better gun. What's not to love put cross hairs on target and watch bullets hit as fast as you can pull the trigger. Try that with a M-14 clone.
 
My third FAL arrived almost two weeks ago.

It was built by FAL expert (smith)ARS/ Mark Graham:
Austrian StG kit built on an Imbel upper, with 18" barrel.

On most of Mark's builds he put a really tiny stamp underneath the receiver, a tad in front of it.

Quite frankly, I don't have the slightest interest in an AR or other modern rifle, other than the 'modern' S.A. M1A and my 2019 Czechpoint VZ-58.
 
modern rifle
Click to expand...

The FAL is absolutely a "modern rifle" and it starts out on exactly the same as any AR in terms of modularity.
It's capability can be upgraded as with any AR to reach the same point.

The issue with both rifles is weight. My biggest gripe in the service and lesson learned from the first of my GWOT tours was it does not make any sense to take a nice lightweight rifle and strap 50lbs of crap to it. You end up with a heavy rifle. With the AR, you end up with a heavy supped up .22 with all the capability of a .22. At least with the FAL you have a heavy rifle that is still a full sized rifle cartridge.

Making good choices is essential in having a capable rifle. You could do a lot worse than a FAL and I certainly would not call it anything but "modern". In fact, our experience in combat with the FAL's "modern" upgrade SCAR left me thinking the SCAR was a step backwards and certainly not up to par when compared to the FAL.

I went with a fixed 3x Prism scope on a QD mount. It does not degrade my close quarters capability, adds some night capability, and allows me to take advantage of the full sized rifle cartridge at distance. It weighs 9.2 lbs empty which is right on par with a the M14 rifle as it came standard issue when it was our Infantry rifle.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Modern FAL.jpg
    Modern FAL.jpg
    302.3 KB · Views: 116
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top