Shepherd Scope on a FAL

P

PATH

New member
I am thinking of putting a Shepherd scope on my FAL. Any of you folks have experience with the Shepherd Scopes. Are they effective on semi-autos or are they best on a bolt action. Their site is http://www.shepherdscopes.com.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone who is using or has used one of their scopes.
 
WRONG, Steve. The FAL is plenty accurate enough if you put a good mount on the gun. I used a DSA mount on a standard barrel DSA gun, and shot 3/4 moa with a Nightforce (uh, that's about a $1200 scope). Good gun, good mount, good scope......happy shooter. Steve, I'll bet you wouldn't put a scope on an M21, either.

By the way, the Shepard is an excellent scope....hoping to add one to my collection soon.
 
Charmedlyfe, I don't understand your accusational tone. Why did you feel it was necessary to make that stab at me? Completely inappropriate.

Yes, your DSA with a brand new barrel may be quite capable of that accuracy. I should have qualified my statement by saying that most surplus FALs couldn't take advantage of the optics. I would, however, like to know if your 3/4 MOA is one lucky 3 shot group, or if it will do that, say, with 20 rounds or more? Just curious.

For your information, I do have a very nice scope on my Mational Match M1A, an M21 it's not, but darn close. My M1A shoots rings around my surplus FAL, though.
 
It was accusational. To make a blanket statement about a type of rifle such as the FAL is not a VGT (Very Good Thing). Yes, my FAL will hold the 3/4 moa through quite a few rounds of GMM 168gr.(Usually 40 before the steel guards are too hot for comfort gotta get those synthetics!!!) By the way, I shoot 5-shot groups. Keeps the count even.

Quite a few of the 'smiths that assemble FALs are getting sub-moa groups out of the surplus STG barrels with match ammo. The gun, when assembled properly, is an exceedingly tight package. I don't like seeing the FAL get a reputation for fair accuracy because of the CAI guns, and other less-than properly assembled guns. It's like saying M1a when referring to chinese copies.
 
I think that it would be a waste of money on an FAL. They're no accurate enough to justify a $500+ scope.
Click to expand...

Oh...Really!??

TimW (report available on http://www.assaultweb.net and the FALFiles) and I recently tested several types of milsurp .308 as well as some match ammo in my Savage 10FP and my Argie FAL and his AZEX FAL.

His AZEX was iron sighted while my Argie had a DSArms mount and a Leupold 2-7x33 Compact. My Argie has had a trigger job (stoned and reduced return spring) while the AZEX is stock, and stiff.

Some of my groups were as large as 2 inches at 100 yards, but others were much smaller. I was able to get just under 1MOA with both Winchester and Federal 168 grain match ammo. I shot groups with my stiff-triggered Savage as I broke it in. On the sixth through twelth shots I scored .75MOA with the match ammo and 2MOA and less with the surplus.

But guess what? I got repeated .5MOA groups through the Argie FAL with Portugese surplus.

So, if you have the money, I think the Shepherd scope would work just fine, especially for the tactical use I figure you have in mind.

Rick
PS, I will be installing a SharpShooter trigger this weekend.
 
Charmedlyfe, now YOU'RE wrong. To say that the Chinese copies are inacurate is an ignorant statement. Ask Smith Enterprises or Fulton Armory about them. I'll use your very words against you with a slight twist, "Quite a few of the 'smiths that assemble Chinese M1As are getting sub-moa groups out of the surplus barrels with match ammo." Obviously, you woke up with a chip on your shoulder this morning, and it's still there. I'll not continue to feed your anger. Whatever your problem with me is, come out with it. E-mail me if you want to, I'm sure that Art would appreciate taking it offline.

I'm glad that you and RickD are getting great groups...but I STILL think that the average surplus FAL won't group like that...at least not the ones that I've shot. In addition, I spend quite a bit of time over at FAL files, and when one guy posts something about getting 1" groups, everyone else asks what he did to do it. Obviously, they're not getting 1" groups either, or they wouldn't care as much.

Charmedlyfe, I still don't understand why you decided to take that tone...why could you not have said, "Steve, I disagree. I get 3/4" groups consistently with my DSA." Wouldn't that have gotten the point across without all this trouble? What was the point?
 
Uh, yeah.....a 'smith can heat-treat a Chinese receiver, put a high-quality barrel on it, and improve the function. You then get an accurate rifle. With the FAL, you just get a good-condition surplus kit (like an STG-58) and stick it on the rec. of your choice (headspaced properly). You then do a good job of finishing (preferably NOT etching the rifling in the park tank), go to the range, and shoot nice little groups.

Do I have a problem with you? I didn't. NOW I do. If you hang out at the FALfiles as much as you claim to, you'd know that the question isn't usually 'What did you do', it's 'What ammo are you shooting'. Quality of assembly is accepted as greatly affecting accuracy potential. Also, most people shoot iron sights, not scoped. Everyone I correspond with on that board that uses a scope and has a decent barrel (not shot-out) shoots 1moa or better with good ammo. In fact Taylor will guarantee <1moa with his cantilever scope mount WITH A MILSPEC BARREL.

"They're not accurate enough to justify a $500+ scope", then you say "I should have qualified my statement". Yes, you should have. Some rifles are more accurate than others. I've had an M1a that couldn't shoot 3" at 100yrds, and I've had one that would shoot 1/2". Do I think that the M1a is too inaccurate for a scope? Well, it depends on the rifle. Same goes for FALs.

You said you have a surplus FAL. OK, what kind? Who assembled it? What shape is it in? These are all important when asking about accuracy. I'm betting that you have a CAI gun. Anyway, your OWN post proves my point. If you've ever worked on an M1a, then you KNOW the quality of a Chinese gun just isn't as good. CAI FALs often have marks where they Dremeled them to get the parts to fit. I've seen lousy crowns on barrels, receivers and lowers that didn't fit properly, etc. No wonder the CAI guns aren't as accurate.

You just can't handle being corrected. You're wrong, and that's the bottom line. You are FAR too arrogant.
 
"I'm betting that you have a CAI gun."
How much would you like to bet? The sky's the limit. Please, PLEASE, bet...c'mon, I dare ya. It shoots about 2 MOA, with good ammo, and yes, that is wtih a scope and the barrel is in good shape.

I've seen Taylor's guns...do you have an idea what Taylor is asking for that <1" guarantee? About $1500. That more than most will put into a surplus rifle.

No one that I know is heat treating the Chinese M14 receivers...the BOLTS are the problem. Even the barrels are pretty good if it's not worn out. Fulton won't change the barrel if it shoots good. Most do, as they're brand new, and typically shoot 1.5" or less.

Like I said before, take this to e-mail if you want to continue.

BTW, being arrogant is better than being an a$$. You have STILL not addressed my comments that I've made TWICE that your tone was unnecessary. It still is. Hundreds of opinions are contradicted on this board every day, and most folks can volley their contradictions without getting personal nor accusational. Why can't you?
 
Charmedlyfe, although we may be arguing here, please take a look at my post your Midway thread...you might be pleasantly surprised.
 
I spend quite a bit of time over at FAL files, and when one guy posts something about getting 1" groups, everyone else asks what he did to do it. Obviously, they're not getting 1" groups either.

I second that Steve Smith!

Well I just walked in the door with two boxes of 168gr Match ammo and I'm going to shoot it tomorrow and find out what I get. I have a $260 scope on my rifle and last time I took it to the range I was disappointed. I know it was an ammo problem and I'm not going to waste time on crappy ammo anymore.
I have a DSA STG58 and I consider myself to be of resonable Marksmenship. I'll post my results tomorrow night. I just posted over at the Reloading forum about getting 1MOA with an FAL and Nobody is getting it. I am kind of confused on this issue because American Rifleman did a thing on the SA58 a few months ago and they were getting close to 1MOA. I don't really know what the quality difference is between the STG58 and the SA58 is?

How is it one of the guys that helped me decide on getting and FAL last month is getting jumped all over on this thread about an FAL?
 
Path what power scope are you looking at?
I shoot at a 500yd range and I have a 12x Sightron scope on my rifle. I know I'm not going to get tight groups at 500yds but It helps me see further. Most guys I know that have FAL's have 4x scopes. I only shot it one time a few weeks ago and had to send my rifle in because of the recall at DSArms. I'll hopefully find out more about the accuracy potential tomorrow.
 
So it's ok for you to intimate that FALs are not accurate, but not ok for me to point out that you are wrong, Steve? You are entirely too sensitive if you whine about someone saying you are WRONG. Or are you trying that old Prussian trick of covering up a noise with a louder noise? "Mommy, that nasty ol' Charmedlyfe said I was WRONG!" Geeeze. Grow up. If you can prove that there is some reason why the FAL is not as accurate as other semiauto rifles, then I'll listen. FAL Lockup is better than the HK and the M14/M1 Garand. FAL doesn't unlock until well after the bullet is out of the barrel. The gas system is adjustable to optimize function with any ammo type. The only weak points are the trigger (but that can be polished effectively) and the scope mount (several options now that eliminate that problem).

As to Taylor's mounting system, you can get the parts for around $250. It's a good system, and I'm planning a new upper with one on it, and a Badger heavy barrel. I'm planning on re-cutting the chamber with a pull-through reamer for a tighter chamber/better chamber-to-bore alignment.
 
Ok, I'll play the cop here, too.

TIMEOUT!

Think twice post once. Stuff like that.

Chill.

I'm sure some moderator somewhere is looking at this with a hairy eyeball, and rightly so. I'm not gonna say who is right, who is wrong, who crossed what line first, whatever. Not my place, not my job. Just chill, please?

Mike
 
Man!!

Lighten up kids... First and last warning.

I don't have to tell adults how to play, do I?
 
If the admin or moderator barks about what I'm about to say, I'd say we're all in a poor state here at TFL.

Charmedlyfe, not once have I "cried to mommy," not once have a said that you could not disagree with me, and not once have I tried to cover anything up by making more noise. I have attempted to keep this as civil as possible, as I think anyone watching could not help but notice. I have made a point to check the e-mail account that is in my profile often, in hopes that this stupid argument could be taken off TFL. We aren't accomplishing anything. You, on the other hand, have incited more trouble than any of this is worth. I mean really, why on earth were you so adamant on making me "wrong." You can scream at me all day that I'm wrong, arrogant, and anything else that you like, but you can not change what's inside my head. I do not believe that the average FAL out there is capable of shooting up to the capabilities of a Shepard scope, or any other good scope out there. BTW, I actually like my FAL, but I wouldn't expect tack-driving accuracy out of it or any other average FAL out there.


Notice to all: I will not post again on this thread or any other regarding the argument between Charmedlyfe and I. If he decides to carry it on, I will not participate. He may still correspond with me via e-mail if he so wishes.


Soda, I'll be looking forward to hear your results, whether they support my or Charmedlyfe's argument.
 
Sodapop,

The scope I am looking at is 4x10 variable. A fellow at my gun club let me look at the scope and it seems fantastic.

My buddy sold me my FAL and showed me a 1 inch group he shot at 100 yds. I took his word it was valid and I don't have all the particulars.

I think I have gone as far as I can go with iron sights. I shot 3 inch group on best target. My gunsmith and I have talked about tweaking the FAL and mounting the Shepard scope to improve groups. It is for tactical use. I'd like to hear about how your FAL shot!

charmdelyfe and steve smith....take it easy fellas we are all on the same side here!
 
Well I'm heading out to the range in 2hrs. Path- I have seen a few Elcan scopes on FAL's and there $700 scopes. I'm too poor to spend that kind of money on a scope. If you got the $$ I would say buy it. But I bet there are cheaper scopes out there that can the same thing. Unless yours has a bullet drop compensator on it?
 
Any rebuttals of rebuttals about who flung dung and I'm gonna delete this whole thread.

The question was about the quality of the Shepherd scope.

To comment about the scope mounting problems on any para-military rifle is legitimate. To categorically put down a rifle over only one aspect of its design or performance is--to be polite--less than wise.

The High Road sez that personal attacks are best ignored; this is why, "Never argue with an idiot; others can't tell who is which." got thunk up.

:), Art
 
Ammo report on Scoped/Unscoped FALs (long)

Hello,

Below is a report from when RickD and I decided to take a quasi-scientific approach to measuring accuracy on our FALs. We would have had chrony reports, but a friend put a .308 milsurp bullet through his chronograph. Oops.

As I read the first question on this thread, PATH asked about putting a Shepherd scope on his FAL. Some said putting a $500 scope on a FAL was silly. SUIT sites are about $250, ELCANs about $650 and ACOGs about $600...hardly sites with the precision of a Shepherd.

Disclaimer: I have only looked through a Shepherd, never used one. I have never looked through an ELCAN or ACOG and have used a SUIT once. Thus, all my comments about it are based on my limited knowledge thereof.

Personally, I think a Shepherd scope for a FAL would make some sense, especially in a tactical situation. My StG58 with bipod as an example, any rangefinding scope would allow fairly accurate fire out to the rangefinding capabilities of the scope.

Where I see the Shepherd having an advantage is the "automatic" holdeover built into the scope...put the target in the circle and fire. True, no real windage/leading that can be done with a mil-dot scope, but with an ELCAN you have to move a cam, and SUITs are ranging between 0-400 and 400-800 yards/meters, depending on where you have the cam lever moved. I don't know how ACOGs rangefind.

So, in a fast-moving tactical situation from 400-700 yards, put the target into the circle of the Shepherd, squeeze the trigger. Move to next target.

Even the IOR/Valdada rangefinding scopes don't appear to be that quick...you must bracket the tartget, turn the BDC, then fire.

So, PATH, if I would have no problem seeing someone with a Shepherd scope on his/her FAL. $500 too much? Not in my opinion.

Now, for those who question a FALs accuracy, see below. True, many of the groups are 1.5-2.5 MOA, with the Chilean surplus crap getting horrendous 4-5 MOA. RickD's FAL has a nice trigger job (Gunplumber at ARS did it) and a nice scope w/solid DSA mount.

Mine had stock StG sites, stock trigger (between 8-10 pounds). You can easily see the difference in groups between the guns.

TimW
Phoenix

- - - - -
Range Report: MilSurp Ammo in Scoped/Unscoped FALs

It was a warm and sunny Sunday morning…bright, not a cloud in the sky. Your typical May 6 in Phoenix. RickD and I decided to test the accuracy of milsurp ammo in our FALs. This seemed a perfect day to do it.

The temperature started in the low 70's at about 08:00 and got to the low 90's by the end of the shooting day, around 14:00. Winds were non-existent in the morning, but
started gusting around 11:30-12:00 hard enough to raise "crime scene tape" streamers to about a 45 degree angle. However, since the wind was consistently from our 6:00 o'clock position, this wasn't a concern. Shooting, done at the Ben Avery range (for those who know it), was conducted at 100 yards.

The first set of tests were conducted using Rick's Argentine FAL with a 21" barrel and a Leupold Vari-X II 2-7x33 compact scope on a DSA mount and ARS trigger job (about 4-5 pounds). The second set was from my AzExArms StG 58 built on an Imbel Gear Logo receiver, no trigger job (about 9 pounds). All shooting was done in 3 shot strings, two strings per ammo "brand" on two different targets. Shooting was done from a sandbag on top of a 50-cal ammo can under the forearm and a sandbag/handhold for the rear. No shooting was conducted from my FAL's bipod.

The shooting strings were shot within about 2 minutes for 3 shots, with a 25 minute break between the strings (the range is on a timer for patching/pulling targets). Only 3
rounds were loaded in the magazine at a time. TimW did all the shooting for this test.

Finally, since we have found that sometimes the dealers don't know what the ammo is
they are selling, I have listed them by Headstamp and what we think it is. For example, one local Phoenix dealer is selling FNM ammo as "Spanish", when FNM is of Portuguese
manufacture. If we are incorrect as to the designation, we would appreciate corrections.

Set 1 - RickD's Argentine FAL w/ Leupold 2-7x33 compact scope, ARS trigger job

Headstamp String 1 String 2
F-78-39 - Portuguese 1-3/8" n/a
HO/HD - sold as both Port and Malaysian 0-3/4 1-3/4
(But is Singaporean surplus)
RG (Radway Green, UK) 2-1/2 2-1/2
FNM 80-11 - Portuguese 0-1/2 0-1/2
Cavim 91 - Venezuela 3-1/2 3

Set 2 - Tim's AzExArms StG-58, open sights, no trigger job

Headstamp String 1 String 2
F-78-39 - Portuguese n/a n/a
HO/HD - sold as both Port and Malaysian 3-1/2 4
(acutally Singaporean surplus)
RG (Radway Green, UK) 3 2-1/4
FNM 80-11 - Portuguese 3-3/8 2-3/4
Cavim 91 - Venezuela 3-1/2 3-3/4

I did not record the shots RickD made with his FAL using Winchester and Federal match ammo, however they were all sub-MOA in the area of about 0-3/4". Very impresive.

So, those who say FALs are not capable of sub-moa performance are wrong. RickD and I have seen it. As RickD says and any serious reloader can tell you, it's a matter of
matching the ammo to the barrel's harmonics. This is the principle behind the BOSS system...only you match the barrel to the ammo instead of the other way around. Makes
sense to me....perhaps I'll have my FAL's muzzle break replaced with a BOSS....

There you have it. Hope this helps.

Oh, for those in Phoenix who want a chuckle, Bear Arms is selling the FNM ammo, calling it "Spanish" and charging about $4.50 per 20 rounds....

TimW
Phoenix
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top