# FN FAL vs M1A



## CourtSwagger (Jan 3, 2013)

As I posted on another topic, one of my next gun purchases will be a "big boy rifle". I am looking at the M1A vs the FN FAL. Right now, I am leaning towards the FAL due to price and simplicity. Any feedback?


----------



## Fuzzee (Nov 20, 2012)

Both in general are excellent rifles for reliability and toughness, while putting, kick a gorilla in the face 7.62x51mm down range. They've just got a different feel, controls and approach to doing it. It basically comes down to which you prefer. An M1A/M14 can be more accurate on average with a little work and has more room for expansion with how the action drops into stocks and how you can drastically change it's feel by the stock you put it in, but both are still excellent rifles. Pick the one you like best.

For color,


----------



## rickkyw1720pf (Nov 17, 2012)

If you want a gun that you can throw around and hunt with then it is a toss up as Fuzze says but if you want the most you can get in accuracy and precision then go with the M1A but it will cost you a Springfield M1A super match is fairly expensive. Neither guns are have the best design to mount a scope with the M1a probably the worst because your scope mount is also a shell deflector. I keep my M1a super match for open sights only.


----------



## Fuzzee (Nov 20, 2012)

There are some great scope mounts for the M1A/M14 though that are highly reliable, tough and designed not to cause jams like Sadlak's and Smith's to name a couple. There are quite a bit of different ways to mount optics though if you want to use a red dot or holoscope where eye relief isn't an issue like a Knight's RAS or Ultimak to name another couple.

M14/M14 Rifle Parts Scope Mount, Spring Guide Gas Piston Sadlak Industries

Smith Enterprise, Inc.

M-14, M1A Scope Mount, M1A "Scout" Mount, Optics

I do like irons myself though and the M1A/M14 has some of the best irons there are. Even better in my opinion with a Smith hooded GLFS.


----------



## Ripon (Dec 22, 2012)

Well I have to vote for the M1A since I just got one


----------



## CourtSwagger (Jan 3, 2013)

For the uninitiated, what is the difference between the FN FAL and the PTR 91? They seem to be virtually the same rifle to me.


----------



## rickkyw1720pf (Nov 17, 2012)

CourtSwagger said:


> For the uninitiated, what is the difference between the FN FAL and the PTR 91? They seem to be virtually the same rifle to me.


The FN FAL is made by a foreign country and is banned for importation into the USA The PTR 91 is made in the USA and is a copy of the HK-91 that is also banned.
I have a prebanned HK-91 I have a set trigger on it making it very precises and I prefer it over the FN-FAL


----------



## CourtSwagger (Jan 3, 2013)

Rickky, other than place of manufacture, same weapon?


----------



## rickkyw1720pf (Nov 17, 2012)

CourtSwagger said:


> Rickky, other than place of manufacture, same weapon?


Not really up dated on the different clones of the HK-91 as there have been several but I did find this on the internet.
The ONLY one (HK-91 clones) I would spend money on would be a PTR-91; they are made here on tooling purchased from FMP, which was an HK-licensed manufacturer in Portugal

The HK series rifles have a unique roller locking system that doesn't use gas from the barrel like almost any other semi-auto. Having nothing attached to the barrel can help improve accuracy. The negative to the HK system is that some propellant gas is used to float the cartridge and you can always tell a casing used in a HK because it will have black lines down the side from the propellant gas but it has no effect if you want to reload the casings.

Edit: There used to be endless talk on which rifle was better the HK-91 and the FN-FAL almost like the 9mm vs 45.


----------



## Infidel (Dec 22, 2012)

Personally I want both rifles but if I had to pick one it'd be the M1A over the FN FAL. But then again I have an affinity for the Garand style action and think the M14/M1A is John C. Garand's design perfected. The FN FAL is a great rifle and has a great reputation, but I prefer the design of the M1A. 

-Infidel


----------



## Fuzzee (Nov 20, 2012)

I had a PTR91 for a while and have fair experience with HK91's and Cetme's too. The PTR91's are a high quality rifle overall that I'd happily take over a FAL again myself. The FAL's never been a good rifle for me though, even as good as it is for some people. Firearms fit the person and someone really needs to find what works best for them. Problem with the PTR91's same as the HK91's is parts cost and availability. PTR91 Inc. is starting to make more parts which is nice, but depending on what you want, you can and may be forced to use HK91/MSG/PSG parts which aren't the cheapest at times. I need an ambi selector on any rifle and a person can almost have to finance parts with the cost oof some HK parts.

http://ptr91.com/

HK 91, HK G3, PTR Parts


----------



## rickkyw1720pf (Nov 17, 2012)

There were a lot of NATO countries Pissed off at the USA because after we convinced all the NATO countries to adopt the 7.62x51 and they designed new rifles for it and armed their armies we decided to change to the 5.56x45.


----------



## Fuzzee (Nov 20, 2012)

rickkyw1720pf said:


> There were a lot of NATO countries Pissed off at the USA because after we convinced all the NATO countries to adopt the 7.62x51 and they designed new rifles for it and armed their armies we decided to change to the 5.56x45.


I don't blame in part, but the reality is some people just can't handle a 7.62x51mm rifle well. And in particular tactics with suppressive fire, a soldier can carry more 5.56x45mm and followup faster. There aren't many women for instance that can actually handle an M14/FAL/G3 well. Shooting one is one thing. Handling, meaning shooting and moving with precision, fast and mobile enough to overcome you adversary is another. Lots of guys can't either.


----------



## rickkyw1720pf (Nov 17, 2012)

Fuzzee said:


> I don't blame in part, but the reality is some people just can't handle a 7.62x51mm rifle well. And in particular tactics with suppressive fire, a soldier can carry more 5.56x45mm and followup faster. There aren't many women for instance that can actually handle an M14/FAL/G3 well. Shooting one is one thing. Handling, meaning shooting and moving with precision, fast and mobile enough to overcome you adversary is another. Lots of guys can't either.


Yes there are advantage with the 5.56x45 especially in places like Vietnam but the timing was bad all the NATO nations were now armed with their brand new rifles at our persistence then we go and switch on them. I personally believe that we should have two main battle rifles available to our soldiers something like the scar 16 and 17. Afganistan with the open ranges a 7.62x51 I think would be preferable. In cities and jungle the 5.56x45 would rule, but that is just my thinking.


----------



## Verteidiger (Nov 16, 2012)

Personally, I prefer the M1A over the FN-FAL, but I also like the original FAL design for a battle rifle.

I had a friend who knew a lot about FALs, and I asked him which one I should pick if I was to order a brand new FAL from DSArms, the American manufacturer. He has since passed away (RIP) but he told me to stick with the original FAL design, the model with the 21" barrel. His reasoning was the modified shorter barrels (carbine length) changed the recoil return spring design from an in-line or straight-back design on the same geometric plane with the barrel, upper receiver and bolt carrier group versus the shortened version which caused a redesign using shorter springs and adversely affecting reliability by making the gun more ammo finicky. He would go into great detail as to why, but the bottom line was the FAL was designed to be a rifle, not a carbine, and was designed for a smaller cartridge, and chambering the rifle to handle 7.62x51 firepower had pushed the rifle to its design limits. Changing the rifle by shortening the barrel and return spring created the potential for increased malfunctions, which is exactly what you do not want in a rifle you have to depend on in combat with lives on the line.

I am the type of person who does not want to know the minutiae and intricacies of how to build a watch; I just want something I can use to tell what time it is, so a lot of what he told me was design engineering issues I did not care about too greatly, although it was interesting. So I will spare you the intricate details. Bottom line was - he thought everyone should own a FAL, but it should be the original FAL rifle design, not the shortened versions.

I will still buy a FAL one day - it is a bucket list gun for me. But I will follow my dear friend's advice, because he knew more about FALs than anyone I have ever met. Here is a link to the model he recommended for me to buy:

SA58 FAL Standard Rifle, .308 Cal. - SA58S21-D S Arms

I think you can't go wrong with either gun, but in the final analysis, I bought the M1A. I liked it so much I ended up buying two more.

But one day I will own the FAL rifle too. But my first choice will always be the M1A.


----------



## Fuzzee (Nov 20, 2012)

rickkyw1720pf said:


> Yes there are advantage with the 5.56x45 especially in places like Vietnam but the timing was bad all the NATO nations were now armed with their brand new rifles at our persistence then we go and switch on them. I personally believe that we should have to main battle rifles available to our soldiers something like the scar 16 and 17. Afganistan with the open ranges a 7.62x51 I think would be preferable. In cities and jungle the 5.56x45 would rule, but that is just my thinking.


If I had to put a bullet into anyone and had the two to choose from, I'd take 7.62x51mm anyday. It's still too much for some though and the military is made up of a wide variety which we want all of as functional as possible. They learned the value of keeping the battlerifles around though which is why so many M14 have been put back into service and we look towards other 7.62x51mm semi's in the mix like the Scar heavy.


----------



## paraquack (Mar 1, 2013)

I don't have a heavy of any brand. It's on my list, but who knows or if, NOW. I can only hope all this BS and cost settles down. No one firearm, be pistol, rifle, or shotgun is the best. Certain situations will dictate which is best firearm. I can only hope I will have the correct one, when I need it.


----------



## Seneca (Nov 16, 2012)

I opted for the M1A...the longer I have it the more I like it. It's been a very good rifle for me. I've thought about getting an FN/FAL but there is just not a lot of incentive for me to go looking...

On the other hand. If I found the right one at the right price I'd buy it.


----------

