The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Tactical Rifle & Carbine => Topic started by: kilopaparomeo on February 21, 2011, 02:03:23 PM
-
Breaks my FAL-fanboy's heart to hear someone talk about my baby like this. Then again, no platform is perfect and I couild write volumes of what is wrong with HKs, ARs, M14s, Glocks, etc etc
Just goes to show, be careful of the hype...
http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog
I have more than a passing acquaintance with Fabrique Nationale's Fusil Automatique Léger, more commonly known as the FN-FAL. I've owned a number of examples, from 'pre ban' milsurp guns to commercial examples to kit guns built on commercial receivers. Over the years I've fired literally tens of thousands of rounds of 7.62x51 through those rifles, many of them in training venues, to the point that at one time I'd become something of a local curiosity: "hey, that's the guy who shoots .308 all the time!" Putting eight or nine hundred rounds of full-power thirty-caliber fodder through a rifle in a weekend, multiple times, will do that for you.
In addition to my own experience I've been pleased to make the acquaintance of four gentlemen who actually carried the FAL (or its inch-patterned variants, the L1-A1 and C1-A1) in service of their respective countries - at least two of whom were presented with the opportunity to use them in live fire against people who were (presumably) trying to kill them.
From all this I've come to a conclusion about Dieudonné Joseph Saive's most enduring design, and it's sure to displease the romantics in the audience: the FAL ain't all it's cracked up to be.
From an ergonomic standpoint the FAL is from a decidedly earlier era in arms design. The safety/selector is difficult to operate from a firing grip, while the horizontal-style takedown lever has a disturbing tendency to unlatch the receiver if one does try to operate the safety from a firing grip. The rear sight on most examples wobbles, making it difficult to attain decent precision from the gun, while the horrid triggers (which even with the best gunsmithing never get really good, just less horrid) don't help matters.
The gun gets very warm - hot, actually - in any sort of sustained fire. Shooting a fast-paced 60-round qualification course, which I've done more times than I can remember, makes the gun unbearably hot. (Unbearably as in "I've sustained burns from trying to hold onto the gun". It reminds me for all the world of the original HK P7, which was notorious for frying digits in as little as four magazines of rapid fire.)
The worst part of the FAL, and this is sure to annoy fans of the gun, is that it's just not all that reliable - certainly nowhere near what people make it out to be, largely because of flaws in the piston design. If the gun is not assembled exactly right the piston will bind in the extended position and keep the bolt from closing. This is because the front of the piston is carried on the barrel, in the front sight block, while the back of the pistol protrudes through a snug hole in the upper receiver. If those two pieces aren't perfectly aligned the piston travels at a slight angle relative to the bore and binds at the most inopportune time, the return spring not being strong enough to work it loose. This is particularly the case after there has been some carbon buildup in the gas block, which reduces the tolerances in the system's expansion chamber.
The piston is also subject to bending, causing the same problem. If the gas pressure isn't properly adjusted for the ammunition lot, too much gas pushes the piston too hard and bends it slightly. When that happens, the piston once again binds in the frame boss and brings the gun to a sporadic halt in chambering.
I realize gas piston AR rifles are all the rage these days, but anyone who's had to fight with an FAL gas plug in order to do the necessary cleaning of the piston will understand why I continue to be less than enthusiastic about the things.
The FAL is not a tremendously accurate gun, at least in its off-the-shelf military configuration. I've shot only one FAL that could be justifiably called 'accurate', and it was a heavy-barreled Israeli 'FALO' once sold by Springfield Armory as the SAR-48. It is a wonderful gun, will easily keep up with the best AR-10 pattern rifles, and the owner is quite unwilling to sell it. (Of course I've only been asking him for the past 15 years, so maybe one of these days he'll tire of my blandishments and agree to sell the thing to me!) Other than that one, all of the examples I've shot have been 'rack grade'. Not bad, certainly suitable for infantry work, but not something that really interests me in a Whelenist sense.
Over the years the weaknesses of the FAl design have prompted me to divest myself of many examples that just didn't measure up, none of them proving to have the combination of reliability, ergonomics, and accuracy that I want. Even my favorite FAL was only average in accuracy, but it least it ran - and with a FAL, that's half the battle.
One veteran of a military force known for their pragmatism once told me "there's a reason we dumped the things." Much as I like the FAL - and I do - I understand the sentiment. Living with a FAL must be a little like living with a British sports car; I'd say that it’s like living with an Italian car, but the Fiat convertible I once owned was more reliable than the average FAL!
I'm sure there are those who will disagree with me, but I've got a lot of trigger time behind a lot of different incarnations, and they all share the same faults. The fact is that the more you shoot a FAL, the more flaws you'll expose. It was a great design in its day, but that day has passed.
-
Never shot one, but always kind of wanted one just for the history if nothing else. I like reading reviews like this that go against the grain. Still, one has to ask, "If it was that bad why did so many countries make it standard issue"? They could have just bought M-14s. Still, I know it was designed for a smaller cartridge and just got boot strapped into 7.62x51 to meet NATO requirements. You still have to say though, just like the AK and AR, if it was that bad, someone else would have gotten the contracts, at least after the flaws were known.
FQ13
-
FAL came out before the M14, the only other choice at the time was the CETME.
Also it was cheap.
-
(http://i31.tinypic.com/2w1xz0i.jpg)
I love my FALs. No they are not perfect but I've never run into the issues that Grant talks about...then again, I've never run 700-800 rounds through them in a day. 200-300 in a day, several thousand rounds total in each, but never "hard use".
+ I've never had the piston misalignment issue.
+ Both of my DSA triggers aren't "match" but they aren't bad either...MUCH better than a stock AR trigger.
+ Stock sight on the StG58 is a little wobbly, that's why my Para wears an A2 sight.
+ They aren't AK reliable but I've not experienced all the problems that Grant talks about.
+ No it isn't tremendously accurate...and wasn't designed to be. It is an honest 2-3 MOA gun...then again most ARs are 2 MOA guns (regardless what you read on arfcom)
+ Yes the gun gets hot after sustained fire...and I can point you to any number of AK videos that show the handguards catching on fire after sustained fire.
+ The selector is hard to reach...that's why I use the L1A1 extended lever. Very easy to reach.
I could easily rail against the M14's exposed op rod, difficulty of cleaning, poor charging handle placement or the G3s lousy ergonomics, awful trigger, terrible charging handle placement, lack of BHO, the AKs poor ergonomics, poor accuracy, terrible sights, etc, etc. But they are all just characteristics of the breed.
-
I don't get what's wrong with the AK's ergonomics, I have no problem with them.
-
Too short LOP for most westerners (although I like my stocks a bit short), selector difficult to work without removing hand from firing grip, charging handle requires majority of shooters either to break their firing grip or reach over / under rifle to work it, mag change requires 2-step motion or you have to smack the mag release with the new mag.
Other than that, not much ;D
-
I have to agree about the Mag change, the rest, never made a difference. Safety, I just use my thumb.
Drop free mags are the best feature of AR's IMO.
-
Here's a pretty impressive display of a guy doing a 15 round drill (Viking Tactics drill?) against 3 targets at 5 meters...first with an FAL then with an AR.
Pretty good shooting with the AR...frankly I'm VERY impressed with his handling of the battle rifle. I can't do anything close to that.
FAL video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHUkltcWM2M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHUkltcWM2M)
AR video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIqh38axcSw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIqh38axcSw)
Apparently all A-zone hits on both runs.
-
Too short LOP for most westerners (although I like my stocks a bit short), selector difficult to work without removing hand from firing grip, charging handle requires majority of shooters either to break their firing grip or reach over / under rifle to work it, mag change requires 2-step motion or you have to smack the mag release with the new mag.
Other than that, not much ;D
The LOP is easily fixed though. All you have to do is change stocks. If you buy a cheap one (and why would you buy anything else for an AK?) its problem solved for less than $100. Plus you get one or two 922R compliance parts depending on the stock. Its kind of a non issue if you can operate a screwdriver.
FQ13
-
FQ is like a stopped watch.
He's been right twice today, (of course he posted about 47 times ;D )
The Tapco replacement stocks are solid.
-
AK mag changes are a problem? You mean like an M-14 mag-change? Or A Mini-14, G-3, FN FAL, or ALL the other guns that change mags the same way, WOW who knew so many gun designers were retarded?
The charging handle is a problem? Like the M-1, M-14, M-1 Carbine, Mini-14, AR-180, Sig 55x, or ALL the other guns that use the same design? Must be the same retards that designed the magazines.
The safety is a problem? Well I suppose if you want to stand around finger-f&%@#$g your safety all day then I guess it might. Of course I just reach up with my fingers and snap it off when I want it off and I leave it the hell off till I figure I don't need to shoot anymore, of course my I keep my fingers the hell off the trigger till I want to fire too.
As for the length of pull, I never had a problem and I'm 6 foot 4 and 200+ pounds, besides if it was longer we would need to put M-4 stocks on it to shrink it down to fit when we wear all that tacti-cool gear the other mall-ninjas get. Then again, I was taught to shoot by people who fought in Vietnam and other places and knew life sucks and you just gotta deal and drive on! If you want to shoot bulls-eyes off a bench, then I guess it might be, but if you plan to fight with it it is fine.
Want to argue about it? Argue with this guy;
or this guy;
I've never understood why people bad-mouth this weapon and forget that the AK is not all that different than the other weapons made during the same time and has been copied ever since. BTW you forgot "The trigger sucks", of course the trigger design is nearly a copy of the M-1 Garand.
-
I've never understood why people bad-mouth this weapon and forget that the AK is not all that different than the other weapons made during the same time and has been copied ever since.
You misinterpret my comments...
I'm NOT bad-mouthing the weapon. If you read my comments above I clearly said that ALL systems had deficiencies. There is no such thing as a perfect system. They all have traits of the breed and you just work around them.
Just like I can find (and agree with) the deficiencies of the FAL, I can find those issues with any rifle / pistol / shotgun. Learn them and learn to work with them.
Do like the mag change system? No. Think there are better ones out there? Yes. Is the standard one useable? Yes
Do I like the charging handle? No. Think there are better ones out there? Yes. Is the standard one useable? Yes
Do I like the safety? No. Think there are better ones out there? Yes. Is the standard one useable? Yes
Want to argue about it? Argue with this guy;
Not arguing. No intention of arguing. That's why I put the little smiley face next to the deficiencies when I answered Tom
Sigh...
For my next post, I will talk about how the 1911 sucks (and I love 1911s)
-
AK mag changes are a problem? You mean like an M-14 mag-change? Or A Mini-14, G-3, FN FAL, or ALL the other guns that change mags the same way, WOW who knew so many gun designers were retarded?
The charging handle is a problem? Like the M-1, M-14, M-1 Carbine, Mini-14, AR-180, Sig 55x, or ALL the other guns that use the same design? Must be the same retards that designed the magazines.
The safety is a problem? Well I suppose if you want to stand around finger-f&%@#$g your safety all day then I guess it might. Of course I just reach up with my fingers and snap it off when I want it off and I leave it the hell off till I figure I don't need to shoot anymore, of course my I keep my fingers the hell off the trigger till I want to fire too.
As for the length of pull, I never had a problem and I'm 6 foot 4 and 200+ pounds, besides if it was longer we would need to put M-4 stocks on it to shrink it down to fit when we wear all that tacti-cool gear the other mall-ninjas get. Then again, I was taught to shoot by people who fought in Vietnam and other places and knew life sucks and you just gotta deal and drive on! If you want to shoot bulls-eyes off a bench, then I guess it might be, but if you plan to fight with it it is fine.
Want to argue about it? Argue with this guy;
or this guy;
I've never understood why people bad-mouth this weapon and forget that the AK is not all that different than the other weapons made during the same time and has been copied ever since. BTW you forgot "The trigger sucks", of course the trigger design is nearly a copy of the M-1 Garand.
G-3 has drop free mags like an AR .
-
Having carried the FN-FAL and used it in accordance with it's label directions, I can tell you that I would snap up as many as I could afford as often as I could afford them.
I don't care HOW MANY rounds a guy pumps down-range AT a "range". It ain't the same. And while it would NOT be my first choice for CQB, it is an EXCELLENT MBR. I never had, ( in the bush ), ANY issues as described.
AS an MBR, history should, ( and probably will...), list it with the Garand, the AK, and the Galil...at the TOP of the list.
-
The biggest flaw with the FAL, as with all other battle RIFLES, is that it was to long for most of the places it was actually used.
It was probably a truly great rifle where long range shots were available, Places like Oman, or the African Veldt. But it was far less handy in the more common jungles of Malaya and Vietnam, or the Urban environment of Ulster.
This is what lead most countries to adopt shorter carbine length weapons like the SA-80 or M-4, which are now proving to have insufficient range for places like Iraq and Afghanistan.
It's really a vicious circle, you try to plan based on lessons of the last war but then some variable factor chucks all your theories out the window.
-
And that's the rub, ain't it. No single system will ever be good at everything. We keep narrowing in on a better system but its really hard for one rifle to be
light
handy
carry lots of ammo
have long range punch
knock every skinny down DRT
be controllable in full auto
be laser accurate to 800 yards
be perfectly reliable
be extermely short
have lots of muzzle velocity
shoot through all cover
be super reliable
be incredibly modular
be completely ergonomic
on and on and on
-
You're looking for the atomic hand grenade ;D
-
G-3 has drop free mags like an AR .
Actually, it has both on the standard model (F-troop makes them take off the paddle) and the paddle works better as the button is hard to use quickly.