is the FN/FAL still around?
- Thread starter stuckinthe60s
- Start date
The USMC adopted the SA58 rifle for certain units in their inventory. DS Arms currently produces their rifle.
It is being used in Ukraine by Ukrainian forces. Also SA58 rifles.
Both the Nigerian and South African Game Rangers issue the rifle as their standard carry. Both of those organizations are engaged in active Infantry style combat against organized and very well equipped poachers. DS Arms has the contract to supply both organizations.
My FN-FAL is a fixed stock 18 inch version copying the Nigerian Game Rangers.
The FN-FAL is still used by about 74 countries in one form or another from primary service rifle to specialized units and/or reserves.
stuckinthe60s
New member
how did they handle compared to the m14 on full auto?
Ignition Override
New member
To learn from many guys who build them from parts kits, go to FALfiles.
------I bought my first pair of FALs recently at age 67.------
They were complete rifles.
The emphasis often is to try to find out who (-last-
) Assembled the rifle which appeals to you. Did they know what they were doing? It can be impossible to know on Gunbroker.
A common turn-off nowadays is the price of .308 ammo- which also limits price increases on HK-91/PTR-91s and M1As (civilian "M-14s").
------I bought my first pair of FALs recently at age 67.------
They were complete rifles.
The emphasis often is to try to find out who (-last-
) Assembled the rifle which appeals to you. Did they know what they were doing? It can be impossible to know on Gunbroker.A common turn-off nowadays is the price of .308 ammo- which also limits price increases on HK-91/PTR-91s and M1As (civilian "M-14s").
Bill DeShivs
New member
I have an unfired one around here.
Ignition Override
New member
Let’s put it another way-
When possibly the best FAL gun smith in the US has a 3-month turnaround (can be typical: my FAL arrived home yesterday), this helps explain not just 1) the popularity but also how worn many milsurp components become, and
2) how difficult it can be for many (Non-builder) people to solve an issue, which often is caused by faulty original assembly QA by Century Arms, or some private builders.
My "Century L1A1 Sporter" was missing the barrel washer.....
Prolific professional gun smith Mark Graham of ARS naturally added the washer, checked headspace etc.
When possibly the best FAL gun smith in the US has a 3-month turnaround (can be typical: my FAL arrived home yesterday), this helps explain not just 1) the popularity but also how worn many milsurp components become, and
2) how difficult it can be for many (Non-builder) people to solve an issue, which often is caused by faulty original assembly QA by Century Arms, or some private builders.
My "Century L1A1 Sporter" was missing the barrel washer.....
Prolific professional gun smith Mark Graham of ARS naturally added the washer, checked headspace etc.
Last edited:
stuckinthe60s
New member
whats the first to go on them?
why were they so popular?
cost?
simple design?
why were they so popular?
cost?
simple design?
Ignition Override
New member
stuckinthe60s:
If you mean for US civilian owners, other FAL owners who were private, true builders are far more knowledgeable, but these rifles seem to have had a Golden Era (in the US) when parts kits were approx. $400 or so (I've only read lots about it)? If you had about $100 of the right tools plus skill, such low cost for a powerful milsurp with character.
This could have been in the mid-90's through 2000.
The much lower-cost and (then) much more available milsurp ammo (ie South Africa and Portuguese) must have helped to a large extent.
By now you must be reading a fair bit on FALfiles..............
If you mean for US civilian owners, other FAL owners who were private, true builders are far more knowledgeable, but these rifles seem to have had a Golden Era (in the US) when parts kits were approx. $400 or so (I've only read lots about it)? If you had about $100 of the right tools plus skill, such low cost for a powerful milsurp with character.
This could have been in the mid-90's through 2000.
The much lower-cost and (then) much more available milsurp ammo (ie South Africa and Portuguese) must have helped to a large extent.
By now you must be reading a fair bit on FALfiles..............
stuckinthe60s
New member
first thing to go on the m1a/m14 was the bolt or op rod. then the gas piston.
first thing to go on a fn was the______________________________?
its been around long enough to have a trend record. anyone know it?
first thing to go on a fn was the______________________________?
its been around long enough to have a trend record. anyone know it?
bamaranger
New member
video
There is a Youtube video running presently entitled the FN-FAL in the Ukraine, or words to that effect.........I have not watched it........yetl
There is a Youtube video running presently entitled the FN-FAL in the Ukraine, or words to that effect.........I have not watched it........yetl
stuckinthe60s
New member
what was the time line on stocks on the fn?
did they start out with wood stocks like the m14, then switch to fiberglass or composite later on?
did they start out with wood stocks like the m14, then switch to fiberglass or composite later on?
Slightly worse. Despite the more in-line recoil, more forward point of balance (muzzle heaviness), and pistol grip, the FAL's lesser weight made for a hard recoiling & muzzle climbing ride.
Which isn't saying much, because standard select fire M14s also sucked in full-auto mode. As did G3s.
The M14E2 was an improvement in full auto controllability over all three (FAL, M14, & G3), but sucked as well. Even when fired in aimed slow short bursts. It was also a hard recoiling piece.
I was issued both M14 w/ selector and the M14E2 versions at Old Scroll 2/75 Rangers. Later used the FAL & G3 at 18B Course, during numerous ODA training events or JCET exchanges with allied forces, as well as at various schools or range venues. This across several decades.
By way of comparison, during 2007/2008 unit testing and down range deployments to Iraq, I found the M17 SCAR-H to be subjectively more controllable (and objectively more accurate) during full auto fire. This despite it's lighter base weight. With the added weight of all the bells & whistles attached (optics, lasers, etc.), it just shot better than those previous battle rifles. Whether on semi or full auto.
In places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Africa, I often encountered FALs (or G3s). But they were mostly regarded as curiosities unless a partner force was running them. Still guns to be respected, but generally not the armament of well-funded & equipped modern forces.
There's a reason the old M1918/1922 BAR was considered a very accurate and controllable auto-rifle. It had the required mass and massive action to tame full power .30 cartridges. Rifles like the M14, FAL, and G3... never did.
As with any marginally accurate weapon (e.g., shorty pistol grip shotguns), you can train yourself to become relatively effective with a select fire battle rifle. However, in the main, some shots are likely near climbing misses when fired as bursts. Most are very high misses when the trigger gets held back for longer strings. Especially so when fired from non-prone supported positions.
Most full auto battle rifles deliver a lot of noisy Sturm und Drang... but damn few hits compared to aimed & rapidly delivered semi-auto shots with the same weapons. Up close... they are devastating in effect and in generating momentary suppression. As long as you don't mind ventilating what's directly behind or laterally within the cone of fire to the target.
IMHO, FAL/G3/M14 select fire capability briefed well, but was mostly impracticable in real usage. Wasted ammo expended missing targets. Except at close range (<25 meters). Good more for delivering short suppressive bursts at distant point targets vs. actual hits.
YMMV.
Last edited:
stuckinthe60s
New member
finally, an answer!
thanks partner.
I handled the e2 back in the day and shot a bm59 w/Nigerian stock configuration. all over the place was the e2. the 59 actually had a comp that worked. hand it to the Italians.
thanks partner.
I handled the e2 back in the day and shot a bm59 w/Nigerian stock configuration. all over the place was the e2. the 59 actually had a comp that worked. hand it to the Italians.
stuckinthe60s
New member
as long as they feed!
------------------------
what was the time line on stocks on the fn?
did they start out with wood stocks like the m14, then switch to fiberglass or composite later on?
------------------------
what was the time line on stocks on the fn?
did they start out with wood stocks like the m14, then switch to fiberglass or composite later on?
The M14 is much worse when compared to an FN-FAL with a Belgian Flash hider.
https://youtu.be/hF8ca8hobas
https://youtu.be/VAABMvmaGWQ
The birdcage flash hider FAL is a matter of opinion. Both are Battle Rifles and have no business being FA weapons.
18Z, Iraq -- 5th or 10th?
10th for all my OIF rotations (and much of my career). But TF DAGGER OEF late 01/early 02. TF BOWIE for rest of 02.
Full auto in a .30 battle rifle is mostly a tits-on-a-boar novelty feature. Good for putting a grin on peoples faces at the range, but little else.
The whole "turn an infantry rifle into an LMG" or "heavy AR" thing has been tried without success so many times, by so many armies, and with so many weapons. It's surprising that the USMC has re-implemented that repetitively failed concept. They will eventually re-learn forgotten lessons the hard way. When they find themselves ass deep in Chinamen and not enough belt or drum feds to deal with that reality.
My opinion on relative full-auto controllability is just my fairly lengthy personal experience with select fire FALs & M14s. I thought they both sucked on full-auto (as did the G3). Like I said up-thread... YMMV.
RLTW/DOL
Full auto in a .30 battle rifle is mostly a tits-on-a-boar novelty feature. Good for putting a grin on peoples faces at the range, but little else.
The whole "turn an infantry rifle into an LMG" or "heavy AR" thing has been tried without success so many times, by so many armies, and with so many weapons. It's surprising that the USMC has re-implemented that repetitively failed concept. They will eventually re-learn forgotten lessons the hard way. When they find themselves ass deep in Chinamen and not enough belt or drum feds to deal with that reality.
My opinion on relative full-auto controllability is just my fairly lengthy personal experience with select fire FALs & M14s. I thought they both sucked on full-auto (as did the G3). Like I said up-thread... YMMV.
RLTW/DOL
Last edited: