FN FAL or M14

FAL vs. M14

  • FN FAL

    Votes: 121 75.6%

  • M14 ( probably norc )

    Votes: 39 24.4%
  • Total voters
    160
m39a2 said:
The M-14 is more accurate and nicer to carry than the FN. Only those who've never held one or better yet had to carry the bloody thing for more than an hour like them. I have fond memories but that doesn't cloud my judgment, I've never gotten a sore cheek from the M-14 series but that FN, well let me tell you.....!

Scott
Click to expand...

ALL too true. :D

I have a fond spot for them as I said. But I sure wouldn't want to lug one around... 12 pounds empty... ugh.... :redface:

And yes, I think one side of my face was permanently altered from getting slammed by that butt stock.... :D
 
FWIW - I've found that the FN Para doesn't have that nasty little recoil that gives you that ever so minor "ouch" to your cheek ... YMMV.

IMG_0003.jpg
 
... Since you're in New Zealand, and can get the L1A1, I would go with that. Spare parts and accessories readily available I'd assume. .... Plus I'd imagine there's a fair sized "pool" of ex-armorers/gunsmiths that have experience with it. Price would most likely be lower for the L1A1 with more being presumably available. ... David K
 
Fenix.NZ said:
alright guys.
im faced with a tough choice ..

i recently bought a savage bolt gun.. its all good but its not me, so its being sold on and im faced with a choice .. FAL vs M14

could you guys make your choice on what you think is the best all round rifle of the 2 . feel free to give reasons aswell, i dont know alot about the FAL but i've always liked them
Click to expand...

Geez...rub it in why don't you?
Bastard...! ;)
 
Both are easily obtained here in the states.

I own several M14s and not one FAL... the M14 is my choice.
 
m39a2 said:
The M-14 is more accurate and nicer to carry than the FN. Only those who've never held one or better yet had to carry the bloody thing for more than an hour like them. I have fond memories but that doesn't cloud my judgment, I've never gotten a sore cheek from the M-14 series but that FN, well let me tell you.....!

Scott
Click to expand...

you were over burdened with the weight of your fn, lol? i thought it was ok. i didn't like the 30 ibs of webbing or the 70 ibs ruck lol. thats not to mention verious other extra mission direct pieces of kit. now if you were talking about the c2, that was a waste. i've used both and own a m1a. think the m1a like you say is more accurate. the fn is easier to maintain and i think a little more robust. honestly, if i could only own one and the ordinary canadian could legaly own it, i would have to choose the fn. but as stated by others they are both great rifles. get both.:D
 
Cia r1a1

Has any one seen the FN FAL R1A1 sporter offered by CAI, other than the fact its a FAL variant. Is it on the list. to me its a Semiauto sporter , and it has a 20 inch barrel, you can get a 5 shot mag for it, and it is a thumb hole not a pistal grip, and its semi only
 
m39a2 said:
Overburdened...no, Airforce!

Scott
Click to expand...

well that explains every thing. KIDDING. its all the same realy. i new what you meant about weight. i can remember back in 86 when we changed to the c7. other then the fact nato was all going to 556, we were told that the ammo was lighter among other things. giving the impression that are load would stay the same as the fn (4 mags?). but when we did change over i found myself carrying over twice as much (5 mags issued, 6 u.s.). sorry a bit off topic. you cant go wrong with either. just wish i had the burden of choosing.
 
I shoot a M1A since many years and I still impressed each time I use it but... FN FAL hands down for me as a survival and all around gun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom