Would You Actually Trade Your M14 For An FAL?

dirtytwo said:
Been there, done both, owned both, got the t-shirts. M-14 all the way! The only time I preferred the C1A1 was on parade; it felt and handled a lot nicer than the C7, and a feu de joie with a 5.56 sounds like a starter pistol at your high school track meet. But I never cared for the C1A1 on the range or in the field. A few years later, when I first shot the M-14, it was like God himself smiled down on me and said: "Son, this is what 7.62NATO really feels like when the rifle wasn't designed by someone who hates you!" Over the years I keep meeting people who wear their nostalgia for the C1A1 on their sleeve, so I point out that the overall CFSAC scores nearly doubled in the late 80s/early 90s when the field switched from the C1A1 to the C7 (iron sights). Translation: better to hit someone with a 5.56 than miss them with a 7.62! Some said "not a fair comparison, the FN was pretty tired by that time", but to my dying day I'll say that recoil was the biggest culprit with the C1A1. Despite its weight, the iffy ergonomics and all the iron in the bolt, bolt carrier and piston flying back at you with every shot eventually made even good shooters flinch pretty often and getting back on target during snaps and rapids was a chore.

And for some magical reason, the M-14 is just a LOT easier on the shooter.

M-14, hands down! My $0.05, of course!
Click to expand...

After reading this I know there are others out there who feel as I do so I'm not crazy after all.
 
RememberTheSomme said:
After reading this I know there are others out there who feel as I do so I'm not crazy after all.
Click to expand...
When I was posted to CFB Moose Jaw in 1990 there was an older AVS tech who served in West Germany in the mid-1950s. Stationed at an RCAF radar installation, prior to the adoption of the FN, they were actually issued 30-06 M1 Garand rifles for base defence force duties, that is until the FN was brought into service. Everyone that requalified on the FN-FAL design agreed that the Garand had less felt recoil and thier individual scores were a bit higher.
 
M14 - no question. The C1 was clunky and heavy and recoil was heavier and I never thought much of it. The gas system was adjustable, but there had to be almost two pounds of mass moved back by gas pressure each shot.
 
It would be cool if someone would make a non-restricted clone of it so you can satisfy your appetite for this really cool rifle. But clearly, there are a number of us who have owned both and based on experience, prefer the M14. You don't know how good you have it with these $400 Norinco m305's.
 
Brutus said:
When I was posted to CFB Moose Jaw in 1990 there was an older AVS tech who served in West Germany in the mid-1950s. Stationed at an RCAF radar installation, prior to the adoption of the FN, they were actually issued 30-06 M1 Garand rifles for base defence force duties, that is until the FN was brought into service. Everyone that requalified on the FN-FAL design agreed that the Garand had less felt recoil and thier individual scores were a bit higher.
Click to expand...

Brutus I concur. My Moms new Husband was RCAF in Metz France and in Germany in the '50's and he indeed used the Garand and the BAR for perimeter security. Said he was instructed by a US Army SGT from a nearby US base, and he told me the 1 MOA clicks on the Garand rear sight that I was installing on my M-14 as he was told over 60 years, and he's never been near the internet LOL. Guess when you are young and trained properly it never really leaves your memory,........"All operations are done by the left hand, while the right hand remains on the pistol grip"........" a gas-operated, magazine feed, shoulder fired weapon.......okay I'm forgetting and its only been 33 years.

Here's an interesting FN for the lovers of such.
161112-1.jpg
 
RememberTheSomme said:
Navy did you find the recoil on the G3 unique to say the least compared to an FN or M-14 with it's delayed-roller lock up?
Click to expand...

I have never had the opportunity to fire a delayed roller action firearm, so I have no idea on the recoil to be honest. It is a mechanically fascinating firearm I wish to own, the FN FAL is just another short stroke piston gun at the end of the day, but the G3 is unique.
 
I'm kinda drooling over DS Arm's version of the FAL... SA58 - Especially the Carbine length...
But would I give up my LRB M25? Tough to say!

I'd get both!!! Why not??!! Why do I have to give up one to get the other?? :))))
 
RememberTheSomme said:
Navy did you find the recoil on the G3 unique to say the least compared to an FN or M-14 with it's delayed-roller lock up?
Click to expand...

I can answer that. I have shot both years ago before the lib's got their panties twisted and removed our ability to enjoy good clean fun. The G-3 does have a sharper recoil pulse than the FAL's. My personal pref, if I were once again able to own and shoot these would be the G-3/HK91. The HK add ons were all top notch quality, and the G-3 actually has a free floated barrel. I found them to be easier to shoot accurately, but that's just MY opinion and I'm sure there are many FAL fans that would disagree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom