Survivalist Forum banner
  • Are you passionate about survivalism? Would you like to write about topics that interest you and get paid for it? Read all about it here!
1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I would like some feedback on which of these rifles is considered the "ideal " or "better " MBR. I am very familiar with the military M14 from my service time, but have no experience with the civilian M1A or the semi-auto FN-FAL. Please list pros and cons of each rifle. I am looking to finish my collection with a rock solid MBR that is rugged, reliable, uses hi-cap mags, and is chambered for the 308 round. Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,042 Posts
I'll play, but this has been hashed out many times across teh interwebs...

Both are fine weapons, I'll pick one point of each and let others chime in...

The m1a is generally much more "inherently accurate" than an fal. In some cases it's not by much, in others it's a wide margin.....it depends on who made what.

The fal is more reliable due to the piston design and adjustable gas port.

It's really just a preference thing...if you go with an fal, get a dsa.

If you decide m1a... Get a Fulton armory.

Ya can't go wrong if you stick with the quality manufacturers.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,890 Posts
I'm old enough to have been trained on and used the C1A1, the Canadian version before we had the C7. I took the FN through mud, freezing Canadian winters, West Coast down pours and dust and heat. Never had a jam and scored well, got my crossed rifles and crown. Only complaint was that the thing was heavy, and somtimes a pig to break down to clean.
I fired some versions of the M14 up here at the range and they felt like nice, natural shooting. Haven't had to take them apart to clean them or drag them through the bush, but I'd still choose a variant over the FN, despite my praise for it. Also, wouldn't it be easier to get parts and accessories for an M1A?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
junglecrawler:
You just said too much of what I was about to say. Now I have almost nothing to say.
Okay, Captain Kilgore, I agree with junglecrawler with the exception of the fact that the I never fit the FN series of battle rifles very well. They and my body just didn't see eye to eye. I may be a little older than junglecrawler because I had to qualify on the Lee-Enfield also and I lovede the ergonomics of that rifle, with the short butt stock.
Also I found the gas regulation on the FN always needed some cleaning or tinkering. I like a firearm that runs whenever I want it to run and does not give me any grief. I just never felt I had that from any FN.
I guess I am really a bolt action or lever action carbine man at heart.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,890 Posts
Ha! Only time I used the Enfield was in cadets in SALH, but loved it. If the mossy's not there tomorrow I might get a Lee Enfield, just for s&g's...
Wait a minute...Alberta? Ever have any contact with Sally Horse?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,890 Posts
Ouch! What is ye? An Edmontonian?:D:
Wait a minute... There are pride parades in Medicine Hat???
I did cadets with SALH, it was a hoot. Went to the Cal Highs for reserves, then on to reg force.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,890 Posts
JC: Very impressive. I was never reg force.
I just tried to make love to fido whereever I could. The 80's/90's was good for that; Ivan ensured we had lots of money to throw around, until FRP came along. Life was good until I went through CABC, then all of a sudden I had to start working hard:eek:.

Edmonchuk... I just pulled that out of my butt; it's been so long I can't even remember any of the old rivalries.:upsidedown:
 

·
To the surface!
Joined
·
8,012 Posts
I have owned and operated both. I currently have a FAL (DSA carbine) which I prefer.

As mentioned, the M1A generally has more potential for precision shooting - if you are interested in match shooting or building up a semi-auto sniper rifle then the M1A is better for that purpose (assuming you start from a good rifle and are willing to spend some money).

The M1A and the FAL both have a large community and therefore a lot of accessories. The M1A probably has more gunsmiths willing to work on it because it is used in matches more than the FAL.

The downsides of the M1A are that I do not care for the way it field strips, and I don't think the action design is as good as the FAL for slogging around in the mud/dust/etc.

One downside of the FAL is that there are a lot of different manufacturers and two different patterns ('metric' and 'inch') so some parts do not interchange between some rifles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,886 Posts
Personally, I have a preference for the FAL. I don't have either.

However, since you know the M14 well, get the M1A rifle. Also, if you were in the military when they were using M14 quite a bit, you're eyes might not be in the best of shape. The M1A take a scope much eaiser than a FAL.
 

·
Canuck
Joined
·
526 Posts
both my parents qualified on the FNC/C1A1 they say its a great gun (crossed rifles and some other reconition) my dad wants me to get one so he can "teach me" to shoot lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
bobusboy:
If both your parents earned cross rifles recognition, and especially if it was crossed rifles with crown, I would pay serious attention if they are willing to share their knowledge of shooting in general and shooting that firearm particularly. It would even incline me to purchase one since then there would be 3 adults who could use it effectively if need be.

I never refuse free advice on shooting from highly qualified individuals. Often at my age the advice is something I already knew but every once in a while I will pick up some new and valuable knowledge from another shooter. I even make it a polint to watch the gun handling of individuals I am on teh range with, partially to make sure they aren't dangerous, but also to see if someone elses shooting style incorporates something that will help me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,028 Posts
I have an M1A (Bush model, 18" barrel) and three FAL's (DSA, IMBEL and a congo version built on a DSA receiver).

Handling preference plays a role. I use my MIA the most (for hunting), however I think the FAL is a better designed "battle rifle"...again, based on my experience with the M4/M16. The FAL breaks down easier and the ergonomics are more suited to urban-type combat. If you're out in a rural area, I think the M1A would be a better choice...just more versatile with better iron sights and more natural handling (of course you could get one of the new stock systems to give you a pistol grip).

I would probably say the M1A is more accurate out of the box, but to be honest, I haven't seen any significant differences. I purchase after-market peep sights for all my FAL's; two have excellent DSA scope mount rail covers that are much better than most shooters.

Where I live in TX, it would have been one of my FAL's. Here in rural GA, my M1A Bush/Scout is my main battle rifle. The FAL is much easier to field strip and clean compared to the M1A…that can make a big difference depending on your needs.





ROCK6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
I have heard good things about DSA, but am ignorant about Imbel. What is the type I and type II receivers? Would the inch pattern be better or the metric? Thanks!
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top