Pelican Parts Forums - Fun with an FAL

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/index.php)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31)

- - Fun with an FAL (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?t=1046054)

I thought this was interesting... Ian show the different recoil spring arrangement in the folding stock Para version.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dPY0v9-RnpI" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Quote:

Originally Posted by sc_rufctr (Post 10872501)

I’m seriously thinking about getting a DSA para FAL. Still dithering on barrel length and optic/no optic.

I’ve wanted a FAL for a long time, but there is no place around here to shoot a rifle caliber. A couple of private ranges 40 miles away but a waiting list to join. Well, a friend just told me he has a big
spread in Washington with a hillside, and he shoots his AR there. Neighbors? They are out sitting there too. Legal? His neighbor is a cop and shoots there too. Me? Sure dude, come over any time. Hmmm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyl (Post 10875613)

After having shot a couple of standard FAL's and a Para folding stock FAL, I would highly recommend the standard stock, unless you have a real need for the Para folding stock. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the Para stock makes the rifle very difficult to shoot. You simply cannot attain a decent cheek weld on that stock. The relatively thin piece of bar stock, or wire, or whatever you want to call it that comprises the "comb" is just too low and too thin. At best, you can press the side of your chin up against it, which is not only uncomfortable, but does nothing to steady the rifle.

What barrel length did you like best?

Any qualms about quality of the DSA FALs? I read this and that online, some bad but old stories, not sure what the current state is.

Oh, why a para? I don’t think the full length FAL in a hard case will fit easily in the 911 trunk ... They’re just cool looking. Maybe there’s some way to attach something to improve the para stock.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins (Post 10695992)

There are two distinctly different Browning BARs. There is the still produced hunting rifle, like the one you use to hunt white tails. Then there is the old military version, which was kind of the precursor to the SAW, the Squad Automatic Weapon. This was a very heavy (20 pounds or more) fully automatic rifle. It was used in WWII, Korea, and I believe possibly in Vietnam. I believe these guys are talking about the latter.

The sporting rifle is on top, the military on the bottom:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1576986600.jpg

Developed in 1918..for thr Great War..came too late to be used during the hostilities. A semi auto versiom was introduced in the 90s by I believe Ohio Ordance..they go for about 3k.

Clyde used a sawed off barreled BAR as a weapon of choice..to nasty effect.

Back in the day the BATF banned importation of the FN FALS with a cut off serial number. Anything above that number was considered to be a machine gun. My friend Ian had two.that were above that cut off number. The BATF confiscated them. IAN took them to court explaining that there was no difference between his FNs and the ones that were legal. The judge found for IAN.ADMONISHING the BATF for being capricious. He got his FNs back and the BATF laid off the FNs.

I raise a glass to Ian!

I was having a beer with some ex Army buddies the other day and one guy started talking about the Aussie SLR.

The standard iron sites leave a lot to be desired. They're good for maybe out to 200 yards.
Beyond that they're next to useless, well they were for me anyway.

Back in the 80s: To "qualify" you had to shoot and drop 10, 6 inch by 6 inch steel plates at 100 meters using only a 20 round magazine. I did it with no issues on the first go but a lot of guys (20 to 30%) couldn't do it & had to have additional training so they could qualify. Even then there was a significant percentage who just couldn't do it. When the Aust Steyr was introduced a Corporal who was an instructor at Kapooka (Basic training camp) told me that 99% of recruits were qualifying on the first try.

(Some of my comments from another thread)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sc_rufctr (Post 10642875)

Just some thoughts. I carried one for years...

1. They're heavy, significantly heavier than an M16 but not necessarily a bad thing because the weight helps with handling and felt recoil.
When marching it was best to keep the rifle close to your body. I usually cradled it across my chest with the magazine removed on long marches.
2. Recoil, yes plenty but I'm not big guy and I had no issues leaning in and firing the rifle.
With practice you can use its weight to your advantage and stay on target after each round has gone down range.
3. They are a proper rifle. Old School loveliness. They ooze quality and they're made of steel.
The breach block and slider and precision machined and they're matched to each other. (The butt and forward stock were wooden)
4. Stoppages are easily cleared and the gas system is adjustable. A well maintained rifle will never jam even when caked in dirt.
But always clean them when you get a chance.

Some time later I was posted to an Infantry battalion.
When I got there I was issue an M16 & a Browning high power, those were the standard weapons for a Medic.
Two completely different animals... With the SLR you got a proper "bang" when you pulled the trigger.
The M16 felt like a pea shooter in comparison.