Jump to content

DSA FAL or M1A  

73 members have voted

  1. 1. DSA 16" FAL para, Springfield M1A

    • DSA 16" FAL
      39
    • springfield M1A
      35


Recommended Posts

M14 has the accuracy advantage, but is slightly less reliable and less ergonomic that the FAL. The FAL has proven itself in a lot of bad situations in every corner of the planet.

 

I really think the M14 being more accurate is false.

 

Look at accurate FAL's in the same price range as accurate M14's.

 

DSA has some very accurate FAL's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a DSA FAL carbine, operative word is had. It shot so low that with the front sight cranked all the way down and the rear set for 600 meteres it hit an inch + under the point of aim at 25 yards. Could not get it to shoot point of aim at 100 yards at all. Major kill joy there. I love the FAL but will never buy another carbine version again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Go with the right arm of the free world. (The only weapon to see more issue and use in soldiers hands is the AK47)

 

There is a reason the M14 had the shortest run for standard issue rifle in history.

 

McNamara and his whiz kids who pushed the M-16 on the US military. He killed the US arms production industry with one egotistic stroke, which is why the M-14 went away. Now it is coming to roost as the M-16/AR-15 family is probably the most ill designed of all modern weapons issued to contemporary military troops. All due to his doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a DSA FAL carbine, operative word is had. It shot so low that with the front sight cranked all the way down and the rear set for 600 meteres it hit an inch + under the point of aim at 25 yards. Could not get it to shoot point of aim at 100 yards at all. Major kill joy there. I love the FAL but will never buy another carbine version again.

Did you ever contact DSA about the problem?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Go with the right arm of the free world. (The only weapon to see more issue and use in soldiers hands is the AK47)

 

There is a reason the M14 had the shortest run for standard issue rifle in history.

 

McNamara and his whiz kids who pushed the M-16 on the US military. He killed the US arms production industry with one egotistic stroke, which is why the M-14 went away. Now it is coming to roost as the M-16/AR-15 family is probably the most ill designed of all modern weapons issued to contemporary military troops. All due to his doing.

 

And the FAL beat the M-14 in .mil testing but the M14 was built in the US.

 

There are plenty of rifles worse than the M4. The FAMAS and LA85 come to mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to disagree that the FAL is more accurate than the M14. The M14 prototype used in the US military trial you mentioned, and even the 60s era ones used in combat, are MUCH different than the modern Springfield M1A. Even the ones being used by our troops in the sand box were rebuilt and accurized by the experts at Quantico. Comparing a 60s era M14 to a modern one is like comparing an 8-track to a CD player. There are no more stocks that split and warp and they are very accurate. I have been to several high power service rifle matches and mostly see M14s, you never see FALs; and trust me, these guys world use a FAL in a heartbeat if it was more accurate. In my personal experience with my own guns, my M14 has a noticeable accuracy advantage over my FALs. But having said this, a slight edge in accuracy does not make the M14 a superior weapon, and I would definetly pick the FAL. Other than an AK, my second choice for a SHTF rifle would be my FAL.

 

To the OP; Here are some pros and cons that I have experienced with my own rifles. This is from my experience. Maybe it will help you decide what you want.

 

FAL:

Pros = Charging handle is very well placed and can easily be operated from prone. I find the FAL easier to take apart and clean. Extra mags are cheap and plentiful. Adjustable gas system helps the FAL eat crappy ammo. Solidly built parts. You can run good hunting ammo through a FAL without bending an operating rod (like my M14 did). sights are decent.

Cons = FAL is a heavier gun. Scope mount options suck for super accurate shooting (just like AK and SKS variants). Trigger pull is a bit heavy.

 

M14:

Pros = Absolutely the best sights ever. New ones are very accurate. USA made. Scope mounting options are better than the FAL for sniper style shooting. Springfield Armory customer service is top notch.

Cons = Safety placement sucks. Can be picky with some ammo. Not as ergonomic as the FAL. Mags and parts are more expensive. Overall, has been less reliable than my FAL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

why isnt the s-308 not an option? i love mine....my 2nd fav rifle, behing my M1A loaded match.....the s-308 is pretty accurate in its 16" carbine version, and extremely light weight esp compared to my m1a. my grps were a hair over 2" at 100 yrs, but when the SHTF most your shots will be closer than that.

 

 

id vote for the M1a, but my vote is for the s-308.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My S308 easily shoots with a standard M14. The FAL is better in terms of parts supply. Considering you could probably score two or three S308's for the price of the FAL, the parts supply is a non issue in one person's lifetime. AK vs FAL as far as takedown and reliability; the nod goes to the AK (I don't like most gas systems, but the AK has never ever failed me). Mags are a great big plus for the FAL

 

If going the cheap route, and dealing with 10 rounds is OK, then go S308.

If spending more go FAL, but only a DSA, not a crap rebuild.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly the only reason the saiga 308 isnt on the list is because of mags. too much $$. having a super accurate rifle is not a huge deal this is basically a SHTF inside of 200 yard rifle, for anything farther than that i will use my remington pss in 308. thats also the reason i am looking at 308. only so it can interchange ammo with my bolt gun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Honestly the only reason the saiga 308 isnt on the list is because of mags. too much $$. having a super accurate rifle is not a huge deal this is basically a SHTF inside of 200 yard rifle, for anything farther than that i will use my remington pss in 308. thats also the reason i am looking at 308. only so it can interchange ammo with my bolt gun.

You could get plenty of mags for the price diff on a DSA FAL.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a DSA FAL carbine, operative word is had. It shot so low that with the front sight cranked all the way down and the rear set for 600 meteres it hit an inch + under the point of aim at 25 yards. Could not get it to shoot point of aim at 100 yards at all. Major kill joy there. I love the FAL but will never buy another carbine version again.

Did you ever contact DSA about the problem?

 

 

I bought the gun used. No warranty. Was a good deal but not that good in the end. I think the previous owner had tried to correct the issue by grinding the front sight down in height also. What could DSA do anyway? The barrel was not bent/warped and the front sight could not come down any further. No way to fix it from my point of view. I still own a FAL, but a nice 20" one, not the carbine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a DSA FAL carbine, operative word is had. It shot so low that with the front sight cranked all the way down and the rear set for 600 meteres it hit an inch + under the point of aim at 25 yards. Could not get it to shoot point of aim at 100 yards at all. Major kill joy there. I love the FAL but will never buy another carbine version again.

Did you ever contact DSA about the problem?

 

 

I bought the gun used. No warranty. Was a good deal but not that good in the end. I think the previous owner had tried to correct the issue by grinding the front sight down in height also. What could DSA do anyway? The barrel was not bent/warped and the front sight could not come down any further. No way to fix it from my point of view. I still own a FAL, but a nice 20" one, not the carbine.

You never know unless you try.

 

I have several used guns I've sent back to their maker. Every one got fixed no questions asked.

 

Maybe it was a crowning issue. Maybe they know about the problem and know a fix.

 

IMHO if you have an issue with any products, new, used, pulled out of a trash can, whatever, and you don't bother contacting the maker. Your complaint isn't valid.

 

Customer service can make all the difference in the world.

 

I'm going to do a test a little later once DSA is open. I'm going to call DSA and ask about fixing the site issue you had and tell them my rifle is used. I'll post back with the reply.

 

Called DSA. The gal that answered said she would have a tech call me back.

 

Less than 30 min later I got a call from the DSA rep.

 

The 16 1/4 barreled FALs often have this problem. If you can't file the sight enough you can swap out the sites for the taller IMI/Israeli FAL sights. The Israeli sites ate 3mm taller. Use a Mark 1/Number 1 sight post. The rep mentioned two places online that would have the sights. www.gunpartsguy.com and www.gunstuff.com

Edited by KrisFox
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you considered a decent CETME? The beauty of the CETME is that someone will always buy yours, even if it's a lemon. They cost less than the DSA, they use standard parts, and mags are cheap and plentiful.

 

I know you seem sold on the 308, but you should also consider that you could buy a pair of x39 guns, with mags and ammo for the price of either a converted saiga with a stack of mags, or a DSA bone stock. I thought alot about the bolt gun/auto thing, but really given the limited number of rounds that most bolt guns put down range, and the fact that the x39 is decent in most urban/suburban settings, variety may be a good thing on your wallet. When the SHTF scenario happens, you may be glad you had the crap x39 in the trunk instead of the $1K plus 308 auto in the safe at home. Just a thought...

 

For me, the choice wasn't quite so pricey since I made my own S308 furniture and got in on the FBMG mag deal when they were 3 per $100. Total cost of a converted saiga 308 and seven mags (took the guts of the stocker into a 20 rd body) was around $700 (built four of them so I'm pretty much set for mags, parts, etc). Not bad, but I doubt you could acquire four decent 308 semi's for under $3000 these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i already own a cetme, and i dont really like it its ok but i wouldnt trust my life with it. and as for the x39s well i already have a few saiga x39s and one rides with me in the trunk. this way i can get home if SHTF. i just want a 308 for the reasons stated above. thanks for the input im going to take the leap and order the fal. although in all reality if shit did ever happen it would probably take a back seat to the ruger 10/22 or the 17. hmr, rifle does no good if you cant pack the ammo i guess

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I would go with a .22, lots of ammo that is lightweight, cheap, and plentiful. You can carry a fair bit, and in SHTF situations where your range of fire is not great, a well placed shot can kill. They also don't make as much noise thus not attracting unwanted attention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I haven't owned an M1A, I have fired a couple. I do own two FALs, one a carbine with a barrel that is 16" at the end of the flash hider. It shoots fine, so something was wrong with the DSA gun mentioned earlier.

I would say it kind of depended on what you are expecting from the rifle. Personally, I think that the FAL is more ergonomic, has been more proven, is easier to disassemble for cleaning, maintenance, etc. I think it just handles better, and the felt recoil is less. The M1A has better sights and a better trigger. The trigger can be rectified, but the FAL just won't shoot with the M1A. It's plenty battle accurate, it's just not really sniper accurate. The DSA scope mount top cover is a good scope mount, and works as well as advertised. It's the only one I would use, and have them on both rifles.

 

Since you say it's a SHTF rifle, I would go with the FAL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

F. A. L. In a combat or survival situation, I can't see any gun having a single advantage over it. The only exception is the M-14 in the sights, that's it. It can eat anything without beating on itself (an M-14 with an adjustable gas plug can too, but nothing else can that I know of). I like the longer barrel though. I have a friend that bought a carbine and immediately decided he should have gotten the full rifle.

 

The M-14 is a great gun, and if the ergos could be redone, it'd be as good as or better than an FAL. If you're going to use optics on either one though, I'd choose the FAL. I have a CETME and I was in love with the M-14, but man when I got my FAL I was completely shocked that the gun I had always overlooked was the best rifle ever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would take the M-14 over the FAL. The US Army chose the M-14 over the FAL for a reason and because it's a better rifle.

 

I have a friend who served in the Israeli army in 1967 and curses the FAL because they fouled up during the war with dust in the desert conditions of the Middle East. Another reason the FAL failed in that war was that soldiers used the magazine lips to open soda bottles to drink. The British and Australians added a sand channel in the bolt carrier to avoid the problems the Israeli army experienced. If anyone has access to an old Life Magazine it shows an Israeli soldier swimming in the Suez Canal with a new AK which he took off a dead Egyptian soldier. Many Israeli soldiers did the same during that war.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well i was going to buy the fnfal, but i found a deal from a friend on the m1a standard m1a w/ springfield mount and 10 25rnd mags. traded straight accrost for my second remington pss. so i guess the m1a will be the one thanks for all the input. the poll is 50/50 anyways so looks like they should be comperable rifles thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still have a FAL, just not a DSA. I also have a PTR-91 and a M1A. My problem with the DSA FAL carbine could not have been fixed with a taller front sight. The gun was shooting low when the rear sight was at maximum elevation for 600 meters. I needed a lower front sight and the one that was there was a short little stub and screwed all the way in. It was a lemon. I probably should have contacted DSA but this was a couple of years ago when their customer service was quite shitty and parts were always out of stock. Maybe things have changed. I just reported on my experiences. Your mileage may vary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Go with the right arm of the free world. (The only weapon to see more issue and use in soldiers hands is the AK47)

 

There is a reason the M14 had the shortest run for standard issue rifle in history.

Not to appear antagonistic, but what would that reason be?

 

 

McNamara and his whiz kids forcing the AR-15/M-16 system on the US military by decree. It was a rather arbitrary decision by the top civilian in the DOD to standardize arms between services. I think the reasoning was that soldiers could carry more of the lighter ammo and that lighter recoil would make them better shots with less training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...