The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 10, 2007, 04:33 PM   #1
Ammo Junky
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: IL
Posts: 537
M1A vs Fal

Which is a better battle rife, if one is better than the other and why?
__________________
Will work for brass.

I apologise in advance for spelling errors.
Ammo Junky is offline  
Old June 10, 2007, 06:57 PM   #2
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
M1A..

Because its American

WildanergonomicallybetterformebesidesAlaska
Wildalaska is offline  
Old June 10, 2007, 07:16 PM   #3
bobn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 30, 2006
Location: midwest
Posts: 1,098
fwiw, at an informal shoot me and another fellow challenged each other to a one shot 200yard run off. m1a kicked his fal butt. does that make it a better battle rifle? may be, maybe not. hopefull here we will never need to know!...bobn
bobn is offline  
Old June 10, 2007, 07:19 PM   #4
PTR 91
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2007
Posts: 264
M1A better quality. Wildalaska, if you are talking about the M1A for spring field arms. It's not even american as far as I know.
PTR 91 is offline  
Old June 10, 2007, 08:47 PM   #5
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
Quote:
Wildalaska, if you are talking about the M1A for spring field arms. It's not even american as far as I know.
Your correct.

Canadian receivers, Taiwanese small parts, US barrels and stock sets.

Unless you have an older one with GI parts, like moi

WildandalphamakesanicerecieverAlaska
Wildalaska is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 01:24 AM   #6
Chris Phelps
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2005
Location: South China, Maine
Posts: 814
For what its worth, 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment - Delta adopted the M1A platform as their official sniper rifle when they were first commissioned in 1979. Last I knew, they were still using it. The FAL, to my knowledge, has never been employed as a sniper rifle. To me, this is a clue as to which is more accurate.
__________________
Bushmaster Superlight AR-15 5.56mm / Custom 24" Heavy BBL Varmint AR-15 5.56mm / Ruger M77 .257 Roberts / Ruger MKI 22LR Pistol / EAA Witness 9mm Pistol / Daisy 2202 22LR / Remington Viper 522 22LR / Stevens 200 .223 / Savage 10FP 24" .308 / Mauser 98 Sporter 30-06
Chris Phelps is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 09:47 AM   #7
HorseSoldier
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: OCONUS 61°13′06″N 149°53′57″W
Posts: 2,282
As a competition gun, the M14 and its modern day clones may have an edge. As a service rifle, which needs to combine speed of handling, reliability, and good ergonomics with minute of man kind of accuracy out to 400 or so meters . . . FAL is far superior.

Quote:
For what its worth, 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment - Delta adopted the M1A platform as their official sniper rifle when they were first commissioned in 1979.
They adopted M21s, not M1As, and this doesn't say too much, since in the early days Beckwith was notorious for scrounging up anything he could find cheap since they weren't the budgetary power house they are today.

Quote:
Last I knew, they were still using it.
No. At least not as a standard sniping weapon.

Quote:
The FAL, to my knowledge, has never been employed as a sniper rifle. To me, this is a clue as to which is more accurate.
Not relevant to discussions of a battle rifle. Sub-MOA performance isn't something Joe is going to need with his iron sights at battlefield ranges.
HorseSoldier is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 12:35 PM   #8
Chris Phelps
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2005
Location: South China, Maine
Posts: 814
Horse, pick up "inside the delta force" by Eric Haney. The M14 was the originally adopted sniper rifle, NOT the M21.

It was also the weapon being used through the Somalia incident. You can figure that one out by watching black hawk down.

Thanks.



(the M1a is the updated Civilian version of the M14, for those who do not know)




EDIT: after posting this, I went down to my mailbox and grabbed my copy of "The Ultimate Sniper - An advanced training manual for military and police snipers" which just arrived today. I opened the package and looked the book over. Low and behold, back cover, lower right corner... whats this? a picture of a US military sniper with... an M14? You betcha!
__________________
Bushmaster Superlight AR-15 5.56mm / Custom 24" Heavy BBL Varmint AR-15 5.56mm / Ruger M77 .257 Roberts / Ruger MKI 22LR Pistol / EAA Witness 9mm Pistol / Daisy 2202 22LR / Remington Viper 522 22LR / Stevens 200 .223 / Savage 10FP 24" .308 / Mauser 98 Sporter 30-06
Chris Phelps is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 01:09 PM   #9
Jason_G
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,902
For a 7.62 infantry rifle, probably the FAL. For a squad designated marksman or some long range accuracy dependent "force multiplier" role, the M14.

(Just MHO, I reserve the right to be wrong! )

Jason
Jason_G is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 01:15 PM   #10
Desert01
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 2005
Location: Castorland, NY
Posts: 545
Chris,

That might be what the book says, however the Sniper configuration of the M-14 is the M-21 and a limited number of M-25's(?). Visualy they appair the same, but the M-21 is best compared to a National Match M-1A/14, not a rack grade M-14. The M-21 was the standard Army Sniper Rifle from the 60's until the M-24 Sniper Weapon System (Remington 700) was adopted in the mid-late 80's. The M-24 may be on the way out in the next two- three years if the Knight M-110 Semi-Auto Sniper System ever gets into the field. Some units retained the M-21 for special purposes after the M-24 came on line. Firing from a moving Helo, ala Blackhawk Down would be a good example of special purposes.

Today a lot of "rack grade" M-14's are being pushed into service as "Designated Marksman Rifles". They are often erroniously refered to as "sniper" rifles, but are far from it. A few have also been converted by Smith Enterprises, illegaly per procurement standards. These so called "Crazy Horse" rifles may classify has sniper rifles under loose terms. Snipers and Designated Marksmen serve very differant roles.

DSA did submit a FAL Sniper Rifle to the XM-110 Trails, but it was not selected. Not sharing a manual of arms with the M-16 family and a overly complicated stock probably had something to do with that. Has a battle rifle the FAL has a lot going for it and is probably the most widely used Battle Rifle in the world. Beat up versions are still around fighting wars all over the world. My own rifle is about 50 years old and still going. The M-14 never realy caught on any where but here.
__________________
Pro Patria "For Country"
www.pro-patria.us
(Material x Training)/Tactics = Mission Success

Last edited by Desert01; June 11, 2007 at 02:44 PM. Reason: Added commentsJason thanks for the Crazy horse Correction, I most have had those Springer White Feathers on my mind!
Desert01 is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 01:47 PM   #11
Jason_G
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,902
Quote:
A few have also been converted by Smith Enterprises, illegaly per procurement standards. These so called "White Feather" rifles may classify has sniper rifles under loose terms.
I thought the ones from Smith were the Crazy Horse builds.

Jason
Jason_G is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 02:51 PM   #12
MK11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 26, 2001
Posts: 577
You got a bunch of replies that the better SNIPER rifle is the M1A but since you asked about the better BATTLE rifle, go with the FAL.

The M1A/M14 is handsome, powerful, and American but it was also one of the biggest duds as a military rifle.
MK11 is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 02:54 PM   #13
Desert01
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 2005
Location: Castorland, NY
Posts: 545
When you go beyound a Battle Rifle:

DSA FAL:

http://www.dsarms.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SA58SPR

Springfield M-25:
http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?model=17

Springfield M-21:
http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?model=20

Crazy Horse:

http://www.smithenterprise.com/products02.html
__________________
Pro Patria "For Country"
www.pro-patria.us
(Material x Training)/Tactics = Mission Success
Desert01 is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 03:01 PM   #14
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,172
Quote:
The M1A/M14 is handsome, powerful, and American but it was also one of the biggest duds as a military rifle.
Thats why they are still being issued

WildcanyousaathatforafalinafirstworldcountryAlaska
Wildalaska is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 04:14 PM   #15
Jason_G
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2006
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,902
Desert01,
I believe the picture you show for the Crazy Horse is actually the MK14SEI, not the Crazy Horse. I think the designation for the Crazy Horse is the M14SE, and is the one being held by the soldier in the first pic on this page:
http://www.smithenterprise.com/products02a.html

Jason
Jason_G is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 05:31 PM   #16
nagib otayek
Member
 
Join Date: May 11, 2006
Posts: 61
The FAL in the 1975-76 Lebanese War

During the 1975-76 war in Lebanon, the Palestinian Militias were armed by Syria mostly with AK 47 assault rifles with the intention to take over the country and force the Christian population to take refuge in Canada and Australia. As the lebanese army desintegrated, christians managed to take over many of the army's depots including a few thousands FAL 7.62. and later bought or received as a gift a generous lot of M16s from Israel. At the time I was in Lebanon and close to the Christian Lebanese Forces Militia. I observed that the AK47 was no match to the FAL in accuracy or range. Its advantage (the AK47) is the simplicity of its mecanism and maintainance. The 30 round curved magazines seem an advantage compared to the 20 rounds of the FAL, but the straight magazine of the FAL with little practice, can be rested on the knee of the sitting shooter and accuracy is considerably boosted. With the FAL and the M16 the christian militias kept the palestinians at bay and won momorable battles, in the cities and in the mountains. As to the MK14 I don't have firsthand information to comment.
nagib otayek is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 08:09 PM   #17
Desert01
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 2005
Location: Castorland, NY
Posts: 545
Jason,

Yeah the Smith Rifles are getting hard to sort out at this point. Of note is the Leupold VX-III 1.5-5X20 in the picture you refer to. Definately more of a DM sight then a sniper sight.
__________________
Pro Patria "For Country"
www.pro-patria.us
(Material x Training)/Tactics = Mission Success
Desert01 is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 09:19 PM   #18
Olive Drab
Member
 
Join Date: June 11, 2007
Posts: 43
both are good choices but neither are on my list for 7.62mm "sniper rifles"
Olive Drab is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 10:41 PM   #19
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 12,453
"...the M1A is the updated Civilian version of the M14..." It's a commercial copy, not an updated M-14. Nor is it a battle rifle. Neither are any of the other commercially made copies of the M14 or FAL.
"...Thats why they are still being issued..." Not as they were first issued in the mid 50's. Nor are they issued to regular infantry. It lasted as an MBR for the least number of years of ANY U.S. rifle.
A real FAL is a proven battle rifle. In jungle, deserts, the Arctic and every other lovely climate. The M-14 proved to be a dismal failure in the jungle. Mind you, in jungles, so did the early M-16's.
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old June 11, 2007, 11:16 PM   #20
Chris Phelps
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2005
Location: South China, Maine
Posts: 814
Quote:
The M-24 may be on the way out in the next two- three years if the Knight M-110 Semi-Auto Sniper System ever gets into the field.
The XM110 has already found its way to the battlefields, and is currently in the hands of quite a few Army snipers. IMO, it will serve much better than the bolt action rifles for conflicts such as the one we are fighting right now, but I seriously doubt the military will shelf the M-24 entirely. It will still have its part to play. I think the XM110 was never intended as a replacement, but rather, as an addition to the toolbox.

Quote:
Mind you, in jungles, so did the early M-16's.
The M16A2s and M-4s (and all other AR variants) are fairing poorly in the sandbox too. There have been a few H&Ks fielded recently for testing. These new rifles have a piston in place of the standard gas tube blowback design of the current rifles. I have not yet read any extensive reports on the new system, but initial reports indicated the chances of failure in desert warfare were 1/4 that of the current rifles. I will be looking forward to seeing where the military will take this.


Of course, this could just be another one of those military trial (and eventually dismissal) phases, much like the 6.5 Grendel. That is an amazing cartridge, and was being tested among a few different specops units, but it seems to have died out. Too bad.
__________________
Bushmaster Superlight AR-15 5.56mm / Custom 24" Heavy BBL Varmint AR-15 5.56mm / Ruger M77 .257 Roberts / Ruger MKI 22LR Pistol / EAA Witness 9mm Pistol / Daisy 2202 22LR / Remington Viper 522 22LR / Stevens 200 .223 / Savage 10FP 24" .308 / Mauser 98 Sporter 30-06
Chris Phelps is offline  
Old June 12, 2007, 10:48 AM   #21
HorseSoldier
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: OCONUS 61°13′06″N 149°53′57″W
Posts: 2,282
Quote:
I seriously doubt the military will shelf the M-24 entirely.
Bolt guns are going to 300 Win Mag. At least in SOF units, but big army seems to follow those developments with a few years to catch up.

Quote:
The M16A2s and M-4s (and all other AR variants) are fairing poorly in the sandbox too. There have been a few H&Ks fielded recently for testing. These new rifles have a piston in place of the standard gas tube blowback design of the current rifles. I have not yet read any extensive reports on the new system, but initial reports indicated the chances of failure in desert warfare were 1/4 that of the current rifles. I will be looking forward to seeing where the military will take this.
HK 416 claims 3-4 times as many rounds fired without stoppage, not 1/4 the chance of stoppage. Since the M4 clocked 5000+ rounds between stoppage without cleaning, I'd have to say it's kind of irrelevant, as I don't know anyone who's ever been in a situation where they had to fire 5000 rounds through a rifle or carbine without a chance to clean.

416 does run better with a suppressor, and does run easier at very short barrel lengths, which might explain why it's populat with the current users.

Quote:
Of course, this could just be another one of those military trial (and eventually dismissal) phases, much like the 6.5 Grendel. That is an amazing cartridge, and was being tested among a few different specops units, but it seems to have died out. Too bad.
Grendel was never under serious consideration by any military unit. 6.8 Rem SPC was seriously looked at by SOCOM as a 5.56mm replacement, but the pluses did not offset the minuses after field trials. You can get most of the thump and less of the logistical headaches by putting 77 grain Mk 262 and more 7.62mm long guns in the mix.
HorseSoldier is offline  
Old June 12, 2007, 01:36 PM   #22
Chris Phelps
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2005
Location: South China, Maine
Posts: 814
Quote:
Bolt guns are going to 300 Win Mag. At least in SOF units, but big army seems to follow those developments with a few years to catch up.
Somehow that doesn't surprise me. the 300 winmag is supposed to be accurate to what... 1200m? The only thing surprising about that is the fact that they aren't moving to 338 Lapua.


Quote:
HK 416 claims 3-4 times as many rounds fired without stoppage, not 1/4 the chance of stoppage.
my mistake.


Quote:
Grendel was never under serious consideration by any military unit.

The Grendel was under consideration by the military the same time as the SPC. what they found was the SPC offered no ballistic advantage over the 5.56mm cartridge, but the Grendel offered nearly identical ballistics to the 308 round out to 800 yards, with just slightly more recoil than the 5.56mm. I have not heard any updates since that report, but there is still muffled talk on the military sniper forums about 6.5 Grendel chambered rifles still in use.
__________________
Bushmaster Superlight AR-15 5.56mm / Custom 24" Heavy BBL Varmint AR-15 5.56mm / Ruger M77 .257 Roberts / Ruger MKI 22LR Pistol / EAA Witness 9mm Pistol / Daisy 2202 22LR / Remington Viper 522 22LR / Stevens 200 .223 / Savage 10FP 24" .308 / Mauser 98 Sporter 30-06
Chris Phelps is offline  
Old June 12, 2007, 02:10 PM   #23
Sturmgewehre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Location: Indiana
Posts: 4,212
The FAL was adopted by some 90 nations. The M14 was adopted by how many?
__________________
Visit my YouTube channel for reviews, tests and more.
Ex Mea Sententia
Sturmgewehre is offline  
Old June 12, 2007, 02:49 PM   #24
Silvanus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 23, 2005
Location: Luxembourg
Posts: 1,324
Why all the talk about "sniper rifles" which neither the M14 nor the FAL are? As for battle rifles, the FAL is superior in my opinion.
Silvanus is offline  
Old June 12, 2007, 02:52 PM   #25
HorseSoldier
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: OCONUS 61°13′06″N 149°53′57″W
Posts: 2,282
Quote:
Somehow that doesn't surprise me. the 300 winmag is supposed to be accurate to what... 1200m? The only thing surprising about that is the fact that they aren't moving to 338 Lapua.
There are some 338 Lapua bolt guns out there as well. Kind of depends on which branch of service (or SOF units thereof) you're talking about.

Quote:
The Grendel was under consideration by the military the same time as the SPC. what they found was the SPC offered no ballistic advantage over the 5.56mm cartridge, but the Grendel offered nearly identical ballistics to the 308 round out to 800 yards, with just slightly more recoil than the 5.56mm. I have not heard any updates since that report, but there is still muffled talk on the military sniper forums about 6.5 Grendel chambered rifles still in use.
6.8mm Rem SPC was the only one that ever had any official backing by SOCOM (no one else ever considered either round at the time, though the USMC has looked at 6.8 Rem SPC since then, though not seriously, by which I mean, without $$$ to do lots of testing and eval). It did what it was advertised as doing -- more thump and enhanced performance at practical (0-400m) ranges. But it also meant a loss of all ammunition commonality with Big Army and other branches, and fixed a problem that was overstated to begin with (5.56mm lethality seems only to be a problem on the internet).

SOCOM did not trial Grendel at all, to the best of my knowledge, nor did it ever have any official backing or interest. The Tier One guys may have (and may be using it), but so far as I know, no one in White Side SOF units is using Grendel or has used Grendel. Alexander Arms may claim otherwise to sell more stuff, but I've seen no evidence to back up the internet buzz about SOF types using Grendel. 6.8mm Rem SPC barely got its foot, briefly, in the door, and Grendel would seem to still be out in the cold entirely (again, unless CAG is using it). For dedicated sniping there are much better rounds, and for a basic service carbine it's ballistics at 600+ meters are pretty much irrelevant.
HorseSoldier is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.12357 seconds with 8 queries