FAL accuracy experiences

[neoinarien]

So I know the M1A and AR10 have followings here. What about FALs? I know DSA advertises SPR and DM FALs. I was wondering what kind of accuracy people were getting either from these or from their FALs in general?

Have people slicked them up somewhat, without forfeiting reliability, to achieve sub 2moa accuracy?

 

[BOLTRIPPER]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

fal's are very cool....however,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[hbus1300]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BOLTRIPPER</div><div class="ubbcode-body">fal's are very cool....however,,,,,,,,,,,,,</div></div> However what? Or were you just setting this up for a m1a or ar10 fanboy to expound on why either is better? I just got a DSA 18" recently and love it, but I have no illusions of it being especially accurate. I got it to fill a 0-300 role and share the same caliber as my bolt gun and be reliable. There may be more holding it back, but the trigger is the thing that stands out as being an opportunity on mine.

 

[FALex]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

what's that term..."minute of man"? That's about right, but I wouldn't trade that lack of accuracy for any other battle rifle. Remember, it's a battle rifle and it is "The Right Arm of the Free World". Damn, I love typing that...there's a reason it is used by over 90 countries as their primary rifle...it may not punch small groups in paper targets but it sure will punch big holes in other targets!

 

[BOLTRIPPER]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hbus1300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BOLTRIPPER</div><div class="ubbcode-body">fal's are very cool....however,,,,,,,,,,,,,</div></div> However what? Or were you just setting this up for a m1a or ar10 fanboy to expound on why either is better? I just got a DSA 18" recently and love it, but I have no illusions of it being especially accurate. I got it to fill a 0-300 role and share the same caliber as my bolt gun and be reliable. There may be more holding it back, but the trigger is the thing that stands out as being an opportunity on mine.</div></div>




no fanboy here.....just a guy that wears out barrels....

 

[normbal]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

2 MOA was about as good as I could ever get at 100 yds with open/iron sights on the FN-FALs I built and I made several. WECSOG-style. But they were finished by the numbers, blasted and duracoated/alumahyde finished and were about as accurate, I think, as they were intended to be. Never much liked the triggers or the weight compared to an AR10 and the magazines were too flimsy for my tastes. Sold 'em all and all the tools. YMMV

 

[30/50]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

Sure accuracy isn't what FALs are known for, but dependability is why over 90 countries adopted it. I've built 26 FALs for others mostly and some for myself. I never have done any heavy barrel builds nor have I ever shot any, but one of my STG builds is giving me just around 1.25 moa at 100 yds. from there... well,,,,,,,
its a FAL. I will say this, that in a SHTF scenario my FALS will be my protect the family from the looting gangsta thugs. As for the trigger, I know of some guys on FAL files that can make them a little smoother.
neo if your considering a FAL- jump in already.

 

[limamike56]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

Most of the time 2 1/2" is about right with quality surplus ammo for me. I have an STG 58 18" barrel built by DSA and a DSA SA 58 with 16.25 barrel. Both are great battle rifles. Solid, no nonsense, dependable weapon all the way. They have DSA Extreme Duty Scope Mounts and BUIS. With a Vortex PST 2.5-10 on top and really good ammo I have shot 1 1/2" 5 shot groups before they start opening up.

 

[cooper_257]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

my DSA Gray Wolf with a match bull barrel will shoot sub moa with 175 SMK and 110 V Max and a few other bullets.

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lIMAMIKE56</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most of the time 2 1/2" is about right with quality surplus ammo for me. I have an STG 58 18" barrel built by DSA and a DSA SA 58 with 16.25 barrel. Both are great battle rifles. Solid, no nonsense, dependable weapon all the way. They have DSA Extreme Duty Scope Mounts and BUIS. With a Vortex PST 2.5-10 on top and really good ammo I have shot 1 1/2" 5 shot groups before they start opening up. </div></div>

Yeah, I think this is part of the problem though. Most guys who shoot FALs (and AKs, and most battle rifles) aren't tuning loads for them. Rather, they are running whatever surplus they can get their hands on.

I plan on wiring up some rounds for it, if I go that route. I'm guessing you can turn a 3.5 into a 2.5 and a 2.5 into a 1.75. I'd be OK with a 2.5moa, but would really rather get into sub 2.0 moa. I don't think that is unreasonable, though it may be ambitious (again, with tuned loads).

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 30/50</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
neo if your considering a FAL- jump in already.
</div></div>

Yeah, I've been toying with a MBR for years now... but have always been tinkering with ARs.

Now it is time.

I hear that the current DSA Imbels are actually better than the SA58 and STG58s -if one wants to get something new. Otherwise, an older STG58 is great and there isn't anything wrong with the SA58. (thoughts?)

 

[427Cobra]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

Mine was a 2moa weapon

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mine was a 2moa weapon </div></div>

Nice! What was the build?

 

[RWSGunsmithing]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

The SPR rifle I have here is said to average 1 moa at 100 yds with fgmm.

 

[Clark]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

I built 4 of the Brit inch pattern with Entriprise receivers.

I built a couple heavy barrel Australian FALs.

I built 5 of the STG58 on Imbel receivers.

I have tested a sample of each of the FALs with numerous trips to the range.

I could never get the mythical 1.5 moa from FALs.

I got more like 6 moa with careful handloads with 168 gr Match Kings.

I am not that bad of a shot. I have built some bolt guns that average .7" 5 shots at 100 meters, averaged over many trips.

I have given up on FALS, SKSs, AKs, and Garands for accuracy work. I am sure they work for soldiers at the squad level, where the targets are always inside of 200 yards. They are no good for sniper work, for me.

I do much better with bolt guns, Ruger #1s, Sav99s, AR15s, and 10/22s.

The jury is still out on BARs.

 

[magnum_99]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

2.5" was the norm for my Stg 58.

Even with a great barrel, you still have that awful trigger to deal with, and the crappy chin weld, and the dodgy scope mounts, and the nearly painful grip angle....

I got over my FAL infatuation pretty quickly.

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Clark</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I got more like 6 moa with careful handloads with 168 gr Match Kings.

</div></div>

6 MOA seems rather extreme... I've never heard of anyone getting this without there being some kind of problem (and then only on M1As or garands where there is a problem with the gas block). I'm not 'calling you out' or any of that crap. Just saying that is very unfortunate/poor and *hopefully* explained by there being some kind of problem. Otherwise it is a radical statistical outlier.

 

[desertfox01]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

2.5 to 3" groups with mine. It spent years as a basic iron sited battle rifle. always consistently whacked the crap out of a 18" gong at 300 yards using iron sights at a local range....it would (and still does) eat every piece of ammo I have ever fed it without questions. Awhile back, I put a scope on it....it just did not seem right with the optic on it. I took the scope off of it. I much prefer this rifle as my basic Iron Sighted Battle rifle. It was designed and ment as a battle rifle. not a precision rifle...if they wanted it to be a precision rifle, they would have made it as a bolt gun.

 

[427Cobra]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: neoinarien</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 427Cobra</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mine was a 2moa weapon </div></div>

Nice! What was the build? </div></div>

G1 kit that I turned into a STG58 clone, I got lucky with the kit, when it showed up covered in grease I thought thats a 100 bucks wasted, degreased it and the bipod was in like new condition and the rest looked pretty good too, I refinished everything, and I assembled it on a Coonan type 1 receiver.

 

[limamike56]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: magnum_99</div><div class="ubbcode-body">2.5" was the norm for my Stg 58.

Even with a great barrel, you still have that awful trigger to deal with, and the crappy chin weld, and the dodgy scope mounts, and the nearly painful grip angle.... I got over my FAL infatuation pretty quickly. </div></div>

You can fix the trigger, add a padded cheek piece, SAW pistol grip and an Extreme Duty Scope Mount from DSA all for less than 200.00 dollars and those issues go away pretty fast if you like the platform.

 

[The Lawn Ranger]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

Had a DSArms Para Tactical-traded it for another M1A. Call me a fanboy.....

FAL's do get points for being extremely cool looking.....

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: m14er</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Had a DSArms Para Tactical-traded it for another M1A. Call me a fanboy.....

FAL's do get points for being extremely cool looking..... </div></div>

Haha, the name kind of gives you away.

 

[M21guy]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

I don't like the FAL. Poor accuracy, poor sights, poor ergonomics, and a poor trigger. To me it is a battle rifle that will never be anything more than just that and even still it isn't the best of those. When it comes to one or the other, it's the M1a for me.

Btw I didn't notice any FALs at the gun shop today, but the M1a NM was sitting on the shelf for $1995. Also a AR-10 Super SASS for $2400ish.

 

[NukeMMC]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Clark</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I got more like 6 moa with careful handloads with 168 gr Match Kings.</div></div>
I couldn't get my Imbel on a Century to shoot 168s either. Take a minute to consider the design. It was built to shoot 147gr ball ammo. I had mine shooting inside 2moa routinely with 135, 150 and 155gr Matchkings.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Clark</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have given up on FALS, SKSs, AKs, and Garands for accuracy work.</div></div>
I am in possession of a SECNAV Trophy M1 Garand MK2-1 in 308 that will outshoot my double-lugged, full-house NM M1A in prone and offhand. They can be made to shoot, and very well. Folks like the late-Dobber Burdette, Ray Kerbs, Don McCoy and Hook Boutin can make a Garand do wonders out to 1000 yards.

 

[NukeMMC]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

At the 1994 National Matches, the Army Reserve Team hosted about half a dozen Aussie Army gents. They shot Army Reserve rifles and did well, considering they do not shoot our course of fire. Talking with them, they have experience modifying their L2A1s for competitions out to 1000m with success. I don't know what mods they do, but they weren't overly impressed by the NM M14 accuracy with M852.

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M21guy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I don't like the FAL. Poor accuracy, poor sights, poor ergonomics, and a poor trigger. To me it is a battle rifle that will never be anything more than just that and even still it isn't the best of those. When it comes to one or the other, it's the M1a for me.

Btw I didn't notice any FALs at the gun shop today, but the M1a NM was sitting on the shelf for $1995. Also a AR-10 Super SASS for $2400ish. </div></div>

Ah, thanks: saved me a call.

They had a standard M1a in black synthetic maybe a week ago. That totally exposed action is kind of scary in a MBR. Then again, my garand has never given me any trouble... but I hardly live in a post-apocalyptic world, so never had a chance to 'really' test it. I'm just imagining it in the snow and crap... a less than thrilling prospect.

 

[NukeMMC]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: neoinarien</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ah, thanks: saved me a call.

They had a standard M1a in black synthetic maybe a week ago. That totally exposed action is kind of scary in a MBR. Then again, my garand has never given me any trouble... but I hardly live in a post-apocalyptic world, so never had a chance to 'really' test it. I'm just imagining it in the snow and crap... a less than thrilling prospect. </div></div>
I dunno. The open receiver worked in some pretty miserable conditions ... WW2 (name a theater and its poor conditions), Chosin Reservoir, VietNam and even in Iraq & Af-stan.

I enjoy both styles of rifle and own several. They all do well for their intended purpose when properly maintained and fed.

 

[Mike_in_FL]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

FYI,the only smith I've ever heard about working magic to make an accurate FAL is Ed Vanden Berg.

 

[canman]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

With a properly adjusted gas system and that is critical they are a about 2MOA with mil surp ammo. Thing is they don't improve a whole lot with match stuff either. They are like a junk yard dog you can feed them just about anything. Great battle rifle. Leave the sling home they hate sling tension.

 

[M21guy]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: neoinarien</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M21guy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I don't like the FAL. Poor accuracy, poor sights, poor ergonomics, and a poor trigger. To me it is a battle rifle that will never be anything more than just that and even still it isn't the best of those. When it comes to one or the other, it's the M1a for me.

Btw I didn't notice any FALs at the gun shop today, but the M1a NM was sitting on the shelf for $1995. Also a AR-10 Super SASS for $2400ish. </div></div>

Ah, thanks: saved me a call.

They had a standard M1a in black synthetic maybe a week ago. That totally exposed action is kind of scary in a MBR. Then again, my garand has never given me any trouble... but I hardly live in a post-apocalyptic world, so never had a chance to 'really' test it. I'm just imagining it in the snow and crap... a less than thrilling prospect. </div></div>

There was a STD w/cluster rail and a socom II on the shelf also. God only know what he might have in the back or coming in. This year alone there has been about every single model in all configurations thru the shop, including a pair of M21's. That is one I rarely see on the shelf. The Scouts never make it to the shelf. So yeah, business is good for M1a's.

I'll drop you a line when I head to the range. Come get some trigger time behind my M21 once. You'll have a feel then what one can really do.

 

[juslearnin]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=241840


http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=252566

 

[younggun22]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M21guy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I don't like the FAL. Poor accuracy, poor sights, poor ergonomics, and a poor trigger. </div></div>

I'll give you 3 out of 4. All except accuracy can be changed relatively easily and improve all of those points (except accuracy). I have a M1a and a FAL and both have their pro's and con's

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NukeMMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: neoinarien</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ah, thanks: saved me a call.

They had a standard M1a in black synthetic maybe a week ago. That totally exposed action is kind of scary in a MBR. Then again, my garand has never given me any trouble... but I hardly live in a post-apocalyptic world, so never had a chance to 'really' test it. I'm just imagining it in the snow and crap... a less than thrilling prospect. </div></div>
I dunno. The open receiver worked in some pretty miserable conditions ... WW2 (name a theater and its poor conditions), Chosin Reservoir, VietNam and even in Iraq & Af-stan.

I enjoy both styles of rifle and own several. They all do well for their intended purpose when properly maintained and fed. </div></div>


::what is about to follow is shameless internet gossip mongering, take that for what it is worth::and yes I am familiar with the M1a pedigree via the M1::I am only saying this because this is what I read, which does not mean I believe it, nor should you, but it does give me a moment to pause::

I have read in other threads and forums that the M1As have had some reliability issues in the sandbox. Not that Wisconsin is a sandbox, but we do have a touch of cold and snow during our 6 months of winter.

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: juslearnin</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=241840


http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=252566

</div></div>

You did your first post here? Aww... thanks

 

[cal50]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

2" is pretty good from a FAL in any trim. I have owned 4 different FAL's and kept my paratrooper with a Kaiserworks adjustable sight lower.

Reliability is the FAL's strong suit. Gas piston with an adjustable nut. I have NEVER had one miss a beat. Trigger is so/so.
It points incredibility well and just "fits" your shoulder and aims like an extension of your arm. Mags (were) available everywhere and inexpensive. I have a very nice M1A as well. Both guns same caliber but handle much differently. I like them both but if I had to pick up one and hit the bush the FAL is my pick.

 

[TallShot]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

I owned a SAR-48, and a L1A1 clone. Best I could get was 2-3 at 100.....

 

[Tactical]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

Love FALs.

accuracy about 2 moa with good hard ball Not so good

Non windage adjustable sites Not perfect

Works with any crap ammo you feed it Fantastic

Feels far lighter in hands than it is.

Fast handling

Work of art

Plus all that history, Africa and ever shit hole ever thought of

You have to have atleast one. I have five

 

[AlterEgo]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

The thing about FAL's is that folks compare a kit gun built with a shot out barrel with fucked crown to a bedded M14 with a Krieger tube.

Apples and oranges. The built M14 more accurate than a worn out FAL? No shit!

I've got a couple that are sub 2 MOA easy. One is just an STG58 barrled mutt with a 4x Hensoldt on it. The issue with FAL's is that some of the 'recent' barrel offerings out there haven't been too good. DSA Izzy pattern chrome lined tubes come to mind.

Work the gun over and it should shoot like anything else. There's a lot of BS out there about FAL accuracy, the fundamentals are just as salient with an FAL as any other firearm.

I like M14 types fine enough, but I'd take an FAL over one personally (my bias for disclosure).

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AlterEgo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The thing about FAL's is that folks compare a kit gun built with a shot out barrel with fucked crown to a bedded M14 with a Krieger tube.

Apples and oranges. The built M14 more accurate than a worn out FAL? No shit!

I've got a couple that are sub 2 MOA easy. One is just an STG58 barrled mutt with a 4x Hensoldt on it. The issue with FAL's is that some of the 'recent' barrel offerings out there haven't been too good. DSA Izzy pattern chrome lined tubes come to mind.

Work the gun over and it should shoot like anything else. There's a lot of BS out there about FAL accuracy, the fundamentals are just as salient with an FAL as any other firearm.

I like M14 types fine enough, but I'd take an FAL over one personally (my bias for disclosure). </div></div>

Add to this that people feed their glass bedded krieger barreled m1a's tuned match ammo while feeding FALs whatever milsurp they can lay their hands on.

 

[M21guy]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

Can a FAL be build to perform at the level of accuracy of the M14?

The answer is no. No matter what you do to it, it is always second best in that single regard.
I imagine the same sort of arguments were going on way back when our own country was testing these new rifles trying to deciding which to adopt. Overall the FAL does have merit, it almost was adopted as our US battle rifle. But it didn't make it. America spoke and the M14 was the winner. Besides both their history this isn't the late 40's when either was first prototyped. Today there are overall better choices for both. Still arguing which is better is kind of pointless. They both have served and have kept the free world, protected.

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M21guy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can a FAL be build to perform at the level of accuracy of the M14?

The answer is no. No matter what you do to it, it is always second best in that single regard.
I imagine the same sort of arguments were going on way back when our own country was testing these new rifles trying to deciding which to adopt. Overall the FAL does have merit, it almost was adopted as our US battle rifle. But it didn't make it. America spoke and the M14 was the winner. Besides both their history this isn't the late 40's when either was first prototyped. Today there are overall better choices for both. Still arguing which is better is kind of pointless. They both have served and have kept the free world, protected. </div></div>

+1

 

[Patriot Prepper]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

We have FALs and AR 15s for close range. As far as reliability, I would think it depends on who is manufacturing the FAL - some of them have quality issues. An FN FAL is not the same as a copy. All the countries mentioned also use the FAL because the copies are inexpensive. I believe the AR platform .308s are proving to be reliable. Just a thought - IMHO

 

[neoinarien]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Patriot Prepper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I believe the AR platform .308s are proving to be reliable. Just a thought - IMHO </div></div>

Hopefully they are getting that way... because they did not start that way.

 

[VKC]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

The accuracy of FALs are worse than M1As and no where close to AR10s. I think AR10S are very realible now with NiCor, NP3 or similar bolt assembly coatings. Plus piston systems run cleaner. I think reliability becomes an issue with aftermarket alternations.

 

[superjc]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

I have a PARA FAL on an IMBEL receiver built on an un-issued Argy kit with barely 200 rounds down the pipe, it seems more accurate than my M1A NM, which is older and probably needs re-bedding. Both are reliable but the trigger on the M1A is 10x better. We're talking NATO 147 grain S.A. and PORT, I've never shot 168 grain thru the M1A, I hear that's the best for that barrel. I like both for the history, and enjoy owning both!

 

[marduk185]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Clark</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I built 4 of the Brit inch pattern with Entriprise receivers.

I built a couple heavy barrel Australian FALs.

I built 5 of the STG58 on Imbel receivers.

I have tested a sample of each of the FALs with numerous trips to the range.

I could never get the mythical 1.5 moa from FALs.

I got more like 6 moa with careful handloads with 168 gr Match Kings.

I am not that bad of a shot. I have built some bolt guns that average .7" 5 shots at 100 meters, averaged over many trips.

I have given up on FALS, SKSs, AKs, and Garands for accuracy work. I am sure they work for soldiers at the squad level, where the targets are always inside of 200 yards. They are no good for sniper work, for me.

I do much better with bolt guns, Ruger #1s, Sav99s, AR15s, and 10/22s.

The jury is still out on BARs.

</div></div>

no offense but,learn to shoot...there are trainings available here at the hide. i have sqeezed 2moa 10 round groups out of a cia FAL clone using south african trash surplus. ive milked 3moa performance out of cia wasr-10 ak clones using wolf trash ammo and ive done 5 round 1 moa groups pretty easy with m1 garands running surplus junk too. i consistently used to get .75moa with match loads from a loaded springer m1a. dont even get me started on the extreme supremacy of sks sniper rifles. none of these example really amount to "precision" shooting but are representations of what many battle rifle platforms are capable of with subpar ammo off a bench with proper technique. shoot more post less.
to the original poster, buy a FAL. it aint gonna be no m24 but theyre cool as hell. if you truly need precision i might concede to an ar10 but fer battle id still go fal. its the awesome sauce.

 

[.22 lefty]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

I used the FN C1A1 for the first 4 years I was in the CF. It is A beautiful assault rifle but not A good sniper rifle. When we did switch over to the C7 (M16 A2) I noticed A significant increase in accuracy due to the flatter trajectory at the shorter ranges. Also remember both weapons where designed to engage targets from 25-300 m.

 

[M21guy]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

Well if the OP can break away from his family for a few tomorrow, he can give my M21 a go. I'm going to be at the range all day if anyone else is intrested. Talk is cheap. Come prove it, trigger time is where it is at anyway. That's "McMiller" in Eagle Wisconsin. First round of cold beer is on me at the days end.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: neoinarien</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> achieve sub 2moa accuracy? </div></div>

Umm, 2moa is something we dial araound here, not consider a definition of accuracy.

 

[hbus1300]

Re: FAL accuracy experiences

What is it about the design that makes a FAL less accurate?