Inline FabricationReloading EverythingMidSouth Shooters SupplyRepackbox
Load DataRotoMetals2Titan ReloadingLee Precision
Wideners
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 44

Thread: FN-FAL, I'm a hopeless gun nut

  1. #1
    Boolit Master



    Tazman1602's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The woods of Northern Michigan
    Posts
    1,771

    FN-FAL, I'm a hopeless gun nut

    Oh boy I'm hopeless. Always wanted a FN-FAL but those that got shredded in the 1980's import bans made it kind of tough on a young gun nut with small children.

    Now, 35 years later Coonan Arms is finally making acceptable uppers at a decent price although it's about a six month wait. I've gotten those in (ordered two...), rounded up Imbel parts kits and all parts to be within 922r (yeah I know....) compliance and have shipped all off to the #1 FAL builder in the U.S. and it should be coming back in 3-4 months. Can't wait to put some rounds down range even though it's not a cast Bullet shooter.

    I certainly could have built it myself, but for one or two FAL's the tooling cost would be significant. These rifles headspace in kind of an oddball way and the measuring tools to calculate that are not to be found anywhere. You can order pin gauges from MSC that can be used and you could need a healthy supply of locking shoulders to boot and then there's the cost of blueing, parkerizing, whatever you want to call it. More cost efficient at my level to send it out to Mark at Arizona Response systems and have the whole thing done in one of his Metacol finishes. What you get back is a looks like new FAL, mine will be a metric FAL of course with carry handle and mounted bipod.

    Interesting project for sure and I was just wondering if any cast boolit members were even interested in FAL's.

    "FN-FAL" if you care, is reference to those rifles manufactured by FN and yes, John Browning did have a hand in the development of this fine old battle rifle. Otherwise it's just plain old FAL or for the inch-pattern rifle L1A1 I believe.

    Gimme some feedback!

    Art
    ”Only accurate rifles are interesting”
    ——Townsend Whelen


    In a time of universal deceit , telling the truth is a revolutionary act
    —- George Orwell

  2. #2
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,436
    I own two. One with an American receiver that is supposed to accept inch and metric but only works with inch, and a Brady ban thumbhole metric. Just mounted piccatiney rail dust covers so I can use dot sights. Never could get the original or Belgian sites to zero to my eye. Not enough windage adjustment. Good guns.

    I took a rifle self defense class at boulder rifle club years ago. All my friends had .223s. The instructor said "Jim brought a real gun."
    QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES?

  3. #3
    Boolit Master roverboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Moss,Tn.
    Posts
    1,110
    Nicknamed the "Right Arm of The Free World" its a mean rifle. I've never shot one but, have shot a STG 58. Which is a similar rifle. Shame you don't see more of them.
    Mrs. Hogwallop up and R-U-N-N-O-F-T.

  4. #4
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    4,635
    A friend used to build these for people and I got the chance to testfire several variations. Some were heavier than they looked while others were very light and handy.
    I have a lower with butt stock here now, I'm putting together a lefthand lace on cheek pad for my friend. He's right handed but with left dominant eye so he shoots rifles from the left shoulder but fires pistols with the right hand.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    7,439
    Yep, the "Right arm of the free world".

    When it was NATO vs the Communists the FAL was on the front lines opposite the AK.

    The Israelis used the FN FAL in the 1967 Six day war and many other conflicts, The Brits used the L1A1 in the Falklands War, the Suez Crisis and just about every other conflict between WWII and the mid 1980's. The FN FAL has a place in history and has some great history itself.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator


    ShooterAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Flagstaff, AZ
    Posts
    12,064
    I had an FN FAL and liked it. Very accurate and reliable. The only complaint I had (with mine anyway) was that it was extremely hard on brass. I ended up trading it off for that reason...should have just kept it. It's an excellent platform for sure, as is the M14/M1A.

  7. #7
    Boolit Master



    Tazman1602's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The woods of Northern Michigan
    Posts
    1,771
    Garand is on the short list also, great weapon. FN FAL is an extremely interesting rifle, a part of history along with Garand that I don't have.

    On being hard on brass, gassing on this rifle is very easy. Goal being to use the least amount of gas port you need in order to eject and rechamber. It's also another gas piston rifle. I could have an AR-10 in 308, this opportunity just presented itself and it's different but then so am I!

    Keep the great history lessons and stories coming and yes, for a battle rifle I'd much rather hump an AR in the bush than a 10-12lb beast. Matter of fact as this age I don't even want to see the bush....lol

    Art
    ”Only accurate rifles are interesting”
    ——Townsend Whelen


    In a time of universal deceit , telling the truth is a revolutionary act
    —- George Orwell

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    7,439
    The best FAL pattern I had was a SAR-48. I owned that gun during my "black rifle" phase.

    The FN-FAL was a reliable rifle. It is a bit long and a bit heavy for its class but it was far more accurate than an AK, particularly at longer ranges.

    One of the more interesting conflicts involving the FAL was the Falklands war in which both sides were armed with FAL rifles.

  9. #9
    Boolit Master
    nicholst55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Metro Area
    Posts
    3,606
    I had two, a STG-58 and an Imbel, both built on Imbel receivers. I kept the Imbel and sold the STG. Mine was assembled and tuned by Arizona Response Systems, and it is truly a nice, handy hard-hitting rifle.
    Service members, veterans and those concerned about their mental health can call the Veterans Crisis Line to speak to trained professionals. To talk to someone, call 1-800-273-8255 and Press 1, send a text message to 838255 or chat at VeteransCrisisLine.net/Chat.

    If you or someone you know might be at risk of suicide, there is help. Call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255, text a crisis counselor at 741741 or visit suicidepreventionlifeline.org.

  10. #10
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3,901
    WE used it in the Canadian army and I found the cartridge great but the rifle was too heavy, barrels were worn badly on the guns I was issued.

  11. #11
    In Remembrance


    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Michigan Thumb Area
    Posts
    5,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Petrol & Powder View Post
    The best FAL pattern I had was a SAR-48. I owned that gun during my "black rifle" phase.

    The FN-FAL was a reliable rifle. It is a bit long and a bit heavy for its class but it was far more accurate than an AK, particularly at longer ranges.

    One of the more interesting conflicts involving the FAL was the Falklands war in which both sides were armed with FAL rifles.

    Yes, both sides of that conflict used the FN-FAL. However the Brit version was a semi auto version whereas the Argie version was select fire. The Brits changed ownership of these FN whenever the opportunity came up so they could lay down more fire when needed.Robert

  12. #12
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    510
    Just a clarification

    John Browning had nothing to do with the FAL design or development.
    JB died in 1926.
    The first prototype FAL was in 1946.
    The FAL is based on the FN-49, which has it origins with Dieudonne Saive in the 1930s.

  13. #13
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    30 miles South of Cheyenne, unfortunately
    Posts
    1,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Tazman1602 View Post
    Oh boy I'm hopeless. Always wanted a FN-FAL but those that got shredded in the 1980's import bans made it kind of tough on a young gun nut with small children.

    Now, 35 years later Coonan Arms is finally making acceptable uppers at a decent price although it's about a six month wait. I've gotten those in (ordered two...), rounded up Imbel parts kits and all parts to be within 922r (yeah I know....) compliance and have shipped all off to the #1 FAL builder in the U.S. and it should be coming back in 3-4 months. Can't wait to put some rounds down range even though it's not a cast Bullet shooter.

    I certainly could have built it myself, but for one or two FAL's the tooling cost would be significant. These rifles headspace in kind of an oddball way and the measuring tools to calculate that are not to be found anywhere. You can order pin gauges from MSC that can be used and you could need a healthy supply of locking shoulders to boot and then there's the cost of blueing, parkerizing, whatever you want to call it. More cost efficient at my level to send it out to Mark at Arizona Response systems and have the whole thing done in one of his Metacol finishes. What you get back is a looks like new FAL, mine will be a metric FAL of course with carry handle and mounted bipod.

    Interesting project for sure and I was just wondering if any cast boolit members were even interested in FAL's.

    "FN-FAL" if you care, is reference to those rifles manufactured by FN and yes, John Browning did have a hand in the development of this fine old battle rifle. Otherwise it's just plain old FAL or for the inch-pattern rifle L1A1 I believe.

    Gimme some feedback!

    Art
    My absolute favorite "black" rifle.

    As far as I'm concerned if it hadn't been for politics, the M-14 would never have seen the light of day. From a BATTLE rifle point of view, the FAL is superior in virtually every way. I will concede that an M-14 can be made into an extremely accurate rifle, and that's fine for match shooting but not very many folks have the ability to use that accuracy in a combat situation. Add to that the fact the ease of field maintenance and repair is so simple even the most doltish of users can usually accomplish it without a great deal effort.

    I have 2 of them. One a G-1 built on an Entreprise receiver and the other a custom barreled 270-308 built on a Coonan type 1 metric receiver.

    If you have the money to pay that jerkwad at ars to build them, you have the money for any tools you might need to build them yourself with plenty of money to spare. A receiver wrench from GunThings , or build it yourself which is what I did, a small hole gauge with a range from, say, .230 to .280, a 1 inch micrometer, a couple of files and a headspace guage and you're good to go.
    When it's time to fight, you fight like you are the third monkey on the ramp to Noah's Ark.... and brother, it's STARTING TO RAIN!!

  14. #14
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    North Central
    Posts
    2,514
    They were great fun to build when parts kits were cheap and plentiful. I had a hand tool for shaving the barrel shoulder down so they would hand time to about 11:00 o clock and that was the secret to a good build. We used to parkerize them and they made a rugged dependable hard hitting rifle. Must have made a dozen or so. Stupidly, I sold all mine for a good profit a while back.

  15. #15
    Boolit Master



    Tazman1602's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The woods of Northern Michigan
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by roysha View Post
    My absolute favorite "black" rifle.

    As far as I'm concerned if it hadn't been for politics, the M-14 would never have seen the light of day. From a BATTLE rifle point of view, the FAL is superior in virtually every way. I will concede that an M-14 can be made into an extremely accurate rifle, and that's fine for match shooting but not very many folks have the ability to use that accuracy in a combat situation. Add to that the fact the ease of field maintenance and repair is so simple even the most doltish of users can usually accomplish it without a great deal effort.


    If you have the money to pay that jerkwad at ars to build them, you have the money for any tools you might need to build them yourself with plenty of money to spare.
    Man you must have had a bad experience with Mark at ARS, he's been nothing but helpful to me. As far as tools and parts I'd have no problem with that except I have zero experience with the FAL platform and by the time I calculated tool costs, locking shoulders, and complete refinishing of the rifle I couldn't come close to what ARS is doing on the rifle. I *may* attempt a build on the second receiver I've gotten, just wanted the first one to be perfect and am confident ARS will do that job -- if not I will spill my guts here.

    Brad at gunthings was also very helpful and he's who I got my Imbel kit and from whom I got a brand new, bipod cut barrel from. His shipping was also VERY fast and he was a huge help too.

    On another note, I bought the AGI video on FN-FAL rifles and found some good information there but also information that I felt was not only outdated by 20 years or more but also might be downright dangerous in places at worst. Sooo I bought a copy of Mark's FN-FAL book and DVD and found it to be not only more comprehensive but also delivered MUCH more professional and safe information for those wanting to get involved with FN-FAL type rifles --- again just my opinion.

    If I had any intentions of building 4 or more FAL's - which I don't right now but we all know how that can change!, then the tooling will change I'm sure, I am bummed that the original locking lug gauges are no longer available or like gold if you can find them.

    Yes John Browning was dead long before the FAL was ever produced, but there's no doubt his designs and long association with FN did indeed get incorporated with the FAL design.

    Art
    ”Only accurate rifles are interesting”
    ——Townsend Whelen


    In a time of universal deceit , telling the truth is a revolutionary act
    —- George Orwell

  16. #16
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    510
    Quote Originally Posted by Tazman1602 View Post
    Yes John Browning was dead long before the FAL was ever produced, but there's no doubt his designs and long association with FN did indeed get incorporated with the FAL design.
    Art
    The FAL is a great design, especially for 1946.

    That said, lets not see things that are not there.

    What specific design elements of the FAL do you claim originated with JMB, exactly?
    For example, can you list any JMB patents used in the FAL?

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    7,439
    The politics that drove some of the NATO decisions, like the M-14, were pretty intense.

    The U.S.A. was the alpha-male of the NATO pack and what the U.S. wanted, the U.S. got.

    I will not disparage the M-14 (I own a M1A) but I agree the M-14 would never have seen the light of day were it not for the politics driving those NATO decisions. And by the way, the FAL started life chambered in British 280 (7mm) not .308, but the U.S. wanted the NATO standard to be 7.62 x 51 so guess what happened?

    The FAL had an interesting place in history and had some interesting history of its own. Of the "Free World" rifles of the cold war era, I preferred the H&K G3 design but the FAL was certainly more widespread. The incredibly wide distribution of the FAL likely contributed to its long service life. It may have even stayed in service a bit too long simply because it was so difficult to replace on a large scale. In any event, it served for a long time and it served well.

    When the 5.56 mm became the NATO standard the FN-CAL was introduced but was expensive to produce. The next FN rifle in the line up was the FNC, which was heavily influenced by the AK design. The FNC didn't really catch on. In my opinion the FNC was a fantastic design that deserved a second chance. It used a rotating bolt and lots of stamped steel. It was sort of a Free World AK that was chambered in 5.56; inexpensive but well made.


    And there's no dispute that Dieudonne Saive was the primary designer of the FN FAL. Saive had worked with John Browning and undoubtedly was influenced by Browning but Browning was long dead when the FN-49 and FN-FAL were designed.

  18. #18
    Boolit Buddy
    one-eyed fat man's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Elizabethtown, KY
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by Petrol & Powder View Post
    The politics that drove some of the NATO decisions... the FAL started life chambered in British 280 (7mm) not .308, but the U.S. wanted the NATO standard to be 7.62 x 51 so guess what happened?
    The Brits tried hard, even going so far as to make a version that was essentially the first 7mm-08. Venezuela adopted the FAL chambered for the 7x49mm “Second Optimum”, also known as 7mm Liviano. Firing a 140 grain bullet at about 2750 fps that pretty much duplicated 7x57 ballistics which they had been using for years. (What a sweet rifle that must have been) So much for the caliber wars...(even though the US hinted if NATO went 7.62, it would adopt the FAL.)

    The M14 was the result of a couple of different sets of politics. One factor was Springfield had been lying to Congress and everyone else that the M14 would be cheap and easy to build using a lot of the M1 tooling they already had. Springfield simply could not do it like they claimed. Their problems caused an emergency contract to International Harvester for M1 rifles in 1957 and initial issue of the M14 delayed until 1959. Even then, there were quality control problems. It was TRW in Cleveland that solved both those issues, arguably making the best M14s, and on time and on budget.

    The second issue which drove the M14 was Camp Perry. So much so that the MTU at Benning was told they were not to participate in any testing which might make the T48 (US version FAL) or later the AR-15 look good. So much for the Chief of Infantry Branch, bragging rights on the range were more important than combat effectiveness.

  19. #19
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,900
    Saive was Browning's assistant, and there is no doubt about their cooperation on what would become the 1935 9mm.pistol. In the beginning it was Saive's idea to have a twin column 1935 magazine, initially opposed by Browning and Colt, who thought that if you had a .45, why did you need to do some extra missing? I don't believe they cooperated formally on any project leading to the gas-operated full-power rifles. But it was a concept which had interested Browning ever since he found that he could cycle a Winchester 7 by a hinged paddle at the muzzle, and it was common knowledge in the war ministries of the world that the full-power automatic military rifle was the thing of the future, once it could be made sufficiently reliable and compact. It is almost certain that they gave it quite a bit of discussion.

    Actually the origin of the hump lock may have been the inverted, manually operated version of the 1895 Winchester-Lee, which arguably isn't a bolt action at all. If James Paris Lee hadn't gained his extremely lucrative British cartridge, taking a rather less dvanced design into the jet age, we might have seen an automatic rifle emerging from that. It is one of life's great corrugated ironies that its 6mm. cartridge, with the almost universal change to a lighter spritzer bullet, might with advantage be adopted by almost any power of the present day.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1895_Lee_Navy

    I doubt very much if British soldiers switched to Argentine SLRs to replace their own. The British didn't adopt the selective-fire version because they didn't much value that feature, and perhaps less when many of the troops had walked across East Falkland without knowing if they would get more ammunition than they carried. The Argentine troops weren't as bad material or as badly trained as was sometimes thought at the time, although they didn't see much of their field officers at the last. But professional soldiers don't usually want to switch to an unknown person's rifle without compelling reason, which laying down more fire than they could aim at someone was not. A small number of the technically similar but conventionally wood-stocked FN-49 were used by the Argentines as sniper rifles, and I can imagine those being seized upon, especially if they were scoped.

    A good friend of mine was involved in troop trials of the FN-49, which didn't result in its adoption by the British. He was full of admiration for its mechanical qualities, and for the real advantage of a semiautomatic rifle, for rabbits on up, of giving you a second shot without betraying noise or movement. But he thought the wood in the forend was so thin that it was hopelessly delicate for modern use. I doubt if it was more accurate as a sniper rifle than the FAL, but the smaller magazine and conventional grip allowed the firer to keep closer to the ground.

    Incidentally he was a Cameronian, a regiment with origins in the guardians of illicit field-preachings by the persecuted Presbyterians in the 1680s. So he sometimes had the traditional duty of sentry, carrying his FN-49 to church parade with ball cartridge in case the British army gave any trouble.

  20. #20
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,900
    [QUOTE=one-eyed fat man;4381408]The Brits tried hard, even going so far as to make a version that was essentially the first 7mm-08. QUOTE]

    Two quite different 7mm. cartridges were developed by the British. The first , most often known as the.276 Enfield, was of about 7mm. Remington Magnum proportions, for the P13 Enfield, but some idiot started a war and the rifle turned into the .303 P14 and .30-06 M1917 American Enfields. It gave some trouble with the powders, bullets and primers of the period, none of them insuperable, but was totally unnecessary for almost all military use.

    The other, the 280 British, was actually a little shorter than a 7mm.-08, and that difference was important. They had designed a bullpup rifle, the EM-2, which perhaps in hindsight is often portrayed as without fault or flaw as a versatile infantry weapon. But when America insisted on what would become the 7.62x51 NATO, the EM-2 came up just a little but short of accepting the alteration. It has been said, without proof I know of, that the second Churchill government bargained away the EM-2, previously agreed by their predecessors, in exchange for adoption of the FN FAL by both themselves and the US. The bullpup format and unitary-power optical sight, but almost no mechanical features of the EM-2, resurfaced as the SA80 in the1980s. The SA80's 4.85x49 cartridge was again abandoned in favour of a larger American round, the 5.46mm., but this time the conversion was feasible.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check