Interesting Video on MBRs

[Old Ironsights]

Main Battle Rifle concept and the pros and cons of the M1A/M14, FAL, and the G3


http://vimeo.com/suarezinternational/review/69326801/0633a31a8f

RE: the G3... "it can be cleaned... if you need to..." :mrgreen:

18" Gong accurate @ 400m OFFHAND with Irons and Para Stock... with De-Linked POF MG ammo. (4x mono Optics bring it down to a 6" gong for me...)

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/IMG_6727.jpg (http://s5.photobucket.com/user/MrMisanthrope/media/IMG_6727.jpg.html)

What's not to Love? :twisted:

[Larry Gibson]

Hogwash, he's selling G3s.

I've shot enough of all 3 (G3, FALs and M14s) in semi, full auto, QCB and long range in over 30+ years in SF (yes I was a Weapons NCO) to disagree with about everything he said except for the selection and use of the 7.62x51 or .308W. I'm not selling any rifles for a living but personally I've sold off the couple G3s and FALs I've had.....still have 2 M1As though......I've done enough side by side comparisons from shooting with the 1RAR in Viet Nam, SAS in Australia, former British Commonwealth troops around the world, Germans with G3s and even in competitions; IPSC and matches with the PPCLI.

Not saying the G3s and FAL aren't serviceable and fine weapons. However, the guy simply denigrates the M14/M1A and FAL as selling points for the G3. Nice video advertisement though.......

Larry Gibson

[Nickle]

There's a guy up in Wyoming that writes under the name Boston T. Party, and a guy down in North Carolina that sells used gun stocks (and a few other things) called Fred (Fred was the dog's name, long gone now).

I know Boston from online communications, I know Fred (his real name is Jack, by the way) on several different levels, and that's both online and in person. Jack I know good enough to call him a good friend.

Now, Boston said once that the FAL was a bit better than the M14 (M1A is a civilian clone by "Springfield Armory"), and had used both. He changed his view later, when he ended up with a better M1A than the one he had before. Fred, on the other hand, has long preferred the M1A, and he liked his Fed Ord M14 much better, but he shot the barrel out, and sold it. Now, I happen to own a nice Fed Ord M14, a real early one, that used USGI surplus parts, not Chinese parts. I'll tell you, I never fail to give Fred a good ribbing for having sold his.

Now, notice that neither of these guys prefers the G3/HK91. Well, you just read Larry doesn't, and I'll tell you I don't either.

Matter of fact, I've owned both a FAL and an M14 clone, and since traded the FAL. I liked the FAL, just a good local friend wanted it, and I wasn't shooting it much.

Here's the skinny. If you want reliability, and can suffer some loss in accuracy and choices, the HK is real good. If you want top accuracy, and can suffer some loss of reliability, then an AR-10 is good. If you want tolerable reliability, and decent accuracy (with some load choices), then it boils down to M14/M1A or FAL. The FAL is more like AR-15 ergonomics, is cheaper and works. The M14/M1A is more like M1 or bolt gun ergonomics, costs more, mounts optics well and works.

Now, here's the kicker. Almost all HK clones are pure T JUNK. Real HK's are some awful expensive. I do believe I could buy an LRB M14 for less than a comparable HK, and still have twice the gun.

By the way, I know of Gabby Saurez, and I've heard he's a decent guy. I do believe he's probably got a pretty good idea of whom I am, and what I'm about (there's a few facts about me I have rarely mentioned here, no need to). But, as noted, he does sell G3's/HK's, and therefore, he will be biased.

[BruceB]

You gents are playing on my field of interest, so I might as well chime in.

My service rifle in the Canadian Army was (naturally) the C1/C1A1, the domestically-produced FAL rifle. After my service time, I owned about half-a-dozen L1A1 FALs, both British and Australian manufacture. A couple of metric FALs also served in my herd over the years.

In 1980 I bought a pair of early M1A rifles, and these were followed by two GENUINE TRW-built M-14s and an original Sudanese-contract AR10. (This was in Canada, and we could buy M-14s in that country.)

A single HK91, actually built by Heckler & Koch, represented that type in my experience.

After a whole lot of shooting, including shooting in the DEEP cold of the Arctic where I then lived, I formed some very firm opinions about these rifles.My preferred type would be the as-issued M-14, closely followed by the M1A. Then comes the FAL, and then (at some distance) the AR10.

The HK91 does not appear on my radar.... I intensely dislike the design, the ergonomics, everything about the rifle. Mr Suarez is welcome to it, because he won't be selling any here!

[Old Ironsights]

Well, I DON'T sell HK clones, and have also worked with all 3 variants. (Carried the G3 when attached to the Bundeswehr in FRG back in the '80s. ) Until PTR started selling their 91-GI I would have agreed that most CETME/HK clones were rolled & welded by drunk monkeys, but the $1000 (I bought mine new for $899 before Obozo v.2) PTR is quite good... and it will shoot cast all day long as there is no Gas System to gunk up.

Like I said, mine is good for hitting an 18" gong @ 400m offhand with iron sights shooting anything from Wolf to delinked POF - even with the para stock.

And, unlike FAL/M14 mags, NOS and MilSurp G3 mags are STILL dirt cheap. I bought 40 for $2/ea.

I also know Boston/Royce (most recently he flew into we were both participating @ Guernsey for a weekend Shoot put on by the FSW members) and since the publication of "Boston's Gun Bible" his opinion of the PTR as a less expensive, more reliable MBR has only increased. He most certainly doesn't discount it and has stated quite directly that for an indestructible SHTF rifle the PTR-GI is tough to beat.

(FWIW PTR is in the process of moving its operation from Conn to South Carolina to get out of the Anti-gun East.)

[Nickle]

Good to see PTR is picking up the mantle of a decent gun, because, like you, I've seen more than my share of junker grade G3/CETME clones out there, and they are pretty dismal. HK prices leave a lot to be desired.

I've got to say that a real deal HK is rugged. You trade off some accuracy for that, but, truth be known, a decent shooter will have little issue within 500 yards with any of the 3, IF it's a decent example. My FAL experience is somewhat biased (towards FAL) because I had a Century L1A1 built on an Imbel inch receiver. It was a good quality rifle. Some others just pale in comparison, and that gives FALs a bad name in general.

On a side note, unlike Gabby, you'll notice Old Ironsides presented a good case, and didn't run down the others.

[Old Ironsights]

About the only "bad" thing I can say about my PTR/any G3 clone is (A) no last-round hold-open and (B) suppression requires a little more tweaking than with a gas gun.

But on the flip side, I've fired my '91 with soft-lead cast boolits and a case full of 4F black powder (a whole magazine worth) with no ill effects...

IMO when it comes to MBRs I look at it less from a Military perspective than from a Guerrilla War perspective. Can the gun operate forever in the worst conditions without logistics &/or an armorer. That's where the Roller Lock design shines.

IIRC in "worst conditions testing" the only MBR to "beat" the G3 was a Galil and then only because in Arctic testing it would continue to function in FA mode AFTER being frozen in ice and the G3 became a semi-auto...

My PTR is only semi anyway, so I'm more than happy with a gun that costs 1/3 as much... ;)

[Artful]

Well I have used all 3 mentioned and I have to agree with most statements made - but for my money I'll take a FAL 8-)