FN FAL 308 shooter

[Dirk Williams]

Many years ago I started a FN-FAL sniper rifle. I just lost interest in it because frankly I was unable to make it do what I wanted.

Used a POF bull barrel 20 inch, and a Magpul stock did all kinds of cool stuff to the action and stoned the trigger to just that breaking point.

It's close but just not there.

My question is, has anyone here ever built one and what did you do to make it a sub MOA shooter.

The isses Im having are the trigger is simply gross. The action eats my match grade brass and I would like to slow the action down for a better smoother flow/recoil/recovery.

I'd like to finish this thing and could use input from anybody who has built one of these.

O yea it's a Metric gun and heavy heavy heavy. Ive got a cheap Super Sniper on it until I can get it semi where I want it to be. If I can get it squared away I would spring for great glass to mount on it.

Thanks
DW

[MistWolf]

FALs are not known for their precision although that hasn't stopped folks from trying. There are better choices for sniper rifles.

Known problems off the top of my head-
-Scopes are mounted to the dust cover which are difficult to secure to the receiver
-Barrels are often over-torqued causing distortion of the barrel & receiver
-Rear locking bolt design is not a good choice for accuracy

http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=329491
http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=241840&highlight=FAL+challenge

A thread about an Aussie FAL being set up for competition shooting in Europe
http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=324116

Couple of threads about applying the straight jacket system to a FAL
http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=302286
http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=327559&highlight=FAL+accuracy

There may be something in the above links to help

[Dirk Williams]

I agree, unfortunatley I started this journey, I need to finsh it and make the best out of it that I can. Im a BIG FN FAL fan in battle rifle configuration and it would be my first choice in most applications.

I just thought such a great rifle could be improved on at a reasonable cost.

Not the case.

Thanks
DW

[Buck]

FALs are battle rifles, not precision rifles. For what its intended role on the battlefield was, the FAL was a fantastic rifle, but it never was and will never be precision rifle...

S/F

B

[Gutshot John]

Definitely not a sniper rifle, it will perform well-enough in the DMR role with the right ammo/optic but you won't break any precision records. An all factory FAL, with quality parts, modified by a competent smith (Gunplumber) is capable of <2MOA.

Home builds? Not so much.

The Dragunov is comparable in terms of accuracy but history has left both weapons by the wayside.

[Dirk Williams]

Gutshot, I think Ive decided to drop the bull barrel and floating front end and go back to just the stock rifle. The stock FN has more practical value to me then this attempt at a accurate gun.

I still have the origional parts with the barrel cut to 16. The rifle handles nicely and still shoots well out to reasonable distance.

I have 2 of the FN's that are 16 inch barreled and like them alot.

DW

[Gutshot John]

The most accurate FAL I've ever owned was a 16" Medium Contour DSA build I did years ago. At 100 yards it could do about an 1MOA w/ a FF HG, outside of that and it opened up quickly to about 3MOA. Never really took it beyond 500 yards. I sold it and have regretted it ever since.

My more recent gun was a DSA FAL with G1 barrel. It was in the 1.5 range from 1-500 with match ammo and out to 2.5 MOA out to about 800. I took it to a DMR class a couple of years ago and was quite happy with the performance.

Both guns were sent to Gunplumber who does some pretty good work to whom I attribute the accuracy.

[TahoeLT]

I had a 50.63 Para (which I traded off and have regretted ever since) that I found an excellent all-around shooter. The 18" barrel gave it a considerable boost over 16" (check velocity fall-off with barrel length--that 2" makes a big difference!), it was maneuverable enough that I used it in carbine classes, and I could run a variety of optics for the situation at hand.

That said, it was not a precision rifle and never would be. I could ring steel out past 450 yds with an Aimpoint, but the gun was never intended to be more than a battle rifle. The trigger was horrendous (and there's only so much you can do about that), and the nature of the tilting bolt means you'll never get consistent lockup. There's a reason why the Brits put the Trilux 4x on there at most.

Embrace the FAL for what it is--a fantastic battle rifle--and go elsewhere for a precision rifle!

[Gutshot John]

check velocity fall-off with barrel length--that 2" makes a big difference!

Not so much, a buddy chrono'd it and you may lose ~20-25 fps/inch.

[TahoeLT]

It's not linear; I wish I still had the reference, but years ago a guy I knew took a 24" barrel and chrono'd it, cut it down 1" and re-crowned, chrono'd again, cut it down 1"....

Anyway, there was obviously a loss of velocity at each cut, but there was a more significant loss between 18" and 16" (then from, say 20" to 18"). Must be something about the burn rate, dwell time, or something.

If someone has a good source for that info let me know...