FAL purchase

[shinken1124]

I've been doing quite a bit of research and I believe I came up with a choice for my first assault rifle. The DSA FAL SA58 Para Tactical Carbine, with the short gas system rail interface option, as well as the extreme duty extended scope mount. I had a few questions before I jump into a sale though. I am very new to this so I applogize for any ingorance in my questions. First off, what is the difference between the shortened gas system, and the long. All of the tacticals seem to be the shortened gas system, so naturally I'd like to know what, if any, are the perks or downfalls. Second, all of their models show the SAW pistol grip as an option to the rifle. What exactly is this, and is it worth the upgrade. What sights would be suggested for the time being(I plan on getting an ACOG scope in the near future but don't think I can afford one at the time of purchase)? Lastly I was wondering about the Match Grade Trigger and if anybody thought this was worth the $175.00 upgrade. Sorry for the lengthy thread, but any advice on any of the topics would be very appreciated.
Thanks,
Aaron

[Cameron]

The tactical line all have the short gas system as you said and there is no down side to this over the standard length system. It is just as reliable, just as adjustable but lighter.
If you plan on using iron sights for awhile before purchasing an I optic I would strongly recommend the "Hampton Lower" that incorporates the M16 A2 rear sight assembly. It is much easier to use than the standard Para sight system and is adjustable for elevation. The extreme duty scope mount is excellent.
SAW grip is exactly what it says an FN pistol grip as used on the M249 SAW (http://www.fnhusa.com/support/images/dynamic/l/FNM0041l.jpg) it is an improvement in fit and angle over the standard spec FAL pistol grip... I have one but I am thinking about an FAL grip from Ergo...

A trigger job is a must on the FAL as they come heavy and dirty, the factory trigger upgrade is excellent but a little pricey at $175... I bought a standard trigger and then spent a whopping $35 with a local g'smith who produced a crisp clean 4lbs trigger (I have no idea how he did it).

The ACOG would be a great optic for a FAL but I went a slightly different route and got an IOR 1.1-4x26 illuminated reticle optic right from DSA (http://www.dsarms.com/prodinfo.asp?number=VT11426CQB) (they had the best prices on these by a long way) and I couldn't be happier. This scope incorporates an ACOG type BDC at 4 power and a horse shoe recticle at 1.1 magnification for CQB.

Here is my DSA SA58 Tactical PARA Carbine
16.25" fluted Badger barrel
Hampton Lower M16A2 rear sight
SAW pistol grip

I add the Magpul CTR stock as the factory (ACE) SOCOM LOP stock absolutely sucked.

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/DSASA58ParaTacCarbineIORScope01.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/DSASA58ParaTacCarbineIORScope02.jpg

After some judicious Krylon...

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/SA58wIORGrassLLargeC.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/SA58wIORGrassRLargeC.jpg

Did I mention that for a 1950s era semi auto battle rifle it is a tack driver...
5 shots of Black Hills 175gr Match at 100yards 5 shots of Black Hills 175gr Match at 50yards
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/DSASA585shots100yardssmall.jpg http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/DSASA585shots50yardssmall.jpg



Get the DSA and start reloading shooting an FAL is highly addictive and nowadays mildly expensive...Cameron
CLICK FOR VIDEO
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/th_FALQuads.jpg (http://s211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/?action=view&current=FALQuads.flv)

[Buck]

Having been a FAL guy for quite some time let me make a few suggestions:

The FAL is a great system for what it is, a main battle rifle... It was not designed to be a sniper rifle or an entry carbine... Every professional military on earth , and there were quite a few that adopted the FAL "the right arm of the free world" and all that, deployed it as part of a larger small arms system... They all also issued to their troops a separate dedicated sniper rifle or some type of SMG...

With that in mind, lets look at the FALs we find today... They are divided into two main categories... Factory built guns and kit builds... I have seen some very nice kit guns, but I have seen ten frankenFal kit guns for every nice one...

The factory built options are original FN guns, A few Lithgows, Armscorp imported IMI & Argentinians, Springfield SARs, and DS Arms...

Other than the DS Arms, all of the others were made by government arsenals operating under a license from FN and have forged receivers and chromed lined barrels... The DS Arms are commercial guns and use a cast receiver and non chrome lined barrels...

- At this point the FN guns and the few Lithgows that can be found are very expensive in the States commanding multi thousand dollar prices

- The Armscorps are a mixed bag... The guns that they imported as complete rifles are great, the ones that they assembled from kits on their cast receivers are not great... So if looking at an Armscorps FAL be sure of what you are looking at...

- The best of the bunch are the Springfield SAR 48 / 4800s... They were all made under license by FN at the Imbel factory in Brazil... Imbel also supplied FALs and 1911s to the Brazilian military... The quality was so good that FN contracted with them to produce spare parts for the factory in Belgium... As this was an active licensed military rifle production line, these are all late type three receivers with the latest FAL design updates...

IMHO the nicest shooting FAL is the standard 50.00 type three metric rifle... The FAL recoil system needs the space inside the butstock to function smoothly... In the PARA models the entire recoil system is contained in the receiver and a special bolt carrier... It greatly increases the felt recoil and the tube stock takes away your cheek weld which makes it worse...

The original design concept of the PARA FAL was to accomidate Belgian paratroopers who needed a rifle that would fit out the door of a Dakota (C-47) during operations... A lot of testing was done at the factory and the shortest barrel that worked reliably with the gas system and gave acceptable accuracy was 18 inches...

So with all of that I would recommend a Springfield SAR 48... If you look around you can find one in the $1,000 range... I would then purchase an alloy PARA conversion kit (lower, carrier, recoil springs, & dust cover) for a type three receiver from DSA... $400 + / -... If you want to have the barrel shortened to 18 inches thats fine, some countries did, and some did not... That package would let you change back and forth between standard and PARA configuration in a few minuets and give you a very high quality FAL for a reasonable price...

Just my .02

Buck

[Rmplstlskn]

What sights would be suggested for the time being(I plan on getting an ACOG scope in the near future but don't think I can afford one at the time of purchase)? Lastly I was wondering about the Match Grade Trigger and if anybody thought this was worth the $175.00 upgrade.

I just recently upgraded my DSA SA58 FAL with the Extreme Mount with the ACOG mount already machined into it. It is very solid and allows you to still use the irons through the ACOG peep hole. It also mounts the ACOG lower for better cheek weld (a common shortcoming with the FAL buttstock).

If you use the standard EM with a Larue mount for the ACOG, that too is sweet and removeable, but it will sit higher, and that little bit makes a big difference.

Yes, the FAL triggers need work, as they suck in stock config. I would rather have it sent to one of the FAL plumbers on FALFiles (Gunplumber is a good one) than have DSA do it. There are also spring replacement kits that help a lot but sometimes with a bad trade-off, light primer strikes on some mil-spec .308 ammo (PORT is the one most often for me, but is some of my most accurate military ammo)

Also, don't forget to get the BRASS CATCHER option to the Extreme Mount! It is a very well made system with fast on/off and helps keep your brass for reloading....

An old pic of mine.... took off the cheek rest and lost the Larue for the above setup...
http://www.wwyd.org/images/AR15/FAL-ARMS-ACOG 009_www.jpg

Rmpl

[TOrrock]

I agree with Buck except that the DSA's are licensed from FN and Steyr, they have an excellent working relationship with FN USA, who make the chrome lined G1 and Israeli HB barrels for them down in SC.

The receivers are machined from a drop forging (like an M1 Garand receiver), they're not cast, and they have the blue prints from Steyr.

http://dsarms.com/prodinfo.asp?number=0291CHC

I would by pass the short gas system.

The standard gas system has worked for 50 years just fine.

I also don't like going below 18" for a 7.62 NATO rifle, although there are plenty of 16.25" barrelled carbines running just fine. FN went to 18" (17.75") for their 50:63 Para and they run great.

You'll be hard pressed to buy a better FAL for under $2K than a DSA, especially when you factor in the lifetime warranty.

[QuickStrike]

http://www.wwyd.org/images/AR15/FAL-ARMS-ACOG 009_www.jpg

Rmpl

How much does that weigh?


I've been thinking of sending my Imbel receiver to "gunplumber" for an 18" build after rounding up the other parts.

[shinken1124]

Thank you guys for the detailed input. I love those pics of your FAL's. I did have another question in regards to the rail interface handguard option(On the SA58). I really like the look of it, but would I be compromising the balance and the feel of the rifle? Also, what features would that open up for me to mount to it. Is that something I should wait on before I get comfortable with the rifle?

[shinken1124]

Also, Templar, were you suggesting a Type 1 receiver over the Type 2. Reading about the type 1 it would seem it is a closer design to the original FAL concept. Does anybody feel that one receiver is a better way to go over the other?

[ostrobothnian]

Here's a good article you may or may not have seen on the DSA FAL.

http://www.vickerstactical.com/Tips/battleRifles.htm

If you have the means and ability I might suggest building your own just like so many do with the AR series rifle. The one below took me about a year to build but was well worth it. Most of the time involved collecting the various parts. It includes a brand new (old stock) original chrome lined Belgian paratrooper barrel and combo device as well as other FN factory goodies. The practice of building over time also nibbles at your wallet vs. emptying it right away :)

http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k152/finlandssvensk/newar001.jpg

Best of luck in your venture.

[Business_Casual]

I've been doing quite a bit of research and I believe I came up with a choice for my first assault rifle.

Please don't take offense, but if you did some research you'd know the FAL is a battle rifle and not an assault rifle. ;)

Just an FYI, I have one of the carbine length guns from DSA and it likes specific ammo, but runs quite well and is a handy version of the system. I have an STG-58 but it is way too heavy and long.

M_P

[TOrrock]

Either the Type 1 of the Type 2 are excellent receivers, either one will work just fine.

I just posted that link to show how the DSA's are constructed.

[Buck]

I agree with Buck except that the DSA's are licensed from FN and Steyr, they have an excellent working relationship with FN USA, who make the chrome lined G1 and Israeli HB barrels for them down in SC.

The receivers are machined from a drop forging (like an M1 Garand receiver), they're not cast, and they have the blue prints from Steyr.

Well you learn something new every day...

Thanks Templar...

Buck

[shinken1124]

Please don't take offense, but if you did some research you'd know the FAL is a battle rifle and not an assault rifle. ;)

Just an FYI, I have one of the carbine length guns from DSA and it likes specific ammo, but runs quite well and is a handy version of the system. I have an STG-58 but it is way too heavy and long.

M_P




I told you I was new at this, thanks for the correction

[Cameron]

The lines between a "battle" and "assault", and "rifle" and "carbine" have been blurred in modern usage.

Is a shortie FAL select fire a "battle rifle" or an "assault carbine"?

It is shorter than a rifle, can be capable of full automatic fire like an "assault rifle" and actually shoots a smaller cartridge than the .30-06 "battle rifle" M1 Garand...

Battle Rifle! - 44" length semi auto
http://www.dsarms.com/images/SA58G1.gif

Battle Rifle... or perhaps Assault Carbine?? - 32.5" length select fire
http://www.dsarms.com/images/SA58OSWNFA.GIF

Not sure how this fits in the middle?
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/FAL/CamzDSA01.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/M4wEOTechFALwIOR01.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/M4wEOTechFALwIOR02.jpg


It's all semantics...


I like to refer to my "battle rifle come assault carbine" simply as "Sweetie!"

Makes my wife pissed!

[Spooky130]

The factory built options are original FN guns, A few Lithgows, Armscorp imported IMI & Argentinians, Springfield SARs, and DS Arms...

- The best of the bunch are the Springfield SAR 48 / 4800s... They were all made under license by FN at the Imbel factory in Brazil... Imbel also supplied FALs and 1911s to the Brazilian military... The quality was so good that FN contracted with them to produce spare parts for the factory in Belgium... As this was an active licensed military rifle production line, these are all late type three receivers with the latest FAL design updates...

Buck

I've got one of the pre-ban SAR-48s and it is a great rifle. I wanted something close to the original built in a real FAL factory. It shoots great and I picked it up about two or three years ago for just over $1200. It probably had about 200 rounds through it at that point. You can dig around on Gunbroker and find them sometimes.

Spooky