I am talking about the world famous FN FAL, which despite being one of the most widely used weapons of the 20th century seems often overlooks and forgotten somewhere between the prolific AK and AR series and the super high speed rifles of the future like the FN2000, SCR, or SCAR.

So what I want to know is anybody own one? Any experience with them? I have been looking into a new weapon for awhile and it pretty much comes down to an AK under folder or an FN FAL.

Outstanding weapon, I have extensive experience with both semi and full auto, and I can`t praise them highly enough. Although a contemporary of the G-3, I think the FN to the be superior weapon. As far as vs. the AK, 7.62x51 is a better round, but the FAL is much longer, especially compared with a folder. Buy an FAL. You will never be sorry.

" Buy an FAL. You will never be sorry."

an FN FAL while not as world wide as the ak, it is by far a better rifle. the 7.62 x 51, is a better round also. fn has a very long history of fine weapons. (wiki can give you plenty of reading.) someday i may own an ak, but i wish for an FN FAL. NUFF SAID.

I've been 'lucky' enough to encounter the C1 and C2 wpns (obsoleted cdn personal weapon and modified variant used as a LMG..FALS) Very well made and reliable and accurate at long rang. but I see why not currently fielded. Heavy, brutal recoil, physically too big for some people, piss poor accuracy when fired rapidly cause the muzzle climbs like hell and heavy cartridges that limit the tolerable load out of ammunition, lack of modularity in design, absence of ability to mount grenade launcher, illumination or other accessories.

as a service weapon, it was an excellent one for the period it was in use, but things changed and it was no longer well suited.

Would still be a wonderful piece for a collection or for range use.

I think the size and the weight of the gun and ammo are why many countries dont use it. Its on my wishlist, but i live in CA.

Posted by big dave I think the size and the weight of the gun and ammo are why many countries dont use it. Its on my wishlist, but i live in CA.

Maybe south California in the near future...lol

Posted by etchleon Heavy, brutal recoil, physically too big for some people, piss poor accuracy when fired rapidly cause the muzzle climbs like hell and heavy cartridges that limit the tolerable load out of ammunition, lack of modularity in design, absence of ability to mount grenade launcher, illumination or other accessories.

Heavy is a matter of perspective. Brutal recoil? A Hell of a lot less than my .30-06 deer rifle. Piss poor accuracy is a result of piss poor training. ANY weapon can be fired accurately in full auto if the operator is properly trained in its use. I seem to remember a Sgt. Major Snoxall of the British Army who put 20 rounds in a 10" circle on full auto at 300 yards during testing. How does modularity in design mean anything in its effectiveness? And as for the last, any competent weapons designer could put a picatinny rail system on the FN. Someone probably already has.


Need I point out that conditions in A-stan and Iraq have already caused the US military to break out a number of the old .308 (7.62x51) systems, because the piss ant .223 (5.56x45) cartridge just won't get the job done at long range or through heavy cover?

Need I point out that conditions in A-stan and Iraq have already caused the US military to break out a number of the old .308 (7.62x51) systems, because the piss ant .223 (5.56x45) cartridge just won't get the job done at long range or through heavy cover?

Something other than M40's?

Posted by Livingstone Something other than M40's?

M1A DMR's and a few older M14's

Also a largish number of more modern systems, such as Reed Knights AR type weapons in .308

Posted by Jonsered Heavy is a matter of perspective. Brutal recoil? A Hell of a lot less than my .30-06 deer rifle. Piss poor accuracy is a result of piss poor training. ANY weapon can be fired accurately in full auto if the operator is properly trained in its use. I seem to remember a Sgt. Major Snoxall of the British Army who put 20 rounds in a 10" circle on full auto at 300 yards during testing. How does modularity in design mean anything in its effectiveness? And as for the last, any competent weapons designer could put a picatinny rail system on the FN. Someone probably already has. Need I point out that conditions in A-stan and Iraq have already caused the US military to break out a number of the old .308 (7.62x51) systems, because the piss ant .223 (5.56x45) cartridge just won't get the job done at long range or through heavy cover?

Heavy is that every extra pound you have to slog up a rock face when its 45 degrees out makes it that much harder and slower.

It has brutal recoil in terms a service rifle, not a civilian hunting rifle or a designated marksmen rifle. The key difference is the volume of fire. Getting pounded by a 7.62x51 200 times is more tiring then the light tap of 5.56. tiring leads to less capable riflemen.
Yes, you can fire it accurately..to a degree...from 0-300m My memory of the FN was that it was less accurate then c7/AR15/M16/ even when firing at your own pace. (That may of just been cause said FN was baffed and worn out though) Past 300, it was indeed superior in accuracy.

Modularity is handy when a component in your weapon fails and you can quickly replace the part. Also reduces logistical work load for the same reason. It also makes cleaning and oiling the weapon easier and faster, reducing the total number of failures.

Yes, there are pitcanny sets for the FN..I was speaking of the original design.

for long range though cover. My optimal solution would be having one FN/Ar10/M14 per section, plus the medium MG to handle that, and keeping the 5.56 for the closer engagements.

What can I say, I prefer the Ar15. I've been over to the sandbox more than once, including as an infantry officer before I switched trades. I had no issues with C7 and found it was a very effective weapon when taking into account all things.

The FN is still cool and I can see it having a role, just not as a standard service rifle.

Somehow hundreds of thousands of US servicemen went through 4 years of war firing the .30-06 Garand all day every day. I........ nah, its cool. Not that interested. Peace.