Thursday, July 1, 2010

FAL vs. HK91‏

Hello, Mr. Aguirre
I've been meaning to ask you, what is your opinion of the FAL vs. the HK91? A local gun shop here in the states has a Springfield SAR-8 (HK-91 clone) in like-new shape for a $1000 with 3 mags and accessories, and that has caught my eye. Also, your opinion of the Sig226? I know you like the Glock 31/32, and so that's at the top of my short list. Also, a guy from my work gave me several hundred rounds of 7.62 NATO, and advice? Im not sure what to do with it, guess I could store it "just in case".
Thanx for your time, and you can use any of this email you want, or not at all, I suppose!
E-


Hi E-,
The FAL is by far more popular and there's a good reason for that. Its a better weapon, more reliable and simply a smarter design. Mags will be cheaper and easy to find anywhere in the world. A short barrel FAL (PARA version) is a compact enough 7,62 caliber, you can get a standard one and add a scope with a good mount for a good designated shooter weapon. Instead of spending the $1000, keep saving a bit more and get a good FAL. You can get one built for $1500, check falfiles.com, you'll soon find a FAL for you. I know sometimes its hard to wait a bit more and get more money together but trust me, you'll be glad you followed that advice.

The Sig226 is an excellent weapon, no dobut, but I preffer Glocks and so do a lot of other people that know their stuff. Glocks arent fancy, but they sure do work.

"a guy from my work gave me several hundred rounds of 7.62 NATO, and advice? "

Yes! buy him a beer, you've got a good friend there! Get yourself a FAL, you already seem to have some ammo. Shoot half of it and save the rest for a rainy day, or until you go to the range and rotate it for fresh ammo.

FerFAL

10 comments:

Jason said...

I don't think you're going to beat $0.97 per magazine for the HK. You have to be careful, because some of the clones aren't great, but if it's one of the SAR-8s with a Greek receiver, that's as good as it gets. $1000 is a screaming deal. If your emailer doesn't buy it, I hope he'll contact me so I can have it shipped from his local gun shop to my FFL.

The main flaw of the HK is that it beats up brass due to its vigorous ejection, but that's exactly what makes it so reliable. It's also ergonomic, has good sights, and in my opinion, is just more fun than a FAL.

SIGs are fine, and the 226 is the most common SIG. Not quite as durable as a Glock, but a little more elegant. If you're not a ninja, it's more likely that your biggest concern will be "Do I really want to carry the weight today?" than "Will it still work after I drag it through the mud?" If the sight of a nicely curved handgun with pretty grips sitting next to your wallet in the morning inspires you to pick it up and put it on just once when you wouldn't have otherwise... then it's actually worth it to buy the gun that gives you a little more pride of ownership.

I'm not saying this because I'm a SIG fanboy. I have multiple Glocks and no SIG handguns. But I think we have to consider human nature as well as technical features. Some people just enjoy a more conventional handgun. As long as it feeds and functions, a gun you'll gladly carry day in and day out is the better gun.

Anonymous said...

HK mags (surplus G3 mags) are a buck each at cheaper than dirt - I doubt that you can touch a FAL mag for anywhere near that.

They are the aluminum ones, and some might be banged up, but mine all look fine. They have steel ones for about $2. Mag pouches too.

HK 91's may kick a bit more than an FAL (I have heard) but they have a reputation for complete reliability.

Bill N. said...

Having owned both a HK91 and DSA FAL go with the FAL. Both are good weapons but the ergonomics are much better on the FAL especially the location of the charging handle if you shoot left handed. Also, the FAL is lighter and the bolt locks open when the last round is fired while the HK does not. Some don't think a bolt hold open device is important but in a gunfight I want my weapons to let me know when my magazine is empty instead of hearing just a click when I try to shoot someone. The receiver of an HK91 is sheet metal and there was a gunsmith tool used to take dents out of the receiver. I would rather have a weapon that doesn't need such a tool. Concerning the SIG I have owned a 226 and a 239. They are without a doubt the best conventional double action pistols with good placement of the controls. However, double action pistol by their design violate the priniciple "consistency equals accuracy" by having two different trigger pull weights. Look at what most IDPA & IPSC shooters use. The top shooters all use pistols that have a single trigger pull (1911s & Glocks). Another thing to consider is the cost of magazines. Glocks cost about half of what SIG magazines run.

Anonymous said...

Thanx for the advice, Mr. Aguirre. Glock 32 or same size in .45 ACP is likely next, then the FAL. You are welcome to give Jason my email address privately so I can send him the contact information, if you have time. I know you are busy, and once again I appreciate your time.
Thanx again!
E-

Don Williams said...

1) Most countries who adopted the FN FAL liked it, aside from the weight. However, Israel dropped it and moved to develop the Galil (and AK-47 type design) because the IDF felt the FAL was prone to jamming in desert conditions (fine sand,etc.)

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_FAL#Production_and_use and
scroll down to Israel.

Don Williams said...

1) Note that most armies have moved to an assault rifle using a cartridge with intermediate power (M16, AK-47,etc) instead of the full power battle rifles like the FN FAL and HK 91.

2) Reasons are:
a) Most shots on battlefield against trained troops are at less than 200 yards. Under stress and physical exertion of combat, it's hard to hit a helmet partially concealed behind a rock at 200 yards while panting for breath --or to hit a target rushing from cover to cover.

b) By weight, You can carry three 5.56 Nato or AK-74 rounds for every 7.62 Nato round. You can carry three AK-47 rounds for every two 7.62 rounds.

c) Military Assault rifles can fire automatic. Automatic fire with the 7.62 battle rifles was never practical --rifle too light to control recoil, barrel heats up too rapidly and can't be switched out.

3) Rapid swings needed for quick kill shots at short range targets are hard to do with heavy battle rifles. Hard to carry them at ready position for minutes at a time.

4) It is poor tactical planning to rely on firing at human wave attacks from behind a fortified wall while under siege. What do you do come nightfall -- or against approaching trenches? You
have given up the initiative and are trapped.

Better to patrol and ambush threats far from your base -- and the assault rifles are better weapons for patrols than are the battle rifles.

5) Sniper doctrine calls for one shot -one kill and then moving to a new position. The reason is that several shots allow the enemy to precisely locate your position: they can get a bearing and by counting the seconds of time lag between the crack of the bullet passing by them and the report from your rifle muzzle, the enemy can determine the distance to you. (Because bullet travels several times faster than speed of sound, the supersonic crack of it passing by will occur several seconds before the report from a firer's rifle is heard.)

Whereas one shot out of the blue rarely betrays your position.

A bolt rifle can be fired almost as rapidly as a battle rifle for the first 4 or 5 shots.

The US Marines and Army found that it was much easier to maintain an accurate zero on a simple bolt action rifle being dragged through the field than it was for the mechanically complex battle rifles.

And without a dependable zero, one shot-one kill doesn't work.

Don Williams said...

Assault rifles vs 7.62 Nato rifles (cont)

3) Rapid swings needed for quick kill shots at short range targets are hard to do with heavy battle rifles. Hard to carry them at ready position for minutes at a time.

4) It is poor tactical planning to rely on firing at human wave attacks from behind a fortified wall while under siege. What do you do come nightfall -- or against approaching trenches? You
have given up the initiative and are trapped.

Better to patrol and ambush threats far from your base -- and the assault rifles are better weapons for patrols than are the battle rifles.

5) Sniper doctrine calls for one shot -one kill and then moving to a new position. The reason is that several shots allow the enemy to precisely locate your position: they can get a bearing and by counting the seconds of time lag between the crack of the bullet passing by them and the report from your rifle muzzle, the enemy can determine the distance to you. (Because bullet travels several times faster than speed of sound, the supersonic crack of it passing by will occur several seconds before the report from a firer's rifle is heard.)

Whereas one shot out of the blue rarely betrays your position.

A bolt rifle can be fired almost as rapidly as a battle rifle for the first 4 or 5 shots.

The US Marines and Army found that it was much easier to maintain an accurate zero on a simple bolt action rifle being dragged through the field than it was for the mechanically complex battle rifles.

And without a dependable zero, one shot-one kill doesn't work.

Don Williams said...

1) Note that most armies have moved to an assault rifle using a cartridge with intermediate power (M16, AK-47,etc) instead of the full power battle rifles like the FN FAL and HK 91.

2) Reasons are:
a) Most shots on battlefield against trained troops are at less than 200 yards. Under stress and physical exertion of combat, it's hard to hit a helmet partially concealed behind a rock at 200 yards while panting for breath --or to hit a target rushing from cover to cover.

b) By weight, You can carry three 5.56 Nato or AK-74 rounds for every 7.62 Nato round. You can carry three AK-47 rounds for every two 7.62 rounds.

c) Military Assault rifles can fire automatic. Automatic fire with the 7.62 battle rifles was never practical --rifle too light to control recoil, barrel heats up too rapidly and can't be switched out.

FerFAL said...

Hi Bill N, thanks for the articulate response. All good points.

FerFAL

Anonymous said...

DSA FAL for $1095 at AimSurplus.com

http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=F1DSASTG58&groupid=11