Cold War Standoff: AR10 vs FAL

[@newdefsys]

Imagine back in the 1950s turning in your old Lee-Enfield or Mannlicher rifle and being issued a brand new FN FAL.

[@hakimcameldriver]

Imagine turning in your enfield for the EM2. Then having to turn in your EM2 for a gun that kicked harder, weighed more, had heavier ammo and was not as good.. poor uk soldier.

[@johndaugherty4127]

Ha ha. He said mann licher...

[@pkasedona1]

Imagine turning your L1A1 SLR in for a SA-80!!

[@newdefsys]

@@pkasedona1 Lol

[@aaronorr5586]

@@newdefsys Sad trombone

[@hstwodrainage.1410]

When I was issued my F.A.L. in Rhodesia. We were told the carrying handle was taken off because they did not want you carrying the gun by the handle, if you are tired and carrying it that way you are not alert, the most comfortable way to carry the gun was with two hands, and you were alert and ready for an ambush. Carry by the handle and ambushed, you have to put the handle down, safety onto fire and action. Carrying with two hands, SHTF, and safety to fire and aim, gives you one or two seconds extra to save your life.

[@Mrgunsngear]

old school AR10s had a ton of potential

[@haroldsobel8599]

Flame me, screw the FAL, owned a DSA. HATED it. Inferior in every way to the AR-10 platform.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

The Dutch-made AI AR10s were superb battle rifles, without question....

[@nuyabiss]

Just finished my ar10 dmr build.

[@elitetrader5468]

@@haroldsobel8599 Very true. The FAL is now obsolete. No reason to own one unless you are a collector or history buff.

[@joebenson528]

@Gavin Fisher

[@neurotoksyn]

The AR-10 never really died. It lives on as the SR-25 which big army adopted for DMR service as the MK 11 Mod 0 and M110 SASS.

[@jfwl1985]

The M110 is to be replaced by the lighter and more compact M110A1 CSASS, which is developed from the G28, a variant of the Heckler & Koch HK417.

[@jm9371]

I remember the FAL from my early days in the Canadian army before we adopted the C7 (M16 A2) in 1989. It was a reliable, high quality piece of gear.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

Canada even used the select-fire LMG version of the FAL, the one with the neat wooden, folding bipod legs that doubled as a hand-guard when folded, but could deploy when prone to stabilize the weapon. Whereas Australia retained the Bren Gun as its squad level base-of-fire weapon. Always wondered what each force thought of the choice of the other, given that both were members of the Commonwealth. Canada was the first military to adopt the FAL, according to the accounts I've seen. The accounts didn't mention Belgium, which presumably would have been number one, since they designed/manufactured it. Still, a feather in the caps of the CF for seeing the potential of the weapon so quickly.

[@servoss21sigg]

When MAC is short on ammo, you know there is a problem :/

[@gunfisher4661]

Free or discount is sometimes an elusive critter.

[@SmallArmsSolutions]

Hey Tim! Awesome video. The BRN-10 recoil feels identical to the original. The rate of fire makes the AR10 on full auto quite punishing on the shoulder but I have to say the in-line construction does minimize muzzle rise but you will have a black and blue shoulder. Similar to the full auto G3. But the LMT full auto MWS, total different story. Completely controllable, most controllable full auto 308 I have ever fired by far.

[@DNchap1417]

If you had to compare the AR-10, FAL, M1A, and G3, SCAR 17, Robinson XCR-M, Desert Tech MDR... how would you order them in terms of controllability in rapid fire? (1 being the most controllable, 7 being the most uncontrollable)

[@richardsveum8452]

I still think we completely missed the boat when we adopted the M14. We could have had an AR10 in .280 British and had a completely modern, light weight, selective fire rifle in the 50’s.

[@elitetrader5468]

That's politics for you. They chose an obsolete pos over something truly ground breaking.

[@edp1189]

You are sooooooo tight!!

[@anthonymayor5171]

we got there 10nyears later. would 280 have been better than 5.56?

[@richardsveum8452]

@@anthonymayor5171 yes, Heavier bullet better sectional density. Pretty sure it was a 140 grain bullet at just over 2500 FPS so a bit flatter shooting than a 7.62x39 and was supposedly quite accurate.

[@john-paulsilke893]

Hard to say for sure but the .280 would have to be compared with its contemporary ammo in .223 at the time and I think we can seen what happened after several decades to the .223/5.56 which would have also happened to the .280 British. Of course the modern AR15 is easily superior to both the AR10 and the FN Fal, but what could have been.....

[@rfengr00]

I can’t decide. Shucks, just have to get both! Put them in a dark safe and see if they create offspring.

[@ramboxlegacy14]

Maybe a SCAR will pop out

[@NYPATRIOTBX]

Matt M , lmao I’m pretty sure your like me, I like anything that goes boom.

[@chevydrum82]

I got a piston ar10....best of both worlds

[@JericoLionhearth]

Little baby XCR-M.

[@dangerousfreedom4965]

It’s called an XCR

[@chiquitosusa]

I carried the FAL for more than a year in my military service in Argentina 1981/1982 it was the 21” barrel with the carrying handle

[@ghosthacktube]

The story from Rhodesia is that there was a soldier who actually lost his eye when the empty case was deflected off a carry handle that was not stowed properly. The case came back and hit him square in the eye, and from that moment on the Rhodesians cut off all the carry handles from all of their FALs. Additionally, the carry handles made noise in the jungle and were also entanglement hazards when parajumping.

[@derekbrake1415]

When I was in the Canadian reserve infantry in the ‘80s, we did have a full auto FAL version that acted as our Section (Squad) support weapon x 2. They had a bi-pod so were pretty accurate, but heavy as .... They were a B to carry on a March or fighting patrol. The carrying handle of both were nice. We would hang it off the buttons of our coats instead of carrying it long distances... arm savers. 😁

[@jakesoros2376]

I heard you could convert the C1 rifles to makeshift full auto through some easy modification to the trigger group. Is that true?

[@derekbrake1415]

Jake Soros Not sure myself. However, before the communist ban here on 01 May, by Comrade Trudeau, FALs were already prohibited to own because it was stated that you could change it to full auto, so maybe. I just don’t trust what the govt or RCMP say.

[@dTheHammerb]

Fucking awesome. Glad to see a fellow Canadian here and chatting about my favourite rifle. Never served in the '80s due to not being born yet though.

[@tini4580]

@@jakesoros2376 yes you could with a simple piece of gun tape......

[@zachaliles]

When I was in the army, US, we figured out we could configure our ammo pouches in such a way on our IBA that you could basically hang your M4 from them instead of carrying them. I was issued an M249 and I remember hanging that bad boy off my ammo pouches all the time. It's funny how you read something and it makes you realize that we're not all that different after all, as far as soldiers go for this story.

[@viniciobrancato4900]

Kinda glad you plugged Small Arms Solution's video, they really did a great job explaining it all.

[@lib556]

So I carried the FAL (C1A1) my first 5 years in the army. No one ever worried about the troops messing with the gas settings (and no one could really be bothered). In fact, in training, that was something instructors randomly checked on. The default gas setting was 4 and the default sight setting was 200 yds (because we had the good Canadian rear sights and not those primitive things that all other nations had). Woe betide the recruit private or Officer Cadet who was caught with either of these having slipped a notch. I don't recall ever having a problem with the carry handle snagging on things. However, it was not needed as no one was allowed to carry the rifle by the handle (except the Rifle regiments on parade who did fast pace march pasts (what Yanks call pass in review) with the rifles carried at the 'trail arms'). We jumped with them without issue (I didn't as I did my para course in 87 and the school was already using rubber M16 dummies by then). One thing that does snag is that crap cocking handle on the example in the video. The Canadian handle was a clever folding one that was never a problem. I've used other FALs with that crap handle and it constantly gets in the way. Mainly because it's on the inside of the rifle against the body.

[@jm9371]

High Five!.. I was in the Canadian Army when they transitioned to the C7. I enjoyed the lighter weight of the C7, but the FAL was solid and packed a punch.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@ libertarian45: I've read about Canada being the first nation to adopt the FAL as its service rifle, in 1954. Including a version for use as an LMG (light machine gun) or SAW. How did the FAL do in that capacity? I know some Commonwealth armies adopted other weapons in that capacity, or kept their Bren guns. How did Canada do with the SAW variant of the FAL?

[@lib556]

@@GeorgiaBoy1961 Depends on to whom you talk. Australia also used the LAR version (that's a more accurate description than SAW) while also using the 7.62 converted Bren. We carried 2 of them per rifle section. Tactics of the time had our 2 x C2s form a 'gun group' under control of the Sect 2IC. This would form a firebase while the rest of the sect flanked a position. In 1985, we changed the tactics and the concept of a 'gun group' was abandoned in favour of splitting the section in half with a C2 in each group. Advantages: a. effectiveness of 7.62mm. b. Ammo commonality with C1s and platoon GPMG (C5 - a 7.62 M 1919). Although, in reality, the Sect Comd typically carried a 9mm SMG. c. Lighter than the Bren. d. parts commonality and familiarity of mechanism b/w C1 and C2. Disadvantages: a. mag fed vs belt ergo less ammo on hand to suppress a target. To be fair, not too many armies had belt feds at sect (squad) level at that time. The Brits did it in the Falklands but that was a 7.62 MAG 58 (what you now call the M 240 and we now use as our platoon GPMG we call the C6). For all its faults, a C2 is way more mobile and light than a 240! But, the firepower...whoa. b. 30 rd mags could be a bit awkward when the C2 was on its bipod. c. Weight of ammo. 7.62 bullets weigh more than 5.56 (duh), are bigger (duh) and the mags were heavy steel! We carried 4 x 30rd mags in a chest rig that was fairly heavy, made breathing an effort when running, was uncomfortable etc. d. No ability to change barrel. Although the C2 barrel was beefier than the C1, auto fire could easily burn it out after time. e. Biggest drawback was lack of ammo. I carried one in training and almost always ran out of ammo in platoon attacks. Bottom line: We never fought any battles with it (although our Airborne Regiment got swept up in the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 losing 2 killed and suffering 30 wounded. The C2 was in use but there are no accounts of how it performed. Imagine it like a BAR in 7.62 with 10 more rds in the mag and a little lighter. The introduction of the C9 (M 249) to replace it was a revelation. 200 rd belt. Single man operated. Quick change barrel... It's a much better weapon.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@@lib556 - Thanks for the history lesson.... much appreciated! Last night, I was watching the Habs play Las Vegas in the SC semi-finals. Think they have a chance? I'm rooting for them....

[@lib556]

@@GeorgiaBoy1961 Ruh roh... Now I'm in trouble... I am not a fan of ANY sports... not even hockey. Some would say that makes me a bad Canadian. I am glad you are rooting for a Canadian team.

[@cokedaz]

The final decision is interesting. The InRangeTV guys did a full multi-person test with a large number of modern and historic .308 rifles, and they picked the AR10 second overall even over the SCAR-H, and often mentioned how much lighter shooting it was to all other guns, and the FAL didn't do very well in their overall handling and drill tests. So this conclusion is surprising I must admit. Maybe that particular version WAS overgassed.

[@cokedaz]

@Rem Max Thanks, That is the ONLY informative reply I have ever received on youtube AND the best one also. Good to know.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

The FN FAL is a superb design, but having said that, it dates from the 1950s... and is no longer the newest kid in town.....

[@DNchap1417]

Largely because of the rock and lock loading procedure

[@aaroniousairlines9949]

It's pretty amazing that the AR-10 beat its contemporaries in that test, and was only topped by a design that is newer by 50 years AND borrowed its ergonomics from the AR AND THE FAL.

[@WORRO]

Again, thank you so much for covering the FAL. When I was a young man and seeing my first FAL I fell in love with it. There's always been something about it to me. And as I've said a dozen times in your video comment section, I finally landed me one about 10 years ago. What an awesome shooter she has been! Awesome video Brother Tim, thumbs up ~John

[@keithdeshong9612]

Nice comparison. FAL vs G3?

[@chucktshoes]

FAL won that shootout.

[@nopenopenopenope194]

Agree, we need this video. We know Mac would prefer the FAL for his familiarity with it's manual of arms, but G3s are also awesome.

[@ihitwrongbutton194]

G3 cetme or ptr my favorite, fn fal is good too though but G3 hands down.

[@ottokis308]

I got both I prefer Fal. But the g3 is a good gun.

[@eragonunderhill5545]

@@nopenopenopenope194 i think the g3 is likely the best military battle rifle of the era. Mainly, it was super cheap to manufacture en masse. they are very reliable and can be made very very accurate, and there are versions of it in 5.56, 9x19 and more with several variations of each (para/short models, LMG, DMR) however the FAL came a little bit sooner and therefore won in the political side of things.

[@STAMPEDE941]

Hey Tim - I used to work at KAC, and as you probably know we had just about all of the original prototypes and production AR10s... They were super controllable on full auto, and IMO were actually softer shooting on FA than on SA. Just my personal experience for reference, great video!

[@steveg3593]

The FAL is such a good looking rifle. It's lines remind me the classic long-body Jaguar.

[@ihitwrongbutton194]

Yeah like a stream line E-type

[@dwmhhr]

I prefer the AR 10 for all the reasons given. I’ve had two FALs. and agree with everything you said in the video but I hated the gas settings. It was something I could never fine tune.

[@Kevin-fj5oe]

The right arms of the free world, a title you can't argues with for sure

[@BigChiefWiggles]

Free world ... lol ... k.

[@Fishlord136]

BigChiefWiggles V damn spittin straight fax here

[@BigChiefWiggles]

@@Fishlord136 Unfortunately...

[@Kevin-fj5oe]

@Vince yes.

[@XFILESPT]

AR.10.👍 ( In U.S. Army tests at Aberdeen Proving Ground in November 1960, and later in Portuguese service, the AR-10 gained a reputation for accuracy (some rifles would group into 25 mm (1 inch) at 100 meters with service ammunition). Portuguese paratroopers found the AR-10 to be not only accurate but reliable in combat, despite rugged service conditions in African jungle and savannah )

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

The real road not taken in terms of the 1950s service trials, was the FN FAL, as excellent as it was. It was the AR10, which was a quantum leap ahead of anything then being offered. The Portuguese paras loved theirs so much that when the contract was ended and no more spare parts were supplied, they had spares fabricated locally at their own expense to keep them running. Finally, they were forced to turn them in sometime during the 1970s. Troops don't go to that kind of trouble and expense for something they don't care about or like.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@ Antony Kirk: Your comments are right on the mark. As fine a rifle as the FN FAL was - and it was a brilliant design - the real missed-opportunity is that the military missed out on the Armalite AR10, the only fifth-generation battle rifle thus far ever designed. Thereby hangs an interesting tale. Armalite, a division of Fairchild Aviation, had submitted a group of their AR10 rifles chambered in 7.62x51 NATO, for competitive testing for the new service rifle to replace the M-1 Garand. The futuristic new design performed superbly according to witnesses, i.e., the NCOs and junior officers charged with the testing. It was accurate, light but durable, well-designed, and surprisingly controllable even in select-fire mode thanks to its straight-line stock and recoil spring/buffer design. But just then, disaster struck. Over the strident objections of chief engineer Eugene Stoner, the designer of the rifle, Armalite CEO George Sullivan insisted on including one non-standard, experimental AR10 alongside its conventional cousins, a prototype with a composite laminated aluminum/steel barrel. That barrel burst catastrophically during sustained fire/endurance testing. A replacement conventional AR10 was quickly supplied to allow testing to start back up, but the damage had been done and Armalite was shortly thereafter dropped from consideration. Stoner's concerns had been justified. Without a government contract for producing them, Armalite ultimately licensed out production to a number of other firms, including the Dutch firm Artillerie Inrichtingen (hereafter AI), which made a number of improvements to the basic Armalite design. These included beefing up the buffer/recoil spring, making it stouter and heavier, and some other changes. These weapons were sold to Sudan, Portugal, Dutch NWM, Burma, and a few other small nations. They are also the weapons so beloved by the elite Portuguese paratroopers, who used their AR10s so successfully in the African bush wars of the 1960s and 1970s. The Paras so loved the design that they paid out of their own pockets to have spare parts locally-fabricated when official supplies dried up. A couple of years ago, "Firearms News" did a special issue on vintage ARs, including an extensive story and review of an original Dutch AR10. The author, whose name I can't recall at the moment, was a recognized expert on the Armalite AR10, especially the license-built versions. In short, the reviewer simply raved about how good of a design it was - and how current, even some sixty years after its introduction. The reviewer said that it compared favorably to many present-day designs of AR10s and AR-308s, and that it would not need much to update it and bring it into the 21st century as a viable service weapon.

[@Enduro-Life]

FN / FAL saw extended war over decades in jungles , bush or desert , - FN FAL Always worked - Really no argument which was better

[@DeadLemonz]

@@Enduro-Life SR25's are still operating reliably around the world to this day, the only difference is they shoot 3-6x tighter groups than the FAL with the same size rifle. The AR-10 platform gives you the flexibility to use your battle rifle as a long range precision rifle too, something that can't be said about the FAL. Both are boringly reliable and weight about the same similarly configured, so trying to argue one is more reliable than the other is a moot point.

[@danraymond1253]

@@DeadLemonz do you know why the ar 10 is more accurate? I know that it is, but I have yet to see anyone explain what allows it to actually maintain a smaller grouping.

[@theothertoddg]

The FAL is an elegant weapon...for a more civilized age.

[@maledetto1221]

You fight in the clone wars?

[@RabbitusMaximus]

...not as random nor as clumsy as a blaster?

[@wardaddy6595]

Esp with a Browning Hi Power on your hip to go with it!

[@AlexSDU]

I love my SLR with it's streamlined folding cocking handle & slim flash hinder. It's a sexier version of FAL.

[@Chayonray]

Did you notice any significant difference in accuracy, especially from offhand use Tim? That might be another factor in the equation.

[@shot9702]

Great comparison. One could argue that the original AR-10 is now the Knights M110 or SR-25 rifle (or LMT, etc) and over the years, like the M16 series, has been improved to become what they are. I find the FAL intriguing due to the history behind it.

[@TheBillyReb]

Which FAL variant that DSA makes would you recommend? I'm tempted on buying one and they make quite a few.

[@TheBrewer3535]

Loved the outtake, Mattel, LOL! I own both (although the AR10 is a modern pattern). For battlefield reliability FAL, for DMR or target shooting AR10.

[@METALLIFY16]

The FAL wasnt called the right arm of the free world for nothing. Its an amazing machine and the FNC/AK5-C further modernized it

[@MIAthe305]

Big time surprised Tim doesn’t have an Armalight 10 in his collection 😆

[@virtuaguyverify]

He's got better, why over pay and downgrade

[@bmstylee]

@@virtuaguyverify my guess is if he could get a real ar10 he would.

[@segwolfxviii2919]

@@virtuaguyverify he's a collector, it wouldn't be downgrading it would be collecting History. That's like me saying buying a Glock 19 gen 4 would be downgrading and pointless because I have a more reliable CZ P01. That's stupid logic , you buy something because you like it and its history.

[@hiramabiff885]

I'm an old war horse. Many years ago I bought and M21 DMR. I restocked it about 10 years ago and did all the fiddly bit to make it better. It is now a 1 MOA rifle and I love it. That being said I own a bone stock DSA FAL with a 16" barrel. It has the fabulous DSA scope mount and good glass. It shoots 2 MOA no matter what I stuff in it from Russki Silver Bear to NATO stock. If SHTF happened I would grab the FAL for anything over 100 yards every time.

[@johnbrewer8882]

The DSA Range Ready, SA58 FAL, 16" or 18" version with the addition of their speed trigger and interior slick coating option inside is KING! Their Range Ready modle gets a more vertical SAW Style Pistol Grip, Ambidextrous Magazine Release, Enhanced Winter Trigger Guard, Non-Reciprocating Left Side Enhanced Profile Charging Handle & Extreme Duty Scope Mount. Not to mention you get a 4150 - 11595E Steel premium barrel, which is mounted to you choice of 4140 fully machined & heat treated receivers with or without the carrying handle. It will outperform any AR10 BATTLE RIFLE in my opinion.

[@johnbrewer8882]

@Jim Beam your experience may vary, just because Tim reviewed one weapon doesn't make it junk or it's QC is bad. Tim has reviewed A LOT of guns that have been lemons, look at the P365, he had problems with it and now he loves it. I ACTUALLY OWN a DSA FAL and it's awesome! The fit, finish, and accuracy is good on mine. Sorry Tim got a bad one, but no gun manufacturer is immune from Tim's luck or the occasional QC slip.

[@johnbrewer8882]

@Jim Beam again, your experience may vary... I OWN one, it functions flawlessly, and it's a definite improvement on the standard FAL. That is ALL I'm saying. You can put my DSA FAL up against any standard FAL and it will perform better. As for it being a waste of money, that is subjective. People 'waste' money on all sorts of things, what does it matter if they want it and can afford it? Power to them, America is a land of Capitalism.

[@johndaugherty4127]

Hey bro, don't feed the trolls. This guy gives bourbon a bad name!

[@jonmeray713]

Dsa does suck testicles though

[@donalddickins8493]

Well thats an ignorant statement. You obviously bought a fal and want to prove to us that ITS THE BEST. The fact is though its not. Modern ar10's have extreme accuracy, reliability, and are so modular that every part can be changed out, and their also cheaper than the fal.

[@lerch400block]

Hahaha Matel. My father-in-law has a rant about it too. His favorite was the M79

[@eldenclark5019]

One piece of information not brought out is the difference in weight! My FAL is a favorite because of it's sleek lines...but they are deceiving due to it's weight....just like all trade offs more weight less recoil. So it's just a matter of when do you want to pay the piper....when you shoot or when you carry it. Shooting from a fixed position solves weight issue in favor of heavy rifle...carry it a lot and shoot it a little tips the scales the other way!

[@deniscleaver7544]

Super-duper video. I love both of them! Thank you for your efforts into its making. I have used both of them and expect to continue, ammo and politics allowing!!

[@Light-hawk]

Any chance of an FN FAL vs FN SCAR? Some people might find that a dumb comparison but I'd just be curious to hear what your thoughts are. Thanks!

[@atomicdmt8763]

outstanding! very good pace / density of info - and easy to understand.

[@scottminshall6420]

Tim I would have to agree with you as well on this, the FN FAL is hard firearm to beat for the time and use in which it was designed. I have a metric rifle in my collection and one day would like to get a inch pattern rifle to keep it company.

[@hockey3761]

Fantastic video! Love the comparison videos

[@vincenttacraebnam8379]

Can’t sit and watch anything over 5 minutes long…except your content: treasure. Thank you 🙏

[@jeffgenchi5863]

Today's civilian market is doing a great job realizing the AR10 potential. The DPMS high rail AR308 really has shown promise. I am on my second build and I just love them. I hope the improvements continue

[@ssumrall70]

Nice Garand Thumb plaid when will the collaboration plaid video happen ;)

[@bobscruggs8886]

In 1962 I was stationed at the Marine barracks at the Naval Ordnance Testing Center at China Lake , Ca one day we had a class with either an engineer from Armalite or Colt he was a very enthusiastic guy showing and discussing the AR 10 in 223 cal I think it was brown he went on to say this rifle is the future of combat weapons , since we were issued M1 Grands we considered this more of a toy since we had to have classes on our so called day off no one really cared . However , I do remember a couple points he mentioned one was he stated that most components were made from a special alloy that did not require much if any maintenance just wipe down I thought he said something like a special silicone was mixed into the metal the rifle was passed around and as I remember it felted a little slippery. We were a guard Battalion and did not test the AR only the base engineers and a couple Sgts fired it , the term AR I think stood for Armalite rifle AR not assault rifle .

[@arapahoetactical7749]

Love your point about the lack of development of the AR and I agree with you on the FAL. It's a rifle I've always liked the looks of but never had the budget at the time.

[@lemystere5345]

I too would have chose then FAL. I'm from a younger generation than you, but have also really admired the FN FAL since I was a child. I used to call it the "Fin Fal".

[@richarddonahuejr.2647]

I have a DS Arms remake of the FAL during the Clinton Gun Ban. I absolutely love it!

[@michaelodonnell1371]

Other Gun Channels: *Gives thoughts on gun comparison in table top review* MAC: *Gives detailed breakdown, history lesson, shoots guns, final opinion* (MAC is the best)

[@todd2048]

Tim I used high density foam in all the Brownells buttstocks it adds a little weight and fills up the empty areas of the buttstock that does dampen some recoil just a fyi a lot of guys have been doing this for some time.

[@CharlieMikeNS]

I can't get the discount for BDU to work. I click the link on your website and it just takes me to BDU where I sign in. No discount.

[@heavyjmertes197]

Tim, really enjoying the rifle comparisons. Keep'em up.

[@larrymac8538]

Nice to see Mac giving a nod to Chris from Small Arms Solutions!

[@shootsteel]

My R1 was a great rifle ... and full auto ... but very hard to handle if you didn't exercise rigourous trigger control

[@matthewblackwood4704]

Can you please tell me what shooting bag that is? I was a darned fool and sold my Embel FAL.....regret it badly.

[@SaorEire]

I really enjoyed this video, thanks Tim.

[@ETHRON1]

Thank you my friend.... You should try an up-to-date ArmaLite AR-10 like mine, it might change your mind...

[@HAACKER45]

That would completely miss the point of the video...

[@thereturningshadow]

Tim, Did you ever compare the FAL to an HK91(G3)?

[@elliotmapp-best9990]

Great review

[@thebearsblack]

that serial almost says MAC maybe its 'military arms technical channel'. been enjoying your channel for a long time. any chance we will ever see a cmmg rdb gaunlet?

[@aredman22]

Great video! I would love to see a FAL vs. G3 comparison.

[@christopherdean9684]

This is a serious question, sorry if it sounds stupid. But typically don’t piston guns have more recoil due to more reciprocating mass? Especially on an AR platform due to the inline design and the reciprocating mass of the relatively light bcg compared to the FAL.

[@wemcal]

Great video and weapons... of course in all in for the FAL

[@keithplymale2374]

The main thing that keeps Brownells from making 100% correct replicas is a big thing and a small thing. The big thing is the receiver has to be made so it cannot be made select fire. The small thing is the materials the furniture was made of originally was environmentally destructive in it's manufacture. So those materials were stopped being manufactured many decades ago. The main things that got the FAL not being adopted was NIH, US Ordinance Department and the M-14. The AR-10 was done in by some of the same things the FAL was. US Ordinance, Springfield Armory and the M-14. I had a Mattel toy M-16 in the 1970's too. Played with it and carried it till it broke. Now of course when I could I got two of the real thing, at least as close as we can have.

[@GetMeThere1]

I'm surprised. I checked, and I don't find a POF Revolution review on your channel.

[@busdrivrr888]

I think the AR10 evolved into a fantastic rifle, as evidenced by all of the really great AR-10 rifles available today.

[@Spike-13]

Hey Tim any plans to get a BCM MKII upper receiver to test out? Really curious about them, I like BCM alot and they seem to exhibit a number of improvements over a normal upper. As always thanks for bthe great video, you're awesome man!👍

[@SkintSNIPER262]

What is there to test? It's literally just a normal AR with more material on the receiver.

[@Spike-13]

@@SkintSNIPER262 it's advertised as being more rigid (resulting in better accuracy and less barrel deflection). This also alleviates any premature wear from bolt lug misalignment. They also have vent holes and a gas expansion chamber to reduce gas blow back while using silencers. I would be interested to see all these claims tested, and I trust Tim to do it.

[@Spike-13]

@Jim Beam most people probably don't shoot their PSA's enough to experience it. But I agree the bolt lug misalignment issue is at the bottom of my list; I'm more interested in the increased rigidity, and if the gas expansion chamber does anything.

[@Spike-13]

@Jim Beam let me clarify; the bolt lug alignment issues are only seen after extensive use, and lots of budget AR owners don't shoot more than a couple hundred rounds a year so the BCM MKII would be of no benefit to them. Only people that shoot 10,000+ rounds would benefit. The MKII also offers more durability, I've seen a Colt upper receiver cracked near the barrel nut and cam pin track on the battlefield Las Vegas thread on ARFcom. The MKII is beefed up in this area. So if you were a high volume shooter you could just keep replacing barrels and theoretically use the MKII upper receiver indefinitely (or at least longer than mil spec). I agree that lug alignment is not a big concern to me, and getting an enhanced bolt from someone like LMT will alleviate any concerns about bolt lug wear, but those fancy bolts are rare and expensive. Once BCM really starts pumping the MKII receivers out they will be cheaper and more readily available than the Gucci bolts. Not to mention the MKII still offers improvements such as more rigidity, more durability, better accuracy, and gas expansion chamber/vent holes for using a can: all at the same weight as a mil spec receiver.

[@Spike-13]

@Jim Beam I totally agree. Good point about the mid length gas system. People like it because it's smoother but it also has the benefit of the bolt unlocking at lower pressures. So I would definitely be interested to see MAC test one with a 10.5 or 11.5 barrel and a suppressor. And maybe one with a longer barrel to test the accuracy claims

[@s.k.6616]

The modularity of the AR rifles is the secret sauce of success.

[@notverylikely786]

Is it possible to get a stronger recoil buffer for the AR10?

[@slr7628]

It’s funny that we were against the FN fal years ago but we use the scar 17 now lmao which is basically a updated FAL ..I don’t own a fal or a clone but I will one day when I get all the bases covered.its one of the best looking rifles too imo.

[@adam3651]

Be nice if someone started importing south american FALs again. I hear too many issues with DSA FALs to buy one

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@ Adam: Imbel of Brazil still makes high-quality FALs, I wish their parts were more available, or even just their receivers. Can't recall of their receivers are select-fire and thus NFA items, or not, but Imbel makes high-quality components. Arizona Response Systems, a high-end customer maker of FAL-pattern rifles, use them a lot.

[@ricksheard1093]

L1A1 SLR (FAL) will always have my heart... Shame we replaced it with the SA80A1 Garbage can... cant replace God's Own Boomstick

[@earlwyss520]

Here in the US, I can and do own one. I just ordered a railed handguard for it, and plan to order a C1A1/T-48 style railed topcover when I can afford it.

[@ricksheard1093]

@@earlwyss520 be thankful... nearest i can get in the UK is a deactivated one

[@earlwyss520]

@@ricksheard1093 I am, I bought it back in 98, and I've been upgrading it since.

[@AlexSDU]

Good old reliable SLR. It's much lighter than the L85 too. Though it's somewhat a long rifle for moving in thick jungle. My dad used the rifle fighting against the Communist insurgents in the jungle of Borneo & Malaya, back in the early 70's.

[@duncandunn1930]

War Fighter01 agree weapon I carried for 12 years in uk infantry

[@red9man2130]

MAC this was the video I have been waiting for!

[@droyal1975]

How do you feel about the AR 10 VS M14. I own an M1A that has a had a good bit of work done to it, and is Extremely accurate, but very heavy as well. Certainly not built for carrying long distances.

[@3.2Carrera]

I love the FAL and own several along with the M1A and BRN-10. I rate the M1A third and this is with the most trigger time shooting it in service rifle competition. I had a great time with the Brn-10 at the range. Mine is a very soft shooting so maybe Brownells changed the spec on the gas port. So since it's new and I'm smitten I like it the best of the three. On another note, the Armalite 50's promotional video is on youtube showing lots of full auto and that seemed OK.

[@jesseguajardo8592]

I so wish I had a FN FAL L1 A1, but I don't know how or where to get one. I'm not even sure if it's even legal to get one these days

[@nathanruben3372]

Evolved version of AR-10 seems to be Turkey new MPT-76 (National ingantry rifle 76) rifle in 7.62/51 category. It has basically AR-10/HM-417 platform taking insignts, goodies from scar etc. with its unique long gas piston system.

[@Biker_Gremling]

For an army, the AR-10 was the far better option. Lighter, more accurate and a more modular design (ideal for future redesigns and upgrades). Also, not requiring fiddling with the gas setting is gives the soldier something less to worry about and mess up. Written by a L1A1 SLR owner that really loves his ex-British Army beaten up rifle.

[@David-li4uw]

Your making judgments based on a modern AR-10. The AR platform back then was marginally at best more accurate than the l1a1 and probably less accurate than the G3. Not to mention the ARs of the day were less reliable than the FAL or G3 platforms.

[@meeshii3]

@David-li4uw Spoken like someone who's never used any of those guns lmao

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

Even in the British Army, the SLR (FAL) was not universally loved. One trooper claimed "SLR" stood not for "self-loading rifle," but "stupidly long rifle," in recognition of how bulky and long the 21" barrel version with the fixed stock really was, especially in vehicle or airborne ops. Which is how the paratrooper and other special versions of the FAL came into being. The downfall of the Armalite AR10 was that the design - as futuristic and advanced as it was - was not quite ready for prime time when it was tested by the Army Ordnance Dept. in the 1950s. Or, rather, the CEO of Armalite insisted that an experimental composite barreled version be included in the test batch, whose experimental barrel promptly burst during endurance testing. Armalite was shortly thereafter dropped from the trials, and that was that. Stupid and costly move by George Sullivan, done over the strident objections of his head engineer, Eugene Stoner. Alas for Armalite's fortunes, Stoner turned out to be prescient in his concerns. Just how good a design was the AR10 was proven during the 1960s and early-mid 1970s when the Portuguese Army's elite paratroopers adopted AR10s made by the Dutch firm of Artillerie Inrichtingen. These "AI" AR10s were of extremely high-quality: Robust, durable, light, accurate, and surprisingly controllable in select-fire use. The 'Paras loved them, but finally had to turn them in during the 1970s for another rifle, G3s if memory serves. Those AI-built AR10s were true to Stoner's original concept, and they worked very well indeed. They were a true fifth-generation battle rifle, and it really gave competing designs a run for their money in terms of innovation and quality.

[@zoltancsikos5604]

Pure nonsense. For an Army, the FAL is the superior option. It shouldn't come as a surprise that it possesses superior reliability and is superior in maintenance also. "lighter" No real difference in weight. They're both light. Carrying one over the other makes no difference to distance covered and speed. Soldiers in many armies are use to carrying things like a MAG58 anyway; they can carry either of these. "more accurate" Are you target shooting trying to get 10 rounds through the same hole? Because that's not what you do against someone's head in war. "more modular design (ideal for future redesigns and upgrades)" Or, they just buy new firearms, as is often the case after 20 or 30 years.

[@zoltancsikos5604]

​@@David-li4uwYes, the AR-10 even today isn't known for being as reliable as other designs.

[@alanhelgeson690]

Hey! Tim, Greetings! You said that the AR-10 could have been developed to a greater degree, but what about the Knight Stoner SR-25 and the Super S.A.S.S. M-110 don't you think that these Two weapon systems are highly developed AR-10 ?

[@edmundcharles5278]

According to original ArmaLite/Fairchild documents and videos, the prototype AR10 did have a pronounced titanium muzzle brake which made full-auto firing very controllable even in such a light 6.5/7 lb rifle. There was also a prototype variant and production version of the AR10 which did incorporate an adjustable gas block feature!

[@MrBlonde294]

11:08 i didn't know that the fal has this feature, makes it faster to load, i like that, similar to AR platform

[@jonaswulff4424]

Thank you MAC great video as allways! I have a question about your watch, I have seen you wearing it upside down in a couple of your episodes. Does it have a tactical / practical reason or is it user preference? You and Gun Jesus (Ian) are superstars in Finland!

[@stevetheduck1425]

When training on the SLR (British semi-auto only FAL), the gas adjustment was not described to me as for variations in different ammunition, but for temperature. Set the gas at half: 5 or 6. Gas setting was taken care of by an immediate action drill: rifle fires 1 or 2 rounds and stops. Pull charging handle to the rear and carry on firing. Rifle fires 1 or 2 more rounds and stops again, adjust gas one click higher, carry on firing. Repeat if needed. This handled most problems, misfires, etc. including underpowered ammunition, I expect.

[@2serveand2protect]

PS. Again! - the "full-auto" firemode wasn't there for truly HITTING any "mark"! It was just meant to make your enemies HOLD THEIR HEADS DOWN until you (as safely as possible) changed your position, to obtain a better angle of fire or get closer to the enemy. Full auto mode was being used (in truth it still is) not to HIT, but for "covering fire". Great presentation - thank You, Sir.

[@donparker1823]

I wish you had talked a bit about the MOA for each rifle. But great work on this video.

[@Condor1970]

I've owned both, and they are both superb weapons. @21:00, your question as to where the AR-10 could have gone if adopted by the military, is starting to get answered by the civilian market creating an enormous number of incredibly high quality and ultra-reliable AR-10 variants and components. And it's only been about 5-10 years since the modern AR-10's have been out there in any real numbers. For about the same price as a quality AR-15, one can buy/build an AR-10 that is easily far superior to any current renderings of the FAL. I honestly wish they had chosen it over the M16. It would have easily evolved into a far superior battlefield weapon over the last 6 decades.

[@svetoslavmarkov2212]

What about the inherent accuracy comparison of both? Which one would be a better DMR?

[@svetoslavmarkov2212]

@Harry Peterson Thanks a lot!

[@madczechoutdoors1088]

Has anyone ever noticed the Mattel rifle the Duke breaks against a tree in the Green Berets?

[@OKBushcraft]

Instantly came to mind, especially when seeing the repro waffle mag. Good call

[@cosmiccharlie8294]

Back in the day i put half a dozen Fal's together. Reliable and fun to shoot. And port ammo was $140 to your door.

[@adrianwalton4489]

I used to carry the SLR (L1A1) you don't need automatic fire on them because they can fire as fast has you can pull the trigger but we had the L2Al for support fire it was the same as the L1A1 but it had a heavy barrel and tripod it would dance when you fire it on auto so you had to fire it like you would shoot the m60....

[@mistert51]

Any chance of doing a “history of the commercial FAL’s” type video? Like the rifles that use the LMT for DSA receivers or any of the other various manufacturers?

[@FuzedBox]

That kind of thing is more Ian's jam.

[@recumbentrevolution6540]

Armalite AR10 Super (SASS) by far the best on the market. Paired will a NIGHTFORCE F1 3.5×15×50 scope. I have this setup and will never part from it.

[@xenonram]

@Jim Beam They're all the same. Just because something costs more doesn't make it better. Assuming you have no experience with any of the above, and you just listed the most common military contractors. It's 2020, and they're all machined on CNC machines from forgings made by the same few companies. Even forgings machined on the worst CNC machines, produce receivers with very tight tolerances. The days of bad AR pattern receivers are petty much gone.

[@DuesenbergJ]

Love how the AR10 still looks Spaceage.

[@jalexanderevans]

Went with the aero m5. Couldn't find an fn fal for the same price.

[@ruststar]

What I really like about the ar10 is the ease of changing barrel/caliber and what I hate about the FAL is that I only have two Cheers

[@igorfazlyev]

your passion for the FAL is so strong it's infectious

[@timmanion2597]

Yeah I got my FAI S TG 58 kit during the band even Knowing it's banned friendlie I still love it. O what fun it is to shoot it.

[@MikeFoxtrot1]

John Wayne hit an AR-10 of a tree and it broke apart like a toy gun.

[@blakedavis2447]

Yea toy guns tend to do that since that’s literally what it was

[@grod4844]

Who makes FN FAL's nowadays? Is it only DSA in the US? Or are there other competitors that are of good quality and reliability?

[@joeshmuckatelli4447]

Agreed on all points.

[@Dr_Xyzt]

I'd choose an AR10, but with a T-handle. I like the way it handles with a 2-point sling.

[@abitnutz6747]

My BRN-10 came with extra rear sight parts that allowed me to lower the rear sight further.This fixed my point of aim problem entirely, However, it was a nightmare to put in as it is super fidley and requires complete disassembly of the entire rear sight...waaay down in there.. My aging eyes just aren't up that. Did not anyone else's BRN-10 have these extra pieces parts? I also thought that the AR-10 was quite a bit lighter than my FAL. I have new DSA 58 with a chrome lined barrel. Accuracy on both riffles is the same. Which means that I'm the limiting factor.

[@carlc4098]

Tim, I have a HK91, FN-FAL, and a SR25. You’re right, the SR25 have the worst kick out of all 3. Which in term it’s less comfortable to shoot all day.