Thanks for watching hope you liked the video! Do you think the FN FAL rifle has a future in the military? Use code TP15 for 15% off your toy replica and it helps support the channel bit.ly/2OfaQWg
It bugs me. South Carolina ,now, has a manufacturer for most of the main rifles of the cold war era. We are missing The M-14 and FAL. FN has a plant in Columbia...wtf?
When they had the option to go with the C7/C8 like they choose to do with their SF. Didn't want to spend that much money so decided to use the pos rifles made in country. Actually Brit SF getting their new L115A2s (the new C8s) so they are handing down their old A1s (old C8s) to other units replacing their pos bullpups lol.
@@desertedgoatgaming The L115A2 is the Artic Warfare Magnum(I think) which is a British sniper rifle. I believe you mean the L119A2 which is the British version of the C8.
@@RR-us2kp, I don't think I'd worry about it breaking most collarbones, I broke my collarbone and it actually takes quite a bit. That being said, I would worry about it breaking MY collarbone: it didn't heal right. Lol
O hell you are right... Lol I can't understand why you fire a rifle, not a gun. As you say... S. L. R. Was a great rifle to use eg. Shoot, strip. An clean. In my training I had to do it in pitch darkness. If I could have one. It would be great.. 👍😁🇬🇧
@@stealthandysteath1069 not allowed to have them here (Canada) either, which sucks because I really want one. I just ended up with four Lee Enfields instead. Lol
I don't know how you can say absolutely. I'd say the m166a2 is a superior rifle and I love a good SLR/FAL. Too bad we didn't get FAL rifles in 5.56.....
Na moral o IA2 parece o filho bastardo da FAL com a qualidade das coisas feitas pela taurus. Muito melhor (e mais barato provavelmente) se eles tivessem dado um upgrade nas FAL que já tem no inventario do que fazer isso, quem sabe um dia o exercito não ganha um brinquedo novo de qualidade.
@@Burrito69killer, o Exército Brasileiro tem um programa de modernização do FAL, substituindo a tampa da caixa de culatra por uma nova com trilhos picatinny (boa para aparelhos de pontaria ópticos como red dots e LPVOs) e usando um cano mais curto e leve... O Brasil tem ambientes ainda mais diversos que a belíssima Argentina, e o FAL é uma das poucas máquinas que funcionam com perfeição em todo o território nacional... A propósito, eu acho o novo Taurus T4 muito melhor que o IA2!
I’m ex British Army & just before I was issued the SA90 I had the FAL SLR for nearly 2 years, omg it was a beast, deadly accurate with a great flat shooting curve up to 600m. Semi automatic was more than enough for this rifle, full auto was just a waste.
Yep. Belgian Chocolate, "babeh". Belgian Maroon Beret: 1st Lt, Belgian Para's, Marches Les Dames. I prefered the FN Maximi (7.62 version of the FN Minimi, or SAW249'er, which is the same), which I could shoot shot per shot. Attached a sniper scope, and got me a beastly "Full-Auto-Capable-Sniper Rifle". Everyone laughed with me, until we hit the long-range firing range. Up to a klick and some beyond, it was DAMN accurate. And this with a 200 round "box-mag". Decent, I would say.
.308 years s actually the opposite of a flat shooter in terms of modern smokeless cartridges. You military guys tend to get very narrow experiences and fit the military rough enough is good enough. .270 for instance is much flatter. And many many more.
I own an L1A1. I once handed it to a visiting former SADF soldier, who got really emotional about it...teared up with joy over once again handling one.
As an ex British Soldier, i used and loved the L1A1 ( our version of the fal ) it was accurate and a very hard hitter. In my 12 years use i never had a stoppage or malfunction. We used it in all conditions from arctic warfare conditions to the jungles of Bruni and Beleze. Then we moved to the L85A1 ( sa80 ) what a pile of crap same weight as the SLR at 10lbs but usless.
We Aussies used it in Vietnam, and a lot of the ex-diggers of that era would have some tales to tell also about it, personally from my own 9 years experience of it in our army, I also never had any problems with it.
Agreed. Us Saffers used it extensive in the Bush War (FN FAL and R1-R3 series rifles, later the R4-6), it had a super reputation of long range efficacy and for putting terrs down.
According to comments by other people who served in the Royal marines or the Royal Army, they say that they call the L85A1 the "The civil servant" because it's expensive, unable to replace, and doesn't work.
@@roybennett9284 no thats not what i am saying, SA80 was absolute shite it fell apart , but plate cracked and fell apart , magazines fell out because the release catch was not covered, hand gaurd sracked. Working parts jammed because the pressed steel warped so they did not return when i got hot. The british army was offered the FNCAL a 5.56 rifle that was proven.
Something that you overlooked the fact that the Brazilian IMBEL produces a Next Generation FN FAL called the IA2. It is likely even greater upgrade than the SA58. Keep in mind that I am talking about the IA2 in 7.62, as IMBEL also makes an IA2 model in 5.56mm which internally is a good bit more different than original FN FAL (has a locking system like that of AR-15)
When your enemy outnumber you 10 to 1 and sometimes 50 to 1 , you would'nt want any other rifle but a FAL. In urban war it shoots thru walls and trees. In the late 70's we used a folding butt version in the parabats in the South African border war.
funny thing is, you were actually right, in the end. usa just replaced their front line dude guns with "xm5" which is essentially fn fal copy. with suppressor and modern computer scope, it weighs even slightly more than the original fn fal. carries heavy 20 round battle rifle magazines.
Yup I did that too. Remember how you placed parts left to right as you disassembled it. Remember the gas plug taking flight if piston wasn’t held down when removing it.
4:58 DSA stands for _David Selvaggio Arms_ , named after the founder. It was founded in 1987 and incorporated in 1992. Originally providing surplus FAL receivers and parts, they later got into the business of manufacturing complete FAL rifles. The DSA SA58 is a semi-auto only version of the Austrian FN FAL (or StG58 > _Sturmgewehr_ 1958). They bought the FAL production lines from Steyr in the mid-1990s when they ceased production of the StG58. The SA58 uses metric-dimension spare parts and magazines and is not compatible with inch-dimension FALs like the Commonwealth L1A1 and Canadian C1A1. It is available in rifle (19-, 20-, or 21-inch barrel) and carbine (16.25- or 18-inch barrel) versions. The OSW ( _Operational Specialist Weapon_ ) is an SA58 made in submachinegun length (11-inch barrel) or sub-carbine length (13-inch barrel) versions.
The M14s used in the arctic testing against the FAL were specialized. They were set aside weeks in advance, tuned, and specially lubricated for arctic conditions. The FALs were given no such treatment. The entire test was a sham, but this was standard operating procedure for the Ord Corps, which sabotaged all the M14's competition with the same zeal they hid the M14's many deficiencies. It wasn't just the FAL they stacked the deck against. They fired proof rounds full auto through an early AR10 with a pencil weight barrel until it ruptured, then dropped the rifle. They removed chrome lining and changed powders on the AR15, issued them as self cleaning with no cleaning kits, and then promoted every single failure the rifle had in combat. The M14 was always an abysmal failure, but its shortcomings were covered by Big Army, who considered it their golden boy. They spent 13 years developing the M14 and it always had problems, from improper heat treating in the receivers and bolts, causing them to crack or lose headspace, to literally everything on the rifle, from flash suppressors to gas cylinders rattling loose. Even after it became apparent that they would not be able to use M1 Garand tooling for the M14, they continued to pump 100 million dollars of tax payer money developing and hyping their abomination of a rifle. For comparison, the Italians spent just five years developing the M1 Garand for box magazines and adopting the BM59, a serviceable rifle by their standards. The M14 was tested against the M16 in 1968 and was found to not be conclusively more reliable or accurate than even the pre-A1 "Mattel Death Trap" M16. Big Army constantly swept these problems under the rug, even opening up acceptable accuracy to 5 MOA for the problem child M14. The M14 is and always has been a piece of shit. The fact that we could have had and would probably still be using a FAL in .280 British should anger all American servicemen past or present. We got cheated for politics, ended up with a rifle that stayed in front line service less than half the time it took to develop it, and never lived up to the hype. Even as it continued to be used in specialized roles into the GWOT, most of them ended up staying in Humvees and collecting dust as they were too finicky and heavy, and often required armorer level attention for even basic maintenance, because the Sage stocks required very specific torque settings and had to settle and then be rezeroed prior to leaving the wire. There has never been a failure in procurement even close to that of the M14, and the M14 remains an embarrassing black eye on the face of American small arms.
Thank you for confirming what I already knew. Back when it was legal for us Brits to own semi-auto rifles, I bought a Springfield M1A for competitions, believing it was superior to my L1A1, or G3. It took me Three Non-qualifications, to realise it was a waste of my hard-earned money. I sold it less that six months after I bought it and went back to my beloved L1A1.
@@russbetts1467 I too wasted money on a Springfield M1A. I shot it with irons because it was so difficult to scope and was content until the gas cylinder shot loose around 1000 rounds. I sent it to Springfield for a unitized gas system and had the bolt roller fly off within a dozen rounds of getting it back from them. I did some research and discovered "Springfield Bolt Roller Impact Defect." Did some more research and discovered all the stuff in my first post. I still have the M1A as it has sentimental value, but I use an Aero Precision M5 ( AR10) for my rifle needs. The AR10 has been superior in literally every single way. It is more reliable, more durable, more accurate, more pleasant and controllable to shoot, easier to scope and accessorize, easier to maintain...just better. The M1A doesn't have a single advantage over the AR10, or as near as I can tell, any other 7.62mm battle rifle. It is truly the worst of the worst and everything a service rifle shouldn't be.
It's just funny. The Soviets were on the right track with the AK-47 and the US had the M14 which didn't last long at all as the service rifle of the US military. The Germans had already learned the lesson in WWII, resulting in the Sturmgewehr. The Soviets arrive on the right track with the AK. The US will finally get a clue with the M16 but even that had some early drama and issues.
@@Warmaker01 M16 only had issues because it was intentionally sabatoged by the same assholes in Big Army that were promoting the M14. Once the M16 was given proper chrome lining and propellants, and issued with cleaning kits, problems went away. The M16 has ended up being a better assault rifle than the AK. The M16/M4 is the professionals choice all over the world whereas the only people still using the AK are barefoot 3rd world disgruntled goat farmers suffering from 1400 years of inbreeding.
Nah! The ATF are getting repurposed and renamed... Their uniforms will read "Alcohol Tobacco and Fuckups" in the future, and they will also work as scapegoats, so they can be blamed and have to answer for anything! A great repurposing of an organization.
If I'm not mistaken the "SLR" title literally meant "self loading rifle" which is a rather apt description of the L1A1 in British commonwealth service since they were semi-only
@@Shadow_Hawk_Streaming I once had the opportunity to fire a Full Auto FAL. First three rounds hit the target. Where the others went, I have NO idea. Standard NATO Number 11 Target at 100 metres. You can keep you full-auto Bundukis. That's a Gat to you youngsters who never had the pleasure of carrying the L1A1.
I carry a SLR in Vietnam and loved it. I had a m16 for a while and hated it. With the SLR it would shot shoot right through the bamboo while the m16 couldn't. I had a fire fight in a monsoon laying in a river bed and the SLR never stopped firing. I like the 223 round for hunting but not for combat, the 7.62 just punched through everything
"Gewehr 1" or G1, but the Belgies weren't about to let them license it for production in (W.) Germany... Something about being invaded twice in the lifetime(s) of some of the FN company directors *might* have played a part in that decision, ya think?
While it wasn't in extensive use with the Bundeswehr , it was used by the militarized Border guard (Bundesgrenzschutz) as their Standard issue rifle until the 90s.
@@MrDeutschGerman Are you reffering to the BGS/BPZ or the bundeswehr? Cause the G1 was starting in '56 the standart rifle of the bundeswehr. Till '59 where the G3 came into play. The G3 is even used by the bundeswehr till today but primarely "newer" variants and some rebooted ones as well.
@@MrUnkasen, Ireland, Brazil, Argentina, and maybe Portugal (not sure on this last one) still use the FAL. Just because the G3 is awesome doesn't mean we have to shit on the FAL, even Germany loved their G1 (german made FAL rifles).
The G3 still sees alot of use in some countries. Portugal still uses them despite wanting to transition to the SCARs and Norway has modded some to be up to modern standards
2 года назад+5
If fal is the right arm, g3 is definitely the left arm of free world
I like how that old guy was holding that shorty FAL in the beginning like only half on his shoulder like it was a 556 carbine lol. I bet he readjusted it after that shot
@Bill and Jizz it's not particularly bad, I own a lightweight 7mm Mag Browning hunting rifle that kicks quite hard for example. But a similar size and weight 7.62 carbine is obviously alot more recoil than a 556.. that was a pretty short FAL.. don't think you'd make a habit out of shooting it like that. If not for recoil discomfort for accuracy
40 yrs ago... I was USMC. Getting training at Camp Lejuene. Argentina seized the Falkland Islands. And Britain responded. As the British transport (another story) travelled south. They did a quick exercise at Lejuene. I had chance to check out the FN FAL. A nice very nice weapon.
I was a conscript with a FAL in the SADF serving three months on the northern Namibian border. When I got home I heard there had been a war in the Falklands. Being a journlalist in civvy life, the revelation came as a huge shock.
Interesting... although the M14 is in no way the FAL competitor, that would be the HK G-3. The M14 is just a charming but oddball choice made by the US only. The 2 main battle rifles of the cold war era are the FAL and the G3.
@@mazambane286 I have a small collection of them, including a transferable full auto version of both. The G3 has it beat in accuracy, reliability, and modularity...but the FAL is easier to shoot and maintain.
@@Skinflaps_Meatslapper You must have a very special one then. Because I've used both and I can testify the G3 is a heap of shit. I've seen their butts crack in half for no reason. I've seen those aluminium magazines fall apart for no reason. And besides who wants to reach all the way up to the muzzle to cock a rifle? Trust me. Under proper field conditions the G3 does not come anywhere near the FAL in the reliability race either.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 "A charming but oddball choice made by the U.S. alone." Have you counted the number of U.S. personnel at the time compared to the rest? The M-14; absolutely was competitive. It's an outstanding weapon. The FN-FAL is itself an excellent weapon, as is the H&K 91. A man armed with any of the three, properly manufactured and maintained, would be well armed.
You guys should check Brazil's evolution of the FAL, the Imbel IA2. As said in the video the new version made in Brazil will be mainly in the 5.56 version, but for the specialized jungle troops there is a 7.62 version of the rifle. A really cool redesign of the FAL and interesting interpretation of what a hibrid M4/FAL would be like.
US should then buy those as itll once again be needing those to fight survive & WIN in any&all current & future jungle combat. If Brazil can do it then the USA can do it too and much much more & better as well.
@@fredcollins8919 Oh you northern guys wanna compete? It's on then, bring it on yankees, we'll make the better rifle. Now for serious, if our guns can help you guys figth off them reds and terrorists, we'll help y'all
@@elvispresley2284Hi Elvis. Glad to see youve finally resurrected from the legions of dead stars from the past & bring us more joy in kickass rocknroll as music nowadays (1996-2022) sucks royally. As for infantry assault rifles, rest assured that despite the US, UK France Germany/Austria Switzerland DO (& have Always made & best used) those mentiomed wespons, esp for jungle warfare (a MUST), desert warfare, mountain warfare & urban combat, it WOULD still be a good idea for both Brazil & the US (& others) to unite forces, being the military/political/ideological/cultural/social/economic etc etc etc Allies/friends/partners that we have always have been & ARE (along with Colombia, Chile, Peru & many others in region) to do as you suggested, unite forces & brains FAST & quickly & effectively develop highly lethal highly effective muktipurpose multiregion/environment modern assault rifle for the 21st century onwards, & yes, use it superbly & mercilessly to quickly & effective stomp.out few remaining ectremist far left loser communist insurgents and/or communist armed forces & others etc etc, jointly as mentioned earlier. Last but not least, all US troops routinely train in & receive the worlds finest jungle warfare training. Always have & always Will. Cheers, Elvis!!!
@@fredcollins8919 I'm back from the dead, the music of today is horrible enough to be as an torture method. I agree, we should join forces once again, our nations have always been allies, we need to develop weaponry, armies and tactics to wipe out the reds, terrorists and etc..., I also think there should be an equivalent of NATO, but for the American Continents We also need to figth back China, they're an evil that has to be put down. Until then, cheers yankee, may God bless the USA, and may God bless Brazil.
Ah, memories. The SLR, as we called it, was our standard weapon and loved in all ways except weight. We had some M16s as well, I think one per squad IIRC and although the light weight was appreciated, it felt like a plastic toy. And this was back when plastic was fragile and crappy. We were told, by Vietnam Vets who should know (should) that the SLR round would go straight through an M113, but the dinky 556 wouldn’t. And the AK 7.62 had to be at the right angle and distance to do so and the right angle and distance was a very limited situation. As we spent far too much time in an M113, it was nice to know that only we had the rifle that would make our armour useless :D.
Well, i don't know if the M113 over here have been improved over the ones used in Vietnam, but i guarantee that it could hold a 7.62x51mm pretty well. And i've sat right by the diesel tank more than i would like to hahaha
@@scotteric8711 Dude there is a proposed Federal Assault Weapons Ban...again. It has higher odds of passing this time aswell. It might not matter where they move to. :(
@@sovereign6291 I'm very aware. Whoever is making 50 BMG nowadays was ahead of the curve months ago. That's how I know where this is headed. The price of that has only been driven so low by over production. And if you watch, we are slowly watching all the niche calibers slowly pick up now as the mainstream rounds are unavailable. The only obstacle to the BMG was its cost, and they removed it knowing so.
Same here during my navy days , we used the FAL and FALO , as the dutch always want something different they opted for the bi-pod version. I cant tell you how many times my fingers got caught when folding them back .
Regarding the FAL’s reliability in Arctic conditions: look up the FN C1A1 variant. It has the Arctic Trigger, the Action Cover has a Clip reloading guide and the action cover is cut back to expose the full cycle of the bolt (dramatically reducing stoppages). This variant also has an adjustable gas regulator, which allows you to tune the performance of the gun according to weather conditions. I learned to shoot on that rifle as an Army Cadet about a gazillion years ago. My two complaints about the C1, was the lack of full automatic capability, and the flash eliminator. I would want to acquire the reproduction rights for the FAL Compensator designed and used by the Rhodesian Army. These devices apparently tamed the tendency for the weapon to “climb” on long bursts. Recoil was mitigated. As a result, control was enhanced as well. One thing which I want to mention - we trained out to 1000 meters with these rifles. It was a great confidence booster as a kid, being shown how to use a precision tool like that.
If it had stayed .280 you would have had lower recoil (letting you go full rock and roll easier), less failure rate and a lot of the other "Problems"would never bean had in the first place.
And now the USA wants to replace 5.56 and 7.62 with 6.8 like that isn’t exactly what Britain suggested 80 years ago with the 280 brit. “The United States can always be relied upon to do the right thing - having first exhausted all possible alternatives.” -Winston Churchill
@@samueladams1775 you've never filed down the pin to turn your Semi Auto in to a Full Auto have you? and you think the FAL is reliable in 7.62, in testing in normal battlefield conditions they where unable to induce a failure, they had to do some fairly extreme temperature and Grit exposure to make it fail wile shooting .280.
I adore the FN FAL. It's so accurate, rugged, and powerful! You just can't go wrong with one in the sense that even though you're humping 15 lbs around all day; it pays back your sweat equity in spades! You can really reach out and touch someone with it, plus the follow up shots come quick and easy too.
Really enjoyed using the rifle when I joined the Canadian armed forces in 1977, even though my trade required me to carry the smg. I felt safer with the FN. still serving,but behind a desk.
Australia & NZ used the FN aka L1A1 7.62 SLR from the 60's to the 90's It was heavy & long but being able to shoot through a 14" dia tree trunk, any brick wall, or a 2" steel Water pipe made a difference
Carried one for 3 years 10/27 inf btn. definitely had great stopping power. and looked good on the parade ground. Still remember rest on arms reversed from ANZAC day
7.62 x 51 will not go through 14inch of live tree. Although it has more penetration than 5.56 or 7.62x39 it has less penetration than 30/06 or even say 6.5 x 55 swede which has better sectional density. 7.62x 51 is a shortened 30/06 Springfield for purposes of packaging. It is a sub optimal cartridge firing a relatively short bullet with a poor ballistic co efficient. It is though of course still a powerful round. Just not as powerful as cartridges optimised for performance rather than packaging.
@@simonschuh5283 They still use shiny ones today on ceremonial duty.! Was not bad on the MTR. My uncle had the contract to make all the rounded foregrips in his factory at Concord and designed it with heat reflecting inner liner. I use to like shooting it on the MTR. But I was only a Sig so.....more radio than shooting!
The FAL should have been chambered in .280; the US forcing .308 on it is what made it not as good as it could’ve been. Intermediate cartridges were the future, and NATO could’ve got there decades earlier if the US hadn’t pulled that...
Isn't the idea behind intermediate rounds today is for better body armor penetration? Shooting against an unarmored target (as everyone pretty much was in the cold war days) it makes sense to use the lightest rounds that you can right?
@@Scroolewse nah, there's an issue of lighter rounds not having the stopping power, otherwise everyone would be using the submachine guns and there was plenty of them availible. There's a need in a balance between low weight of equipment (gun, magazines, total ammo) and disabling an opponent with a shot and hit him far away, possibly behind a cover. There's a reason AKM is still very common in russian special forces. Heavy 7.62x39mm has a strong punch despite the subsonic speed. It drops a body with a single hit, unlike 5.45 that can potentially fly through, leaving a person injured, but still armed and dangerous.
@@bionmccool 7.62x39 isn’t subsonic by default The AKM isn’t very popular with Russian SF anymore, in fact most guys don’t even use 7.62x39 anymore other than Zaslon. 7.62x39 isn’t a magic instakill round either, and 5.45 creates more devastating wound channels, while being better at range too, and it keeps velocity well at longer ranges. 5.45 is overall a much more effective round than 7.62x39 all things considered
@@bionmccool .280 (or any of the other 6mm+ rounds would be the happy medium. A lot harder hitting than the 5.56, and far more controllable than the 7.62. The only problem with those rounds, at least here in the U.S. is availability and price -- but had they been adopted by NATO, there would be a plethora today.
8:59 "This is a difficult thought experiment, ........we'll never know". Eh, we do know. The M14 was the shortest serving rifle in U.S. military history and no major country adopted it, whereas the FN FAL......
Hey Cappy! Recently the Brazilian military is moving on from their old Fals(here we have a locally produced short version called PARA-FAL), Brazilians came up with a 5.56 rifle(IA2 5.56mm), but also adopted a really dope version of the FAL to use as a DMR. Check it out it's called IA2 7.62mm, I think that any FAL fan would love it. Keep up the good work Chris!
O Brasil poderia ter mudado do 7.62 NATO para o .243 (já que há uma necessidade de um rifle de combate urbano), porque basicamente a única mudança necessária para a arma usar este calibre seria trocar o cano (ferrolhos , armações, carregadores são todos iguais para .243 e 7.62 NATO), o que faz com que o custo de troca de calibre seja bem menor (e hoje temos balas de .243 com peso próximo as balas de 5.56, o que se traduz em um recuo menor e também pode-se usar menos pólvora para ter um desempenho semelhante a 5.56, mas sem ter a dor de cabeça de ter que reabastecer todo arsenal com armas de um calibre muito diferente ou lidar com as desvantagens do 7.62 para combate urbano)
The SLR is a magnificent Soldiers weapon that is battle proven for reliability in adverse conditions, stopping power and accuracy at range, three important factors to a Soldier on the battlefield, and greatly appreciated by us in the South Atlantic in 1982, it's worth carrying the extra bit of weight.
They could do what Japan did: adopt the 7.62NATO round, but download it to the ballistics of the 7.62x39. Use existing stocks of full power ammo for the crew served machine guns.
@P. Cameron honestly, for me most of those countries that use or used the 7.62 NATO should switch to .243 (for the need of a close combat rifle), because basically the only change needed for the weapon to use this caliber is change the barrel (bolts, receivers, magazines are all the same for .243 and 7.62 NATO), which makes the cost of changing the caliber is much lower (and today we have .243 bullets with a weight close to 5.56, which translates into a lower recoil and you can also use less powder to have a performance similar to 5.56, but without having the headache of having to replenish your entire arsenal with weapons that receive a very different caliber or dealing with the disadvantages of 7.62 NATO for CQC)
@@gamerbg294 I think the issue for most countries is not replacing the weapons, but instead scrapping ginormous stockpiles of 7.62 NATO. Retaining the 7.62 NATO for MGs would allow them to use it up, and gradually transition to another round. It’s one of the reasons the US has never gotten rid of 7.62 for MGs, despite tons of research dollars dedicated to 6.5 caliber SAWs in the 80s.
My Dad fought in the Rhodesia war with a FAL and a pair of stubbies stationed on the out skirts of Bulawayo. We use to watch the paratroopers jumping from our back garden. I was six years old, we would practice drills with my mom and my siblings, crawling from our beds to the passages cupboard in case we were hit, fortunately it never happened.
Not a perfect platform, but after many years of shooting the M14, I had the chance to shoot an FN FAL. WOW! The ergonomics are fantastic!. Average accuracy and reliability. Parts replacement much easier than any of the others in the class. Long? Yes. Heavy? Kinda, but not too heavy.
I was in the Canadian army when we used the FN and manufactured the rifle in this country under license to our specs. One thing is we trained with it extensively for winter warfare and it performed well. Of course we didn’t use oil to lubricate it in winter. We used powered graphite. Never froze up. But I’d prefer it or an M14 over the M16. Just like that full power round.
Trained in Canada with the FN and used it in a number of comp. It was a Good rifle ,slightly on the heavy side but you sure could reach out and touch someone.
My Canadian FN C1A1 was an excellent rifle. Unlike most versions of the FN FAL it was semi-auto only, but it had some features that made it perfect for the Canadian Army: It had a removable trigger guard so you could fire it while wearing arctic mitts; It had a built-in mag charger so you could load a stripper clip straight into the magazine without needing to remove the mag; And it had a wooden stock that wouldn't crack in extreme cold weather like the plastic stocks used in other NATO armies. It also was accurate and punched really, really hard! I remember a "firepower" demonstration put on by visiting US Army troops where they fired 5.56mm rounds at a cinderblock wall, chipping it into pieces until there was nothing left. It didn't impress us. We knew our 7.62mm NATO rounds would punch straight through a cinderblock wall and take out anyone standing on the other side. One round, one kill.
Fun thing I learned while looking into IMBEL, they have done even more modernizing with the FAL. IMBEL currently makes the IA2 for contractors and the Brazilian military and police forces, it appears to be a smaller FAL chambered in 5.56 NATO that takes STANAGs. Has an adjustable folding stock and rails so the user can attach whatever they need.
I have had a Belgian FN FAL for several decades now and have a scope mount for it. I also have an HK 91 both of which fire the 7.62 x 51. I prefer the FAL since it handles smoothly and have a scope mount that allows for easy on/ off scope scope detachment . This battle cartridge handles long distance shooting, unlike the 5.56 mm . The FAL is truly an 600- 1000 meter battle rifle . I think that the M 14 won out for political reasons rather than practical ones.
We used the FN FAL in Australia as main infantry section riflemans weapons as we called it "L1A1 SLR" or simply "SLR", right through from the late 1950's until the end of the 1980's. Loved it. Also had an L1A2 version, not so widely used; pretty much heavier barrel, detachable bipod and a 30-round magazine, selective fire, mini-squad concept. But the SLR was easy to use and the ammunition same as the section forepower weapon, the M60. Would be great to see a modern updated version. Even better, I want one!
During Malvinas War in 1982, Argentina ´s Army used The Fals in two version: FAL ( Fusil Automatico Ligero ) and FAP ( Fusil Automático Pesado). Today, Argentina ´s Army is developing a new version of this strong rifle.
I have the 18" barrel fixed stock SA58 and it shoots really well. I haven't found a folding stock that is as comfortable and swapping out the fixed stock for a folder also requires a different lower receiver and bolt carrier. An 11" barrel is too short for the 7.62 NATO. I wouldn't go below 16".
Having shot both the FAL & the M14 a lot I personally found the FAL not comfortable to shoot. It felt awkward. The M14 always felt good and comfortable. I'd definitely give the modern version of the FAL a good try out and see how she felt.
My family was transferred from Uitenhage (now Kariega) near Port Elizabeth in 1962 because my dad was a toolmaker needed in Pretoria to work on making FALs under licence for the SADF. Imagine my horror when reporting for national service in 1971 I was issued with a Lee Enfield Mk IV. The reason was because I had elected to serve in the Commandos, a type of home guard. One saving grace was that my platoon commander was Quinten George Murray Smythe, VC. And I got an FAL, which we called the R1, about three years later when conscripts were transferred from the Commandos to regular reserve infantry regiments. My outfit did patrols in the then Rhodesia, but not in shorts.
So you admit that it's the fault of the U.S. That it shoots such a heavy recoil cartrige rather than what the brits proposed which would have been lighter on recoil but just as effective in practice.
I loved the SLR. This was my personal weapon when I first enlisted and for the first 3 years of my service. Amazing weapon. The recoil wasn't ever a problem. It works well in FIBUA but it's too long for CQB. The Australians used the SLR in Vietnam and never had a problem with it and I can't ever recall hearing that they wanted an M16 while serving alongside the US.
Would it have been worth the US adopting it? just from a logistics perspective it makes sense to use the same rifle as your allies. particularly when it is a better rifle. re the production issue, if Australia could afford to build it, the US could manage it. recoil? not an issue if you train with it.
Canada manufactured it too. But we kept the rifle semi automatic. We had the FN C2 which was the automatic version with bipod and a much heavier barrel. That was a heavy rifle.
@@politenessman3901 And I was almost always the C2 gunner in my section. I was one of the smallest guys in the platoon but they liked my attitude so they always assigned one of the C2’s to me. We usually had 2 C2’s per section.
@@leewaun Back in my day an Aust Inf section had 1 x GPMG M60, 2 or 3 M16A1 (one with M203 GL) and the rest were L1A1 SLRs (10 Man sect if fully manned). I carried the M60 for 2 years, then became a Regt Sig with M16 and 77 Set radio. L2A1 was for 2nd line units in Aust service (along with the 7.62mm Bren).
I have a SA58 or DS Arms copy of the FAL. I also have an MA-1A (M-14), PTR 91(G-3) and an Armalite AR-10. They are all battle rifles and they are all quality weapons.
FN-FAL, or as we always refered to it, the SLR, was definitely a long weapon for longer range shooting. The newer 5.56 weapons a great for closer, more mobile fighting. But I will say that the SLR was good for arms drill as at least, you could put it on the ground.
@Vince Are you talking from Personal Experience? Have you ever fired one? Or are you just repeating what some 'Armchair Soldier' told you? As 'Company Marksman' in my unit, I never had trouble hitting targets at Half-a-Mile.
As an ex infantryman who used SLR and SA80, SLR was a reliable rifle in 6 years it never let me down , however when we converted to SA80 it was a total let down for the 3 years i used it, 5.56 absolutley usless . Eventually it was improved and worked to a degree, it still has problems , FN offered the british government the FN CAL5.56 but we had spent a fortune already and was rejected.
I was going to bring up the Falklands conflict about how we uses a semi where the argies had full auto, but that's like comparing my football (soccer not hand egg) skills to Beckham's 👀
In the original proposed cartrige or even if they'd considered a 5.56 variant instead of the sa-80 series in the 70s\80s full auto was very viable due to the weight and front heavy balance
The trouble with full auto, is the limited amount of ammo each man can carry, to remain effective. 120 rounds in 6 magazines; 2 Bandoleers of 50 rounds in stripper clips; a box of 200 rounds in stripper clips and 100 rounds of 'Disintegrating Link' for the 'Gimpy'. That lot weighed close to 30 Pounds, on top of all your other kit. Full Auto? No Thanks. 20 Aimed Shots Per Minute suits me fine; 30 in a firefight.
@@russbetts1467 would it make a ass out of you and me if I assumed you served ?? 😅 There talk from books, then there's I did it talk 😅 this come across as I was there 🤯
@@bradcogan8588 I feel sorry for all the lower enlisted Argentine forces, imagine having little to no proper training, no rations most the time, shite pay, and then your told " the people of the Falklands will welcome you as hero's " to see there more British then the UK 👀 also trow the fat cat officers legitimately robbing the lower ranks of there pay and having great meals.... So yeah I feel bad for all of them :(
I am a Canadian Army veteran of the FN era. And can say with absolute confidence that the US claims about poor performance in winter conditions are a load of complete garbage. I will also say that it really should have been in 7mm. It was a fantastic weapon that could have been even better. In 7mm it was capable of fully automatic fire. In 7.62, it required a considerable upgrade to be capable of automatic fire; this made the upgrade an excellent section LMG.
The British 7mm and 6.8mm cartridges may have been cutting edge in terms of the ballistic performance of their projectiles (6.5-7mm bullets are often very efficient in terms of aerodynamics), but in no way could the then-experimental rounds be considered true intermediates. The 280 British came in two varieties, according to the sources I've seen: 139-grains @ 2270 fps, and a 140-gr.load @ 2549 fps. These are full-power rifle loads, not intermediates. They are somewhat less-powerful in terms of muzzle energy than 7.62x51mm NATO, but not by all that much. If anything, the 280 came in around the same level of power as the old Swedish Mauser 6.5x55, a very respected cartridge, but nothing anyone would mistake for an intermediate. It is germane to note that the FAL was manufactured in 7x57mm under contract for the Belgian Congo, and a few other nations. Not the same as 280 British, but they were supposed to be very good rifles in their own right. I have never understood why the British Army didn't stick to their guns, so to speak, and ask that their design be accepted as an alternate or maybe an assault rifle cartridge. Or they could simply have remained silent and kept working on it until the time was ripe for its re-introduction. The old guard who had pushed through the 7.62x51 at U.S. Army Ordnance - the Col. Rene Studlers of the world - weren't going to be in charge forever, right? I don't know if you follow modern cartridge design, but the 6.5 Grendel is an amazing performer. It can push a 123-grain high-BC bullet to around 2350-2500 fps which remains supersonic out past 1200 yards. The 6mm ARC (.264-cal.) is also a very good performer. These are true intermediates, and can be fired out of a standard AR15 with a simple switch of the upper/barrel to the new chambering. Coming full-circle, the U.S. Army's adoption of 6.8 Fury echoes the British 280 as well. It isn't an intermediate in any sense of the word, either. Indeed, the new cartridge operates at such high pressures that new technology was invented to allow it in terms of the case design and other factors. But then, Big Green - the U.S. Army - insisted that it make its performance targets out of a short 13-inch barrel, which I think is crazy. There's no need for the barrel to have been that short, even accounting for the suppressor.
The modernized version may serve better task & purpose, but in replacing the wood furniture with plastic and metal and simple, organic lines with right angles and rails, the 'soul' of the weapon was lost, in my opinion.
Wood looks amazing. It sucks ass to deal with though. Cracking, swelling, and shattering if hit a certain way, it makes sense militaries went away from them. I think the best looking updates though are the polymer facsimile furniture. Those things preserve the look and feel of the originals much better than the rails. But of course, the rails are a necessity in this day and age.
The M14 inherits two traits from its "daddy," the M1 Garand that the FN FAL cannot inherit: A perceived cost advantage in machining and manufacturing (which is technically true) and the other is the supreme love from the largest segment of America to use one weapon in America's history. Because they were so similar in performance, I don't think the FN-FAL ever had a chance over WW2-bias of the M14. It is clear that the scaling down to 5.56 had a huge tactical impact on late 20th century infantry. The heavier round requires a better trained soldier to use equally well. What is a more interesting question to me is to ask why so many nations overlooked the problems solved by the 5.56 round (and its WaPac equivalents) for as long as they did. I think the FN-FAL's test of battle was across Africa, and a generation of Africans love it in a similar fashion to the way in which Americans loved the Garand (/M14). Remember that the M14 had a pretty short service life relative to the rifles before and after it. It wasn't exactly 'successful' in American service.
ofc it wasn't succesfull m14 honestly was still kinda outdated for its time but hey at least US got m16 ... ohh sorry ı meant M16A1 the original M16 according to some soldiers was still pretty shite
@@concealedpocketgary4193 - But you're a real expert, right? Tell all of us your qualifications - aside from having an internet connection, that is....
My first FN FAL during SADF basics in 1976 had wood furniture and later we got new composite stock rifles, some specialized units got the PARA 3 with a folding stock, cleaning and maintenance in the field was crucial. Wish I still had one today.
I was fortunate to serve in the Australian army in the 80's and 90's. I have used the M16, SLR and the Steyr. One advantage the M16 and Steyr have over the SLR is that they don't rust as easy in bad weather. You need to be vigilant with cleaning the SLR or it will fail. However i did like the SLR and was sorry to see it get fazed out in the early 90's. Then i fired the Steyr for the first time. with the telescopic sight it turned me from an average shot to a good shot. It improved the groupings for a lot of soldiers. By the way i was a combat engineer not an infantry soldier and i generally carried the M60. The Aussie army still uses the SLR for ceremonial parades and is a great weapon for doing rifle drill.
The 30 round mag was way too long, even on the l1a2. I used return the 3x30 round mags I was issued for the AR back to the Q wallas and get 5x20 rd mags instead.
I would've like to see a discussion on what the rifle would be like in the original .280 cartridge (or similar) it was designed for, and if any modern manufacturers are considering something like that. I'd love to see a modern FAL chambered in the 6mm+ range.
Wait, now i see something, at the date the FAL was projected, basically everyone was using M14 or so, in Europe, FN HERSTAL just used the M14 20-round boxes, since even the cartridge was the same 7.62x51mm
@@allancoelho6905 "at the date the FAL was projected, basically everyone was using M14 or so, in Europe" No. No NATO army ever adopted the M14, except the USA itself. In fact nobody adopted the M14 at all unless they were given them as US military aid. It just wasn't popular. Meanwhile the FAL was adopted by basically every western army except the ones (like Germany) that FN wouldn't license the design to. Over 90 users compared with ONE for the M14. That says it all, really.
I used the FN FAL or SLR as we called it in the NZ army. We preferred it over the M16A2. Its a fantastic rifle, I've never had a malfunction with it. Our SLR's were semiautomatic only, and yes they are very accurate.
FN FAL is probably my favourite rifle so I'm happy to see a video about it, always just seemed cool to me lmao And seeing the next gen version making me extra happy god damn 😩💀❤️
I used it when I was a young pleeb in the Canadian Armed Forces and I can tell you the FAL (or FN C1A1 in Canada) was one sweet honey of a rifle. Heavy...yes. But you always knew you had some serious firepower.
The US were dumb to take the m14, the fal was so much better as a service rifle, and it would have been so much better if they had gone the 280. British instead of 308
For anyone who cares to hear about this firearm fun-fact: It's a common belief that the AK-47 is a clone/heavily steals from the WW2 German StG-44 (it's considered the first "assault rifle", a intermediate caliber, select fire, rifle/carbine). That's just untrue, they only slightly resemble each other cosmically with the mechanism (bolt/bolt carrier) being completely different. The FAL however isn't as similar cosmetically but the internals are much more reminiscent of the StG-44, they both use a tilting bolt design (which isn't a very common locking mechanism, especially with new firearms), a major difference internally however is the fact the FAL uses a spring loaded short-stroke gas piston where the StG-44 used a long stroke gas piston (which is more similar to what a AK uses), also not all FALs are select fire due to the heavy recoil making full auto really hard to control, the StG-44 however is select fire. A major difference between FALs and most current military rifles (like the M-4 or AK-74) is the FAL is considered a battle rifle (due to its caliber), where AKs and ARs are considered assault rifles (I mean actual military select fire rifles, civilian versions are semi auto and aren't actually assault rifles).
Lots of nostalgia in Canada for the "FN" (aka FN FAL). The fact the C1/C1A1 was chosen by of all places Canada suggests that the FN did not have a real problem with cold weather! While full-autofire of the base rifle was a waste, Canada adopted a heavy-barrel and bipod equipped version (C2/C2A1) as a SAW (Section Automatic Rifle).
Thanks for watching hope you liked the video! Do you think the FN FAL rifle has a future in the military? Use code TP15 for 15% off your toy replica and it helps support the channel bit.ly/2OfaQWg
It bugs me. South Carolina ,now, has a manufacturer for most of the main rifles of the cold war era.
We are missing The M-14 and FAL.
FN has a plant in Columbia...wtf?
Fuck that just make a MA5D
where did you get the t-shirt?
Not as long as the POF Revolution DI exists. Alabama Arsenal has the best video on it.
ruclips.net/video/Mwl-AWev1GM/видео.html
Hey Chris can you make a video of the FVL, FARA, and B-21?
Britain somehow replaced the FAL with a heavier 5.56 rifle.
When they had the option to go with the C7/C8 like they choose to do with their SF. Didn't want to spend that much money so decided to use the pos rifles made in country. Actually Brit SF getting their new L115A2s (the new C8s) so they are handing down their old A1s (old C8s) to other units replacing their pos bullpups lol.
@@desertedgoatgaming The L115A2 is the Artic Warfare Magnum(I think) which is a British sniper rifle. I believe you mean the L119A2 which is the British version of the C8.
@@imperialinquisition6006 Yes, thank you for correct, I always do that and apparently never learn lol.
and shittier
@@LonersGuide seconded.
"I FN love the FN FAL"
Nice one.
I go full cheese every chance I get
@@Taskandpurpose you’ll make a great father, and it really shows if you already are one
I have FALlen in love with the gun
@@mice6545 Lol!
My favorite FN
"This rifle doesn't have enough recoil, I wish it would hurt my shoulder more!"
"Have you tried shooting it like this?" 9:21
"How do I break my collar bone while shooting a rifle?"
"Like this" 9:21
@@RR-us2kp, I don't think I'd worry about it breaking most collarbones, I broke my collarbone and it actually takes quite a bit. That being said, I would worry about it breaking MY collarbone: it didn't heal right. Lol
ive seen a lot of people do that. my dad does it too. kinda thinking it was some weird old world military training or something
O hell you are right... Lol I can't understand why you fire a rifle, not a gun. As you say... S. L. R. Was a great rifle to use eg. Shoot, strip. An clean. In my training I had to do it in pitch darkness. If I could have one. It would be great.. 👍😁🇬🇧
@@stealthandysteath1069 not allowed to have them here (Canada) either, which sucks because I really want one. I just ended up with four Lee Enfields instead. Lol
To be fair, the fal is absolutely superior to the ar and ak in the one metric that matters, how good it looks with a pair of short shorts on a man
😆 top comment! And yeh those shorts are like speedos. If I wore them my cleaning rod would def be exposed.
I don't know how you can say absolutely. I'd say the m166a2 is a superior rifle and I love a good SLR/FAL. Too bad we didn't get FAL rifles in 5.56.....
This is the story of rhodesia
@@VeryGemmy A land both fair and great?
Yes
Here in Brazil, we're now replacing the FN FAL by the Brazilian-made IA2, in 5,56 and 7,62 versions. But a true legend never dies...
We have some IA2's on our police departament, and some ParaFal's...
Long story short, FAL is great, IA2 is absolutely CRAP 🤣
Na moral o IA2 parece o filho bastardo da FAL com a qualidade das coisas feitas pela taurus. Muito melhor (e mais barato provavelmente) se eles tivessem dado um upgrade nas FAL que já tem no inventario do que fazer isso, quem sabe um dia o exercito não ganha um brinquedo novo de qualidade.
@@Juliovictor5000 entonces crees que seria mejor que Brazil haga lo que hace Argentina, y simplemente tomar sus viejos FALs y modernizarlas?
@@Burrito69killer, o Exército Brasileiro tem um programa de modernização do FAL, substituindo a tampa da caixa de culatra por uma nova com trilhos picatinny (boa para aparelhos de pontaria ópticos como red dots e LPVOs) e usando um cano mais curto e leve...
O Brasil tem ambientes ainda mais diversos que a belíssima Argentina, e o FAL é uma das poucas máquinas que funcionam com perfeição em todo o território nacional...
A propósito, eu acho o novo Taurus T4 muito melhor que o IA2!
@@samuel-JF1981 concordo com você...
I’m ex British Army & just before I was issued the SA90 I had the FAL SLR for nearly 2 years, omg it was a beast, deadly accurate with a great flat shooting curve up to 600m. Semi automatic was more than enough for this rifle, full auto was just a waste.
Yep.
Belgian Chocolate, "babeh".
Belgian Maroon Beret: 1st Lt, Belgian Para's, Marches Les Dames.
I prefered the FN Maximi (7.62 version of the FN Minimi, or SAW249'er, which is the same), which I could shoot shot per shot.
Attached a sniper scope, and got me a beastly "Full-Auto-Capable-Sniper Rifle".
Everyone laughed with me, until we hit the long-range firing range.
Up to a klick and some beyond, it was DAMN accurate.
And this with a 200 round "box-mag".
Decent, I would say.
.308 years s actually the opposite of a flat shooter in terms of modern smokeless cartridges.
You military guys tend to get very narrow experiences and fit the military rough enough is good enough.
.270 for instance is much flatter. And many many more.
@@HighMaintenancePS Know why, mr?
Without looking it up? :)
This seann saighdear does ...
Target will fall when hit....
It had stopping power which the SA80 didn’t at longer ranges over 300 yards
Belgium’s with a secret deal for chocolate and waffles
America messed up
What kan i say belgium makes good guns and better chocolate
hey don’t dis belgium chocolate or waffles
@@binamertens6782 and the Dutchies, who are worse at both, still sees Belgium as a little baby.
if we have to up the stakes, we throw in a couple of kegs of beer.
I own an L1A1. I once handed it to a visiting former SADF soldier, who got really emotional about it...teared up with joy over once again handling one.
If you worked and relied on it , you will understand and i will definate never trade it for 5.56. If you hit the enemy its time out for him.....
Most British soldiers from that era haven’t a bad word to say about the SLR, and will tell you it was an awesome personal weapon
As an ex British Soldier, i used and loved the L1A1 ( our version of the fal ) it was accurate and a very hard hitter. In my 12 years use i never had a stoppage or malfunction. We used it in all conditions from arctic warfare conditions to the jungles of Bruni and Beleze. Then we moved to the L85A1 ( sa80 ) what a pile of crap same weight as the SLR at 10lbs but usless.
We Aussies used it in Vietnam, and a lot of the ex-diggers of that era would have some tales to tell also about it, personally from my own 9 years experience of it in our army, I also never had any problems with it.
Agreed. Us Saffers used it extensive in the Bush War (FN FAL and R1-R3 series rifles, later the R4-6), it had a super reputation of long range efficacy and for putting terrs down.
According to comments by other people who served in the Royal marines or the Royal Army, they say that they call the L85A1 the "The civil servant" because it's expensive, unable to replace, and doesn't work.
I suppose it's like a WW2 veteran looking at the SLR thinking it's the end of the world as we know it.
@@roybennett9284 no thats not what i am saying, SA80 was absolute shite it fell apart , but plate cracked and fell apart , magazines fell out because the release catch was not covered, hand gaurd sracked. Working parts jammed because the pressed steel warped so they did not return when i got hot. The british army was offered the FNCAL a 5.56 rifle that was proven.
Imagine using the M14
*This post was made by the FAL gang*
And the rest of the free world
imagine putting M in all your equipment names
this post was made by literally everyone besides the US gang
@@germanwarrabbit there are few non-US guns like the Mosin Nagant M44
Imagine owning either
*this post was mafe by broke gang ;_;*
Imagine using a FAL
*This post was made by the C1 gang*
Something that you overlooked the fact that the Brazilian IMBEL produces a Next Generation FN FAL called the IA2. It is likely even greater upgrade than the SA58.
Keep in mind that I am talking about the IA2 in 7.62, as IMBEL also makes an IA2 model in 5.56mm which internally is a good bit more different than original FN FAL (has a locking system like that of AR-15)
When your enemy outnumber you 10 to 1 and sometimes 50 to 1 , you would'nt want any other rifle but a FAL. In urban war it shoots thru walls and trees. In the late 70's we used a folding butt version in the parabats in the South African border war.
Fn Fal n G3 were used throughout Latin America during the 1980s. Recruits that were new were given M16. It didn’t matter if they died or not!
funny thing is, you were actually right, in the end. usa just replaced their front line dude guns with "xm5" which is essentially fn fal copy.
with suppressor and modern computer scope, it weighs even slightly more than the original fn fal. carries heavy 20 round battle rifle magazines.
It's been 35 years. I reckon I could still field strip and assemble the ol' SLR in the dark.
Same here. But I cheat as I have one privately.
Same here.
No problem at all.
Yup I did that too. Remember how you placed parts left to right as you disassembled it.
Remember the gas plug taking flight if piston wasn’t held down when removing it.
I can do that too, but I do have 10 FALs here at home!!
4:58 DSA stands for _David Selvaggio Arms_ , named after the founder. It was founded in 1987 and incorporated in 1992. Originally providing surplus FAL receivers and parts, they later got into the business of manufacturing complete FAL rifles.
The DSA SA58 is a semi-auto only version of the Austrian FN FAL (or StG58 > _Sturmgewehr_ 1958). They bought the FAL production lines from Steyr in the mid-1990s when they ceased production of the StG58. The SA58 uses metric-dimension spare parts and magazines and is not compatible with inch-dimension FALs like the Commonwealth L1A1 and Canadian C1A1. It is available in rifle (19-, 20-, or 21-inch barrel) and carbine (16.25- or 18-inch barrel) versions.
The OSW ( _Operational Specialist Weapon_ ) is an SA58 made in submachinegun length (11-inch barrel) or sub-carbine length (13-inch barrel) versions.
The M14s used in the arctic testing against the FAL were specialized. They were set aside weeks in advance, tuned, and specially lubricated for arctic conditions. The FALs were given no such treatment. The entire test was a sham, but this was standard operating procedure for the Ord Corps, which sabotaged all the M14's competition with the same zeal they hid the M14's many deficiencies. It wasn't just the FAL they stacked the deck against. They fired proof rounds full auto through an early AR10 with a pencil weight barrel until it ruptured, then dropped the rifle. They removed chrome lining and changed powders on the AR15, issued them as self cleaning with no cleaning kits, and then promoted every single failure the rifle had in combat.
The M14 was always an abysmal failure, but its shortcomings were covered by Big Army, who considered it their golden boy. They spent 13 years developing the M14 and it always had problems, from improper heat treating in the receivers and bolts, causing them to crack or lose headspace, to literally everything on the rifle, from flash suppressors to gas cylinders rattling loose. Even after it became apparent that they would not be able to use M1 Garand tooling for the M14, they continued to pump 100 million dollars of tax payer money developing and hyping their abomination of a rifle. For comparison, the Italians spent just five years developing the M1 Garand for box magazines and adopting the BM59, a serviceable rifle by their standards. The M14 was tested against the M16 in 1968 and was found to not be conclusively more reliable or accurate than even the pre-A1 "Mattel Death Trap" M16. Big Army constantly swept these problems under the rug, even opening up acceptable accuracy to 5 MOA for the problem child M14.
The M14 is and always has been a piece of shit. The fact that we could have had and would probably still be using a FAL in .280 British should anger all American servicemen past or present. We got cheated for politics, ended up with a rifle that stayed in front line service less than half the time it took to develop it, and never lived up to the hype. Even as it continued to be used in specialized roles into the GWOT, most of them ended up staying in Humvees and collecting dust as they were too finicky and heavy, and often required armorer level attention for even basic maintenance, because the Sage stocks required very specific torque settings and had to settle and then be rezeroed prior to leaving the wire. There has never been a failure in procurement even close to that of the M14, and the M14 remains an embarrassing black eye on the face of American small arms.
Thank you for confirming what I already knew. Back when it was legal for us Brits to own semi-auto rifles, I bought a Springfield M1A for competitions, believing it was superior to my L1A1, or G3. It took me Three Non-qualifications, to realise it was a waste of my hard-earned money. I sold it less that six months after I bought it and went back to my beloved L1A1.
@@russbetts1467 I too wasted money on a Springfield M1A. I shot it with irons because it was so difficult to scope and was content until the gas cylinder shot loose around 1000 rounds. I sent it to Springfield for a unitized gas system and had the bolt roller fly off within a dozen rounds of getting it back from them. I did some research and discovered "Springfield Bolt Roller Impact Defect." Did some more research and discovered all the stuff in my first post. I still have the M1A as it has sentimental value, but I use an Aero Precision M5 ( AR10) for my rifle needs. The AR10 has been superior in literally every single way. It is more reliable, more durable, more accurate, more pleasant and controllable to shoot, easier to scope and accessorize, easier to maintain...just better. The M1A doesn't have a single advantage over the AR10, or as near as I can tell, any other 7.62mm battle rifle. It is truly the worst of the worst and everything a service rifle shouldn't be.
It's just funny. The Soviets were on the right track with the AK-47 and the US had the M14 which didn't last long at all as the service rifle of the US military. The Germans had already learned the lesson in WWII, resulting in the Sturmgewehr. The Soviets arrive on the right track with the AK. The US will finally get a clue with the M16 but even that had some early drama and issues.
@@Warmaker01 M16 only had issues because it was intentionally sabatoged by the same assholes in Big Army that were promoting the M14. Once the M16 was given proper chrome lining and propellants, and issued with cleaning kits, problems went away. The M16 has ended up being a better assault rifle than the AK. The M16/M4 is the professionals choice all over the world whereas the only people still using the AK are barefoot 3rd world disgruntled goat farmers suffering from 1400 years of inbreeding.
@@MTMILITIAMAN7.62 well i guess a few hundred years to go for the US to be a country guilty of inbreeding ?? 🤔🤔
"I don't have a dog in this race at all"
*sad ATF noises*
Bruh.... 😂😂😂
My dude is spittin fire
Nah! The ATF are getting repurposed and renamed...
Their uniforms will read "Alcohol Tobacco and Fuckups" in the future, and they will also work as scapegoats, so they can be blamed and have to answer for anything!
A great repurposing of an organization.
Dont tease them like that
Fuckin' savage.
Americans; "The FAL is too heavy"
Also Americans: replacing M4 with something heavier than the FAL
I carried one of these although we called them the SLR loved that bad boy always gave me confidence.
If I'm not mistaken the "SLR" title literally meant "self loading rifle" which is a rather apt description of the L1A1 in British commonwealth service since they were semi-only
@@Shadow_Hawk_Streaming I once had the opportunity to fire a Full Auto FAL. First three rounds hit the target. Where the others went, I have NO idea. Standard NATO Number 11 Target at 100 metres. You can keep you full-auto Bundukis. That's a Gat to you youngsters who never had the pleasure of carrying the L1A1.
Truth. I almost felt sorry for potential enemy soldiers on the receiving end of section or platoon fire from the L1A1.
I carry a SLR in Vietnam and loved it. I had a m16 for a while and hated it. With the SLR it would shot shoot right through the bamboo while the m16 couldn't. I had a fire fight in a monsoon laying in a river bed and the SLR never stopped firing. I like the 223 round for hunting but not for combat, the 7.62 just punched through everything
Me too - that unmistakable sound of the brass being ejected - I miss it badly
"Except the US". Yeah actually West Germany used G3 mostly. Only in the 50s did they use FAL but still.
"Gewehr 1" or G1, but the Belgies weren't about to let them license it for production in (W.) Germany... Something about being invaded twice in the lifetime(s) of some of the FN company directors *might* have played a part in that decision, ya think?
While it wasn't in extensive use with the Bundeswehr , it was used by the militarized Border guard (Bundesgrenzschutz) as their Standard issue rifle until the 90s.
@@MrDeutschGerman Are you reffering to the BGS/BPZ or the bundeswehr? Cause the G1 was starting in '56 the standart rifle of the bundeswehr. Till '59 where the G3 came into play. The G3 is even used by the bundeswehr till today but primarely "newer" variants and some rebooted ones as well.
@@nunyabidniz2868 Turns out the G3 is still in use though and the FAL not so mutch.
@@MrUnkasen, Ireland, Brazil, Argentina, and maybe Portugal (not sure on this last one) still use the FAL. Just because the G3 is awesome doesn't mean we have to shit on the FAL, even Germany loved their G1 (german made FAL rifles).
The G3 still sees alot of use in some countries. Portugal still uses them despite wanting to transition to the SCARs and Norway has modded some to be up to modern standards
If fal is the right arm, g3 is definitely the left arm of free world
No Português Scar l & 17
I like how that old guy was holding that shorty FAL in the beginning like only half on his shoulder like it was a 556 carbine lol. I bet he readjusted it after that shot
@Bill and Jizz it's not particularly bad, I own a lightweight 7mm Mag Browning hunting rifle that kicks quite hard for example. But a similar size and weight 7.62 carbine is obviously alot more recoil than a 556.. that was a pretty short FAL.. don't think you'd make a habit out of shooting it like that. If not for recoil discomfort for accuracy
@Bill and Jizz 76.2? What tf you be shooting.
40 yrs ago... I was USMC. Getting training at Camp Lejuene.
Argentina seized the Falkland Islands. And Britain responded. As the British transport (another story) travelled south. They did a quick exercise at Lejuene.
I had chance to check out the FN FAL. A nice very nice weapon.
I'd have to say the Brit version is slightly better suited to combat.
I was a conscript with a FAL in the SADF serving three months on the northern Namibian border. When I got home I heard there had been a war in the Falklands. Being a journlalist in civvy life, the revelation came as a huge shock.
Interesting... although the M14 is in no way the FAL competitor, that would be the HK G-3. The M14 is just a charming but oddball choice made by the US only. The 2 main battle rifles of the cold war era are the FAL and the G3.
I would go HK G3 all day
@@notkyrill1144 Have you ever used both? Not at the range for an hour either. I mean really used!
@@mazambane286 I have a small collection of them, including a transferable full auto version of both. The G3 has it beat in accuracy, reliability, and modularity...but the FAL is easier to shoot and maintain.
@@Skinflaps_Meatslapper You must have a very special one then. Because I've used both and I can testify the G3 is a heap of shit.
I've seen their butts crack in half for no reason. I've seen those aluminium magazines fall apart for no reason.
And besides who wants to reach all the way up to the muzzle to cock a rifle?
Trust me. Under proper field conditions the G3 does not come anywhere near the FAL in the reliability race either.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
"A charming but oddball choice made by the U.S. alone."
Have you counted the number of U.S. personnel at the time compared to the rest?
The M-14; absolutely was competitive. It's an outstanding weapon.
The FN-FAL is itself an excellent weapon, as is the H&K 91.
A man armed with any of the three, properly manufactured and maintained, would be well armed.
You guys should check Brazil's evolution of the FAL, the Imbel IA2. As said in the video the new version made in Brazil will be mainly in the 5.56 version, but for the specialized jungle troops there is a 7.62 version of the rifle. A really cool redesign of the FAL and interesting interpretation of what a hibrid M4/FAL would be like.
FNC 5.56 , FN Cal 5.56 , Scar l 5.56
US should then buy those as itll once again be needing those to fight survive & WIN in any&all current & future jungle combat. If Brazil can do it then the USA can do it too and much much more & better as well.
@@fredcollins8919 Oh you northern guys wanna compete? It's on then, bring it on yankees, we'll make the better rifle.
Now for serious, if our guns can help you guys figth off them reds and terrorists, we'll help y'all
@@elvispresley2284Hi Elvis. Glad to see youve finally resurrected from the legions of dead stars from the past & bring us more joy in kickass rocknroll as music nowadays (1996-2022) sucks royally. As for infantry assault rifles, rest assured that despite the US, UK France Germany/Austria Switzerland DO (& have Always made & best used) those mentiomed wespons, esp for jungle warfare (a MUST), desert warfare, mountain warfare & urban combat, it WOULD still be a good idea for both Brazil & the US (& others) to unite forces, being the military/political/ideological/cultural/social/economic etc etc etc Allies/friends/partners that we have always have been & ARE (along with Colombia, Chile, Peru & many others in region) to do as you suggested, unite forces & brains FAST & quickly & effectively develop highly lethal highly effective muktipurpose multiregion/environment modern assault rifle for the 21st century onwards, & yes, use it superbly & mercilessly to quickly & effective stomp.out few remaining ectremist far left loser communist insurgents and/or communist armed forces & others etc etc, jointly as mentioned earlier. Last but not least, all US troops routinely train in & receive the worlds finest jungle warfare training. Always have & always Will. Cheers, Elvis!!!
@@fredcollins8919 I'm back from the dead, the music of today is horrible enough to be as an torture method.
I agree, we should join forces once again, our nations have always been allies, we need to develop weaponry, armies and tactics to wipe out the reds, terrorists and etc..., I also think there should be an equivalent of NATO, but for the American Continents
We also need to figth back China, they're an evil that has to be put down.
Until then, cheers yankee, may God bless the USA, and may God bless Brazil.
The FAL IMO is a really aesthetically pleasing rifle, and is in fact, more than powerful enough and damn accurate. A great piece.
Ah, memories. The SLR, as we called it, was our standard weapon and loved in all ways except weight. We had some M16s as well, I think one per squad IIRC and although the light weight was appreciated, it felt like a plastic toy. And this was back when plastic was fragile and crappy. We were told, by Vietnam Vets who should know (should) that the SLR round would go straight through an M113, but the dinky 556 wouldn’t. And the AK 7.62 had to be at the right angle and distance to do so and the right angle and distance was a very limited situation. As we spent far too much time in an M113, it was nice to know that only we had the rifle that would make our armour useless :D.
Well, i don't know if the M113 over here have been improved over the ones used in Vietnam, but i guarantee that it could hold a 7.62x51mm pretty well. And i've sat right by the diesel tank more than i would like to hahaha
The SLR great weapon a great man killer,better than a lot of the garbage weapons of today. ⚔️⚔️⚔️🇬🇧🇬🇧
7.62x51 ball ammo is not going through a M113 LMAO, at least at any significant distance. Shitty APCs anyways.
As I seem to recall we Brits claimed the M16 was made by Pallitoy.
The DS Arms FAL variants are works of art, really happy they are keeping a gem of a rifle alive.
They probably made a bunch of sales, because of this video too. :)
These are about $1800 😭
They need to move out of IL before the governor and Kinzinger shuts them down.
@@scotteric8711 Dude there is a proposed Federal Assault Weapons Ban...again. It has higher odds of passing this time aswell. It might not matter where they move to. :(
@@sovereign6291 I'm very aware. Whoever is making 50 BMG nowadays was ahead of the curve months ago. That's how I know where this is headed. The price of that has only been driven so low by over production. And if you watch, we are slowly watching all the niche calibers slowly pick up now as the mainstream rounds are unavailable. The only obstacle to the BMG was its cost, and they removed it knowing so.
I used the 7.62 FN FAL in the Belgian army. It was heavy as hell to log around whole day. But I loved it at the shooting range.
Same here during my navy days , we used the FAL and FALO , as the dutch always want something different they opted for the bi-pod version. I cant tell you how many times my fingers got caught when folding them back .
Kutwijf
You can't have your cake and eat it. ⚔️⚔️⚔️
Regarding the FAL’s reliability in Arctic conditions: look up the FN C1A1 variant. It has the Arctic Trigger, the Action Cover has a Clip reloading guide and the action cover is cut back to expose the full cycle of the bolt (dramatically reducing stoppages). This variant also has an adjustable gas regulator, which allows you to tune the performance of the gun according to weather conditions. I learned to shoot on that rifle as an Army Cadet about a gazillion years ago. My two complaints about the C1, was the lack of full automatic capability, and the flash eliminator. I would want to acquire the reproduction rights for the FAL Compensator designed and used by the Rhodesian Army. These devices apparently tamed the tendency for the weapon to “climb” on long bursts. Recoil was mitigated. As a result, control was enhanced as well.
One thing which I want to mention - we trained out to 1000 meters with these rifles. It was a great confidence booster as a kid, being shown how to use a precision tool like that.
If it had stayed .280 you would have had lower recoil (letting you go full rock and roll easier), less failure rate and a lot of the other "Problems"would never bean had in the first place.
And now the USA wants to replace 5.56 and 7.62 with 6.8 like that isn’t exactly what Britain suggested 80 years ago with the 280 brit.
“The United States can always be relied upon to do the right thing - having first exhausted all possible alternatives.” -Winston Churchill
The FAL didn't have a high, or moderate failure rate. It is extremely reliable.
@@samueladams1775 you've never filed down the pin to turn your Semi Auto in to a Full Auto have you?
and you think the FAL is reliable in 7.62, in testing in normal battlefield conditions they where unable to induce a failure, they had to do some fairly extreme temperature and Grit exposure to make it fail wile shooting .280.
@@glenmcinnes4824 mine had no problems and no, I didn't alter anything. I didn't need to.
@@glenmcinnes4824 it takes more than grinding off the little pin to make a FAL full auto. It takes a different sear, or a modification to the sear.
Hey Chris. Can you do a video about CAS aircraft like the A-10 and the AC-130?
I second this. Also can you do all the killstreak rewards from COD mobile.
Great idea ! it's been a while since I've done any air craft videos
Yes it would be a great video mate
@@Taskandpurpose Real engineering has a detailed video on the A-10 if you want to research it the same way as the FAL ;)
Haha A10 go brrrrrrrt
I adore the FN FAL. It's so accurate, rugged, and powerful! You just can't go wrong with one in the sense that even though you're humping 15 lbs around all day; it pays back your sweat equity in spades! You can really reach out and touch someone with it, plus the follow up shots come quick and easy too.
Really enjoyed using the rifle when I joined the Canadian armed forces in 1977, even though my trade required me to carry the smg. I felt safer with the FN. still serving,but behind a desk.
Imagine using the AR-10
This was made by FAL gang
M110 master race
This was made by the Armalite gang
the right arm of the free world? more like the western world's hurkin jerking arm.
Posted by AR Gang.
@Roderick storey Isn`t that just a FN FNC?
@@odaxovv or FN CAL (predecessor to the FNC)
@@desertedgoatgaming fuck the m110
This was made by sr25 gang...
Australia & NZ used the FN aka L1A1 7.62 SLR from the 60's to the 90's
It was heavy & long but being able to shoot through a 14" dia tree trunk, any brick wall, or a 2" steel Water pipe made a difference
Carried one for 3 years 10/27 inf btn. definitely had great stopping power. and looked good on the parade ground. Still remember rest on arms reversed from ANZAC day
7.62 x 51 will not go through 14inch of live tree. Although it has more penetration than 5.56 or 7.62x39 it has less penetration than 30/06 or even say 6.5 x 55 swede which has better sectional density.
7.62x 51 is a shortened 30/06 Springfield for purposes of packaging. It is a sub optimal cartridge firing a relatively short bullet with a poor ballistic co efficient.
It is though of course still a powerful round. Just not as powerful as cartridges optimised for performance rather than packaging.
There is always some keyboard warrior that's just read a ballistics chart and is all clued up .
@@HighMaintenancePS Depends on what kind of tree we're talking about m8.
@@simonschuh5283 They still use shiny ones today on ceremonial duty.! Was not bad on the MTR. My uncle had the contract to make all the rounded foregrips in his factory at Concord and designed it with heat reflecting inner liner. I use to like shooting it on the MTR. But I was only a Sig so.....more radio than shooting!
The FAL should have been chambered in .280; the US forcing .308 on it is what made it not as good as it could’ve been. Intermediate cartridges were the future, and NATO could’ve got there decades earlier if the US hadn’t pulled that...
Isn't the idea behind intermediate rounds today is for better body armor penetration? Shooting against an unarmored target (as everyone pretty much was in the cold war days) it makes sense to use the lightest rounds that you can right?
@@Scroolewse nah, there's an issue of lighter rounds not having the stopping power, otherwise everyone would be using the submachine guns and there was plenty of them availible.
There's a need in a balance between low weight of equipment (gun, magazines, total ammo) and disabling an opponent with a shot and hit him far away, possibly behind a cover.
There's a reason AKM is still very common in russian special forces. Heavy 7.62x39mm has a strong punch despite the subsonic speed. It drops a body with a single hit, unlike 5.45 that can potentially fly through, leaving a person injured, but still armed and dangerous.
@@bionmccool 7.62x39 isn’t subsonic by default
The AKM isn’t very popular with Russian SF anymore, in fact most guys don’t even use 7.62x39 anymore other than Zaslon.
7.62x39 isn’t a magic instakill round either, and 5.45 creates more devastating wound channels, while being better at range too, and it keeps velocity well at longer ranges.
5.45 is overall a much more effective round than 7.62x39 all things considered
@@bionmccool .280 (or any of the other 6mm+ rounds would be the happy medium. A lot harder hitting than the 5.56, and far more controllable than the 7.62. The only problem with those rounds, at least here in the U.S. is availability and price -- but had they been adopted by NATO, there would be a plethora today.
But but murica #1!! What do they know about guns anyway! :(
.308 makes some of the cover available into concealment.
@Class Act
Die laaste woorde van enige floppy?
'Ek het FAL-len en ek kan nie opstaan nie.'
@@hellacoorinna9995 huh
@@k9officerft434 I think it’s Dutch if you wanna put it into Google Translate or something.
@@notisac3149 he said from what I can see: The last words of any floppy? 'I have FAL - len and I can not get up. '
8:59 "This is a difficult thought experiment, ........we'll never know". Eh, we do know. The M14 was the shortest serving rifle in U.S. military history and no major country adopted it, whereas the FN FAL......
Hey Cappy! Recently the Brazilian military is moving on from their old Fals(here we have a locally produced short version called PARA-FAL), Brazilians came up with a 5.56 rifle(IA2 5.56mm), but also adopted a really dope version of the FAL to use as a DMR.
Check it out it's called IA2 7.62mm, I think that any FAL fan would love it.
Keep up the good work Chris!
O Brasil poderia ter mudado do 7.62 NATO para o .243 (já que há uma necessidade de um rifle de combate urbano), porque basicamente a única mudança necessária para a arma usar este calibre seria trocar o cano (ferrolhos , armações, carregadores são todos iguais para .243 e 7.62 NATO), o que faz com que o custo de troca de calibre seja bem menor (e hoje temos balas de .243 com peso próximo as balas de 5.56, o que se traduz em um recuo menor e também pode-se usar menos pólvora para ter um desempenho semelhante a 5.56, mas sem ter a dor de cabeça de ter que reabastecer todo arsenal com armas de um calibre muito diferente ou lidar com as desvantagens do 7.62 para combate urbano)
*Sees the FAL and sweats Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2019*
Its over rated but I love it, semi's are so much fun
@@paulpittman2554 it’s a 1 shot kill in hardcore
@@Quakkauq hardcore is the only way to play
Yup
And MGSV.
The SLR is a magnificent Soldiers weapon that is battle proven for reliability in adverse conditions, stopping power and accuracy at range, three important factors to a Soldier on the battlefield, and greatly appreciated by us in the South Atlantic in 1982, it's worth carrying the extra bit of weight.
With a barrel that short, you are actually getting ballistic effectiveness about that of an AKM, but paying for .308 ammo. InRange did a video on that
Yeah most of this short barrel 308s are just dumb. Lot of recoil, bright as fireball and end of the day a AKM would be better.
@P. Cameron push is mostly American civilian market. Most countries with Fal marksman rifels still use full sized rifels.
They could do what Japan did: adopt the 7.62NATO round, but download it to the ballistics of the 7.62x39.
Use existing stocks of full power ammo for the crew served machine guns.
@P. Cameron honestly, for me most of those countries that use or used the 7.62 NATO should switch to .243 (for the need of a close combat rifle), because basically the only change needed for the weapon to use this caliber is change the barrel (bolts, receivers, magazines are all the same for .243 and 7.62 NATO), which makes the cost of changing the caliber is much lower (and today we have .243 bullets with a weight close to 5.56, which translates into a lower recoil and you can also use less powder to have a performance similar to 5.56, but without having the headache of having to replenish your entire arsenal with weapons that receive a very different caliber or dealing with the disadvantages of 7.62 NATO for CQC)
@@gamerbg294 I think the issue for most countries is not replacing the weapons, but instead scrapping ginormous stockpiles of 7.62 NATO. Retaining the 7.62 NATO for MGs would allow them to use it up, and gradually transition to another round. It’s one of the reasons the US has never gotten rid of 7.62 for MGs, despite tons of research dollars dedicated to 6.5 caliber SAWs in the 80s.
Title: fal glows up
Mercenaries : OHH YEEAAAAAAH
Siege of Jadotville 2 : Electric Boo galoo
Back when the manliest of men went into Congo for weekend fun times
@@globalwarfighter lol
My Dad fought in the Rhodesia war with a FAL and a pair of stubbies stationed on the out skirts of Bulawayo. We use to watch the paratroopers jumping from our back garden. I was six years old, we would practice drills with my mom and my siblings, crawling from our beds to the passages cupboard in case we were hit, fortunately it never happened.
That would have been the Rhodesian Light Infantry (RLI) One of the bravest units god ever shoveled guts into! Never forgotten.
Who needs women when you can have an FAL
What about both?
@@teoborges3949 No, only FAL
FAL brings the women.
@@LonersGuide only chads use FAL
FAL never leaves
"Your AR is decent until you need a 7.62x39 AK"
*FAL has joined the chat*
*7.62x35mm/.300 AAC Blackout has joined the chat*
*7,5mm Swiss joined the chat*
Galil: Dont you leave me behind
Die laaste woorde van enige floppy?
'Ek het FAL-len en ek kan nie opstaan nie.'
I can't think of any situation where I'd rather have 7.72×39 over 5.56 and I'm an ak fanboy. Well, an ak fanboy who's main rifle is an ar 🤣
Not a perfect platform, but after many years of shooting the M14, I had the chance to shoot an FN FAL. WOW! The ergonomics are fantastic!. Average accuracy and reliability. Parts replacement much easier than any of the others in the class. Long? Yes. Heavy? Kinda, but not too heavy.
I was in the Canadian army when we used the FN and manufactured the rifle in this country under license to our specs.
One thing is we trained with it extensively for winter warfare and it performed well. Of course we didn’t use oil to lubricate it in winter. We used powered graphite. Never froze up.
But I’d prefer it or an M14 over the M16. Just like that full power round.
Trained in Canada with the FN and used it in a number of comp. It was a Good rifle ,slightly on the heavy side but you sure could reach out and touch someone.
My Canadian FN C1A1 was an excellent rifle. Unlike most versions of the FN FAL it was semi-auto only, but it had some features that made it perfect for the Canadian Army: It had a removable trigger guard so you could fire it while wearing arctic mitts; It had a built-in mag charger so you could load a stripper clip straight into the magazine without needing to remove the mag; And it had a wooden stock that wouldn't crack in extreme cold weather like the plastic stocks used in other NATO armies.
It also was accurate and punched really, really hard! I remember a "firepower" demonstration put on by visiting US Army troops where they fired 5.56mm rounds at a cinderblock wall, chipping it into pieces until there was nothing left. It didn't impress us. We knew our 7.62mm NATO rounds would punch straight through a cinderblock wall and take out anyone standing on the other side. One round, one kill.
Fun thing I learned while looking into IMBEL, they have done even more modernizing with the FAL. IMBEL currently makes the IA2 for contractors and the Brazilian military and police forces, it appears to be a smaller FAL chambered in 5.56 NATO that takes STANAGs. Has an adjustable folding stock and rails so the user can attach whatever they need.
"Thanks babe"
*Looks at empty ring finger*
It's ok man, me too
Imagine dying
This is brought to you by the rhodesian gang
Thank you, sometimes I forget to do that.
Zimbabwe more like zimbabwont haha funni.
yeah rhodesia did die lmao
@@oppdropper1312 Who paid you to say this propaganda. Rhodesia was only occupied.
There was a time. I would wake up, discover i wasn't dead and wonder why.
Dying doesn't matter. What i do before i die is everything.
I have had a Belgian FN FAL for several decades now and have a scope mount for it. I also have an HK 91 both of which fire the 7.62 x 51. I prefer the FAL since it handles smoothly and have a scope mount that allows for easy on/ off scope scope detachment . This battle cartridge handles long distance shooting, unlike the 5.56 mm . The FAL is truly an 600- 1000 meter battle rifle . I think that the M 14 won out for political reasons rather than practical ones.
We used the FN FAL in Australia as main infantry section riflemans weapons as we called it "L1A1 SLR" or simply "SLR", right through from the late 1950's until the end of the 1980's.
Loved it.
Also had an L1A2 version, not so widely used; pretty much heavier barrel, detachable bipod and a 30-round magazine, selective fire, mini-squad concept.
But the SLR was easy to use and the ammunition same as the section forepower weapon, the M60.
Would be great to see a modern updated version.
Even better, I want one!
We also had a version of the L1A2 down here in South Africa, called the FAL HBAR, I've seen a few locally, but they are very hard to find nowadays.
When I served, I loved and mean loved the SLR L1A1.
During Malvinas War in 1982, Argentina ´s Army used The Fals in two version: FAL ( Fusil Automatico Ligero ) and FAP ( Fusil Automático Pesado). Today, Argentina ´s Army is developing a new version of this strong rifle.
4:18 that's not a Fal, that's a G3.
IKR. They are distinctively different to the trained eye, yet people so often make the mistake of confusing one for another.
.........well spotted :)
Ak4 to be honest, Swedish variant of the G3
I used that weapon for 8 months of my conscription.
I carried M14 and I own one now. Wasn’t so heavy in boot camp, but now it weighs a ton it seems.
50 years past boot camp takes its toll.
I have the 18" barrel fixed stock SA58 and it shoots really well. I haven't found a folding stock that is as comfortable and swapping out the fixed stock for a folder also requires a different lower receiver and bolt carrier.
An 11" barrel is too short for the 7.62 NATO. I wouldn't go below 16".
The Right Arm Of The Free World
Ah yes Aboy
@@texan_nerd8168 ah yes a boy
Ah yes, my favourite gun/game channel, Aboy
@@jaxsonwilson765 god damni a typo
@@texan_nerd8168 l
Having shot both the FAL & the M14 a lot I personally found the FAL not comfortable to shoot. It felt awkward. The M14 always felt good and comfortable. I'd definitely give the modern version of the FAL a good try out and see how she felt.
My family was transferred from Uitenhage (now Kariega) near Port Elizabeth in 1962 because my dad was a toolmaker needed in Pretoria to work on making FALs under licence for the SADF. Imagine my horror when reporting for national service in 1971 I was issued with a Lee Enfield Mk IV. The reason was because I had elected to serve in the Commandos, a type of home guard. One saving grace was that my platoon commander was Quinten George Murray Smythe, VC. And I got an FAL, which we called the R1, about three years later when conscripts were transferred from the Commandos to regular reserve infantry regiments. My outfit did patrols in the then Rhodesia, but not in shorts.
The germans had the good old g3
But the First rifle the Bundeswehr used was actually the FN FAL, just called G1
great weapon, i freaking love it.
Portugal uses that one
Germany used G3 because FN refused to let Germany build FALs. Something about being invaded twice.
Ah yes, the spiritual successor to the chauchat
So you admit that it's the fault of the U.S. That it shoots such a heavy recoil cartrige rather than what the brits proposed which would have been lighter on recoil but just as effective in practice.
You got that right.
The Brits had the better cartridge idea. What about a version in 6 mm Remington ?
I loved the SLR. This was my personal weapon when I first enlisted and for the first 3 years of my service. Amazing weapon. The recoil wasn't ever a problem. It works well in FIBUA but it's too long for CQB. The Australians used the SLR in Vietnam and never had a problem with it and I can't ever recall hearing that they wanted an M16 while serving alongside the US.
The reference to the Rhodesian short shorts was a nice touch.
Would it have been worth the US adopting it? just from a logistics perspective it makes sense to use the same rifle as your allies. particularly when it is a better rifle. re the production issue, if Australia could afford to build it, the US could manage it. recoil? not an issue if you train with it.
Canada manufactured it too. But we kept the rifle semi automatic. We had the FN C2 which was the automatic version with bipod and a much heavier barrel. That was a heavy rifle.
@@leewaun Aust did the same with the L1A1 SLR and the L2A1 (Heavy barrel variant) being capable of Auto fire and had 30rd mags
@@politenessman3901 And I was almost always the C2 gunner in my section. I was one of the smallest guys in the platoon but they liked my attitude so they always assigned one of the C2’s to me.
We usually had 2 C2’s per section.
Oh as to one of the many great moments in the career of the M14 it is the rifle carried by the Marines in the opening credits of Gomer Pyle.
@@leewaun Back in my day an Aust Inf section had 1 x GPMG M60, 2 or 3 M16A1 (one with M203 GL) and the rest were L1A1 SLRs (10 Man sect if fully manned).
I carried the M60 for 2 years, then became a Regt Sig with M16 and 77 Set radio.
L2A1 was for 2nd line units in Aust service (along with the 7.62mm Bren).
I have a SA58 or DS Arms copy of the FAL. I also have an MA-1A (M-14), PTR 91(G-3) and an Armalite AR-10. They are all battle rifles and they are all quality weapons.
FN-FAL, or as we always refered to it, the SLR, was definitely a long weapon for longer range shooting. The newer 5.56 weapons a great for closer, more mobile fighting. But I will say that the SLR was good for arms drill as at least, you could put it on the ground.
@Vince no idea where you have got that information from. Everything I have ever seen about it shows it as being as accurate as iron sights allow.
@Vince Are you talking from Personal Experience? Have you ever fired one? Or are you just repeating what some 'Armchair Soldier' told you? As 'Company Marksman' in my unit, I never had trouble hitting targets at Half-a-Mile.
As an ex infantryman who used SLR and SA80, SLR was a reliable rifle in 6 years it never let me down , however when we converted to SA80 it was a total let down for the 3 years i used it, 5.56 absolutley usless . Eventually it was improved and worked to a degree, it still has problems , FN offered the british government the FN CAL5.56 but we had spent a fortune already and was rejected.
I was going to bring up the Falklands conflict about how we uses a semi where the argies had full auto, but that's like comparing my football (soccer not hand egg) skills to Beckham's 👀
In the original proposed cartrige or even if they'd considered a 5.56 variant instead of the sa-80 series in the 70s\80s full auto was very viable due to the weight and front heavy balance
The trouble with full auto, is the limited amount of ammo each man can carry, to remain effective. 120 rounds in 6 magazines; 2 Bandoleers of 50 rounds in stripper clips; a box of 200 rounds in stripper clips and 100 rounds of 'Disintegrating Link' for the 'Gimpy'. That lot weighed close to 30 Pounds, on top of all your other kit. Full Auto? No Thanks. 20 Aimed Shots Per Minute suits me fine; 30 in a firefight.
We also had Royal Marines though.
I feel sorry for the poor Argentine conscripts who's last heard words were "FIX BAYONETS".
@@russbetts1467 would it make a ass out of you and me if I assumed you served ?? 😅
There talk from books, then there's I did it talk 😅 this come across as I was there 🤯
@@bradcogan8588 I feel sorry for all the lower enlisted Argentine forces, imagine having little to no proper training, no rations most the time, shite pay, and then your told " the people of the Falklands will welcome you as hero's " to see there more British then the UK 👀 also trow the fat cat officers legitimately robbing the lower ranks of there pay and having great meals....
So yeah I feel bad for all of them :(
I am a Canadian Army veteran of the FN era. And can say with absolute confidence that the US claims about poor performance in winter conditions are a load of complete garbage.
I will also say that it really should have been in 7mm. It was a fantastic weapon that could have been even better. In 7mm it was capable of fully automatic fire. In 7.62, it required a considerable upgrade to be capable of automatic fire; this made the upgrade an excellent section LMG.
The British 7mm and 6.8mm cartridges may have been cutting edge in terms of the ballistic performance of their projectiles (6.5-7mm bullets are often very efficient in terms of aerodynamics), but in no way could the then-experimental rounds be considered true intermediates. The 280 British came in two varieties, according to the sources I've seen: 139-grains @ 2270 fps, and a 140-gr.load @ 2549 fps. These are full-power rifle loads, not intermediates. They are somewhat less-powerful in terms of muzzle energy than 7.62x51mm NATO, but not by all that much. If anything, the 280 came in around the same level of power as the old Swedish Mauser 6.5x55, a very respected cartridge, but nothing anyone would mistake for an intermediate.
It is germane to note that the FAL was manufactured in 7x57mm under contract for the Belgian Congo, and a few other nations. Not the same as 280 British, but they were supposed to be very good rifles in their own right.
I have never understood why the British Army didn't stick to their guns, so to speak, and ask that their design be accepted as an alternate or maybe an assault rifle cartridge. Or they could simply have remained silent and kept working on it until the time was ripe for its re-introduction. The old guard who had pushed through the 7.62x51 at U.S. Army Ordnance - the Col. Rene Studlers of the world - weren't going to be in charge forever, right?
I don't know if you follow modern cartridge design, but the 6.5 Grendel is an amazing performer. It can push a 123-grain high-BC bullet to around 2350-2500 fps which remains supersonic out past 1200 yards. The 6mm ARC (.264-cal.) is also a very good performer. These are true intermediates, and can be fired out of a standard AR15 with a simple switch of the upper/barrel to the new chambering.
Coming full-circle, the U.S. Army's adoption of 6.8 Fury echoes the British 280 as well. It isn't an intermediate in any sense of the word, either. Indeed, the new cartridge operates at such high pressures that new technology was invented to allow it in terms of the case design and other factors. But then, Big Green - the U.S. Army - insisted that it make its performance targets out of a short 13-inch barrel, which I think is crazy. There's no need for the barrel to have been that short, even accounting for the suppressor.
4:19 that's not a FAL, that's a G3...
Facepalm
The modernized version may serve better task & purpose, but in replacing the wood furniture with plastic and metal and simple, organic lines with right angles and rails, the 'soul' of the weapon was lost, in my opinion.
Nobody wants wood furniture guns anymore.
Wood looks amazing. It sucks ass to deal with though. Cracking, swelling, and shattering if hit a certain way, it makes sense militaries went away from them. I think the best looking updates though are the polymer facsimile furniture. Those things preserve the look and feel of the originals much better than the rails. But of course, the rails are a necessity in this day and age.
@@quiety8148 People who appreciate the beauty of wooden furniture do.
@@quiety8148 wrong
@@epitaph3988 real
1:15 Churchill said: "Old my beer."
It’s more valid today more than ever against body armour. Love both the FAL & G3A3.
The M14 inherits two traits from its "daddy," the M1 Garand that the FN FAL cannot inherit: A perceived cost advantage in machining and manufacturing (which is technically true) and the other is the supreme love from the largest segment of America to use one weapon in America's history. Because they were so similar in performance, I don't think the FN-FAL ever had a chance over WW2-bias of the M14. It is clear that the scaling down to 5.56 had a huge tactical impact on late 20th century infantry. The heavier round requires a better trained soldier to use equally well. What is a more interesting question to me is to ask why so many nations overlooked the problems solved by the 5.56 round (and its WaPac equivalents) for as long as they did. I think the FN-FAL's test of battle was across Africa, and a generation of Africans love it in a similar fashion to the way in which Americans loved the Garand (/M14). Remember that the M14 had a pretty short service life relative to the rifles before and after it. It wasn't exactly 'successful' in American service.
ofc it wasn't succesfull m14 honestly was still kinda outdated for its time but hey at least US got m16 ... ohh sorry ı meant M16A1 the original M16 according to some soldiers was still pretty shite
The M14 was an abysmal disaster of a service rifle.
@@concealedpocketgary4193 - But you're a real expert, right? Tell all of us your qualifications - aside from having an internet connection, that is....
My first FN FAL during SADF basics in 1976 had wood furniture and later we got new composite stock rifles, some specialized units got the PARA 3 with a folding stock, cleaning and maintenance in the field was crucial. Wish I still had one today.
A mans rifle loved mine in SADF never let me down definitely not a pop gun like some of the assault rifles used today
Hey you did a segment on my favorite gun, she's an oldie but she's a goodie.
0:05 - 0:13 *Germany and the HK G3 - "Am I a joke to you????!!!"*
I own both! Couldn’t decide which so I got both
I was fortunate to serve in the Australian army in the 80's and 90's. I have used the M16, SLR and the Steyr. One advantage the M16 and Steyr have over the SLR is that they don't rust as easy in bad weather. You need to be vigilant with cleaning the SLR or it will fail. However i did like the SLR and was sorry to see it get fazed out in the early 90's. Then i fired the Steyr for the first time. with the telescopic sight it turned me from an average shot to a good shot. It improved the groupings for a lot of soldiers. By the way i was a combat engineer not an infantry soldier and i generally carried the M60. The Aussie army still uses the SLR for ceremonial parades and is a great weapon for doing rifle drill.
Yes, and I was a Sig, so not too much shooting of the L1A1. Just enough to get a liking without having to carry it in the field !
But I did like the drill !
Do they really have to make every tactical refit in Tan? Sometimes they even ditch the good old black. Not to mention my favourite olive drab
I love olive with wood accents. Going to re do my fear 116 in it.
The US literally thought like a girl in that scenario. "I will lead them on and then leave them "
I’m sorry for your loss
Sorry to hear that :(
It's was one us military officer who fucked it up I believe
Crony capitalism. Well, for the sake of the military, we have to accept the brutal inefficiency and corruption that government brings.
Unfortunately yes
We used them in the Australian Army in Vietnam up till around the 1990's.Loved them, using the 7.62 round,30 round mag and good hitting power.
The SASR modded them rifles. They nicknamed it "The Bitch".
The 30 round mag was way too long, even on the l1a2. I used return the 3x30 round mags I was issued for the AR back to the Q wallas and get 5x20 rd mags instead.
That's a platform that deserves upgrades. Such a classic.
The FAL is one of the greatest rifles ever made, period.
That's why there turning it into a ar15?
I would've like to see a discussion on what the rifle would be like in the original .280 cartridge (or similar) it was designed for, and if any modern manufacturers are considering something like that. I'd love to see a modern FAL chambered in the 6mm+ range.
I feel like a lot of these dumb decisions and arguments could’ve been circumvented if we could of just used the same magazines in both
That's too easy the military industrial complex requires things to be more difficult than they should be to make more money out of it.
That would be a nice idea in logistics tho. It's like the rifles that use AR mags. It just makes it easier
Wait, now i see something, at the date the FAL was projected, basically everyone was using M14 or so, in Europe, FN HERSTAL just used the M14 20-round boxes, since even the cartridge was the same 7.62x51mm
@@allancoelho6905 "at the date the FAL was projected, basically everyone was using M14 or so, in Europe"
No. No NATO army ever adopted the M14, except the USA itself. In fact nobody adopted the M14 at all unless they were given them as US military aid. It just wasn't popular. Meanwhile the FAL was adopted by basically every western army except the ones (like Germany) that FN wouldn't license the design to. Over 90 users compared with ONE for the M14. That says it all, really.
“I FN love the FAL” bruh
I used the FN FAL or SLR as we called it in the NZ army. We preferred it over the M16A2.
Its a fantastic rifle, I've never had a malfunction with it. Our SLR's were semiautomatic only, and yes they are very accurate.
2:46 videogame customisation on a nutshell
FN FAL is probably my favourite rifle so I'm happy to see a video about it, always just seemed cool to me lmao
And seeing the next gen version making me extra happy god damn 😩💀❤️
If you dress up an old horse,....it's still an old horse!
I used it when I was a young pleeb in the Canadian Armed Forces and I can tell you the FAL (or FN C1A1 in Canada) was one sweet honey of a rifle. Heavy...yes. But you always knew you had some serious firepower.
The US were dumb to take the m14, the fal was so much better as a service rifle, and it would have been so much better if they had gone the 280. British instead of 308
I wouldn't be mad if somone would gift me ether an m14 or an FN FAL, as long as they stay away with all those tacticool shit.
You can buy M1A, which is M14 without full auto capability. I have one and love shooting it. Shoots .308 / 7.62x51. You just can’t get the ammo now.
@Vince ...no. Go to Springfield Armory.
For anyone who cares to hear about this firearm fun-fact: It's a common belief that the AK-47 is a clone/heavily steals from the WW2 German StG-44 (it's considered the first "assault rifle", a intermediate caliber, select fire, rifle/carbine). That's just untrue, they only slightly resemble each other cosmically with the mechanism (bolt/bolt carrier) being completely different. The FAL however isn't as similar cosmetically but the internals are much more reminiscent of the StG-44, they both use a tilting bolt design (which isn't a very common locking mechanism, especially with new firearms), a major difference internally however is the fact the FAL uses a spring loaded short-stroke gas piston where the StG-44 used a long stroke gas piston (which is more similar to what a AK uses), also not all FALs are select fire due to the heavy recoil making full auto really hard to control, the StG-44 however is select fire. A major difference between FALs and most current military rifles (like the M-4 or AK-74) is the FAL is considered a battle rifle (due to its caliber), where AKs and ARs are considered assault rifles (I mean actual military select fire rifles, civilian versions are semi auto and aren't actually assault rifles).
In Canada, the full auto version was a squad weapon. The rank and file got the single auto loader version.
"we'll never know" Yeah I can Consider that A Yes considering US is Land of Lobby and Personal Interest
don't know if you've ever heard of small arms solutions, hers a link to a good vid ruclips.net/video/mby4hOq-DpI/видео.html
Lots of nostalgia in Canada for the "FN" (aka FN FAL). The fact the C1/C1A1 was chosen by of all places Canada suggests that the FN did not have a real problem with cold weather! While full-autofire of the base rifle was a waste, Canada adopted a heavy-barrel and bipod equipped version (C2/C2A1) as a SAW (Section Automatic Rifle).