FN FAL, teaching your troops the difference between a battle rifle and an assault rifle in practical rates of fire and the weight management since 1955
During the 1982 Falklands War between Great Britain and Argentina, both sides were equipped with the FN FAL. The only notable difference between the two being that the Argentinian FAL rifles had both semi and full-automatic fire modes, whereas the British FAL rifles were semi-auto only.
Incidentally, the only thing preventing automatic fire with the L1A1 SLR is an edge of the selector- cutting away at the oblong end will enable select fire. You could also default to the auto sear by obstructing the main sear reset (the lads would do this with a match stick)
Well the SLR was the inch pattern and the one used by the Argentines was the Metric. Mags and parts are not interchangeable between the 2 but they can be modified but I ch patterns are more common. I thibk they stockpiled quite a few SLRs it's hard to say, but the new 7.62x51 nato rifle the UK uses is a DMR AR10 pattern rifle with 20 round mag SS match grade barrel with 20 round mags. But if the EM-2 and FAL was chambered in .270 /.280 British (7mm British) that every nation apart from the US liked as it was a good intermediate cartridge that would still be in use today, the perfect intermediate round should be between 6.5 to 7mm that has a good taper. But 7.62x51 nato was just cut down . 30 06 and they assumed they could just use tooling to make a mag fed M1 garlands but actyaky the M14 cost alot to make and was replaced fast by the M16
@@luked2767actually the British SLR can use metric and inch parts magazines. The 7.62x51 come on the request of the USA as it was originally in 280 what was way better suited for the FAL. I carried that rifle for 6 years. It’s good but not the holy grail as some people seem to think. Privately I still own one. Memory lane I call it
I have had my FAL for over 25 years, and other than correcting a problem with headspace, it has never failed despite thousands of rounds. With a Leupold tactical scope, it will reliably bang steel at 700 yards. By far, it's my favorite rifle ever. When I got too old to enjoy recoil anymore, I added a comp that smoothed it out, and it's still going strong. Told my wife I wanted to be buried with it. LOL
@@destroyerarmor2846 you know that the G3 shares the same design as the FAL, right? You are literally saying one is better than the other because one is Belgian and the other is German...
@@blakee2525 Completely different rifle designs? Fuck, guess I gotta ignore all those engineers on FN that told me that they were all based on the FAL platform, and all of those articles I saw in magazines that said the same then, and believe in what? You? Nevermind, I guess your opinion comes from a point of complete ignorance on the subject of the FAL platform.
Amen to that, my man. I built mine on an Austrian StG58 kit with a DSA receiver. It's a tack driver. Added optics to it to compensate for my ageing eyes. Then got cataract surgery. The range with decent ammo is astonishing.
The Australian soldiers I know that used the FN during the Vietnam war said that if a VC hid behind a tree,all you did was aim at the tree,the bullet would go through the tree and kill the person behind it
@@goulddddable We did use the SLR L1A1 which was the British copy of the FN FAL and production was indeed allowed at Lithgow. However, The L1A1 was not the original. It was a copy of the FNFAL.
IF the tree is only big enough to let him hide in one spot. but if the cover barricade is big enough, you empty your mag and never hit the guy. 30 AK is stupid and 308 is moronic. You need a SILENCER, a subsonic ammo OPTION and the rifle needs to be handy with the silencer scope and bipod on it. None of that is true of any 308.
It's been 43 years since I handled one and I can visualize every part to the c1a1 and how it fit together. It really was pretty easy to clean. A pure battle rifle with staggering firepower that was excellent at penetrating cover which meant more white flags and less casualties.
Reliability is a critical element, as is penetrating power at distance, but knowing your weapon will fire when you pull the trigger is perhaps more important in a stressful situation in the end
If anyone thinks that the FAL has an issue with reliability, go search for "Ol Dirty" that was chronicled on FALfiles. The guy that owned it, and it was just a basic (Century? Some parts build?) FAL, not a high quality Imbel or DSA rifle, fired over 15,000 rounds through the thing without ever cleaning it. And without a singe malfunction. When he saw that the cycling was starting to slow down, he'd drop it into a puddle and let it soak for a bit, take it, and continue firing it. He showed pictures of the internals and it was just caked with carbon deposits.
When I was in grade school, I saw a photo of a soldier carrying an FAL and knew that one day I would have one. Decades later I finally got one. Always “endeavor to persevere “
As a 16yr old soldier in 1986 I was issued my SLR. It doesn't jam, it weighs a lot, but the thing just smashes everything it hits and is accurate at 600m individual and 800+ as a squad.
@@memo1975 They are called 'junior leaders ' and go to a military college for nearly 2 years before joining they're regiments at 17 and three quaters ... its a bit like a military apprentiship
That’s technically the same as the AR-15/M-16 effective range? I kinda suspect it’s more likely it’s good out to 800-1,000 whereas the M-16 is definitely not effective past 600 meters.
I served in the Candian Army and was initially issued a C1A1 rifle. It kicked llke a cannon but I loved it. I was in tears when my unit swapped out the C1A1 for the C7.
Damn. I'm not even a military or gun person, and I'm cringing. The end of an era. Meanwhile the US Army has decided they don't like Colt M4's anymore, and want to switch to the untested XM-7 for longer-range engagements. Sounds like reinventing the wheel.
Fighting in the South African Defence Force we used the R1 which is the FAL manufactured under licence. Fully automatic, it was a great rifle. However in the sandy conditions in the bush war, I felt the R1 was too well made, it's close internal tolerances just couldn't cope with the sandy conditions we experienced there. I had my rifle jamb by a single grain of sand during contact, the cartridge was jambed in the breech and the whole base of it was ripped off, so nothing could be done until it went to the tiffys. Very unsettling under fire! The AK's we captured were in a deplorable state, yet fired every round put into them, despite some of those rifles looking like thay had never been cleaned or oiled in years! If I had been given the choice I would have preferred the AK for those conditions.
I carried a FN Para Version in the SAP until 2011. Was also issued the R1 as my Personal weapon for many years, The R1 was a SA Copy of the FN. We had the privilege of many Genuine FN's in various configurations. Long Barrel folding stock, short barrel folding stock, heavy barrel squad auto with bipods, as well as the R1 R2 and and R1 paras. Loved the weapon. Never ever failed on the range or in combat. Easy to clean, easy to strip, great to fire... downside was the weight
@@isrbillmeyer No. Many special SA forces used captured AK47s in 7.62x39. This had various advantages including being able to resupply off the enemy and when camoed up to look like enemy. The conventional military (infantry etc) stayed with NATO-sized weapons R1=FAL in 7.62 then from about 1984 on, R4/R5 based on Galil in 5.56.
In Brazil they are used daily in Rio's drug war, they call it the rifle that silences all other weapons because when it shoots you can't hear other weapons shooting, you can only hear it.
Bought my surplus L1A1 20+ years ago. I call her “Baby”. She will never leave me as long as I’m alive. I trust the rifle more than any other I own. Even the ones I built with my own hands. How can you not love a .308 semi auto rifle with a 20 round mag?
i'm with you there. The Fal is even better than the M-14. Its my favorite.308. I sold mine to my brother bc he begged. At least its still in the family.
My favorite photo of the FAL was from Rhodesia, mid/late '70's. Two ladies wearing tennis whites walking to the courts, each carrying a racket in one hand, an FAL by the handle in the other. Probably a Time or Newsweek photo.
My favorite is of 3 RLI guys smoking on a mountain top with a FAL pointed upwards and smoking in boots and short shorts. Have it as a background on my phone. Rhodesia is one of those nations that helped seal the FAL in the history books
Arguably one of the greatest platforms ever engineered… I own three FALs and they are my absolute favorites (at least in terms of rifles). Ridiculous stopping power, solid reliability, ease of use/maintenance and accuracy make it a great all-arounder with its only real drawback (in my opinion) being its weight. Fantastic video! I’m looking forward to seeing more.
@@ianmedford4855 the kalashnikov is more versatile and affordable, with cheaper ammunition and production cost, with overall very good reliability fal is effective yet hard to control in full auto and fails to fullfill the AK's role (which was its original purpose) due to the 308 chambering: this makes it far more effective at longer ranges, therefore more lethal and, on paper, a stronger weapon. nontheless, both guns are great feats of mechanical engineering and both should get the recognition they deserve, but thanks to the actions of the united states back in the days the fal was being developed, only the AK is greatly spoken of. all of this despite the fal being adopted by a huge number of western countries and the entirety of the commonwealth.
@@ianmedford4855Yup. Go to the range and run a tactical course using a properly zeroed AKM VA an FAL and see which one gets you better times and more hits.
@kevinhart46 the c2 has a bippod and 30 rd magazine as a squad rifle, the c1 has no bipod as it's a battle rifle and carries a 20 rd magazine! This weapon is not ment to attach another 2 feet of silencer you might as well use a hollowed out potatoe!
@@gryph01 You are correct it a definitely a “good rifle”. The thing is the competition was generally better. The AR-10 had the best recoil mitigation of any 7.62 battle rifle of the day and I’d still used today. The G3 had a bit less recoil mitigation and a fixed barrel (granted a tough reload). I personally feel it is inferior as a military weapon. I understand why it was adopted to a degree. However the AR-10 is really the go to for 1950s magic. Then again it’s a much better gun than the M14 (nothing good to say about one). However as a civilian gun the FAL makes way more sense. So I probably should ha f specified I meant military use. My apologies…
The FN FAL was my favorite weapon of the older COD MW2. I loved shooting that weapon in game. Even though it was semi-auto, it was a one or two hitter quitter. And extremely accurate
The auto setting was removed because soldiers would just let rip and waste ammo by the bucket load. Better to train them to shoot more accurately. I used it quite a lot but only on the ranges (Caesar's Range Aldershot) in 1967. I haven't touched one since 1973 but I reckon I could still strip and rebuild it, blindfold. Same ammo as the Gimpy too.
Pros: 1.Fires a LARGE and POWERFUL Round 2.Has a HIGHER fire rate than the AK 3.Has Range CONS: 1.Not suited for close combat 2.Not suited for full auto fire
Automatic fire is useless with 7,62x51. You have massiv recoil and you will hit nothing. The 7,62x51 has more energy than the 7,62x39 but both rounds will penetrate the body without transfering a lot of their energy. With Softpoint or Hollowpoint ammo both calibers are verry effectiv.
The Australian Army used this awsome rifle in semi auto configuration in 7,62. And having a machine gun Firing inaccurately at you can still give you a bad day, but then the squad machine gun was the M60. As for "close range" it's a 7,62 nobody's getting close but if you're talking clearing a building that's what training is for and the boys did it well but that's also when the squadman carring the F1 came into play. If ypthe US used this weaponry in Iraq I believe their hit rate would have been much higher.
Rate of full auto fire is about the same usually being 100 rounds faster for the FAL and it depends on how the AK is set up FN FAL Rate of fire 650-700 rounds/min Most AKs are: Rate of fire Cyclic rate of fire: 600 rds/min Combat rate of fire: Semi-auto 40 rds/min Bursts 100 rds/min
also presents well on parade in rifle drill. projects power with attached bayonet. wimpy 5,56 weapons are an embarassment. on parade size does matter. SMLE with 17in bayonet was the epitome.
Definitely! FN FAL BATTLE RIFLE- the way all Battle Rifles were meant to look, and after firing the FN FAL, always puts a big smile of confidence from might- on ones face.
I remember firing this as a skinny 17year old squadie in basic training. We’re fired it as a .22 variant and then we’re allowed to fire one 7.62 round down the 25 mtr range. I was super excited, but when the recoil hit me I was in a state of shock, I gave it back to my instructor praying I would never have to do that again. Subsequently in my 6 years in the BA I must have put God knows how many rounds down the barrel of the SLR ,until it was second nature but I’ll never forget my first.
My memories of the FN (UK version) was it was heavy to handle but very powerful, I saw a photo of someone who was shot by it, they had a small entry wound but their back no longer existed, so it had stopping power.
Undoubtedly the FN FAL is one of the best rifles ever made, but its greatest quality is as an alarm clock, it was widely used and approved by the habitants of Rio de Janeiro. A hug from Brazil.
One of the para’s who served in Cyprus told me that they were frequently ambushed by terrorists from upstairs windows who would then duck down behind the walls but the F N was powerful enough to hit the target through the wall itself.
@@wisemankugelmemicus1701depending on what the wall is made of, it was likely bricks. If it were made from anything like that like concrete for example, then 5.56 and any handgun round would take multiple shots to penetrate. But .308 and 7.62 absolutely demolishes things like that.
A big thing is under which doctrine both were developed. The FAL was developed as the standard NATO infantry rifle, originally in .280 british, but the US military wanted something bigger, so the decision was made to use something based on the .308 Winchester cartridge. Only for them to use the M14 instead. The AK-47 on the other hand was supposed to the SMG, used together with the SKS as rifle and the RPD as LMG. But it was quickly noticed that the AK basically makes the SKS obsolete. And the AK was never meant for long range. The idea was for up to 300m, and at those ranges it performs perfectly well. An d there is another rifle at the era, the german G3 (shown at 3:53 for example), which was based on the spanish CETME which in turn was based on the Mauser StG45 prototype and developed by the same people. All three rifles can be very reliable and accurate. The big difference is indeed in ammunition. 7.62x51 mm is simply more powerful than 7.62x39 mm. But full auto .308 is not something enjoyable, while 7.62x39 is just fine.
The VC/NVA troops came to respect those "strange hardy soldiers who avoided walking on tracks or trails, preferred to move quietly through the bush or jungle, carried long brown rifles (L1A1 SLR) and would always attack our flanks"
Salute to your dad. My old man served in ‘68-‘69. When I was a kid, he would tell me stories about how guys would bring back contraband weapons from the field (mostly AKs and SKS rifles). Then, they would break them down and hide them inside cheap Japanese televisions they bought at the PX and ship them back home…along with a few other things that weren’t GI (weed, heroin, speed, etc.).
"Well Sir, I can get my butt killed when my M16 jams. Or I can take an earful from you for having a powerful weapon that actually works. Not a hard choice!"
I was also trained on L1A1 (SLR) it was an awesome rifle and reliable, I had no issues with it's length during CQB. Had a go with the Auto version while down in the Falklands found it difficult to hold on target when on full auto.
FAL's accuracy are dismal at best..M-16's/M-4's are way more accurate..Battle cartridges are useful if used in accurate rifles and the tiltating bolt of the FAL is lacking..
I have very good memories of the FN and the licenced South African R1. Accurate as hell. And pranking your fellow soldier by adjusting his gas without him knowing. But to claim that it had crushed the AK is wishful thinking.
all I can say is that I'm one of the few people that in 1975 was on the side of the AK and of the receiving end of the FAL on the Angola War. Well, it is an understatement to say that the FAL was a wicked yet beautiful weapon. We all got to fear and admire it.
hard to compare both rifles, since from the get go they were designed for different purposes, the AK 47 being a dependable yet cheap rifle with a sheetmetal receiver that fired a mild cartridge that a conscript could master quickly with average intelligence. The FN FAL was a rifle designed to hit them way out there, and be easy to take down and clean as well as having that gas system that took away alot of the 308's recoil. Ive fired both and only when I know where a conflict happens can you decide which you would want; for short range and in close house fighting the AK is a better bet since it handles faster, recoils less and might be considered more dependable. But if the fight were to happen in the desert or other long range engagement, of course you would want the FN with its ability to hit at long range. If both situations were happening, I would want the power of the 308 overall.
The success of the AK is not that it is cheap, but that it is a weapon that is good enough in any situation. A soldier using the FN FAL would be at an advantage in certain situations. But he would also be at a disadvantage in many others. For example, in forest and jungle warfare, urban battles, storming trenches...
These points feel like the major reasons why Finland adapted to copy AK for the FDF’s service rifle. I still remember from conscript service how our average combat range was less than 300 meters in the Finnish wilderness with all the trees and under foliages, while having the only open fields at swamp/bog spots. 😅
Yeah in Argentina the FN FAL is a weapon with a long tradition, and it is still used to this day by the Gendarmería to guard schools and other buildings where people vote when there's an election.
I started off using the L1A1 and moved onto the SA80 as the "upgrade". I only recently just stopped crying myself to sleep! I read that some think that the L1A1 isn't suited to close combat - I would suggest it depends on the environment you're fighting in. That extra length with the "pig sticker" on the end can give you a real edge over smaller weapons and the stock can be a very effective clubbing device. I didn't see the semi auto option of L1A1 as a problem as it meant using well aimed shots rather than a typical "spray and pray" technique of an AK47 for example. The results of the former, in most instances, produced better results in my opinion. Other viewpoints, of course, are available!
Loved this weapon while in the British Army, single shot accurate, no need for auto fire. It's just good training to hit your target first time. Then had to use the SA80 toy gun.
When compared to the AK, the FN FAL fires a heavier bullet at a higher velocity out to longer range more accurately than the AK and has similar reliability to the Kalashnikov. It takes more training and practice to fire the FAL in full auto but that is about the only downside.
That heavier pill and higher velocity came at a price. Heat. Training wasn't the issue. Longevity and reliability were. The FAL was never designed for fully automatic fire for this reason. Fully automatic options came later but incorporated heavier barrel profiles and weren't considered viable as normal service rifles for most militaries. There were exceptions, notably, Argentina. It didn't work out too well for them, though.
When the first combat evaluation reports came back for the MP43 (which became known as the StG 44 or Sturmgewher 44 ie first assault rifle) they were very positive for several reasons but the main one was that they could advance a lot faster because the semi auto feature and the big 30 round magazine they didn't need to stop to reload magazines. The full auto feature was useful be not the main one. I can't see someone advancing being able to take the time to aim to be able to shoot beyond 300m anyway.
The Australian L1A1 was limited to semi-automatic fire only for several reasons. Full-sized rifle rounds are bulky and heavy, and automatic fire drastically reduces accuracy. Unlike armies that blindly spray rounds in the general direction of the enemy, we were trained to fire only when we could see a target.
Used the R1 (South African) version. Beautiful rifle. A large beast however. Usefull cartridge. Plenty of power out to 400m plus. 308 is a nice utility round, not quite 300 Win mag but it got the job done 😜
I bought a FN FAL back in 1987 for $1500. I loved the simplicity of the bolt design, it was so easy to clean. I shortly after bought a FN-FNC .223. for about $1200. Great shooters, very accurate.
I loved the British L1A1 SLR, used it for many years. It was semi-auto only as you were trained to fire accurate single shots, no spray and pray. It was accurate out to 600 meters and in my experience was trouble free and very reliable. It normally used a 20-round magazine, but the 30-round Bren L4 LMG would also fit. The FAL was made using Metric measurements, the L1A1 was converted to Inch, so most parts are not interchangeable.
@@pdxyyz4327 It really depends on were the rifles were manufactured, if from Belgium they would be Metric. I believe Canada uses American SAE threads not British BSF? The parts not using screw threads should be the same.
@@billballbuster7186 The Canadian C1A1 design came out of the Allied Rifle Committee, which was Canada, Australia and the UK. The C1A1 and both L1A1s used the same threads.
I loved the British Brown Bess, used it for many years. It was flint-lock musket, as you were trained to fire inaccurate volleys, no spray and pray, no iron sights, no nothing. It was inaccurate out of 600 sea miles and in my experience was trouble free and very reliable (you could always stuck someone with a bayonet in case of misfire). It normally used a powder bag as a magazine, but a horse-drawn cart would also fit. The Brown Bess was made using craftsman's guesswork for the measurements, but could be converted to inches by using your thumb as a measurement tool, so most parts between different muskets are not interchangable
The FAL is a main battle rifle The AK is an assault rifle Nominal effective range of FAL is 600m " " " of an AK is 300m While the FN *may* be used in an assault role, tha AK is not suited to long range/DMR use Any of the cartridges ever chambered in the FAL are faster and heavier, delivering more KD power at range than the AK round at the muzzle....near enough Different tools for different jobs
I served and the Australian used a version we called the SLR. We used it in Vietnam, the us soldiers were envious. Downside for us was as we got close to taking up the Styer was the barrel replacement dropped off. Accuracy dropped off markedly. The Styer was not half the rifle. It does not punch through plates in body armour. Whereas the 7.62 NATO will. Need to change again.
Modern top-tier military armor takes 7.62 NATO. Latest Russian plates are rated to take the B32 API round, so basic ball ammo won't do much to it. If you think that the whole rest of the world is stupid for moving from 7.62x51 or 7.62x54R or 7.62x39 down to 5.56x45, 5.45x39 or 5.8x42 then you probably also think you are smarter than top-flight officers that spent many years analyzing it all.
I used the slr in the army it was far superior to the sa80 a1 it was only semi automatic but with a well placed matchstick it could shoot automatic but you wouldn't dare cause of the recoil a brilliant rifle I loved it
On long 3 day foot patrols carrying your 200 rounds 7.62 x 51's first line ammo, with little or no chance of re supply, one tended to NOT want to use full auto, even though I had it. There was no future in expending all your ammo in 5 minutes during a 7 minute fire fight...
@@sugarnads In jungles of Vietnam I'd far rather be armed with any rifle chambered in 7.62x51 than an M16. At least the 7.62 knows the difference between cover and concealment. That piss willy 5.56 is deflected by even the smallest twig.
@@mazambane286 FA increases likelihood of hitting a moving target. Big difference between hitting a fixed paper target and a person taking evasive movements and hiding behind cover. Even worse if your fighting in a jungle or dense foliage which you cannot easily spot your target. There is a reason why all infantries are provided FA rifles, perhaps with the exception of sniper units.
I was in the RAAF in the 70s and I was issued with Australia's version of the FAL; the (wood stock) L1A1 SLR using the 7.62 NATO round. A truly amazing firearm. Lethal at 600 yds; like a sniper rifle at 500 yds and at closer ranges well, brutal. Our firearms' instructors (who were Airfield Defence Guards) showed us what just one round could do to a human body (via simulations) at 100 yds and closer. On the 25 yd sidearm range an instructor set up a 5 gal can of water and put a neat hole in the front, centre of the can. Through the round's tumbling action, the entire back of the can was blown away and every drop of water was gone. All our instructors had done at least one tour of duty in Vietnam. They told us that, man for man, the Australians consistently had a higher kill ratio in the field thanks to the SLR. They also firmly believed that if US forces in Vietnam had been using the SLR the outcome of that conflict could have been very different. Sure, the US had all the advanced field equipment, artillery, choppers and aircraft that were available at that time but, as General Patton believed; and I’m paraphrasing, “A good soldier with a good rifle is the most powerful weapon in any war.” Of course, he was talking about the M1 Garand rifle, but his 'rule' is just as valid if you replace the Garand (an excellent, powerful weapon) with the SLR firing a 7.62 NATO round. Our SLRs were made, under licence, at the Small Arms Factory at Lithgow, NSW. To this very day the SMF still make a civilian, 'hunting' version of the SLR. The SLRs were damn good military weapon. I still miss mine after all these years. They were more complex and took longer to field clean and could be problematic if dropped in mud, compared to the AK 47, but I know which firearm I’d always take into battle. It was their superior gas feed mechanism that made them a far more effective and accurate rifle. AK 47s have taken the front spot in terms of popularity because they are simplistic and can be used by untrained operators who, basically, just ‘spray and prey’, hoping to hit something. One thing that sort of bothered me about the narration of this video is the bloke doing the talking kept saying, "...our AK 47...". I couldn't make sense of that. He definitely didn't sound Russian. Otherwise, a good video. Cheers, B.H.
@black_falchion9137 Trajectory of 7.62×51 vs. 7.62×39 "It’s also generally accepted that the 7.62 NATO is flatter trajectory. When zeroed in to 100 yards, the same 7.62 Soviet cartridge that we discussed above drops 6.5 inches after 200 yards. It drops almost two feet after 300. However, the NATO drops 3.6 inches after 200 and 13.5 inches after 300." There really is no debate between an aperture sight an inch and a half away from your eyeball, and a notch "vee" set way out there on the other end of the receiver, sitting on top of the gas block. And the reputation the AK has for being difficult to upgrade with optics is quite well known. Trying to turn the top dust cover into a picatinny is unsatisfactory. Trying to mod the cover of the gas piston to picatinny is unsatisfactory. Reviewers of the latest iteration of the AK, the AK-12, observe that even now, the AK is difficult to optic.
What is not commonly know is that the FN FAL was originally intended to use the .270 British cartridge. That would have allowed the rifle to be fired with better control in full-auto shooting and would have meant that more ammunition could have been carried.
@@gohldfingah something something "need more stopping power" Same reason the .40 S&W was developed. 9x19 mm was considered too weak and .45 ACP had too little capacity. So they made something in between. And it was sort of adopted by some police forces, but there is a reason why 9 mm is pretty much the standard nowadays. It is more effective to hit two weak rounds than one strong round. Capacity and controllability wins over raw power. It's the same with 5.56x45 mm and 5.45x39 mm. Weaker cartridges, but smaller and lighter (so the soldier can carry more) and easier to control. But the powerful cartridge wins on range, which is why the larger rounds are still used for those cases.
It is such a great collectors gun because of the wide variety, the Hebrew Hammer, the British L1A1, the Rhodesian babypoo FAL with the cutoff carry handle, and on and on.
Having used the R1 version of the FAL in the Angolan bush war, I can say it was heavy to carry on patrol in the bush, didnt like desert dust, and could only take 16, not twenty rounds, to prevent magazine jams, and we did have (afrikaans😁) Auto fire, however, was a great rifle. Very accurate. Preffered carrying our R4 (galil) for patrols, was way lighter. 👍🍻🇿🇦
My country was on the other side of that war. Our soldiers were shock to know during Cuito battle of some MPLA soldiers that had never cleaned or provided any maintenance to their AKs during the war and while they used it as a pillow. There is also a soviet report about it. The russian guy was also shocked. Both are good weapons.
I've never had those issues bro, also don't know of anyone els who did in my service, we had strict rules and we always cleaned and oiled our rifles daily with frequent rifle inspections, its how it should be right ?, even in the bush 👍
@@brunogo-j9755 you don't shoot if the weapon is full of mud bro, but it still should because the gas ram is what makes it so reliable even if there's grit in the rifle, and a few shots n its running smooth again, once again I've never had those problems, I've done rout marching in heavy rain too with no problems exept for a bit of rust developing, but when you squeeze the trigger it fires, the fal was built to withstand the elements on a battle field and was verry reliable, if a round casing is damaged or the magazine is dented or deformed it could cause a stoppage, but I've never experienced that either, the steel magazines wer pretty sturdy and could take quit a pounding, so in a dire situation your rifle will still work for you but must be cleaned the first moment you get, gritty mud would cause excessive wear and tear on the breach block, anyway I'm not saying fal is invinsible but it did far better than anything els it competed against 👍, also as you should know if your gas is set too low it can also cause a malfunction and should only be set down if ur gonna fire a rifle grenade 😉, usualy a setting on 2 or 3 is the best for a fal for normal use, also even though it was fully auto we never ever used it in full auto, semi auto was much more accurate and amo conservative, you need lots of practice to accurately use full auto and even then you would be lucky if even half your rounds hit the target
@kevinhart46 you seem to underestimate the fn lol, it's a tried and tested rifle that is so good that many countries around the world used it and many still do, if we're both in a trench with sand bags and I use the fn an you got ur AR or whatever and were shooting at eachother, I don't want to be you bro, firstly I won't need a whole magazine to kill one guy, a good shooter only needs one shot 😉
FN-FAL or PARA-FAL is indeed a very iconic assault rifle when talking about Brazil. It was the army's and Rio de Janeiro state police's official assault rifle for many decades. It was used both inside against the narcos in the favelas, as well as abroad in peace missions along UN, such as in Africa and Haiti. Besides many criticisms because of the close combats in the favelas, it has proved to perform very well. Specially because of its power and precision. Being able to hit with precision and go through brick walls easily. It is still used to this day. Though the official assault rifle of the Brazilian army is now IMBEL IA-2.
Lugged an L1A1 around West Germany for many years. It was a reliable rifle, but was too heavy and too long. If you were deploying from armoured vehicles or helos, this was not the rifle you wanted to be carrying. A proper Battle Rifle though - you could engage the enemy at 1200 m range on the standard SUSAT sights.
Been binge watching your channel entire weekend...As an ex Special Forces (European), wounded by different weapons, I love your videos! Keep up the good work!
When I joined the Canadian military, I was issued an FN A1 C1 7.62mm Semiautomatic rifle with a 10-round magazine. The C@ version could be made fully automatic or semiautomatic with a 20-round magazine. That was back in 1981.
Back in 1990, when i served in the Greek army, i scored 10/10 shots on target from 300 meters distance with this beauty. This gave me a ten days leave as reward 🤩
I had the FN-FAL issued as my military service rifle from 1994-1996. I could have the G3 option, but the very low maintenance and very good accuracy was in favor of FN-FAL. GREAT WEAPON
It was a weapon that made everyone a DM. Ranges competition were very competitive. The instruction with 556 was a whole different dynamic. Dropping s fire support team at 400m to overwatch your advance was pushed back to snipers whereas the FN was efficient not only at suppression but also effective fire at that range.
@@Max_Da_G 1. Distance is pretty useful in cities. The most danger is often in the depht in a urban scenario. There is a reason why the americans brought back their M14´s and the germans their G3. 2. Urban combat was something that should be avoided at all costs, especialy in the early cold war eras.
@@Max_Da_Gwhen doing house clearing you are using more grenades, but it is handy to have a weapon that will fire THROUGH doors, floors, walls, and ceilings. 😊
The AK platform “won out” because it was supplied en masse by the USSR in the many proxy wars from 1950-1991; it “won” because of its wide distribution intent on upending capitalism and thus availability in places which had not purchased it nor selected it based on its capabilities compared to an alternative. Quantity is a quality of its own, and while it was certainly cheaper for an institution to supply a Regiment of 500 with AKs, there is no doubt that the same Regiment of FALs would have been the far deadlier force to fight against…you can’t excel in close combat with an AK if you cannot even get within 200m of the objective/enemy because the FAL can shave the hair off a fly’s asshole
the AK isnt very controllable on full auto either NEITHER are worth a shit on FA if you havent trained with them quite a bit and if you DO put in the time to train youll get better results from time spent with the FAL the AK is meant for peasants who cant read let alone understand rotational drift..
The thing the AK can do is being functional after 20 000 in the hands of a 12 year old who picked it up because his 14 yo instructor got shot down. It won't be accurate, but it will run.
I carried the Brit version the SLR for 6 years before the L85 replaced it, unlike the replacement , it never let me down, bits never fell off it when you werent looking either, and when you hit someone with that round no matter what they are hiding behind they aint getting back up to play,. - btw the Brit version has debris clearing cuts on the the bolt carrier which overcomes the issues the other variants have when dirty
Well said, Brother! It was my 'Personal' for about 7yrs, but for some reason I did 10yrs with SLR for range quals. But as a 'techie', for the rest of my time, I had the SMG. I got out after 14yrs, it was the month before they started handing out the L85 to Tech Trades. So I only ever fired 32 rounds of 5.56, didn't like it. My SLR is one of the few things I really miss. 😭
I used the SLR when I was an army cadet and later on when I was an infantry reservist before joining the regular forces, and I have never fired anything as good ever since.
I used to to shoot this rifle, and it was a nock down, if you got hit with it , you would be out of combat, dead , or badly wounded, but in the end they wimps ,wanted Smaller round to save the battle field casualties, but after all that is the job to kill as many enemy as possible this rifle could put a bullet through a 1/4steel plate at 1/2 a mile, as a high speed bullet it could get you behind a wall or bush and cars .we had different means to to clean the weapon for different theatres of war, it had interchangeable parts, that could be swooped-out on the battlefield and at the time use the same ammunition of your enemy if they were using caliber as you.
We had the version called SLR. The Shooting Team had those chosen for their use by the Armourer, with four grooves and lands, for greater accuracy. Fired something like 100,000 rounds through SLR alone. Could adjust by strike at 800m.
I have used this rifle during my NCC training back in 2019. So freaking powerful rifle. One of my female platoon comrade wasn't able to cock it 😂. The cocking handle was very stiff.
Because the FAL - could shoot 1/2 the group size and shoot twice the distance of the AK. I knew the Capt of a shooting team - in Canada - somewhere. His comment was that it would shock you - once the armorers were done with a rebuild.
The 7.62 x 51 Nato cartridge shoots further, is faster, and more powerful than the AK's 7.62 x 39mm round. But that being said, not everyone can shoot it effectively. I personally don't have an issue with it because it's my personal favorite cartridge of all time, and I get plenty of time with it. But the 7.62 Soviet round is more tame and easier to handle for both unexperienced and experienced alike. Not to mention, it has a standard 30 round capacity versus 20 of the 7.62 Nato cartridge. And you can carry a lot more of it as well. That's why we switched to 5.56 Nato, despite it only being half as powerful. Although I'm personally on the side of we need to go a little bit larger and more powerful while still maintaining intermediate size, capacity, grain weight, and recoil. Thus why I think we should be using 6.8 SPC instead of 5.56 Nato. 3,000 FPS and 1,700 Foot lbs of Energy out of a 16-inch barrel.
If the recoil is too strong for you, all you have to do on a FAL is to adjust the pressure regulator over the barrel, thus giving you a far more forgiving recoil, at the cost of lower RPMs. So, the argument that the 7.62x51 NATO kicks too much is understandable, but the pressure regulator was made to compensate this. So, it is a rifle that anyone can shoot accurately, without having to compromise the projectile speed or stopping power. Weight being the best argument, along with the number of rounds in a combat load. Still, FN came with a 30 round mag solution, in the FALO, that could easily be used in the FAL because they are essentially, just a longer version of the same mag, that uses the same mechanisms to be locked in the rifles. Still, lugging around 8-10 mags that weighs almost a kilo each is not an easy task, along with a rifle that weighs almost 6kg when combat-ready is a disadvantage that could lead to some losses on the battlefield that can be mitigated by a smaller caliber round, along with a lighter rifle. So, these particularities made the FAL become one of the best DEFENSIVE weapons in the world, while not so good as an offensive weapon. So, the americans were not completely wrong when they decided to make the M4, because their doctrine is far more based on the offensive than the defensive.
Yeah that makes sense lets tool up for some specialist hotshot round that isn't actually that much better than 5.56 which we have truckloads of. 1500 lb-feet of muzzle energy versus 1700 not that big of a gulf in my opinion.
Spot on but there are 30 rounds of 7.62x51 NATO. Straight stick of 30 G3 South African FN FAL C2 LSW🇨🇦 and the curved one goes to the Cetme Modello A-C.
The Para-FAL (paratrooper version with folding stock) made in Brazil by IMBEL (state-owned arsenal) is my favourite. I'm a police officer, and rifles, at opposite to infantrymen, are the LAST resource, not the first. When a rifle is necessary, criminals are heavily armed and wearing bulletproof vests. The 7,62mm NATO cartridge is advantageous in these combat scenarios. Proportionally, a police rifleman has the same value than an Artillery barrage for an infantrymen.
@@cecilsmith2061 The CETME , G3 , HK 11, and PTR 91 chew up brass necks in their fluted chambers . That is not an issue for militaries who consider fired brass as expendable waste items . I am a USN veteran and I reload my spent 7.62 NATO and 308 Winchester brass . I have owned a couple of FAL rifles and a Springfield Armory M1A . The FAL , M14 , and M1A don't wreck the spent cases , so it makes better sense for someone who wants to save their brass and become reolader to own one of those rifles over a CETME pattern rifle . I have a friend that owned a CETME some years ago . His rifle was a Jamomatic with worn out roller blocks and I couldn't reload the brass cases . Consider that the M14 was so similar to the M1 Garand that it didnt take much in the way of retooling Garand production lines to field the M14 in numbers . And consider that creating numbers of FALs in US arsenals would take a lot of money importing Belgian armory tooling . The biggest mistake was not designing all weapons chambered in 7.62 NATO to use the same magazines .
It really depends on the battle. Over long ranges in the plains of Europe or Russia, that FAL is going to reach out and touch someone at ranges where the AK is just spraying and praying. If you're in the middle of a hot, sweaty, south Asian jungle... well that AK is going to have a bit of an advantage at those mostly point blank ranges and be able to lay down a lot of suppressive fire for people who know how to fire and maneuver.
@@nikxohs3925 garand thumb says that battle rifles made a comeback because of Ukraine so no an AK is still a great gun but ukranian ak74s are far far worse than the nato supplied m4s and scars
ak dont stop to work in any condition and dont need specials tools to maintain it as nato weapons do.only cowards like usa soldiers want a gun that kills in 1000 miles. real battles are in 100-200 yards and ak is better there
When I first came across this rifle here in Canada back in the 1970s, it was simply called the "F.N." When I asked the soldier what FN stood for he stated truthfully "Fabrique Nationale" from Belgium. He did not have much use for the American automatic rifle the AR-15. Not a long enough range and it didn't hit hard enough with it .22 or 556 caliber slug.
In the Dutch army one was forced to keep the 2-legged stands for belly firing on constantly, which added a lot of weight and took it out of balance. If real war had broken out the landscape would have been covered with discarded stands.
![L1A1 🇬🇧 SLR [British FN FAL - Iron Sights] to 600yds (Feat. Bloke on the Range) Practical Accuracy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/q0j3AAfte2w/mqdefault.jpg)
![L1A1 🇬🇧 SLR [British FN FAL - Iron Sights] to 600yds (Feat. Bloke on the Range) Practical Accuracy](/img/tr.png)
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
'FN FAL, teaching the enemy the difference between cover and concealment since 1955 '
Jip ...why I would still chose it in a built-up area...granite is about your only cover that outlasts the 200 rounds of ammo...😂😂😂
funny!
FN FAL, teaching your troops the difference between a battle rifle and an assault rifle in practical rates of fire and the weight management since 1955
Use the 16 or 18 inch folding stock FAL....
During the 1982 Falklands War between Great Britain and Argentina, both sides were equipped with the FN FAL. The only notable difference between the two being that the Argentinian FAL rifles had both semi and full-automatic fire modes, whereas the British FAL rifles were semi-auto only.
Incidentally, the only thing preventing automatic fire with the L1A1 SLR is an edge of the selector- cutting away at the oblong end will enable select fire. You could also default to the auto sear by obstructing the main sear reset (the lads would do this with a match stick)
@@TheSundayShooter reminds me of how the USA removed the full auto capabilities of the M14 just by cutting or welding the selector
yea we also use mag machine guns and hy power pistols and blowpipe missiles
Well the SLR was the inch pattern and the one used by the Argentines was the Metric.
Mags and parts are not interchangeable between the 2 but they can be modified but I ch patterns are more common.
I thibk they stockpiled quite a few SLRs it's hard to say, but the new 7.62x51 nato rifle the UK uses is a DMR AR10 pattern rifle with 20 round mag SS match grade barrel with 20 round mags.
But if the EM-2 and FAL was chambered in .270 /.280 British (7mm British) that every nation apart from the US liked as it was a good intermediate cartridge that would still be in use today, the perfect intermediate round should be between 6.5 to 7mm that has a good taper.
But 7.62x51 nato was just cut down . 30 06 and they assumed they could just use tooling to make a mag fed M1 garlands but actyaky the M14 cost alot to make and was replaced fast by the M16
@@luked2767actually the British SLR can use metric and inch parts magazines.
The 7.62x51 come on the request of the USA as it was originally in 280 what was way better suited for the FAL.
I carried that rifle for 6 years. It’s good but not the holy grail as some people seem to think.
Privately I still own one. Memory lane I call it
I have had my FAL for over 25 years, and other than correcting a problem with headspace, it has never failed despite thousands of rounds. With a Leupold tactical scope, it will reliably bang steel at 700 yards. By far, it's my favorite rifle ever. When I got too old to enjoy recoil anymore, I added a comp that smoothed it out, and it's still going strong. Told my wife I wanted to be buried with it. LOL
40 year old G3A3 is better than any fal
@@destroyerarmor2846 you know that the G3 shares the same design as the FAL, right?
You are literally saying one is better than the other because one is Belgian and the other is German...
@@sombraarthur dude, no. Completely different rifle designs. Sorry, but I had to say it.
@@blakee2525 Completely different rifle designs? Fuck, guess I gotta ignore all those engineers on FN that told me that they were all based on the FAL platform, and all of those articles I saw in magazines that said the same then, and believe in what? You?
Nevermind, I guess your opinion comes from a point of complete ignorance on the subject of the FAL platform.
Amen to that, my man. I built mine on an Austrian StG58 kit with a DSA receiver. It's a tack driver. Added optics to it to compensate for my ageing eyes. Then got cataract surgery. The range with decent ammo is astonishing.
The Australian soldiers I know that used the FN during the Vietnam war said that if a VC hid behind a tree,all you did was aim at the tree,the bullet would go through the tree and kill the person behind it
Beautifully powerful and reassuring. One shot, one kill.
They used the original Lithgow SLR L1A1
@@goulddddable We did use the SLR L1A1 which was the British copy of the FN FAL and production was indeed allowed at Lithgow. However, The L1A1 was not the original. It was a copy of the FNFAL.
IF the tree is only big enough to let him hide in one spot. but if the cover barricade is big enough, you empty your mag and never hit the guy. 30 AK is stupid and 308 is moronic. You need a SILENCER, a subsonic ammo OPTION and the rifle needs to be handy with the silencer scope and bipod on it. None of that is true of any 308.
Those were some heavy hitters
It's been 43 years since I handled one and I can visualize every part to the c1a1 and how it fit together. It really was pretty easy to clean. A pure battle rifle with staggering firepower that was excellent at penetrating cover which meant more white flags and less casualties.
Reliability is a critical element, as is penetrating power at distance, but knowing your weapon will fire when you pull the trigger is perhaps more important in a stressful situation in the end
ruclips.net/video/5MK_R4mIk_I/видео.html
It one need's a .308 (7,62 x 51 NATO) that bad, just neck-up an rpk! @p.cameron1588
If anyone thinks that the FAL has an issue with reliability, go search for "Ol Dirty" that was chronicled on FALfiles.
The guy that owned it, and it was just a basic (Century? Some parts build?) FAL, not a high quality Imbel or DSA rifle, fired over 15,000 rounds through the thing without ever cleaning it. And without a singe malfunction. When he saw that the cycling was starting to slow down, he'd drop it into a puddle and let it soak for a bit, take it, and continue firing it. He showed pictures of the internals and it was just caked with carbon deposits.
Also, taking into consideration that the average conscript wouldn't be able to use FN FAL to its full potential
Amen and Airborne!
When I was in grade school, I saw a photo of a soldier carrying an FAL and knew that one day I would have one. Decades later I finally got one. Always “endeavor to persevere “
i too had a (somewhat) similar experience - i was conscripted & had to carry one !
As a 16yr old soldier in 1986 I was issued my SLR. It doesn't jam, it weighs a lot, but the thing just smashes everything it hits and is accurate at 600m individual and 800+ as a squad.
my favorite gun in the Belgain army
16!? Wow, that's young.
@@memo1975 They are called 'junior leaders ' and go to a military college for nearly 2 years before joining they're regiments at 17 and three quaters ... its a bit like a military apprentiship
@@peterjones-b5b thanks for the info, interesting to learn other countries' approach to military service
That’s technically the same as the AR-15/M-16 effective range? I kinda suspect it’s more likely it’s good out to 800-1,000 whereas the M-16 is definitely not effective past 600 meters.
I served in the Candian Army and was initially issued a C1A1 rifle. It kicked llke a cannon but I loved it. I was in tears when my unit swapped out the C1A1 for the C7.
Damn. I'm not even a military or gun person, and I'm cringing. The end of an era. Meanwhile the US Army has decided they don't like Colt M4's anymore, and want to switch to the untested XM-7 for longer-range engagements. Sounds like reinventing the wheel.
Fighting in the South African Defence Force we used the R1 which is the FAL manufactured under licence. Fully automatic, it was a great rifle. However in the sandy conditions in the bush war, I felt the R1 was too well made, it's close internal tolerances just couldn't cope with the sandy conditions we experienced there. I had my rifle jamb by a single grain of sand during contact, the cartridge was jambed in the breech and the whole base of it was ripped off, so nothing could be done until it went to the tiffys. Very unsettling under fire! The AK's we captured were in a deplorable state, yet fired every round put into them, despite some of those rifles looking like thay had never been cleaned or oiled in years! If I had been given the choice I would have preferred the AK for those conditions.
Ja my bra!!! Jy praat nou n pot kak. N grein sand?????😂😂😂😂😂
You can always trust AK wherever in the world.
It was built in South Africa as the R1. It was used by the fighting forces of South Africa in Angola and it is a fantastic weapon.
Thanks for the info
But most SA special forces used AK47s for various reasons and SA moved to the 5.56 in about 1984.
I carried a FN Para Version in the SAP until 2011. Was also issued the R1 as my Personal weapon for many years, The R1 was a SA Copy of the FN. We had the privilege of many Genuine FN's in various configurations. Long Barrel folding stock, short barrel folding stock, heavy barrel squad auto with bipods, as well as the R1 R2 and and R1 paras. Loved the weapon. Never ever failed on the range or in combat. Easy to clean, easy to strip, great to fire... downside was the weight
@@cccmmm1234 Do you mean the R4 and R5 that was based on the Galil friom Israel, which was very similar to the AK?
@@isrbillmeyer No. Many special SA forces used captured AK47s in 7.62x39. This had various advantages including being able to resupply off the enemy and when camoed up to look like enemy.
The conventional military (infantry etc) stayed with NATO-sized weapons R1=FAL in 7.62 then from about 1984 on, R4/R5 based on Galil in 5.56.
In Brazil they are used daily in Rio's drug war, they call it the rifle that silences all other weapons because when it shoots you can't hear other weapons shooting, you can only hear it.
Bought my surplus L1A1 20+ years ago. I call her “Baby”. She will never leave me as long as I’m alive. I trust the rifle more than any other I own. Even the ones I built with my own hands. How can you not love a .308 semi auto rifle with a 20 round mag?
i'm with you there. The Fal is even better than the M-14. Its my favorite.308. I sold mine to my brother bc he begged. At least its still in the family.
My favorite photo of the FAL was from Rhodesia, mid/late '70's. Two ladies wearing tennis whites walking to the courts, each carrying a racket in one hand, an FAL by the handle in the other. Probably a Time or Newsweek photo.
Wish I could see that photo ... I believe you !
My favorite is of 3 RLI guys smoking on a mountain top with a FAL pointed upwards and smoking in boots and short shorts. Have it as a background on my phone. Rhodesia is one of those nations that helped seal the FAL in the history books
Rhodesia was a skirmish, not war. There are more killed in city of Chicago per year than in that "war" in "Rhodesia". BTW AK won that war.
I have to say, loved carrying the FAL in battle, yet the M14 was the one I feel in love with, both are great rifles.
Arguably one of the greatest platforms ever engineered… I own three FALs and they are my absolute favorites (at least in terms of rifles). Ridiculous stopping power, solid reliability, ease of use/maintenance and accuracy make it a great all-arounder with its only real drawback (in my opinion) being its weight. Fantastic video! I’m looking forward to seeing more.
The FAL is probably the best RIFLE of the Cold War era, but the Kalashnikov is still a better WEAPON.
@@ianmedford4855 the kalashnikov is more versatile and affordable, with cheaper ammunition and production cost, with overall very good reliability
fal is effective yet hard to control in full auto and fails to fullfill the AK's role (which was its original purpose) due to the 308 chambering: this makes it far more effective at longer ranges, therefore more lethal and, on paper, a stronger weapon.
nontheless, both guns are great feats of mechanical engineering and both should get the recognition they deserve, but thanks to the actions of the united states back in the days the fal was being developed, only the AK is greatly spoken of.
all of this despite the fal being adopted by a huge number of western countries and the entirety of the commonwealth.
@@ianmedford4855Yup. Go to the range and run a tactical course using a properly zeroed AKM VA an FAL and see which one gets you better times and more hits.
Don't forget to mention its ridiculous recoil, in proportion to its stopping power, Ouch!
@@vhjmvn RIDICULOUS RECOIL BS! I CARRIED THE SLR FOR 22 YEARS IN 2 ARMIES AND NEVER HAD A PROBLEM! IF YOU WANT RIDICULOUS RECOIL TRY A LEE ENFIELD!
I was CDN infantry in the 80's. I was trained on the FNC1 and C2. Excellent piece of kit. A real battle rifle.
Was recce using the sterling but i also preferred the c1a1 to the subgun even if it was a bitch climbing out of a vehicle 😎
@kevinhart46 Actually there is a 22lr conversion for the FN. I have used them back in the 80's.
@kevinhart46 the c2 has a bippod and 30 rd magazine as a squad rifle, the c1 has no bipod as it's a battle rifle and carries a 20 rd magazine! This weapon is not ment to attach another 2 feet of silencer you might as well use a hollowed out potatoe!
@@reloadnorth7722 100% their is 22 conversion kits for it
Same! Always volunteered for C2. Heavy barrel, bipod, 2-rd burst. Putting 5 rounds into 1.25” @ 100
Certainly as a 17 year old Air Cadet, the FAL L1A1 was a marvellous piece of kit, even over the well respected Lee Enfield. 303 rifle.
The FALwas garbage compared to contemporaries!!!
@@danielcurtis1434 maybe thats the reason he showed a H&K G3 at 3:55 , Lol
@@danielcurtis1434 It was a good rifle. I routinely shot 1" groupings with it at the 100 meter mound.
@@gryph01 You are correct it a definitely a “good rifle”. The thing is the competition was generally better. The AR-10 had the best recoil mitigation of any 7.62 battle rifle of the day and I’d still used today. The G3 had a bit less recoil mitigation and a fixed barrel (granted a tough reload). I personally feel it is inferior as a military weapon. I understand why it was adopted to a degree. However the AR-10 is really the go to for 1950s magic.
Then again it’s a much better gun than the M14 (nothing good to say about one).
However as a civilian gun the FAL makes way more sense.
So I probably should ha f specified I meant military use. My apologies…
Im from Iraq 🇮🇶 I do love love love lee anfield mk3
The FN FAL was my favorite weapon of the older COD MW2. I loved shooting that weapon in game. Even though it was semi-auto, it was a one or two hitter quitter. And extremely accurate
The auto setting was removed because soldiers would just let rip and waste ammo by the bucket load. Better to train them to shoot more accurately. I used it quite a lot but only on the ranges (Caesar's Range Aldershot) in 1967. I haven't touched one since 1973 but I reckon I could still strip and rebuild it, blindfold. Same ammo as the Gimpy too.
Pros:
1.Fires a LARGE and POWERFUL Round
2.Has a HIGHER fire rate than the AK
3.Has Range
CONS:
1.Not suited for close combat
2.Not suited for full auto fire
Automatic fire is useless with 7,62x51. You have massiv recoil and you will hit nothing. The 7,62x51 has more energy than the 7,62x39 but both rounds will penetrate the body without transfering a lot of their energy. With Softpoint or Hollowpoint ammo both calibers are verry effectiv.
Why isn't it suited for full auto fire? Are you saying cause the recoil?
@@danraymond1253
Yes.
The Australian Army used this awsome rifle in semi auto configuration in 7,62.
And having a machine gun Firing inaccurately at you can still give you a bad day, but then the squad machine gun was the M60.
As for "close range" it's a 7,62 nobody's getting close but if you're talking clearing a building that's what training is for and the boys did it well but that's also when the squadman carring the F1 came into play.
If ypthe US used this weaponry in Iraq I believe their hit rate would have been much higher.
Rate of full auto fire is about the same usually being 100 rounds faster for the FAL and it depends on how the AK is set up
FN FAL Rate of fire 650-700 rounds/min
Most AKs are: Rate of fire Cyclic rate of fire: 600 rds/min Combat rate of fire: Semi-auto 40 rds/min Bursts 100 rds/min
the FAL isnt' just a good rifle, but also badass and beautiful
also presents well on parade in rifle drill. projects power with attached bayonet. wimpy 5,56 weapons are an embarassment. on parade size does matter. SMLE with 17in bayonet was the epitome.
@@kevinlatham5661 hmmm insecurity? need to compensate for something?
@@Stravioska actually paraded with FN and SMLE.hefty but impressive.
Terrible grip angle though.
Definitely!
FN FAL BATTLE RIFLE- the way all Battle Rifles were meant to look, and after firing the FN FAL, always puts a big smile of confidence from might- on ones face.
I remember firing this as a skinny 17year old squadie in basic training. We’re fired it as a .22 variant and then we’re allowed to fire one 7.62 round down the 25 mtr range. I was super excited, but when the recoil hit me I was in a state of shock, I gave it back to my instructor praying I would never have to do that again. Subsequently in my 6 years in the BA I must have put God knows how many rounds down the barrel of the SLR ,until it was second nature but I’ll never forget my first.
In 1993 when I was 18 years old I did my military service in Mexico the FAL was our assigned rifle, awesome rifle!
👊💥🇲🇽
My memories of the FN (UK version) was it was heavy to handle but very powerful, I saw a photo of someone who was shot by it, they had a small entry wound but their back no longer existed, so it had stopping power.
This was my first service rifle. Never forgotten!!!!❤
Undoubtedly the FN FAL is one of the best rifles ever made, but its greatest quality is as an alarm clock, it was widely used and approved by the habitants of Rio de Janeiro. A hug from Brazil.
It’s debatable honestly I’d say that title belongs to the AK47 and AR15
@@BaconSlayer69 NO, I WOULD SAY THE FAL!
One of the para’s who served in Cyprus told me that they were frequently ambushed by terrorists from upstairs windows who would then duck down behind the walls but the F N was powerful enough to hit the target through the wall itself.
Most weapons are
@@wisemankugelmemicus1701depending on what the wall is made of, it was likely bricks. If it were made from anything like that like concrete for example, then 5.56 and any handgun round would take multiple shots to penetrate. But .308 and 7.62 absolutely demolishes things like that.
@@wisemankugelmemicus1701Nope.
Terrorists 🤣🤣
@@awf6554 Even a .22 can punch through several layers of drywall. Garand Thumb made a video which conclusively proved just that
A big thing is under which doctrine both were developed.
The FAL was developed as the standard NATO infantry rifle, originally in .280 british, but the US military wanted something bigger, so the decision was made to use something based on the .308 Winchester cartridge. Only for them to use the M14 instead.
The AK-47 on the other hand was supposed to the SMG, used together with the SKS as rifle and the RPD as LMG. But it was quickly noticed that the AK basically makes the SKS obsolete. And the AK was never meant for long range. The idea was for up to 300m, and at those ranges it performs perfectly well.
An d there is another rifle at the era, the german G3 (shown at 3:53 for example), which was based on the spanish CETME which in turn was based on the Mauser StG45 prototype and developed by the same people.
All three rifles can be very reliable and accurate.
The big difference is indeed in ammunition. 7.62x51 mm is simply more powerful than 7.62x39 mm. But full auto .308 is not something enjoyable, while 7.62x39 is just fine.
Aaah...
My old firestick. My first crush, we did everything together. A real beauty.
My Dad was in Vietnam in 1966. Because of the problems with the M16,My Dad did some trading with the Aussies for one. Got into trouble for having it.
The VC/NVA troops came to respect those "strange hardy soldiers who avoided walking on tracks or trails, preferred to move quietly through the bush or jungle, carried long brown rifles (L1A1 SLR) and would always attack our flanks"
Salute to your dad. My old man served in ‘68-‘69. When I was a kid, he would tell me stories about how guys would bring back contraband weapons from the field (mostly AKs and SKS rifles). Then, they would break them down and hide them inside cheap Japanese televisions they bought at the PX and ship them back home…along with a few other things that weren’t GI (weed, heroin, speed, etc.).
"Well Sir, I can get my butt killed when my M16 jams. Or I can take an earful from you for having a powerful weapon that actually works. Not a hard choice!"
I was also trained on L1A1 (SLR) it was an awesome rifle and reliable, I had no issues with it's length during CQB. Had a go with the Auto version while down in the Falklands found it difficult to hold on target when on full auto.
Great rifle…..used it in the 80’s . Power and accuracy.
FAL's accuracy are dismal at best..M-16's/M-4's are way more accurate..Battle cartridges are useful if used in accurate rifles and the tiltating bolt of the FAL is lacking..
I have very good memories of the FN and the licenced South African R1. Accurate as hell. And pranking your fellow soldier by adjusting his gas without him knowing. But to claim that it had crushed the AK is wishful thinking.
The title is standard dumbass RUclips clickbait, I agree.
all I can say is that I'm one of the few people that in 1975 was on the side of the AK and of the receiving end of the FAL on the Angola War. Well, it is an understatement to say that the FAL was a wicked yet beautiful weapon. We all got to fear and admire it.
Indian army had fn fal and ak47 both but soilder going on mountain warfare always preferred fn fal, they used to say "one bullet,one enemy "
It's called longer range weapon. battle rifles and Assault rifles are not the same
We had SLR, as Self Loading Rifle, a licensed version for FAL
hard to compare both rifles, since from the get go they were designed for different purposes, the AK 47 being a dependable yet cheap rifle with a sheetmetal receiver that fired a mild cartridge that a conscript could master quickly with average intelligence. The FN FAL was a rifle designed to hit them way out there, and be easy to take down and clean as well as having that gas system that took away alot of the 308's recoil. Ive fired both and only when I know where a conflict happens can you decide which you would want; for short range and in close house fighting the AK is a better bet since it handles faster, recoils less and might be considered more dependable. But if the fight were to happen in the desert or other long range engagement, of course you would want the FN with its ability to hit at long range. If both situations were happening, I would want the power of the 308 overall.
They are completely different rifles with different purposes.
The success of the AK is not that it is cheap, but that it is a weapon that is good enough in any situation. A soldier using the FN FAL would be at an advantage in certain situations. But he would also be at a disadvantage in many others. For example, in forest and jungle warfare, urban battles, storming trenches...
Carry an FAL and a little Krinkov problem solved
These points feel like the major reasons why Finland adapted to copy AK for the FDF’s service rifle.
I still remember from conscript service how our average combat range was less than 300 meters in the Finnish wilderness with all the trees and under foliages, while having the only open fields at swamp/bog spots. 😅
plus sniper capability
If I could only choose one rifle it would be the FAL, awesome beautiful rifle.
Went for training in New Zealand. Awsome weapon. Loved it. I remember seeing it in Soldier of Fortune magazine. The Rhodesian Army.
Yeah in Argentina the FN FAL is a weapon with a long tradition, and it is still used to this day by the Gendarmería to guard schools and other buildings where people vote when there's an election.
I started off using the L1A1 and moved onto the SA80 as the "upgrade". I only recently just stopped crying myself to sleep!
I read that some think that the L1A1 isn't suited to close combat - I would suggest it depends on the environment you're fighting in. That extra length with the "pig sticker" on the end can give you a real edge over smaller weapons and the stock can be a very effective clubbing device.
I didn't see the semi auto option of L1A1 as a problem as it meant using well aimed shots rather than a typical "spray and pray" technique of an AK47 for example. The results of the former, in most instances, produced better results in my opinion. Other viewpoints, of course, are available!
ONE OF mates Was In N irland And The FALKLANDS and HE SAID EXACTLY THAT !!!😁g
@@geoffreycarson2311 i prefer l1a1
Same experience with L1A1. The iron sites sucked though. Should have put the same sites as later model LE No4s or 7.62 LMG (Bren).
Did you know that the MOD were playing with the idea of a bulpup version of the SLR back in the early days before the SLR was rolled out.
KABER. GOD. ALMIGHTY 🙏🙏
Loved this weapon while in the British Army, single shot accurate, no need for auto fire. It's just good training to hit your target first time. Then had to use the SA80 toy gun.
I'm canadian might as well add the colt c7a2 to that toybox!
oh not that sa 80 thing junk in a pile.😊
When compared to the AK, the FN FAL fires a heavier bullet at a higher velocity out to longer range more accurately than the AK and has similar reliability to the Kalashnikov. It takes more training and practice to fire the FAL in full auto but that is about the only downside.
That heavier pill and higher velocity came at a price. Heat. Training wasn't the issue. Longevity and reliability were. The FAL was never designed for fully automatic fire for this reason. Fully automatic options came later but incorporated heavier barrel profiles and weren't considered viable as normal service rifles for most militaries. There were exceptions, notably, Argentina.
It didn't work out too well for them, though.
When the first combat evaluation reports came back for the MP43 (which became known as the StG 44 or Sturmgewher 44 ie first assault rifle) they were very positive for several reasons but the main one was that they could advance a lot faster because the semi auto feature and the big 30 round magazine they didn't need to stop to reload magazines. The full auto feature was useful be not the main one. I can't see someone advancing being able to take the time to aim to be able to shoot beyond 300m anyway.
It is also heavier and longer, making it I´ll suitedfor the "SMG but better" role the AK was designed for
Cold War Era guns are so aesthetically pleasing.
well, in Colombia there's an armed conflict from like... more than 50 years ago idk and the "rebel" side uses almost always the FN FAL and the AK-47
The Australian L1A1 was limited to semi-automatic fire only for several reasons. Full-sized rifle rounds are bulky and heavy, and automatic fire drastically reduces accuracy. Unlike armies that blindly spray rounds in the general direction of the enemy, we were trained to fire only when we could see a target.
Australian here, I fired this assault rifle called FN FAL , and I fully agree with the video. It is a beauty.
Used the R1 (South African) version. Beautiful rifle. A large beast however. Usefull cartridge. Plenty of power out to 400m plus. 308 is a nice utility round, not quite 300 Win mag but it got the job done 😜
Me too, Boet. Vasbyt!! 😄
KAAVER GOD ALMIGHTY 🙏😊
"The right arm of the free world"
Nuff said, I'm sold.
I bought a FN FAL back in 1987 for $1500. I loved the simplicity of the bolt design, it was so easy to clean. I shortly after bought a FN-FNC .223. for about $1200. Great shooters, very accurate.
I loved the British L1A1 SLR, used it for many years. It was semi-auto only as you were trained to fire accurate single shots, no spray and pray. It was accurate out to 600 meters and in my experience was trouble free and very reliable. It normally used a 20-round magazine, but the 30-round Bren L4 LMG would also fit. The FAL was made using Metric measurements, the L1A1 was converted to Inch, so most parts are not interchangeable.
Most of the commonwealth nations used the inch pattern so lots of parts. Canada developed the inch pattern plans as the first adopter.
@@pdxyyz4327 It really depends on were the rifles were manufactured, if from Belgium they would be Metric. I believe Canada uses American SAE threads not British BSF? The parts not using screw threads should be the same.
@@billballbuster7186 The Canadian C1A1 design came out of the Allied Rifle Committee, which was Canada, Australia and the UK. The C1A1 and both L1A1s used the same threads.
@@fergusmason5426 That would probably be BSF (British Standard Fine), there is another British thread, Whitworth, but thats a lot older.
I loved the British Brown Bess, used it for many years. It was flint-lock musket, as you were trained to fire inaccurate volleys, no spray and pray, no iron sights, no nothing. It was inaccurate out of 600 sea miles and in my experience was trouble free and very reliable (you could always stuck someone with a bayonet in case of misfire). It normally used a powder bag as a magazine, but a horse-drawn cart would also fit. The Brown Bess was made using craftsman's guesswork for the measurements, but could be converted to inches by using your thumb as a measurement tool, so most parts between different muskets are not interchangable
The FAL is a main battle rifle
The AK is an assault rifle
Nominal effective range of FAL is 600m
" " " of an AK is 300m
While the FN *may* be used in an assault role, tha AK is not suited to long range/DMR use
Any of the cartridges ever chambered in the FAL are faster and heavier, delivering more KD power at range than the AK round at the muzzle....near enough
Different tools for different jobs
I served and the Australian used a version we called the SLR. We used it in Vietnam, the us soldiers were envious. Downside for us was as we got close to taking up the Styer was the barrel replacement dropped off. Accuracy dropped off markedly. The Styer was not half the rifle. It does not punch through plates in body armour. Whereas the 7.62 NATO will. Need to change again.
Modern top-tier military armor takes 7.62 NATO. Latest Russian plates are rated to take the B32 API round, so basic ball ammo won't do much to it. If you think that the whole rest of the world is stupid for moving from 7.62x51 or 7.62x54R or 7.62x39 down to 5.56x45, 5.45x39 or 5.8x42 then you probably also think you are smarter than top-flight officers that spent many years analyzing it all.
You must be very old
@meinkek7896 why you are saying that ?
@@Max_Da_G Your analysis by “top flight officers” didn’t happen. 5.56 was a panic decision during Vietnam.
@@Max_Da_G Dunning Kreuger kid, trust the experts, get your 5th booster
How do I get the feeling that you like the FAL?
I used the slr in the army it was far superior to the sa80 a1 it was only semi automatic but with a well placed matchstick it could shoot automatic but you wouldn't dare cause of the recoil a brilliant rifle I loved it
SLR, SA80 A1 …
An awesome rifle,should not have been replaced but upgraded.
That's what I've been saying but put down in favour of sheet metal junk sa 80 .😢
On long 3 day foot patrols carrying your 200 rounds 7.62 x 51's first line ammo, with little or no chance of re supply, one tended to NOT want to use full auto, even though I had it. There was no future in expending all your ammo in 5 minutes during a 7 minute fire fight...
Anyone who was decently trained knows to double tap.
Full auto is for those who can't shoot straight.
The Australian soldiers at the battle of Long Tan in Vietnam had the L1A1 (our version of the FAL). The battle lasted 3 hours!
@@peterkerr4019they got ammo resupply atleast once and i believe twice.
@@sugarnads In jungles of Vietnam I'd far rather be armed with any rifle chambered in 7.62x51 than an M16.
At least the 7.62 knows the difference between cover and concealment. That piss willy 5.56 is deflected by even the smallest twig.
@@mazambane286 FA increases likelihood of hitting a moving target. Big difference between hitting a fixed paper target and a person taking evasive movements and hiding behind cover. Even worse if your fighting in a jungle or dense foliage which you cannot easily spot your target. There is a reason why all infantries are provided FA rifles, perhaps with the exception of sniper units.
If I'm not mistaken the FAL is a battle rifle and not an assault rifle😊
Yep
I think we are in an age where such designations have no meaning anymore...
@@jimvick8397 No, they’re still relevant.
@@The_Black_Falchion Convince Jay Inslee of that...
@@jimvick8397 I don’t know who that is, so I feel no inclination to do so.
Back in the day , this rifle takes me back.
I was in the RAAF in the 70s and I was issued with Australia's version of the FAL; the (wood stock) L1A1 SLR using the 7.62 NATO round. A truly amazing firearm. Lethal at 600 yds; like a sniper rifle at 500 yds and at closer ranges well, brutal. Our firearms' instructors (who were Airfield Defence Guards) showed us what just one round could do to a human body (via simulations) at 100 yds and closer.
On the 25 yd sidearm range an instructor set up a 5 gal can of water and put a neat hole in the front, centre of the can. Through the round's tumbling action, the entire back of the can was blown away and every drop of water was gone.
All our instructors had done at least one tour of duty in Vietnam. They told us that, man for man, the Australians consistently had a higher kill ratio in the field thanks to the SLR. They also firmly believed that if US forces in Vietnam had been using the SLR the outcome of that conflict could have been very different.
Sure, the US had all the advanced field equipment, artillery, choppers and aircraft that were available at that time but, as General Patton believed; and I’m paraphrasing, “A good soldier with a good rifle is the most powerful weapon in any war.”
Of course, he was talking about the M1 Garand rifle, but his 'rule' is just as valid if you replace the Garand (an excellent, powerful weapon) with the SLR firing a 7.62 NATO round. Our SLRs were made, under licence, at the Small Arms Factory at Lithgow, NSW. To this very day the SMF still make a civilian, 'hunting' version of the SLR.
The SLRs were damn good military weapon. I still miss mine after all these years. They were more complex and took longer to field clean and could be problematic if dropped in mud, compared to the AK 47, but I know which firearm I’d always take into battle.
It was their superior gas feed mechanism that made them a far more effective and accurate rifle. AK 47s have taken the front spot in terms of popularity because they are simplistic and can be used by untrained operators who, basically, just ‘spray and prey’, hoping to hit something.
One thing that sort of bothered me about the narration of this video is the bloke doing the talking kept saying, "...our AK 47...". I couldn't make sense of that. He definitely didn't sound Russian.
Otherwise, a good video.
Cheers, B.H.
Flatter shooting
More powerful
Better range
Better iron sights
Better sight radius
Better ergonomics
Easier to upgrade with optics
Not really
Yes
Yes
debatable
Yes
No
Generally no.
@black_falchion9137
Trajectory of 7.62×51 vs. 7.62×39
"It’s also generally accepted that the 7.62 NATO is flatter trajectory. When zeroed in to 100 yards, the same 7.62 Soviet cartridge that we discussed above drops 6.5 inches after 200 yards. It drops almost two feet after 300. However, the NATO drops 3.6 inches after 200 and 13.5 inches after 300."
There really is no debate between an aperture sight an inch and a half away from your eyeball, and a notch "vee" set way out there on the other end of the receiver, sitting on top of the gas block.
And the reputation the AK has for being difficult to upgrade with optics is quite well known. Trying to turn the top dust cover into a picatinny is unsatisfactory. Trying to mod the cover of the gas piston to picatinny is unsatisfactory. Reviewers of the latest iteration of the AK, the AK-12, observe that even now, the AK is difficult to optic.
What is not commonly know is that the FN FAL was originally intended to use the .270 British cartridge. That would have allowed the rifle to be fired with better control in full-auto shooting and would have meant that more ammunition could have been carried.
I read the M1 Garand was the same--started out as .276 then military politics dictated .30-06
@@gohldfingah something something "need more stopping power"
Same reason the .40 S&W was developed. 9x19 mm was considered too weak and .45 ACP had too little capacity. So they made something in between. And it was sort of adopted by some police forces, but there is a reason why 9 mm is pretty much the standard nowadays. It is more effective to hit two weak rounds than one strong round. Capacity and controllability wins over raw power.
It's the same with 5.56x45 mm and 5.45x39 mm. Weaker cartridges, but smaller and lighter (so the soldier can carry more) and easier to control.
But the powerful cartridge wins on range, which is why the larger rounds are still used for those cases.
I loved it. I could put 5 rounds in a 2 inch grouping at 200 yards, sitting, standing, and prone. My rifle’s serial number was 8L2024.
It is such a great collectors gun because of the wide variety, the Hebrew Hammer, the British L1A1, the Rhodesian babypoo FAL with the cutoff carry handle, and on and on.
Feel privileged to say that the L1A1 was the personal weapon I was issued with in the infantry.
Having used the R1 version of the FAL in the Angolan bush war, I can say it was heavy to carry on patrol in the bush, didnt like desert dust, and could only take 16, not twenty rounds, to prevent magazine jams, and we did have (afrikaans😁) Auto fire, however, was a great rifle. Very accurate. Preffered carrying our R4 (galil) for patrols, was way lighter. 👍🍻🇿🇦
My country was on the other side of that war. Our soldiers were shock to know during Cuito battle of some MPLA soldiers that had never cleaned or provided any maintenance to their AKs during the war and while they used it as a pillow. There is also a soviet report about it. The russian guy was also shocked. Both are good weapons.
I've never had those issues bro, also don't know of anyone els who did in my service, we had strict rules and we always cleaned and oiled our rifles daily with frequent rifle inspections, its how it should be right ?, even in the bush 👍
In my military service, my FAL have jammed due the mud in the training camp, this weapon never went close to AK 47 :(
@@brunogo-j9755 you don't shoot if the weapon is full of mud bro, but it still should because the gas ram is what makes it so reliable even if there's grit in the rifle, and a few shots n its running smooth again, once again I've never had those problems, I've done rout marching in heavy rain too with no problems exept for a bit of rust developing, but when you squeeze the trigger it fires, the fal was built to withstand the elements on a battle field and was verry reliable, if a round casing is damaged or the magazine is dented or deformed it could cause a stoppage, but I've never experienced that either, the steel magazines wer pretty sturdy and could take quit a pounding, so in a dire situation your rifle will still work for you but must be cleaned the first moment you get, gritty mud would cause excessive wear and tear on the breach block, anyway I'm not saying fal is invinsible but it did far better than anything els it competed against 👍, also as you should know if your gas is set too low it can also cause a malfunction and should only be set down if ur gonna fire a rifle grenade 😉, usualy a setting on 2 or 3 is the best for a fal for normal use, also even though it was fully auto we never ever used it in full auto, semi auto was much more accurate and amo conservative, you need lots of practice to accurately use full auto and even then you would be lucky if even half your rounds hit the target
@kevinhart46 you seem to underestimate the fn lol, it's a tried and tested rifle that is so good that many countries around the world used it and many still do, if we're both in a trench with sand bags and I use the fn an you got ur AR or whatever and were shooting at eachother, I don't want to be you bro, firstly I won't need a whole magazine to kill one guy, a good shooter only needs one shot 😉
FN-FAL or PARA-FAL is indeed a very iconic assault rifle when talking about Brazil. It was the army's and Rio de Janeiro state police's official assault rifle for many decades. It was used both inside against the narcos in the favelas, as well as abroad in peace missions along UN, such as in Africa and Haiti.
Besides many criticisms because of the close combats in the favelas, it has proved to perform very well. Specially because of its power and precision. Being able to hit with precision and go through brick walls easily. It is still used to this day. Though the official assault rifle of the Brazilian army is now IMBEL IA-2.
FAL is a battle rifle.
Did the IA2 7.62 variant entered service or were left in prototype phase only?
My dad was really happy when they got issued the FAL. It meant they could get rid of the Bren.
Lugged an L1A1 around West Germany for many years. It was a reliable rifle, but was too heavy and too long. If you were deploying from armoured vehicles or helos, this was not the rifle you wanted to be carrying.
A proper Battle Rifle though - you could engage the enemy at 1200 m range on the standard SUSAT sights.
You can't have everything it's better than sa 80 the LMT 762 is good has little muzzle climb scar H as well😊.
Been binge watching your channel entire weekend...As an ex Special Forces (European), wounded by different weapons, I love your videos! Keep up the good work!
When I joined the Canadian military, I was issued an FN A1 C1 7.62mm Semiautomatic rifle with a 10-round magazine. The C@ version could be made fully automatic or semiautomatic with a 20-round magazine. That was back in 1981.
FNC1A1. Canadian 1st, Alteration 1st. The FNC1A1 had a 20 rd mag, the C2 a 30 round. I also joined up in 1981, retired in 2003.
Back in 1990, when i served in the Greek army, i scored 10/10 shots on target from 300 meters distance with this beauty. This gave me a ten days leave as reward 🤩
I had the FN-FAL issued as my military service rifle from 1994-1996. I could have the G3 option, but the very low maintenance and very good accuracy was in favor of FN-FAL. GREAT WEAPON
It was a weapon that made everyone a DM. Ranges competition were very competitive. The instruction with 556 was a whole different dynamic. Dropping s fire support team at 400m to overwatch your advance was pushed back to snipers whereas the FN was efficient not only at suppression but also effective fire at that range.
Yeah, it was so damn good to use in close quarters, right? Was so good to clear houses with? All that distance was so useful in cities, right?
@@Max_Da_G 1. Distance is pretty useful in cities. The most danger is often in the depht in a urban scenario. There is a reason why the americans brought back their M14´s and the germans their G3.
2. Urban combat was something that should be avoided at all costs, especialy in the early cold war eras.
@@westphalianstallion4293 M14 EBRs still suck.
@@Max_Da_Gwhen doing house clearing you are using more grenades, but it is handy to have a weapon that will fire THROUGH doors, floors, walls, and ceilings.
😊
Reliability and ability to control the rifle under automatic fire as well as price point are the main reasons the AK platform ultimately won out.
In every conflict where the FAL has faced the AK, The side carrying the FAL were more successful.
Prove me wrong.
The AK platform “won out” because it was supplied en masse by the USSR in the many proxy wars from 1950-1991; it “won” because of its wide distribution intent on upending capitalism and thus availability in places which had not purchased it nor selected it based on its capabilities compared to an alternative. Quantity is a quality of its own, and while it was certainly cheaper for an institution to supply a Regiment of 500 with AKs, there is no doubt that the same Regiment of FALs would have been the far deadlier force to fight against…you can’t excel in close combat with an AK if you cannot even get within 200m of the objective/enemy because the FAL can shave the hair off a fly’s asshole
the AK isnt very controllable on full auto either NEITHER are worth a shit on FA if you havent trained with them quite a bit and if you DO put in the time to train youll get better results from time spent with the FAL
the AK is meant for peasants who cant read let alone understand rotational drift..
@@mazambane286
Like in Vietnam war lol
The thing the AK can do is being functional after 20 000 in the hands of a 12 year old who picked it up because his 14 yo instructor got shot down. It won't be accurate, but it will run.
When I was in the Canadian military we had both types. The fully auto version replaced the Bren. I loved this rifle.
Also used stripper clips.
Damn dude how old are you
@@KnownHomophobe -- 73, we’d just got rid of the dinosaurs.
Badass Canuck.
@@duanepigden1337when asked for your age always reply "Old enough to sleep alone but young enough to know better".
Fn was called SLR self loading rifle L1A1 SLR in our army, we had two types
Semi and Lmg (L2A1/C2)
Ishapore 1A/1C
I carried the Brit version the SLR for 6 years before the L85 replaced it, unlike the replacement , it never let me down, bits never fell off it when you werent looking either, and when you hit someone with that round no matter what they are hiding behind they aint getting back up to play,. - btw the Brit version has debris clearing cuts on the the bolt carrier which overcomes the issues the other variants have when dirty
Well said, Brother! It was my 'Personal' for about 7yrs, but for some reason I did 10yrs with SLR for range quals. But as a 'techie', for the rest of my time, I had the SMG.
I got out after 14yrs, it was the month before they started handing out the L85 to Tech Trades. So I only ever fired 32 rounds of 5.56, didn't like it.
My SLR is one of the few things I really miss. 😭
it's not only a good rifle, it is aslo beautiful piece.
It was made in both metric and imperial specs, they are not interchangeable
I used the SLR when I was an army cadet and later on when I was an infantry reservist before joining the regular forces, and I have never fired anything as good ever since.
I used to to shoot this rifle, and it was a nock down, if you got hit with it , you would be out of combat, dead , or badly wounded, but in the end they wimps ,wanted Smaller round to save the battle field casualties, but after all that is the job to kill as many enemy as possible this rifle could put a bullet through a 1/4steel plate at 1/2 a mile, as a high speed bullet it could get you behind a wall or bush and cars .we had different means to to clean the weapon for different theatres of war, it had interchangeable parts, that could be swooped-out on the battlefield and at the time use the same ammunition of your enemy if they were using caliber as you.
I remember during the show "Top Gun", one of the contestants saying that he hated the FAL, as he found it difficult to handle.
We had the version called SLR. The Shooting Team had those chosen for their use by the Armourer, with four grooves and lands, for greater accuracy. Fired something like 100,000 rounds through SLR alone. Could adjust by strike at 800m.
Yes, fired thousands of rounds training for Bisley every year; by May we were knocking down Fig11s at 500yds quite happily - iron sights, of course.
Because the men using the FN were better trained than those using the AK.
Yeah, that's why they ultimately sucked in most of the armed conflicts of the era, like Vietnam
Type 56 stomp FA -i- L
@@user-SaputroYono you couldn't fish a baby trout with that shitty bait
I have used this rifle during my NCC training back in 2019. So freaking powerful rifle. One of my female platoon comrade wasn't able to cock it 😂. The cocking handle was very stiff.
Indian police also uses this rifle
@@ayushmankumar1483 maybe. Didn't knew it Iam from Nepal, i thought they used INSAS now.
@@nepalspecialservice646it was used before INSAS.
@@ayushmankumar1483
I guess you mean the Paramilitary aka CRPF (Centrally Reserved Police Forces) and not the regular civilian police.
@@Mjr.Nuke-Hazard_089 Maharashtra Police uses SLRs
Because the FAL - could shoot 1/2 the group size and shoot twice the distance of the AK. I knew the Capt of a shooting team - in Canada - somewhere. His comment was that it would shock you - once the armorers were done with a rebuild.
Crush? Which rifle is used more widely though?
The 7.62 x 51 Nato cartridge shoots further, is faster, and more powerful than the AK's 7.62 x 39mm round. But that being said, not everyone can shoot it effectively. I personally don't have an issue with it because it's my personal favorite cartridge of all time, and I get plenty of time with it. But the 7.62 Soviet round is more tame and easier to handle for both unexperienced and experienced alike. Not to mention, it has a standard 30 round capacity versus 20 of the 7.62 Nato cartridge. And you can carry a lot more of it as well. That's why we switched to 5.56 Nato, despite it only being half as powerful. Although I'm personally on the side of we need to go a little bit larger and more powerful while still maintaining intermediate size, capacity, grain weight, and recoil. Thus why I think we should be using 6.8 SPC instead of 5.56 Nato. 3,000 FPS and 1,700 Foot lbs of Energy out of a 16-inch barrel.
If the recoil is too strong for you, all you have to do on a FAL is to adjust the pressure regulator over the barrel, thus giving you a far more forgiving recoil, at the cost of lower RPMs. So, the argument that the 7.62x51 NATO kicks too much is understandable, but the pressure regulator was made to compensate this. So, it is a rifle that anyone can shoot accurately, without having to compromise the projectile speed or stopping power.
Weight being the best argument, along with the number of rounds in a combat load. Still, FN came with a 30 round mag solution, in the FALO, that could easily be used in the FAL because they are essentially, just a longer version of the same mag, that uses the same mechanisms to be locked in the rifles.
Still, lugging around 8-10 mags that weighs almost a kilo each is not an easy task, along with a rifle that weighs almost 6kg when combat-ready is a disadvantage that could lead to some losses on the battlefield that can be mitigated by a smaller caliber round, along with a lighter rifle.
So, these particularities made the FAL become one of the best DEFENSIVE weapons in the world, while not so good as an offensive weapon. So, the americans were not completely wrong when they decided to make the M4, because their doctrine is far more based on the offensive than the defensive.
Yeah that makes sense lets tool up for some specialist hotshot round that isn't actually that much better than 5.56 which we have truckloads of. 1500 lb-feet of muzzle energy versus 1700 not that big of a gulf in my opinion.
Spot on but there are 30 rounds of 7.62x51 NATO. Straight stick of 30 G3 South African FN FAL C2 LSW🇨🇦 and the curved one goes to the Cetme Modello A-C.
The first rifle I carried when I joined the Cdn Army in 1980
I loved my SLR excellent weapon, great stopping power.
The Para-FAL (paratrooper version with folding stock) made in Brazil by IMBEL (state-owned arsenal) is my favourite.
I'm a police officer, and rifles, at opposite to infantrymen, are the LAST resource, not the first. When a rifle is necessary, criminals are heavily armed and wearing bulletproof vests. The 7,62mm NATO cartridge is advantageous in these combat scenarios.
Proportionally, a police rifleman has the same value than an Artillery barrage for an infantrymen.
I’ve always loved the look of the FN FAL. It strikes me as a modern rifle with a contemporary aesthetic
There’s a reason it became known as the Right Arm of the Free World.
Sure would’ve been nice to have one of those in Spain though.
And convince the entire Old guard in Spain to ditch their "beloved" CETME? Far easier for Hell to Freezer all over.
Brother we almost had em in the US, but we just HAD to go for the M14...
Never underestimate the bias towards local manufacturing lol
@@jackhammertwo1 the cetme is beter
@@anuvisraa5786 "Cada Esquina Tiene Mierda Escondida" ese era el mote que los propios militares que lo usaban le dieron? Por si no lo sabías paisano.
@@cecilsmith2061 The CETME , G3 , HK 11, and PTR 91 chew up brass necks in their fluted chambers . That is not an issue for militaries who consider fired brass as expendable waste items . I am a USN veteran and I reload my spent 7.62 NATO and 308 Winchester brass . I have owned a couple of FAL rifles and a Springfield Armory M1A . The FAL , M14 , and M1A don't wreck the spent cases , so it makes better sense for someone who wants to save their brass and become reolader to own one of those rifles over a CETME pattern rifle . I have a friend that owned a CETME some years ago . His rifle was a Jamomatic with worn out roller blocks and I couldn't reload the brass cases . Consider that the M14 was so similar to the M1 Garand that it didnt take much in the way of retooling Garand production lines to field the M14 in numbers . And consider that creating numbers of FALs in US arsenals would take a lot of money importing Belgian armory tooling . The biggest mistake was not designing all weapons chambered in 7.62 NATO to use the same magazines .
I love this channel and I hope you make more firearm content!
It really depends on the battle. Over long ranges in the plains of Europe or Russia, that FAL is going to reach out and touch someone at ranges where the AK is just spraying and praying. If you're in the middle of a hot, sweaty, south Asian jungle... well that AK is going to have a bit of an advantage at those mostly point blank ranges and be able to lay down a lot of suppressive fire for people who know how to fire and maneuver.
yes, for this now in ukraine that ukrainians uses usa and nato weapons loose every where from AK
@@nikxohs3925Ukrainians are using AKs in their fight against Russia.
@@nikxohs3925 garand thumb says that battle rifles made a comeback because of Ukraine so no an AK is still a great gun but ukranian ak74s are far far worse than the nato supplied m4s and scars
ak dont stop to work in any condition and dont need specials tools to maintain it as nato weapons do.only cowards like usa soldiers want a gun that kills in 1000 miles. real battles are in 100-200 yards and ak is better there
@@nikxohs3925 too bad you're wrong as Ukraine has proven
When I first came across this rifle here in Canada back in the 1970s, it was simply called the "F.N." When I asked the soldier what FN stood for he stated truthfully "Fabrique Nationale" from Belgium. He did not have much use for the American automatic rifle the AR-15. Not a long enough range and it didn't hit hard enough with it .22 or 556 caliber slug.
Finding a FAL is like findinf a unicorn now. So i got the FAL's progeny, the SCAR 17.
In the Dutch army one was forced to keep the 2-legged stands for belly firing on constantly, which added a lot of weight and took it out of balance. If real war had broken out the landscape would have been covered with discarded stands.
😂
"The dutch were here."
"how do you know?"
"we're standing in a minefield of bipods"
Fn fal is one of my very favourite battle rifles so nice 😊 thank you for this video my dude