Looking for 308 battle rifle recommendations

[Vlad G 345]

1982 was a full 33 years ago. 

 

That was the year of the first artificial heart, MJ released Thriller, Epcot center opened, the first Ford Ranger came on the market, and the Commodore 64 was first released.  

 

Please tell me some more on how we should base our weapon decisions on the Falklands War. 

[DevsAdvocate 112]

How many people buying a FAL will be doing regular barrel swaps? really? FALs I've seen had both threaded and pinned barrels, if you are building one up yourself on a DSA receiver this will be problematic if you have never done it before but otherwise it is a straight forward process.

 

You would take the FAL over the G3? I would take the G3 OVER the FAL if I could only have one. G3 mounting optics with the claw mount is a pinch, I can get sub moa 300 yards with mine using the German issue scope and mount (match ammo, of course).

 

G3 requires NO tools to take down, all push pins and can strip a G3 in under a minute with practice (that's front hand guard, remove butt stock, drop trigger housing/pack, drop bolt). G3 barrel is pressed into the trunnion, shop press to remove the barrel/replace.

 

Charging handle is non reciprocating, the cocking tube free floats so not interference with the barrel and roller delayed operation.

 

If the extractor brakes no worries, a true mil-spec G3 clone with have sufficient flutes (and flute depth) to still kick spent casings out and keep on working.

 

I won't lie, I really like the look of a PTR91 with wood furniture... I've often debated trading my FAL kit n caboodle for one.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

People play weekend warrior / arm chair commando all the time and from my experience it's the "hey I want a SCAR" or "hey I want a pistol AR upper" type. I've seen idiots sporting SCAR's and M4 clones in tactical gear at the range who have no Military/Police affiliation...just arm chair "hey let's play soldier" weekend commandos.

 

The person in that image is supposedly an Air Force STO so it was issued to him and paid for with big Government budgets and endless funds, the FAL and G3 might cost less but have stood the test of time.

 

Want a 308 battle rifle that will work and is proven? Get a G3 or FAL. Not good enough? look into a nice M1A. All three of those are proven systems.

 

No offense, but why hate on range kiddies sporting a SCAR when giving them a pass with a FAL/PTR91/M1A?  You can easily play armchair commando with any of those.  

 

Also, the FN SCAR is fairly well "proven"... it's not like it was doing nothing in Afghanistan/Iraq/Kenya for the last decade or so...

[Vlad G 345]

Plus that whole attitude is like a spit away from saying only the military should have guns, lest someone at the range look foolish. 

[Carcano 14]

- 90 nations?  Irrelevant. NO, IT IS RELEVANT. PROVES JUST HOW RELIABLE AND DURABLE IT IS.

- My SCAR is far easier to detail strip and break down than my FAL PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT

- Off the bench, the SCAR is a bit more accurate than the FAL, but marginally so REALLY? MAYBE YOU SHOULD SHOOT A DECENT FAL.

- FALs going "strong"?  I guess.  Even the best made guns wear out though.  SURE THEY DO, BUT HAS THE SCAR SURVIVED NEARLY 50+ YEARS OF USE? NO.

- Full auto is irrelevant to our discussion, but the SCAR wins there from most reviews I've seen FULL AUTO IS A WASTE, BURST CAME ALONG FOR A REASON...

- Magazine, points to the SCAR, I can buy them far more easily than proper FAL mags FAL MAGS ARE CHEAP AND EASY TO FIND ONLINE AND MAIL ORDER.

- Semi-auto recoil... SCAR wins marginally... but that also may be due to the PWS brakes. AGREED.

- Ergos... SCAR wins.  FAL is best of the "old school" though SURE, IF YOU WANT SURE FIRE LIGHTS, FRONT PISTOL GRIPS, AFTERMARKET ACCESSORIES.

 

Where the SCAR leaves the FAL in the dust:

 

- Modularity, plenty of integrated rail space and the ability to swap components with ease.  Including removal of the barrel. BARREL REMOVAL IS IRRELEVANT FOR MOST

 

- Better trigger... I had to upgrade my FAL to an Eagle Arms trigger to make it worthwhile, even then, it pales to my SCAR with a Giessele AGREED. BUT PSG-1 PACK ON MY G3 BLOWS THE SCAR AWAY.

 

- Lighter weight... ounces = pounds, pounds = pain.  I'M NOT IN THE SAND BOX ON FOOT DOING PATROLS, IF SHTF YES BUT OTHERWISE WEIGHT ISN'T THAT BAD.

 

- Ambi push bottom mag release.  The FAL latch is problematic, especially with out-of-spec mags. NEVER HAD ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT.

 

Honestly, the biggest issues with the FAL is that it's pretty much no longer supported.  Magazines aren't easy to come by anymore, and few people make new accessories for it.  DS Arms is pretty much your best bet for most FAL related items. MAGAZINES ARE A DINE A DOZEN (WELL, 20 ROUNDERS) IF YOU KNOW WHERE TO LOOK, LOT'S OF ACCESSORIES EXIST JUST NOT IN RETAIL STORES.

 

Don't get me wrong, but the SCAR is a superior platform ergo wise, weight wise, and simplicity.  If you're gonna lay out the cash for a .308 "battle rifle", it's the best money can buy.  I love them both though, but push comes to shove, I'd sell the FAL before I sell the SCAR. I'LL KEEP MY FAL BUT AND IF YOU SELL YOUR FAL I'LL TAKE IT

[Carcano 14]

Plus that whole attitude is like a spit away from saying only the military should have guns, lest someone at the range look foolish. 

 

Wow, you took that the wrong way.

 

No, I never said only the Military should have guns but IMO too many people play soldier and fail to think realistically.

[Carcano 14]

No offense, but why hate on range kiddies sporting a SCAR when giving them a pass with a FAL/PTR91/M1A?  You can easily play armchair commando with any of those.  

 

Also, the FN SCAR is fairly well "proven"... it's not like it was doing nothing in Afghanistan/Iraq/Kenya for the last decade or so...

 

FAL entered production and service in 1954, SCAR in 2004. The FAL has stood the test of time and the SCAR is questionable.

 

Not giving "range kiddies" a pass with the FAL/PTR/M1A but is goes to show how common sense/realistic usage is beyond the comprehension of many gun owners. When you see people show up in tactical gear complete with helmets you know they are taking it way too far, we are not in a war zone (yet).

[Vlad G 345]

Wow, you took that the wrong way.

 

No, I never said only the Military should have guns but IMO too many people play soldier and fail to think realistically.

 

So .. are you then saying that the badass with government provided SCAR-H also failed to think realistically?

 

Yeah, I'm screwing with you, but I think you are letting your personal preferences get in the way of reality. 

 

For example you keep saying that something that has been around longer is somehow better then something only a decade old as if all progress has stopped at some indeterminate point in the past.  Why pick 1954? Why not say that the M1 is more proven then the FAL? Why not the Enfield? 1954 is actually closer to the 19th century then it is to today. We didn't have jet powered transatlantic planes in 1954, and today we fly in jets made of PLASTIC (cough .. composites). 

[Carcano 14]

1982 was a full 33 years ago. 

 

That was the year of the first artificial heart, MJ released Thriller, Epcot center opened, the first Ford Ranger came on the market, and the Commodore 64 was first released.  

 

Please tell me some more on how we should base our weapon decisions on the Falklands War. 

 

And we learned that the FAL will get the job done, and a perfect match up of arms on both sides which is rare.

 

Yes, 33 years and many of those FAL rifles are still going strong.

 

Falklands: mud, dirt, sand, salt water, all enemies of guns and the FAL kept going. I can go on and on with more if you would like.

 

 

[Vlad G 345]

Did you post that from a Commodore 64? I still have mine, and it still works just as well as it did back then. 

 

Tell me, if that FAL is so amazing why did the Brits and pretty much everyone else replace it?  

[Carcano 14]

So .. are you then saying that the badass with government provided SCAR-H also failed to think realistically?

 

Yeah, I'm screwing with you, but I think you are letting your personal preferences get in the way of reality. 

 

For example you keep saying that something that has been around longer is somehow better then something only a decade old as if all progress has stopped at some indeterminate point in the past.  Why pick 1954? Why not say that the M1 is more proven then the FAL? Why not the Enfield? 1954 is actually closer to the 19th century then it is to today. We didn't have jet powered transatlantic planes in 1954, and today we fly in jets made of PLASTIC (cough .. composites). 

 

No, our Govt. needs to justify budgets and this is one way in which they do so.

 

The M1 and M14 saw use up until Vietnam and limited use during the 90's/early 2000's. Most of those M1's sat in crates for 30 plus years not in continues military service.

 

The Enfield is irrelevant, we simply cannot compare the .303 and .308 let alone the fact that the Enfield is a bolt action magazine fed rifle and the FAL/G3 are semi-automatic (and in some cases, select fire) rifles.

 

The Enfield is also still in limited use, Indian police/security forces are still using them and many many other countries have put them in deep storage much like the Mosin nagant (which also saw use in Chechnya and Bosnia during the 1990's).

[Carcano 14]

Did you post that from a Commodore 64? I still have mine, and it still works just as well as it did back then. 

 

Tell me, if that FAL is so amazing why did the Brits and pretty much everyone else replace it?  

 

 

 

Commodore 64's were lame, we had Apple and IBM machines when they first came out

 

Budget reasons, that's why.

 

The majority of FALs pulled from service are in deep storage and reserve rifles. Not completely replaced from front line service some are still in front line service and were in the sand box.

 

HK won the contract top supply the G3 and later the SA-80.

 

Yanks love plastic guns

[Vlad G 345]

I give up. I do encourage you to send in your thoughts to the Army next time they solicit for a new rifle. 

 

Now, I'm gonna go sell my plastic and aluminum and carbon fiber modern rifle, and I'll quickly go buy a rusty FAL to replace it with. 

[Carcano 14]

 

 

Tell me, if that FAL is so amazing why did the Brits and pretty much everyone else replace it?  

 

By everyone else you must live in a cave...

 

You do realize MANY nations still utilize the FAL as a primary battle rifle so no "pretty much everyone" hasn't replaced the FAL.

[Carcano 14]

I give up. I do encourage you to send in your thoughts to the Army next time they solicit for a new rifle. 

 

Now, I'm gonna go sell my plastic and aluminum and carbon fiber modern rifle, and I'll quickly go buy a rusty FAL to replace it with. 

 

Rusty FAL? ever heard of hot blue tanks?

 

Or save up and buy a nice Belgian FAL, I have one in PA being stored I'll let you have it for $5K. Mint in box with paperwork Never seen the light of day.

 

Edit: Oh that's right no FAL for you in NJ so buy a nice FAL kit, do a hand pick and grab a DSA receiver. They must be horrible that's why DSA sells out all the time.

[Vlad G 345]

heh. They sell out all of the 2500 rifles they make, including ARs

[Carcano 14]

heh. They sell out all of the 2500 rifles they make, including ARs

 

I have a few stripped DSA lowers sitting here, nice lowers and while I haven't bought DSA upper I assume they are just as good.

 

BTW That picture from the Falklands I have one matted on my office wall, also have a nice Heckler & Koch poster from Operation Nimrod a few of the SAS guys signed for me... I love H&K (as you can probably tell by now )

 

Opinions are like a** holes, we all have one and with guns it really comes out since what one person likes another may not. I still stand behind my G3 clones and FAL's but if the SCAR works for you great.

 

If you are ever in South Jersey and want to try the VKE-91K and some other HK clones let me know I'll guest you to my range No hard feelings over the debate

[Vlad G 345]

I've shot most "battle rifles". Didn't come out impressed by any of them, but thanks for the offer.

[CageFighter 236]

The FN-FAL is superior to the shit box SCAR (yes, I said it!).

.

 

you must have hit ur damn head!  

[Kaiser7 33]

This is weird, I made a thread on Reddit just last night asking the same question.

 

Probably should have asked here first, the people on r/firearms don't understand NJ's laws.

[Carcano 14]

you must have hit ur damn head!  

 

Nope and I still have all 21 digits.

 

If you like the SCAR good for you, IMO it's a piece of shit but hey some guys on here consider the PTR and FAL to be shit, too.

 

Everyone is different, I've handled and bought tons of guns which others considered pieces of shit yet I liked them enough to shell out cash for them.

 

Maybe we should be limited to bolt action rifles and single/double barrels only here in the US like they do in other countries so everyone has a Mosin, Enfield, etc. and it reduces the pissing matches (Just Kidding)

[RUTGERS95 890]

I want a fal real bad

[Shane45 807]

Carcano, your on the verge of blind faith here. Changing a FAL barrel is a pain unless you have a tray full of locking shoulders. Indeed it isn't 1982 and as a battle rifle, its an advantage to be able to equip it with some non 1982 equipment. Accuracy, not with a FAL. Seen a number of prototypes. None could pull it off. Seen a few that were seemingly successful hand built ventures, but these were a handful at best and the juice wasn't worth the squeeze according to the makers. It was not designed as such and to turn it into a precision semi is counter to the design. Hinging mags suck! The dust covers with rails to mount optics are very hard to get to hold zero(if at all). Now to the FAL's credit, indeed it is reliable and can continue to function in less than ideal conditions, but so can many others. But now you champion the M1A and that just tells me you dig the nostalgic rifles and that's fine. But don't mistake lore with reality. The reality being that by most accounts the M1A wasn't all that great and certainly lacked in the accuracy department as well. Its ok to like old rifles. I wouldn't mind having an IZZY Fal, a LRB M1A, a HK SR9, but none of them would be my choice if I had to pick a battle rifle to go in harms way.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

Nope and I still have all 21 digits.

 

If you like the SCAR good for you, IMO it's a piece of shit but hey some guys on here consider the PTR and FAL to be shit, too.

 

Everyone is different, I've handled and bought tons of guns which others considered pieces of shit yet I liked them enough to shell out cash for them.

 

Maybe we should be limited to bolt action rifles and single/double barrels only here in the US like they do in other countries so everyone has a Mosin, Enfield, etc. and it reduces the pissing matches (Just Kidding)

 

Sooooo, what's your rationale behind calling the SCAR a piece of shit?  

 

The logic doesn't flow right... if FNH was the creator of the vaunted FAL, and they took lessons learned from that and applied it to the SCAR, therefor the SCAR is a superior replacement.

[Shane45 807]

Logic is abandoned when love is the motivation

[Carcano 14]

Sooooo, what's your rationale behind calling the SCAR a piece of shit?  

 

The logic doesn't flow right... if FNH was the creator of the vaunted FAL, and they took lessons learned from that and applied it to the SCAR, therefor the SCAR is a superior replacement.

 

The SCAR feels cheaply made, it's plastic and how long it will hold up compared to the all metal FAL is the burning question.

 

It might last when me and you turn to dust, who knows.

 

Overall IMO, again let me make myself very clear IN MY OPINION the FAL or G3 is a better choice. If you like the SCAR go for it, I wouldn't waste my money on something that hasn't been proven. Google SCAR vs FAL and you will bust a nut.

 

Logic is abandoned when love is the motivation

 

Not always, but I would rather give up 101 hot 10/10 ladies over my FAL and G3 clones so that says something now doesn't it?

 

Logic is, FAL (while old) is a great rifle. G3 is the same. If you want a ton of crappy rails, lights, plastic accessories get the SCAR. If you want something you can beat the living shit out of and depend on get FAL or G3. I'm not a tacticool/plastic accessories guy for what it's worth.

[Vlad G 345]

So .. how long before something is proven, according to you? Do you have a number in mind, or is it a random thing? Is it age based or combat based or what?

[DevsAdvocate 112]

The SCAR feels cheaply made, it's plastic and how long it will hold up compared to the all metal FAL is the burning question.

 

It might last when me and you turn to dust, who knows.

 

Overall IMO, again let me make myself very clear IN MY OPINION the FAL or G3 is a better choice. If you like the SCAR go for it, I wouldn't waste my money on something that hasn't been proven. Google SCAR vs FAL and you will bust a nut.

 

- "SCAR feels cheaply made" is subjective.  

- "it might last when me and you turn to dust" has nothing to do with this.  Plastic trumps metal, it's why polymer handguns like the Glock are superior to the 1911 in almost every way except trigger pull.

- I googled SCAR vs. FAL, and the general opinion is in favor of the SCAR.  Even the FALboys on FAL forum agree.

 

It's not a zero sum game, both are fine weapons, but let's face it: firearms technology has come a long way in 65 years.  The SCAR is the penultimate evolution of the battle rifle concept.  The G3s, FALs, M1As are stuck in the past.  The only folks who cling to them are traditionalists like yourself, who do so out of emotion rather than rationale.

 

People always think the gun community is made of mature men who go by the numbers, but for some folks, the fanaticism for a certain rifle rivals that of a 16 year old for her favorite pop star... 

[Carcano 14]

- "SCAR feels cheaply made" is subjective.  

- "it might last when me and you turn to dust" has nothing to do with this.  Plastic trumps metal, it's why polymer handguns like the Glock are superior to the 1911 in almost every way except trigger pull.

- I googled SCAR vs. FAL, and the general opinion is in favor of the SCAR.  Even the FALboys on FAL forum agree.

 

It's not a zero sum game, both are fine weapons, but let's face it: firearms technology has come a long way in 65 years.  The SCAR is the penultimate evolution of the battle rifle concept.  The G3s, FALs, M1As are stuck in the past.  The only folks who cling to them are traditionalists like yourself, who do so out of emotion rather than rationale.

 

People always think the gun community is made of mature men who go by the numbers, but for some folks, the fanaticism for a certain rifle rivals that of a 16 year old for her favorite pop star... 

 

Plastic trumps metal, really? I can flex the mag well on my Glock with my fingers wouldn't be too hard to crack the frame. I'll keep my S&W 59, I can outshoot any Glock owner with that pistol and I know it's durable, reliable and accurate out of the box..

 

I own a plastic gun, a trade-in .40 Glock 22 (Gen 2) and like it a lot, very comfortable and pretty accurate so I'm not 100% anti-plastic I'm 99% anti-plastic.

 

Sometimes simple is better, you can load your plastic SCAR up with plastic toys, I'll keep my all metal G3 and FAL with iron sights.

 

OP asked for options, he was given them and should try out one of each at the range (or, fondle one of each at a store) and see which he likes better.

[Carcano 14]

So .. how long before something is proven, according to you? Do you have a number in mind, or is it a random thing? Is it age based or combat based or what?

 

When the SCAR pops up in a few more major conflicts and hits the 25 year mark I would consider it "proven", FAL & G3 proved itself for being reliable in all conditions imaginable not some lab test or yank in his backyard with a tub of sand and bucket of water.

 

I'll take a simple, reliable, battle proven weapon with 50+ years of service over a weapon which rolled into service just 10 years ago.