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

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 too had a (somewhat) similar experience - i was conscripted & had to carry one !

my favorite gun in the Belgain army

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.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/a7N7krVl0q_Pj30.html

@@kevinhart46 I have seen FAL bolts get so much debris exposure that despite already being seated with a live cartridge there exists exactly enough muck to prevent the gun from firing. And God forbid you actually do try to force that bolt shut to get the round off, because the ensuing clusterfuck trying to get it clean enough to cycle afterward will be enough to make you detest hearing "right arm of the free world" for the rest of your life.

It one need's a .308 (7,62 x 51 NATO) that bad, just neck-up an rpk! @@PaxNovusAmericana

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

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.

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

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.

It’s debatable honestly I’d say that title belongs to the AK47 and AR15

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!

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

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.

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"

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

Me too, Boet. Vasbyt!! 😄

KAAVER GOD ALMIGHTY 🙏😊

It's called longer range weapon. battle rifles and Assault rifles are not the same

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

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..

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

I'm canadian might as well add the colt c7a2 to that toybox!

oh not that sa 80 thing junk in a pile.😊

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 🙏🙏

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.

That's what I've been saying but put down in favour of sheet metal junk sa 80 .😢

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

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 😉

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

You can't have everything it's better than sa 80 the LMT 762 is good has little muzzle climb scar H as well😊.

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.

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.

The title is standard dumbass KZfaq clickbait, I agree.

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.

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 .

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

No where near 17 lbs. More like 10lbs.

@davidfisher9026 maybe 10 pounds bone stock with plastic furniture. Mine is fully upgraded.

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. 😊

Also used this during my military service in the Belgian Army, back in 1988. I was a FALO gunner. We received the FNC at the end of my service, didn't seem to be same quality as the Fal was.

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".

😂

"The dutch were here." "how do you know?" "we're standing in a minefield of bipods"

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.

We Aussies did and our's was referred to as the SLR with wooden stock and forward grip. I carried one in SE Asia in 67/68. Lovely weapon with some real stopping power.

If I had to pick just one, on business and for real, the C1A1 would be my choice, every time. Never had an issue with reliability, serviceability, accuracy, or pretty much anything else. The C7 is a different animal.

@@flyingbeaver57 Many ex-CF love the FN and did not want to give it up. The C7 is much lighter and easier to shoot, which makes sense as it's close to the most optimal version of the AR-15/CAR-15 in widespread service.

@@helbent4the c7 is an m16 with a few better quality parts geez 🙄

@@BaconSlayer69 Yes. That's not an unfair assessment. Much like how a Shelby Cobra is just a Ford Mustang with a few better quality parts.

Effective range of the .308win is 730 meters

You'd never be better served by a FAL over an AK. Long range you say? FALs are not precision rifles. they shoot about a 4 inch group at 100 yards. I'm sure you can improve this to an extent but it will never be a sniper rifle. Youre then stuck with a heavy, long rifle with small magazine size. When it comes to CQB and real life or death firefights, the extra mass and small mag size will get you killed. During WW2 in all of the various battles of the eastern front, the USSR decided against continued manufacture of SVTs and other full powered rifles in favor of intermediate calibers. War has not changed that much in these 70+ years. As for personal use, if you live in Arizona, the FAL is the right choice, If you live in a place with trees AK all the way.

FAL CQB involved using the Flak modification ... shoot through brick and cinder block walls to create a spray of stone shrapnel inside the room before entering it. (Don't tell the SNCO or UN do-gooders though).

Nope, they were looking at 30-06 cartridges and noticed a 1/2" of empty space above the powder. Hence the T65 round was born

@@christinepearson5788 Well that solved a problem then. Have to say it was a hell of an effective round. Flatter shooting and higher velocity than the .303 and that was a potent enough round.

@@christinepearson5788 Well done, that accurately describes a.308 round.

Heh. I was a reservist and for our passing-off parade in basic training, we had to execute a special present-arms drill movement. It involved us raising our rifles one-handed, well above the usual height in that drill movement, then slapping the magazine with our left hand and then bringing the rifle swiftly downwards while completing the movement. With bayonets fixed, no less. The kicker was that while lifting our rifles with our right hands, we had to extend our fingers along the upper part of the buttstock where it joined with the receiver, meaning that most of the weight of the rifle was supported by the crook of our hand in between the base of the thumb and the base of the index finger. It was a difficult movement to learn and execute properly. One guy dropped his rifle on the parade square floor while doing it. The beasting he got from the parade warrant officer for doing so was a sight to behold. To this day, I still don't know if that drill movement was ever authorized in the Canadian Forces Manual of Drill and Ceremonial. But I suspect it looked awfully impressive to all the people who came to watch the passing-off parade.