If I bought it expecting bolt gun levels of accuracy (or even "AR with a good barrel" levels of accuracy) I would have been very disappointed. I bought the FAL expecting battle rifle accuracy. My advice is don't go in with false expectations. The rifle just didn't feel right with optics in terms of cheek rest and ergonomics so I went back to irons only. Right after I purchased the rifle I put a DSA railed top cover on with an EOtech and didn't like the combination at all. The sights are my biggest gripe with the FAL, but again, it's a matter of not using the rifle as it was originally intended (and the NM M1A sights have me spoiled.) The FAL sights are perfectly adequate for battle rifle use but not all that great for accurate target shooting. It compares quite will to the other shoulder arms in the category. You need an assault weapon that is light, points easily, and hits hard. I might be able to squeak out more accuracy if the sights were as good as the national match sights on my M1A. Answer (1 of 4): So, what is the modern battlefield It is urban, close range and frightful. The gun may be capable of better accuracy but 2 MOA is as good as I can shoot it consistently with the factory iron sights. Very good IMO considering it's surplus ammo, a used barrel, and factory iron sights. After putting about 1K rounds of Aussie down the pipe my experience has been that the gun & ammo puts the hole within 2 MOA of where I want it to be when I tested it on paper at 100Y and 200Y and I had no problem hitting the steel up on the hill (400Y I think) at San Luis Obispo range about a year and a half ago. As the rifle is an inch pattern built on a metric receiver. The good news is, any FAL can be set to rights and once they are, they stay right. CAI Angry Beavers sometimes were very creative in making the parts fit, not always in good ways. The bad news is, CAI quality is hit & miss. I've had a couple 1.5" 10 shot groups at 100 yards but I consider those to be luck. CAI rifles built on Imbel receivers are among the better ones. The result was a semi-automatic-only FAL rifle with a great deal of character and charm. Custom built by DS Arms for the author, this IMBEL FAL-style rifle was made from a combination of U.S.-made and original Brazilian parts. Until then a 5.56 would still be the best choice.I have a 18" DSA STG-58 and it usually keeps everything within 2 MOA using Aussie surplus ammo and iron sights- that's 10+ shot targets, not 3 or 5 shots. Gun Review: DS Arms Rebuilds IMBEL FAL Rifle. That is if the rounds were more mainstream. My personal choice after much experimenting would be an upgraded caliber in a piston AR.
But there are easier rifles to do this with. You could survive a battle or just survive with one. If this is your "SHTF" rifle, I would say they are reliable. I still hate cleaning it, but with the extra punch the heavier bullets provide, I think it's a better choice. I didn't come to this conclusion though until I started shooting 75/77 gr. The weight of the bullets is the final decider for me. As a battle rifle, I've come to decide I will take my 5.56 over it. The reliability issues with it make it not so sellable. I can't get anybody to take the CETME off my hands. I sold the FAL because it brought more than I paid for it. I've shot old and new Garands and M1A (M14) in 30-06 and. I used Prvi Partisan ammo that I could get 1 moa out of with my bolt gun. I thought the gas piston arrangement would be better than the delayed roller-block. I got an L1A1 back when they were cheap (under $500). So, I decided the next best thing in this category was an FAL. Mine unfortunately only could achieve 4 MOA at best.
I bought a CAI CETME thinking it would be cool.
0 kommentar(er)
