Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: My FAL vs G3 observations

  1. #11
    Gunco Irregular Grendeljaeger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    High plains/Front Range
    Posts
    4,325
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)

    Default

    I love 'em both but IMHO the H&K ergonmics really suck compared to the FAL, but on the other hand the G-3s or 91s have a nearly free floated barrel and that really helps with accuracy. The only rifle I ever sold was my 91 right before the AWB and I still kick myself. My mother in law bought it for my brother in law and he had to sell it because of strict NJ laws.
    Gunco member #11


    “it is dangerous to be right in matters about which the established authorities are wrong” Voltaire

  2. #12
    Gunco Member oldpaint0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    131
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)

    Default

    I like the the G3/CETME platform simply because you can homebuild it. It is fairly easy to build and accuracy is great. Recoil, a Mosin 44 has recoil, yah have been shooting AR's too damn much. I do love the FAL and even had a Imbel kit and a Century 80% receiver, but after much research on completing the 80% receiver I sold it. I will have me a FAL or 2 someday.

  3. #13
    Gunco Veteran [486]'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    MSP area, MN
    Posts
    1,631
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oldpaint0 View Post
    I like the the G3/CETME platform simply because you can homebuild it.
    You can do the same with FALs. They just thread together like most other rifles.

    You probably won't be able to make a receiver at home though...

  4. #14
    TRX
    TRX is online now
    Gunco Irregular TRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central Arkansas
    Posts
    2,759
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

    Default

    Hm. I always thought the G3 was gas operated, but after seeing a couple of comments here I looked it up. The "gas tube" seems to be just a guide rod sleeve, and the "gas block" is just the support for it, right?

  5. #15
    Gunco Regular mrtank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    336
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRX View Post
    Hm. I always thought the G3 was gas operated, but after seeing a couple of comments here I looked it up. The "gas tube" seems to be just a guide rod sleeve, and the "gas block" is just the support for it, right?
    On the later G3s and G33s the triple frame (front sight) is only attached to the barrel and the cocking tube shouldn't touch it at all. The handguard attaches to the cocking tube and doesn't attach to the barrel at all ether. The earlyer g3s and CETMEs had a straight cocking tube that did fit inside of the Triple frame.
    Early g3 straight cocking tube
    Later G3 cocking tube.


    The page I snagged the pictures from. Arizona Response Systems, LLC. Notes. HK G3 Build, PTR-91 receiver.

  6. #16
    Gunco Member BIG 54R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Metro Houston-Galveston
    Posts
    207
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Default

    fal hands down even with a cpl nitpick beefs I have such as the sights being just adequate and the non-reciprocating charging handle.

    overall the fal is like shooting an ar only it's a true mbr...by this I mean no recoil/kick.

    my cetme I love but it's a beater in the truest since!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Search tags for this page

There are currently no search engine referrals.
Click on a term to search our site for related topics.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •