Up until recently, I also owned a “ Para” FAL that had been converted to take inch magazines by Rich Saunders. Two were re-built by Century Gun Works, using pre-ban Australian inch receivers, and two were re-built by Arizona Response Systems on SAR-48 receivers that they converted to inch specifications. For what it is worth, we have four L1A1s here at the ranch, all of which are pre-ban. And if you have an even bigger budget, you might buy a pre-ban SAR-48, Argentine FM-LSR, or an original Belgian FAL. If you have a bit more money, I also recommend both Century Gun Works (CGW, run by Rich Saunders in Gardnerville, Nevada–not to be confused with Century Arms) and Arizona Response Systems for custom FAL and L1A1 builds, using post-ban receivers. Many of them have functioning problems–both feeding and cycling glitches. In contrast, the Century Arms FALs have a bad reputation for very un-even quality control. JWR Replies: I highly recommend Dave Selvaggio’s ( DS Arms) FALs. Also, will FAL’s perform equally well with either 7.62 X 51 NATO or commercial. I know there is a huge price range, but I am mainly interested in reliability (and accuracy, of course). I’ve researched from the Century “cobbled togethers” to the “new” DSA’s, etc. that: “If I ever hear shooting nearby and have my choice of grabbing either an AR-15 or FAL, then I’ll grab the FAL.” Would you please recommend/suggest a brand name of a FAL type rifle that is currently available in the U.S.? I read your FAL FAQ, but didn’t see any brand references.
CENTURY ARMS L1A1 INCH OR METRIC FULL
The FAL files post I linked on which parts on the L1A1/FAL are interchangeable seems to disagree with your count of exactly 3 parts the won't readily swap without a quick chase to threads but even then, I would think the Barrel (amongst other parts) not being immediately interchangeable would fall outside of "completely interchangeable internal components necessary for the full operation and function of one of the enumerated banned weapons".In the 2/23/07 blog, you replied to Stephen D. threaded parts as you said in your edit) and this it's a "L1A1" in name only. The results I got when I looked up the Century "L1A1" and whether or not it was metric or inch basically said its a Metric gun with some hand fitting done with some parts (e.g. You're right, that is a FAL-O, Numrich had that diagram for the FAL instead of the regular FAL for whatever reason. In hindsight probably should have searched the whole forum. Sorry about beating a dead horse I searched this subforum and found ~3 posts in the past 3 years or so, and then the majority of results were from 2013 and before. There are exactly 3 parts that won't readily swap without a quick chase to the receiver's threads. That's not to say you can't try, but I'd be extremely surprised if you could get that one past them.Įdit: It should be noted that there are examples of FAL clones out there that DO have mixed parts in them, but that's because with the exception of threaded parts, they are completely interchangeable, which is one of the things that they're looking for in banning particular weapons or categories of them. The only other difference is the cut for the magazine stud and the thread pitch. A true metric FAL would be almost exactly the same as the lower picture with the exception of the cocking handle and dust cover. That's an Izzy FALO, a licensed copy of the LAR. African and Rhodesian parts became big sellers, they changed the name to R1A1 for the same reason. That means a Century L1A1 could actually be metric as it was a name thrown out by them to attract buyers rather than any indication of what parts were used. As for the century argument, it's pretty invalid as they aren't mixed parts (inch and metric in the same gun) but are in fact built on receivers that will take either inch or metric parts. As such, they are, despite local nomenclature, FALs. We've gone over this several times before.Īll FAL based rifles (with the possible exception of DSA) are licensed patterns of the FN-FAL, that includes REAL L1A1s, R1A1s, FALOs, etc.
0 kommentar(er)
