HK91 vs. FAL

Curious about some opinions on OS comparison between the FAL design and the HK91....
Although they are both excellent rifles, I will take the side of the HK91...
From studying the mechanicals perspective, I actually would think the hk91 to have a few distinct advantages:
1. The fluted chamber on the 91 eases extraction, allows dirt a place to go and would seem to keep a stuck case from occurring. Additionally, I have seen a video on youtube showing a cetme (same basic design) that was used without extractor. Slower, but the cases would not stick even with no extractor!
2. The roller delayed blowback design means no gas assist parts to fail or become fouled.
3. I have read that the 91's are generally more accurate.
4. Although both are relatively easy to strip and clean, the 91 has independent and hot swapable trigger group.
5. Trigger groups easily modified for minimal creep and light, clean break on 91.
6. No recoil assembly components behind receiver, allowing the extending stock to go forward all the way to the rear of the receiver for minimum length.
7. All 91's share the same parts to the best of my knowledge (aside from the AL rec. models that are uncommon anyway).
8. The sights on the 91's are the best factory sights I have ever personally used, as opposed to loose and less precise sights which I have tried on a couple of FALs.
9. Cheaper magazines and all high quality.
10. Quick release optical mounts (which though quite expensive), do no obscure view of iron sights and are well known as zero repeatable after removed and replaced.

I respect the FAL design as well so no offense to any FAL owners. Just looking for some educated dialogue on the pro's and cons of each. Let's hear it... from both sides!!

HK91 is harder on the shell because those flutes are meant to channel gas around the shell and create an air bubble that helps remove the shell. It doesn't have a gas system but with the chamber fluting it still pushes carbon and gas back into the firing system. And is still a little dirty. Other makers of similar rifles got around stuck shells by greasing the ammo up really good and that kept it from sticking.

But they are both good rifles. Get both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DOC

But they are both good rifles. Get both.

---

Enabling at it's finest....[Beer]
Good point on the fluting negs. I have seen brass after the 91... Probably best to just run surp through them.

I owned both a PTR-91 and an SA-58 for about a year and sold them to buy a Ducati. I recently rebought an FAL. Both were great (as is the Duc!). I second the remark that the HK action gets dirty--real dirty, and it is more difficult to clean because there is no removable top cover and because of the convoluted shape of the receiver. That said, you can run either of them really dirty and it doesn't matter at all. The cheap and available HK mags issue is a big plus. I wasn't a fan of the claw mount for optics. Yes, it is easy on and off, but puts the optics very high. The "looking through the legs of a giant" view of the iron sights through the mount is not great either, but better than nothing, I guess. I eventually went with a low profile B&T picatinny type mount which lowered the optics, but obscured the sights, just like optcis on an ARMS mount on the FAL does. Some other minuses with the HK platform are the lack of last shot bolt hold open, the lack of the paddle-type ambi mag release on the clones (which can be added for $$$), and the slightly greater difficulty operation of the operating lever due to the folding design and the tightness of the roller locking system. One big plus for the HK is the relatively low cost and ease of switching out stocks (just pull two pins). One more thin that to me it is not a plus, is that you can add more crap on to the HK platform if you are of the tacti-kewl persuasion.

If you can't tell, my opinion is that they are very close, but I prefer the FAL by just a bit. But, a lot of people will think my minuses are plusses. On a completely irrelevant note, I think the FAL's long, lean profile is more elegant. It looks like it has only what it absolutely needs to function as a battle rifle. I love being an enabler, so I will put it this way. Try to own both for a while, and do your best to figure out if you can live without one of them. I can, but don't want to...

This maybe a plus. But sitting next to my AK or AR that mag sitting the HK91 looks huge like a monster mag that might only look small next to a 50 BMG.

Its a .308 too. A real nice non-PC battle slash hunting round.

DOC--the .308 round is a huge plus! Properly loaded it can take down anything in the states.

I'm a little worried about .308 working on terminators. But that is what my plasma rifle in the 40 watt range is for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DOC

I'm a little worried about .308 working on terminators. But that is what my plasma rifle in the 40 watt range is for.

---

Thats awesome! I remember the Terminator gun store scene. I wonder, would the Plasma rifle be an NFA weapon?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DOC

But they are both good rifles. Get both.

---

Agree, get both.

The HK won't jam on you, ever, even in desert conditions. But the FAL is much more ergonomic, the controls are exactly where you would want them. I particularly like the charging handle on the left side.

Do you see a pattern forming here? It is expensive...

You gotta pay to play. But fortunately not all at once. I would get the HK first then the FAL later. But that is what I'm doing. I have never shot an FAL but I have read a lot about them the mags are cheap and available on both rifles and the ammo for the most part is too. But the deciding factor for me getting my CETME G3 is the slapping down of the charging handle. Just like the MP5! But I never knew what a pain it was to unlock the handle until later.

And about the plasma rifle being NFA item. No at first but even though its not a firearm it would get added later with a antigun congress. Just like the streetsweeper is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tor Larson

Hope these helped. If the world was coming to an end and you needed a gun that would never break, never need parts, and never need cleaning then the HK91 would be it. The rest of the time? I'd take an FAL hands down. Next up? an M1a.

Tor

---

Great input Tor! I have had a little experience getting to try out both rifles (enough to understand exactly what your criticisms of the 91 system are). Our views are almost identical on the two, except that I think I would put my preference on the 91 overall.
I'm not sure why you mentioned the hk mount scarring the reciever badly though, as it is very firm and I didn't see that. Biggest complaint for me was definately the flip charging handle as you mentioned. Not easy to use and despite supposed ergonomics, I don't like a charging handle on the left side anyway.
Accuracy of each types I tried was very good/excellent, but was done with iron sights on each. I found the hk sights far superior for sight picture and much more solid. I was pleased with the results of shooting each, though I would have to give the fal the nod for offhand because of the narrower, more comfortable handguard. For prone the hk was the king.
As far as brass on the 91 goes, I guess that is the price one must be willing to pay for losing the gas system. FWIW neither of the two fals cycled perfectly. One could be adjusted to work properly, while the other could not. Obviously the 91 just worked.
On the 91 recoil comment, I noticed that too. Recoil was harsher than the fal. I attributed it to the fact that the rifle did not have a muzzle attachment on at the time. With brake installed, are you saying that recoil is still harsh? The hk, definately felt much more "mechanical" during operation, but it did not affect shooting results.
Of note, the hk had the williams trigger job done I was told. It was fairly light with very crisp release. I would characterize it as target grade. The two fals had standard triggers, I believe and they were not bad either. I have heard about the stock 91 triggers being very heavy.
Did see the weapons after use and did not notice any major fouling on either type. I guess one thing I don't know is how often one would have to clean the rollers and how difficult it is to do.
I will probably stick with my bolt rifles, but definately found these two rifle designs very interesting and a great experience to use.

Now about the m1a...?

I have both a CETME and a FAL. I'd say the differences have been pretty well laid out in here for both. I like the CETME well enough, for a blaster. It's actually fairly accurate if you can get over the trigger. It does do a number on brass, though, so if you reload I'd use something surplus that you wouldn't want to. The FAL is just a sweet gun, nice ergonomics, better trigger than a G3/CETME/91, and the folding stock on a FAL is much better than the collapsible unit on a G3. I admit I like my FAL wayyyy better than my CETME. One point the G3 types have right now - ultra cheap magazines.

Now, M1A? That's a whole 'nother animal! IMHO, it outclasses either the G3 types or the FAL, higher quality, better trigger (or can be made so), better scope mounting ability, etc etc. I like them well enough that I have two, and I'm considering a third. [Twist]

I have had both, dumped the 91 for a fal, then got another fal, and want to buy a 3rd heavy bbl for long range work. All fals are dsa. Long story short, as quoted before, go run a 3 gun match with both, and think about which one will go home with you with giving u a black and blue eye. My 91 always bucked so bad that it would hit me in the right eye socket. Fal mags are just as cheap as 91's, parts are abundant for both platforms...i just like mine to say fal on em...

Having shot military Fal's in 82 and 89 I got in on the ground floor of building them when it cost all of $300. I liked the G-3's but were never comfortable with them. Tried to buy a Cetme a few years ago just to have one but it fell through.

So having a bunch of Fals and kinda liking the Cetme I did this.

That one is new Jerry. I remember you starting it just never saw the completed rifle. I like it.