FNFAL virgin....help me pick the right one for my first time.....

[mrclark303]

These US builds really are 50/50 Metric imperial.

I have to say that all the Imbel Fals I have seen in the past though have been beutifully made.

So having an Imbel receiver at the heart of the build can't be a bad thing.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[82Trooper]

Couple more....
I see some market with a Trilux sight...is this a desirable accessory?
How easily can other optics be mounted?
what issues would arise from a 50/50 inch/metric mixer?
What parts would NOT interchange on an inch model to a metric model, and vice versa?
Thanks for the continuing education.

[mrclark303]

Don't mention the SUIT... Not a liked piece of kit by those who had to maintain them!

That said, they are part of the Rifles history. They come with their own top cover mount.

Some will simply not group, even when fitted with a new spring and apparently in excellent order. I can honestly say I have never come across two that shot same!

Some very consistent, others not so much...

Another (many would say more sensible) option to fit a solid forged Weaver top cover and fit a modern optic.

With regards to interchangeable parts, you have to remember they are very closely related, so most parts interchange.

The slightly different TMH design of the Inch pattern means the Fal butt and pistol grip won't fit the metric TMH correctly.

Though the L1 pistol grip and trigger group can be retrofitted to a fal TMH with a small modification (Inch pistol grip screw fitted from the inside, metric from the outside)

The example you have shown us with the Imbel receiver has an L1 TMH fitted, this shows how well everything interchanges!

The most obvious issue being the Fal magazine will operate in a Inch pattern rifle, (in a fashion) but not the other way round.

The gas blocks won't fit between the Rifles either.

No issues whatsoever with an L1 built up around an Imbel receiver though.

[Brian Dick]

SUIT = Shooter Usually In Trouble.

[mrclark303]

I was wondering when that little gem was going to get dropped Brian

[82Trooper]

....and is there any difference (from a fitment standpoint) in bayonets? metric vs inch?
and....how about the interchangeability of the wood stock sets between models...L1A1 vs FN FAL?
for instance...
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/765698361
says "L1A1 Wood Furniture Set British. Surplus, refinished. Fits L1A1. Does not fit FAL. "
is that because the FN's are of the metric persuasion?

[browningautorifle]

and is there any difference (from a fitment standpoint) in bayonets? metric vs inch?

The bayonets don't even look the same...the UK, Aus, Can bayonets look almost the same and the metric and original EX bayonets are a complete different type and won't interchange.

Fits L1A1. Does not fit FAL.

We've been telling you, they're different rifles...

[82Trooper]

Sorry if I appear dense...I was simply looking to clarify what might fit what, and why.

[mrclark303]

Woodwork, pistol grip is a different fit on the Fal.

The Fal butt won't fit an L1, because the L1 has a screw spur/tag extension on the underside of the TMH.

The L1 butt can however be "made" to fit an Fal, in a rather ugly Heath Robinson fashion

Forends and carry handles will fit either rifle.

Cocking handles can fit between Rifles, but the fal receiver needs a little adjustment to fit the folding carry handle of the Inch pattern rifle

---------- Post added at 08:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:29 AM ----------

Then, when you think you have a handle on this, there's the Indian 1A1, an unlicensed, rather crude blend of both Rifles!

Though like all the Fal family, its a thoroughly reliable service rifle.

[browningautorifle]

there's the Indian 1A1,

I can actually list the differences there, I changed one to look like a CDN once. Turned out good except it's still IAI...