Sweeney
NES Member
I have an HK 91, STG 58 FAL, and 5 M14 types... a pre-ban SEI (future XM25), 2 Bula (1 is Rock-Ola branded), a Fulton and a pre-ban Springfield Bush gun.
For me ergonomics goes to the M14. I improved the FAL with a SAW grip.
Sights; Hands down the M14 then HK then FAL. I have an HK rear on my FAL now.
The trigger; hands down goes to the M14. The FAL is OK, the HK is akin to dragging a boat anchor across a parking lot.
I find the M14s to be as, if not more, accurate than the FAL and HK.
I use a Brookfield scope mount on my scoped M14 which still allows use of the iron sights (looking under the scope).
I don't know the current product but SAi synthetic stocks in the past were like wet noodles and adversely impacted accuracy. A wooden or USGI fiberglass stock helps a lot.
All of mine get the Brookfield XM25 gas cylinder treatment and NM spring guides.
Most of the aftermarket manufacturers have had some issues with receiver specs at some time such as right side shelf height, safety bridge geometry, etc. that can impact their reliability. For my XM25 project Mitch found that the right side shelf was 0.002" high which rotates the op rod which then misaligns the bolt causing it to impact the rear shroud of the barrel when going into battery... this was corrected. A properly made to USGI spec receiver is very reliable.
None of these where intended to be target rifles. They are battle rifles meant to hit a human size target out to 3 or 4 hundred yards that can be made into target rifles.
I like them all though I do flip flop between the M1 Garand and M14 as my favorite to shoot.
For me ergonomics goes to the M14. I improved the FAL with a SAW grip.
Sights; Hands down the M14 then HK then FAL. I have an HK rear on my FAL now.
The trigger; hands down goes to the M14. The FAL is OK, the HK is akin to dragging a boat anchor across a parking lot.
I find the M14s to be as, if not more, accurate than the FAL and HK.
I use a Brookfield scope mount on my scoped M14 which still allows use of the iron sights (looking under the scope).
I don't know the current product but SAi synthetic stocks in the past were like wet noodles and adversely impacted accuracy. A wooden or USGI fiberglass stock helps a lot.
All of mine get the Brookfield XM25 gas cylinder treatment and NM spring guides.
Most of the aftermarket manufacturers have had some issues with receiver specs at some time such as right side shelf height, safety bridge geometry, etc. that can impact their reliability. For my XM25 project Mitch found that the right side shelf was 0.002" high which rotates the op rod which then misaligns the bolt causing it to impact the rear shroud of the barrel when going into battery... this was corrected. A properly made to USGI spec receiver is very reliable.
None of these where intended to be target rifles. They are battle rifles meant to hit a human size target out to 3 or 4 hundred yards that can be made into target rifles.
I like them all though I do flip flop between the M1 Garand and M14 as my favorite to shoot.