Anybody built an FAL before?

[dakota.potts]

I've been looking at doing one of a couple different builds, and the FAL is one recently that's interested me. I thought about doing an AK, but the FAL is a little more interesting to me and it seems like it can be put together with less specialty tooling. I don't currently have any way to crush rivets or press a barrel, but I can punch pins and I can easily get access to tools to torque the barrel.

Curious if anybody on here has any experience in building one. I've gone over the concepts a couple of times (it's a little difficult to find good tutorials) and I think I now have a pretty good understanding of the operating system of the gun and what would be necessary to build one. If you have done one, what would you rate the difficulty of the build and how satisfied were you with the outcome?

I'm a gunsmithing student starting soon, so if I run into any major issues I can probably get help from an instructor. For the most part, however, this will be an extracurricular project.

The goal is to learn something about a new rifle system, gain some basic gunsmithing and assembly skills in military-type rifles, maybe practice some refinishing techniques, and end up with a cool rifle.

It's looking like the cost of the parts kit and the receiver is going to total close to $700 plus another $150 or so in US made compliance parts and maybe another $150-200 in tooling?

Would really like to keep the whole thing under $1,000, so if anybody has sources on parts kits or receivers that are cheaper, that would be appreciated. Also any tips on what tools are really necessary vs. which ones you can get creative with

[wogpotter]

The first & biggest challenge is going to be getting all parts actually working together!

There are 2 distinct "types" the Metric FAL & the Commonwealth (Inch Pattern) L1A1. This confuses many people because they don't yet understand what is & what isn't interchangeable. Some parts are, some aren't. Whole sub assemblies may be interchangeable while the parts within them are not as well. Also the "Inch" & "Metric" terms are misleading. There aren't actually different parts in many ways, but different design features.

Example: An "Inch" mag catch screw is actually metric threaded & will screw into a Metric receiver, only the description of the part is "inch", its a metric thread, but with a different length & head. The head supports the different magazine catch's ambidextrous release lever. You can use it in a metric gun, but not vice-versa because the catch needs the extra support!

Add to that the "oddball variations" (Indian, Argentine & Israeli) & its even worse!

Now to utterly confuse there are the many, many "User Preference" parts. These are interchangeable with, but different from, the parent rifle, but not between the Inch & metric types.

The only really tough part of building once you got past that hurdle is timing the barrel & headspacing. Everything else is just bolting stuff together.

Receiver wrench, an absolute must.

Barrel vice, an absolute must.

Pin gauges or (yeah, good luck) a tapered hole gauge tool, Gotta have either/or.[B]

Headspace gauges, set of 3, need them absolutely.

Alignment jig. Very nice option but you can fake it.

Recoil spring compression/butt-stock nut tool. Meh, screwdrivers & cleaning rods work perfectly.

Shoulder shaver. Waste of money, use cut out abrasive discs & the barrel.

Don't think I'm trying to put you off, I'm not. But it will really pay you back a thousand times over to research so you become a FAL (or L1A1) parts guru before you start plonking down cash for "parts kits"

[dakota.potts]

Thanks, I am familiar with the metric vs. Inch parts but didn't realize the difference was so complicated.

The plan was to get an Imbel Parts Kit that has everything other than upper receiver, locking shoulder, and magazine. For 922(r) compliance, I'd swap in a DSA trigger kit, US made stock and railed handguard, FN SAW grip, and maybe a US muzzle brake. All of the above are available for metric guns.

For a receiver I was thinking about a Coonan Type 3. Does that all seem copacetic to you?

And what resources do you recommend for learning more about the topic?

[wogpotter]

That's the problem, most don't get the level of complication.

Coonan have a bit of a sketchy rep. If you can find one go with an Imbel, you can easily meet the 922(r) with other bits.

"The FAL rifle" by Blake Stevens at Collector Grade Publications is The FAL Bible. That would be my hardcopy resource for all the parts questions.

For the build process I'd go (much as its goes against the grain) with the Gunplumber's guide & DVD from Arizona Response systems.

[rickyrick]

I have fal tools, but no idea what to do with them lol. Came with a bulk purchase. One day I might do it.

[Gunfixr]

I havent seen gunplummers guide, i have seen the ati (??) video.
Its ok, but neglects one thing. When setting up headspace, remove the extractor from the bolt. It hits the mating area on the breech end of the barrel, and has to be pushed aside a bit, wildly throwing off your reading.

You can measure it with gauge pins, the stepped gauge made for headspacing fals, or if you are careful to do it right, you can use small hole gauges that are measured with a micrometer.

You will need a barrel vise and receiver wrench, you can time it good enough by eye, if you have an eye for such things (some dont). The stock tool, a cleaning rod and screwdriver will work. Getting the extractor out without a tool is much easier than putting it back in. Pressing in the locking shoulder is preferred over beating it in.
Clearly, you will need a go headspace gauge. A no go would be useful, in case you dont end up snug on the go, you will be able to verify its not out of spec. I used to set them snug to the go, as often the rifle will settle a few hundred rounds in, and may open up a thousandth.

Imbel is a good receiver, so is dsa.

Eta, when you get your gauges, they should both be from the same manufacturer.

[dakota.potts]

Question about the gauges. I read one guide (Cruffler's maybe) that mentioned using two different brand gauges for headspace. The idea is that 7.62 NATO and .308 have different headspace tolerances, but that the two do have an overlap of approximately .010", and that the two gauges used would set headspace comfortably in that range to be able to shoot all kinds of ammo comfortably. Would you know anything about that?

[wogpotter]

This is one of those ask 10 people, get 10 answers questions.

My choice, use the correct set for what's stamped on your build. For .308 Win, use .308 win gauges, for 7.62mm NATO use 7.62mm NATO gauges.

& now the trick.
For an inch build use neither! The Commonwealth didn't use SAAMI specs for the L1A1, so get a NATO spec FIELD.

[4thPoint]

There's an upside to there being both Inch and Metric versions of the FAL as well, it allows you to pick and choose (occasionally) parts from one version that may be superior to the other (depending on how you define superior)*

I have a FrankenFAL built on a Metric upper with an Inch lower and a Inch barrel/sights. I'd kinda prefer metric barrel but oh well.

Anyway, you can use either an Inch or Metric magazine release. The metric one is a neat, small tab you can push with the trigger finger, the Inch version pretty much requires one to use the left hand and thumb. I started with the Metric version and a bit of a trimmed angle on the receiver to allow me to get a good push on it. After a bit though, I returned to the Inch version because I wanted to make certain I retained a hold on the magazine and the Inch version pretty much guarantees you'll have the proper grip on it to retain it before putting in a new magazine.

I replaced the L1A1 top cover with the top cover from the Canadian version because it had stripper clip guides that allowed topping off the magazine while it was still inserted in the weapon. I don't plan on ever doing it but the top cover definitely looks different, especially when the bolt is locked back and the entire top of the rifle is exposed above the mag.

I also used a Canadian 'disk' rear sight in place of the original Inch version for a few years, but recently that was replaced with an updated H&K style

http://www.robertrtg.com/store/pc/FAL-L1A1-c9.htm




*did I offer enough caveats to that, I think I did (maybe)

[dakota.potts]

Say I wanted one that would reliably feed .308 or 7.62 NATO but didn't expect a match chamber... What gauges would you use to set headspace on that?

[wogpotter]

SAAMI .308 win FIELD.

[smee78]

I had Arizona Response systems AKA GunPlumber build mine and I love it, he is a wealth of knowledge and is frequently over on the FAL Files. I would get over there and start asking questons as well. Alot of builders over there.

[gyvel]

Thanks, I am familiar with the metric vs. Inch parts but didn't realize the difference was so complicated.

It really isn't that complicated. Virtually all parts from an "inch pattern" kit will fit an Imbel receiver. Barrel threads are the same, but inch pattern barrels require shoulder washers to accomplish correct barrel timing, that's all. Everything thing else is as close to drop in as you can get.

Indian and Israeli FALS are in a different category, but even Israeli parts will work, with the exception of the barrels, which have the same thread as a Type 38 Arisaka.