Based on my experience between my L1A1 and my M1A I would make the following observations. Both rifles are good and fairly comparable. I think which you think is better will come down to your personal preferences.

It has been my experience that the M1A is more accurate. Much more. This is probably mostly due to its vastly superior iron sights. Iron sights just don’t get much better. I will say though on the side of the L1A1 the sights are faster to pick up due to the larger size of the hole in the rear sight. I think that larger size though hurts the accuracy a bit. Now if I could find a hyth rear sight I would be in business. That being said like ksuguy said someone could probably improve the FAL style sight. I don’t think it would be hard to replace with some version of the M16 rear sight. Bottom line I think the L1A1 sights are faster at close quarters while the M1A without a doubt has the edge when it comes to long range shooting. As well I think the M1A is easier to shoot with a sling.

Mag changes are about the same. Both are the rock in kind with a paddle style mag release between the rear of the mag and the trigger guard. I think the one on the M1A is easier to use because there is more room between the mag release and the trigger guard. As well with the extra distance if you want you can knock out your old M1A mag with the new one in hand like many guys do with AK. I can’t do that with my L1A1 due to that lack of space.

I think the safety on the L1A1 is much better though. While the one on the M1A works I just don’t like having to stick my finger in the trigger guard just to release the safety.

Both charging handles are easy to use. It comes down more to which side do you prefer it to be on? If you like the right side the M1A has it going for you if you like the left the L1A1 scores points. Perhaps taking some of those points though would be the fact that the charging handle folds up against the receiver. This is another little step that you have to do to get the rifle back into action. For me it isn’t a big deal I am practised at it. On the other hand the fact that it folds down means that handle is one less thing to poke you in the back with the rifle slung. I do like that.

One other thing to keep in mind is the L1A1 doesn’t have a last shot bolt hold open. I would give the edge to the M1A that does here. In theory that makes mag changes faster with the M1A, especially if you consider that you will probably have to unfold the charging handle on the L1A1 too. As well there is the mag changes themselves which I think the M1A has a slight edge in. The big advantage though is realizing just that little bit sooner that it is time to reload. On the other hand if you are more worried about getting dirt into the action between mag changes you may want to go with the L1A1. It is worth noting here though that the C1 has a last shot bolt hold open.

Another nice thing on the M1A is it has a stripper clip guide so you can top off a mag in the gun with stripper clips if you want, at least if you don’t have a mount for optics. I don’t know how useful this is in real life but I think it is nice to have the option. It is worth noting that the C1 has that feature as well.

I suppose the stripper clip feature is a lot like the adjustable gas system. How often do you need it? But it is nice to have. In theory the M1A doesn’t even need it so that is a plus. On the other hand it can’t hurt to have the option unless you lose parts while field stripping the riffle in the field.

One feature though that I don’t think is nice to have even if you don’t need or use it is the stupid carrying handle on the L1A1. I think the Kiwis were right to take theirs off. That is what I have done with mine. It is just useless extra weight that gets caught on your web gear with you rifle slung and who knows what else.

Between the two I think it is easier to diagnose and clear a jam with the M1A than the L1A1 because the receiver is much more exposed. On the other hand because of that it makes it easier for crud to get in there in the first place.

Field stripping is about a wash. Both are easy. I think getting the basic field stripping done may be a hair easier with the L1A1 but the fact that you need a special tool if you need to mess with the return spring on the L1A1 makes that a bit of a wash.

The L1A1 has a several things going for it though.

In my mind the main one is it is much more modular. You can change out different stocks pretty easy including for stock length. This is one of the things I like the most about the L1A1. I think the standard stock on the M1A is too long. I like to go with the short length butt stock on my L1A1. This is a personal preference thing though, but with the L1A1 you have a couple of options. Nowadays though that is changing with the M1A. The only problem here though is most of the new M1A stocks cost and arm and a leg and add some weight to an already heavy gun.

If the M1A has a real weakness I think it would be its stock. There is too much play between it and the receiver. You don’t have this problem with the L1A1. This is why to get the best accuracy out of an M1A you typically glass bed it. But that brings up a different set of problems. Despite this setback it has been my experience that the M1A is still more accurate.

The L1A1 is easier to mount optics on though it isn’t hard to do it on an M1A, just a little more temperamental.

I think the L1A1 balances better. With the M1A I think the balance point is right about where the mag is. Which is a bit annoying as I want to put my forward hand right where the magazine is. With the L1A1 I put my hand right in front of the mag and it feels comfortable there. Again this is a personal preference thing. If you are running with you support hand all the way forward as seems so popular these days that probably won’t matter and either gun will work well.

As well I feel that the L1A1 is just a more comfortable rifle to lug around all day. Again a personal preference thing.

Bottom line I would feel comfortable with either if that is what I had to take to battle. In fact if the crap really hit the fan I am quite sure I would grab either one. I think the L1A1 has a bit of an edge at close range while the M1A has a definite edge at longer ranges. In confined spaces though like a vehicle either one is going to suck because they are so long. That and the weight are the only real drawbacks to either system. If you can live with the length and weight both will probably serve you well.

I don’t think it would be hard to replace with some version of the M16 rear sight.

DSA does make a receiver that has an M16A2 type sight, though they don't list the site assembly itself separate from the receiver on their website. They do have a "tactical" windage-adjustable rear sight for the folding stock 'paratrooper' models, though it seems to lack elevation adjustment, and I'm not sure if it would fit on standard fixed-stock receivers.

Having handled (but not yet shot) both, I think I would chose the FAL over the M1A, because the FAL balances better and feels more ergonomic, though I think I would replace the stock with an aftermarket/custom one to shorted up the LOP a little bit.

Mods, I think it might be a good idea to split this discussion off into a separate FAL thread.

A short M1A is on my 'wish I could justify' list.  A shorter one should balance better, and in my area the possible and legal shots are relatively short.

H2O Man: You seem to be the expert on all things related to the platform...  Would you favor the 18" or the 16" models from Springfield, and why?



Kaso

A short M1A is on my 'wish I could justify' list.  A shorter one should balance better, and in my area the possible and legal shots are relatively short.

H2O Man: You seem to be the expert on all things related to the platform...  Would you favor the 18" or the 16" models from Springfield, and why?

Kaso

"wish I could justify"  means sneak it in to the budget.  I wish I had the self discipline to save up for one.  I get close and then I see a pistol, or two I just have to have .

H20 man: where did you find the wood pistol grip stock?  I want a similar setup.  Black Rifle in disguise.  That has always been one of the benefits of the M1A, IMHO.  Not to mention, I love wood, and wood and blue steel has always said class in my mind. 

"wish I could justify"  means sneak it in to the budget. 

Haha, no, it means that the rifle has no place among my 'working' guns.  If I could find even one good reason to purchase one, I would sell off some guns I dislike to fund it.



Kaso

I think he was just showing the rail system.   I would really like to get one of those for my M1A.  It originally came with a Springfield Armory mount,  but I decided I didn't really like that with the big burris XTR I had.   Sold the mount to someone here and I will probably put the XTR on a nice bolt gun eventually.    Been using the M1A with irons,  but I think I might like to go with a full length rail system and a smaller 2-6x scope.

Very well.  I thought I was being shown pieces of a rifle.



Kaso

You are being shown pieces of a rifle.

Yes, I did figure that out eventually.   The picture of a partial rifle with no explanation threw me off.

Show and tell is half 'tell.'



Kaso

Weight reduction was my #1 motivation for this stock swap.

Before:


After:


The total weight of my M21 A5 DMR / SASS is now a little more than three (3) pounds lighter than before.

It may be slightly more muzzle heavy than before, but not by much.

So i am finally going to be getting my 1st M14/M1A. Unfortunately its on a budget and since i have left Vermont and moved back to Canada for Nursing school. I'm a little on the low side of budget for the moment. So ill be getting an Norinco M305 M14S, the upside is that with the US to Ca $ exchange rate i''l be making out like a bandit. Yes The Springfield models are available but they are 2000+$ price range. Si its the Norinco for me as of right now. 699$ isnt bad. Plus my exchange rate and employee discount at work.

So whats everyone's thoughts on the Norinco M14S.....