Any one know how to build a FAL?

[abpt1]

So I want to build a kit and wanted to know if anyone here has any pointers ?



Some cool vids ......for the hell of it ...






http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOxntuXpfdM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOxntuXpfdM)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Em8xi12L_84&feature=watch_response (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Em8xi12L_84&feature=watch_response)http://www.qtl.co.il/img/trans.png

[Schuetzenman]

I've built over a dozen and still have 2 of my own. You need; a receiver wrench and a barrel vice, headspace gauges, gauge pins to find the locking shoulder size in order to set head space and a Dremel tool with cut off discs, the fiber reinforced types. I can probably build one to mechanical function in about 2 hours. Refinishing it and baking the finish more hours.

http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/SmallG1_Imbel1.jpghttp://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/SmallG1_Imbel4.jpg
First two I ever built. Ended up selling the G1 but the Imbel was later converted to folding stock after the assault weapon ban ended in 2004. I nearly forgot, to build a 922r compliant FAL you need to substitute 7 US made parts. The usual composition is a US receiver, (DSA or Coonan) a hammer, trigger and sear, gast piston, charging handle, and lastly either a pistol grip or handguards.

[deth502]

instead of any furniture, i went with mag floorplates for the 7th part. they were only $1ea when i was doing it. just recently finished off my first pack of 20.

[deth502]

oh, and most all of them do, but make sure your receiver comes with the ejector block installed.

[Schuetzenman]

oh, and most all of them do, but make sure your receiver comes with the ejector block installed.

Never seen one that didn't have it pinned in already. I've used Coonan, DSA, (my favorite but the most expensive) and Brazilian imported Imbels. I never went floor plate as I don't want to worry about does this mag have a floor plate or not. With 4 FAL rifles origianlly in my collection I have about 100 mags. A $15 buck pistol grip is cheap by contrast.

[deth502]

ive seen an off brand one pop up from time to time on gunbroker without the block. if your buying from a regular supplier, it shouldnt be a problem.

afa the furniture, ive had some us stuff, and i was totally unimpressed with the quality of it. the only part that didnt look vastly inferior was the pistol grip, but the us one didnt have the cutouts to latch the cleaning kit in. im sure theres better stuff out there, but the stuff ive seen wasnt. coupled with that the fact that i had about 7 mags at hte time, and even now, years later, i only have just over 20, it wasnt that big of a deal to me. but i agree, for $100, id pass on them.

[abpt1]

Great I was hoping a few of you guys had a handle on this . This will be my first new caliber in like 5 years ! lol and its .308 Funny I never owned one before shot a lot of them but only ever had 30-06 or 300 win mag no .308...This looks a lot more complicated than a AK :thud:
http://www.qtl.co.il/img/trans.png

[Penguin]

It is something I would be real tempted to do if I could find a good inch parts kit.

[Schuetzenman]

Great I was hoping a few of you guys had a handle on this . This will be my first new caliber in like 5 years ! lol and its .308 Funny I never owned one before shot a lot of them but only ever had 30-06 or 300 win mag no .308...This looks a lot more complicated than a AK :thud:
http://www.qtl.co.il/img/trans.png

Actually, no it's not more complicated than an AK. AK builds are the hardest to do if you're going to build it riveted vs. screws and even then it's still simipler IMHO. I figured out how to build the FAL by doing just a bit of reading and going at it. You need good stout barrel vice to hold the barrel solid when torquing on the receiver. One also needs a good receiver wrench to prevent damage to the receiver. It will clamp around the receiver where the barrel threads into the receiver.

If a barrel can be hand screwed in to about 10:00 to 11:00 it should torque down to top dead center. If it comes up at 9:00 hand tight one must remove about .004" off the shoulder of the barrel that rubs up against the front of the receiver face or take that much off the face of the receiver. Believe me if doing a WECSOG, (Wile-E-Coyote School of Gun Smithing) build meaning no lathe or mill to work with, you will find it far easier to remove the metal off the face of the barrel shoulder than try and tackle the receiver. This is where a Dremel tool, (required for WECSOGing a build) and the fiber cut off wheels come in. You would be well served to have a set of digital vernier calipers to measure the depth from the mounth of the barrel shank to the shoulder on the barrel. Remember you're going to need to take .004" off that to advance the timing of the barrel. Going slowly and measuring frequently work your way around the entire shoulder. Try the fit up and if it is now 10 to 11:00 the barrel can be torqued down to top dead center.

Top dead center is best down with a pair of spirit levels, small torpedo levels. The barrel is leveled up in the barrel vice first and securly clamped. Then you torque the receiver on and use the two parallel sections of the receiver to sit the level on. If the bubble is centered you're there, if not keep pulling.

Should you over time, say go to 12:00 or 1:00 you have the option of doing either a spacer washer or peaning the shoulder on the barrel to raise the metal and prevent the barrel from screwing on too far. English L1A1 rifles use a timing washer.

Too bad you're way up in PA as I have all the tooling here to do a build. If you could stop by on a Saturday we could go through a build from A to Z and you'd fully understand how to do the build in the future. With my blast cabinent and stock of Gun Kote on hand we could get you out of here with what looks like a factory new FAL rifle in one long day.

[Crash]

I bought a parts kit and sat on it for years because I wasn't sure if I was capable of doing the build. One day I traded for a DSA FAL receiver and I felt like I was commited to doing the build so I read a lot on the DIY forums on several websites. In the end it wasn't that hard.
I think finding quality compliance parts was the hardest part as some of them were low quality and I didn't want to put them on my rifle. If I can help let me know...

[rahatlakhoom]

I've been sitting on 4 FAL kits for a couple years.
They don't look like they would be too difficult to build.
I need to get off my butt and allocate funds for some receivers.

[Blacksmith]

You need; a receiver wrench and a barrel vice, headspace gauges, gauge pins to find the locking shoulder size in order to set head space


I understand the concept of using the headspace gauges to set the headspace. but I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “gauge pins to find the locking shoulder size”. Can a person just set the barrel in to where the headspace is to tight and then take a little of the back of the bolt until it’s right?
where do the pins come in?

[deth502]

I understand the concept of using the headspace gauges to set the headspace. but I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “gauge pins to find the locking shoulder size”. Can a person just set the barrel in to where the headspace is to tight and then take a little of the back of the bolt until it’s right?
where do the pins come in?

the fal works off of a tilting bolt lock up like an sks, and the spot where the back of the bolt tips into, same as an sks, determines headspace. teh barrels only job is to time right to the receiver, lining up the gas ports and what not, the headspace is set by a piece of hardened metal pressed into the receiver in said spot where the bolt tips into to lock. teh depth of the chamber, length of the bolt, ect ect, determine what size teh locking shoulder needs to be. what you will do is put the go gauge in the chamber, then lock the bolt in, then you have a series of "pin gauges" (just round blocks of a known diam, a lot of ppl use drill bit shanks) that you slide in the hole where the locking shoulder goes to determine exactly what size you need to get the propper headspace. make sense?

afa taking a little off the back of the bolt, not recomended. that said, ive dont it before when my locking shoulder was a little too tight. i just stoned a few thou off the bolt and it was perfect.

[Blacksmith]

the fal works off of a tilting bolt lock up like an sks, and the spot where the back of the bolt tips into, same as an sks, determines headspace. teh barrels only job is to time right to the receiver, lining up the gas ports and what not, the headspace is set by a piece of hardened metal pressed into the receiver in said spot where the bolt tips into to lock. teh depth of the chamber, length of the bolt, ect ect, determine what size teh locking shoulder needs to be. what you will do is put the go gauge in the chamber, then lock the bolt in, then you have a series of "pin gauges" (just round blocks of a known diam, a lot of ppl use drill bit shanks) that you slide in the hole where the locking shoulder goes to determine exactly what size you need to get the propper headspace. make sense?

afa taking a little off the back of the bolt, not recomended. that said, ive dont it before when my locking shoulder was a little too tight. i just stoned a few thou off the bolt and it was perfect.

Thanks.
That cleared it up.

[Tx Dogblaster]

Great thread! I've thought about building an FAL for a while just because I like 'em and I'm too cheap to buy a factory rifle.

It's good to see a thread being followed and added to without all the douchebaggery that goes on in GD...

[Schuetzenman]

the fal works off of a tilting bolt lock up like an sks, and the spot where the back of the bolt tips into, same as an sks, determines headspace. the barrels only job is to time right to the receiver, lining up the gas ports and what not, the headspace is set by a piece of hardened metal pressed into the receiver in said spot where the bolt tips into to lock. teh depth of the chamber, length of the bolt, ect ect, determine what size teh locking shoulder needs to be. what you will do is put the go gauge in the chamber, then lock the bolt in, then you have a series of "pin gauges" (just round blocks of a known diam, a lot of ppl use drill bit shanks) that you slide in the hole where the locking shoulder goes to determine exactly what size you need to get the propper headspace. make sense?

afa taking a little off the back of the bolt, not recomended. that said, ive dont it before when my locking shoulder was a little too tight. i just stoned a few thou off the bolt and it was perfect.

Pretty good reply. I'm going to try and take some photos of the gauge pin thing I use. It's about 10 or 12 inches long and is stepped in diameters by about .002". It's made by a guy from Falfiles named Moses for his on line nick. The way you use his device is with the Go gauge in the bolt face one shoves the pin in the locking shoulder hole and at the same time you slide the bolt carrier forward until it locks in. Pull bolt group back to unlock it then shove the stepped pin in further to the next larger diameter, repeat process until the bolt won't lock in and then back up one step if you want a really tight chamber or 2 steps if you want a looser NATO spec. In as much as I shoot surplus I always went for the looser chambering. Not reloading the brass so I don't need to worry about stretching.

http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/Getting_Started.jpghttp://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/Locking_Shoulders.jpg
First image is a typical pile of FAL kit on the counter top. Notice the screw drivers and the pin punches. Next image is of 4 Locking shoulders and the receiver pivot bolt. The LS is a hard cylinder of metal with two flats ground on it. It has an "L" shape and the foot of the L has a peanut or figure 8 shape to it. That part fits in a recess on the right side of the receiver, a.k.a. the ejector port side of the receiver.
http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/Clamping_BBL_small.jpghttp://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/Small_leveled_receiver.jpg
Here's a photo of a receiver hand timed on a barrel in a barrel vice. Last image is of the leveling set-up and shows how the torpedo levels are used to line up the receiver with the front sight / barrel. A platform tool screws into the frong sight post threads of the front sight gas block assembly. You get the barrel dead center up with the level and clamp the vice down on it to hold it then with the wrench on the receiver one pulls the receiver into top dead center having the level sit on the rails of the receiver. If you look at the image of the receiver with the two levels on it, the wrench is clamped aroudn the receiver and the breaker bar handle is installed on it. I don't have any individual photos of the wrench or stepped gauge pin thing at the moment. http://www.gunthings.com/ this link was where I would often get a Locking Shoulder if I didn't have the right size with the kit as well as some compliance parts. DSA would also be a good source of compliance parts. I like their pistol grips best for what's on the market but they don't take an Imbel type cleaning kit. Not a biggie for me.

[abpt1]

WOW great info !

I would take you up on that in a heart beat Schuetzenman, if you were not 800 +/- miles away but the offer is greatly appreciated!

Sorry I have not had a chance to replied just busy and one of our dogs died last night . I dont know where to start I guess wait for the kit and asses what condition its in..
here is a link
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=204971771
what are the easiest 922 parts to find beside the receiver ?

[deth502]

i use the welding rod method instead of the level method.

its very easy, very cheap, and very acurate.

just slide a welding rod through the hole in the fsb so its half sticking out over each side. then lay the 2nd one across the rails on the receiver. then just simply eye down them and tighten till theyre parallel.


looks like one hell of a receiver wrench , schuetz, did you make that yourself? ive never seen a manufactured one look that solid.

[Schuetzenman]

WOW great info !

I would take you up on that in a heart beat Schuetzenman if you were not 800+/- miles away but the offer it greatly appreciated!

Sorry I have not had a chance to replied just busy and one of our dogs died last night . I dont know where to start I guess wait for the kit and asses what condition its in..
here is a link
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=204971771
what are the easiest 922 parts to find beside the receiver ?

The ones I listed are the easiest to source. Having not built an FAL for 5 years now I'm not sure on cheap sources of parts. Tapco used to be a cheap charging handle and gas piston source, I've used and am using both parts. DSA proably makes the best US parts though they will be higher. Since Tapco went wholesale only I've lost touch with them and their product lines.

The welding rod or just steel rod method didn't work for me to my level of satisfaction. That's why I invested in the front sight level platform. I did the rods, took the weapon out and it shot way right, went home did it again then it shot way the hell left. Never had one that required tweaking after I went to the levels. BTW, one level is sufficient, you just move it from the front platform to the receiver. When bubbles are settling in the same spot, you're there.

On did I make the receiver wrench, half yes, half no. The fundimental wrench is aluminum, so it's soft as aluminu is. I didn't make that part. The part I did was the dark gray section to the right that is bolted to it with the 2 big Allen bolts. I used a socket adapter and welded that to the steel plate. That's what the breaker bar, (1/2") fits into. If I need to I slip a 4' piece of pipe over the handle and that gives me all the torque I need to center up even a stubborn tight receiver. BTW, if the receiver is tight and you're close you can rock it, that is tighten then loosen the receiver multiple times and it should come on in to TDC, (top dead center).

A tip on use of a receiver wrench. Cut notebook paper and wrap the receiver with it, tape in place. I go 2 layers deep with the paper. This is to pad the receiver from the receiver wrench marring the surface. In my wrenchs case it doesn't really dmage the steel but it will leave white / silvery aluminum marks on the finish like paint. It's a PITA to clean off so the paper prevents the need for that.

[Tx Dogblaster]

How much do FAL receivers sell for? Who sells them? I've never really looked into them but this thread has piqued my interest in trying a different type of build. I know NOTHING about FAL's other than the fact that they're .308 and I like the battle rifle look. Would I have to buy as many tools and jigs as I have for my AK builds?

[Schuetzenman]

How much do FAL receivers sell for? Who sells them? I've never really looked into them but this thread has piqued my interest in trying a different type of build. I know NOTHING about FAL's other than the fact that they're .308 and I like the battle rifle look. Would I have to buy as many tools and jigs as I have for my AK builds?

Like I've said, the FAL is easier. The two most required things are the barrel vice and the receiver wrench. Third in line would be the gauge pins to know what size locking shoulder to use. Sizes of locking shoulder range from .250" to .268". I seem to recall .256" seemed to be the typical size with an Imbel receiver, which I don't think one can find anymore, the Imbel receiver that is. The Gunthings link is the only place I know of that may still have locking shoulders, well probably DSA does as well. http://www.dsarms.com/searchprods.asp

On receivers Dan Coonan makes a type 1 receiver. His original ones were investment cast. He stopped making them and now I see he has a CNC milled receiver, which should put his on par with DSA's receivers. http://www.coonaninc.com/index.php/cPath,7 Last DSA receiver I purchased was near $400 and I was a dealer. Brownell's for http://www.brownells.com/ barrel vice and other gunsmithing tools.

Like all of this gun building really if you're going to build just one, you might as well not as you could buy it cheaper than your end cost after buying the tools to do it. In my case I was building them when kits were $130 bucks and an Imbel receiver set me back $240 bucks delivered. I built 4 for myself and did barrel install and heaspacing on a couple dozen that were then finished out by their owners. Once the barrel on and it's headspaced it's a piece of cake to build the weapon. The DIY of a cheap MbR was the nice part of FAL building. But thanks to BATFE's meddling the kits all cost over 3 bills now and don't usually come with a barrel, those have been torch cut.

[deth502]

http://www.entreprise.com/fal/fnreceivers.htm

[Schuetzenman]

http://www.entreprise.com/fal/fnreceivers.htm

Yeah, I forgot about these guys. However, I'm not sure of their quality at present. Back when I was activly building there were horror stories about their receivers not being made right, off spec etc. Not sure if they have fixed those issues, one would hope they have.

[deth502]

ive heard they have, i cant vouch for all of the receivers they are putting out, but i can say ive personally put 2 together with no issues.

i also put one together on a xxx (i forget which reincarnation of the company it was, hesse, vulcan, or whatever other name) brand receiver that aboud with horror stories. on that one i had to take a few thou off the bbl shoulder to get it to time, and do a bit of grinding on the latch to get it to lock into the lower. the locking shoulder was also pretty tight trying to get it in. imo, even for a "problem receiver", that still wasnt a lot of work.

[Tx Dogblaster]

Sounds like it'll be cheaper to buy a rifle outright... I don't foresee more than 1 maybe 2 max in my future so the tooling would probably be too expensive to justify. Thanks guys!

[deth502]

building tools are nothing compared to an ak. all i bought for mine was a used action wrench. its no where near as stout as schutez's, but i got it for iirc, $25 shipped, used. the welding rods cost nothing, although levels are dirt cheap too. i did the drill bit shank method for sizing, which i would attribute for the slight innacuracies that caused me to need to stone the back of the bolt on one build slightly. even still, the pin gauge cant cost that much.

[Tx Dogblaster]

Well maybe I'll keep my eyes open for parts and used tools. I was imagining tools like my AK hobby involves. If I was going to only build 1 Or 2 AK's then it wouldn't have been worth it but this "sounds" a bit more reasonable. Worth investigating at least.

[Penguin]

Enterprise makes the only inch reciver that I know of right now.

[Partisan1983]

Enterprise makes the only inch reciver that I know of right now.

DSA also does

http://www.dsarms.com/DSA-L1A1-Inch-Receiver-762-Cal---029L1A1/productinfo/029L1A1/

[abpt1]

OK I have another question. If I have 17 parts 7 have to be US or if I have 16 parts 6 have to be US is this correct ?

[deth502]

not sure exacly where your going with that question, but...

no more than 10 counted parts can be foreign.

the fal uses 17 of the 20 listed parts.

that leaves 7 parts that need to be either domestic, or left out. the only one easily left out is the muzzle device.

[abpt1]

not sure exacly where your going with that question, but...

no more than 10 counted parts can be foreign.

the fal uses 17 of the 20 listed parts.

that leaves 7 parts that need to be either domestic, or left out. the only one easily left out is the muzzle device.

Thats where I was going not more than 10 parts can be foreign. ok Thanks I am just tiring to get a list of US parts that I need for the correct number of compliance parts is 7

Trigger pack = 3 parts
Gas piston = 1
Stock and Grip = 2
Flash /break =1

on another note if I add the bipod to my RPK then I need to add one US part ?

[deth502]

bipod is not a counted part, adding or removing it wont matter.

dont forget your receiver, that will likely be a us part. the forearm is also an option.

[Penguin]

DSA also does

http://www.dsarms.com/DSA-L1A1-Inch-Receiver-762-Cal---029L1A1/productinfo/029L1A1/

Nice are they make an L1A1 rifle as well or just recivers? I would love to get an DSA inch FAL as their reputation is second to none.

[Partisan1983]

Nice are they make an L1A1 rifle as well or just recivers? I would love to get an DSA inch FAL as their reputation is second to none.

They were gonna at one time, but for some reason they never did.

They do offer gunsmithing services and they have a bunch of L1A1 parts. I am pretty sure you could call 'em up and see what it will cost and what options you would like, for them to build you one.

Their customer service is awesome and even when ordering a standard model, I have had them do all kinds of different options. Basically like Burger King....you can have it your way ;)

[Penguin]

Cool I guess it couldn't hurt to ask. If I could find an inch parts kit I would be very tempted to do it myself. What would be really cool is if they could build me a inch one that was a Para model.

[Tx Dogblaster]

What is the difference between metric & inch? What are the differences? Are they recognizable at a glance or is it something internal? Are any parts interchangeable?

You guys may think this is a silly question but I've heard the terms for years and have no knowledge of FAL's other than recognizing them.

[abpt1]

What is the difference between metric & inch? What are the differences? Are they recognizable at a glance or is it something internal? Are any parts interchangeable?

You guys may think this is a silly question but I've heard the terms for years and have no knowledge of FAL's other than recognizing them.

I think the main reason for going metric is cheaper mags . http://www.centuryarms.com/receivers.htm

[Tx Dogblaster]

Thanks for the link Abpt1.

Another question then, looking at the receiver differences, if I was to build on an inch receiver then I would need an inch parts kit because of the folding charging handle and the different top cover correct? Or could you use a metric kit and just replace the charging handle and top cover? The questions are purely hypothetical in my mind because I'm just trying to understand what exactly I would need to look for if I decided to build one.

[deth502]

youll need an inch kit to build on an inch receiver. not sure if teh lower will fit, i dont think so, but the barrel wont and teh bolt/carrier wont, neither will any of the other parts that go in the receiver. (top cover, mag catch, bho, ect..)

[Penguin]

There are lots of differences between inch and metric. With the exception of the mags most are minor in the grand scheme of things. Some parts are interchangable some aren't. Inch mags won't fit in a metric rifle as they have larger locking tabs. Metric mags will usally fit in an inch rifle but may or may not work. The cocking handles are different, same with the psitol grips. Rear sights are different. Inch ones will fold down and are in yards. Metric ones don't fold and are in meters, though ones on the canadian C1 are a compeletly different set up. Inch bolt carriers have sand cuts, metric ones generally don't unless they are the para models. The hammer springs are different. The safety bolt relese and mag relese are different. Same The gas block I belive is different though I am not sure. The gas regulator and cut off valves are different. The part that opens the upper and lower recivers I think are slightly different as well. I belive there are a few other differences as wll but I have to leave for work.

[rahatlakhoom]

I did take an inch barrel and it screwed into a metric receiver stub.
Anyway, yesterday I dug out a copy of the FAL Gun Plumbers Guide by Mark Graham.
It covers everything as far as I can tell.
I feel much more ready to build one with this at hand.

[Tx Dogblaster]

youll need an inch kit to build on an inch receiver. not sure if teh lower will fit, i dont think so, but the barrel wont and teh bolt/carrier wont, neither will any of the other parts that go in the receiver. (top cover, mag catch, bho, ect..)

Thanks deth502. That's what I suspected but I wanted to make sure.

[Penguin]

It is my understanding that inch and metric barrels will fit into both types of recivers. It is just with inch ones you need to use a breaching washer to get the barrel to index right, another difference between inch and metric.

Where things get real interisting is with iserali and indian barrels is my understanding. They don't really interchange with out rethreading I have heard.

On my last post I left that out and inch reciver covers have two tabs on the rear that metric ones don't have. I think but, I don't know for sure, that metric ones will fit on an inch one and if you grind off the tabs the inch ones will fit a metric rifle. Also usally the forends are different as well. Metric ones usally have slots for fitting a bipod. Inch ones don't as far as I know, with the exception of the heavy barreled varients. Those have for ends that folded out into bipod legs. Also as a general rule in the military configurations inch ones were usally semi auto while metric ones would often be full auto.

[Penguin]

I did take an inch barrel and it screwed into a metric receiver stub.
Anyway, yesterday I dug out a copy of the FAL Gun Plumbers Guide by Mark Graham.
It covers everything as far as I can tell.
I feel much more ready to build one with this at hand.

So where does one get this FAL plumbers guide, it sounsd like a good book.

[deth502]

It is my understanding that inch and metric barrels will fit into both types of recivers. It is just with inch ones you need to use a breaching washer to get the barrel to index right, another difference between inch and metric.

Where things get real interisting is with iserali and indian barrels is my understanding. They don't really interchange with out rethreading I have heard.

On my last post I left that out and inch reciver covers have two tabs on the rear that metric ones don't have. I think but, I don't know for sure, that metric ones will fit on an inch one and if you grind off the tabs the inch ones will fit a metric rifle. Also usally the forends are different as well. Metric ones usally have slots for fitting a bipod. Inch ones don't as far as I know, with the exception of the heavy barreled varients. Those have for ends that folded out into bipod legs. Also as a general rule in the military configurations inch ones were usally semi auto while metric ones would often be full auto.

its my understanding that the bbls will "fit" but will not "interchange" meaning you can screw them in, but the timing is differnt, even if you used the washers.

also, most all of the metric hg's ive seen have the detents in them for the bipod to fit into, but rarely do they have a bipod cut bbl. you do need a special barrel to use a fal bipod.

[Penguin]

Ok good to know. Personally I don't usally care for bipods. I really don't care for the fore arms that have the cut outs for them. I will say though that as far as bipods go the FAL ones are the ones I like the most. They seem very slim while folded.

[rahatlakhoom]

So where does one get this FAL plumbers guide, it sounsd like a good book.

I got a copy on FAL files couple years ago.
I guess I would get one from http://www.gunthings.com/
It's a very thoughtfully written manual.
Covers headspacing in great detail with all the
other important issues.

[abpt1]

OK so for a imbel kit what type(1,2 or3) of metric receiver do I want ?

[deth502]

look at your lower when you get the kit. iirc, t3 are the square ones. if you have the square corners on the lower, a t3 will match, if you have the cut corners, then either a t1 or t2.

your kit should probably be a t3 kit.

[deth502]

as proof that the receivers will interchange, check this thread out:

http://www.militaryfirearm.com/Forum/showthread.php?p=215003&posted=1#post215003

if you know where your looking, there are quite a few mismatched uppers and lowers there, mostly t3 uppers on lowers made with the lightening cuts.

[rahatlakhoom]

The thing that is puzzling me with the semi-auto build version of the FAL
is the vague information on how this is legally accomplished.
(The US part count, I understand from prior experience)

I've learned, (perhaps erroneously, that the SELECTOR, and TRIGGER PLUNGER, are
the two items that need alteration to insure the semi-auto operation of this rifle.
I don't see that the lower trigger assembly has any difference than the original
config. Nor, that the receiver's being sold has any dimensional difference from the
original. The G3 receivers have the distinction of being altered to accept only
a semi trigger pack. Can someone give a quick dissertation on how the FAL
qualifies as a semi-auto???

Could I reweld chunks of demilled FAL receiver and fall into a safe zone of
semi-auto operation? (as I am prone to do)

thanks guys, this is a helpful thread.

[deth502]

The thing that is puzzling me with the semi-auto build version of the FAL
is the vague information on how this is legally accomplished.
(The US part count, I understand from prior experience)

I've learned, (perhaps erroneously, that the SELECTOR, and TRIGGER PLUNGER, are
the two items that need alteration to insure the semi-auto operation of this rifle.
I don't see that the lower trigger assembly has any difference than the original
config. Nor, that the receiver's being sold has any dimensional difference from the
original. The G3 receivers have the distinction of being altered to accept only
a semi trigger pack. Can someone give a quick dissertation on how the FAL
qualifies as a semi-auto???

Could I reweld chunks of demilled FAL receiver and fall into a safe zone of
semi-auto operation? (as I am prone to do)

thanks guys, this is a helpful thread.

this all comes back to that "ejector block" that was mentioned before that should come with the new receiver.

pivot on the upper that the lower attaches to goes through the ejector block. the saftey sear pivots on that as well. the ejector blocks that come with the new receivers are not cut to allow the saftey sear to go in there. muck like an ar lower has extra metal in the rear area to prevent the saftey sear from being able to be installed by simply drilling the pivot hole.

the plunger?? never heard of that.

the selector, most mod it to keep it from being able to be rotated to the fa position. this will not "insure the semi-auto operation" per se, as even if you were to put one in the fa position, without the saftey sear, you will only get hammer follow and likely cause a malfunction. this would be the same as putting a fa disconnector in an ak, and expecting fa fire.

[rahatlakhoom]

this all comes back to that "ejector block" that was mentioned before that should come with the new receiver.

pivot on the upper that the lower attaches to goes through the ejector block. the saftey sear pivots on that as well. the ejector blocks that come with the new receivers are not cut to allow the saftey sear to go in there. muck like an ar lower has extra metal in the rear area to prevent the saftey sear from being able to be installed by simply drilling the pivot hole.

the plunger?? never heard of that.

the selector, most mod it to keep it from being able to be rotated to the fa position. this will not "insure the semi-auto operation" per se, as even if you were to put one in the fa position, without the saftey sear, you will only get hammer follow and likely cause a malfunction. this would be the same as putting a fa disconnector in an ak, and expecting fa fire.

Thank you sir. This is clear to me now.
You can see the tit of the safety sear behind the pivot lug on this midsection.
(btw, I'm looking for 2 of these midsections, stripped of parts, pm me.)
http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01117.JPG

[deth502]

yup thats it. i cant help you with the receiver sections though, ive never even saw a cut receiver. all of the kits i got only came with the small piece that the barrel threads into. those small parts around the pivot, the pivot itself, the locking shoulder, the bho, the mag catch, and the screw and springs, came seperate in a little baggie.

and none of my kits came with the saftey sear either.

[rahatlakhoom]

My first FAL.

I did do a reweld.
Metric front stub, Inch middle section, metric rear end.
This is an Austrian STG58 kit.
(why didn't you guys tell me the FAL beast is as heavy as a
Garand?)

I do have a semi-auto, US part compliant rifle.
The safety-sear area on the receiver was welded solid.
The safety-sear area on the ejector block was welded solid.

Enjoy the pics, I have dumped 80 rounds of nice Yugo 7.62 x 51
into this toy this morning without a hitch.

http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01138.JPG

http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01131.JPG

http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01127-Jan22-3.JPG

[deth502]

nice!

the hardest part of any fal build ive ever done was installing one of those bipods. those are some damn stiff springs in those!!

what kind of rear site you got there?? dosent look standard. is that one of the dsa lowers with the different sights? almost looks like an ar a2 site, but i dont see the elevation knob.

[Penguin]

Looks nice. I think that is a Para rear sight.

[abpt1]

coonan type 3 otw for 270 shipped .......... errr cant wait ...

[rahatlakhoom]

Whatever type of sight that comes on the Austrian stg 58
I'm new to FAL's

[Schuetzenman]

Whatever type of sight that comes on the Austrian stg 58
I'm new to FAL's

Umm, umm, umm! Lost track of this thread and there have been some questionable statements of fact bandied about. On your sight, it looks like a Para rifle's hooded rear sight and would not be typical for an STG58 rifle.
http://www.dsarms.com/images/106.jpg Photo credit DS Arms. This is the typical metric rear sight including STG-58 Austrian rifles.

Next on the topic of Metric vs. Inch pattern rifles. 95+ countries adopted the FAL as their main small arm at one time. Only the UK did Inch along with it's affiliated countries like Australia. Inch pattern magazines have a large front locking lug that is a milled piece that looks to be brazed to the mag body. The Metric magazine has a small rounded locking lug that is forged from the sheet metal of the magazine itself. Inch mags will NOT fit in a metric receiver, metric mags can fit in an Inch receiver. Metric mags are cheaper than Inch because there's about 90+ countries that made them vs. the UK influenced nations that used the FAL. Supply is up on metric magazines so the price is lower.

Next can an L1A1 inch pattern rifle kit be built up on a Metric receiver. Yes it can, I have done it. The funky Inch stocks attach to the lower receiver which is the trigger housing under BATFE rulings. The latch up on the metric receiver was just fine on the Inch lower. Used a DSA type 1 on a guys Inch kit, used the breeching washer, worked out fine. Also have put an Inch barrel on a Metric rifle that had a shot out bore. Most difficulty I had was a new Israeli Heavy Barrel FAL barrel install. I used a needle file to chase the threads and reduce them just enough to screw in all the way so I could get the TDC timing right.

Like I said way back 3 pages ago the FAL is an easy weapon to build, but it takes some special tooling to pull it off; barrel vice, receiver wrench, gauge pins. Only the AR15 is simpler and lower in cost for tooling to build it.

[rahatlakhoom]

Looks like I ended up with a para rear sight.
Owner of the kit had already swapped out a bunch of things
for US parts etc. I guess he must have wanted a para sight on it also.
I can't complain. Next fal build I have my eyes set on one of those IMI
heavy barrels. Sarco has a great furniture deal on this set up.

[Schuetzenman]

Looks like I ended up with a para rear sight. Owner of the kit had already swapped out a bunch of things for US parts etc. I guess he must have wanted a para sight on it also. I can't complain. Next fal build I have my eyes set on one of those IMI heavy barrels. Sarco has a great furniture deal on this set up.


The Paratroop rear sight is hooded to survive being dropped out of a plane with the shooter, but it limits range on the weapon to about 350 meters. The standard sight slides up in 100 meter steps out to 600 meters. Just something you might want to think about given your full length barrel.

[Penguin]

Personally I kind of like the Para rear sights. The ones I really like though are the canadian C1 rear sights.

[deth502]

Next can an L1A1 inch pattern rifle kit be built up on a Metric receiver. Yes it can, I have done it. .

i wanted a sand cut bolt in mine (the only ones i know of are inch) and it wouldnt physically fit into my receiver. maybe i got a bad one :dunno:

[Penguin]

As far as I know the ones that had sand cuts would be the inch ones with the exception of the canadian ones. Also I belive the Para ones had sand cuts as well. So if an inch bolt carrier won't fit in your gun I would look for a Para bolt carrier. All the Para FAL's were metric if I am not mistaken.

[Schuetzenman]

i wanted a sand cut bolt in mine (the only ones i know of are inch) and it wouldnt physically fit into my receiver. maybe i got a bad one :dunno:

You must have as I've had my hands on 4 sand cut bolts that fit in DSA metric receivers. I had assumed they were L1A1 carriers, but the came in demilled kits that were out of Turkey. I think I might still have one in the workbench drawer.

[Schuetzenman]

As far as I know the ones that had sand cuts would be the inch ones with the exception of the canadian ones. Also I belive the Para ones had sand cuts as well. So if an inch bolt carrier won't fit in your gun I would look for a Para bolt carrier. All the Para FAL's were metric if I am not mistaken.

No sandcuts in a standard Metric Para rifle carrier. Israeli's have a form of sand cuts in their carriers but you don't see the milled stripes up the side of the carrier body, just notches in the rails.

[slamfire51]

Schuetzenman knows what he is talking about.
He built my FAL (SPOOKY) on an Imbel receiver.
Never had a problem with it. Great workmanship on his part.

[deth502]

I think I might still have one in the workbench drawer.

if you can find it, can you do me a favor? measure the rail thickness on it here

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb31/deth502/temp/2-1.jpg

that was the hold up on mine. if i got a screwed up one for some reason, ill have to start keeping an eye out for another sand cut one at the shows. at this point though, after i headspaced it already, id be worried if it would work with my bolt.

thanks

[Schuetzenman]

if you can find it, can you do me a favor? measure the rail thickness on it here

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb31/deth502/temp/2-1.jpg

that was the hold up on mine. if i got a screwed up one for some reason, ill have to start keeping an eye out for another sand cut one at the shows. at this point though, after i headspaced it already, id be worried if it would work with my bolt.

thanks

Found two of them. One that looks newer is micing with digital verniers about .116 to .117" and a more used carrier mics around .115" ish.

[deth502]

thanks. thats right where im at.

i never measured the old one, it went in a trade, but if i had to guess, it was prob about .150". it was almost half again bigger than the slot in my receiver.

so if i find one now, do you know if my metric bolt will fit in the inch carrier?

[Schuetzenman]

thanks. thats right where im at.

i never measured the old one, it went in a trade, but if i had to guess, it was prob about .150". it was almost half again bigger than the slot in my receiver.

so if i find one now, do you know if my metric bolt will fit in the inch carrier?

Should. I have a bolt taken off one rifle in one of the two sand cut carriers.

[abpt1]

i wanted a sand cut bolt in mine
why?
http://www.qtl.co.il/img/trans.png

[deth502]

why?
http://www.qtl.co.il/img/trans.png

just for the look

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e169/panzermk2/L1A1%20sale%20pics/P9050046.jpg

[abpt1]

just for the look

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e169/panzermk2/L1A1%20sale%20pics/P9050046.jpg
yeah that does look much better ....

[Schuetzenman]

No sand in my part of Georgia, just the red clay.:eyebrows:

[ak474ever]

My first FAL.

I did do a reweld.
Metric front stub, Inch middle section, metric rear end.
This is an Austrian STG58 kit.
(why didn't you guys tell me the FAL beast is as heavy as a
Garand?)

I do have a semi-auto, US part compliant rifle.
The safety-sear area on the receiver was welded solid.
The safety-sear area on the ejector block was welded solid.

Enjoy the pics, I have dumped 80 rounds of nice Yugo 7.62 x 51
into this toy this morning without a hitch.

http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01138.JPG

http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01131.JPG

http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01127-Jan22-3.JPG

- did you heat treat it after it was done?
- how many rounds did you put through it?
- how did you mill/smooth out the welds?
- how did you get the charging handle grooves perfect?

[rahatlakhoom]

- did you heat treat it after it was done?
- how many rounds did you put through it?
- how did you mill/smooth out the welds?
- how did you get the charging handle grooves perfect?

No heat treating was done.
I've put 120 rds through it so far.
I did not use a mill. Carbide burrs, die grinder, 4" angle grinder, hand files, small dremel type grinding wheel to
cut the bolt carrier channel and all the other small grooves.
Alignment using attachments gets the process started.
http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01120-Jan22-2.JPG

[deth502]

wow, that looks like one hell of a gap to fill in the back.

how many different receivers is that? im guessing its gotta be at least 2 to get the pieces big enough after grinding clean.

[Partisan1983]

There were sand cut metric bolt carriers made......not exactly rare or common, but DSA (and others) did sell 'em for a time being......and no they were not Para carriers.

[abpt1]

LOL so I got my receiver and some ammo this month learned how to rebuild the lower (thx Deth!) next warm day Ill weld my selector stop in.... then I just have to go slap it together......lol




http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/ict.jpg

[rahatlakhoom]

wow, that looks like one hell of a gap to fill in the back.

how many different receivers is that? im guessing its gotta be at least 2 to get the pieces big enough after grinding clean.

Try 3. I had the original STG stub, (cut across the thread contact area). Compressed and rewelded the slot. G1 magwell pieces. Inch mid-section.
G1 tail end. And the gap at the end was a mother. I was beading one blob from one end to the other until Mason met Dixon.

[ak474ever]

No heat treating was done.
I've put 120 rds through it so far.
I did not use a mill. Carbide burrs, die grinder, 4" angle grinder, hand files, small dremel type grinding wheel to
cut the bolt carrier channel and all the other small grooves.
Alignment using attachments gets the process started.
http://www.gunsnet.net/photopost/data/500/medium/DSC01120-Jan22-2.JPG
Looks really good. What type of welding rod did you use?

[rahatlakhoom]

Gas shielded Mig wire. .024" mild steel.
Welcome to Gunsnet by the way.

[Penguin]

Try 3. I had the original STG stub, (cut across the thread contact area). Compressed and rewelded the slot. G1 magwell pieces. Inch mid-section.
G1 tail end. And the gap at the end was a mother. I was beading one blob from one end to the other until Mason met Dixon.

Did you have any problem getting the charging handle to fit since you used an inch mid section? The slot for the charging handle is milled a bit different between inch and metric.

[deth502]

now, i dont know this for sure, but i thought the only difference in the charging hanle slot was the length of it, with the inch receivers having the front of it cut short.

[rahatlakhoom]

Did you have any problem getting the charging handle to fit since you used an inch mid section? The slot for the charging handle is milled a bit different between inch and metric.

The specs on both types of receivers are extremely close.
It did not present a problem. I was pleased at how the different sections lined up.
Late 50's and through the 60's must have been the golden age of machining tolerances.
I'd venture to say that FN was leading the charge for the FAL to be the battle rifle of choice
back in the day. It has my vote for being the most versitle, robust .308 rifle.


now, i dont know this for sure, but i thought the only difference in the charging hanle slot was the length of it, with the inch receivers having the front of it cut short.

I have an inch front stub. I can see that there is no divot up front in the slot for the retention pin to lock into.
So, perhaps an inch handle is a bit forshortened. Still, plenty of room for alterations.

[Penguin]

now, i dont know this for sure, but i thought the only difference in the charging hanle slot was the length of it, with the inch receivers having the front of it cut short.

I belive they are slightly different but I don't have a metric one to compare against my L1A1's

[Penguin]

I'd venture to say that FN was leading the charge for the FAL to be the battle rifle of choice
back in the day. It has my vote for being the most versitle, robust .308 rifle.

FN marketed it heavily and, I think very sucsesfully. It was used by 90 or so different countries. It was used by just about every one who wasn't using an AK with the notable exceptions of the US and the germans. The US looked at adopting it. The germans used it until they were not granted a licinse to make their own, then they adopted the G3.

[deth502]

i believe the us actually fielded the fal on a short basis (a trial run, possibly what you meant by "looked at adopting it") but ended up not doing it. cant remember the time frame of the story as to weather it lost out to the m14 or the smaller 223. i have, however, seen a us govt offical manual for one that were supposedly issued with the rifles.

on another development note, i think the fal is one hell of a good solid gun, but there are those who disagree. the rifle was initially designed for a much smaller intermediate cartridge during the same time russia was developing their intermediate cartridges (7.62x39) from lessons learned in ww2 against the germans. it was only at the very end of its design that it was changed to be a full power 308 rifle, and many say that the design is only marginally adequate for the larger cartrige.

[Penguin]

The version the US tried was the T48. And we did limited troop trials with it. It lost out to the M-14. It was belived at the time that a lot of the M1 garand machinery could be used to build it and reduce the cost of adopting it. That proved to not be the case though. Also the M-14 did much better on the arctic testing that the T-48.

The FAL was orginally developed around the round the Stg-44 shoot the 7.92 Kurz if I remember right. FN built it in 7.62 NATO at the request of britian. The brits were really hoping the western world would get behind one caliber and type of rifle. It was belived that the US had made an unofical deal with Churchill that the US would adopt the FAL if the Brits would adopt the 7.62 NATO round. At the time the british were pushing an intermidite cartridge concept and, the US was steadfastly against it.

While I would like to go into more detial I have to get going for work but, that is a breif run down.

[abpt1]

i believe the us actually fielded the fal on a short basis (a trial run, possibly what you meant by "looked at adopting it") but ended up not doing it. cant remember the time frame of the story as to weather it lost out to the m14 or the smaller 223. i have, however, seen a us govt offical manual for one that were supposedly issued with the rifles.

on another development note, i think the fal is one hell of a good solid gun, but there are those who disagree. the rifle was initially designed for a much smaller intermediate cartridge during the same time russia was developing their intermediate cartridges (7.62x39) from lessons learned in ww2 against the germans. it was only at the very end of its design that it was changed to be a full power 308 rifle, and many say that the design is only marginally adequate for the larger cartrige.



I was just reading this with my coffee ...



Now for some interesting information on the FAL. These rifles headspace by the action of the bolt dropping into the receiver and pushing against the locking shoulder. The engineers who designed this rifle wanted to be able to compensate for stretching of the receiver over the life of the weapon. To do this, they made the locking shoulder in different sizes to allow for different headspace requirements as the rifle aged. In the FAL’s non-neutered configuration it is a main battle rifle, a machinegun, and designed to consume large amounts of ammunition in a very short period of time. Because of this the FAL was over built and given the ability to have a "liberal" headspace and still function properly and safely

http://www.alpharubicon.com/leo/barrelingthefal.htm



ok this locking shoulder WTF is the deal is there any way I can find out what size i need before I mount / time the barrel ?

[rahatlakhoom]

I was just reading this with my coffee ...




http://www.alpharubicon.com/leo/barrelingthefal.htm



ok this locking shoulder WTF is the deal is there any way I can find out what size i need before I mount / time the barrel ?



No. The headspace must be acquired with the barrel in it's correctly timed
position. Locking shoulder install is the last step.

[Penguin]

Once you have the barrel on there is a gauge that you can get that tells you what size locking shoulder to use. Once you have it in double check with head space gauges.

[abpt1]

OK so if its too big at that point can i take it down and If its too small I need to buy one .

[deth502]

you shouldnt take it down, but it is possible. the surface is hardened, so taking the hardened layer off will not do good things for the longevity of it. ive stoned a few thou off them before to get a fit, but i wouldnt go more than that.

[abpt1]

you shouldnt take it down, but it is possible. the surface is hardened, so taking the hardened layer off will not do good things for the longevity of it. ive stoned a few thou off them before to get a fit, but i wouldnt go more than that.
ok well Ill just wait and order the right one if it dont fit ..

[rahatlakhoom]

One advantage of the locking shoulder is that it is easy to replace.
That's why I said, what the heck, and filed one down.

[abpt1]

Well got the stub off some dremel work and a 24in pipe wrench finally did it ! here are some pics .









http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0849.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0850.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0828.jpg



And I touched this up with some grill paint


http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0832.jpg

[rahatlakhoom]

Hey, you are doing it.
:cool1:

[abpt1]

So what type of anti seize should i use on the barrel so If I want i can change it out in the future with out mussing up my receiver ?

[Schuetzenman]

So what type of anti seize should i use on the barrel so If I want i can change it out in the future with out mussing up my receiver ?

Personally I never put anti-seize on my barrels. It would leach out and probably screw up my Gun Kote Refinising. My advise would simply be to put some Kroil on the barrel, it should crawl up into the threads. It can get behind scope optics, should be able to get in the threads.

[abpt1]

Just waiting for a LS


http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0939.jpg


:)



Thanks for the help guys!

:thumbsup:

[rahatlakhoom]

:you-rock:

Fantastic Job!
I want to hear what you think of it after some range shooting.

[rahatlakhoom]

I assembled my para this morning.
Ready to fire later today after everyone is wide awake.

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/4471/dsc01325i.jpg

http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/9518/dsc01326h.jpg

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/9462/dsc01327g.jpg

[abpt1]

I assembled my para this morning.
Ready to fire later today after everyone is wide awake.

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/4471/dsc01325i.jpg

http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/9518/dsc01326h.jpg

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/9462/dsc01327g.jpg

:thumbsup:

Thats looks great !

[Schuetzenman]

What color is that exactly? Looks kind of OD green.

[rahatlakhoom]

Gunkote OD from the can seemed too light. I mixed in satin black until
I got a very dark green/grey.

[abpt1]

Did a test fire yesterday i !


http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0979.jpg

[Schuetzenman]

Did a test fire yesterday i !


http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0979.jpg

Ok .... AND what happened? How can you make an open ended post like that? :slap:

[abpt1]

Well I was breaking in my DPMS so I was not really testing.... My DPMS is shoot one clean shoot one clean 0-200 rds so I was busy plus I dont have a bore sight so I was just trying to get it on paper ...

I took one mag for my trouble some romy g and two mags for the fal.. The G is getting cut apart this after noon just cant fix the rails so I will start over....also my uncles new Savage mod 10 he was breaking in it shot awesome !

The fal shot very nice All the brass was in perfect shape I checked 20-30 rounds and landed in one spot 4-5ft away around the 3oclock position. the Falcon arms TRP trigger reduction pack worked smooth and crisp and it kept all the rds on paper at 100yds ....the barrel I got on the fal seems tighter in DIA than my NIB DPMS ? Damn that fal barrel got hot fast and burn the hell out of my hand...




http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0980.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0977.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0978.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0982.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0983.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0985.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/abpt1/IMG_0984.jpg

[abpt1]

And a big thanks to Deth and everyone for all the help !

[deth502]

no problem :thumbsup:

did it function well right from the get go, or did you have to adjust the gas nut any?

[abpt1]

no problem :thumbsup:

did it function well right from the get go, or did you have to adjust the gas nut any?


Yes it ran perfect with the South African circa 1984 next time I take it out I am going to try some 1993 RG and maybe a few rds of ppu .308....http://www.qtl.co.il/img/trans.png

[Moebrown20]

And a big thanks to Deth and everyone for all the help !

Don't cut that G!
Grind the rails and weld a new set. You can do it!

[rahatlakhoom]

Nice range report.
Your FAL looks awesome.

My test firing revealed shortcomings on the gas cycle.
It won't eject the spent round. I suspect the 16" barrel is cutting down
the dwell time for gas. If I remove the mag, it will cycle a single round, but
just barely. Regulator is cut down to 0 bypass.
Is it normal to have to enlarge the port on a shorty barrel?

What do you think Schuetzenman, you've built more than I have.

Everything is otherwise very tight, no gas leakage.
Seems real accurate at 50 yds thus far.

[Schuetzenman]

Nice range report.
Your FAL looks awesome.

My test firing revealed shortcomings on the gas cycle.
It won't eject the spent round. I suspect the 16" barrel is cutting down
the dwell time for gas. If I remove the mag, it will cycle a single round, but
just barely. Regulator is cut down to 0 bypass.
Is it normal to have to enlarge the port on a shorty barrel?

What do you think Schuetzenman, you've built more than I have.

Everything is otherwise very tight, no gas leakage.
Seems real accurate at 50 yds thus far.

You are thinking correctly, you aren't getting enough gas pressure to cycle the weapon. I do assume you had the gas port fully closed right? Off the top of my head I found most FAL 20" weapons had to be opened up to make work. The couple of 16" guns I've done for folks we had to open them up even more than the 20" weapons. If my memory is correct on a 13" DSA shorty with the long hider silver soldered on it I had to go to .125" to get it to work. My advise is find a drill bit that fits the existing gas port hole under the front sight perfectly, then step up one drill size over that. In drilling the gas ports, put a cleaning rod or at least a wooden dowel in the bore to prevent you overshooting and contacting the rifling at the bottom of the bore under the port. Go slow, check frequently for penetration to the bore.

Going again on memory, I believe I was opening up a 20" barrel gas port to about .115", 16" barrels to .118 to .120 and anything shorter to .125". Start with the least difference in size, in other words open up the gas port as little as possible and then verify function. If it still doesn't cycle well, try one more step up in size and again test fire to verify function. Good luck with it.

[deth502]

Don't cut that G!
Grind the rails and weld a new set. You can do it!

http://www.smithequipment.com/images/6reasonsHandTorch.png :thumbsup:

i think it was a rail alignment issue from the get go, and all of the fixes tried werent enough to compensate. instead of trying to grind them out without ruining anything, it will be much easier to get a $12 flat and start over.

[abpt1]

Don't cut that G!
Grind the rails and weld a new set. You can do it!

:terminator:
Its been grinded ,welded ,grinded ,bent, welded,Grinded....... Its going to become a underfolder..... :thumbspbig:













:thumbup:








http://www.smithequipment.com/images/6reasonsHandTorch.png :thumbsup:

i think it was a rail alignment issue from the get go, and all of the fixes tried werent enough to compensate. instead of trying to grind them out without ruining anything, it will be much easier to get a $12 flat and start over.

The G the parts are already in my RPK and I am having issues with that chambering a live round but not a blank ?

[Moebrown20]

Its been grinded ,welded ,grinded ,bent, welded,Grinded....... Its going to become a underfolder.....


The G parts are already in my RPK and I am having issues with that chambering a live round but not a blank ?

You have a underfolder kit? From where?
Try a different mag with the blank and live round.

[Moebrown20]

I think it was a rail alignment issue from the get go, and all of the fixes tried werent enough to compensate. instead of trying to grind them out without ruining anything, it will be much easier to get a $12 flat and start over.

Yeah, I guess. That sounds like a build party somewhere in PA!

[rahatlakhoom]

You are thinking correctly, you aren't getting enough gas pressure to cycle the weapon. I do assume you had the gas port fully closed right? Off the top of my head I found most FAL 20" weapons had to be opened up to make work. The couple of 16" guns I've done for folks we had to open them up even more than the 20" weapons. If my memory is correct on a 13" DSA shorty with the long hider silver soldered on it I had to go to .125" to get it to work. My advise is find a drill bit that fits the existing gas port hole under the front sight perfectly, then step up one drill size over that. In drilling the gas ports, put a cleaning rod or at least a wooden dowel in the bore to prevent you overshooting and contacting the rifling at the bottom of the bore under the port. Go slow, check frequently for penetration to the bore.

Going again on memory, I believe I was opening up a 20" barrel gas port to about .115", 16" barrels to .118 to .120 and anything shorter to .125". Start with the least difference in size, in other words open up the gas port as little as possible and then verify function. If it still doesn't cycle well, try one more step up in size and again test fire to verify function. Good luck with it.


I will follow your advice and open it up in as small increments as possible.
Thank you, I appreciate it.

[deth502]

The G the parts are already in my RPK and I am having issues with that chambering a live round but not a blank ?

do you mean FEEDING, or actually CHAMBERING ? if the bolt wont close on the live round its probably a headspace issue.

[abpt1]

do you mean FEEDING, or actually CHAMBERING ? if the bolt wont close on the live round its probably a headspace issue.


I think I got a little too much grill pain in there .......going to polish it a bit and try again .....if I am using a different bolt that should not matter right? the head space is the trunnion and the barrel correct ?

[abpt1]

Yeah, I guess. That sounds like a build party somewhere in PA!
:thumbsup:

[deth502]

I think I got a little too much grill pain in there .......going to polish it a bit and try again .....if I am using a different bolt that should not matter right? the head space is the trunnion and the barrel correct ?

yes, the bolt is a part of the headspace. the carrier isint, but the bolt is.

[63DH8]

If anyone in the Pac-North-west wants to do an FAL build, I have the tools. Instead of a level or rod to time the barrel to the receiver, I use a laser.

[SpinKiller]

If anyone in the Pac-North-west wants to do an FAL build, I have the tools. Instead of a level or rod to time the barrel to the receiver, I use a laser.

Hi, 63DH8
I feel a little wierd asking you this six months after your post, but I need a little help barreling my Argy Kit.
I tried a wood block for my reciever, but frankly the torque is way to much for the wood to handle, plus I don't want to damage anything doing something stupid. Let me know if the obove offer is still valid.
I would really appreciate a little advice, and the correct blocks and wrenches.
Thanks!

[bluzjamer]

I have had an inch kit for a bunch of years. Have one together that a friend had built and I bought. Shoots great, never got around to buying a receiver and now they are like $500....liveable I guess all things considered and the current state of the union. I snoozed and I loosed.

[Penguin]

Be glad you have the kit, I can't find one at all. At least not inch. I saw a couple of metric ones at the gun show this morning though. First of those I have seen in quite some time though.