[andy]

not even with a trigger job, match ammo, scope and dirt filled bags to fire from. typical one, with ball ammo, and iron sights, field position, you can't even hit a 12" x 24" torso, with a rangefinder to help you, and ZERO wind and mirage, HALF of the time, first shot at 600 yds. that means that what hits you DO get are pure LUCK. hit-miss is SAME "2 possible outcomes" as heads-tails coin toss, which we all ADMIT is just pure luck. add in the (nearly always present) camo on the target, fatique, indigestion, wind, mirage, etc, and the scoped FAL with match ammo, etc, aint a 600 yd rifle, either. It's lucky to group 12" out there, much less CENTER that 12" group on the 12" wide torso.

 

[RIKA]

It would help if you stopped buying cheapie stolen crap from the local gang banger. FALs differ greatly in quality of materials and workmanship. Your generalizations don't hold up.

I don't think that you would stand up at 600yds and let Magnum88C or one of the other guys shoot at you with a FAL.

RIKA

 

[Magnum88C]

It's lucky to group 12" out there, much less CENTER that 12" group on the 12" wide torso.

Not really lucky. A good FAL will shoot about 2 MOA, with no modifications. Of course, anyone who knows anything, knows the FAL isn't, never was, and neverwas intended as a sniper weapon. It's untra-reliable, accurate enough, powerful enough, BATTLE RIFLE. A good scope will take full advantage of it's range capabilities, which as I've said on MANY occasions is 600 yards for the typical FAL, 800 yards for an exceptional, or worked on one.

If you knew how to sight in a scope, you'd know WHERE the group is centered is a function of properly setting up the scope. But, someone who can't shoot past 100 yards with a rifle. . .

BTW, it'll do a sh!t load better than an 11.5" poodle popper at 600 yards.

 

[Garand]

The FN FAL is one of the finest most reliable battle rifles the world has ever produced. The Canadian FN C1A1 was my issue rifle during the first 13 years of my military career. I carried it from Alaska to California, from British Columbia to the Middle East (twice). It never failed me.

I owned my own Australian L1A1 that I used in Service Rifle Competition for 10 years. Canadian service rifle is unlike US Service condition matches. On our rifles you were only allowed to smooth the trigger to a 6 lb pull and shave the width of the front sight. Thus everybodys rifle was the same and the final score was based on marksmanship ability.

On the 500 meter deliberate stage, you had 7 shots from the prone posittion. The target was 18"x22" with a 10" circle, basicly a 1/2 sillouette target. The scoring was 5 &4 for a max of 35 points. With my iron sighted FN, I averaged 28 points. This was from a rifle that the Australian gov't had declared surplus. I've always wondered what I would have been able to do with a new rifle?

As for weight, it is really an irrelevent topic. Most seasoned soldiers will select a rifle that is reliable over one that isn't. When you have carried a rifle in the bush for a couple of weeks you will find that , the rifle has become part of your body and you won't be able to notice an additional 2 lbs of weight. Given the geographical locations that I have served I found that the AR15.M16 series just can't cut the mustard in semi arctic or semi desert conditions. I want a rifle the can function at -40F, the FN can do that.

During my service I worked in Urban operations and exercises and found no problem with the length of the rifle. You just develop new skills that incorporate the additional length.

Gunkid, try attending a Service conditions match, watch shooters that haven't got rifles with all the bells and whistles. It's a match that marksmanship skill is required. Not one in which group has the best armourer or biggest budget.

 

[Aslan]

not even with a trigger job, match ammo, scope and dirt filled bags to fire from. typical one, with ball ammo, and iron sights, field position, you can't even hit a 12" x 24" torso, with a rangefinder to help you, and ZERO wind and mirage, HALF of the time, first shot at 600 yds. that means that what hits you DO get are pure LUCK. hit-miss is SAME "2 possible outcomes" as heads-tails coin toss, which we all ADMIT is just pure luck. add in the (nearly always present) camo on the target, fatique, indigestion, wind, mirage, etc, and the scoped FAL with match ammo, etc, aint a 600 yd rifle, either. It's lucky to group 12" out there, much less CENTER that 12" group on the 12" wide torso.

Still trying to make up for your lack of understanding of probabilities?

Mirage can help you judge the wind.

As has been stated, the FAL is not intended to be a sniper rifle. Though you keep trying to claim that everyone thinks it is and thus attack the only weakness in the weapon that you can invent.

:devil:

 

[84 C4]

not even with a trigger job, match ammo, scope and dirt filled bags to fire from. typical one, with ball ammo, and iron sights, field position, you can't even hit a 12" x 24" torso, with a rangefinder to help you, and ZERO wind and mirage, HALF of the time, first shot at 600 yds. that means that what hits you DO get are pure LUCK. hit-miss is SAME "2 possible outcomes" as heads-tails coin toss, which we all ADMIT is just pure luck. add in the (nearly always present) camo on the target, fatique, indigestion, wind, mirage, etc, and the scoped FAL with match ammo, etc, aint a 600 yd rifle, either. It's lucky to group 12" out there, much less CENTER that 12" group on the 12" wide torso.

You couldn't hit the broadside of Rosie O'Donnell...

 

[GBullet]

Yeah, I'll bet those 90+ countries issuing FAL's, for nearly half a century, feel kinda stupid for it.

 

[Aslan]

not even with a trigger job, match ammo, scope and dirt filled bags to fire from. typical one, with ball ammo, and iron sights, field position, you can't even hit a 12" x 24" torso, with a rangefinder to help you, and ZERO wind and mirage, HALF of the time, first shot at 600 yds. that means that what hits you DO get are pure LUCK. hit-miss is SAME "2 possible outcomes" as heads-tails coin toss, which we all ADMIT is just pure luck. add in the (nearly always present) camo on the target, fatique, indigestion, wind, mirage, etc, and the scoped FAL with match ammo, etc, aint a 600 yd rifle, either. It's lucky to group 12" out there, much less CENTER that 12" group on the 12" wide torso.

I've seen people hit better than half the time. There are people that will do 60% hits on first shot under worse conditions, just like there are people that can do better than 80%. And, yes, there are people who will do much worse.

It isn't necessarily a 50-50 outcome. Or, do you beleive the lottery is a 50-50 outcome? you will either win, or you won't.

You try to invent your own rules for probability, but it isn't the way you make it out to be.

Skill plays a major part in your scenario. So do many other factors. (but you seem to want to project your failings on everyone else.)

personally, I will operate on the assumption that EVERYONE can make those shots and will plan accordingly. That way, when they can't, it's a pleasant surprise - and when they can, I'm not going to be dying thinking "wtf? that's impossible!".

Unlike some people who think that they are better than everyone else.

:devil:

 

[b0B_]

The FALs suffer from barrel whip. They tend to actually shoot tighter groups with the shorter barrels.

 

[mrostov]

My HK91 only had a barrel length of about 18" and it was a very accurate weapon.

 

[Garand]

I do believe that accuracy with the FN is also dependant on the quality of the manufacture.

 

[Aslan]

not even with a trigger job, match ammo, scope and dirt filled bags to fire from. typical one, with ball ammo, and iron sights, field position, you can't even hit a 12" x 24" torso, with a rangefinder to help you, and ZERO wind and mirage, HALF of the time, first shot at 600 yds. that means that what hits you DO get are pure LUCK. hit-miss is SAME "2 possible outcomes" as heads-tails coin toss, which we all ADMIT is just pure luck. add in the (nearly always present) camo on the target, fatique, indigestion, wind, mirage, etc, and the scoped FAL with match ammo, etc, aint a 600 yd rifle, either. It's lucky to group 12" out there, much less CENTER that 12" group on the 12" wide torso.

less then 50% is pure luck - let's try this on for size.

What are the batting averages for MLB players? Some of the BEST have averages well below .500, so I guess that all those hits are pure luck, since we know that either they will hit the ball or they won't - the same aas a coin toss.

but if less than 50% is pure luck, then why are there so many different batting averages? I mean it's pure luck - or does skill have something to do with it?

Hmm, that might mean that all random events don't have a 50-50 probability.

It might also mean that a hit rate of less than 50% for long distance shooting might not be a random event.

food for thought.

:devil:

 

[Garand]

btt

 

[Dorobuta]

Not very good at statistics, I see...

 

[Dorobuta]

 

[Dorobuta]

not even with a trigger job, match ammo, scope and dirt filled bags to fire from. typical one, with ball ammo, and iron sights, field position, you can't even hit a 12" x 24" torso, with a rangefinder to help you, and ZERO wind and mirage, HALF of the time, first shot at 600 yds. that means that what hits you DO get are pure LUCK. hit-miss is SAME "2 possible outcomes" as heads-tails coin toss, which we all ADMIT is just pure luck. add in the (nearly always present) camo on the target, fatique, indigestion, wind, mirage, etc, and the scoped FAL with match ammo, etc, aint a 600 yd rifle, either. It's lucky to group 12" out there, much less CENTER that 12" group on the 12" wide torso.

By the exact same token, neither is your shorty CAR. So-what? Although I'd put more faith in the FAL than your shorty at that distance.

Also you don't understand how luck and random events work. Hits at point of aim or within the known tolerance of the rifle would not be luck. Otherwise I could point the rifle in the general direction, close my eyes and score random hits - no?