Dieudonné Saive - JM Browning's protégé

[The Heretic]

Dieudonné Saive - The Browning of Belgium

Dieudonné Saive is a designer who doesn't receive the credit he often deserves. He's the designer of some of the most important firearms in the world.

gatdaily.com

Read More

 

[2506]

Hot take referring to the M-14 as "an abomination."

 

[DunRanull]

"The untied States even considered it, but then we went with the abomination that was the M-14."
What an idiot. Obviously he never owned and used an M14. Granted it is a knock-off of the M1 Garand, it is an accurate and smooth-handling weapon. I sold mine not because of any flaws or issues, but because I am actively trying to thin the herd. Not a whole lot of luck doing that, and regret having let it go even tho I'm not .308/7.62x51 poor by any stretch. Miss it's ability to "reach out and touch someone" here in the Colorado mtns.

 

[kopcicle]

Never heard of a Fusil Automatique Leger breaking an op-rod.
Then again what do I know? I voted for the other guy.

 

[The Heretic]

"The untied States even considered it, but then we went with the abomination that was the M-14."
What an idiot. Obviously he never owned and used an M14. Granted it is a knock-off of the M1 Garand, it is an accurate and smooth-handling weapon. I sold mine not because of any flaws or issues, but because I am actively trying to thin the herd. Not a whole lot of luck doing that, and regret having let it go even tho I'm not .308/7.62x51 poor by any stretch. Miss it's ability to "reach out and touch someone" here in the Colorado mtns.

Obviously everybody has their opinions on various firearms and some have extreme opinions.

Just the same, interesting article on Browning's protégé, the person who completed the Browning HP and created the FN-FAL - a masterful gun designer in his own right.

 

[osprey]

I admire the m14 and have shot the civilian version but I do not have enough time with it to really comment on it. I do have a lot of experience with several fal's and can say it is a very robust and versatile design. I think it is probably safe to say both Browning and Saive were mechanical geniuses.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Interesting read....thank you for posting.

I don't have enough time with a FN-FAL to make any sort of meaningful comment..other than the one that I fired worked well and handled nicely.

While not a M14...I did carry and use a M21 on some combat deployments.
It also worked well and handled nicely...and with the M21 I can say from the actual use it was intended for ...
It was not , in my experience , an abomination.
Andy

 

[Provincial]

Generally, sporting and military firearms writers are like most historians: They read the works of famous and/or highly-regarded "leaders" of the subject, then rephrase or outright parrot the work of those worthies. Very few do the diligent research necessary to determine the truth.

WWII weaponry/Vehicles/Aircraft history is undergoing a revision by historians who are actually doing real research. Some accepted "facts" (like Sherman tanks being deathtraps) are being upended based on actual statistical research. It seems like it takes at least two generations for skeptics to come into fashion.

 

[DunRanull]

Obviously everybody has their opinions on various firearms and some have extreme opinions.

Just the same, interesting article on Browning's protégé, the person who completed the Browning HP and created the FN-FAL - a masterful gun designer in his own right.

Maybe Mr Suave was beefed because the US chose to go it's own way with the Garand-derived "made here" M14 rifle. Considering the way the FAL was treated by the US military, one could cut him a little slack considering he was a Frenchie anyway.

 

[Stomper]

Generally, sporting and military firearms writers are like most historians: They read the works of famous and/or highly-regarded "leaders" of the subject, then rephrase or outright parrot the work of those worthies. Very few do the diligent research necessary to determine the truth.

WWII weaponry/Vehicles/Aircraft history is undergoing a revision by historians who are actually doing real research. Some accepted "facts" (like Sherman tanks being deathtraps) are being upended based on actual statistical research. It seems like it takes at least two generations for skeptics to come into fashion.

I seem to recall watching a documentary where they mentioned the troops referred to the M4 Sherman as a "Ronson" (as in a Ronson lighter) because they used gasoline instead of diesel fuel and when hit proper by a German 88mm they had a tendency to "light up like a Ronson lighter".

 

[kopcicle]

Frenchie

Belgian

 

[wired]

I dont know if I'd call it an abomination but it clearly wasn't the best choice in trials. The Army was always pretty bad at allowing political choices over sensibility in weapons procurement. That was probably their low point. Is it a good weapon? In semi, yes it is. In full auto you really have to fire one to appreciate how utterly uncontrolable they are. Hard weapon to service and keep clean. As an interim weapon between the M1 and the M16 they filled a slot but the FAL is/was a much better platform as a military arm. Easier to service and clean and much easier to control F/A . They have drawbacks too that are less related to their military usage. Scoping one is and always has been a major pain.

 

[osprey]

Seems both have some challenges when scoping, so I would consider that judgement as a wash.

 

[Provincial]

I seem to recall watching a documentary where they mentioned the troops referred to the M4 Sherman as a "Ronson" (as in a Ronson lighter) because they used gasoline instead of diesel fuel and when hit proper by a German 88mm they had a tendency to "light up like a Ronson lighter".

While gasoline is more flammable than diesel, and early models of the Sherman tended to burn, most of the fires were due to a hit in the ammunition storage area. Changing to a "wet" ammo storage, where the rounds were submerged in water, greatly reduced the fires.

As for the "Ronson" nickname, here as a link to a debunking post:

https://www.quora.com/Why-were-M4-S...an-wasn’t-adopted-until-after-the-war?share=1

More recent investigations have shown that casualties in Shermans were actually lower than infantry, and greatly exaggerated during the war. Mostly because of tank-on-tank battles with superior German tanks. Such battles were actually less common than thought, with mines and anti-tank weapons the most likely threats.

 

[The Heretic]

Maybe Mr Suave was beefed because the US chose to go it's own way with the Garand-derived "made here" M14 rifle. Considering the way the FAL was treated by the US military, one could cut him a little slack considering he was a Frenchie anyway.

It wasn't Saive who made the unfortunate comment about the M14, it was the author of the article (Travis Pike) and was solely the opinion of the author.

I've owned and shot an FN-FAL, an M1A and a Garand (a "Tanker" in .308 - which if you want to call anything an "abomination", that some people might - not me, I kind of liked it, even though Garands have their issues).

I think of the three the FN-FAL is significantly superior in a number of ways, but not without its own flaws (it sometimes does not do well in sandy environs). The FN-FAL is a LOT more versatile/adaptable and modular than the Garand & M1A/M14 - it is on the level of the H&K 91/G3 (I used to own an HK91 too) in that regards and more popular/adopted around the world. I also like the adjustable gas system.

The Garand & M1A/M14 have their issues.

I definitely do not like what it takes to clear a serious FTF/FTE jam on the Garand - of which I had a number because of the poor commercial adaption of it to .308 (I don't know if there were better commercial mods to .308 - probably were {Fulton Armory probably does it better?} - but the one I owned was not reliable and a PITA to clear).

The M1A I owned was a quite precise rifle, but it was heavily modified. But it seemed to me that due to the receiver design that debris (e.g., mud) could get packed behind the bolt in the rear of the receiver - although that never happened to me; I never used the rifle (or the Garand) in an field environ, only at the range - so I cannot claim that it happens in the field.

As for the whole process of the USA adopting the M14 vs. other rifles (including the FN-FAL); now yes, that was a cluster **** and was very much a NIH political fiasco that should not have happened, but did. It doesn't make the M1A/M14 an abomination though. The process of the AR-15/M16 adoption was too. There are some very good books on that history and the rifles:

Black Rifle M16 - Vol. 1 & 2 Set: Christopher R. Bartocci, R Blake Stevens, Edward C Ezell: Amazon.com: Books

Black Rifle M16 - Vol. 1 & 2 Set [Christopher R. Bartocci, R Blake Stevens, Edward C Ezell] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Black Rifle M16 - Vol. 1 & 2 Set

www.amazon.com

Signed, First Edition & Collectible copies of The Great Rifle Controversy: Search for the Ultimate Infantry Weapon from World War II Through Vietnam and Beyond | ThriftBooks

The FAL Rifle 1993: Volume 1-3: Stevens, R. Blake: 9780889351684: Amazon.com: Books

The FAL Rifle 1993: Volume 1-3 [Stevens, R. Blake] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The FAL Rifle 1993: Volume 1-3

www.amazon.com

US Rifle M14 - from John Garand to the M21: Stevens, R. Blake: 9780889351103: Amazon.com: Books

US Rifle M14 - from John Garand to the M21 [Stevens, R. Blake] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. US Rifle M14 - from John Garand to the M21

www.amazon.com

More on the Fabled Fal: a Companion to 'the Fal Rifle': R. Blake Stevens: 9780889355347: Amazon.com: Books

More on the Fabled Fal: a Companion to 'the Fal Rifle' [R. Blake Stevens] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. More on the Fabled Fal: a Companion to 'the Fal Rifle'

www.amazon.com

 

[The Heretic]

Scoping one is and always has been a major pain.

Any of the rifles that have removable action covers (FN-FAL, AK) or even just sheet metal actions (HK91/G3) are problematic. I have found that "Scout" scope mounts sometimes help, but it can be hard to find optics with the required eye relief (which can be solved by the manufacturers if the optic is simple magnification and not NVG/Thermal?).

I had an ARMS claw mount for my HK91 and could never get it to be stable no matter how tight I clamped it down. There are scout scope mounts for the FN-FAL and AK now - not sure about HK91.

 

[DunRanull]

Belgian

FROG... his very name denotes his ancestry, and the southern part of Beligum is Walloon i.e. French. No problem, just sayin. Some of my best friends are Francophile... All that said...
Both the BHP and the FAL are two of my very favorite small arms. I salute D Suave for that!

 

[The Heretic]

 

[titsonritz]

I've never cared for FAL sights and much prefer the ones on the "abomination."

The FN-FAL is a LOT more versatile/adaptable and modular than the Garand & M1A/M14 - it is on the level of the H&K 91/G3 (I used to own an HK91 too) in that regards and more popular/adopted around the world.

I don't about that...maybe back in the day of legacy battle rifles, but when you take into consideration the modern M14 chassis like the Sage International EBR series, Troy S.A.S.S. and VLTOR CASV-14 handguard & M1-S Stock systems...I don't think so.

 

[kopcicle]

the modern M14 chassis like the Sage International EBR series, Troy S.A.S.S. and VLTOR CASV-14 handguard & M1-S Stock systems...I don't think so.

...and it took how long to arrive at that?
The FAL was a plug and play dispenser of .308 party favors since it's inception.
. Countless countries throughout the free world adopted the FAL in its many variations for over 50 years and still counting.

Think what you will and I'll think what want. No offense intended. It is after all, opinion.