How much work and $$ to put a folder on a FAL?

[goon]

Sorry to post such a seemingly dumb question, but I did use the search to no avail.
As I understand it, to put a folder on my FAL I'd need a para bolt carrier and recoil springs, a different reciever cover, the folding stock, and possibly a rear sight.

Some info I have turned up is that the para reciever cover has "ears" that need ground off or that mods would have to be made to my lower.
If at all possible, I'd like to do a parts swap and just leave it at that since I don't want to ship my rifle off and go through all that trouble.
So I guess my questions are:

Can this be done by just swapping parts? Any problems with that?
How much will it cost?
Where do I look for parts? (Already checked DSA but I don't really even know what I'm looking for.)
When we talk about modifying my reciever, what exactly does that mean and is in necessary?

 

[Still 2 Many Choices!?]

http://dsarms.com/prodinfo.asp?number=P120USSETN

We just had a thread on this not two days ago...This link has EVERYTHING needed to convert to a para... 459.95 to get the one with the Para scope mounted dust cover, and 394.95 to convert without the rail for a scope. You won't even need to "cut the ears" off of anything... HTH.

Still 2 Many Choices!?

 

[Bwana John]

1. Can this be done by just swapping parts? Any problems with that?
2. How much will it cost?
3. Where do I look for parts? (Already checked DSA but I don't really even know what I'm looking for.)
4. When we talk about modifying my reciever, what exactly does that mean and is in necessary?

Ok Ill try.

1. After buying the Para bolt carrier, para recoil springs, para top cover, para lower, para stock and para rear sight all the rest of the parts swap out from your old lower. You can alter your exisiting lower and sight, but its easyer to just buy those parts.

2. ~ $350-$500+

3. DSA, Falcon Arms, Dealers Wharehouse(?), and FALFiles marketplace.

4. The para topcover is under a lot more tension than the rifles top cover because of containing the recoil springs. To contain this extra tension the front of the top cover is longer and contained by a extra cut in the receiver. Many people just grind the extra nose off the para top cover, the right way to do it is have the receiver modified (~$50+)

AND after putting out all this money, many people dont like how the rifle handles, it's heaver, the cheekweld is not as good, and it seems to have more recoil.:banghead:
BUT the rifle is soooo much more cool.

 

[Bwana John]

This link has EVERYTHING needed to convert to a para... 459.95 to get the one with the Para scope mounted dust cover, and 394.95 to convert without the rail for a scope.

Good Luck with DSA, average wait time is ~6-9 months

 

[Still 2 Many Choices!?]

Yes there is a horrific wait time for DSA, but you can use the time to put up the money for the conversion... Atleast thats what i plan to do ... Or I may just order a second rifle already a Para...

Still 2 Many Choices!?

 

[goon]

Thanks.
I did a search on here and did find a link about this but the link didn't work. But I found this kit after searching on DSA's site. The only thing is that I won't need the alloy lower because other than a little more weight, there isn't anything wrong with the lower that's already on my FAL. Will a standard lower work with a para folder?
That would take about $125 off of their price.
For about $275 it might not be a bad option.

About the nose at the front of the cover - I understand why it's there now.
How many of you guys have the version either without that nose or have ground the nose off and has it caused you any headaches?
From what I can understand, the biggest thing it would do is keep the cover from sliding back under the tension of the spring during reassembly. It would seem that once it's back together it wouldn't really make any difference because the cover isn't going anywhere since the lower reciever is keeping it in place.
Is that correct?
That issue might be mitigated by just making the cover fit a little tighter (mine is TIGHT already).

It's not that I'm against getting the reciever modified. But one thing I am against is shipping my rifle off to have someone else work on it. Just don't need the hassles associated with that and the gunsmiths in my area could handle shortening a barrel, drilling and tapping, etc but probably not that. So I'd prefer to get around it if at all possible.

 

[Bwana John]

Will a standard lower work with a para folder?

Only after modification (taking off tange, ect..)

From what I can understand, the biggest thing it would do is keep the cover from sliding back under the tension of the spring during reassembly. It would seem that once it's back together it wouldn't really make any difference because the cover isn't going anywhere since the lower reciever is keeping it in place.
Is that correct?

No, It keeps the top cover captive in the vertical direction, after closing the lower receiver.

Just don't need the hassles associated with that and the gunsmiths in my area could handle shortening a barrel, drilling and tapping, etc but probably not that.

All it takes its the correct tool, ~$30, any "gunsmith" should be able to do it.

 

[Bwana John]

Here is a link to Falcon Arms. Their parts are susposed to not be as well finished, but they are a lot cheaper.
http://www.falconarms.com/xcart/home.php
You can also find beat up South African lower/stock combos for ~$150
The "Best" that I have seen were new Imbel para kits.
I have seen real Belgiun Bolt carriers also.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

But, kinda' like a Vegas Showgirl, they're REALLY COOL to look at. But living with one day-in/day-out is a different story. Most of the favorable handling characteristics of an FN FAL are lost when converted to a Para. I simply HAD to have one, so I did. And eventually swapped everything back over to a fixed stock, because it shot & handled SOOOO much better that way. My opinion? An FN FAL makes a poor choice for a long-barreled pistol. Goon, save your bucks for that AR we've talked about!

 

[Coronach]

But, kinda' like a Vegas Showgirl, they're REALLY COOL to look at. But living with one day-in/day-out is a different story.

I've never lived with a Vegas showgirl, but I'm willing to give it a shot.



Somehow, I don't think my wife will approve.



In all seriousness, how does turning a FAL to a Para adversely affect handling? Any added weight is to the rear, and every standard-length FAL I've handled is nose-heavy. (cheekweld I can understand)

Thanks,

Mike

 

[goon]

GT - thanks. I have been really considering both options. I think the AR is probably going to be the "solution".
I was trying to find a way for one rifle to do everything I want one to do.
I wanted decent power, common ammuntion, and compact enough that in the event of some kind of evacuation I could take my rifle with me. I also would have preferred to only worry about one type of ammo.
But the more I think about this, it doesn't make sense to do that. Trying to make my FAL do that seems like taking the lid off the trunk of a car and trying to use it as a pick-up: it might sort of work but not nearly as well as if I'd just bought a pick-up truck in the first place.
Plus when you add in that I'll probably be looking at about $400 to do this right and I'll risk screwing up a good reliable rifle in the process, it does seem like it would make more sense to spend just a little more ($500-600) and put an AR together with it.
I'm coming to the realization that they really are different tools that just happen to have some overlap.

 

[Bwana John]

But, kinda' like a Vegas Showgirl, they're REALLY COOL to look at. But living with one day-in/day-out is a different story.

Yep. I have the Para to look at and drool over, I dont shoot it much. (It does fit under a trenchcoat pretty well)

If you have to unass quickly from a APC or jump out of a perfectly good airplane I suspose they work pretty well.

The one Para part that is really worth it is the Para rear sight, I have one on all my FALs.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

Coronach, I HAD a leggy, beautiful HFMW ("High-Fashioned Model Wife") as a younger man. But, like some of my Porsches, the upkeep was a KILLER! The New & Improved Mrs. Ghost Tracker is an Atlanta Peach who shoots & fishes, cooks like Momma, and makes me happy just thinkin' about her. I hope all y'all do (or have done) as well.

The FN-FAL is, to me, the top choice in .308 Battle Rifles. Tough, well-balanced, easily maintained, easily controlled, easy to shoot well. When folded, the Para stock puts a big, heavy, chunky mechanical locking device directly above my trigger finger. The balance & control-ability goes to that of a sledge hammer. It's a chore to open & close the stock. As mentioned, the cheek weld is all but non-existant. In general, to me the benefits of the Para stock are far out-weighed by the liabilities. If you want a short, handy gun...buy one. But don't try & turn an FAL into one.

Oh, and the HFMW is now on husband #6! And it's not lookin' too good for him.