Firearm & Gun Forum -

Firearm & Gun Forum - (
-   FAL Forum (
-   -   British L1A1 (

mrmac 03-22-2013 02:33 PM

British L1A1
I picked one up at a gun show. Anyone know anything about this gun?

unclebear 03-22-2013 02:52 PM

Look like an FN FAL, probably produced under contract by the british gov and given the designation. If I remember they were used by both sides in the Falklands war the british where armed with the semi auto L1A1 and the Argentinians were armed with the full auto/ semi auto FALs. Other then that I'm sure someone else will come along with more info.

DFlynt 03-27-2013 03:55 AM

Had an L1A1, nice rifles it's basically an FN FAL built on what is called the inch pattern as opposed to the metric pattern that most other FAL's are built on.

teenahlake 03-28-2013 03:57 AM

also uses a slightly different magazine, you can use metric but it's a bit sloppy

tazzman55 02-18-2015 01:57 PM

I have not been able to find inch pattern magazines for my L1A1, and those that I have asked about it have not given me much hope of finding them.

Sent from my iPad using Firearms Talk

luckey37 02-18-2015 06:01 PM

Who made the upper receiver? Most of the L1a1 were inch parts kits installed on metric receivers. So it all depends on the upper

Sent from my iPad using Firearms Talk

4thPointOfContact 02-18-2015 09:58 PM

Very few actual L1A1's were imported (if any) but there were quite a few L1A1 barrels and stocks attached to metric uppers and Inch lowers. (NOT that that is necessarily a bad thing.) The two major importers/mfg's I can think of were Hesse and Entreprise. Hesse didn't have a stellar reputation, Entreprise was occasionally spotty.

Entreprise usually had Type-3 uppers, less expensive than Type-1 or -2 because much less machining was done. You can see how plain the magazine well looks with no lightening cuts.

There are some advantages to Imperial/Inch FAL's (being that the UK looked at the Metric version and decided what they needed.)
1) The magazine release appears to be more clunky, requiring the left hand to release instead of just the right index finger. Requiring the left hand insures the magazine is easier to retain and not lost on the battlefield (it wasn't designed to be disposable like the AR magazine was).
2) The Inch safety is usually noted to be easier to reach than the Metric one.
3) Inch and Metric bolt hold opens are interchangeable, although most Inch bho's won't lock back it's an easy replacement.
4) If the receiver is actually Metric, metric magazines are much easier to obtain than Inch ones and will fit any magazine pouch interchangeably.
5) The Inch rear sight folds, which some people don't care for, there are companies that are making 'paratroop' rear sights for the L1A1. Someone has even adopted the H&K diopter sight to the FN - RobertRTG.
6) Inch upper receivers can accept the Canadian top cover which allows stripper clips to be used. Not that it's super useful, but it's fun to see an FAL that's completely open up top.

If at all in doubt if you have a Metric or Imperial receiver, check the photo below.
Imperial on the left has a big honkin' cut out for the magazine whereas the Metric has a dainty little half moon (which works just as well).

tazzman55 02-19-2015 03:24 AM

Thanks. Mine has the big honking cut out. So it must be an inch pattern rifle.

Sent from my iPad using Firearms Talk

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:13 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.