DS Arms got some billet titanium and decided to make a batch of titanium receivers and other parts. This turned out to be a nightmarish amount of work, and two of the receivers had to be scrapped, leaving only 10 completed. They also made a number of other titanium parts, including flash hiders (which this rifle has) and gas blocks (which this one does not). Between the titanium and aluminum parts and the choice of a lightweight configuration, this FAL tips the scale at just UNDER 7.5 pounds (3.4kg). That is a very remarkable achievement, and does so without making sacrifices in durability or features. It is slightly sharper recoiling than a standard 50.00 FAL (which weighs almost 10 pounds / 4.5kg), but not uncomfortable at all – the recoil is less than I had expected.
Unfortunately DSA does not appear to have any plans to make addition titanium receivers, but this small batch serves as a very cool proof of concept!
I have a heavy barrel FN FAL that shoots like a dream but the weight is it’s only drawback. A much lighter one would be the icing on the cake.
I have a heavy barrel FN FAL that shoots like a dream but the weight is it’s only drawback. A much lighter one would be the icing on the cake.
ok, now let’s see it with carbon fiber furniture.
Now, they need to make a titanium lower – in Para configuration!
For what we’re paying for the current Army service rifle, this this makes great economic sense. A FAL is a little heavy, but gets away with it because it’s well-balanced (and pretty). After optics and a grenade launcher are added, a titanium FAL is still a really attractive option.
“(…)3.4kg(…)That is a very remarkable achievement, and does so without making sacrifices in durability or features. It is slightly sharper recoiling than a standard 50.00 FAL(…)weighs almost (…)4.5kg(…)but not uncomfortable at all – the recoil is less than I had expected.”
Change from default FN FAL is undeniable, yet it was convoluted way to get in result self-loading 7,62×51 mm with weight comparable to Browning BAR 1960s hunting rifle (NOT to be confused with BAR machine gun used by United Nations forces during Korean War).
https://www.guns.com/news/reviews/browning-bar-rifle-review gives following data
Weight 7.8 pounds
Barrel Length 22.75 inches
Capacity: 4+1 (.30-06 Springfield)
This gives around 3.5 kg, which strictly speaking is more than 3.4 kg, but with noticeable longer barrel than 16 inches AND using bigger cartridge (7,62×63 rather than 7,62×51) AND without striving for shaving mass from components (e.g. furniture is wooden).
All props to DSA, but… Let’s be honest: As much as I appreciate the FN FAL as what it is, it’s still a transitional mid-century rifle based on something from earlier on, the FN-49.
As such, lightening it up by building significant parts of it in titanium isn’t really addressing the issue inherent to the design, namely that the tilt-locking bolt requires more material and mass in the receiver than is really necessary.
I mean, I love my FAL, but… It’s a little pointless to “improve” an inherently heavy design by subbing out the materials involved, at great expense. It’s like with the M240… OK, great: Build the damn things out of titanium, and you get something that’s vaguely portable. However, why the hell don’t you take a look at the PKM, and try to figure out how to emulate that design, instead? It’d be exponentially cheaper, and a lot easier to do.
I honestly don’t get a lot of this crap. Why? Why the hell are you going to such great lengths to address design issues by changing materials, instead of looking a few layers deeper into the design, and actually designing around your problems? This reminds me of the whole MG45 vs. SIG 710 series. The MG45 was going to be a stamped sheet-metal design optimized for mass production; the Swiss took that concept, and then executed it in machined steel. Why? Was anything gained? Having examined one, I’m not sure they did achieve anything at all with that change.
You can do everything you accomplish in this by going to a 7.62 AR-10 based design, so… Why? Same with the titanium M240: What’s the damn point of it, when you can’t affordably manufacture the weapons in this lighter material? I mean, c’mon… How much does it cost to stamp a PKM receiver vs. the titanium machining on the lightweight M240? Is it even vaguely in the same ballpark? I’ll lay you long odds that you’d probably be able to stand up manufacture of the stamping dies here in the US for a lot less, if only you could get your ego around adopting a Soviet design.
One that I hate admitting is pretty much exponentially superior to anything in its class, in terms of weight and affordability.
Boutique and cool ain’t the way to go, folks. Lose the ego, do the necessary.
“(…)look at the PKM, and try to figure out how to emulate that design(…)”
I was must inform that this apparently was done recently in Türkiye (which has history of at least hundred of years of rivaling Russia) and this yielded Modern Makineli Tüfek
https://modernfirearms.net/en/machineguns/turkey-machineguns/mmt-2/ puts its followed way
It must be noted that Turkish military uses many types of machine guns besides aforementioned MG-3, including American M60E3, Belgian FN MAG (which is also manufactured by MKE as PMT-76) and Russian Kalashnikov PKM variants, procured from East Germany and Bulgaria. Apparently, the light weight and high reliability of the Russian gun so impressed Turkish military, that MKE ventured to produce a domestic version of this design, adapted to 7.62x51mm NATO ammunition.
So if you want machine gun which internally is akin to PKM AND externally cooperate with modern gizmos (Picatinny rail) AND you do not have personal grudge against Türkiye then use Modern Makineli Tüfek
The Poles already have in service the UKM 2000.
However, the western design that was equal or superior to the PK without copying it, to me, was the SIG MG 710-3.
Ok, it could have been more stamped and less machined (at the time SIG was still Swiss), but, on paper, it had MG42/MG3 volume of fire and ease of barrel change in PK weight and length (on paper because it saw too little use to have real life statistics, but, being a roller delayed action with a MG42 feed system, there’s no reason for it to not work).
It’s a “Gucci FAL” Made for the sake of demonstrating it can be made, but never intended for mass production.
A 3.4 kg rifle recoil will be about 30 % larger than its 4.5 kg counterpart firing the same cartridge. A lighter weapon as an end in itself is another example of “no free lunch”.
Add to that the ‘nightmarish amount of work’ Ian mentions. Would that be interest to producing the rifles on a large scale? I’m not sure the ‘proof of concept’ translates into a rifle a military needs to have
Now let’s see one in scandium.
Magnesium would be more dramatic. 🙂
“Magnesium(…)”
Keep calm, this already was done by Scotti, see
article https://alternathistory.ru/aviatsionnye-pulemety-skotti/
photo https://alternathistory.ru/files/users/user32336/%20%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9%20%D0%BF%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%82%20%D0%A1%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%82%D0%B8%20%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%206.5%20%D0%BC%D0%BC%20%D0%B8%D0%B7%20%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE%20%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B0%20%D0%AD%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD.jpg
this is ultralight Scotti 6,5 mm aviation machine gun made from Elektronmetall (which is magnesium alloy)
The stock is cast Elektron.
The receiver, visually, is a practically standard Scotti Model X receiver.
2nd link, slick looking thing
The use of titanium leads to severe corrosion of ALL other metals. Read about the titanium Russian submarines, which are no longer produced. Even brass parts corrode when in contact with titanium.
Hmmm… Metal science etc eh, cheers if that is accurate. Hello, Vladislav – Are you into metal science etc? Do you know anything about Nitinol for example… Be great if you do, I have 100 questions.
Could try and “furgerrubootit” it, essentially; what we do is try to turn this into the Haenal stg 45 with the gas delay, pop one of those big oz mags on and a tripod and use it as a Bren gun? No? Thought it was a good idea, personally.