Parts Build or DSA Built FAL

>>33079190
Everyone is going to tell you to do a parts build, mostly because they are fetishists and fantasy purists. 90% of the people who hate on DSA have never seen an FAL IRL. 99% have never fired one. This is /k/ after all. Your chances of pushing your gun to the limit where cast vs. milled is going to make an iota of difference are somewhere between slim and none.

I have an SA58 that the weirdo I bought it off tried customizing to be as accurate as possible: heavy barrel, etc. It shoots maybe 1.5 MOA with irons. DSAs can be very accurate, reliable firearms

Also, hate to break it to you, but the "random guy on a forum" is usually your best bet

>>33079249
Thanks anon. I figured as much with DSA, like I have been searching around and I really had not found any issues with them. The only people I found who had problems with them were random people on forums....who just so happened to be selling some FALs they were building themselves. Plus going off of what you said I feel as though modern casting techniques are probably better than milling processes from the 195-60's.

Why in the ever living fuck was he trying to do that?

Yea I was just trying to find a consistent source of parts or something like that. Yea I think I might just accept my rifle not having a carry handle but at least having a warranty.

I would also like to know

>>33079323
I'm planning on buying a DSA Fal when I can spare the money. Like the other guys said the odds of shooting the gun so much that milled vs. cast receiver starts to matter are low, and if the receiver does start to wear out you can replace it for a few hundred dollars.

I know 2 guys with DSA's that have issues, neither will work with steel reliably at all and 1 has issues with some brass too.

How is the rpd from them? I've been looking at one lately and would like a professional opinion from /k/.