X VS Y VS Z

I don't particularly care for the M1A.

I think I've mentioned it before.

But...

Proponents of one 7.62 battle rifle or another tend to have the one we love and despise the others.

We have lists!  Lists of all the things that our bestie does that the others don't.

A few of us love one because it stood us well when it mattered.  Applied rather than theoretical.

A few of us hate one because it didn't work when it was needed.  Applied rather than theoretical.

Some of us are flat wrong because they judge an issue weapon's capabilities based on the example set by a commercial model.  Being wrong from this goes both ways.

Combat record matters to a degree, but because commercial guns are not the same as issue, it might not matter as much as some ascribe.

That my choice stood me well when it mattered, fared well for many in combat in varied environments and was widely issued matters not one whit to someone who's experience with one of the others matches mine.

In reality the M14/FAL/G3 debate is a debate about the margins.  One is not particularly more reliable than the others under real conditions.  One is not particularly more accurate than the others under real conditions with a typical infantryman on the trigger.  They are all similarly heavy and powerful.  They all have features that endear them to one individual or another.  All of them can be made to fail if you abuse them enough.  A system of abuse that lets one pass and the others fail can be devised for any of them.