FN FAL

[daftandbarmy]

I've been everywhere, man:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9dAUkPKIkY&feature=youtu.be

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Man, I loved that rifle. I'd take it today, over our current issue, in a heartbeat.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Man, I loved that rifle. I'd take it today, over our current issue, in a heartbeat.

Yup, hard to beat the ol' blunderbuss. We used to call it the Timex rifle: Takes a licking and keeps on ticking...

 

[Dissident]

Ahh, good ol' nostalgia. You guys are cute.

I've been saying for a while than even when we switch over to 40MW plasma rifle, you can take my M16FOW rifle away from my cold dead hands.

 

[expwor]

Learning how to shoot on a FNC1A1 Rifle (not gun LOL) Serial # 5L0541 made shooting and not just qualifying, but getting marksman (191/200) on an AR-15 when I joined Correctional Service Of Canada
easy.  The AR-15 is like a pop gun in comparison to the FN
Glad I learned to shoot on the FN

Tom

 

[jollyjacktar]

A brand new FNC1 would have been nice, but they were pretty well clapped out by the time I was using them in the 80's.  Now, my SMG... I loved her.  But yeah, a nice new FNC1 would be better than a C7 most any time.

 

[medicineman]

My C1 was pretty decent for a 1956 model anything - hit a 1/2" group on the 25m range in Cornholis and was in the top 10 in my platoon on the real range.  Weird thing - had a hard time adjusting to the C7 when I got posted to Calgary, largely I think because of the weight and recoil difference.

MM 

 

[Bass ackwards]

I somehow snapped the pistol grip off of the one I was issued. I was assigned another rifle and roughly three weeks later, the ejector broke off that one.

In spite of that, I did really like the weapon and was impressed with its range and accuracy.

 

[my72jeep]

I miss not hearing the return spring twanging with every shot.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I miss not hearing the return spring twanging with every shot.

Here's your fix  :camo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciFnTiacaDU&index=12&list=PL1201241573903DAF

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0mIm50Od8U&list=PL1201241573903DAF&index=13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvB9LzziqfA&index=14&list=PL1201241573903DAF

 

[OldTanker]

Brings back lots of memories. I did my basic training in 1970 and my section instructor was an old corporal in the PPCLI (although he would tell you he was really QOR). He was as rugged and rough as you would expect of a "career corporal" of that era but could he ever instruct. I remember every lesson he taught us about the FNC1A1. I'm sure if I had one put in my hands today, and I haven't touched one since 1994 (an Argentinian model, in Cyprus), I could still strip, assemble and do the test after assembly, probably with my eyes closed. Whats the new term, muscle memory? I don't know if that's what I have, but that old Corporal drilled the FN into my soul.

 

[a_majoor]

Reality check. While the FN was a very rugged battle rifle, it was also heavy and bulky, hit the shooter like a mule (especially if you were not gripping the weapon correctly) and you carried much less ammunition because of the weight and size of the 7.62 X 51 round. Imagine carrying a chest rig with 10 loaded FN magazines in today's type of war.

While not against 7.62 battle rifles in principle (and recognizing that the battlespace is evolving to where this type of rifle is becoming useful again), resurrecting the FN, or other contemporary battle rifles (M-14, G-3, CETME etc.) might not be the best solution. A modern weapon with composite furniture, rail system, collapsable stocks, possibly bull pup layouts for compactness while maintaining a full length barrel would be my choice for such a weapon today. The picture is of an SRSS rifle based on an M-14 action

 

[Kirkhill]

Reality check. While the FN was a very rugged battle rifle, it was also heavy and bulky, hit the shooter like a mule (especially if you were not gripping the weapon correctly) and you carried much less ammunition because of the weight and size of the 7.62 X 51 round. Imagine carrying a chest rig with 10 loaded FN magazines in today's type of war.

Imagine having an assured "neutralization" with a double tap.....  How many "stowed kills" are there in your 10x 5.56 mags vs our old 4x 7.62 mags and a bandolier?  300 rds 5.56 vs 140 rds 7.62 ball plus 10 rds tracer.

:warstory: >

 

[daftandbarmy]

Imagine having an assured "neutralization" with a double tap.....  How many "stowed kills" are there in your 10x 5.56 mags vs our old 4x 7.62 mags and a bandolier?  300 rds 5.56 vs 140 rds 7.62 ball plus 10 rds tracer.

:warstory: >

I happily carried 10 x mags for the SLR in NI with a cheerful little mixture of ball, trace & AP... a nice little medley.

Pals who fought in the Falklands went into action with 17 mags. 1 on the weapon and 16 carried in the fighting order and smock pockets. They used all of it... several times of course.

 

[Loachman]

The extra weight of weapon and ammunition was balanced by the reduced weight of water and body armour.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The extra weight of weapon and ammunition was balanced by the reduced weight of water and body armour.

And superior, through selection processes resulting in world leading fitness levels (and humility  ;D)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_company

 

[dapaterson]

Fighting Argie conscripts helped too.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Reality check. While the FN was a very rugged battle rifle, it was also heavy and bulky, hit the shooter like a mule (especially if you were not gripping the weapon correctly) and you carried much less ammunition because of the weight and size of the 7.62 X 51 round. Imagine carrying a chest rig with 10 loaded FN magazines in today's type of war.

While not against 7.62 battle rifles in principle (and recognizing that the battlespace is evolving to where this type of rifle is becoming useful again), resurrecting the FN, or other contemporary battle rifles (M-14, G-3, CETME etc.) might not be the best solution. A modern weapon with composite furniture, rail system, collapsable stocks, possibly bull pup layouts for compactness while maintaining a full length barrel would be my choice for such a weapon today. The picture is of an SRSS rifle based on an M-14 action

Here's your reality check. You're already carrying 80 lb+ of gear. What's a few more pounds. Oh, and what about the designated marksman that's already carrying a 7.62?

BTW, I already own a 7.62 bullpup with an 18.5" barrel. They are already out there.

Here's a picture of my sister with my 7.62 bullpup and my 15 shot 12 gauge bullpup. Both non-restricted and not registered.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Here's your reality check. You're already carrying 80 lb+ of gear. What's a few more pounds. Oh, and what about the designated marksman that's already carrying a 7.62?

BTW, I already own a 7.62 bullpup with an 18.5" barrel. They are already out there.

Here's a picture of my sister with my 7.62 bullpup and my 15 shot 12 gauge bullpup. Both non-restricted and not registered.

That is definitely the way ahead. All they need to add is a bayonet.

BTW, does your sister outshoot you very often?  ;D

 

[NavyShooter]

http://www.milsurps.com/content.php?r=156-FN-1A1-vs.-FN-L1A1-vs.-FN-C1A1

Those rifles (plus an Aussie that I've more recently added) are in my basement right now.

NS