FNC1 - Years In Service

[FJAG]

Moi with my FNC1 in 69.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I am doing research for a project on the FNC1. Trying to nail down years in service with the CF. PPCLI RHQ has 1955-1988 (makes sense as Reg Force Combat Arms switched to C7 in 87/88 - that's when I first got issued the C7). The Queens Own Rifles website/history indicates the started transitioning to C7 in Jan 1990. I have also "heard" the last Reserve Units switched finally in 1992. So years in Service I have is 1955 to 1992?
Can any of the "old hands" confirm or deny?

Not in use but we had pallets upon pallets of them in preservation for war stock at the local base supply until very recently, we also had the same for the SMGs.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I'm surprised to hear about the kick from the 7.62x51.

Ive hunted with .308 most my life and never really flinched at the recoil. But perhaps my Win M70 is just that much of a better quality.

 

[dapaterson]

I'm surprised to hear about the kick from the 7.62x51.

Ive hunted with .308 most my life and never really flinched at the recoil. But perhaps my Win M70 is just that much of a better quality.

The FN has a manual gas regulator, with settings from 1 to 10. Properly adjusted, the kick was greater than a C7, but not excessive.

Improperly adjusted , well, the kick was significant.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The FN has a manual gas regulator, with settings from 1 to 10. Properly adjusted, the kick was greater than a C7, but not excessive.

Improperly adjusted , well, the kick was significant.

I've never had one in my hands... So this is all very interesting.

I don't find the C7 has any kick at all... Or very little...

 

[KevinB]

The FN has a manual gas regulator, with settings from 1 to 10. Properly adjusted, the kick was greater than a C7, but not excessive.

Improperly adjusted , well, the kick was significant.

0-12 IRRC (plus the gas plug that could be set of grenade launcher) and no gas back or bleed off. (It’s been a while since I fiddled with one)

The other very significant issue was the stock.
The M16 series is a straight line recoil, straight line stock.
The FAL did not have straight line recoil (breach block and carrier moved straight line but the tail went down at a 25ish degree angle - and the wood stock was inlet — so you could end up eating the stock fairly unpleasantly if you had the wrong length of stock.
And the Chipmunk Cheeks became famous from it.

The CAF had 4 stock lengths (Short, Normal, Long and XL) , but very very few units ever actually fit the rifles to people.

 

[Halifax Tar]

0-12 IRRC (plus the gas plug that could be set of grenade launcher) and no gas back or bleed off. (It’s been a while since I fiddled with one)

The other very significant issue was the stock.
The M16 series is a straight line recoil, straight line stock.
The FAL did not have straight line recoil (breach block and carrier moved straight line but the tail went down at a 25ish degree angle - and the wood stock was inlet — so you could end up eating the stock fairly unpleasantly if you had the wrong length of stock.
And the Chipmunk Cheeks became famous from it.

The CAF had 4 stock lengths (Short, Normal, Long and XL) , but very very few units ever actually fit the rifles to people.

We might be drifting a bit, but I have it in my head the C7 could be fitted with different stock lengths... Am I just making that up ? But like the FN almost no one did that...

Now most are collapsible so its not really an issue.

 

[NavyShooter]

The C-7 did have 3x different stock lengths available. The 'standard' size, the 'short' version and the long version was about a 1" insert plate that went in.

We used them on the shooting teams, as everyone had their own rifles.

I'll dig up some pics of my FN to share later. I used to have 3 - see attached. I sold off the Brit and the Indian ones a few years back to another collector. The SUIT sight brought a good return on investment as well.

NS

 

[NavyShooter]

https://www.milsurps.com/threads/article-fn-1a1-vs-fn-l1a1-vs-fn-c1a1.26033/

Full Pictoral comparison.

 

[FJAG]

I've never had one in my hands... So this is all very interesting.

I don't find the C7 has any kick at all... Or very little...

I think how one feels the recoil of any rifle is a very personal thing. During my earlier FN days I felt the recoil wasn't that big a deal and always looked down at the folks who whinged about their shoulders and cheeks. (If you haven't noticed I'm very judgemental) A lot of the bad shooting in those days was from folks anticipating the shot and flinching with each trigger pull. One of my very early concentrations had me spend two weeks as the C2 man in a rifle section. A C2 on full auto is an interesting experience but not as demanding as a section commander who is constantly changing the C2 group from one flank to the other during an advance.

There was a long break between when I fired my last FN round until I was out on the ranges with a C7. While not hard at all, I found the C7s recoil more than I had expected it to be. It wasn't quite the powder puff that I had expected.

 

[dapaterson]

I recall the planning for a range day in NDHQ in the early 2000s with a senior officer being very excited to fire the new rifle. I tried to reassure him that the change from an iron sight to the optical sight wasn't significant at 100m.

That's when I learned that to him the new rifle was the C7, not the C7A1.