The FN C1 - Service Rifle of the Past (and C7A1 vs FN C1A1)

[KevinB]

A lot of units used electric pencils to write the Ser# on the bolt/carrier - it served as an accountability issue, remember the pictures of an AR-15 Semi-Auto Carrier, and a C7/C8 Auto Carrier, and how they where parnoid soldiers where going to swap bolts in the early days for the C7...


Personally have been on the receiving end of extra's for a dirty bolt, I prefer matching, as it ensure that some one does not go shopping for a clean bolt and screw someone with their dirty one.

Also for a purely lifespan wise outlook, bolts and barrel extensions will wear together to a certain point to mesh.  If you keep swapping bolts, you really do prematurely age them when you swap them. 
  Yes they can be swapped, but they really should not be unless its an emergency.

 

[SeanNewman]

...Personally have been on the receiving end of extra's for a dirty bolt, I prefer matching, as it ensure that some one does not go shopping for a clean bolt and screw someone with their dirty one..

If that's the issue then of course.  I 100% agree that in the case of accountability it's important to keep matching numbers and I don't think anyone would challenge you on that.

My question above was more about functionality because everything I knew pointed to there being no mechanical issues with swapping parts like this on the M16/C7 vice the .50 cal where it really is verboten.

 

[TCBF]

... Personally have been on the receiving end of extra's for a dirty bolt, I prefer matching, as it ensure that some one does not go shopping for a clean bolt and screw someone with their dirty one....

-  1988, Lahr, Cdn Boeselager Team: stoppages galore with C7s. Bolt carriers and bolts were filthy.  I got some baggage tags from the AMU, and said "As ye clean, so shall ye shoot!" Next range had two stoppages in 1,000 rounds.

 

[KevinB]

I hear 5-10% of lifespan banded about about the decrease caused by swapping bolts.

I have zero knowledge if it is true, it kinda makes sence to me, but the other parts of me wonders if its life some of the other wives tales about bolt ring misalignment etc.

 

[zuicy227]

I was in the Cadets in 1986, we used the FN's  in Ipperwash, ONT. ,on the range was awesome  and even working the butts. I wish i could own one, i don't care how old they are or how heavy they are , i want one , someone give me  a deal, i'll treat her good.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I was in the Cadets in 1986, we used the FN's  in Ipperwash, ONT. ,on the range was awesome  and even working the butts. I wish i could own one, i don't care how old they are or how heavy they are , i want one , someone give me  a deal, i'll treat her good.

Unless you have a PAL with 12.5 Prohibited, aquisition & possession, you're out of luck and can't legally have one.

 

[Drobb]

Quick from C1 users would the rifle if been more useful if equipped built in bipod like the Austrian FAL?

Thanks

 

[NavyShooter]

Drobb,

Can you relate this query to your thread about the FNC2?  A remarkably similar rifle which did have a bipod?

NS

 

[expwor]

Quick from C1 users would the rifle if been more useful if equipped built in bipod like the Austrian FAL?

Thanks

More useful compared to what?  You'd need shooters who have shot the FN C1 and the FAL to compare the two
As the rifle that was most everyone's personal weapon (to the best of my limited CF knowledge) back in the day it seemed pretty useful to me. And that's with the caveat I had limited exposure to rifles (.22 only) until Militia
And trivia, my FN (when with the PWOR) was made in 1959, no big deal except I was born in 1961, my rifle was older than me.
Sorry waxing nostalgic now

Tom

 

[Colin Parkinson]

You mean like this? 8)

It's great when you want to shoot and drink beer at the same time.

 

[Rifleman62]

On our Junior NCO crse in Shilo, the summer of 1963, the wpns we trained on were the Sten, BREN, the new Sterling, 3.5 inch rocket launcher, 36 grenade and brand new FN C1's in their cardboard boxes. It took forever to clean the new FN's.

Add: FN C1's with the notch behind the rear sight.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I got to fire the 3.5" the ammunition so old it wobbled through the air! As for the C2, never thought much of it as a weapon, neither one thing or another. You had to limit your fire to preserve the barrel, easy to burn your hands on it. It was very accurate, the long mag was a pain to shoot with in prone and reload.

The FNC1 is already a heavy rifle, a bipod just adds to that and it would be a bugger to carry through the bush with it on. Better to shoot from a sandbag that at least offers some protection.

 

[Rifleman62]

With the 3.5, you could load the rocket right pass the contact latches and then have to gently tip the launcher forward to get the round. We were using I think, 1954 ammo on our Group 1 Infantry crse in the summer of 1964. Every third rocket was a misfire that after going through the Misfire drills had to be unloaded and deposited in designated area. I still have a photo of the blown in place.

You had to limit your fire to preserve the barrel, easy to burn your hands on it.

On the BREN, you never burnt your finger tips closing the ejection cover underneath the wpn twice.

 

[Loachman]

I got to fire the 3.5" the ammunition so old it wobbled through the air!

Muzzle velocity was a whopping 340 feet per second, so, yes, one could watch the rounds lazily coast downrange.

There was also a little-known anti-bunker version with a three-round gravity-fed magazine.

 

[AlDazz]

I have used the C1 and C7. The FN is the one I remember the best as it always seemed more battle worthy. I also remember the serviceability problems as they started to age. I always hoped they put the best in war stocks in case they were ever needed again. 

 

[SeaKingTacco]

The entire FN stock was cut for scrap a few years ago.

 

[Loachman]

I forgot about my last post.

Nobody cares enough to ask about the anti-bunker 3.5 inch rocket launcer with three-round gravity-fed magazine...

 

[AlDazz]

Last fired that fine antitank weapon in 1978. If there was a 3 round magazine it one in the tube and one in each pocket.  I remember it did wobble in flight and was surprised when it hit the hard target.

 

[Loachman]

The first (bottom) two rounds in the magazine had wooden warheads. The third (top) round had a standard HEAT warhed.

The technique involved working one's way around to the back of the bunker, then firing the first two rounds at the door in rapid succession.

When an occupant opened the door to see who had just made a loud "knock-knock" sound, one could then fire the HEAT round directly inside.

 

[NavyShooter]

Heh.

Wish I had a mag-fed Bazooka.