FN F2000 Forward Ejecting Shell Casings, Good or Bad?

reply to post by tooo many pills[/url]

There in lies the problem. People who play video computer games [like me] but not necessarily you, expect weapons to behave like they do in the game.

Nowhere in any game I have ever played, does the weapon suffer a breach explosion [as happened to a lady friend of mine when she was at Bulford Ranges firing a Sterling SMG];

Nowhere in any game I have ever played does a weapon malfunction because of dirty or damaged ammunition or a damaged magazine, as happened to me during an LMG competition shoot.

Stoppages occur. That's why we Brits have an IAD or Immediate Action Drill! This is drummed into a serviceman or woman during weapon training and the actual weapon handling test is unforgiving.

Our servicemen and women are taught that whenever or wherever possible, they must battle clean their weapon, usually half a section at a time.

This should take no longer than than 5 minutes but it should be noted that unlike some weapon systems, the L85A2 can still be fired with the recoil rod & spring assy left out of the weapon.

The constant harping that happens on ATS when members continually criticise this or that weapon system, vehicle or aircraft, from the safety of an armchair, their experience based on their ability to play COD 10 and not eating dirt while some scumbag tries to take your head off, is seriously beginning to annoy me.

Yes, I see that. Calm down. You'll notice I ASKED if it ejects with enough force to overcome enough gravity to clear that tube when being fired up. I didn't criticize anything. I was thinking of buying one someday. I probably won't because I'd rather have an AR-15. You know, the most complained-about-by-armchair-commandos gun in the world.

reply to post by mattifikation[/url]

Ah, I can see where you are coming from. Are you talking about an original AR15 as designed by the great Eugene Stoner himself, or one of the hundreds of legal knock-offs?

The AR15/M16 was one of the most complained about assault rifles in the world, but the people complaining were usually the grunts in the mud doing the complaining.

It was not until it was drummed in to them about cleaning it every couple of hours when they could [a must in a jungle environment] that the weapon proved its realiability.

It was the same when we switched over from the FN SLR to the SA 80. Old hands like me bitched like crazy about having to keep it properly cleaned but boy, we did enjoy full auto! Now and again, of course.

In '64-'65 the M-16 Ammo was also one of the problems that caused the jams in the field. I worked for Colt in '67 when they were trying to fix the jamming and FTE problem! Sustained fire would cause jelling of the unburned ball powder used and would gum up the Gas Impingement system tube. Not enough gas got back to the bolt to allow full travel to the rear causing 'Failure to Eject'! Many don't know that only 90-95 % of the powder in a round actually burns. The rest will cause build up in the system. Better burn rates and a less 'greasy' powder helped to curb the problem.

reply to post by ZindoDoone


actually it was the powder used that caused the jamming , The us DoD changed the powder specifications from the powder used in testing ,to that issued for economic reasons , this fouled the gas mechanism, when the powder was changed back to the manf/spec powder the problem was more or less sorted( with changes to the follower as well etc)

...That's what he just said...

Buildup in the chamber area also caused problems with 'INJECTING' the next case into the chamber which gave birth to the 'Forward assist' plunger!

Zindo