Nav wrote:





I never fired a modified FN (i.e. with full auto) but the recoil was
quite large and seemed (to me) to make the semi-auto about as much as
one would want. Could you keep it anywhere near a target on auto? How
did you make it fire a 3 round burst -was it a further modification?


Here we used to use two versions of the FN, designated FNC1 and FNC2, (FN Canada), C1 was semi auto with twenty round clips, the C2 was full auto with
a bipod, heavier barrel, modified barrel attachment to facilitate rapid changes, and thirty round clips.

I have fired both weapons extensively, you are correct, on full auto the C2 climbs up to the left something fierce, the idea is to squeeze of a short
burst of three rounds, it takes a bit of practice.

That being said the weapon is ridiculously expensive, complicated, heavy and far too powerful to make a good assault rifle.

Cheers
Marty

I want to get shot with a Napoleonic Howitzer!

Gilligan

"Steve Daniels" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:16:00 -0400, something compelled DSK
, to say:

BTW since our gov't in it's wisdom will not let us have such dangerous
toys, the Glaser "safety" slug is a good close approximation. Loses
accuracy at range, but really kicks ass close up.

If I ever get shot, I hope it's with a Glasser. And the FBI
agrees with me.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote

I doubt the FBI would shoot you.

That's what the Weaver family in Idaho and the religious kooks in Waco
thought too.

"DSK" wrote

Some years ago, various agencies were using Glaser loads but it wouldn't
surprise me if something better was out there now. Why do you and the
FBI think they're ineffective?

Ineffective is a bad word. Before Glaser, court baliffs and others expecting
to engage dangerous criminals but avoid "collateral damage" in a crowded
courtroom, et cetera, handloaded .38 cal HBWCs upside down to create a super
hollow point that hit hard but didn't come out the other side a la Fearless
Fosdick to kill the judge or jurors. The Glaser "Safety" round does that
even better, making it a good choice in a home or apartment where one would
prefer not to penetrate walls. However, being designed NOT to penetrate
far, it cannot produce a deep deadly wound channel nor penetrate a magazine,
car window or much else without loosing knock-down capability. It is very
effective at what it was designed to do but there are far more deadly
general purpose bullets available.

In article et,
Gilligan wrote:
I want to get shot with a Napoleonic Howitzer!

Gilligan

I would like to get shot at with no result.

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

In article ,
Vito wrote:
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote

I doubt the FBI would shoot you.

That's what the Weaver family in Idaho and the religious kooks in Waco
thought too.

Well, you're right. If they didn't have any guns, they wouldn't have
been shot. :-)



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

Horvath wrote in message . ..
On 29 Sep 2004 18:55:33 -0700, (Joe) wrote
this crap:

Because you'll runout of bullets in 1.6 seconds. Get a weapon with a
rate of fire around 350 rounds per minute.

You can set it for select fire. A 3 round burst, single, or fully automatic.
And they do sell extra clips.


It's called a "Magazine."


Jarhead huh?

Joe





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Vito wrote:
Ineffective is a bad word. Before Glaser, court baliffs and others expecting
to engage dangerous criminals but avoid "collateral damage" in a crowded
courtroom, et cetera, handloaded .38 cal HBWCs upside down to create a super
hollow point that hit hard but didn't come out the other side a la Fearless
Fosdick to kill the judge or jurors. The Glaser "Safety" round does that
even better, making it a good choice in a home or apartment where one would
prefer not to penetrate walls. However, being designed NOT to penetrate
far, it cannot produce a deep deadly wound channel nor penetrate a magazine,
car window or much else without loosing knock-down capability. It is very
effective at what it was designed to do but there are far more deadly
general purpose bullets available.

Once again Vito, you manage to conceal a tiny grain of truth in a load
of twaddle.

http://www.m1911.org/ammo.htm#gss

http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine...guns02.htm#gss

Glaser slugs are designed for higher velocity, thus more energy, and to
shed that energy almost immediately into the target. The result is a
tremendous wound channel, very deadly. The little thing you got right is
that they are not designed to penetrate windows, doors, etc etc.

DSK

On 30 Sep 2004 12:13:39 -0700, (Joe) wrote
this crap:
It's called a "Magazine."


Jarhead huh?


Them's fighting words.





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

In article ,
Horvath wrote:
On 30 Sep 2004 12:13:39 -0700, (Joe) wrote
this crap:
It's called a "Magazine."


Jarhead huh?


Them's fighting words.

Translation: He's scared ****less.
--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."