😂😂😂FS2000 owners, I am not the only one

shawn is alive

New member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Bought a Non- restricted FS2000 couple months ago, and I am the third onwer of it. Brought it out to range today for test fire. Temperature was -5 degrees Charging handle broke off after the first two shots of XM855 62gr green tip. So lucky that spring was found on the bench, and did not fly away into the snow. RO was right beside me, he literally LHAO. I was not surprised at all, cuz I know I am not the only one, and I think that is the reason why Judo chop charging handle was invented. I am just curious that FN literally use the same material for military and Special operation groups? What if it break off during the operation...... To all FS2000 owners, if you plan to use it as a goto rifle, and have not installed a Judo chop charging handle, you might wanna to rethink about that, and do not be next me. To all gunners, wish you have a great year.
IMG_1485_zps2kkm29u3.jpg.html

IMG_1488_zpsd9c4d5pi.jpg.html
TurD3


TurD3

here are some pics....
https://imgur.com/a/TurD3
 
Last edited:
Holy ####..

How did you manage that. I have had mine out for -20 with no issue.


Unless you are HK slap-ing

That said I will still try to track down a judo-chop for you.
 
That’s brutal. You’d think that they would have a material that can survive a little bit longer than that. I had an FNX pistol that broke 2 extractors in -10 so maybe they need to hire some new engineers lol.
 
Bought a Non- restricted FS2000 couple months ago. Brought it out to range today for test fire. Temperature was -5 degrees Charging handle broke off after the first two shots of XM855 62gr green tip. RO was right beside me, he literally LHAO. I was not surprised at all, cuz I know I am not the only one, and I think that is the reason why Judo chop charging handle was invented. I am just curious that FN literally use the same material for military and Special operation groups? What if it break off during the operation...... To all FD2000 owners, if you plan to use it as a goto rifle, and have not installed a Judo chop charging handle, you might wanna to rethink about that, and do not be next me. To all gunners, wish you have a great year.
IMG_1485_zps2kkm29u3.jpg.html

IMG_1488_zpsd9c4d5pi.jpg.html

Hate to say it but the FS2000 is a gigantic lemon from the word go. Ever wonder why it's no longer in production??
 
Hate to say it but the FS2000 is a gigantic lemon from the word go. Ever wonder why it's no longer in production??

Because a newer design was needed for a larger contract.

The F2000 saw limited success in a number of military contracts, as well as police and special security.
It was one of the early bullpup designs, which was ahead of its time in terms of manufacturing and design features.
It was the first bullpup to have solved the ambidextrous issue.

However, FN decided to design a new service rifle for a much larger US DoD contract, which specified a traditional rifle layout.

So FN concentrated on the SCAR.



Calling it a lemon is simply not true. It was a prototype rifle in every sense of the word.
 
Last edited:
Not to mention... The F2000 is the go-to rifle for sic-fi movies and TV.

Lately the Tavor has stepped in, but that is likely due to the availability of F2000s being as rare as they are... Tavors are much more common.
 
Because a newer design was needed for a larger contract.

The F2000 saw limited success in a number of military contracts, as well as police and special security.
It was one of the early bullpup designs, which was ahead of its time in terms of manufacturing and design features.
It was the first bullpup to have solved the ambidextrous issue.

However, FN decided to design a new service rifle for a much larger US DoD contract, which specified a traditional rifle layout.

So FN concentrated on the SCAR.



Calling it a lemon is simply not true. It was a prototype rifle in every sense of the word.

You are correct it was a prototype and an experimental rifle.

What you are incorrect about is its "early bullpup". Sorry but the aug was a middle aged rifle by the time this was conceived. And i think the sa85 was also in its teenage years. And correct me if I'm wrong but i believe keltec beat them to the forward ejection idea(both ended up not working too well)

Barring that nothing else it offered was revolutionary. But its magwell was limited to what it could use without modifications. Clearing malfunctions was a nightmare. Trigger was typical bullpup... it was on the heavier end of the rifles. And as mentioned by the op the charging handle is flimsy.

On the plus side it does look cool af. I maintain its second only to the g11 when it comes to attain the space magic look.
 
Because a newer design was needed for a larger contract.

The F2000 saw limited success in a number of military contracts, as well as police and special security.
It was one of the early bullpup designs, which was ahead of its time in terms of manufacturing and design features.
It was the first bullpup to have solved the ambidextrous issue.

However, FN decided to design a new service rifle for a much larger US DoD contract, which specified a traditional rifle layout.

So FN concentrated on the SCAR.



Calling it a lemon is simply not true. It was a prototype rifle in every sense of the word.

The SCAR, another solution to a non existent problem. Designed to solve the over gassing/over cycling, back pressure, accelerate wear, and cyclic rate issues of the mk18 with suppressor. The believed answer was piston operation to save the day. In the end the answer was the HK 416 or simply better suppressors like the linear pass through designs by OSS suppressors, which results in an almost zero increase in back pressure/over gassing.

You are correct it was a prototype and an experimental rifle.

What you are incorrect about is its "early bullpup". Sorry but the aug was a middle aged rifle by the time this was conceived. And i think the sa85 was also in its teenage years. And correct me if I'm wrong but i believe keltec beat them to the forward ejection idea(both ended up not working too well)

Barring that nothing else it offered was revolutionary. But its magwell was limited to what it could use without modifications. Clearing malfunctions was a nightmare. Trigger was typical bullpup... it was on the heavier end of the rifles. And as mentioned by the op the charging handle is flimsy.

On the plus side it does look cool af. I maintain its second only to the g11 when it comes to attain the space magic look.

Cool looking or not it was far from cutting edge in the bullpup world and ultimately failed commercially.
what is lemon stands for?
Lemon, sucks, junk, failure, obsolete, poor.
 
I had one ages ago. One of the first three that came into the country.
It was a fun rifle; accurate, reliable and comfortable.
Great sporting rifle.
Great feeling in any position and the recoil impulse wasn’t jarring like some bull pups can be.
Trigger - I’d compare to a stock Glock trigger that has had some work done to it. Kinda smooshy to start but the break was reasonably clean. Perfectly usable service rifle trigger.
I can’t compare it to Keltec, but the ejection mechanism was well built and reliable.
I’ve always thought that FN could hit a home run if they ditched the clamshell stock set and reverted back to a more traditional type stock that was perhaps modular, got rid of the magwell gasket, and some other tweaks here and there, they’d have a really viable Service Rifle.
As it stands I still like it, and kinda wish I had kept the one I had to a degree.
 
The SCAR, another solution to a non existent problem. Designed to solve the over gassing/over cycling, back pressure, accelerate wear, and cyclic rate issues of the mk18 with suppressor. The believed answer was piston operation to save the day. In the end the answer was the HK 416 or simply better suppressors like the linear pass through designs by OSS suppressors, which results in an almost zero increase in back pressure/over gassing.

From an engineering perspective, the G36 / HK 416 self-adjusting short-stroke piston system is many, many times superiour to the FS2000 and SCAR systems.

The FN design just radiates "Because Belgium" in it's needless complexity, inferiority of which as compared to the HK approach include:
- The need for a tool to fish out the piston instead of that being possible by hand
- The install of the piston from the front of the firearm instead of the back (can be argued as also a safety problem) means that piston can get stuck in the firearm
- The two-position gas regulator switch that means you need to touch a possibly scalding hot part of the firearm if you need to adjust it in the midst of shooting (eg, your suppressor fell off/was shot off)
- The screw-in gas regulator screws on the FN gas block can be lost or can migrate into the piston chamber and, well, it's like a family of raccoons got in there with everything destroyed
- The FN gas block is at a 45 degree angle to the firearm, which is weird (not really a bad thing, but a blatant reflection of "Because Belgium" thinking).
- The FN trunion is a screw on affair held in place by a counter-rotating castle-nut which has it's problems when trying to get things to work together, (just like Molenbeek). To head-space a barrel the trunion needs to be screwed on first so that the bolt will fit and rotate, but not be loose. Then the castle nut is screwed on and hopefully it will torque against the trunion without moving the trunion from the set position. Then the chamber can be cut (good luck returning the trunion back to the exact location it was when you measured everything out! Or keep the trunion on and hope your tools can clear). Oh, yeah, and that gas port and the two pin slots on the other end of the barrel that need to be cut too? Good luck getting them to alight exactly at 45 degrees with the trunion. If you mess the alignment up by a degree or so you will either get an out-of-spec chamber (because the trunion will need to be rotated) or the piston will only strike the rod partially, eventually bending it from the asymmetrical forces (good luck finding a replacement rod).

Grafting the self-adjusting G36 / HK 416 gas system onto the FS2000 / SCAR might be possible with a custom gas-block because the distance between the centre of the barrel and the piston is greater on the FS2000 / SCAR then on the G36 and the barrel dimension is smaller on the FS2000 / SCAR than the G36 / HK 416 (14 mm vs 15 mm). A custom barrel with a 15mm diameter will require the barrel support to be reamed out to 15 mm, and doesn't solve the issue of the centre distance differences. A replacement gas block design is seemingly the only solution, but then the issue is that the FS2000 has the recoil-rod attached to the bolt carrier group while the G36 / HK 416 has a very short impulse where the piston travels about 10, 15 mm and gets pushed back into the cylinder by the recoil rod that travels independent of the bolt carrier, while in the FS2000, the rod travels the length that the bolt-carrier travels (10, 15 cm). So the question remains on how to keep a G36 / HK416 piston in the gas block on the FS2000 system, which explains why the Belgians when with the piston being "trappable" in the gas block: else, with the first shot, the piston might fly into the receiver. So the gas block would require a trap of sorts, probably a screw-on shroud to trap the piston.
 
Back
Top Bottom