I’ld buy one even though 9mm is pretty anemic for such a platform. Good choice on the mags though, for such a smallish round.
I’ld buy one even though 9mm is pretty anemic for such a platform. Good choice on the mags though, for such a smallish round.
At 1000 or even 1500 I'll take one for sure.
YEA BABY!
Set up a facility here in Canada, make under license. No FRT required, make receiver here import the other parts.
The right, always trumph!
I'm admittedly not very well versed in gunsmithing and I get the way lower pressures/wear and tear of pistol rounds but if they were cranking these out 80+ years ago firing 7.92, surely with modern tech in machining/metallurgy these couldn't be that hard to produce in proper rifle cals like 7.62x39? CNC and automated brakes should reduce some of the tooling needs no?
Building them in a low pressure cartridge like 9mm allows them to use a simple blow back action. Far cheaper to produce. I agree though, I’d love one of these in its original chambering or something else common, but I probably wouldn’t like the price. This is a plinking gun. May as well be in a plinking calibre.
A guaranteed buy for me. I would love an original, but this would be as close as it gets here so I’d be all over it.
I think 7.62x39 or 7.62x51 would have been my choice.
"A gun is not a weapon, Marge, it's a tool. Like a butcher's knife or a harpoon, or...or an alligator."
CCFR/NFA Member
I tried to see how it is sterlingish, and the only thing I could come up with was... well I'm still trying to picture a sterling when I look at the picture. I can only come up with 3 thing that relate each other: the caliber is the same, and the original guns of these two designs debuted in the same war. I would love a sterling, but id love this FG-9 a little bit more. It will look pretty sweet beside my P.08 and MP-40. The Sterling would look very nice beside my No.4 Mk1 (T) however!