Mint, unfired, FR-7

[grelmar]

Wanted one of these for a while, haven't come across one in decent condition at a decent price. This was the cheapest Fr-7 at the Easter gun show, by several hundred $$. And it was the only one in minty condition - the rest had obviously done several tours as truck guns.

My Calgary Easter Gunshow mint, unfired, FR-7:

 

[Phat Eagle]

Sweet! I've been on the lookout for a nice one too! How much?

 

[grelmar]

I spent $400... The beater FR-7's were all tagged at $550-$600.

When I first looked at it, I thought it had been sanded and scrubbed and refinished. But turning it over, the arsenal stamps were still intact and clear on the bottom of the stock, and it occurred to me "The old guy bought it, safed it, and never fired it."

A few years ago they were in the $350 range for "gently used" ones. $400 in today's market for one in this nice of condition, I'll take.

 

[shredder0]

Very nice and just like mine very loud!!!

 

[bearhunter]

OP, that is a lovely rifle. It was of course a refurb from a 7x57 to its present cartridge. If you look at the bolt face you can see the circle around the firing pin from leaking primers. It was obviously considered to be OK because it was used again in your rifle.

The cartridge is was chambered for is the 7.62 CETME. The dimensions are identical to the 7.62x51 Nato. There is a lot of controversy over whether the 7.62 Nato round is to hot for these rifles. Do some due diligence on the internet and find out for yourself before using 7.62 Nato or commercial 308 Winchester, which also has identical dimensions.

The difference with the CETME round was the bullet, which was around 125 grains. I've heard pressures were lower as well but you couldn't prove it by me. Supposedly the 7.62 Nato round is safe in these handy little rifles. The rifle I had was in similar condition to your rifle. I have shot thousands of 7.62 Nato through it and the one I presently have, which isn't as nice.

 

[cainesy]

That's a handy little rifle, how's the kick, is they bruisers? My interest hasn't been this peaked since the SKS popped up yrs ago. Well, time to go hunting again, gotta get me one of them.

 

[grelmar]

OP, that is a lovely rifle. It was of course a refurb from a 7x57 to its present cartridge. If you look at the bolt face you can see the circle around the firing pin from leaking primers. It was obviously considered to be OK because it was used again in your rifle.

The cartridge is was chambered for is the 7.62 CETME. The dimensions are identical to the 7.62x51 Nato. There is a lot of controversy over whether the 7.62 Nato round is to hot for these rifles. Do some due diligence on the internet and find out for yourself before using 7.62 Nato or commercial 308 Winchester, which also has identical dimensions.

The difference with the CETME round was the bullet, which was around 125 grains. I've heard pressures were lower as well but you couldn't prove it by me. Supposedly the 7.62 Nato round is safe in these handy little rifles. The rifle I had was in similar condition to your rifle. I have shot thousands of 7.62 Nato through it and the one I presently have, which isn't as nice.

Yup, aware of the history, and controversy around chamber pressure for 7.62 CETME vs. 7.62 NATO.

The controversy seems to have died down over the years, as people keep firing 7.62 NATO through them without any trouble. I have thousands of rounds of 7.62 NATO surplus (as in, I actually don't know how much I have, beyond "thousands, don't feel like counting" )... The ammo fell into my lap through a friend who had to move to the US for work and just gave it to me.

I have an M1A, but wanted a handy little bolt gun for blasting problem coyotes and badgers - don't need hollow points for non-game animals here, and 7.62 NATO will most definitely assure a "humane" kill. This fit the bill.

Haven't shot it yet, so can't say for sure. But given the weight of it, I'm going to assume the recoil is in the "stiff" category, but no worse than an M38 Mosin.

 

[bearhunter]

Both of the rifles I have owned as well as others have all been accurate with 150 grain bullets and lighter.

 

[grelmar]

Both of the rifles I have owned as well as others have all been accurate with 150 grain bullets and lighter.

Thanks!

I have a pile of South African surplus 7.62 with 147 gr projectiles I'm going to start with. If it works, I'll just set aside the whole supply I have of it for the rifle. Also a bunch of the Hirtenberger, and a bunch Czech contract ammo (the green box stuff), but not interested in burning the Czech ammo right yet, because it's corrosively primed. It's all NATO spec load with 147gr projectiles.

 

[Agent of orange]

nice looking my fr7 was my dads truck gun for at the shore shooting harbour seals. With permission from dfo with only instructions to shoot out to sea from the warf ah they 80s. I read a lot of the lore of the small ring vs large ring and what to not fire in it. but Ian at forgotten weapons just did a cetme round video in january https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Njddshr3n8

 

[grelmar]

nice looking my fr7 was my dads truck gun for at the shore shooting harbour seals. With permission from dfo with only instructions to shoot out to sea from the warf ah they 80s. I read a lot of the lore of the small ring vs large ring and what to not fire in it. but Ian at forgotten weapons just did a cetme round video in january https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Njddshr3n8

There's a metric TON of gun-board chatter about viable cartridges for these guns, but when you start digging into the (very few) really reputable sources, it starts to become clear that these guns were, in fact, made for 7.62 NATO. White Labs (sorry, can't find a link) actually did some testing on these, and pushed them out to hot loads at 95,000 psi chamber pressure without failure - far above the 50,000(ish) psi of NATO spec 7.62, and considerably hotter than any of the commercial .308 on the market.

Long term, if you run hot ammo through these, then I don't doubt it will start to affect headspacing and safety. But you could say that about almost any gun. You can get away with a few hot rounds, but the effects over time are cumulative.

The FR7 and FR8 were both developed after the Spanish had worked out the issues with the CETME rifle, which went on to be adopted by the Germans as the G3. 7.62 CETME, as a cartridge, never made it out of trials, and was never adopted. The idea (myth) that either the FR7 or FR8 was built with the 7.62 CETME cartridge in mind is pure speculative bunk.

Now, that doesn't mean I'm going to run hot and heavy .308 commercial ammo through it. I'll stick with NATO surplus cartridges with 147 gr. projectiles, and similar commercial hunting ammo, because that will do everything I need the gun to do. And by all accounts, it performs best (most accurately) with <150 gr bullets.

Great video from Ian (as always), btw. Going to bookmark it for every time some blathers on about the FR7 or FR8 or CETME rifle being built for the 7.62 CETME cartridge.

A Canadian fellow did a good job of looking into it, and actually managed to get in touch with some people who were in the Spanish military at the time all these rifles were being developped. It all points to them being built for the 7.62 NATO cartridge.

http://www.zoneballistic.com/colinsballistics/fr-8.html

From what I've learned, I believe that by 1965 when the FR-7's & 8's were being made, that Spain was using basically standard NATO ammunition. My Spanish source quotes a spec. page listing FR-8 using a 147gr. bullet with a velocity of 2700fps. He also points out the worldwide sales of a Cetme sporter in .308 Win. that uses the same barrels and the Germans use of the NATO round as early as 1956.

March - 2002, I received the following email from another ex-military man from Spain named Ignacio...

"As i'm not fluent in english i´ll try to sumarize:

FR-7, Really never intended to be used by the Spanish Army, in fact belonged
to Guardia Civil, simiral to french "Gendarmería"

FR-8, Never intended for using the 7,62 CETME ammunition, this cartidge was
only used in CETME Mod.B assault rifle, is a kind of "low power" 308 NATO,
so the FR 8 was to be used with the NATO 308....it happens that the usual
spanish cartidge is ligthly more powerful than the german (ask the
Argentinians that used Spanish Santa Barbara ....)

 

[gaff]

nice one .

 

[Agent of orange]

ya I plan on getting some surplus ammo to plink as i also have a g1911 that was sporterized and converted to 308

 

[fenceline]

OP, that is a lovely rifle. It was of course a refurb from a 7x57 to its present cartridge. If you look at the bolt face you can see the circle around the firing pin from leaking primers. It was obviously considered to be OK because it was used again in your rifle.

The cartridge is was chambered for is the 7.62 CETME. The dimensions are identical to the 7.62x51 Nato. There is a lot of controversy over whether the 7.62 Nato round is to hot for these rifles. Do some due diligence on the internet and find out for yourself before using 7.62 Nato or commercial 308 Winchester, which also has identical dimensions.

The difference with the CETME round was the bullet, which was around 125 grains. I've heard pressures were lower as well but you couldn't prove it by me. Supposedly the 7.62 Nato round is safe in these handy little rifles. The rifle I had was in similar condition to your rifle. I have shot thousands of 7.62 Nato through it and the one I presently have, which isn't as nice.

No. It wasn't chambered in the 7.62 CETME. It was always in 7.62 NATO.

That internet myth needs to die.

 

[grelmar]

No. It wasn't chambered in the 7.62 CETME. It was always in 7.62 NATO.

That internet myth needs to die.

Good luck killing that myth. It's so persistent, that it has kept the value down on CETME rifles in the US, and both the FR-7 and FR-8.

The 7.62 CETME cartridge was never adopted, never went into full production. It was abandoned before the CETME rifle was completed (the CETME C, IIRC), and the rifle that was adopted was developed for the 7.62 NATO cartridge. 7.62 CETME was effectively a "trials" cartridge that never went anywhere, and no production rifle was ever built for it.

But because some dude in the mid 80's had a crappy understanding of Spanish, a mountain of myth and BS has arisen around it.

 

[Hitzy]

Thanks!

I have a pile of South African surplus 7.62 with 147 gr projectiles I'm going to start with. If it works, I'll just set aside the whole supply I have of it for the rifle. Also a bunch of the Hirtenberger, and a bunch Czech contract ammo (the green box stuff), but not interested in burning the Czech ammo right yet, because it's corrosively primed. It's all NATO spec load with 147gr projectiles.

NATO ammo will have the NATO cross on it, there is a lot more that goes into NATO spec 7.62x51 then 147gr bullets.
Austria is not part of NATO, neither is South Africa, if the Czech is corrosive then it predates Czech Republic joining NATO in 1999. So really you have a bunch of 7.62x51 surplus, none of it is NATO spec.

 

[Sharps '74]

And another "... everyone knows ..." gun myth bites the dust.

 

[grelmar]

NATO ammo will have the NATO cross on it, there is a lot more that goes into NATO spec 7.62x51 then 147gr bullets.
Austria is not part of NATO, neither is South Africa, if the Czech is corrosive then it predates Czech Republic joining NATO in 1999. So really you have a bunch of 7.62x51 surplus, none of it is NATO spec.

I'll give you that one. It would have been more accurate to say "made within the tolerances of the NATO specification" - other than the Czech ammo. The NATO specification delineates non-corrosive.

In terms of chamber pressure, head space, velocity, bullet weight and diameter, case length, etc. etc., the Hirtenberger and South African ammo was made to fit within the tolerances.

The Czech ammo is a bit more of a mystery though. It was "supposedly" contract made for export to a nation that was floating back and forth as to which side of the fence was propping it up, but something went sideways and the export never happened. But that's only a story that I heard from a guy who heard it from a guy.

Shoots pretty good, though.

 

[Hitzy]

I'll give you that one. It would have been more accurate to say "made within the tolerances of the NATO specification" - other than the Czech ammo. The NATO specification delineates non-corrosive.

In terms of chamber pressure, head space, velocity, bullet weight and diameter, case length, etc. etc., the Hirtenberger and South African ammo was made to fit within the tolerances.

The Czech ammo is a bit more of a mystery though. It was "supposedly" contract made for export to a nation that was floating back and forth as to which side of the fence was propping it up, but something went sideways and the export never happened. But that's only a story that I heard from a guy who heard it from a guy.

Shoots pretty good, though.

Well no, the cartridge cases are much different as well between Hirt and NATO.
NATO specs specific weight, thickness, and hardness at different points for 7.62 brass.
Hirt is about the weight of commercial Win 308 brass, and nearly as soft as Federal.

 

[MiG25]

I'll point out that Spain didn't join NATO until 1982.

Nice rifle.