why were FNs prohibited ??

Ripstop said:
Originally Posted by teclaydon
"...I've used the C2 ...it wasn't meant to be fired from the shoulder in full-auto. Fired from its bipod in controlled bursts (as a trained C2 gunner would do), it was very effective..."

Yes, but I cannot see the thugs laying down in the street to fire upon their rivals and others unfortunate enough to be around. To use a bipod, you must be immobile. I do not see being 'capable' of full auto enough of a reason to prohibit this particular firearm. BTW, of all the firearms I cannot have, I WANT a FN the most! I consoled myself and bought a SAFN-49... the closest I'll ever get.
Click to expand...
The C2 wasn't just capable of full-auto through conversion, it was designed and manufactured to fire that way (as I'm sure you know). The C2 was no less deserving of prohibited status than any other full-auto firearm.

Semi-auto FNs (like the C1) are a different story and - if I correctly understood the initial post at the top of this thread - were the subject of the original 'why prohibited?' question.
 
teclaydon said:
The C2 wasn't just capable of full-auto through conversion, it was designed and manufactured to fire that way (as I'm sure you know). The C2 was no less deserving of prohibited status than any other full-auto firearm.

Semi-auto FNs (like the C1) are a different story and - if I correctly understood the initial post at the top of this thread - were the subject of the original 'why prohibited?' question.
Click to expand...

What's the difference between the C1 and C2? The C2 has a heavy barrel w/integral bipod, and is provided with a C2 selector and a short trigger plunger. I don't believe there's any difference in the receivers, someone correct me if I'm wrong.
 
'cantom'

Pretty much hit the nail on the head as far as the differences C1 vs C2, I had the 'pleasure' of being issued a C2 on ex. a few times, a little front heavy (unbalanced) due to the bipod and heavier barrel, a little awkward at times due to the 30 round magazine and the 'PLO' style magazine bra one had to wear across the chest.
 
cantom said:
"...What's the difference between the C1 and C2? The C2 has a heavy barrel w/integral bipod, and is provided with a C2 selector and a short trigger plunger. I don't believe there's any difference in the receivers, someone correct me if I'm wrong..."
Click to expand...
Along with the differences you mentioned, the C1 was semi-auto only ...which - commonalities with the C2 aside - was significant enough of a difference to allow semi-auto FNs to be sold to Canadian civilians (before it was put on the prohibited list).
 
Last edited:
jennis said:
"...I had the 'pleasure' of being issued a C2 on ex. a few times..."
Click to expand...
I don't know if it was the case with you or not, but it seemed to me that they always gave the C2 - extra weight 'n all - to the smallest guy(s) in the section...

;) :confused: ;)
 
I was (am) 6'1 so the weight / length was not an issue, just loved the section attacks and running with the 'bra' smacking me in the chin all the time
 
jennis said:
"...I was (am) 6'1 so the weight / length was not an issue, just loved the section attacks and running with the 'bra' smacking me in the chin all the time..."
Click to expand...
I must have had the good(?) fortune of working with guys who had a warped sense of humour (ie: the smallest person got the heaviest gear to carry). I don't recall many folks ever putting their hand up and volunteering to be the C2 man ...and if a new guy was foolish enough to do so, he usually only made that mistake once.

:cool:
 
The best thing about the C2 was that you didn't (usually) have to carry the Gustav.

As an aside, were the C1's originally fully auto? Wasn't it the C1A1 that was made semi-auto?
 
oppy said:
As an aside, were the C1's originally fully auto? Wasn't it the C1A1 that was made semi-auto?
Click to expand...

The EX series were selective, and ended up pinned to semi.
The Cdn C1 was semi only, although there was the naval model, the C1A1D which was selective fire.

The differences between the C1 and the C1A1 were primarily changes involved in going over tot he 2 piece firing pin, and the plastic carry handle installation.
 
Last edited:
stencollector said:
The EX series were selective, and ended up pinned to semi.
The Cdn C1 was semi only, although there was the naval model, the C1A1D which was selective fire.

The differences between the C1 and the C1A1 were primarily changes involved in going over tot he 2 piece firing pin, and the plastic carry handle installation.
Click to expand...

The Lithgows I've had had the third selector position, although the semi selector of course woudn't rotate around to it. Did the C1's not have it? I've actually never handled one...
 
cantom said:
The Lithgows I've had had the third selector position, although the semi selector of course woudn't rotate around to it. Did the C1's not have it? I've actually never handled one...
Click to expand...

The C1A1 lower has the extra notch at the auto position for the change lever detent, exactly the same as the C2A1 lower.
C1C2.jpg
 
Last edited:
ian_in_vic said:
That surplus ammo was Portugese Santa Barbara - very nice.
Click to expand...
Indeed, I bought 1K of the stuff, and a couple months later (after just about all of it was gone), tried to get some more... alas, none to be found. It was probably the best "ball" ammo that I've ever picked up. Very accurate for military grade, very consistent as well. I kept one 20 round box, just couldn't expend the last 20 rounds unless I got to replenish the same ammo.
 
Yeah, I was maybe 135lbs at the time, and I got the 'privilege' of carrying the C2 during drills one day. Run like hell, hit the ground/deploy bipod (tricky for me), get back up, and try to keep up with the rest of the section.

Those C1 photos sure bring back a lot of memories though...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom