Weapon Myths

[BernDawg]

Just a quick interjection here about the 7.62 NATO round.  IN Suffield back inthe 80's (  :warstory: ) we ran out of Canadian 7.62 (imagine that!) and had a batch of Brit 7.62 issued to us.  Had the worst time getting the stuff to cycle in our C1's.  Hard extractions, stove pipes, generally piss poor performance.  Im talking every 2nd or 3rd round here too.  I sure as hell wouldn't have wanted to have to use that anywhere for real.
    Now a question for the more knowledgeable on here (I-6, Wes).  Is this poor performance common in a round that is supposed to be universal or do you think we got a bad batch?

 

[Jay4th]

For a while Cdn 7.62 was forbidden to be used by other NATO units due to the piss poor QC.
-source "North American FAL's", Collector Grade Publications.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Sometimes cases have bulges or the bullet is not properly seated, adding to the length or shortening it, all can cause feeding issues.

 

[Jay4th]

Alot depends on how ammo is stored.  More than we usually realize.  Extreme hot storage does weird things to powder inside casings as does cold.  If you store a bunch of sleeves of ammo under a tarp in the sun for a couple weeks and then put it in a cool Sea container or vice versa you will have serious consistency issues even with ammo from a good manufacturer.  Even so much as how much oil is on your weapon has serious effects. ie dangerously high chamber pressures if chamber is oily etc.  Surprisingly well stored ammo can last just about forever. I still use Second World War .303 brit regularly. This topic is well covered in an article in Small Arms Review about four issues ago. 

 

[TCBF]

Not just any propellant will do.  Our ammunition must function to spec over a wide range of temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure.  Not easy.

There are trap shooters out there who use different ammo for warm and cold weather.  "Status Of Steel" Reloading Pamplet even designates "Good cold weather load" and so on for some of it's shotgun shell recipes. 

The odd benchrest shooter has been known to watch the thermometer as well.

SAAMI (Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) specifications for headspace, how to measure headspace for a specific cartridge, dimensions such as OAL, etc, are often 'tighter' than Mil Spec standards due to most civie rifles not being required to operate under grotesque conditions.  Their chamber pressure standards however, are often loaded down for the lowest common denominator of Mil Surp rifles.

For example, .303 British SAAMI specs are based on the concept that no load they mfr should blow up an old Lee Enfield from WW1. Especially considering few people even notice the bolts and rcvrs often have differing serial numbers, and so never get their headspace checked. 

 

[1feral1]

NATO approved small arms ammo, has the + and circle on its base. In short this is for use by NATO countries and should be approved for all small arms of that calibre.

Australian ammo does NOT have this, and hence only used in Australian weapons, and NATO approved ammo is not authorised in Australian weapons period.

As for how ammo is stored, all professional armies store it cool and dry. I have fired ammo as old as 1915 and wartime 40s stuff. Never a problem.


Cheers,

Wes

 

[geo]

For a while Cdn 7.62 was forbidden to be used by other NATO units due to the piss poor QC.
-source "North American FAL's", Collector Grade Publications.

Jay,
this point leads into the oposite direction of Berndog's queery.....
in his case, it's someone else's ammo doing bad things to our weapons.

From a personal perspective, I never really had a problem with our 7.62 in the FN BUT, with respect to the C4 C5 GPMG... was it the ammo or the weapon?

(edited to correct Oopsie... C5 VS C4)

 

[George Wallace]

C-5

C-4 Goes BOOM.  DM 12 gives you head-aches.

 

[Old Sweat]

Geo,

Reference your observation re the GPMGs converted from .30 to 7.62:

From a personal perspective, I never really had a problem with our 7.62 in the FN BUT, with respect to the C4 GPMG... was it the ammo or the weapon?
[/quote]

From what we were told at the time, the fault lay with the weapon and perhaps specifically with the size and/or shape of the chamber. As I recall it, the gun would often fire a few rounds and then the top cover would pop open and the belt would flop out. This was not a good thing. Fixes were still being worked on in the late 1970's or about ten years after the guns were converted. I am not sure if the C4 was ever fixed.

I will now wander back to my lane, as I am not really comfortable commenting on calibres under 40mm or so.

 

[a_majoor]

From my experience the GPMG C-5 had dreadful feed problems, mostly due to the mechanics of converting the gun to fire 7.62 X 51. My usual experience was to fire a burst, clear a stoppage, fire a burst, clear a stoppage etc., with the occasional "Bolt Two!" thrown in for good measure.

This happened all the time, and it did not seem to matter if the gun was fired by a slack-a** who simply screwed in the barrel and backed off three clicks or a manaical perfectionist who spent 10 minutes headspacing and timing the gun with his own personal guages. (I fall somewhere in the middle). Considering all the moving parts and convoluted operating system, it is a testament to John Browning that the thing even worked at all.

I very rarely encounter stoppages in a C-6, but the new gas piston is not as user friendly, and is a source of difficulty. Service ammunition, unless improperly stored and degraded or dirty is not a problem in my opinion, and I have fired everything from 9mm to .50 HMG in weather and temperature ranging from -400C to +350C. The condition of the weapon is key.

 

[Danjanou]

Oh, come on, it was sixteen years ago.  It only proves I'm human, can make mistakes, and that some information can get mixed up if not used for a long period of time.   

Funny it's been about 20+ years since I was in a mortar platoon, and I'd lay odds I wouldn't embarrass Mssr O'Leary or Von Garvin on the firing line now. I even remember the difference between smooth and rifled bores. Mind I had a good WO back then. :

 

[BernDawg]

Lots of good answers guys thanks.  As to the fouling we wouldn't let that happen in our weapons on a regular basis as this was an on-going issue at the time. When in doubt clean it.  Right? As to the odd miss-shaped round or casing IIRC the problem was Coy wide with every one having these problems so it may have been a bad batch or maybe it was the storage issue coming from across the pond and all.  I don't remember how the rounds were marked ref the + and circle so that may have been an issue.
    Now about the C-5.  I felt that the gun had it's moments both maintenance wise and firing wise.  I used to get mine just hummin with nothing but a screwdriver and a can of oil but that was a long time ago and there is no doubt that the C-6 is a far superior weapon with a lineage almost as storied as Mr Maxims original design.

My 2 bits.
BD

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Here is a recurring myth, Russian 7.62 x25 ammo will work nicely in a C96.  :

 

[Acorn]

The C1 "GPMG" had huge problems with feed due to the conversion from .30 cal. The C5 was actually an improvement. My first MG course (I did 3 - long story) was with the C1. My memory is about 25 years old though. However the 7.62 barrel was definitely rifled.

My mortar memories are a few years more recent. No rifling, but if the obturation ring on the 81mm is missing or f***ed up, the round will exit the tube like a "half-f***ed salmon." Credit for that line goes to an old Patricia mortar sgt who will remain nameless.

And, apologies for not having read all pages of this thread, but the "interchangeable ammo" myth is just that, a myth. It may, however, go back to the days of roundshot and muzzel-loading cannon/muskets when the shot designed for a given weapon had a load of windage to start with, and an adversary with smaller balls (there's a double-entendre) could compensate with extra wadding and use his ammo in opponents' weapons.

Acorn

 

[geo]

C1 GPMG?... don't remember that designation... C1 was always a FN Rifle in my early training.

GPMG 7.62 Rifled barrels?.... yeah, unless the darned thing was burnt out ... in which case the bullets were going all over the place.

half f***ed Salmon?... love it!

 

[Danjanou]

C1 GPMG?... don't remember that designation... C1 was always a FN Rifle in my early training.

GPMG 7.62 Rifled barrels?.... yeah, unless the darned thing was burnt out ... in which case the bullets were going all over the place.

half f***ed Salmon?... love it!

Geo lots of stuff had the C1 designation remember including the SMG.

The C1 was the official designation of the original Browning GPMG. Most were rebored from the old .30 cal to 7.62, which was the reason fro fed problems IIRC. The C5 was the newer improved version, basically some of the problems re the feeding were fixed, the barrels were lined with teflon?  And some changes wer made with the head spacing and timing.  I trained on the oplder C1 in the late 1970’s on my TQ1/QL3 infantry and served in the platoon weapons det now and then on FTX. First was the “newer” C5 in Germany in 1980 and later used them on y Machine gun course.

Amazing what random facts I can pull out of addled brain almost 30 years later on a moments notice.

 

[geo]

SMG C1!... oh yeah!
GPMG C1..... still don't remember but that doesn't mean much, I remember that lousy little cocking handle we had before it was replaced with the big "O" ring & the 30 cal ammo.... with respect to the C5 designation.... never really used that term either

 

[BernDawg]

WE really didn't use the term very much either.  It was, and always will be, The G-pig to me.  :warstory:

 

[Danjanou]

WE really didn't use the term very much either.  It was, and always will be, The G-pig to me.  :warstory:

Agreed, among names we can't use on this forum as it is a family site ;D

Realistically outside of weapon lectures did anyone call the FNC1 anything but FN, or the SMG anything but that. FNC2 was the proverbial exception to thew rule as i can't remember calling it anything but C2.  :warstory:

 

[geo]

You're right Danjanou,
C2 & C3 would be the only ones I can think of

And who can ever forget the old C2 mag bras ::warstory::