Rock and Roll with an L1A1..............

[Peter Laidler]

There have been a few myths about converting an issue L1A1 rifle to the select fire role. It wasn't THAT simple for the average soldier to make the L1 series of rifle fire automatic, believe me.

The first method was to try to rotate the change lever around to the 'A' position but this was impossible due to its shape and by being prevented from going past the shaft of the 'PIN, axis, trigger' protruding from the left side, just to prevent this. You could try to cut it short, but it was deliberately hard, just to prevent this so grinding it would be the only option.

You could try to completely remove the change lever but it was held in place with an akwardly placed split pin. However, even if you DID manage to get it out completely, with your thin screwdriver and snipe nosed pliers, you were stuffed again because;
the trigger will NOT rotate far enough to the rear to enable .... blah blah... because the PLUNGER, trigger (behind the 'PLATE, grip pistol') is deliberately too long to allow it to be pushed in far enough. And if you DO try to press it in further, the guide hole in the GRIP pistol is too short AND the 'SPRING sear and trigger' (interchangeable...) becomes coil bound as I seem to remember it.

There was a method, using a matchstick between the rear bent of the SEAR and the rear step of the trigger, but that meant taking the trigger assembly OUT........., and you can't do that without taking the LEVER, change out..... and that's retained by that bloody akward split pin. AND, if you did manage this, on the range without being noticed, you would have a rifle that only fired automatic. Try explaining that away to the range conducting Officer when his fire order was something like '...5 rounds application - at the target in front - , in your own time, - go on!

You COULD have a select fire L1A1 rifle, but it would have to be an Armourer that did it for you or a VERY astute and mechanically minded soldier, believe me.

First, you'd have to copy the L2 change lever profile, then remove the trigger plunger an grind .2" from the inner end...., yes, grind it because it's very hard, for that reason! Then you've got yourself a what we Armourers called a 'big Iron'! And when a standard L1A1 lets rip on auto, it REALLY does let rip. But to be truly honest, they shake themselves to bits. For example. The gas cylinder lasts for about a day, due to it continually splitting along the weak flat area where the PIN, fixing, gas cylinder prevents it from unscrewing. Even our L2A1's were little boys trying to do a mans job. They were just heavy rifles......., and not even accurate heavy rifles. There's only one gun that can be a section machine gun and it's not a heavy rifle....., it's a BREN gun

[jeff hamerstone]

Pete ; You hit the nail right on the head with that one!!!

[Lee Enfield]

Ummmn, Peter, I think you forgot an important point...

Turning an L1A1 change lever into a "look-a-like" L2 change lever is merely what we would today refer to as "mall commando" or "LCF" (looks cool factor).

I really don't see the point in trying to mimic the outter profile of the C2/L2 change lever as the important bit is the internal cut in the shaft which allows the trigger to be pulled further than normal.

Having said that, whoever thought that reinventing the Browning BAR was a good idea, should have designed something superior to the M.1918, let alone something totally inferior to the FN BAR-D

[Peter Laidler]

I see what you're getting at L-E, but you have GOT to configure the outer part of the standard L1A1 change lever to the L2 spec before you can even start to configure the internal chamfer. That's because without the external configuration (to clear the protruding left hand side of the PIN axis trigger), you CANNOT rotate it to the 'A' position. And to be fair (and we're nit-picking a bit here really.....) you can chamfer the inner shaft to create greater room for trigger rotation until the cows come home, but if you can't rotate the change lever................, then you ain't got rock and roll!

A great thread, keep it up

[jeff hamerstone]

Well and correct me if I'm wrong gentlemen, the only way you can change a semi L1A1 to selective fire is to mill the receiver, install an ejector block, and use the correct selector switch. Great Thread!!!

[jeff hamerstone]

And install the safety sear :)

[Peter Laidler]

From what you're saying Jeff, it would appear that there might be TWO variants. I am only familiar with the UK and Australian L1A1 rifle. That is single shot 'R' or safe 'S' only. To change it to automatic, you don't need a safety sear or ejector block as it's already there ..... unless there is a version, maybe a commercial version with an ejector block NOT machined for a safety (or Automatic) sear.

To convert an L1A1, as issued, you need to change the change lever to the L2 version, or modify what you've got, shorten the PLUNGER, trigger, take two coils off the SPRING, trigger plunger. Then you've got a big iron.

That's the way to shake your L1A1 rifle to bits in a day.

Is there a commercial L1A1 machined without the facility for a safety sear Jeff?

Great thread...............

[jeff hamerstone]

Pete; I'm pretty sure all commercial receivers that are sold have ejector blocks without the cut for the safety sear. Some receivers on the market come without any ejector block installed.

[Peter Laidler]

Ah, Jeff., you have answered the question. Because without the safety or automatic sear, you can't have auto fire on our UK Military L1A1's.

I modified my standard L1A1 to fire automatic just because as Armourers, we could! I used it on the range quite often during our Armourers range test days. I let rip with a burst of machine gun fire from my L1A1 while stood up in the fire trench. I heard someone behind me say ' .....what the xxxx's he got there! Good fun if you could get away with it!

It seems as if someone got wise and deleted the auto sear facility on the commercials.

We were told during our apprenticeships that the auto fire features had to remain on the rifles because every change from the norm meant buying a 'purchase licensing concession' from FN. So little things like folding cocking handles and manual holding open device, UK design flash eliminator, redesign trigger mechanism housing cost a lot of money. As did every(?) modification we did to it up to 25 years afterwards too.

For our FN MAG 58 GPMG's we had to pay for every modification too. Shame that there isn't a forum for those too. We call 'em GBF's for Great balls of fire!

[jeff hamerstone]

Pete; That is very interesting, thanks for that. I have never made a conversion only because it is illegal and comes with a seven year jail sentence in this country. I have fired many weapons full auto in the army. (even blew my ear drums out on a ma duece). It has always been a hope of mine to fire a L1A1 in the dance mode. I own several versions of the FN though, that I built. One of my favorites is a L1A1 with matching #'s and nice furniture, I even have the original upper that was saw cut, I welded it back together someday I'll make a display gun out of it.

[jeff hamerstone]

Hey Pete; While we are on the subject my L1A1's serial number is
UB59 A33163 . Do you have anyway of checking the number to see if it has
any record or history ?

[m4carbine]

I keep hearing the term "SEAR CUT RECEIVER", there is no such thing, its the ejector block that has the only cut in it to accept the "Safety sear" (auto sear), no cut in the receiver!

I am not exactly sure how different an L1A1 is from a metric gun, but in a
MM gun you:
A) Grind the semi notch off, on the safety flange of the selector.
B) Knock out the ejector block and mill the relief for the Safety sear,
Re-install ejector block.
C) Add bullets, safe direction and have fun.

I know this to be true because I have done it, more that once, Class lll/SOT manufacturer.

[Peter Laidler]

Hi again Jeff. Only thing I can tell you is that yours is a BSA made gun from 1959 and that it was a 'new order' gun from BSA. Previous to this, BSA were given a 'transfer order' that originally went to Fazakerley. Alas, Fazakerley were, er ...., a 'trouble prone facility' and never produced a complete L1A1. These 'transfer order guns' were apparently 6 figure numbers dated 1958 so commenced UB58A xxxxxx and I had UB58A-121585. It went like a steam train or as we used to say, '.......banged like a toilet door'...., only we didn't use the word 'toilet'! This 'transfer contract' wasn't a very well known fact.

Once into the system your rifle could have gone anywhere. Britain had HUGE orders to fulfill for her own army had had to be fulfilled within 10 years (completed in 1968) so the rest of the Commonwealth went to Lithgow. Don't take the next bit as gospel, but it cost a little more to produce the L1A1 in Australia than in England (I presume, due to unit cost) but the UK subsidised the extra cost for the other Commonwealth armies to buy from Australia so that they could re-arm at the same price.

Hi again M4/Marty. I am only familiar with the UK/Australia L1A1's, having worked on about a million of the bloody things! What about a photograph of the Military and commercial ejector blocks side by side so that we can all see the differences

Great thread, let's keep it going................

[jeff hamerstone]

Pete; when i said saw cut receiver I was refering to the term meaning the BATF in this country only allowed "parts kits" for rifles legal to buy only if the receiver was cut in half with a chop saw. Now they have decided to allow only parts kits that have been cut with a cutting tourch, and you only get the small part of the receiver wher the barrel screws in. As for inch & metric receivers, I have put L1A1 kits on metric receivers, this allows you to use metric mags which are more plentiful. what you have to do is rethread the barrel use the existing spacer adn mkae sure the head spacing is right , it is really quite simple. DSA is now coming out with a L1A1 with the correct markings (I'm thinking hard on buyinh one to build. I prefer the 1st design forarms over the 2nd design. but they are real hard to get over here, do you have any outlet to those?

[jeff hamerstone]

Please ecuse the typo's on the previous reply I'm at work hoping my boss didn't catch me so I was rushing :)

[jeff hamerstone]

Pete ; what does BSA stand for

[Peter Laidler]

BSA = Birmingham Small Arms. A reliable commercial gun maker who come to our aid whenever the need arises

What do you mean by the 'fore-arm' that you need?

[jeff hamerstone]

Pete; Im looking for a pair of wooden forearms or handguards that have the oval shaped vent holes, (I believe they are called the 1st design) they are slimmer than the other style that have the round vent holes. I have a nice pair of the handguards with the round holes that I don't want, If you have the ones I'm looking for I would like to buy them, trade or whatever. I also have a lot of other parts. I'm not real good at posting pictures but sometimes I'm able (by luck) to accomplish it.

[John Sukey]

Well Now would someone PLEASE tell the folks at the BATF that!
Even with the safety sear intact, you STILL have a SEMI-AUTO RIFLE!
The SKS has a safety sear, the M1 Garand has a safety sear, BUt the safety sear in an L1A1 designed to keep the rifle from firing untill the bolt is locked, is EVIL!

[jeff hamerstone]

Yep John go figure; In the great state of Pennsylvania USA you can ride a motorcycle without a helmet legally but if you get caught not wearing a seat belt in your car you get a ticket. BUREAUCRATIC BULL****!!!!!!!!!

[jeff hamerstone]

Pete; The handguards pictured in the heading of this forum are the ones that I am in search of.

[Sarge13]

Hmmm - I'm of the opinion that anyone who can't shoot an FN/FAL accurately on full auto can't shoot the rifle!!! :thdown: :rolleyes:
I have an early 60s Isreali with a selector switch. It is both fun and accurate on FA! It also doesn't shoot to pieces in a hurry! I've been shooting it - almost exclusively on FA - for several years and have Never had a problem. :thup: It is a joy to shoot and a snap to double or tripple it when ever I want to - which is how I shoot it most of the time. It is also very accurate when doubled OR trippled. With a 5 rd burst I almost always get a flyer high and right. :cool:
Sarge

[stencollector]

When I was a young 16 year old militiaman, myself and another tried a variation of the old match trick. We used a small wad of tin foil each on the bottom of our trigger housings to get that cool full auto effect out of our C1A1 rifles. We had to play with the thickness of the tinfoil to get it to fire properly and controllably. When the enemy came through the defile, we let them have it (blanks only of course). The other guy ran into a bit of a problem when his gun ran away and jammed with the bolt in the rearward position. After the excersize was over he had to turn the rifle in uncleaned and with the piece of tinfoil still in place, since the rifle could not be opened. Fortunately for him, by the time the rifle made it to the weapons techs a week later, any record of who had been issued the rifle were long forgotten.

I got to fire a full auto FN C2A1 a number of years back before I deactivated it. It certainly liked to jump about. Seems like the front end was just too llight for real accuracy.

[Sarge13]

Hmmm - What do you call "real accuracy?" Can you put a 3 rd burst in a 6" circle = heart shot - NO! Can the 3 rds be kept on the top ½ of a man sized target at 100 yds, or 150 - YES!
This "ain't No match competition" rifle, it's a Combat rifle and the accuracy requirements are a good bit different. I can consistantly put a 2 rd and most of the time a 3 rd burst into the flat side of a GI 5 gal gas can at 100 yds. NO one would walk away from that!
A friend and I were out shooting Stens, AK & my FN/FAL today. At about 80yds I was putting both rds on a steel plate about the size of a mans chest - off hand, I rarely do bench shooting!
Sarge

[Peter Laidler]

I think that you're generalising a bit Sarge. It'd be a little bit over the top to say that anyone who can't shoot a FN accurately in the auto fire role can't shoot the rifle. I've fired many, many thousands of them, mostly L1A1's but hundreds of L2's and many many L1A1's doctored to fire auto .... all in the interest of Armourers 'education' you understand....., on Armourers test ranges. And I can confirm that when an L1A1 and L2A1 are set to single shot fire, from the Armourers Enfield rest, the accuracy diagrams are totally different and the L1A1 IS more accurate.

Another fact, proven, time after time, is that an L1A1 firing R is more accurate than an L2A1 firing at R or A

Fantastic rifle, yes. Hard hitting, yes. Do I love them, yes. But the auto rifle is just that, an auto rifle. There is only room for one machine gun in a rifle section, and that isn't a heavy rifle, it's a Bren gun. Or a GPMG!

Going off the subject, when Mr Kalashnikov was at Warminster, he was asked about the RPK and he commented that putting a different butt on a rifle didn't make it a machine gun. And putting a longer magazine onto a rifle didn't make it a machine gun either. And putting a heavy barrel on a rifle just made it a heavy rifle. And as for putting a bipod on a barrel.................

That's JUST what we did with the LSW, although we didn't mount the bipod directly onto the barrel. Heavy rife, yes but machine gun, NO

[jeff hamerstone]

There is only one reason that troops are issued selective fire (full auto) rifles, and I have read test & reports time & time again. And it has been proven that an individual that has a rifle that has full auto capability is willing to fire first in a combat situation. It is all psychologically!!!, accuracy has nothing to do with it, although accuracy definitly counts when it comes to body counts.
and when you have a weapon that can keep the muzzle on target the better the results.

[Sarge13]

Well - Maby? :bow: I am of course wrong in my comments because I only own one (1) FN/FAL type rifle and I got it by accident (I bought a collection and it was in the bunch). Thus I have No practical experience with these rifles, the one I got is undoubtedly a miracle of production and I am just lucky in being able to handle it!!! :madsmile:
But on the other hand ---
I have owned and/or shot most of the FA weapons in the world over the past 55 yrs so I DO have a little bit of experience with the type! I currently own about 25 FA weapons and shoot several of them regularily - the FN/FAL & Bren being 2 of my favorites. I have made some or all of my living with firearms (a lot in the Military) for most of the past 55 yrs.
After due consideration - 30 seconds? :eek: - I think I'll stick with my original comment!!! :rolleyes:
Sarge

[jeff hamerstone]

Well I'm not being critical, but I think the Brit's choose the semi auto version
of the FN because they knew that sustained fire was less accurate than full auto when it comes to a rifle. Some statisical, mathamatical, genius, figured out during the Vietnam war that one Vietnamese was killed per One thousand round fired. I don.t know haow they figured that one out. But if had to pick a rifle to go to combat with it would be the M1 Garand, and that includes the M16, AK47, or any othe selective fire rifle that is out there, Only my opinion:beerchug:

[Jim K]

In my VERY limited experience with the FAL (T48) I found it more controllable in FA fire than the M14, but IMHO that is not saying much. Good trigger control can keep two or maybe three shots in a reasonable size target, but that does not make the rifle truly controllable; it involves shutting the rifle off before it becomes uncontrollable. Sort of like saying a car is a great racing machine as long as it isn't driven over 35mph.

The army basically agreed that neither the M14 nor the FAL was worth much in FA fire and that was the reason for ultimate adoption of the M16, which is considerably better in that use.

The main use of a machinegun is not to "mow 'em down" as in the movies, but to put several bullets in the same area to increase the hit probability. In fact, a machinegun can be too accurate. The BAR bipod was moved from the foreend to the muzzle specifically to spoil the accuracy; no one saw any point in putting 20 rounds through one enemy soldier's third jacket button.

Jim

[Peter Laidler]

EXTREMELY valid point Jim. It's a fact, as I said, that an auto rifle L1A1 is not as accurate as a semi. If it were, why are the Armourers test range accuracy diagrams so different?

And you got it in one. Machine guns don't need to be super accurate. They've just got to be zeroable and reliable. I know that's simplifying things a lot but...................

[jeff hamerstone]

I really need to start proof reading my replies before I press the submit button , I feel like an idiot,What I meant to say on my last post was That rifles fired on full auto have less accurcy than rifles fired on single shot, but in a panic situation if you have full auto capability you sacrifice accuracy for self confidence. And I'm only guessing but I think that is why the Brits choose semi-auto FN's over full auto selective fire FN's.:banghead:

[John Sukey]

The only problem with a full auto rifle is that troops tend to leave it in the go-fast mode. It can get a bit sticky if you use up all the ammunition you have on full auto in a fire fight and it's still going on.

[jeff hamerstone]

You also have to be carefull that you don't melt the barrels, I've seen them glow red hot and the bore looked like a dark line right down the center, on other type weapons.

[Sarge13]

A select fire rifle is not intended to be used on FA all the time!
Proper training will keep most - But NOT all - from misusing the rifle on FA.

You can have similar problems with semi autos. I once had 2 M1 Carbines so hot that the stock was smoking. We had all this excess ammo and the range officer didn't want to do the paperwork to turn in back in so after the troops left the range those NCOs & officers who wanted to shot it all up. I shot one till it started smoking and then grabbed another. I very probably trashed 2 Carbines that day. But hey, it was unkles weapons and nobody was complaining, so I had a ball. It is amazing how fast you can go thru multiple mags when the object is to shoot them empty, not hitting some specific object - altho I was trying to do that too.
Sarge

[jeff hamerstone]

Sarge13 ; That must of been a blast :) getting a chance to burn up those two carbines. I was never allowed to go over the five round burst rule, but when I did my senior NCO let me know about it :beerchug:

[Sarge13]

I don't think my intention on the first carbine was to get that result, doubt that I even knew it was possible. Can't say what my thoughts were on the second as I don't remember. I would also be surprised that I was the only one to get similar results/cause a carbine to need rebuild that afternoon.
Who knows as no one talked about it afterwards.
Had a similar opportunity on the M60 range one afternoon, but we were not abusing the guns that time. The assigned gun crews finished with their familiarization shooting and it was decided that the range officers & NCOs would shoot up the remaining ammo. That was the only time I ever fired the 60 from a tripod. Accurate little beast! :thup: Another fun afternoon! :cool:
Sarge

[Peter Laidler]

We always have a similar problem at the end of range and field firing shoots, wher there is, say, 3,000 rounds of ammo left. You just KNOW that if you take it back, the ammo storeman will complain about the small trifling mixed lots and amounts that he has to log back in. So to prevent this happening and to keep his books straight, we just shoot the lot off. Preferably from the GPMG/L7A2/MAG-58 in the sustained fire role or a Bren from the ground.

That's how my young son who used to come with me to watch, has probably fired enough ammo to frighten a small Country! There's nothing quite like a hot machine gun barrel.........................

[jeff hamerstone]

I've told this account many times and I will never forget it, since we are on the topic of running weapons on full auto I find it appropriate to add to this thread. One day we were on the moving tank firing range where move your tank to one firing position to another. the last station was when the tank comander fired a couple hundred rounds from the .50 cal. We returned to the staging area and as we were dismounting the tank my loader lost his balance and proceded to slip off the turret. the only thing he had to grab before he hit the ground was the red hot barrel of the 50. I never in my life since have seen somebody's palm of thier hand so badly blistered. I really felt sorry for him, I always paid attention on dismounting tanks the proper way after that incident.

[stencollector]

Those C2A1 barrels got blisteringly hot as well. When looking to reposition a -FNC2A1 while in the prone position, you had the choices between that long naked barrel or the tiny 4" handle which was usually folded out of view. The barrel usually won and in the split second it took you to realize the mistake the damage would be done, usually to the webbing of your palm between the thumb and fingers. It was a mistake any C2 gunner usually made once but rarely twice.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/stencollector/C2A1FN.jpg

[jeff hamerstone]

WOW those FNC2A1'S HAD NO HANDGUARDS??? You Brits are tuff :beerchug:

[stencollector]

WOW those FNC2A1'S HAD NO HANDGUARDS??? You Brits are tuff :beerchug:

That "C" is for Canadian. The bipod acted as handguards when bipod was not in use. The Australian version was also so similar that claims were made that the Auzzies used Cdn surplus parts and equipment to make theirs. (Not true according to some of the more serious collectors)


The earliest C2 top covers, with the rear sight built into it, were removed from Cdn service and sent to Australia where they were modified for use by that country. I have seen the early Cdn C2 top covers available years ago, but not in the last decade. I am missing one of those for my collection.

[Peter Laidler]

We had Lithgow made L2's in Malaya Sten collector, complete with the tangent backsight on the cover. Are you saying that these were actually Candian made parts? We didn't have them for long because the Bren was the LMG of choice until we left.

What's the difference between a Canadian C2 tangent backsight and one modified for use be the Australians?

[stencollector]

Peter
I had this discussion some time back on another forum with Kevin Adams, who has great photos and material related to the FNs. He posted the following two pictures of the Cdn C2 top cover and the full length Australian version. I have never seen both in person side by side but the actual tangent sure looks to be the same. One of the early ref books by Blake Stevens mentioned that the Cdn top covers went to Australia.

Credit for both these photos go to Kevin Adams
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p236/nzl1a1collector/CDNC21000mtangentsight.jpg
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p236/nzl1a1collector/AUL2A11000msight.jpg

It is very possible that the two had nothing more in common that the drawings for the tangent.

[jeff hamerstone]

Seeing those two pictures of the top covers with tangent sights is the reason I love gun forums, I have never seen or knew covers like that have ever existed. What a thread Peter started here, A. :D

[S-A-M3]

NZ troops needed more firepower in Afghanistan, so they got L2`s from the Navy stores, but didn`t have enough mags, so an appeal went outto gun collectors to sell them back to the army!:banghead:

[Peter Laidler]

God................. I wish they'd phoned me up! How many did they need...., a thousand..........., two thousand?

[nzl1a1collector]

NZ troops needed more firepower in Afghanistan, so they got L2`s from the Navy stores, but didn`t have enough mags, so an appeal went outto gun collectors to sell them back to the army!:banghead:

Not quite... the Navy supplied 12 L1A1 rifles that were then converted in New Zealand to SAS specs, they have now been replaced by G3 IIRC. There was an issue with getting parts and mags and the current Armourers have no training on the L1A1 rifles so there was a bit of an issue there too.

[nzl1a1collector]

God................. I wish they'd phoned me up! How many did they need...., a thousand..........., two thousand?

Put me down for a couple of thousand mags :dancingbanana: Talking of that have you ever seen any mag dated prior to 1959?

I would love to get a 56 or 57 dated mag but never seen any.

[Peter Laidler]

What mags do you mean Kev the Kiwi? Rifle mags prior to 56/57 or Bren/X10/L4 mags mags prior to 56 - 57.

Prior to the L4A2 Bren, the mags used were FN spec. After the L4A2, they were L1A1 rifle spec mags, albeit 30 rounders. We have some 30 round FN's. Let me know exactly what you need and I'll see........................

[OWCH]

Hello nzl1a1collector
and Peter.

Great thread.
Here is a picture.
LEO import post 94 AW ban ( a whole nother story)
UB61 upper and UE58 lower

Kevin you have seen a pic of the lower on the files of this one.. and made comment about the change switch might be Indian..

[Will M]

Yes, the safety sear holds the hammer until it is tripped by the carrier, the sear being out of the way in full auto mode. Without the safety sear, the hammer would ride forward as the breech bloch & carrier moves forward, maybe or maybe not firing the rifle. ( could fire before the breech block is locked) and we have an excessive headspace problem! The heavier barrel and bipod of the C2 helps control full auto by a bit.

[jmoore]

About the only 7.62x51 rifle I like less in auto mode is the G3.

Not from anything functionally, its just hard to achieve hits!

Of course, the M14's our group have used got some control enhancements; the pistol grip from an AK mounted on the fore end of Forsyth County's ex-GEMA M14 is particularly useful, as is the Smith Enterprises muzzle brake.

[shoot!!!]

Owning FN's I can't shoot,, I have seen a guy with an Ishapore, put a little lever in the side, no detent so he guessed, and it worked FA. Did they not have the safety requirements to avoid this? He flicked it back and semi,, I thought it was neat!!