FN distruction tests.

[browningautorifle]

I recall seeing a number of EX rifles held in QM as late as 1984 in Victoria BC. They were in a back room rack that few would know about and labeled clearly, "For cadet use only", the copper wash still evident on them...I mentioned what they were to the regular force Sgt there, and left the building. Some couple months later, I was there again and saw them no more...wonder what happened? Knowing us, they met the gas axe, as B Echelon was only a hundred yards away...

[Lee Enfield]

That's not a Canadian variant. Unless you mean it's an FN...and that makes it similar?

FN-FAL's manufactured to the high front and rear sight blocks were referred to by FN as the "FAL Canada" due to the fact that Canada made the first quantity order(2000 rifles) for the FAL in June 1953 some 5-1/2 months before the Brits (x8e1 and x8e2) and Americans (t48)...both ordered in Dec 1953.


The first guns not built to the FAL-Canada standard was the German G1 order which consisted of the 3mm lower front and rear sights, and a few mechanical changes.

[Peter Laidler]

Not exactly related to destruction testing, but.....
The word ‘stretching’ of the body has featured in L1A1 and Bren Gun mythology. And while not directly related to the ‘SPARE BODY’ thread, the point was raised. And that got me thinking….. So earlier this week I took the opportunity to speak to and later visit some of my colleagues, the scientific bods ‘….wot I know’. Apparently this is not a new myth, first appearing in the 50’s regarding Bren Gun bodies that could not meet the CHS and breech-block stop problems/criteria. I have simply taken the verbal conversation, precied it and changed it to relate to the L1A1. Here goes.

The ‘stretching’ of L1A1 bodies is stretching (if you’ll excuse the pun) the imagination of the most hardened metallurgists out there in forumland. Put simply, to stretch something, you need to pull it apart between two fixed points. For example. When you bolt two pieces of steel together, as the nut is drawn down tightly, the bolt will stretch. Just to emphasise the point, and we’ve ALL done it to our old Triumph motorcycle cylinder head studs, if you over-tighten to beyond the point of its elasticity, the bolt will shear (or it’ll strip the thread…., whatever but you get the point). Call it what you will but in laymans terms, that is stretching beyond the point of elasticity

At the point of firing the L1A1 rifle and Bren gun, the body is actually COMPRESSED at the point of firing when the max. load is placed along it. The compression takes place between the locking shoulder, along the body et al and stops at your unfortunate shoulder which in fact cushions the force we call recoil. So there is no stretching. Compression, yes but not stretching as in ‘something to pull against’.

So where exactly does ‘STRETCHING’ take place? One could reasonably argue that there IS stretching in the gun-body area between the barrel nut (or the locked barrel to body thread) and the locking shoulder while the projectile passes up the bore. But while this is a theoretical and indeed, a measurable fact, in reality it is so insignificant as to be of no real value in relation to the subject of actually ‘stretching’ a body. After all, the projectile is not actually holding anything back or supporting anything because it is actually moving! In our example, a nut against a bolt head is stretching the bolt in realistic terms! No, this soft lead core with a soft copper jacketed projectile is moving forwards AGAINST the locked breech block. This causes recoil which is the rearward compression of the breech block against the locking shoulder.

To measure the actual resistance of the projectile in the bore and the impact this resistance will have in mechanically ‘stretching’ the solid ordnance steel body can be measured using simple laboratory tools or leverage. Indeed, we use the same simple mechanics to manually/mechanically push different projectiles along bores for various tests and classroom lessons. The gun bodies are worn out and in the case of the Bren guns it is a case of worn out barrel bearings

(this was a hand written after-note…..) For the ultimate experiment that would certainly disprove this is this. You would have to clamp the barrel at, say, the gas block and clamp the breech block down behind the locking shoulder. And draw back the breech block back straight in line with the bore. The gas block would tear away before the body ‘stretched. And in any case, the tendency of the body would be to bend upwards (or downwards with the rifle). And don't forget, to stretch a Bren gun or L1A1 rifle body to any measurable degree, you've got to stretch it longitudinally to beyond the point of its metallurgical elasticity...........

Always ready to listen and discuss opposing views.

[tankhunter]

Peter, I think you have 'Stretched' that one out long enough, Mate!.............