Armory Sponsor
Pre-recall M249S parts - hammer, carrier - (pics) (Page 2 of 2)
|
Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: if it's pre-recall, i am making a cry face. Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: Originally Posted By PAESAN: My early-serial Para is listed for trade if you have a transferable 1919 sideplate available  if it's pre-recall, i am making a cry face. Yes, pre-recall. Gone now. And I don’t miss it. |
|
Originally Posted By withoutremorse42: Too bad I already bought one, post recall too. I hope that one goes to someone who'll appreciate the pre recall nature |
“The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates.”
"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
|
Originally Posted By jtb33: +1. The early ones with the good trigger are super rare, as I've got to believe that most sent their early ones back for the "recall work". FN was pretty aggressive in encouraging owners to send theirs back, and even paid shipping both ways as well as sending you packaging (also on their dime) to ship the gun back to them. |
“The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates.”
"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
|
I have some guys asking about having the job done ...we got some cart before the horse stuff on this yet. First i need to know the (in .001" amount) that the slide hammer moves the buffer back after contacing it. Second i need to know if machining that will affect the buffers job of buffering. If that doesnt affect it and the post machined slide hammer will work, i need to machine it enligh so it foesnt touch and verify that it works. If it doesnt, i also dnt know what FN wants to do then......its not just making an old styl slide hammer for it. They changed the firing pin and other things. We are still "sorting" the details here. |
|
Originally Posted By HaveBlue83: I have some guys asking about having the job done ...we got some cart before the horse stuff on this yet. First i need to know the (in .001" amount) that the slide hammer moves the buffer back after contacing it. Second i need to know if machining that will affect the buffers job of buffering. If that doesnt affect it and the post machined slide hammer will work, i need to machine it enligh so it foesnt touch and verify that it works. If it doesnt, i also dnt know what FN wants to do then......its not just making an old styl slide hammer for it. They changed the firing pin and other things. We are still "sorting" the details here. found my calipers. will measure rearward travel ETA rearward travel during trigger pull is between .016"-.021" depending on trigger pull speed, measured multiple times and in multiple places in the system. |
Joined:
Jan 2025
Posts:
1
EE: 0% (0)
UT, USA
|
I’ve been lurking on forums for years, and have finally joined up so I can chime in on this. Please forgive me if I am oblivious to certain rules or conduct, or if this is way out of place. I shoot my M249s often, I have probably 10k rounds through it. I had the 2017 recall done, but I know exactly why FN came out with the 2022 recall. I had a case of remanufactured .223 that would burst fire, no more than 3-4 rounds at a time, and most often only double fire. Only when trying to run the gun as fast as my trigger could go. Upon examination of that particular case of ammo I found the primers to be thin, and seated very deep. I assume the firing pin had enough energy to detonate upon the bolt coming into battery, and the recall changes to the firing pin and hammer were made to prevent that. Again, I found this only occurred when shooting that particular case of ammo. Out of curiosity and for science I hand loaded some ammo that mimicked that case and was able to repeat the result. Now I know for sure what to avoid so I can avoid that particular unsafe firing event. |
|
Originally Posted By Irishman93: I’ve been lurking on forums for years, and have finally joined up so I can chime in on this. Please forgive me if I am oblivious to certain rules or conduct, or if this is way out of place. I shoot my M249s often, I have probably 10k rounds through it. I had the 2017 recall done, but I know exactly why FN came out with the 2022 recall. I had a case of remanufactured .223 that would burst fire, no more than 3-4 rounds at a time, and most often only double fire. Only when trying to run the gun as fast as my trigger could go. Upon examination of that particular case of ammo I found the primers to be thin, and seated very deep. I assume the firing pin had enough energy to detonate upon the bolt coming into battery, and the recall changes to the firing pin and hammer were made to prevent that. Again, I found this only occurred when shooting that particular case of ammo. Out of curiosity and for science I hand loaded some ammo that mimicked that case and was able to repeat the result. Now I know for sure what to avoid so I can avoid that particular unsafe firing event. Great info, thanks for sharing. |
| I have an early example and never sent it in for either recall. What I discovered is that, when pulling the trigger very slowly, there is a sweet spot where the sear is just barely catching the linear hammer but not low enough to reset. At this point, the rifle will sometimes burst fire because the play between the slots on the linear hammer and the corresponding rails in the receiver is just enough that sometimes the linear hammer will ride over the tip of the sear and follow the bolt home. It doesn't happen very often and when it does, it'll fire two or three rounds before you end up with a dead trigger situation. Then, you simply re-cock the action, ejecting a live round in the process and continue on. I always assumed this was the reason for the first recall. |
|
Originally Posted By ProbableColtAddict: I have an early example and never sent it in for either recall. What I discovered is that, when pulling the trigger very slowly, there is a sweet spot where the sear is just barely catching the linear hammer but not low enough to reset. At this point, the rifle will sometimes burst fire because the play between the slots on the linear hammer and the corresponding rails in the receiver is just enough that sometimes the linear hammer will ride over the tip of the sear and follow the bolt home. It doesn't happen very often and when it does, it'll fire two or three rounds before you end up with a dead trigger situation. Then, you simply re-cock the action, ejecting a live round in the process and continue on. I always assumed this was the reason for the first recall. Very interesting, thanks for sharing. Did you find the burst instances to happen for a variety of ammo or a certain kind like the poster above? About how far in the trigger's path did it happen? Thx |
|
Originally Posted By TallPine: Very interesting, thanks for sharing. Did you find the burst instances to happen for a variety of ammo or a certain kind like the poster above? About how far in the trigger's path did it happen? Thx All I've ever shot through mine is surplus NATO ammo, both 55 and 62 grain. It happens when the trigger is pulled to just before the point that it releases the sear. |
Joined:
Jan 2025
Posts:
2
EE: 0% (0)
UT, USA
Joined:
Jan 2025
Posts:
3
EE: 0% (0)
UT, USA
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
1
EE: 0% (0)
USA
| I 3D printed a approximate version of the early hammer and noticed when charging the rifle the hammer spring tends to want to bind up slightly. I do not know if this may have been an issue with the early style or not. I also made a hybrid version that is longer like the new hammer, but with a slight reduction in length. The spring does not bind and the trigger pull is noticeably lighter as has been mentioned before. I tested with a shell with primer only and it does work. The lighter trigger pull is so nice! |
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
1
EE: 0% (0)
CA, USA
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
2
EE: 0% (0)
CA, USA
|
Man Rc60 sheeesh shes hard A F. I just got a mill in my garage shop, and its def a makeable part, but ur gonna need to know what it is ...D2 or (im guessing) 4140. I have a block of pre heat treated 4140 and i could prolly heat treat it after machining but id have to see. I have a rockwell tester at work, i can verify that too Im not gonna die anytime soon but if u want, i can use it to make an actual print so if people want to go about making a bunch, you could. And i could also after sending yours back, go and make some (if i can). If u want to, pm me Lemme know. This is a rent free annoyance that FN did all of this. They didnt verify the trigger pushed the new style back, and they added the trigger spring, and overall a crap redo. It BOTHERS ME deepy, as a former M249 weapons card holder. |
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
3
EE: 0% (0)
CA, USA
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
4
EE: 0% (0)
CA, USA
|
Anyone made any progress on this? I’m been thinking that maybe start with modifying cheap parts first to see what can be done. My thoughts were maybe shorten the piston of the buffer, or maybe smooth out the “hook” on the trigger sear to a more flat 90° angle. I’m particularly interested in the sear angle along with a shortened slide hammer, since it appears those were the two main “fixes” FN did. |
Joined:
Mar 2026
Posts:
1
EE: 0% (0)
AZ, USA
Joined:
Mar 2026
Posts:
2
EE: 0% (0)
AZ, USA
|
Look, I am happy to jump on a Zoom call with whomever is interested in producing these slide hammers. I have two FN M249S's - one is a pre-recall and the other is a post-recall. I am not an M249 armorer nor have any detailed knowledge about the platform - but happy to help if anyone needs more info on these.  |
https://www.ArizonaShooting.org
Joined:
Mar 2026
Posts:
3
EE: 0% (0)
AZ, USA
Pre-recall M249S parts - hammer, carrier - (pics) (Page 2 of 2)
Armory Sponsor