Armory Sponsor
Posted: 12/25/2008 11:39:25 PM EDT
|
I am looking to add a bullpup to the collection and am very excited about the MSAR and the FS2000. If I like the bullpup enough I could use it as my patrol rifle as well.
Here are the pros and cons that I have found: MSAR Cheaper Uses proprietary mags (still cheaper even if I purchase 6 mags) Harder to use from off side shoulder (only a problem if I use it for duty) 2.29 inches shorter than the FS2000 .3 pounds lighter Looks better IMHO Locks back after last round I like the VFG FS2000 Can use equally well from either shoulder (could be a huge deal if I like a bullpup enough to carry it at work) Uses AR mags Doesn't uses PMAGS which are my current duty/go to mags Doesn't lock back after last round Made by FNH and may be a better collector piece? May be able to handle one locally before I decide Has built in BUIS's Both seem somehwat limited in sling and light mount choices, but only really issues if I like it enough to carry it. Between the two, which would you choose? If you would choose the MSAR, how would you compare it to the AXR? I like the fact that the AXR uses PMAGS, but it is in the same cost range as the FS2000 and still has the off shoulder issue. Thanks. I have been reading everything I can find on the net about the two and am looking for more opinions. |
|
I was tossing this very thing around awhile back.
Here's where I landed and why. 1. FN Herstal is a HUGE... HUGE Weapons company, regardless of future legislation they aren't going anywhere. Same may NOT be the said for Micro-Techs MSAR (AUG clone). If the political climate gets unfriendly, it will be hard for Micro-tech to stay in business, spares will likely become extinct no fault of Micro-Tech just a theory on the nature of the business and their very limited resources. Not an indictment of their quality or business model so much as a concern regarding their ability to weather political storms. 2. FN went to school on the Styer AUG, the L85, then they made them better. Plain and simple, there are going to be teething issues certainly but the FS2000 is a truly modern weapon. The Styer AUG was designed only a decade after our beloved AR-15, while the L85 followed along just after in the 80's. The FS2000 (F2000) is a child of the late 90's designed and built by one of the most respected and trusted firearms manufacturers in the world. In M240 we trust... History will tell but eventually I am pretty confident that the F2000 will surpass the AUG in terms of sale numbers and combat effectiveness. Maybe... 3. Magazines, and this is kinda what sealed it for me. I've already got a stack of AR Magazines laying around and yeah I've got Pmags as well. However I'd much rather have to avoid putting a PMAG in an FS, than worry about buying enough unproven ANYWHERE magazines in a rifle I'm depending on to be useful and reliable. PMAGs are dandy but hardly a revolutionary item and one that is easily replaced with a C-products Stainless at $15 a pop or even the Much over Hyped HK 416 mag etc. Now then, the Microtech should ring in at about $1000 yeah, and the FS2000 maybe at about $1300 (Imported) so they are both overpriced, but if I'm spending $1700??? I may as well Spend $2200 and get something that's got a big ole' mothership of support available for it now and in the longterm. So, I'm likely getting an FS2000 assuming a SOCOM 16-II doesn't sneak up on me. But between the very Cool looking Microtech, or the FS? It's the FS easily. |
|
I've used both and settled on the STG.
I found the STG handles better for me (YMMV), just couldn't get used to the FS2000's wide forend. The STG is US-made so no import ban to worry about and spare parts are available (FN won't sell spare parts to consumers). STG has bolt hold-open and is a simpler design (bolt assy of the FS2000 is scary-complex, never seen so many springs and levers in a bolt assy before). FS2000 has had a couple of broken charging handles reported. FS2000's BUIS don't cowitness and the rear aperture needs to be opened up to be usable. FS2000 is more difficult to rail if you want to add a taclight, laser, etc. Yes, the STG uses a proprietary mag but they're extremely rugged & well made (I dropped a loaded 42rd mag about 5' onto concrete and all it did was spit out the first 2 rds). STG is easier to sling w/multiple options available. Overall the STG fits my needs much better than the FS2000 (again, YMMV). Tomac STG-556 & FS2000 side-by-side: 
FS2000 bolt assy: 
My STG-556's w/Trijicon RX30's, MI folding BUIS & TLR-1 taclights: 
Slings- Bottom STG has a single point sling adapter and the top STG has a std "silent" sling that works well when carried "AK-style" (ie: over the neck): 
|
|
I have to disagree with Tomac, I have a Steyr AUG and FS2000 regular and with built in sight.
The handling differnce between the two is like the difference between a short skeet shotgun and a long trap gun. The FS2000 swings alot better then the AUG because the center of gravity is farther back and it feels really light. the AUG is more front heavy. I prefer the FS2000 to shoot multiple targets up close and the AUG for long range shooting. besides that, the FS2000 trigger is better than my AUG, and length of pull is better for me. overall I think it is a toss up, really each has its strengths and I like both. I lean a little bit to the FS2000 because it is so fast to swing from target to target, and works well with a Eotech. |
|
It sounds like you need the AXR.
Takes AR mags, takes PMAGs, has last round bolt hold open. In addition the barrel has standard 1/2-28 threads, has a billet receiver, AUG parts interchange with it in any combination, American made and owned, dead on reliable. Some people say they don't like the grip? If you don't like the VG swap it with an AUG grip. I found one for $15 and am doing that exact thing. |
|
FS2000:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have. 2. Heavier Trigger with a reset that IMHO isn't that great. 3. Does not come standard with VFG. Sorry, bullpups are all about CQB and for that you need the control of a VFG..even more so with a bullpup. 4. Can't use polymer magazines. Why? Seems like they could have got around that issue pretty damn easy. 5. Can't do a quick chamber check. Have to lift that damn "toliet seat" cover to see what's going on with the chamber and that doesn't lend itself to speed. 6, No drop free mags..I can deal with that, but it would have been nice to have. Again not sure why they couldn't make it have drop free magazine release seems like a simple enough thing to do. 7. FS2000 makes obtaining parts near impossible. The only way you'll get a new FS2000 part is if you purchase another rifle, send it to FNH, or find someone willing to part out an FS2000...good luck. 8. No quick change barrel system. Come one...how can I do the recreation of the scene in Die Hard where the bad guy pulls the AUG out of the bag and you here that click of the barrel as it is installed with the FS2000? 
FS2000 is great. It brings things to the bullpup world, but in my book the Steyr AUG is still King of the Bullpups. If I could get forward ejection without all the negatives somehow I'd be all over that rifle. |
|
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. 3. Does not come standard with VFG. Sorry, bullpups are all about CQB and for that you need the control of a VFG..even more so with a bullpup.
While I agree with your premise about a bullpup rifle being designed with CQB in mind, I disagree with your conclusion about a Vertical Fore-Grip being absolutely necessary. On full auto they definitely can help, but the guns we are talking about are for the American civilian market so that's a non-issue. Further, the VFG on an AUG can be folded over to be turned into a more conventional handhold for the user. It's a personal preference kind of thing. 4. Can't use polymer magazines. Why? Seems like they could have got around that issue pretty damn easy.
This has a lot more to do with the various companies that make magazines than FN. The polymer mags, including the celebrated PMAG, seem to be out of spec for a standard NATO mag. The PMAG with its ribs have trouble fitting in rifles with deep mag wells (including the FNC) that are designed to accept the standard NATO AR-15/M16 mag. I have been told that the problem exists with some S&W15 rifles as well. I do not know if or when Magpul is going to fix this but expecting any company to make a gun that can accept all magazines that deviate from the specifications seems a little unfair. 5. Can't do a quick chamber check. Have to lift that damn "toliet seat" cover to see what's going on with the chamber and that doesn't lend itself to speed.
Training and practice takes care of this as an issue. 6, No drop free mags..I can deal with that, but it would have been nice to have. Again not sure why they couldn't make it have drop free magazine release seems like a simple enough thing to do.
Training and practice takes care of this as an issue. The release and removal of the mag can be done in one fluid motion. It is very quick once you are used to doing it. Again, there are reasons you do not want a magazine to drop free on a combat firearm. The top reason is if the shooter inadvertently activated the mag release. -Think of the problems for a person doing that at night in the rain and mud or in the brush... 7. FS2000 makes obtaining parts near impossible. The only way you'll get a new FS2000 part is if you purchase another rifle, send it to FS2000, or find someone willing to part out an FS2000...good luck.
That's not quite the case. People can and have contacted FN to get parts. I know I read people getting extra fore-grips to use for mounting flashlights and extra charging handles to replace broken ones. I have no doubt that certain parts are not available but I believe that has to do with FN not wanting people engaging in garage gunsmithing where a mistake could lead to serious injury. FS2000 parts are not all over the place like AR parts but you don't have 10+ brands of FS2000 rifles on the market either. Personally, I prefer the FS2000. That said, it is a mistake to buy a firearm without trying it or at least handling it. Doing so tempts fate for unhappiness. Aside from Martens, who knows what will be the deal maker or the deal breaker for him with either platform? |
|
Training is NOT going to help folks get around the fact that to do a chamber check on the FS2000 you have to lift the chamber cover up.
You do NEED a VFG with a bullpup used for CQB whether it's semi-auto or full. The fact is that the VFG help with weapon retention it makes the rifle easier to manipulate in tight quarters and it is in short a "most have" when you're going to be up close and personal with your suspect/enemy/intruder. The Monolith tri-rail foregrip will help there, but then you're spending hundreds of dollars more. There is a reason the British recently released a rail system and VFG as standard for the new issued L85A2's that are being put to good use in Helmand Province in Afghanistan. That's the way I see it. I don't intend for anyone to follow my lead, but I think the folks here all know this stuff anyways. It simply comes down to what floats your boat more. If you want that weak side transition and are willing to work around the short-comings of the rifle then go with the FS2000. MSAR is nice because there is also no 18 U.S.C. 922r crap to worry about. You also get the ability to go 16" and 20" right now with a 14" and suppressor barrel assembly possible in the future. |
|
Quoted:
It simply comes down to what floats your boat more. Yep, that's why there are so many different handguns and rifles. For me it's FS2000 all the way. But then I only shoot at the range for fun. Although ambidextrous, I shoot a rifle primarily left handed so I contacted TPD about a left handed AXR (I had decided on AXR over the MSAR). They said it was several months out but I'm not sure that's accurate. So in the meantime I purchased a couple of FS2000s and have really enjoyed them and won't be ordering an AXR. |
| MSAR will have the E4 rifle available soon after SHOT. It will use AR15 mags, any AR15 mags, including those made by us out of the same polymer as our STG-556 mags. It will have a last round hold open. The E4 will also have barrels with 1/2 x 28 thread. It also has some pretty cool updates you will just have to wait until SHOT. |
|
Quoted:
MSAR will have the E4 rifle available soon after SHOT. It will use AR15 mags, any AR15 mags, including those made by us out of the same polymer as our STG-556 mags. It will have a last round hold open. The E4 will also have barrels with 1/2 x 28 thread. It also has some pretty cool updates you will just have to wait until SHOT. Well that sounds interesting! |
|
Between to two, it came down to the fact that my father and brother are left handed, while I am right handed. The only truly ambidextrous bulpup is the FS2000 (I can hand it to my father or brother without doing anything and it is ready to go).
However, overall I still strongly prefer an AR 
|
|
5. Can't do a quick chamber check. Have to lift that damn "toliet seat" cover to see what's going on with the chamber and that doesn't lend itself to speed.
Training and practice takes care of this as an issue. Keeping in mind that I prefer the FS2K at least inasmuch as that was the one I purchased, but: What is the quickest way to do a chamber check on the FS2K? If you have a mag in your rifle, and don't know whether or not you have a round chambered, what's the quickest way to find out? And can you do it without ejecting the live round, if any, that is chambered? |
|
Quoted:
MSAR will have the E4 rifle available soon after SHOT. It will use AR15 mags, any AR15 mags, including those made by us out of the same polymer as our STG-556 mags. It will have a last round hold open. The E4 will also have barrels with 1/2 x 28 thread. It also has some pretty cool updates you will just have to wait until SHOT. Cool. Now I PM'ed you a while ago about a STG that takes AR mags. I was told it would be a replacement stock. Is the E4 the full rifle version of it? If I buy an STG now and get the "retrofit" stock, will that be the same (more or less) as the E4? Also, does SHOT mark the date you start making them or the date you start selling them? As in, they're ready to go, just waiting for the date? Thanks |
| i've shot both and i much prefer the AUG/MSAR. the F2000 has too much damn plastic on it. you would think that FN could've made it more streamline. yes, it's lightweight, but it feels like i'm trying to shoulder a refrigerator box. the AUG shoulders and shoots like a dream. |
|
Quoted:
i've shot both and i much prefer the AUG/MSAR. the F2000 has too much damn plastic on it. you would think that FN could've made it more streamline. yes, it's lightweight, but it feels like i'm trying to shoulder a refrigerator box. the AUG shoulders and shoots like a dream. LOL, my first impression was 'this feels likea pregrnant fish with a picatinney rail on top' 
the F2000 is a neat concept, but they really should have refined it a bit more both by slimming it down and by simplyfying it internally a bit. |
|
Quoted:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. Please explain to me where a "last round hold open" feature is a bad thing. I'd love to understand that. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
MSAR will have the E4 rifle available soon after SHOT. It will use AR15 mags, any AR15 mags, including those made by us out of the same polymer as our STG-556 mags. It will have a last round hold open. The E4 will also have barrels with 1/2 x 28 thread. It also has some pretty cool updates you will just have to wait until SHOT. Cool. Now I PM'ed you a while ago about a STG that takes AR mags. I was told it would be a replacement stock. Is the E4 the full rifle version of it? If I buy an STG now and get the "retrofit" stock, will that be the same (more or less) as the E4? Also, does SHOT mark the date you start making them or the date you start selling them? As in, they're ready to go, just waiting for the date? Thanks +1 I would also like to know as i am looking to buy an stg but would hold off for this. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. Please explain to me where a "last round hold open" feature is a bad thing. I'd love to understand that. Prevents the ingress of dirt and sand. To make the L1A1 more reliable in desert environments the Brits removed the original FAL hold-open and added sand cuts to the bolt carrier. |
|
Quoted:
MSAR will have the E4 rifle available soon after SHOT. It will use AR15 mags, any AR15 mags, including those made by us out of the same polymer as our STG-556 mags. It will have a last round hold open. The E4 will also have barrels with 1/2 x 28 thread. It also has some pretty cool updates you will just have to wait until SHOT. Sonovabitch, sounds like I should have just waited 6 months to get my STG, as you will now be making exactly what I wanted in the first place. Curses!
Well, maybe I can pick up a new one and sell the current one as a 'very rare, colectors item!' model. 
|
|
If MSAR just sells the new E4 as a whole rifle and doesn't offer the stock as a conversion aftermarket option by itself I'm going to be pretty damn disappointed in them.
They had better continue to offer their AUG/MSAR magazines as well at the same relative price. If they screw over the folks that purchased the original STG's they are going to burn some bridges. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. Please explain to me where a "last round hold open" feature is a bad thing. I'd love to understand that. Prevents the ingress of dirt and sand. To make the L1A1 more reliable in desert environments the Brits removed the original FAL hold-open and added sand cuts to the bolt carrier. Interesting. I didn't know that though the reasoning seems weak. If the weapon is to remain in the elements and unloaded for a period of time, just drop the bolt and close the dust cover (if so equipped). If I'm in a fight, I damned well want a "last round hold open". That one second that the bolt is open to the elements won't bother me, I swear. |
|
Quoted:
If MSAR just sells the new E4 as a whole rifle and doesn't offer the stock as a conversion aftermarket option by itself I'm going to be pretty damn disappointed in them. They had better continue to offer their AUG/MSAR magazines as well at the same relative price. If they screw over the folks that purchased the original STG's they are going to burn some bridges. Is there any reason to believe the won't? So far MSAR has been pretty receptive to customer input and I can't see them doing this to past purchasers. I also vaguely remember reading here that the stock would be available as an accessory for existing AUG owners. |
|
Quoted:
If MSAR just sells the new E4 as a whole rifle and doesn't offer the stock as a conversion aftermarket option by itself I'm going to be pretty damn disappointed in them. They had better continue to offer their AUG/MSAR magazines as well at the same relative price. If they screw over the folks that purchased the original STG's they are going to burn some bridges. Relax! Everything will be just fine! We will continue to produce STG-556 mags and STG-556 rifles. |
|
Also consider an AXR (Aug clone) it also takes AR Mags and is a milled receiver (not cast like the MSAR). I love my MSAR but havent shot it much since I just got it. The ony thing I dont like about it is that you cant put back up iron sights on it. I have my Aimpoint and eotech magnifier on it.
Stevenfiveo PS the AXR is about 500 dollars more then the MSAR and there is a 10 week wait list which I'm on  One more thing, you could always buy both and see for yourself.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. Please explain to me where a "last round hold open" feature is a bad thing. I'd love to understand that. Prevents the ingress of dirt and sand. To make the L1A1 more reliable in desert environments the Brits removed the original FAL hold-open and added sand cuts to the bolt carrier. Interesting. I didn't know that though the reasoning seems weak. If the weapon is to remain in the elements and unloaded for a period of time, just drop the bolt and close the dust cover (if so equipped). If I'm in a fight, I damned well want a "last round hold open". That one second that the bolt is open to the elements won't bother me, I swear. In the case of the L1A1, that was the reason and can be referenced in R. Blake Steven's work, The FAL Rifle Hold-opens are most popular on American rifles and are less of an issue with European Weapons. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. Please explain to me where a "last round hold open" feature is a bad thing. I'd love to understand that. Prevents the ingress of dirt and sand. To make the L1A1 more reliable in desert environments the Brits removed the original FAL hold-open and added sand cuts to the bolt carrier. Interesting. I didn't know that though the reasoning seems weak. If the weapon is to remain in the elements and unloaded for a period of time, just drop the bolt and close the dust cover (if so equipped). If I'm in a fight, I damned well want a "last round hold open". That one second that the bolt is open to the elements won't bother me, I swear. In the case of the L1A1, that was the reason and can be referenced in R. Blake Steven's work, The FAL Rifle Hold-opens are most popular on American rifles and are less of an issue with European Weapons. Not doubting you at all, just don't agree with the reasoning. Thanks for the info. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. Please explain to me where a "last round hold open" feature is a bad thing. I'd love to understand that. Prevents the ingress of dirt and sand. To make the L1A1 more reliable in desert environments the Brits removed the original FAL hold-open and added sand cuts to the bolt carrier. Interesting. I didn't know that though the reasoning seems weak. If the weapon is to remain in the elements and unloaded for a period of time, just drop the bolt and close the dust cover (if so equipped). If I'm in a fight, I damned well want a "last round hold open". That one second that the bolt is open to the elements won't bother me, I swear. In the case of the L1A1, that was the reason and can be referenced in R. Blake Steven's work, The FAL Rifle Hold-opens are most popular on American rifles and are less of an issue with European Weapons. Not doubting you at all, just don't agree with the reasoning. Thanks for the info.
I think most of it comes down to training. I prefer a hold-open also, but I remember when I used to shoot IPSC competition. The idea was not to shoot the gun dry, but to do a mag change with the last round in the chamber. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. Please explain to me where a "last round hold open" feature is a bad thing. I'd love to understand that. Prevents the ingress of dirt and sand. To make the L1A1 more reliable in desert environments the Brits removed the original FAL hold-open and added sand cuts to the bolt carrier. Interesting. I didn't know that though the reasoning seems weak. If the weapon is to remain in the elements and unloaded for a period of time, just drop the bolt and close the dust cover (if so equipped). If I'm in a fight, I damned well want a "last round hold open". That one second that the bolt is open to the elements won't bother me, I swear. In the case of the L1A1, that was the reason and can be referenced in R. Blake Steven's work, The FAL Rifle Hold-opens are most popular on American rifles and are less of an issue with European Weapons. Not doubting you at all, just don't agree with the reasoning. Thanks for the info.
I think most of it comes down to training. I prefer a hold-open also, but I remember when I used to shoot IPSC competition. The idea was not to shoot the gun dry, but to do a mag change with the last round in the chamber. Well, the hold open allows you to both. Seems that having a hold open on a combat weapon is the best idea. The L1A1 was designed a while ago so I would suppose the thinking has changed, the SA80 has a hold open doesn't it? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. No last round bolt hold open. From what I understand the forward ejection makes that near impossible to have.
There are other platforms (i.e. AK's & FNC's) that don't have the last round bolt hold open feature. Part of it is the view of the people making the gun for their respective military forces. There are reasons a last round bolt hold open is not always a good thing just like there are reasons for not wanting drop-free magazines for combat troops and cops. Training and practice with the platform will make it seem like a very minor issue. Please explain to me where a "last round hold open" feature is a bad thing. I'd love to understand that. Prevents the ingress of dirt and sand. To make the L1A1 more reliable in desert environments the Brits removed the original FAL hold-open and added sand cuts to the bolt carrier. Interesting. I didn't know that though the reasoning seems weak. If the weapon is to remain in the elements and unloaded for a period of time, just drop the bolt and close the dust cover (if so equipped). If I'm in a fight, I damned well want a "last round hold open". That one second that the bolt is open to the elements won't bother me, I swear. In the case of the L1A1, that was the reason and can be referenced in R. Blake Steven's work, The FAL Rifle Hold-opens are most popular on American rifles and are less of an issue with European Weapons. Not doubting you at all, just don't agree with the reasoning. Thanks for the info.
I think most of it comes down to training. I prefer a hold-open also, but I remember when I used to shoot IPSC competition. The idea was not to shoot the gun dry, but to do a mag change with the last round in the chamber. Well, the hold open allows you to both. Seems that having a hold open on a combat weapon is the best idea. The L1A1 was designed a while ago so I would suppose the thinking has changed, the SA80 has a hold open doesn't it? I believe it does. |
Armory Sponsor