FN F2000 Forward Ejecting Shell Casings, Good or Bad?, page 1

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 12:20 PM

link

If you do not know already, the Belgian made FN F2000 fires a 5.56x45mm NATO round from a 30 round magazine loaded from the back in a bull pup layout. It is a selective firing weapon operating from a closed bolt. When the gun is fired, a swiveling tray ejects the spent shell casing through a separate tube running along side the barrel, where it is ejected in the front of the gun. To me, this seems like an easy way to jam, as the casings could get stuck and build up in the gun and might only be fixed through a field strip of the weapon. What do you think? I haven't heard of any problems like this yet, but it just seems that it would be likely to jam that way, like the P-90 loading mechanism.

jibeho

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 12:41 PM

link

The P90 has been the PDW for the Secret Service and other personal protection details around the world for a number of years now and has been proven to be very reliable and powerful for its size. I would imagine the same degree of reliability out of the F2000.

Just for fun

muzzleflash

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 12:56 PM

link

Here is a video about the FN(FS) 2000.

From what I hear it is a very awesome weapon.

N1ghtCr4wl3r

posted on Jun, 16 2010 @ 01:08 PM

link

reply to post by jibeho

I understand, and have seen this video, but after prolonged shooting, I would expect casings to get distorted and twist different ways inside the ejection tube. While it is highly unlikely, it seems like a recipe for disaster in combat.

Lonestar24

posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 02:01 PM

link

reply to post by N1ghtCr4wl3r

I agree that the tube system is another possible source of failure (e.g. obstruction by mud), but if the casings are not distorted by a failure of the firing system or faulty manufacturing there is no possibility for them to get stuck in the tube by themselves.

mattifikation

posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 02:00 AM

link

I wonder what happens after a prolonged period of firing at an extremely elevated position? For example, if you have to point the gun up at a fifth story window and engage a sniper and you have to fire an entire magazine into the window? Will the gun eject with enough force to overcome gravity and clear that tube?

dazbog

posted on Jun, 18 2010 @ 03:06 AM

link

I just put 1000 rounds through this weapon. No FTE. HOWEVER, they just kind of dribble out which is somewhat disconcerting and just not my cup of tea.

fritz

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 12:55 AM

link

Originally posted by mattifikation I wonder what happens after a prolonged period of firing at an extremely elevated position? For example, if you have to point the gun up at a fifth story window and engage a sniper and you have to fire an entire magazine into the window? Will the gun eject with enough force to overcome gravity and clear that tube?

If I'm an infantryman for a start I'd call on my squad grenadier, the SAW or even better, a General!

If I'm mechanized infantry, then a few .50 will seriously mess up his day.

But from ground level, shooting back at a sniper who's hidden Floors up?

Get real. Never happen. Bad scenario my friend. You did not think this through!

America?

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 03:14 AM

link

Eh sounds like FN tried setting themselves apart from the competition by using this design that apparently only works mediocrely. Personally this wouldn't be my first choice anyways.

ANOMALY502

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 03:17 AM

link

I love my FN 5.7 pistol, shoots smoothly and accurately very glad I purchased it. I haven't had the pleasure of firing any other FN weapons. Just thought I'd get that into the thread.

mattifikation

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 12:43 PM

link

reply to post by fritz

So an infantryman's rifle doesn't need to be able to reliably shoot up, just because it's not the best weapon for the job?

moonwilson

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 12:52 PM

link

My main problem with the FN F2000 is not the forward ejection- it's the price. They want like $2500 for those things- ridiculous. The reason the shell casings are ejected forward is because it makes the weapon more "ambidextrous". Hot shell casings in the face are what most lefties get from more "traditional" bullpup designs.

DaddyBare

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 01:14 PM

link

In my days as an Armorer I played around with this toy...
they work remarkably well if your a right handed shooter...
if your a lefty you get spent cases ejecting right before your eyes... you can convert it to throw spent cases the other way but no one I know has ever done so...

My problem with it is the same with any bullpup design... there's a rod attachment for the trigger and they always feel mushy or springy... not at all crisp... picture yourself trying to pull the trigger with a ball point pen... the flex from the pen is what I'm talking about...

moonwilson

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 02:34 PM

link

Originally posted by DaddyBare
In my days as an Armorer I played around with this toy...
they work remarkably well if your a right handed shooter...
if your a lefty you get spent cases ejecting right before your eyes... you can convert it to throw spent cases the other way but no one I know has ever done so...

My problem with it is the same with any bullpup design... there's a rod attachment for the trigger and they always feel mushy or springy... not at all crisp... picture yourself trying to pull the trigger with a ball point pen... the flex from the pen is what I'm talking about...

No, "casings to the face" is precisely the problem that the forward ejection port eliminates. With "traditional" bullpup designs, like the AUG, or the L85A1 etc., yes, lefties get cases to their faces, as the action is lined up pretty much with your eye socket. The new generation of bullpup rifles, like the F200 or the KelTec RFB, the casings are ejected forward, away from the shooter, no matter which side of the rifle his face is on.

The trigger transfer bar is a legitimate complaint about the bullpup layout. They have gotten better over the years, but most triggers are still relatively "squishy" when compared to more conventional rifles. It's an engineering problem that can be overcome though. For example, the trigger on the MSAR is actually pretty good- for a combat rifle, anyway. You won't be seeing them at Camp Perry for a while though, I'm sure.

theability

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 02:48 PM

link

If I had my wishes I'd prefer forward ejecting casings. During military use, I've had a few casings from my M16-A2 hit me in the face-cheek and I'll say the burning casing wasn't a nice feeling. I had burns for weeks.

Yes I shoot lefty.

So forward feeds are a nice evolution.

fritz

posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 12:39 AM

link

Originally posted by mattifikation reply to post by fritz[/url]
So an infantryman's rifle doesn't need to be able to reliably shoot up, just because it's not the best weapon for the job?

I just don't think you get where I'm coming from.

From ground level - i.e walking down the street, you'd damn well need binocular eyesight to spot a sniper 5 floors up - let alone engage him with your rifle!

It's the you spotting the sniper scenario I have issues with. Nothing to do wish a weapon not being able to shoot upwards.

After all, thousands of jundies fire their AKs straight up in the air every time they celebrate anything.

As to hitting him with a rifle - assuming you saw him in the first place, well, as I said. Give me a 40 mm A Pers/HE grenade any time.

mattifikation

posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 01:06 AM
link

Okay, so then he's three stories up, and he's a bad shot and he missed, so now you know where he is.

The point I was getting at is if you're firing the gun "up" for whatever reason, does it eject with enough force to clear the tube?

fritz

posted on Jun, 26 2010 @ 07:31 AM
link

reply to post by mattifikation[/url]

Having spoken to my Permanent Staff Instructor here where I work, he agrees with me that provided the weapon in question is regularly maintained and battle cleaned now and again, he can see no reason why the weapon should fail to eject correctly.

Of course there will be stoppages. Nature of the beast. Especially if you continually fire on full auto [as our American friends like to do] or 'doctor' your ammunition in any way.

Ammunition supply will be critical but here again, it is down to the infantryman using the weapon system.

I always taught my soldiers that 'care and maintenance of ammunition' was just as critical and cleaning and maintaining the weapon itself.

It would appear from the musing of the ill-informed [as usual] that there are problems with the weapon in question.

My question would be to those who question the weapon's reliability is, have you ever fired it in a combat?

If not.......................................'nuff said!

gambon

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link

reply to post by DaddyBare

this is exactly why they designed it to eject forwards...not the left or right..

tooo many pills

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:53 PM
link

Is that a Famas? I like it on 3-shot burst fire, but the p90 is for noobs. Haha, sorry I had too, I play Counter-Strike.

It seems like the further the ejecting shell has to travel the more chance it has to get stuck and jam, but I am no expert nor have I shot the gun in question.