-  [WT]  [Home] [Manage]

[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]
Posting mode: Reply
Subject   (reply to 104045)
File URL
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Images greater than 300x300 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 1062 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2017-02-04 Show/Hide Show All

Patches and Stickers for sale here

File 149590419873.jpg - (161.05KB , 927x1248 , FN49_BookJohnsonA.jpg )
104045 No. 104045 ID: 813f6b
Because I needed to request a permit for a shotgun I'm planning to buy, I also added a permit for a SAFN onto the list.

As it turns out, perfect timing. Two collector's already notified they were selling theirs AND a local surplus dealer just brought a batch of refinished belgian army SAFNs onto the market. The wood is likely not correct and the parts are fully refinished, but personally, I don't mind too much if the price is right.

Here's some pics of the various rifles I've been offered so far.
Expand all images
>> No. 104046 ID: 813f6b
File 149590433156.jpg - (3.47MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN5308.jpg )
First off what appears to be a civilian model. It doesn't have a crest of the Belgian royal house & army (L for Leopold II or B for Baudoin) or the Luxemburg army, so the logical assumption is a civilian model (or "gift" to smooth over military purchases).
>> No. 104047 ID: 813f6b
File 149590440772.jpg - (3.34MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN5310.jpg )
See? No crest on the receiver/chamber.
>> No. 104048 ID: 813f6b
File 149590446421.jpg - (3.49MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN5309.jpg )
Finish doesn't get much more pristine than this with surplus guns...
>> No. 104049 ID: 813f6b
File 149590452280.jpg - (3.29MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN5314.jpg )
>> No. 104050 ID: 813f6b
File 149590459274.jpg - (3.51MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN5312.jpg )
>> No. 104051 ID: 813f6b
File 14959047633.jpg - (3.46MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN3126.jpg )
This ABL (belgian army) version is finished in grey enamel paint. Which is period correct. Black was also used.

Not sure if the stock finish is period correct though.
>> No. 104052 ID: 813f6b
File 149590480936.jpg - (3.25MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN3129.jpg )
B for King Baudoin/Boudewijn, not Belgium.
>> No. 104053 ID: 813f6b
File 14959048398.jpg - (3.42MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN3132.jpg )
>> No. 104054 ID: 813f6b
File 149590495693.jpg - (3.49MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN3133.jpg )
>> No. 104055 ID: 813f6b
File 149590503041.jpg - (7.35KB , 640x480 , FNsafn30_06CornetLota01a.jpg )
Don't have decent pics of the refinished belgian army SAFNs at the surplus dealer but they go for €850 with surplus wood and €950 with new wood.

I'll post some more later.
>> No. 104056 ID: 813f6b
File 149590506575.jpg - (9.01KB , 640x480 , FNsafn30_06CornetLotb01a.jpg )
(all matching numbers ofc)
>> No. 104057 ID: 57d4f8
>AND a local surplus dealer just brought a batch of refinished belgian army SAFNs onto the market.

You suck! I've been hoping these make it to the US surplus market for a while now. I'd much have a Belgian luxo-SKS than an M1 Garand. On the bright side of things, they still exist, rather than being scrap metal, so that's good news.

I'd go for the 'civilian' gun, mostly for the novelty of having an oddball one. Then again, if you're going to shoot the crap out of it go for the surplus gun. That way if it gets worn, at least it's a used gun you're wearing rather than something highly collectible.

Either way, let me reiterate how jealous I am.
>> No. 104059 ID: 813f6b
File 149591659476.jpg - (3.33MB , 4608x3456 , DSCN5426.jpg )

When I asked him about the lack of crest, seller of the first now claims it's likely a tool room model from FN itself. That's why there is no crest. I'm thinking it's probably just a civilian sale model.
Not sure if I believe him, but he's a rather known collector around here. You've probably seen his pics before.
Maybe FN-H itself can tell me more, don't know how cooperative they are in tracking down guns.
>> No. 104060 ID: 56190f
File 149591705833.jpg - (402.35KB , 1600x1010 , Belgian FN 49 (SAFN 49) Egyptian 3.jpg )
I had an Egyptian contract FN49 in 8mm Mauser. Very nice black walnut with a shiny finish. Very heavy, though. Took it on an elk hunt and discovered that carrying that around all day was tiresome. It also had a tendency to tear the rims off the brass when ejecting.
>> No. 104061 ID: 56190f
File 149591708320.jpg - (372.94KB , 1600x662 , Belgian FN 49 (SAFN 49) Egyptian 4.jpg )
>> No. 104062 ID: 56190f
File 149591713268.jpg - (388.91KB , 1600x1017 , Belgian FN 49 (SAFN 49) Egyptian 5.jpg )
>> No. 104063 ID: 56190f
File 149591717575.jpg - (155.98KB , 923x1600 , Belgian FN 49 (SAFN 49) Egyptian 6.jpg )
>> No. 104064 ID: 56190f
File 149591739636.jpg - (144.19KB , 1600x856 , Belgian FN 49 (SAFN 49) Egyptian 7.jpg )
Why don't the Arabs use Arabic numerals, like we do?
>> No. 104065 ID: 56190f
File 149591745132.jpg - (266.18KB , 1600x869 , Belgian FN 49 (SAFN 49) Egyptian 8.jpg )
>> No. 104066 ID: f2172d
I contacted Ruger awhile back and they were able to tell me the date of manufacture of my AC556. Tried the same with Armalite for my AR-18, but of course, the current version of Armalite in Illinois does not the records of the original Armalite from California.

Good luck with the SAFN and let us know how it shoots. Cool rifle and uncommon here in the States.
>> No. 104076 ID: ea0b87
Had an 8mm Egyptian model in the past. Nice little gun but eventually traded away after tracking down reasonably priced 8mm got tedious.
>> No. 104094 ID: 813f6b
File 149667637543.jpg - (191.38KB , 705x1133 , needsmoargun.jpg )

So I cracked & bought the pictured one on the spot.

It was just too fucking perfect to pass up (virtually no finish wear, almost no internal wear, barrel was a mirror). Not even re-arsenaled. Just factory fucking new. Whatever blemish shows up in the pictures is barely visible irl.

And the price was fair, so no use in arguing.


I visited this strong room. Dozens of FALs, FNCs, CALs, FN BAR Ds, FN MAG, Minimi, SAFNs, MG34, MG42, FN made UZIs, MP5s, Thompsons, Garands, cases upon cases of high powers, etc. Absolutely breath taking. All in working condition (except display & teaching models) and full auto where relevant.

I almost spilled all my spaghetti when I entered the room.
>> No. 104123 ID: 0876ee
File 149706364169.jpg - (57.13KB , 728x546 , kcLAG9kg.jpg )
I own a Lux, I have to say, I am not a fan. Before I bought one, I'd see pics of them online and think they were goddamn sexy, and I love tilting bolts.

There's nothing really wrong with the FN49, except the stock, which I'll get to.

There's a few SMALL inconveniences out of it, like the non-detachable magazine. I don't mind the non-detachable magazine on the SKS, but for some reason, it bothers me more on the FN49, maybe because you can't drop it and have to cycle rounds to clear it. I mean, even the shitty detachment on AG42s at least lets you remove the mag for cleaning without unscrewing out the trigger group. That said, the manual bolt hold open is 10/10, I love the idea of topping off a top-charging semi rifle, and the FN49, G43, VZ58, and M1A are cool as shit that you can do that. It just feels like there was this tiny, few year period where that made sense, the first generation, or generation and a half of combat feasible semi-auto battle rifles. The charging handle also feels just a little too small for the strength of the spring, I would have appreciated a little more leverage, especially if my hands were wet or something, enough to put two fingers on. MAS44s also suffer from this, btw.

The FN49 is also oddly heavy. It just seems like a couple pounds heavier than other rifles in its class, the 8-10 round semi-auto battle rifles, so its less fun to carry. I think the weight comes from the stock. For some weird bullshit reason, they made the stock RIDICULOUSLY THICK. This just makes the rifle feel bulky as hell, which okay, if I wanted pointy, I'd get an M1 carbine. Especially around the wrist of the stock, you can see in the side profile pictures, but its not that noticeable, its a bit wider than most other stocks, the C grip is absurdly thick, and way closer to the trigger than the other rifles, but what you don't see in side pictures, which was my entire experience before gunbrokering one, is just how THICK the stock is. Like look at this, >>104052 , you can see how much the stock extends past the handguard. I don't know, I have smaller hands, maybe, but just the stock made me not really like the FN49 very much. I guess Belgians have comically oversized hands.

I have to admit, I haven't shot it. Partly because the lack of enjoyment of the rifle itself, but mostly because I keep getting other guns. So I can't comment on how good of a shooter it is, it might be great.

Would I buy it again? Yes, but only to complete the collection. I have every other 8-10 shot battle rifle, and the FN49 holds a unique place in history, but personally, I can see why the belgian navy adopted the 1950 mauser, which is a beautiful gun.
>> No. 104126 ID: 813f6b
File 149707962754.jpg - (125.56KB , 1024x768 , P6140004.jpg )
>There's a few SMALL inconveniences out of it, like the non-detachable magazine.

Which is quite standard for a gun designed prior to WW2. While plenty of examples of detachable mags exist, they were usually shot down by the armies fielding them. Most obvious example being the SMLEs which are perfectly capable for being fed from detachable mags, but the rifles were modified to lock the mags in for fear of "loss" and increasing complexity of the logistics.

While the production only started after WW2 and the design could have been updated with ideas from the SVT40 etc, I'd argue that if the SAFN didn't have a fixed mag, it's highly likely it would be regarded with less nostalgia than it is now. It's the last "elegant old-war rifle".

>The FN49 is also oddly heavy. It just seems like a couple pounds heavier than other rifles in its class, the 8-10 round semi-auto battle rifles, so its less fun to carry.

It's the same weight as a Garand or a Johnson, and significantly lighter than a Ljungman, FG42 or G41? The only rifle I can think of in its class which is really lighter is the SVT?

>For some weird bullshit reason, they made the stock RIDICULOUSLY THICK.

It's ironic that you should mention it, because aside of the complaint with regards to detachable mags, the stock being too flimsy was the official complaint that came out of the Korean war.

The SAFN served next to the Garand and proved itself equal by all accounts (including american ones), but the army complained that "the stock would split after knocking down several doors with it". It's obviously not something we think about today, but it was common back then. This explains why the stocks were so beefy. They really had to handle abuse that goes above & beyond what we'd regard as acceptable.

I don't know what type of trials FN put the SAFN through, but you can be sure the thickness of the stock was a result of trying to make the rifle as solid as possible for military use.

One thing you failed to mention though, is the danger of the single piece firing pin. It is prone to breaking or getting stuck if very dirty, which means you now have a full auto uncontrolable .30-06 on your hands. If your rifle was not yet upgraded to the two piece firing pin, I'd suggest you do so even if you do not fire it. It may prevent disaster for someone further down the road.
>> No. 104127 ID: d0041a
IMO FN-49 was markedly handier and lighter than the Hakim, both shot well but the FN-49 is downright pleasant - I didn't have the same ergonomic issues - the stock is thick but I'm also a bigger guy

Again IMO no other 10 shot semi held a candle to the MAS 49/56 - that rifle handles like a carbine and it feels 4lbs lighter than it actually is, I'm still bewildered why the french didn't give it a 20 rounder when it was better than the M14 and BM-59 (and at least nearly on par with the FAL and G3)
>> No. 105357 ID: b18fec
File 150390503349.jpg - (286.32KB , 751x860 , IMG_2868.jpg )
Detachable mags is a minor complaint, to be honest, kind of like SKS's. Its something that would totally have made sense, and all its contemporaries offer detachable mags (even if only as a emergency action, as SVTs/G43s were, or for cleaning only, as in the Schmidt Rubins or Ljungman derivatives). I mean this just like my complaint about the CZ52...it makes no sense that it didn't have a slide release lever (and you can buy aftermarket slide stops with a thumbable lever for 30 bucks), but I'll use neither a CZ52 nor an FN49 in a situation where I'd need that TACTICAL HIGH SPEED LOW DRAG ABILITY. Its a very SMALL complaint like I said, and you are definitely correct in that up to the second world war, there was a predominant attitude that solders would just loose expensive magazines and loading from a cheap stripper clip is fine too. Similar attitude with magazine cut-offs, I guess.

Its been a while since I've handled them comparatively, but the other contemporaries you listed feel lighter, but according to wikipedia:
SVT40: 8.5lb
FN49: 9.5lb <---- You are here
M1: 9.5lb
Johnson: 9.5lb
G43: 9.7lb
MAS49: 10.3lb
AG42B: 10.4lb
FG42: 10.9lb (I'm surprised the FG isn't higher)
G41: 11lb

You're absolutely right on weight, which is really surprising to me. I think I need to handle them comparatively a bit more since its been a while, but from my personal recollection of feel:
G43 (but mine has a super sanded stock, so this could be why...havent gotten around to getting a correct Fox stock yet)

Side note, I need a johnson and a g41 for collector's sake. But, this is really interesting to me why I thought it was so heavy. Maybe its longer, or the wide grip led to an illusion, or maybe I'm just being a little bitch? Either way, I hereby retract my complaint on weight, and am glad to learn and improve my knowledge.

As far as thickness, good note on historic use. I'm surprised they had issues with it breaking, when other rifles of the period didn't have this issue (or at least, not that I know of). Maybe a choice of wood? Did the Belgians have the same problem with their Mausers? I also have a Belgian model 1950 navy mauser (beautiful guns, btw, get one if you can), and its stock (while still beefy) isn't /oddly/ thick. The rationale to beef it up makes sense, but for my personal enjoyment of the rifle its reduced.

Thanks for bringing the firing pin to my attention, I'll check it as appropriate. I do want to shoot it, but up until now, I've just had way more .303, 7.5x55, and 8mm to shoot to shoot my plethora of .30-06s (as a shame to being an amerifat).

The 49/56 is a brilliant rifle, but you have to give it consideration that it came out way after the other rifles, by the 50s the French had learned the lessons of the earlier MAS40/44/49 as well as other european designs. Though, I've typically compared it to the more period-correct G3, FAL, M14, and Stgw57. Compared to these rifles, wow its light weight *really* shines, but the 10 round capacity really becomes more apparent, compared to their standard 20 rounds (and 24 for the 510). When I bought mine, I actually did look online for 20 rounders, and was very surprised they were never made by MAS or by US aftermarket.

Pic: My battle rifles, as relevant to the thread. Left to right, G43, MAS44, SVT40, M1, FN49, FN1950, AG42B, FG42, MAS49/56. Below: PE57, M1A. Handling them now, the FN49 weight does not stick out as much as before, and the AG42 is heavier than I remember. But I could be biased by looking up the numbers.
>> No. 105358 ID: bf333d

It might just be that the balance feels off for you. This greatly affects perceived weight.

Something like the SVT40 may be very long, but feels remarkably light when firing.

In the meantime, I'm told the permit for my SAFN should be in the mail now. Can't wait to go claim it...
>> No. 105359 ID: bf333d
>Did the Belgians have the same problem with their Mausers?

Did some research, but couldn't find anything out of the ordinary.
>> No. 105360 ID: f2172d
Does it really take 2 months for you to get the permit?
Man, my sympathies.
>> No. 105361 ID: bf333d
File 150411279080.jpg - (38.01KB , 266x273 , 1471153270909.jpg )
>Does it really take 2 months for you to get the permit?

For large caliber semi autos, it can take 2 weeks to 4 months for the governor to issue your permits.
And if you fail to get it after 4 months, you can file a protest with the justice department, which almost always guarantees you get your permits, but that tacks on 6 to 8 months of waiting time for it to be processed.

Yup, wonderful system, that's easily abused by antigun governors and their staff. Hell, most governors exclusively staff their gun administration by people who have never touched a gun and have no interest in them at all. You could say it's to prevent bias, but it's really just to make sure they can be manipulated to be antigun.

In contrast, I can walk into a gun shop with my sportshooting license and walk out with a bolt action rifle or a .22LR pistol immediately, with a self-issued permit the seller and buyer sign, sending a copy to the gun administration.
>> No. 105369 ID: d9c6fe
that type of attitude is true of absolutely every government pissant ever, its not just gun regulators. they're all some combination of officious, arrogant, greedy, lazy and abusive. the lowest footsoldier cops are like that and so are senators, generals & other bigshots. in decades of regular interaction with federal, state and local government the only helpful people i have met are the people in the air quality inspection part of auto registration and some people in state departments of agriculture.
every other one of them acts like you're having an audience with the king to ask a special favor when you go to them to have them do the job that they are required by law to do. we have far too many backslapping rimjobbers who think that they're above reproach occupying positions of power.
i like people who work in gas stations and convenience stores, they usually seem like they're working quickly with no bullshit or manipulation.
>> No. 105370 ID: e9b3d2
File 150415211978.jpg - (127.87KB , 4193x917 , Belgian WW1 Mauser M1935 short rifle with scope by.jpg )
How's the war surplus market in Belgium?
- Belgian Mauser M1935 short rifle with scope by Certar, Goerz.
>> No. 105371 ID: bf333d
File 150419404679.jpg - (403.14KB , 2000x1500 , 01 - My collection of British items.jpg )
>How's the war surplus market in Belgium?

Pretty good, though recently it has taken a hit.

Previously, you did not need an permits or licenses to be able to own a "historical, folklorical or decorative weapon" (HFD). This meant stuff like the K98K, SMLE, etc, but also some small ring hammer C96s or 1895 Nagant revolvers, etc.

The minister in charge of the rules unilaterally destroyed the list of "HFD" weapons under the pretext that these weapons posed a risk to public safety. But obviously several gun shops etc took the minister to court and the decision was overturned due to lacking any ground to destroy the list. However now most HFD weapons are in limbo, since the courts overturned the decision to destroy the HFD list, but it was never officially reinstated by the minister.

Regardless, it's easy to find surplus weapons. Including full autos, but you need special collector's permits for those. Due to this, a lot of MGs are quite cheap.

pic unrelated.
>> No. 105373 ID: 764560
Same here, I liked my egyptian 8mm but got real tired of tracking down 8mm that wasn't garbage but didn't require me to refinance my car. Traded it to a collector
>> No. 105395 ID: 60979c
I wonder if that one was built from an original Scharfshutzengewehr 98.
[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]

Delete post []
Report post