PDA

View Full Version : Ident: Para.... what is it?


rallyman
December 25, 2002, 03:41
What's the correct receiver (Type I, II, or III) for a Para? I know there is prolly a more involved answer here, but how 'bout for starters? Let me, maybe, narrow it a bit......correct for the most common Paras. Is there such thing as a common Para?

Also were most, all, none, Paras handle cut?

Thanks for the help.

FWRA
December 25, 2002, 07:52
Originally posted by rallyman
What's the correct receiver (Type I, II, or III) for a Para? I know there is prolly a more involved answer here, but how 'bout for starters? Let me, maybe, narrow it a bit......correct for the most common Paras. Is there such thing as a common Para?

Also were most, all, none, Paras handle cut?

Thanks for the help.

Type III for the Argentine kits and for the Imbel para kits.

EMDII
December 25, 2002, 11:11
Belgian Paras had all three variants, although the Type 1 was less prevalent, and probably used on prototypes more than anything else.

rallyman
December 25, 2002, 12:00
Ok, so that answers ALL the variations I was looking for - Thanks guys!

Now what about handles? Is it proper for Paras to have handles or not? Or both?

Thanks again,

Merry Christmas!

BlasterLP
December 26, 2002, 10:58
what type of canopy are you going to jump with your para?
Personally, I would make one of each :)

EMDII
December 26, 2002, 11:10
Originally posted by rallyman
..... Now what about handles? Is it proper for Paras to have handles or not? Or both? .....

AFAIK, ALL the factory Paras had handles. But L/FN, xIA and some of the guys who really 'saw' import action can better define that.

The persistent 'rumor' that carry handle cuts affect accuracy does not bear up under scrutiny. As an MBR, 2 MOA accuracy is not affected by the mass removed from the carry handle slot. Strictly aesthetic. Recoil is the reaction of the bullet moving down the bore (action: per Monsieur Newton). The recoil is equal to and opposite from that of the action, ergo, straight back along bore centerline. The breeching threads on the barrel transfer all that load into the female threads of the receiver trunnion. There is no significant movement of the barrel separate from that of the receiver. The recoil is transmitted more-or-less- straight aft into your shoulder, via the recoiling parts and raw energy dumped at time of firing.

jimmieZ
December 26, 2002, 11:13
The Argie Para I got from FWRA had the carry handle and was set up for a type 3 receiver (without the lightening cuts). It also has a std. type charging handle vs the folding charging handle seen on early Belgian Paras.

Jim Z

xcpd69
December 26, 2002, 19:13
Originally posted by EMDII


AFAIK, ALL the factory Paras had handles. But L/FN, xIA and some of the guys who really 'saw' import action can better define that.



I thought the 50.63 short Paras came without a carry handle?

Michael64
December 26, 2002, 23:29
The 50.63 has the short para barrel, holland rear sight and is not milled for a carry handle.

EMDII
December 27, 2002, 09:47
Interesting. My personal Belgian 50-63 has a Carry Handle. I can get the SN range when I get home.

xcpd69
December 27, 2002, 10:06
From the Remtek Website:

FN FAL 50.63 (http://www.remtek.com/arms/fn/63/5063.htm)

EMDII
December 27, 2002, 10:08
Oh I don't doubt it, but neither can I disregard the 50-63 shorty I had. Weird. Weirder.
:? :?

xcpd69
December 27, 2002, 10:17
Was it a Type II or III upper on yours? Who imported it? Folding Charging Handle? Holland sight?

EMDII
December 27, 2002, 10:23
Type 3 lower, and Type 3 upper (slab). Folding CH, conventional Para backsight, NOT the Holland. Matched SNs, yadayada. Metal folder, all Belgian proofs. Importer was Steyr IIRC, but I'll check when I get in.

xcpd69
December 27, 2002, 12:17
Ted, being a Type III WITH a Type III lower, I would hazard a guess that it was a late production model, and they eliminated the non carry-handle receivers as a cost cutting feature. Less variations, less expense.

Was the receiver cut for the folding charging handle, or handle modified?

ALSO, I read on here before that there were some receivers only imported, and rifles assembled here from spares, but I DON'T know the chronology. May have been AFTER Steyr.

P.S. The only thing sillier than beating a dead horse, is beating one after it's long gone... :D

EMDII
December 27, 2002, 13:40
Receiver was cut for the folding charging handle, and IIRC it was a late SN gun. This gun had a uniform finsh and texture, and to all appearances was matched in Belgium.

I agree: the cost-savings of eliminating a divergent machine operation is probably pretty good when you look at the marginal cost (that is: what did it cost you to make that VERY last receiver today?). One less choice (slot or not) times however many decisions the operator had to make means some US$ saved (or Belgian francs, I suppose back then).

Like Henry Ford said: you can have it any color you want as long as it's black, black, or.... black.

rallyman
December 28, 2002, 01:22
Wow....More info than I ever hoped for......thanks and keep it up guys.....You just gotta love all these variations....