Talk:F1 submachine gun

Say what?
I was interested to read that "the F1 had a robust and simple design and proved useful in close-quarters fighting during the Vietnam War" because I was under the impression (from various readings and websites) that the F1 was extremely unpopular and generally replaced by an M16 or even an Owen at the operator's earliest convenience. The "simple" part may be true enough, but robust it wasn't. As for it's effectiveness, "useless" would seem a more apt descriptor than "useful". Just a thought.172.190.204.98 (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have never had any first hand experience with the weapon in question so I cannot comment on the validity or otherwise of the points you raised. However if you have a reliable reference that you can use to support such statments then I think these observations should definately be worked in to the article with an inline citation. Anotherclown (talk) 05:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I have read on gun forums and blogs that the F1, like the Owen, required the magazine to be loose and rattle during fire. The mag spring was relatively weak and easily jammed in the box when a tight fitting mag was used. The shaking motion dislodged the jam. The gun had no more stopping power than a 9mm pistol, and was useful only when closer than 50m.202.125.31.66 (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Two Stage Trigger
Minor buglet but the F1 didn't have a two stage trigger, its rate of fire was low enough that an operater could fire a single round. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.211.237.191 (talk) 21:01, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Magazine
I've removed some bits from the paragraph regarding the magazine; specifically, that it didn't need a specialist magazine filler, "unlike its contemporaries": it's reasonable to say that the Sterling was perhaps its major contemporary and also didn't need a filler given that it was a basic double-stack magazine; indeed, at a glance they may even be the same design for all I know. The bit about it having the same spring pressure as a .22 magazine also seems both subjective and not entirely relevant, though the enhanced reliability of a downward-feeding magazine seems to be a thing so I've left that in. That said, "seems to be a thing" also isn't encyclopaedic so I've also left the "citation needed" tag! --Vometia (talk) 13:20, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Magazine again
I remember an early version of the F1 in the 1960s which had its magazine mounted horizontally on the left, like a Sten gun. Peter Bell (talk) 14:27, 18 June 2019 (UTC)