PDA

View Full Version : pacific armament


themarmot
August 24, 2008, 16:16
did pacific armament ever manufacture fal rifles from kits? how was the quality?what are they worth? my coworkers brother says he has one for $800

Gunny71
August 27, 2008, 11:49
My PAC Imbel receivered STG has assembled by Century stamped very lightly under the barrel....Could not tell the monkeys put it together untill I saw that, fit and finish is way above normal CIA standards.

bykerhd
August 27, 2008, 20:01
IAI built FALs using PAC Gear Logo Imbels.
Century did use some also. Not many I think. Most Century Imbels are marked as imported by Century and do not have the Gear Logo on them. I've no idea how many other licensed builders may have used those Gear Logo Imbels.

The Gear Logo receivers were preferred by most individual builders. The Gear was cool looking and they were easier to get than Century's version for a while I think. Century offered a lot of bare Imbel receivers towards the end of when they could be imported, and even after, for quite reasonable prices.

The receiver markings, in a lot of cases, only refer to the receiver itself.
Century did mark some rifles as assembled by them. Lots of owners disassembled those same rifles and rebuilt them.
Sometimes better and sometimes not.:rolleyes:

ftierson
August 27, 2008, 20:11
Century also sold a bunch of gear-logo Imbel receivers...

Forrest

tracyballard
August 27, 2008, 20:19
although I have heard that PAC cobbled together some crappy 1911 pistols out of spare parts at one time, I believe they were mainly just a middleman moving guns and gun parts as they bought them.

p712k
September 03, 2008, 17:13
PAC made at least a few complete rifles. I have a PAC assembled rifle that matches on the Upper, Lower, BC, and Bolt. It looks like a mainly STG kit which PAC re-serialed and built on a Imbel. The top cover is FN marked though. The inside of the magwell is stamped 2000.

Can anyone ID the mag release?

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d78/P712k/DSCI0687.jpg

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d78/P712k/DSCI0686.jpg

Can anyone help me out with some info on its barrrel? It is marked 7.62x51 VCL140, in front of that is something that looks like a target, here is a pic:

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d78/P712k/DSCI0689.jpg

ostrobothnian
September 03, 2008, 17:56
The markings on the barrel are Steyr. Looks like someone took the time to do some machining (and or dremeling) and stamping on the lower, bolt and carrier. Mag release is israeli I think.

p712k
September 04, 2008, 16:56
I am not one to call someone out on the net a being wrong but you dug yourself really deep with that post, and I really did not care for the tone of it either.

But I have a question, are you ready to be wrong, like really totally 100% wrong…

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d78/P712k/Parts.jpg

Each Part, Lower, Carrier, and Bolt has been renumbered with PACxxxxx – the same SN on the receiver. Now I know that a gunsmith didn’t do that to build a fake PAC gun, so I think it is safe to say it is a PAC build.

thedrickel
September 04, 2008, 17:03
Anybody could have renumbered it to matching "PAC00XXX" for shits and giggles. Doesn't necessarily mean that PAC did it.

tracyballard
September 04, 2008, 17:06
D. Lehrman knows FAL's, he's like EF Hutton. If someone is wrong I'm not betting on him.

p712k
September 04, 2008, 17:18
Ok, so someone took the time to stamp fake PAC serial numbers on 3 different parts it after milling the old ones off. Its not like PAC is like DSA and it would get them more $$.

Maybe he knows his FALs but new information does come to light.

ostrobothnian
September 04, 2008, 17:43
Whomever built it I guess is irrelevant. It is an Austrian StG 58 kit (almost) on a type 3 Imbel manufactured receiver (which is a mismatch in the first place, technically). Personally the rifles I trust most are stamped "ostrobothnian" :D. Not really... the name takes up too much space. Just hope the buyer didn't pay extra for some simple grinding and stamping.

If it shoots well you have a fine rifle I would say.

p712k
September 04, 2008, 18:24
I was not told that this was a complete PAC rifle at the time of sale, bought it from a co-worker who had owned it since 01 or 02. About all he knew was that it was a Imbel receiver and a STG kit. He has a stong interest in ARs and needed funds for a ACOG, got a very good deal on the rifle and all the mags he had. As I said it does not really matter to me who made it, my other rifles are kit guns - which have not been re-numbered. I saw this thread and thought, thats interesting, my rifle looks like a PAC build.

My other recent thread is for info on a type III para lower, I am thinking of turning this rifle into a para with a full length barrel.

J. Armstrong
September 04, 2008, 19:42
On any and all of my builds that I send out to Sledgehammer ( as opposed to the ones I assembled myself ) I request at least the bolt and carrier to be reserialled to match the receiver. This is NOT to make people think it is a factory gun or similar, but to avoid inadvertantly switching bolts and causing headspace problems. Besides, it is a nice professional finishing touch. . Can't pass judgement on your rifle, but I would be hard pressed to take the bet against Dean :D ( even though he has outted me as being anal-retentive !!!). I claim far less expertise than Dean or other members who I hold in VERY high regard, but I have to say a PAC built rifle would be a new one on me !!! It would further appear that the lower had the original sn milled away and was then reserialled - again, not uncommon at all.

The mag release is the common Israeli variant, also used on a very, very few early "Canada" variants such as Venezuelans.

There was a Sarco "humper special" para lower in marketplace recently - looked like it would clean up nicely.

As mentioned by others - nice rifle, enjoy it :) I don't think anyones intent was to disparage it, only to ascertain its provenance a bit better.

BTW, while there may be those who prefer the Gear Logos, I would opine that they are NOT better than the non GLs, and in some ways are not as good, in that there were a number of them on which the logo had been stamped too hard causing deformation of the top cover slots and carrier rails. Quite easily resolved, to be sure, but definitely not "better". I've also long held the admittedly unsubstantiated opinion that towards th very end of production, Imbel was getting a bit "easy" with QC, which would pertain mostly to the GLs. Don't get me wrong, I like Imbels fine (but the FMAPs, if you can find 'em, are better :) ).

mutter
September 04, 2008, 19:42
Question for you gents. When, or about when, did PAC import imbel gear logo recievers that did not have a magwell stamp and "Itajuba" is stamped differently then the current ones?

Thanks

sturmgrenadiere
September 05, 2008, 20:48
p712k

I had ARS remumber everything PAC1234... or whatever the number was (sold it years ago) on my first FAL built. It has nothing to do with trying to make a fake or faux-authenticity. It has everything to do with the aesthetics of a custom build.

This is common stuff to many. Hell, whenever I finally get back in touch with Pat Jones and by an unmarked Aussie lower from him, I will have it, the unmarked aussie bolt, and unmarked aussie carrier all serialized with the DSA inch receiver so that the rifle has all matching numbers. Is this arsenal authentic, nope. I built it. Is this for any future deception or potential for more $ if I sell it. Nope. I do it because it is part of the fun of this hobby.

I have a current batch of four metric rifles in the works at the moment. I will have at a minimum each bolt renumbered to the upper so I don't mix anything up when cleaning, in the event I have multiple rifles at the range that day. A little head space insurance...

Regards

Ben