PDA

View Full Version : Imbel Made Inch Receivers?


drakejake
January 15, 2009, 17:53
Can someone give me information on the topic "Inch receivers made by Imbel"? One would think that a Brazilian company would have made only Metric receivers because South American countries used Metric rifles. Did Imbel make Inch receivers strictly for the use of Century Arms? If so, about how many were made? I would have guessed that Century would have gotten their Inch receivers from some other source. Did any Commonwealth nations buy their receivers from Imbel?

Thanks,

Drakejake

bykerhd
January 15, 2009, 18:12
Imbel DIDN'T make Inch receivers.
They did make some Type III profile receivers that would accept Inch parts.

Or, at least most folks around here THINK they did.
I'm not sure that anyone has ever determined positively that Imbel machined them for the Inch features. Or, whether Century had them done by someone ?

The really odd part is there seems to have been two different generations of the Inch feature receivers. The first were cut for the Inch top covers, cocking handles and bolt hold opens. The next ? version didn't have the top cover cuts.

FN74
January 15, 2009, 18:12
they were metric receivers modified by century to look like inch receivers.

dono
January 15, 2009, 20:18
Originally posted by drakejake
Can someone give me information on the topic "Inch receivers made by Imbel"? One would think that a Brazilian company would have made only Metric receivers because South American countries used Metric rifles. Did Imbel make Inch receivers strictly for the use of Century Arms? If so, about how many were made? I would have guessed that Century would have gotten their Inch receivers from some other source. Did any Commonwealth nations buy their receivers from Imbel?

Thanks,

Drakejake

Use the search function. Type in Imbel inch. Then click the button that says 1 month and older. You will be overwhelmed with information. The search function is you friend.

BTW I have an L1A1 build on a completely inch cut Imbel inch receiver. It was built by a well known gunsmith. (not Century).:fal:

drakejake
January 15, 2009, 20:45
Hey, I had already done multiple searches on the topic before posting here. Your suggested search is too broad and doesn't work very well. I was a professional researcher and teacher of research for about 30 years. I do many searches every day. You know it is sometimes more efficent for everyone just to ask a question directly and get a direct answer. Unless there is some law against doing so.

Drakejake

dono
January 15, 2009, 21:16
No law. But It has been beat to death numerous times. If you take the time to read through the "broad results" you will find your answers. The problem is that I type too slow and you will be waiting a long time for me to retype what has already been discussed numerous times. There is no law against asking a question but sometimes it is just common courtesy to to do a quick search. I really was trying to help and was not trying to insult your"professinal" researching background.:eek: :whiskey:

idsubgun
January 16, 2009, 20:38
Originally posted by drakejake
Can someone give me information on the topic "Inch receivers made by Imbel"?

Go here:

Link (http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51796&highlight=made+canada+imbel+receivers)

chrsdwns
January 22, 2009, 19:56
The Imbel Inch receivers were Type 3 configuration receivers with Inch pattern mag wells, folding charging handle and tab reliefs for the top cover. They did not incorporate the Inch pattern sand cuts on the inner rails.

FULLMETALJACKET
January 23, 2009, 12:47
Not all of them had inch cut magwells, most were cut for metric mags.

capt ron
January 26, 2009, 11:16
Originally posted by dono
No law. But It has been beat to death numerous times. If you take the time to read through the "broad results" you will find your answers. The problem is that I type too slow and you will be waiting a long time for me to retype what has already been discussed numerous times. There is no law against asking a question but sometimes it is just common courtesy to to do a quick search. I really was trying to help and was not trying to insult your"professinal" researching background.:eek: :whiskey:

i have to go along with "dono" on this. once there has been a discussion on a subject it shoud never ever be talked about in another thread. this will cause a brain strain on those that have the correct answer for everything and may cause injury to those that type slower than there brain works. i agree with " dono" it would be common courtesy to do a quick search to relieve those that feel compelled to trying to help out with an answer ( any answer) other than what the question was asked. :biggrin:
maybe " there should be a "law" :rofl: