The FAL Files  

Go Back   The FAL Files > Weapon Specific Forums > The HK Files

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 12, 2019, 09:34   #1
jimmieZ
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 319
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Central Florida USA
Posts: 907
CETME L Observations

In fitting various surplus and new made mags to my rifle I note the following: If the steel block that forms the rear of the mag well was moved back .010 to .020 in. most mags would fit fine. The mag well is just a tad too short in length (front to back). Even new mags show more marking in the rear trough than any where else. Again, not a big problem with the number of mags I've got - 2 out of 3 surplus mags are useable.

Jim
jimmieZ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12, 2019, 16:06   #2
7.92 Dreamin
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82122
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Richmond, CA
Posts: 60
Who built it? HMG? MCM? Homebuild?
I can say for certain that the receivers and weldaments that HMG has produced are good, but not perfect. There's a lot of little things that are off just enough to cause some quirks.

(also post some pics man, love to see everyone's CETME L)
7.92 Dreamin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12, 2019, 16:43   #3
jimmieZ
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 319
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Central Florida USA
Posts: 907
This is a new MarColMar rifle - as shown in the photos attached to the " My New CETME L" posting.
jimmieZ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12, 2019, 20:21   #4
hkshooter
Mighty Fine!
Silver Contributor
 
hkshooter's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 5391
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Central Indiana
Posts: 7,185
It seems I've read MCM has some very specific instructions about what mags will work and should be used with these rifles. In other words not every run of the mill AR mag you try is going to fit and only some of those that will, will run. There are comments about this in the owners manual.

This rifle's weak link is the mags, that's a matter of recorded history.
__________________
"2A was specifically for, as you note, dealing with what is no longer feasible within the system. This applies to all organs of the state, whether they carry badges, gavels or law degrees."
Mark Graham
hkshooter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 12, 2019, 22:57   #5
Combloc
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 55596
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 846
Save yourself frustration and just use Okay Industries GI magazines. That's what MCM recommends and they will sell you all you want at 10 bucks a pop.
__________________
I ain't too bright!
Forums are for furthering knowledge, not bragging about what you've got.
Combloc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 13, 2019, 13:11   #6
7.92 Dreamin
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82122
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Richmond, CA
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by hkshooter View Post
This rifle's weak link is the mags, that's a matter of recorded history.
From what I've read that was more to do with poor QC on Spanish magazine production than say, tolerances in the mag well. Is that what you're referencing or do you know of other issues as well?
7.92 Dreamin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 14, 2019, 11:19   #7
raubvogel
Registered
Contributor
 
FALaholic #: 64403
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7.92 Dreamin View Post
From what I've read that was more to do with poor QC on Spanish magazine production than say, tolerances in the mag well. Is that what you're referencing or do you know of other issues as well?
A sure way to win a battle is to ensure the enemy has only Santa Barbara CETME L magazines.
__________________
All I'm really asking for here is a knife that will not jam and a unicorn that doesn't need sharpening. Will_Power
It's been my experience that all you really need to harvest a deer is a car. They come right through the windshield just fine. 357ross
That poop is priceless. MFC
raubvogel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14, 2019, 18:15   #8
hkshooter
Mighty Fine!
Silver Contributor
 
hkshooter's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 5391
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Central Indiana
Posts: 7,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7.92 Dreamin View Post
From what I've read that was more to do with poor QC on Spanish magazine production than say, tolerances in the mag well. Is that what you're referencing or do you know of other issues as well?
This is the gist of what little I've read. Spanish mag production was abysmal. Seems I've read soldiers used them once and then discarded them sometimes. So while mag quality was definitely an issue the rifles themselves are magazine sensitive. The MCM owners manual leads me to believe this is why they chose a single common and quality mag producer to build the rifles around. The rifles won't allow any slop or inconsistent magazine placement or weak springs so they chose a mag and that's the one MCM recommends users use with the rifles. They warn in the manual that not all AR mags are going to fit, this isn't intentional, just the result of the tight engineering.
__________________
"2A was specifically for, as you note, dealing with what is no longer feasible within the system. This applies to all organs of the state, whether they carry badges, gavels or law degrees."
Mark Graham
hkshooter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 14, 2019, 19:30   #9
jimmieZ
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 319
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Central Florida USA
Posts: 907
It's one thing to have "tight" engineering and quite another when that self-serving approach keeps one from using quality NATO magazines - regardless of country of manufacture. It's a damned good thing MarColMar isn't building a rifle intended to do battle. Don't get me wrong - I really like the rifle I got, but if you're spending over $2 million to do your construction correctly don't you think a little extra work on mag placement could have occurred?

Jim
jimmieZ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 14, 2019, 19:50   #10
7.92 Dreamin
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82122
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Richmond, CA
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by raubvogel View Post
A sure way to win a battle is to ensure the enemy has only Santa Barbara CETME L magazines.
You have no idea how much it pains me to know that otherwise adequate rifle designs have been absolutely sabotaged by corner cutting at Santa Barbara. I have such a soft spot for roller delayed designs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkshooter
So while mag quality was definitely an issue the rifles themselves are magazine sensitive. The MCM owners manual leads me to believe this is why they chose a single common and quality mag producer to build the rifles around.
I think this may have something to do with the inconsistency of supposed """STANAG""" commercial magazines in the market. I seem to recall a forum conversation I saw between some of the MCM team and an Apex gun parts rep talking about it. I'll see if I can source and quote what i'm remembering.

On an personal level I can say that I've ran into magazine issues specifically related to that-- even from what should be reputable Gov suppliers. Modified Gen 3 PMAGS have worked flawlessly so far. Haven't tested Lancer L5's but just from handling they appear to work out of the box and i suspect will be the best functioning so far.

This may differ from MCM rifles since they made some changes in the mag well area, but I suspect others will have similar experiences.

Edit: Found it
http://www.militaryfirearm.com/Forum...L-Rifles/page6

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarColMar Firearms
We have tried three different makers of STANAG mags, and our design did change slightly the angle and depth of the mag to make STANAG mags the preferred magazaine for the CETME L... as the original mags are not good all around. Although imperceptible to the shooter and owner, it works great.

The only issue we have had so far, is with STANAG mags that are NOT STANAG... LOL as in they are producing mags that are OUTSIDE the STANAG standard.
Although it does seem like he's talking specifically about mag catch issues.

Last edited by 7.92 Dreamin; April 14, 2019 at 19:56.
7.92 Dreamin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 14, 2019, 20:39   #11
Combloc
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 55596
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 846
It's more than just magazines that were the problem as far as QC goes. I had a chance to fire an as issued select fire CETME recently. No matter what magazines were used, it was a jammomatic. IMO, if the worst thing you have to worry about with the MCM rifle is the fact that some magazines won't fit, they knocked the ball out of the park.

The original rifle I shot is the top one shown below. Click on it and the picture will get larger:


I also fired a select fire rifle built by MCM and it ran like a sewing machine. There is no question that MCM did their homework. Just accept the fact that only certain magazines will fit and be happy you have one that is made so well. In my experience, they really are NICE rifles!
__________________
I ain't too bright!
Forums are for furthering knowledge, not bragging about what you've got.

Last edited by Combloc; April 14, 2019 at 20:51.
Combloc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 14, 2019, 21:30   #12
7.92 Dreamin
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82122
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Richmond, CA
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Combloc View Post
I had a chance to fire an as issued select fire CETME recently. No matter what magazines were used, it was a jammomatic.
Out of curiosity can you remember what kind of malfunctions you were getting?
also you lucky SOB lol-- your entire thread is just incredible. cool experience
7.92 Dreamin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 14, 2019, 23:21   #13
Combloc
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 55596
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 846
All were failure to feed. Multiple GI magazines.

P.S. Yes, I had a good time. LOL.
__________________
I ain't too bright!
Forums are for furthering knowledge, not bragging about what you've got.
Combloc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2019, 14:08   #14
jimmieZ
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 319
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Central Florida USA
Posts: 907
Range Report - My CETME L - The Good, The Bad & The Ugly

Well, I finally got a chance to shoot the new CETME L from MalCoMar this past week. The finish on the rifle I received is just great and I was chomping at the bit to get her on target. To say I was excited would be am understatement. However, things started getting bad almost immediately. I had the Okay mag that came with the rifle and it fit fine - but don't you dare touch that mag while firing or the gun stops. If you're very careful about where your supporting hand is, and it doesn't touch the mag, you might get off more than 6 shots in a row. As was first reported by Combloc, the rifle shot very high and left right out of the box. OK, not quite as bad as the first Combloc range trip but bad enough that there is no more room for adjustment after I settled the rounds into the black - at 50 yards! The rear sight is about all the way to the right and just looks way off to me (the ugly). I thought MarColMar addressed this issue. I will contact MarColMar andsee what they suggest I do with this carbine.

Jim

Last edited by jimmieZ; May 11, 2019 at 14:19.
jimmieZ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 2019, 12:06   #15
jimmieZ
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 319
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Central Florida USA
Posts: 907
Dave Bane contacted me and will make this right. He further explained how this issue developed, how their first attempt to fix it went and, finally, what they are doing now so this will not be anyone else's problem in the future. I really think they have this issue in control at this time.

Jim
jimmieZ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 2019, 16:02   #16
hkshooter
Mighty Fine!
Silver Contributor
 
hkshooter's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 5391
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Central Indiana
Posts: 7,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmieZ View Post
Dave Bane contacted me and will make this right. He further explained how this issue developed, how their first attempt to fix it went and, finally, what they are doing now so this will not be anyone else's problem in the future. I really think they have this issue in control at this time.

Jim
Good to hear. Still, seems they'd want to be sure any remaining inventory would have been checked for the flaw before they were shipped.
What do I know, however. There may be a good reason this didn't happen.
__________________
"2A was specifically for, as you note, dealing with what is no longer feasible within the system. This applies to all organs of the state, whether they carry badges, gavels or law degrees."
Mark Graham
hkshooter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2019, 11:57   #17
ServiceRifle
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 23959
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,266
I just got mine - haven't taken it to the range yet - but ONE thing needed an immediate fix I couldn't stand it - and certainly couldn't use the rifle until I resolved the problem.

The rear sight aperture on the CETME L is atrocious. The big flats on the sights are MUCH too wide and the 200 meter aperture is MUCH to small. Until I can get a good A1 rear sight assembly to replace it with, I disassembled the CETME's rear sight assembly and recontoured the 200 meter aperture flat (with a file and a drill) to approximate the size (diameter) and shape of the good old A1 200 meter sight.

I noticed that if you want to add additional range to the windage capability of this rifle all you would need to do is to shorten (decrease the width) of the CETME's rear sight aperture L. It is unnecessarily wide and lends itself to this relatively easy fix.

Otherwise it appears to be a nice well made rifle. Mine will seat and cycle dummy rounds with OK USGI mags, FUSIL steel 30rd mags, and Lancer hybrid mags. Nothing else that I have would fit - let alone function.

If the rifle runs it will be well worth the money - after all where else can you find a roller delayed blowback rifle that uses $10 AR mags

https://imgur.com/3v7IewB

I only did the 200m aperture - left the other one alone. It makes a HUGE difference for me. Touched it up with a little cold blue after I finished filing/drilling - then I topped that off with a little high temp ceramic auto paint. Now I have a useable sight. I didn't do the other flap since I will never use it. The opening on the 200m aperture is actually a little LESS than the actual opening on a 200m AR rear sight.

If you look at the photo you can judge for yourself how much of that sight flap could be narrowed in order to provide for more lateral movement of the sight - providing the shooter with a greater range of adjustment for windage

My next thought is to do a little something with those two large verticle flaps at the rear of the sight - in order to open up the viewing channel. I'm still thinking about that one.

If you're overly nervous about doing something to the rifle's original "configuration" Apex has replacement aperture L flaps for the CETME L for $17



QUOTE=jimmieZ;4736117]Dave Bane contacted me and will make this right. He further explained how this issue developed, how their first attempt to fix it went and, finally, what they are doing now so this will not be anyone else's problem in the future. I really think they have this issue in control at this time.

Jim[/QUOTE]

Last edited by ServiceRifle; May 16, 2019 at 16:35.
ServiceRifle is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2019, 14:15   #18
7.92 Dreamin
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 82122
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Richmond, CA
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by ServiceRifle View Post
The rear sight aperture on the CETME L is atrocious. The big flats on the sights are MUCH too wide and the 200 meter aperture is MUCH to small.
It's actually not as bad as you would think during practical use.
Except in low light. It's worse than anything you can imagine as soon as light starts fading.
Can you post pics of your modification? I thought about doing it with mine but I wanted to keep it in original configuration. Would't mind seeing how it looks.
7.92 Dreamin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2019, 14:34   #19
ServiceRifle
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 23959
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,266
Link to photo of my "reconfigured" 200m aperture. Link is ABOVE - in edit to my initial post

Last edited by ServiceRifle; May 16, 2019 at 16:15.
ServiceRifle is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2019, 21:04   #20
hkshooter
Mighty Fine!
Silver Contributor
 
hkshooter's Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 5391
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Central Indiana
Posts: 7,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by ServiceRifle View Post
I just got mine - haven't taken it to the range yet - but ONE thing needed an immediate fix I couldn't stand it - and certainly couldn't use the rifle until I resolved the problem.

The rear sight aperture on the CETME L is atrocious. The big flats on the sights are MUCH too wide and the 200 meter aperture is MUCH to small. Until I can get a good A1 rear sight assembly to replace it with, I disassembled the CETME's rear sight assembly and recontoured the 200 meter aperture flat (with a file and a drill) to approximate the size (diameter) and shape of the good old A1 200 meter sight.

I noticed that if you want to add additional range to the windage capability of this rifle all you would need to do is to shorten (decrease the width) of the CETME's rear sight aperture L. It is unnecessarily wide and lends itself to this relatively easy fix.

Otherwise it appears to be a nice well made rifle. Mine will seat and cycle dummy rounds with OK USGI mags, FUSIL steel 30rd mags, and Lancer hybrid mags. Nothing else that I have would fit - let alone function.

If the rifle runs it will be well worth the money - after all where else can you find a roller delayed blowback rifle that uses $10 AR mags

https://imgur.com/3v7IewB

I only did the 200m aperture - left the other one alone. It makes a HUGE difference for me. Touched it up with a little cold blue after I finished filing/drilling - then I topped that off with a little high temp ceramic auto paint. Now I have a useable sight. I didn't do the other flap since I will never use it. The opening on the 200m aperture is actually a little LESS than the actual opening on a 200m AR rear sight.

If you look at the photo you can judge for yourself how much of that sight flap could be narrowed in order to provide for more lateral movement of the sight - providing the shooter with a greater range of adjustment for windage

My next thought is to do a little something with those two large verticle flaps at the rear of the sight - in order to open up the viewing channel. I'm still thinking about that one.

If you're overly nervous about doing something to the rifle's original "configuration" Apex has replacement aperture L flaps for the CETME L for $17



QUOTE=jimmieZ;4736117]Dave Bane contacted me and will make this right. He further explained how this issue developed, how their first attempt to fix it went and, finally, what they are doing now so this will not be anyone else's problem in the future. I really think they have this issue in control at this time.

Jim
[/QUOTE]

Nice mod. That is a seriously narrow range of adjustment and I can understand why you'd want to "fix" it.
__________________
"2A was specifically for, as you note, dealing with what is no longer feasible within the system. This applies to all organs of the state, whether they carry badges, gavels or law degrees."
Mark Graham
hkshooter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 17, 2019, 13:55   #21
ncreptile
Registered
 
FALaholic #: 39586
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 115
One good thing that can be said about MarColMar is they take care of their customers. The owner seems to take problems as a fun challenge rather than trying to make excuses/pushing it off. Not only from my experience but seeing others posts they really seem to take pride in their product/own mistakes.

Mine jammed quite a bit initially but after 4-5 magazines all that stopped. Guess it was a break in period.

Hope your issues got resolved.
ncreptile is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©1998-2018 The FAL Files