Century C-93

[tac-40]

My local LGS has a Century C-93 put away on the back shelf with some feed issues. I might try to fix it and make it mine just for the sake of saying I got another Century to run right. From the collective, what are some of the normal issues these things have and what was the fix. It is not mine, and while I should be able to get it for a very good price (read cheap), I am not looking at spending a bunch on the parts, making it cost the same as a new one. I have a little experience working on the HK-91, CETME C and L (builds) and the MP5 trouble shooting and repairs.

Let me be clear, I know about Century and their lack of correct build/repair procedures to make things work. And I am willing to invest the time to make this work. But I would like to know up front what the potential problems are before investing a lot of time to figure out it is a POS and will remain a POS once bad parts are replaced.

 

[easttex]

Following. I think I know what the answer might be but I defer to experienced folks who do know.

 

[kroberts]

Have you shot it? Who told you about the "feed issues"?
I know just enough about these things to embarrass myself but I would definitely want to know exactly what it's doing based on first hand info.

 

[TXMoose]

Yeah, anicdotal stories of bolts ground back to get correctish bolt gaps

 

[otis61]

One thing I know century did when they built them was instead of changing the locking roller size to get the right bolt gap was they ground the back of the bolts. That's the first thing you need to look at.
I know for a fact that there are, or were, a lot of those out there like that. Militaryfirearm.com used to be a good place to go to fix these. That sight is down now.

 

[tac-40]

Yeah, anicdotal stories of bolts ground back to get correctish bolt gaps

One thing I know century did when they built them was instead of changing the locking roller size to get the right bolt gap was they ground the back of the bolts. That's the first thing you need to look at.
I know for a fact that there are, or were, a lot of those out there like that. Militaryfirearm.com used to be a good place to go to fix these. That sight is down now.

I am aware of those horror stories and the photos of the ground bolts, among other issues. But most are easily fixed by replacing the modified parts with the proper ones.

KRoberts, the rifle has a repair writeup form attached to it stating that info. I have not done anything to the rifle except look it it over and hand cycle the bolt to see if it functions properly empty. The write-up also had an order form for some replacement parts with the extractor and springs among them. I don't know if those were installed.

This rifle in in the shop's "graveyard" where unrepairable and parts guns are placed. While the shop is capable of repairing 99% of the guns they sell, they don't have anyone with experience in troubleshooting and repairing non-USA military weapons.

And that is reason for this thread. I believe I can troubleshoot it and get it running easily, since I think I know what the issue is (rollers and bolt gap), but since I have never owned or fired one, I was hoping that the hive would share their experiences with me.

Several of the reviews of the Century C-93 said that unlike the CETME's, they used mostly HK parts to assemble them and that they did not pay particular attention in installing the right size or even matched rollers.

 

[easttex]

Well, if you can get it for a pittance and all you need to do is swap some parts, why not try it?

Worst case scenario, you return the parts and sell the rifle off as parts to someone else?

 

[yellowhand]

I have a couple of them.

Once you get the Bolt gap some where around normal, changing rollers, etc, scrub the living hell out of the chamber, where a lot of their problems originate with not wanting to cycle properly.

If those flutes are not scrubbed out, hit and miss on feeding and extraction.

And after doing this above,,,,,,you may need to hand cycle 5 to 15 plus rounds, fire, fail to function/cycle, hand cycle over and over, and many of them will begin to run properly.

A lot, hell, most people won't take the time to "break them in", get them cleaned out completely, and throw up their hands and say, its defective and or needs parts changed out etc,,,,,both of mine, now run perfectly, and several I've worked on, cleaning, and the above, just get them firing, and they pretty much break in and run after some rounds ran through them, with cleaning and patience most issues can be resolved with them.

How much they asking for this "junker"????

 

[Rudolf]

Allied Armament did the contract for some of those C93s. They barely did a test fire on it. They just fired one round and didn't care if it cycles. They were on a contract and had very limited time.

 

[tac-40]

How much they asking for this "junker"????

No price tag since it is in "the graveyard". I am hoping to get it for a lot less than he has in it. I used to be their go-to gun repair guy and I know how much he pays for them and what his mark up is. Since it is a total loss to him right now, I think I might get a deal. If not, I'll move on to another project. I still have a couple of FAL rebuilds waiting in the wings.

 

[yellowhand]

Allied Armament did the contract for some of those C93s. They barely did a test fire on it. They just fired one round and didn't care if it cycles. They were on a contract and had very limited time.

Both of mine showed this to be true.

Its a complicated weapon,,,a lot of moving parts, getting them all seated, working properly, takes a few rounds, sometimes, more than a few.

I always hated being issued a brand new M16,,,,,would take that down to the dump, and burn through a dozen mags before accepting it to carry.

Jam O matics they were when new....

 

[tac-40]

Both of mine showed this to be true.

Its a complicated weapon,,,a lot of moving parts, getting them all seated, working properly, takes a few rounds, sometimes, more than a few.

I always hated being issued a brand new M16,,,,,would take that down to the dump, and burn through a dozen mags before accepting it to carry.

Jam O matics they were when new....

Last year at the RBGC FAL Match I brought 3 rifles, a newly built Izzy LB, a 16" short gas metric built on a hand finished and fitted Entreprise receiver, and a normally reliable IMBEL on IMBEL build. All three turned out to be single shot rifles. After all the care I put into them getting running and sighted in, I forgot about taking care of the mags. They were full of fine sand or grit which caused the followers to stick on rapid fire. On slow fire, the follower normally moved back into position to feed the next round. And of course I found that out after the match so I had DNF's for every stage.

 

[yellowhand]

Last year at the RBGC FAL Match I brought 3 rifles, a newly built Izzy LB, a 16" short gas metric built on a hand finished and fitted Entreprise receiver, and a normally reliable IMBEL on IMBEL build. All three turned out to be single shot rifles. After all the care I put into them getting running and sighted in, I forgot about taking care of the mags. They were full of fine sand or grit which caused the followers to stick on rapid fire. On slow fire, the follower normally moved back into position to feed the next round. And of course I found that out after the match so I had DNF's for every stage.

I know, it's happen to me a time or two, when I was shooting matches or working for a living.

Something overlooked, not thought of crops up and truly tries to ruin your day.

Worse fistfight I was ever in, a FNG messed with my kit, a huge moose, pulled out my mags from my LBE, screwing with my rifle, to "see" how I did/set up "things", when I was getting a final location briefing, right before we were to load out,,,,,innocent, stupid even, but he learned a valuable lesson in life that day.

Modern weapons are finicky, along with their owners.LOL

 

[tac-40]

Got back to my LGS for a closer look. Records showed it was a buy-back (LGS warranties every gun it sells, so owner probably had issues and returned it). Forearm is definitely after market with a T slot running the length of the forearm bottom and very wide and boxy (read uncomfortable to the support hand). An adjustable swivel stud is attached by a square nut in the slot and tightened down. Checked the bolt, carrier, and locking piece. Didn't see any grind marks or excessive wear. Rollers not marked so should be standard 8mm size. All of the numbers on the bolt, locking piece, and carrier matched. Using dummy rounds, hand cycling from mag showed no issues. Bolt gap was 0.009 inch (0.010 was fairly tight), however, the breech face and chamber were very dirty with powder residue and carbon buildup. Didn't have the chance to clean it or fire it, but dry fired okay with good safety engagement and reset.

So, from what I have seen so far, I will definitely replace the furniture (at least the forearm), get a set of plus rollers, new extractor spring, and possibly locking levers. With all this and very deep cleaning I should be able to get it running correctly. And the owner was just over what I wanted to pay, but I was lowballing the crap out of him. It will probably come home with me in the next couple of weeks.

 

[yellowhand]

Got back to my LGS for a closer look. Records showed it was a buy-back (LGS warranties ever gun it sells, so owner probably had issues and returned it). Forearm is definitely after market with a T slot running the length of the forearm bottom and very wide and boxy (read uncomfortable to the support hand). An adjustable swivel stud is attached by a square nut in the slot and tightened down. Checked the bolt, carrier, and locking piece. Didn't see any grind marks or excessive wear. Rollers not marked so should be standard 8mm size. All of the numbers on the bolt, locking piece, and carrier matched. Using dummy rounds, hand cycling from mag showed no issues. Bolt gap was 0.009 inch (0.010 was fairly tight), however, the breech face and chamber were very dirty with powder residue and carbon buildup. Didn't have the chance to clean it or fire it, but dry fired okay with good safety engagement and reset.

So, from what I have seen so far, I will definitely replace the furniture (at least the forearm), get a set of plus rollers, new extractor spring, and possibly locking levers. With all this and very deep cleaning I should be able to get it running correctly. And the owner was just over what I wanted to pay, but I was lowballing the crap out of him. It will probably come home with me in the next couple of weeks.

I've got some extra smalls if you can't find what ya need to get it running good.
You'll like it...

 

[hkshooter]

Were you able to check mag fit and lock? With some guns the only mag that fits and works was the one that came with the rifle and that's also the only one they would warranty the rifle with also.
There were malformed receivers that had the catch mislocated so either the catch or the catch slot was modified to work and standard HK mags didn't always fit and work.
You said you saw nothing unusual about the carrier. Check the nose of the carrier that contacts the cocking support. Sometimes they ground this area to correct cocking tube support gap but they also welded up the end and ground it back to correct the gap. Any marks at all on the nose of the carrier could indicate a gap work around and this creates problems that stack up.

 

[tac-40]

Thank for that tidbit about the carrier nose. I didn't see anything there but wasn't looking that closely. Only had one magazine (40 round) and it hand cycled dummy rounds fine. It had no alterations that I could see. And I didn't see anything obvious in the mag catch. The mag did not drop free but it inserted and removed easily by hand (similar to an early Glock mag). I made a little adjusting tool for sheet metal magazine wells after not compensating for weld shrinkage during a CETME L build. That should work to align this mag well fine, if needed. The only issue I had was wanting to rock the mag in versus strait insertion. Mag reminds me of AK and muscle memory took over.

One thing I did notice was the trigger housing was an aftermarket item. IIRC it was stamped Fleming Arms. Found a reference online that said it was a conversion to AR style pistol grips versus the HK ones. I didn't look any closer since I wasn't sure what I was looking at. But it was pinned and clipped properly and safe-semi only selector positions.

Decription found with the picture: https://www.sturmgewehr.com/forums/...fleming-hk-ar-push-pin-full-auto-lower-18900/

Here is a picture that looks like the one on the rifle but with Full Auto position and next to it is one like I saw:

 

[hkshooter]

Legacy HK roller gun's mags are not supposed to drop free, the rifle wasn't designed that way.
Nor do they insert straight up like an AR15. If you look at the front of the mag right in front of the feed lips there's a shallow slot, If you look inside the mag well at the lower rear end of the trunnion there's a small tab. Tab goes in slot. One still inserts the front of the mag first, at a bit of an angle. Right as the magazine hits home in the top of the mag well, then you pull it to the rear to click it in. The motion isn't as prominent as an AK rocking motion, only slight.
If the receiver is not formed correctly, or if the trunnion isn't installed in the correct location, the slot in the magazine will not catch the tab on the trunnion and this can cause feeding issues. Sometimes they still work, other times not.
I once had a HESSE receivered home build that had problems that the height of the shelf caused. I corrected that and the rifle ran fine but the mags didn't lock in correctly in the front, missed the tab all together. I was amazed it ran as well as it did.
If you click in the mag and then try to pull down the front of the mag by pulling the bottom of the mag to the rear, the mag should not move in the front. If it does the mag isn't catching the trunnion.

 

[tac-40]

Reading that, I recalled the HK tab and slot as well as having to lock the mag in. As I said, AK muscle memory had to be overcome. I did not know about the "drop free" issue mentioned. I have a PTR 91 that allows the mags to drop free with a small shake. Thus, the basis of my comment.

 

[Jinx]

I have 2, love 'em, & both are tack drivers to boot. They both had teething issues when I got them, failure to feed & eject. Bolt gap was off a bit, the trigger pack sat a touch too low on one causing the ejector lever to strike too low and send the old casing back into the receiver and both had tired worn out recoil springs that I believe caused excessive bolt carrier speed in recoil. These guns were made from service rifles from Asia and probably were quite tired when Century got them and built them into C93s and ya' know Century was too cheap to replace any springs. New springs, shimmed trigger pack and in spec bolt gap and now I have probably a thousand rnds through each.... maybe a lil' less through the newer gun2. I always keep my eye out for them locally, I need a spare while gun1 is down for some much needed service/love. (I broke the welds on the receiver's stock push pin sleeve in the back of the gun)
If you get it check the above and inspect the chamber for radial groves from a fuq'd up chamber reamer, that'll make casings stick as you know. The gun s**ts where it eats because of the delayed blow back design. The chamber flutes help float out the spent casing but are a pain to de-carbon propperly and ya' get alot of buildup in the roller recesses in the receiver, again, a pain in the ass to de-carbon. Once it's "broken in" those areas don't need as much attention, the gun was designed to run dirty, just like the MG3, G3 and CETME.

 

[Bubacus]

Agreed with all of the above. I had a CETME that was pretty dirty when I got it. They need to really scrub that sucker down to see what's what and swap mags. Then see what the real problems are.

 

[ftierson]

Agreed with all of the above. I had a CETME that was pretty dirty when I got it. They need to really scrub that sucker down to see what's what and swap mags. Then see what the real problems are.

Back when the CAI CETME rifles were $300 each, I must admit that I bought a couple...

One was from a brand new gun, and the other, while having a fine bore, was pretty gunked up which led to failure to extract/eject problems. I just scrubbed the flutes clean and the rifle turned into a completely reliable one...

Just sayin'...

Forrest

 

[Potshot]

I heard tell that the angry beavers decreased barrel press fit, beware of that

 

[tac-40]

Well, I brought it home today. Got it for 3 bills. Cleaned it up and looked it over carefully and this is what I found. Definitely HK barrel and triple tree. Forearm aftermarket POS and will be replaced. A2 style butt stock is unmarked but looks to be aftermarket also since it has two roll pins installed above and below the sling mount at the 4 and 10 0'clock positions. These pins go all the way through and none of the pictures I've seen have these pins. It will be replaced as well. The bore is shiny and bright with good strong rifling. The bolt, carrier, and locking piece are matching number. The bolt appears to be a full auto bolt from what I can tell. The locking piece has the number 8 on it so I am assuming it is a number 8 locking piece. The bolt has the letters BT stamped on the collar that locks it into the carrier. BT is also stamped on the main body just in front of the collar. None of these pieces appear to be ground on because they are all smooth and shiny. The trigger pack is a semi-auto modified HK. The hammer has a "C" on its stem (assume that means Century). The lower is like I stated earlier, an aftermarket part made by Flemming Fireams. It is a quality part and based on the web, was a highly sought after mod to allow AR pistol grips to be used and give the rifle the look of a full auto G33. The lower locks up tight to the upper. The push pin has a ring on it but appears to be home made because the welding looked like something I did. Gotta get a new one of those.

Cleaned the crap out of the barrel and bore, focusing on the chamber and flutes. After wearing out a stainless .40 cal bore brush and using Sweets bore cleaner, the chamber looked pretty clean and shiny. Lubed everything up and dry fired it several times. No issues noted. Measured the bolt gap and found it to be .180 mm which is minimum spec, IIRC. That means I need a set of +2 rollers. Rollers in the bolt were unmarked.

The mag is unmarked but has a date, 6/1/76 in the follower. You guys mentioned the different mags and their issues. How can you tell them apart? Is there a source document/web site for this info? The mag fed correctly while hand cycling the action. It also locks securely on the trunion tab. Insertion and removal is easy and when locked in, very little movement in any direction. The body of the mag appears to be steel (attracts magnet) but the feed lips appear to be aluminum (non-magnetic).

 

[hkshooter]

The mag is unmarked but has a date, 6/1/76 in the follower. You guys mentioned the different mags and their issues. How can you tell them apart?

The different mags out there are less important than any of them being able to lock into the rifle. Many of these later PTR C93 rifles had the catch slot in the mag body opened up to get them to lock into the magwell. Means most likely an unmodified mag will not lock into the rifle and is also why PTR said they will only warranty the rifle with the mag it came with. All others are off the table and it's because the mags were modified to fit a defective receiver. Take any other magazine except early plastic MKE, (the ones with the helo molded into them?) and if the receiver/magwell is in spec they should lock in fine and work. If not then you have a problem child.