Author Topic: CETME -- HK 91  (Read 8258 times)

Rastus

  • Mindlessness Fuels Tyranny
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6794
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 580
CETME -- HK 91
« on: March 01, 2009, 01:58:32 PM »
I saw several CETME/HK91 clones at the Grand National gun show in Tulsa yesterday.  A clone is likely as close as I'll ever get to a real HK.

Any suggestion of things to look for?  Are their other clone manufacturers to chose from?  I'd heard something about something (the chamber?) needing to be fluted to run properly. 

Any help would be appreciated....looks like I need to burn space on the credit card before BHO and his yapping dog Holder make the fun stop.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
-William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)
                                                                                                                               Avoid subjugation, join the NRA!

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: CETME -- HK 91
« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2009, 02:16:16 PM »
Actually the HK is a copy of the CETME, not the other way around,
The origin of this rifle can be traced back to the final years of World War II when engineers at the German Mauser factory designed the 7.92 mm StG45 assault rifle,[2] first with the Gerät 06 ("device 06") using a roller-delayed blowback mechanism originally adapted from the roller-locked recoil operating system of the MG42 machine gun but with a fixed barrel and gas system. It was realized that with careful attention to the mechanical ratios, the gas system could be omitted. The resultant weapon, the Gerät 06(H) was assigned the designation StG45(M) but was not produced beyond prototype stage.

The German technicians involved in developing the Sturmgewehr 45 continued their research in France at CEAM. The StG45 mechanism was modified by Ludwig Vorgrimler and Theodor Löffler at the Mulhouse facility between 1946 and 1949. Three versions were made, chambered in .30 Carbine, 7.92x33mm Kurz as well as the 7.65x35mm cartridge developed by Cartoucherie de Valence and adopted in 1948. A 7.5x38mm cartridge using a partial aluminium bullet was abandoned in 1947. Löffler's design, designated the Carabine Mitrailleuse Modèle 1950, was retained for trials among 12 different prototypes designed by CEAM, MAC, and MAS. Engaged in the Indochina War and being the second NATO contributor, France canceled the adoption of these new weapons for financial reasons.

In 1950, Vorgrimler moved to Spain where he created the LV-50 rifle chambered in the intermediate 7.92x33mm Kurz cartridge and later, the proprietary 7.92x40mm CETME M53 round.[2] At this point, the rifle was renamed the Modelo 2. The Modelo 2 attracted a lot of attention from the West German Border Guards (Bundesgrenzschutz), which sought a new service rifle. Not willing to accept a cartridge outside of the NATO specification, the Germans asked CETME to develop a 7.62 mm version of the rifle. The resulting CETME rifle Model A was chambered for the 7.62x51mm CETME cartridge which has identical chamber dimensions but a reduced-power load compared to the 7.62x51mm NATO round. Further development of the rifle with input from HK produced the CETME Model B which received several modifications including the ability to fire from a closed bolt in both semi-automatic and automatic firing modes, a new perforated sheet-metal handguard (the folding bipod had been the foregrip in previous models), improved ergonomics and a slightly longer barrel with a rifle grenade launcher guide. In 1958, this rifle was introduced into service with the Spanish Army as the Modelo 58, firing the 7.62x51mm CETME round.

In 1956, the Bundesgrenzschutz canceled its planned procurement of the CETME rifles, adopting the FN FAL (G1) instead. However, the newly formed West German Army (Bundeswehr) now displayed interest and soon purchased a number of CETME rifles (7.62x51mm NATO chambering) for further testing. The CETME, known as the Automatisches Gewehr G3, competed successfully against the SIG SG 510 (G2) and AR-10 (G4) to replace the previously favored G1 rifle. In January 1959, the Bundeswehr officially accepted the CETME rifle. The West German government wanted the G3 rifle to be produced under license in Germany; purchase of the G1 had previously fallen through over FN's refusal to grant such a license. In the case of the G3, the Dutch firm Nederlandse Wapen en Munitiefabrik (NWM) held production and sales rights to the CETME design outside of Spain. To acquire production rights, the West German government offered NWM contracts to supply the Luftwaffe with 20 mm ammunition. Production of the G3 was then assigned to Rheinmetall and HK. The latter company already had ties to CETME, and had worked to further optimize the CETME rifle for use with the full-power 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge (as opposed to the downloaded CETME variant). In 1969, Rheinmetall gave up production rights to the G3 in exchange for HK's promise not to bid on MG3 production. Later in 1977, the West German government ceded ownership of G3 production and sales rights exclusively to HK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_&_Koch_G3

Ocin

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 210
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: CETME -- HK 91
« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2009, 04:04:48 PM »
I found this site of an US based manufacturer building what (at least to me) seem to be H&K G3 clones.

http://www.ptr91.com/index.html

I have no idea what the quality of these rifles is but it might be what you are looking for?

Ocin
Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.
Gandhi, An Autobiography, p. 446 (Beacon Press paperback edition)

warhawke

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 365
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: CETME -- HK 91
« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2009, 10:19:01 PM »
The PTR-91 is the best H&K/CETME you can buy, period! If you want a CETME you need to go to http://forums.gunboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39 and do the reading. It is a PITA to find a CETME that the grinder-monkeys at CIA have not ruined, or you pay a bigger wad to get one that somebody has un-fornicated.

I suggest getting the PTR, which is a modified H&K that uses nearly 100% parts compatibility (only the barrel and chamber extension are different) and has lighter recoil than the H&K-91 and is more accurate.   
"Una salus victus nullam sperare salutem"
(The one hope of the doomed is not to hope for safety)
Virgil

Rastus

  • Mindlessness Fuels Tyranny
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6794
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 580
Re: CETME -- HK 91
« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2009, 06:09:29 AM »
Thank you for the sites to go to.  How do you think these compare to FN FAL's?
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
-William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)
                                                                                                                               Avoid subjugation, join the NRA!

Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: CETME -- HK 91
« Reply #5 on: Today at 11:30:59 PM »

WaffenAlaskan

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 18
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: CETME -- HK 91
« Reply #5 on: March 02, 2009, 07:22:08 AM »
 I got one a little while ago just because it was the only one left! WaffenAlaskan

warhawke

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 365
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: CETME -- HK 91
« Reply #6 on: March 02, 2009, 09:22:19 AM »
The FN FAL has somewhat better ergonomics but the H&K/CETME is far more reliable both functionally and mechanically. The FN (except for the folding stock Para) uses a "Rat-tail" or a long rod attached to the bolt-carrier which pushes against the recoil-spring. Th recoil-spring itself is contained in a tube in the butt-stock, the spring is difficult to clean and due to the hole in the rear of the unit it is susceptible to moisture and dust.

The bolt-carrier itself locks against the "locking shoulder" which is a pin located at the rear of the magazine well in the receiver, which makes the weapon difficult to headspace and somewhat more susceptible to debris in the action. It is also headspaced by changing the locking shoulder which is more difficult than changing the rollers and/or locking piece on the H&K.

The gas adjustment on the FN is also somewhat complicated for the new user and is somewhat susceptible to dirt and debris to say nothing of damage.

The H&K/CETME is a very simple design. It is recoil operated and the roller-locking system is extremely forgiving of headspace which allows it to safely fire a huge variety of ammunition (including .308 Win. which is dimensionally different than 7.62 NATO, though you still shouldn't). The recoil spring is totally contained in the action so even if your butt-stock breaks off the weapon will still function. The sights on the H&K/CETME are far more robust than the FN though allowing fewer adjustments for range (the PTR has a rear sight windage adjustment knob which the H&K/CETME's lack, another plus for it). I have seen H&K's with a quarter to a half million rounds through them, which still function fine, though they needed new barrels and were less than accurate. One area where the FN used to excel was in mounting optics, but with new low-mount rails available for the H&K/CETME this advantage no longer applies. Having a magazine release tab installed on the H&K/CETME also improves magazine changes and makes them more like the FN. Likewise there are a number of modifications to the stock which will provide a longer length of pull and make the weapon more comfortable for the average American shooter. The issue of reloading and the H&K's supposed 'ruining' of fired brass is a myth as well, the flute marks which are caused by the fluted chamber of the H&K/CETME do not damage the brass, while the H&K/CETME does dent the brass on ejection, this dent  does shorten the life of the brass for reloading but does not ruin it and can be avoided by installing a brass deflector.
"Una salus victus nullam sperare salutem"
(The one hope of the doomed is not to hope for safety)
Virgil

tommy tornado

  • Very Active Forum Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 192
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: CETME -- HK 91
« Reply #7 on: March 02, 2009, 11:39:26 AM »
I have a Federal Arms copy of the H&K 91.  I like it alot and haven't had many problems with it yet.  I can post pics later but I have a high mount for a scope and a 4.5x14 mil-dot scope on it.  Out to two hundred yards so far it doesn't shoot bad.  It is a military trigger so it is not percision but it will work when the zombies come through Texas.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk