MARCOLMAR CETME L hits market

[ramairthree]

Very interesting.
Not a gun I have any time with and had barely know the existence of before.

This has been a ton of info.

If only it functioned great with just plain AR mags....

[Bret]

Very interesting.
If only it functioned great with just plain AR mags....

I thought that Marcolmar made this to run with USGI mags?

[ramairthree]

I thought that Marcolmar made this to run with USGI mags?

I am not familiar enough to say for certain,
they are AR mag compatible- and were designed that way,

But there seems to have been, both in one of the videos here and by vague memory,
Less than optimal function with standard AR mags vs some very slightly different ones made just for them.

Anyone with better info please chime in.

It would be cool to get one.
I like getting different issue guns as a hobbyist/collector.

Or if I am a fan of the maker.
(Both reasons I have an ARX, HKs, SIG, etc.)

But if the function seen in the video is typical, I will probably pass.

[SteyrAUG]

I am not familiar enough to say for certain,
they are AR mag compatible- and were designed that way,

But there seems to have been, both in one of the videos here and by vague memory,
Less than optimal function with standard AR mags vs some very slightly different ones made just for them.

Anyone with better info please chime in.

It would be cool to get one.
I like getting different issue guns as a hobbyist/collector.

Or if I am a fan of the maker.
(Both reasons I have an ARX, HKs, SIG, etc.)

But if the function seen in the video is typical, I will probably pass.

Probably can't judge the Marcolmar rifle by the Hill & Mac rifle anymore than you can judge a DSA FAL by a Century Arms build. But the initial double feeds on the Marc rifle were troubling to me and I don't buy into "break in periods" for any firearm. I do wonder if it was cleaned prior to shooting or just straight to the range out of the box.

At any rate, it seems like a finicky rifle that is very magazine particular and that just doesn't interest me. Wouldn't put up with it from a CAI Tantal for $399, certainly am not going to deal with it for a rifle that costs more than $1000.

[Tokarev]

Wouldn't put up with it from a CAI Tantal for $399, certainly am not going to deal with it for a rifle that costs more than $1000.

I agree. Some of this is probably the nature of the beast when combining new reverse-engineered parts with old surplus parts. Especially when the old surplus parts might not be known to be of highest tolerances to begin with.

Still, I am interested in these rifles and will likely pick one up after I've seen a few more range reports. If the majority of the guns run fine out of the box and/or MarColMar will warranty anything that's problematic I think the rifle will be a fun and unusual range toy.

[TED]

I am not familiar enough to say for certain,
they are AR mag compatible- and were designed that way,

But there seems to have been, both in one of the videos here and by vague memory,
Less than optimal function with standard AR mags vs some very slightly different ones made just for them.

Anyone with better info please chime in.

It would be cool to get one.
I like getting different issue guns as a hobbyist/collector.

Or if I am a fan of the maker.
(Both reasons I have an ARX, HKs, SIG, etc.)

But if the function seen in the video is typical, I will probably pass.

In one of the videos from SHOT 2019 the owner of MARCOLMAR specifically states that they have redone and tweaked the mag well to be more compatable with AR mags. Now, whether taht is limited to just USGI style or Pmag style or what I do not know.

TED

[SteyrAUG]

I agree. Some of this is probably the nature of the beast when combining new reverse-engineered parts with old surplus parts. Especially when the old surplus parts might not be known to be of highest tolerances to begin with.

Still, I am interested in these rifles and will likely pick one up after I've seen a few more range reports. If the majority of the guns run fine out of the box and/or MarColMar will warranty anything that's problematic I think the rifle will be a fun and unusual range toy.

I think the design itself is overly complex and limited. It's not really a CETME scaled down to 5.56 in the same way a HK33 is a scaled down G3. And for the life of me I can't understand why.

Why is the recoil spring deep inside the buttstock? Why is the trigger group needlessly complicated? I understand the need to go with a new direction on the magazine well to accept STANAG magazines but lots of things simply don't make sense. HK was born at CETME, I guess when the Mauser engineers left to work at HK the Spanish started making design ideas that simply weren't practical.

[Tokarev]

http://www.smallarmsreview.com/displ...darticles=1046

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[TED]

I think the design itself is overly complex and limited. It's not really a CETME scaled down to 5.56 in the same way a HK33 is a scaled down G3. And for the life of me I can't understand why.

Why is the recoil spring deep inside the buttstock? Why is the trigger group needlessly complicated? I understand the need to go with a new direction on the magazine well to accept STANAG magazines but lots of things simply don't make sense. HK was born at CETME, I guess when the Mauser engineers left to work at HK the Spanish started making design ideas that simply weren't practical.

In that same shot show 2019 video I referred to above the owner of MARCOLMAR mentions that the CETME L was actually designed as a 5.56 (though needing refinement which MARCOLMAR has done) whereas the HK 33 was not. The HK 33 he says was not designed from the ground up as 5.56 but was adapted from the 7.62 NATO.

Here is the video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZPHyRQSPhQ

[SteyrAUG]

In that same shot show 2019 video I referred to above the owner of MARCOLMAR mentions that the CETME L was actually designed as a 5.56 (though needing refinement which MARCOLMAR has done) whereas the HK 33 was not. The HK 33 he says was not designed from the ground up as 5.56 but was adapted from the 7.62 NATO.

Here is the video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZPHyRQSPhQ

True. What I'm saying is the CETME L would have been better off if they just scaled down the .308 rifle like HK did.