CZ Bren 2 barrel stamp

S

Saltwater Soldier

New member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
No Man’s Land
I’ve been looking for a CZ Bren 2 16.5” carbine with the barrel stamped 5.56, searched hi and low and only came across barrels stamped 223. Every other version including 9” , 11” and even the 18.5” non Restricted display model that was on display at Taccom this year were all stamped 5.56. I’ve asked numerous dealers and distributors for information on this but I have never received an definitive answer or explanation. Just wondering if anyone has a 16.5” carbine stamped 5.56 or knows the reason I can’t locate one. Sorry if I’m resurrecting an old thread, but I haven’t seen this topic or question asked before. Thanks.
 
As usual, rifles are stamped .223 because it's not a nato caliber. Governments are ok with .223 by shy away from 5.56 because this what the military uses.
 
Last edited:
Maybe they are stamped .223 to get around restrictions some countries have around military calibers. Easier to explain it’s a civilian rifle and not a military rifle. Just a guess.
 
SustainingGopher said:
Maybe they are stamped .223 to get around restrictions some countries have around military calibers. Easier to explain it’s a civilian rifle and not a military rifle. Just a guess.
Click to expand...

This most likely is the main factor. My bet is it is the same barrel but stamped 223 or 5.56 depending on a number of things. Doesn't make sense for CZ to have two different (really similar) barrels.

Only CZ can properly answer this IMO - maybe shoot them an email? Now if they were smart they would make it 223 Wylde and that would tick all the boxes.....
 
I heard the same from a dealer, but then it doesn’t make sense that all the 9” and 11” versions that I checked had the barrel stamped 5.56. I’ve been at this for months yet to get an accurate explanation. I have even asked a rep from the importer. I’m curious if anyone has or knows of any 16.5” carbines stamped 5.56.
 
If you look hard enough, there was a guy who was at the CZ factory when the first Bren 2 was brought in and sold because of something that wasn't quite what the production rifles were supposed to be. I'll see if I can't hunt it down but that guy might have some contacts at CZ to answer (not CZ USA, CZ Europe)
 
slushee said:
If you look hard enough, there was a guy who was at the CZ factory when the first Bren 2 was brought in and sold because of something that wasn't quite what the production rifles were supposed to be. I'll see if I can't hunt it down but that guy might have some contacts at CZ to answer (not CZ USA, CZ Europe)
Click to expand...

That would be great, love to hear someone else chime in on this, feels like I’m kicking cans.
 
rugbydave said:
For what it's worth, the 16" barrels were specifically done for the US civilian market so that might have something to do with it.
Click to expand...

Good point, what it feels like is that the 16" barrels (&18.6") were marked to be best suited to their final destination (US & Canada) - ie 223 is pretty common (more so than 5.56) and it takes away that scary "military" calibre angle.

The question then becomes what reamer did those barrels actually use? Was it the same 5.56 reamer that was used on the other barrels marked 5.56? In which case it could obviously run both 5.56 & 223 with no issues.

If they did use a 223 reamer then 5.56 is kinda off the table (debatable but on paper at least). Only CZ can answer this but I'm not sure they would give the game away if the gun is 5.56 capable as it would take them into the "military grade" domain which to the lefties of the world has negative connotations.

As I said before they should go 223 Wylde as it ticks all the boxes (can safely use 5.56 or 223, the name isn't scary / associated with the military, and its dimensions lend themselves to good accuracy with the right ammo).
 
Sal####er Soldier said:
That would be great, love to hear someone else chime in on this, feels like I’m kicking cans.
Click to expand...

Why the fuss? What difference does it make? Unless of course you are one of those people who thinks that a couple of thousandths of an inch is gonna cause your rifle to explode in your face, when decades of user experience and hundred of millions of rounds has not produced a single example of such occurring?
 
These rifles are manufactured in europe and the stamping is done to cip standards vs saami standards. And cip 223=556. The bren 2 can fire 556 just fine
 
Response from CZ Europe:

As for the overseas market, I do believe 5,56x45 NATO is allowed for civilian use there while in many countries in the EU, incl. The Czech Republic it is not.

That said I would always stick to feeding the gun the ammo marked on the gun. If it says .223 use .223 and if 5.56 then 5.56 it is.

We certainly do not recommend using any other ammo types than what the gun is intended to use.

Hope it helps.

S pozdravem / Kind regards
 
slushee said:
Response from CZ Europe:

As for the overseas market, I do believe 5,56x45 NATO is allowed for civilian use there while in many countries in the EU, incl. The Czech Republic it is not.

That said I would always stick to feeding the gun the ammo marked on the gun. If it says .223 use .223 and if 5.56 then 5.56 it is.

We certainly do not recommend using any other ammo types than what the gun is intended to use.

Hope it helps.

S pozdravem / Kind regards
Click to expand...

That is exactly the kind of vague ass covering answer I expected.
 
Sniffer said:
That is exactly the kind of vague ass covering answer I expected.
Click to expand...

Of course the factory would respond with, "shoot what the barrel is marked". They'd have to be insane to say, "shoot whatever, it'll probably be OK". That'd just open them up to a lawsuit from some moron who did something stupid.

The whole 223 vs 556 argument is the longest running, most silly episode EVER. There is NO reason whatsoever not to shoot 556 in a 223 chamber. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to put forward photo evidence of a rifle that EXPLODED as a result of 556 in a 223 chamber.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
Of course the factory would respond with, "shoot what the barrel is marked". They'd have to be insane to say, "shoot whatever, it'll probably be OK". That'd just open them up to a lawsuit from some moron who did something stupid.

The whole 223 vs 556 argument is the longest running, most silly episode EVER. There is NO reason whatsoever not to shoot 556 in a 223 chamber. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to put forward photo evidence of a rifle that EXPLODED as a result of 556 in a 223 chamber.
Click to expand...

Which is my point.

If it is a 556 barrel marked as 223 for any sort of political angle they also wont confirm that or they've now made the rifle more "military" which melts the minds of lefties it seems.
 
Sorry guys, don’t mean to backtrack, and I absolutely appreciate everyones input. But again why is it all the other versions 9” and 11” barrels I’ve looked at including the 18.5” that was on display at Taccom are all stamped 5.56, and all the 16.5” barrels I’ve looked at are stamped 223. Was there any of the 16.5” carbine’s that arrived in Canada stamped 5.56. Maybe these barrels were originally manufactured for a European destination that required a 223 stamp.
 
Sal####er Soldier said:
Sorry guys, don’t mean to backtrack, and I absolutely appreciate everyones input. But again why is it all the other versions 9” and 11” barrels I’ve looked at including the 18.5” that was on display at Taccom are all stamped 5.56, and all the 16.5” barrels I’ve looked at are stamped 223. Was there any of the 16.5” carbine’s that arrived in Canada stamped 5.56. Maybe these barrels were originally manufactured for a European destination that required a 223 stamp.
Click to expand...

Who cares. What difference does it make? Shoot the thing, with whatever ammo you have at hand.
 
Sal####er Soldier said:
Sorry guys, don’t mean to backtrack, and I absolutely appreciate everyones input. But again why is it all the other versions 9” and 11” barrels I’ve looked at including the 18.5” that was on display at Taccom are all stamped 5.56, and all the 16.5” barrels I’ve looked at are stamped 223. Was there any of the 16.5” carbine’s that arrived in Canada stamped 5.56. Maybe these barrels were originally manufactured for a European destination that required a 223 stamp.
Click to expand...

The 16.5 is the same gun probably sold in the us. Minus some components for it to be 922r compliant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom