Cz bren 3
- Thread starter mildot
- Start date
The only downside I can see is the aluminum at the butt stock hinge. The Bren 2 polymer interface didn't impress me, but changing it to aluminum in the Bren 3 will, i believe, begin to show excessive wear on the latch receiver.
There are two fixes...don't fold and latch the stock like a fidget toy, but let's get real? The other fix would be taken from a Tavor 7 design and imbed hardened steel inserts at the interfaces (charging latch lock on Tavor 7).
That nit pic aside, I'd buy it if it came here.
There are two fixes...don't fold and latch the stock like a fidget toy, but let's get real? The other fix would be taken from a Tavor 7 design and imbed hardened steel inserts at the interfaces (charging latch lock on Tavor 7).
That nit pic aside, I'd buy it if it came here.
They do use steel inserts in Gen 3.
Funny that some Bren fan club boys were discarding Bren 2 criticism with "battle proven" argument, while most if not all of this criticism came from battle field experience in Ukraine and several videos on this subject were made in English, Ukrainian and Russian. Well, it looks, unlike some fan boys, CZ paid attention to the real battlefield experience.
Let's see what we know so far against existing design flaws:
1) Flimsy plastic stock hinge. Fixed in Gen 3 with aluminum hinge.
2) inconsistency of accuracy (I attribute this to the combination of the way trunnion is attached with pencil barrel profile). Gen 3 has medium profile barrel bringing it close to HB, and it looks like (but I can't be sure 100% from the vid) they changed the way trunnion-receiver-HG are attached together. I really hope they changed this.
3) Steel bolt riding in aluminum receiver got changed in Gen 3 with steel inserts.
4) Flimsy charging handle that can be easily bent - not resolved in Gen 3.
5) Plastic guide for charging handle - unknown status for Gen 3.
6) Magazine overinsertion issue is caused by absence of support for magazine in receiver. Unknown status for Gen 3.
7) Cast metal gas block destruction. They definitely changed gas block, I hope it's milled in Gen 3. In Gen 2 it was mix and match.
8) Bolt too short travel for reliable extraction-feeding sequence, most affected were 7.62 guns with even shorter bolt travel, but even 665 was too short to my knowledge. Not sure if they changed anything. I would have changed.
9) Technically it's not the issue, but rather poor choice of solution to prevent the issue. Overcomplicated carrier design to address the issue of rebound - they changed design again in Gen 3. A bit of stupid way to resolve the issue, but we will see how good it is.
10) they said "breach part is changed", not sure what they were addressing with this.
11) no changes to plastic [lower] receiver and I personally believe it's a bad choice of material for a battle rifle.
There were several more issues but I don't keep the list, that just from top of my head.
P.S. With current laws this gun has no chances for FRT.
Funny that some Bren fan club boys were discarding Bren 2 criticism with "battle proven" argument, while most if not all of this criticism came from battle field experience in Ukraine and several videos on this subject were made in English, Ukrainian and Russian. Well, it looks, unlike some fan boys, CZ paid attention to the real battlefield experience.
Let's see what we know so far against existing design flaws:
1) Flimsy plastic stock hinge. Fixed in Gen 3 with aluminum hinge.
2) inconsistency of accuracy (I attribute this to the combination of the way trunnion is attached with pencil barrel profile). Gen 3 has medium profile barrel bringing it close to HB, and it looks like (but I can't be sure 100% from the vid) they changed the way trunnion-receiver-HG are attached together. I really hope they changed this.
3) Steel bolt riding in aluminum receiver got changed in Gen 3 with steel inserts.
4) Flimsy charging handle that can be easily bent - not resolved in Gen 3.
5) Plastic guide for charging handle - unknown status for Gen 3.
6) Magazine overinsertion issue is caused by absence of support for magazine in receiver. Unknown status for Gen 3.
7) Cast metal gas block destruction. They definitely changed gas block, I hope it's milled in Gen 3. In Gen 2 it was mix and match.
8) Bolt too short travel for reliable extraction-feeding sequence, most affected were 7.62 guns with even shorter bolt travel, but even 665 was too short to my knowledge. Not sure if they changed anything. I would have changed.
9) Technically it's not the issue, but rather poor choice of solution to prevent the issue. Overcomplicated carrier design to address the issue of rebound - they changed design again in Gen 3. A bit of stupid way to resolve the issue, but we will see how good it is.
10) they said "breach part is changed", not sure what they were addressing with this.
11) no changes to plastic [lower] receiver and I personally believe it's a bad choice of material for a battle rifle.
There were several more issues but I don't keep the list, that just from top of my head.
P.S. With current laws this gun has no chances for FRT.
Some nice upgrades, particularly if you are running high round-counts like most SOF units. That said, it is highly unlikely that I will ever reach 20K+ rounds through my 14" Bren 2. With zero indications of wear to the hard-coat aodizing on my aluminum Receiver Rails at approximately 700 rounds, I am confident of the original platform's adequate longevity in most civilian hands. I note that 16.5" is now a standard Barrel length in addition to 14.5", no doubt to cater directly to the vast US civilian market.
Yup, nice upgrades for sure. But the Bren 3 looks like overkill for my needs, whereas the Bren 2 will suffice just fine. I actually preffer the lighter "Pencil" profile Barrel and overall weight of the Bren 2 - to me that was a major selling feature because it speaks to an understanding of the fundamental truth that military rifles are frequently carried far more than they are actually fired. The adoption of a heavier "HK 416-style" Medium-Heavy profile Barrel and Steel Receiver Guide Rails will increase the overall weight of the rifle by an appreciable amount. "Progress" is always a trade-off to some degree. I will stick with my Bren 2 rather than "upgrade" to the heavier Bren 3 when it hits the civilian market, particularly with a NR version in Canada still dependant upon 3rd-party, button-rifled Barrels rather than a Cold-Hammer-Forged and Hard-Chromed CZ factory tube.
Yup, nice upgrades for sure. But the Bren 3 looks like overkill for my needs, whereas the Bren 2 will suffice just fine. I actually preffer the lighter "Pencil" profile Barrel and overall weight of the Bren 2 - to me that was a major selling feature because it speaks to an understanding of the fundamental truth that military rifles are frequently carried far more than they are actually fired. The adoption of a heavier "HK 416-style" Medium-Heavy profile Barrel and Steel Receiver Guide Rails will increase the overall weight of the rifle by an appreciable amount. "Progress" is always a trade-off to some degree. I will stick with my Bren 2 rather than "upgrade" to the heavier Bren 3 when it hits the civilian market, particularly with a NR version in Canada still dependant upon 3rd-party, button-rifled Barrels rather than a Cold-Hammer-Forged and Hard-Chromed CZ factory tube.
The concern is that production of Bren2 will stop soon, and you can't buy Bren3. So basically there is nothing you can buy.
This is usually how product line goes, like Bren1 to Bren2, T21 to X95, various MCX. My guess is that Bren 2 will cease in Q3 this year when parts run out - when you see Bren2 on sale in the US the end is near/here. Given the major changes, Bren 2 is EOL and will be no more soon.
Given the political landscape, they will try to make election happen in 2025 Oct. This means new gun laws, if put into high priority, won't kick in until 2026 Q4.
Since Bren2 is probably cheaper to make, I will say that it probably has a bit more to come but probably not for long.
I say buy a Bren2 if you haven't had one, or there will be at least 1 year and a half minimum you can't buy a new cz in between line switch and government change.
This is usually how product line goes, like Bren1 to Bren2, T21 to X95, various MCX. My guess is that Bren 2 will cease in Q3 this year when parts run out - when you see Bren2 on sale in the US the end is near/here. Given the major changes, Bren 2 is EOL and will be no more soon.
Given the political landscape, they will try to make election happen in 2025 Oct. This means new gun laws, if put into high priority, won't kick in until 2026 Q4.
Since Bren2 is probably cheaper to make, I will say that it probably has a bit more to come but probably not for long.
I say buy a Bren2 if you haven't had one, or there will be at least 1 year and a half minimum you can't buy a new cz in between line switch and government change.
PP will scrap the OIC BS.
