IWI CSR18 Carmel non restricted rifle with 18.6” Barrel

serg777 said:
Doing the same thing and hoping for a different outcome. When rolling the dice on this thing, what’s the realistic plan exactly?

Hoping to shoot it a couple of times before it gets prohib? Banking on collector value so it becomes an expensive safe queen then? Counting on grandfathering so you can keep using it legally? Or just hoping nobody notices ex-NR ever exists?

And before someone says “wait for the next government” - that seems like is not an option for many years to come.

Seriously, what’s the actual endgame here?
Click to expand...
Not care because the government is absolutely incompetent and can't do anything.
 
Kano said:
Height over bore is so 2005, havent you seen the 2 inch+ red dot mounts for NV usage? :p
Click to expand...
ap3OVmY.gif
 
Kano said:
Height over bore is so 2005, havent you seen the 2 inch+ red dot mounts for NV usage? :p
Click to expand...
yes if the job requirement is to go passive a lot - and even that is an outdated idea being jerry rigged to make work, because the tech of blue toothing from "sight" to "goggle" is not new. if you pay attention to stuff made by Anduril such as the Eagle eye both LAD and aiming through the red dot using ridiculous mounting are transitional. The challenge is not the technology, it is more about integrating things in a sensible way. that the user find practical. If I am running a tech company, I will replace the LAD with a digital internal bore sighter that projects an internal digital "aiming point" and blue tooth that "invisible digital aiming point" to the processor of Eagle Eye to fuse into the NV and Thermal picture.

For most people the use case is not trying to rig it so it can be use with NVG passively. Low sight to bore is practical for most.

Why are the old IWI stuff like X95 and Carmel way they are? Well, the IDF is replacing X95 with M4 and the border police is with ARAD. The answer is that they were told to incorporate a plastic shell, like AR160 and G36 - and this is how it well end up with this architecture
 
serg777 said:
Doing the same thing and hoping for a different outcome. When rolling the dice on this thing, what’s the realistic plan exactly?

Hoping to shoot it a couple of times before it gets prohib? Banking on collector value so it becomes an expensive safe queen then? Counting on grandfathering so you can keep using it legally? Or just hoping nobody notices ex-NR ever exists?

And before someone says “wait for the next government” - that seems like is not an option for many years to come.

Seriously, what’s the actual endgame here?
Click to expand...
Shoot it as much as you can afford to.
 
greentips said:
Why are the old IWI stuff like X95 and Carmel way they are? Well, the IDF is replacing X95 with M4 and the border police is with ARAD. The answer is that they were told to incorporate a plastic shell, like AR160 and G36 - and this is how it well end up with this architecture
Click to expand...

Polymer makes sense for the hot climate of Israel, less likely to grab a desert heater part.
 
Ustauk said:
Polymer makes sense for the hot climate of Israel, less likely to grab a desert heater part.
Click to expand...

Although ambient Summer temperatures often exceeded 55C, I never noticed a problem with my issued C8 carbine being too hot to handle when out and about in the sunshine in Afghanistan. Unless the carbine had just been extensively fired, they were fine to handle, - especially as the hand-hold and cheek-weld parts were typically made of polymer. I do not recall the metal parts being too hot to handle either, unless (again) the firearm had recently fired several Magazines in short order.

Polymer handling surfaces make good sense in the Desert, no doubt about it. I am not however convinced that small arms employed in hot climates need full polymer cladding such as has been attempted with the Carmel. Exposed Barrels cool the quickest, not Barrels that are covered by a Handguard clad in polymer gripping surfaces with no venting opportunity.....
 
CobraGT said:
Yeah, it's metal. No polymer cladding, or at least I've seen nothing ito indicate there's any.
Click to expand...

The final export version is Mlok aluminum. The original version was Picatinny quadrail with removable polymer covers. Full length covers were available, giving it sleeker look. The below version shows what it looks like with only half the covers, and the suppressor gives you an idea what a faux suppressor reverse compesator would look like on the longer Canadian barrel.

 
Ustauk said:
The final export version is Mlok aluminum. The original version was Picatinny quadrail with removable polymer covers. Full length covers were available, giving it sleeker look. The below version shows what it looks like with only half the covers, and the suppressor gives you an idea what a faux suppressor reverse compesator would look like on the longer Canadian barrel.

Click to expand...

Definitely a fan of that handguard, if I can source one at some point.
 
Ustauk said:
The final export version is Mlok aluminum. The original version was Picatinny quadrail with removable polymer covers. Full length covers were available, giving it sleeker look. The below version shows what it looks like with only half the covers, and the suppressor gives you an idea what a faux suppressor reverse compesator would look like on the longer Canadian barrel.

Click to expand...
That looks really stupid if you ask me. If you leave it in a rack, unattended for any time, someone's going to tie a laundry line to that barrel.
 
Armedsask said:
Can someone please inform the Israelis about height over bore?
Click to expand...
IMG_7037.jpegIMG_7036.jpeg
Now travel back to 1998 and you were tasked to create an indigenous rifle. The criteria was optimizing engagement from 50 to 250 scoring hits ( anywhere) on big silhouette targets.

Notice the apparent drop when a high sight over bore of about 4” is zeroed at 100m with meprolight reflex vs the 200m mostly used in the us for AR style low 2.5 sight over bore. when TAVOR was first desiged it was envisioned to be equipped with the old MARS. Think about how a 4 to 6 MOA dot could be zeroed to hit anything from 50 to 250. Going back to 25 years ago, the thinking was a bit different. Like back in the 80's, all the military tests focused on 200 and 300m paper range and big reactive targets like in the ACR test for the forward looking. The vertical sight over bore probably was not even considered crucial for the mass, because consideration was not given to high precision high speed close range shooting that only became a thing beyond the selected bunches during the GWOT.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom