Poll

FTE / Stovepipe issues in 7.62x39 Bren 2 guns (or not)

Have NOT had any issues with Bren 2Ms w/ stock OEM hand guard or rails.
7 (25.9%)
Have NOT had any issues with Bren 2S w/ stock OEM rails.
6 (22.2%)
Have NOT had any issues with Bren 2Ms using aftermarket hand guard or rails.
4 (14.8%)
Have NOT had any issues with Bren 2S using aftermarket rails.
0 (0%)
Have HAD issues with Bren 2Ms w/ stock OEM hand guard or rails.
2 (7.4%)
Have HAD issues with Bren 2S w/ stock OEM rails.
2 (7.4%)
Have HAD issues with Bren 2Ms using aftermarket hand guard or rails.
5 (18.5%)
Have HAD issues with Bren 2S using aftermarket rails.
1 (3.7%)

Total Members Voted: 27

Author Topic: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not  (Read 14728 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline sneakyhenry

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #15 on: September 03, 2020, 04:52:47 PM »
More fishing around for info, but it may be a good idea to get down what date of mfg for everyone's rifles as well.  BCG should have a date code that either says 18, 19, or 20.

I think this could be a fantastic idea!

Offline Archos

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #16 on: September 03, 2020, 05:01:22 PM »
My 9" Bren 2 has had at least 25+ malfunctions in the roughly 600-700 rounds I have put through it. It has happened with both my HBI handguard and Stock handguard.

I have also had an issue with the pistol stripping the first round from a full magazine as well. This happened on my very first range trip, stock gun.

Also, my Bolt carrier is dated 19.

Offline sneakyhenry

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #17 on: September 03, 2020, 06:42:52 PM »
My old Bren 2s that was extremely reliable showed a 2018 dated BCG ( I looked back at the original photos of it). My new Bren 2s 11" pistol shows a date or 2020.

Offline MeatAxe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1758
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #18 on: September 04, 2020, 04:25:31 AM »
What's was the verdict of MAC's video torture test of the Bren 2?

Sorry, don't have patreon - the Cliff Notes synopsis will do.

Offline Magsz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #19 on: September 04, 2020, 08:52:04 AM »
This is second hand info but apparently he fired 2100 rounds without issue.

I guess CZ saw the video and called him.  I'm not sure what the context of the phone call was.

Conceptually speaking, videos like his are either extremely hurtful, or helpful.  I'm hoping its the latter.

CZ can choose to sweep the issue under the rug and reference a "successful" video like MAC's, or they can acknowledge that there is a small percentage of issues and fix it quietly and successfully.  I'm hoping its the latter.

Offline Wobbly

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12800
  • Loves the smell of VihtaVuori in the morning !
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #20 on: September 04, 2020, 11:26:13 AM »
CZ can choose to sweep the issue under the rug and reference a "successful" video like MAC's, or they can acknowledge that there is a small percentage of issues and fix it quietly and successfully.  I'm hoping its the latter.


While I'm all for any company voluntarily fixing issues with any of their manufactured products, the obvious first thing to do is identify if there is an "issue". Just because 5 or 6 very vocal people complain loudly doesn't constitute an "issue". Especially if those 5 or 6 are from a total population numbering in the thousands.

There is no evidence so far of a single point of failure. If there is no single point "issue", then how can it be "fixed" ? And if it can't be "fixed", where then is the "sweeping the issue under the rug" ?


Everyone must admit that it could just as easily boil down to users purchasing an array of shoddy ammo. How can CZ be held responsible because users are purchasing the cheapest, crap ammo they can find ?

So although the level of rhetoric on this subject has already reached the level of "trial by Oprah" and CZ has already been pronounced guilty, we are far from that point. Oprah, Dr Phil, et al need to turn down the rhetoric. As it stands, some comments are no better than BLM accusing people they've never seen before of being "racist". Let's not sink that low.

 ;)
In God we trust; On 'Starting Load' we rely.

Offline sneakyhenry

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #21 on: September 04, 2020, 11:42:20 AM »
We need to have round count, ammunition choice, barrel lengths reported even for non-issues.

Also, purchase date.  As we know, there were two shipments of Bren 2S's into the country, 2018 & 2020.   

My old Bren 2s was a 9" 7.62x39mm 2018 model one of the first ones into the country. I used wolf polyformance with consistent gas & ejection, I shot at least 500 rounds through it with no malfunctions.

Offline America_First

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #22 on: September 04, 2020, 01:58:03 PM »
CZ can choose to sweep the issue under the rug and reference a "successful" video like MAC's, or they can acknowledge that there is a small percentage of issues and fix it quietly and successfully.  I'm hoping its the latter.


While I'm all for any company voluntarily fixing issues with any of their manufactured products, the obvious first thing to do is identify if there is an "issue". Just because 5 or 6 very vocal people complain loudly doesn't constitute an "issue". Especially if those 5 or 6 are from a total population numbering in the thousands.

There is no evidence so far of a single point of failure. If there is no single point "issue", then how can it be "fixed" ? And if it can't be "fixed", where then is the "sweeping the issue under the rug" ?


Everyone must admit that it could just as easily boil down to users purchasing an array of shoddy ammo. How can CZ be held responsible because users are purchasing the cheapest, crap ammo they can find ?

So although the level of rhetoric on this subject has already reached the level of "trial by Oprah" and CZ has already been pronounced guilty, we are far from that point. Oprah, Dr Phil, et al need to turn down the rhetoric. As it stands, some comments are no better than BLM accusing people they've never seen before of being "racist". Let's not sink that low.

 ;)

Shoddy ammunition?  I've never had a single malfunction in any AKM or Vz.58 related to ammunition.  Thousands upon thousands of rounds fired of shoddy ammunition since I was 18 and purchased my first AKM  ;D

I'll agree however, that we are a very small community of owners here.  This may be an issue with simply a break-in period required on some models, I'm going to fire a case of Golden Tiger on Monday and try to shed some light on the issue from someone who has had problems already.  Will heavily oil the bolt as recommended, already moved the CH to the right. 

Offline Magsz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #23 on: September 04, 2020, 02:03:35 PM »
CZ can choose to sweep the issue under the rug and reference a "successful" video like MAC's, or they can acknowledge that there is a small percentage of issues and fix it quietly and successfully.  I'm hoping its the latter.


While I'm all for any company voluntarily fixing issues with any of their manufactured products, the obvious first thing to do is identify if there is an "issue". Just because 5 or 6 very vocal people complain loudly doesn't constitute an "issue". Especially if those 5 or 6 are from a total population numbering in the thousands.

There is no evidence so far of a single point of failure. If there is no single point "issue", then how can it be "fixed" ? And if it can't be "fixed", where then is the "sweeping the issue under the rug" ?


Everyone must admit that it could just as easily boil down to users purchasing an array of shoddy ammo. How can CZ be held responsible because users are purchasing the cheapest, crap ammo they can find ?

So although the level of rhetoric on this subject has already reached the level of "trial by Oprah" and CZ has already been pronounced guilty, we are far from that point. Oprah, Dr Phil, et al need to turn down the rhetoric. As it stands, some comments are no better than BLM accusing people they've never seen before of being "racist". Let's not sink that low.

 ;)

Not a single person here has decried that CZ is guilty.

Not a single person here is saying that CZ is sweeping the issue under the rug.

Its often the vocal minority that point out potential flaws in products.

Its often the user base in this current world that finds flaws in products.  There are tons of people that ascribe to the philosophy of "never buy first generation products".  While the Bren 2 is not a first generation product, it could be argued that the MS, for the American market is.

If no one ever shoots their stuff and talks about it and proffers data points, how do we ever hope to improve anything?

The "cheap" ammo thing is a tired argument.  Yes, ammo is a part of the system.  Yes, some ammo is trash, ala winchester USA Forged.  I expect my commercial grade guns to be able to run commercial grade ammo.  My particular sample wont even run mil surplus ammo so once again, the argument of "cheap" ammo being the culprit is not fair.

I cant recall a post on this forum in regards to the Bren 2 thus far that has had an overly negative tone.  No one here has busted out the pitch forks or the torches and has condemned CZ to the point where their name is Mud.  Given their excellent track record for excellent products, most people here are assuming that the people having issues (myself included) will be taken care of.

Personally, I'm not going to come onto a forum and lie for the sake of protecting the fragile hearts of CZ fans.  My gun went back with issues, it came back with issues and CZ fluffed me off.  I'm not condemning them because as i've said on other forums, CZ may not really know what's going on right now.  I work for a huge bureaucracy.  Getting anything done is like pulling teeth from a chicken regardless of how badly the men and women on the ground need change affected.  I can only imagine what its like at CZ and it will probably take a bit to get the engine spooled up to the point where they either identify an endemic issue, or an isolated issue with a certain batch of guns.  I'm willing to wait to a point and see how this pans out.  Or, ill move on, no big deal.  I know that myself and others are not shy about reporting our experiences.

Offline czkyle1776

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #24 on: September 04, 2020, 06:40:47 PM »
CZ can choose to sweep the issue under the rug and reference a "successful" video like MAC's, or they can acknowledge that there is a small percentage of issues and fix it quietly and successfully.  I'm hoping its the latter.


While I'm all for any company voluntarily fixing issues with any of their manufactured products, the obvious first thing to do is identify if there is an "issue". Just because 5 or 6 very vocal people complain loudly doesn't constitute an "issue". Especially if those 5 or 6 are from a total population numbering in the thousands.

There is no evidence so far of a single point of failure. If there is no single point "issue", then how can it be "fixed" ? And if it can't be "fixed", where then is the "sweeping the issue under the rug" ?


Everyone must admit that it could just as easily boil down to users purchasing an array of shoddy ammo. How can CZ be held responsible because users are purchasing the cheapest, crap ammo they can find ?

So although the level of rhetoric on this subject has already reached the level of "trial by Oprah" and CZ has already been pronounced guilty, we are far from that point. Oprah, Dr Phil, et al need to turn down the rhetoric. As it stands, some comments are no better than BLM accusing people they've never seen before of being "racist". Let's not sink that low.

 ;)

I'm pretty sure they were just saying that CZ could do one of two things. If they choose not to do anything, they have the MAC video to point to and say, "see errythang's fine." I don't think anyone has accused CZ of burying the issue already, but they're hoping that they don't. No one said CZ is guilty, yet. They're speculating on courses of action that CZ may take. I don't see anything wrong with people getting upset their expensive product isn't working and then get even more upset when they're blamed for it not working. We don't have access to CZ's repair ticket history. There's no way to know if it's "only 5 or 6 very vocal people." There may be many more with issues that don't participate on this forum. 

Offline keefypants

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #25 on: September 04, 2020, 08:18:09 PM »
Went to the range again today, and brought 9 mags of wolf polyformance, the same ammo I've ever only shot in my 2S, and pretty much did 2x 4-5 mag dumps straight, and magically did not experience a single failure.  Gun was super toasty, but no issues experienced aside from the expected 1-2 o'clock ejection.  Did notice however that on the last two mags, 3 or so rounds of each ejected to the 3-4 o'clock position.  Not sure if the key to reliability is to keep the gun as dirty as possible so less gas makes it into the system or something dumb like that.  Will do another trip in a couple weeks and see what happens.  Having the previous 300+ rounds experience 2-3 ftes each, then doing a quick dump of 270 rounds completely flawlessly, I have no idea what the bleep is going on with this thing.

Offline Wobbly

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12800
  • Loves the smell of VihtaVuori in the morning !
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #26 on: September 04, 2020, 09:04:57 PM »
CZ can choose to sweep the issue under the rug and reference a "successful" video like MAC's....


Not a single person here is saying that CZ is sweeping the issue under the rug.


OK.


I'm not saying your gun doesn't have a problem. I'm not saying you don't have a right to be upset. I'm not saying you don't have a right to voice your disapproval.

All I'm saying is this thread reads like there's a giant conspiracy to cover up a single issue with one model. While I agree several owners are having trouble, no one has proved it's all related to a single item. While several guns fail to eject, there are so many contributors to proper ejection that 7 guns could all have 7 completely un-related causes which all result in the same outcome.

Secondly, while "blowing off steam" may feel good, it is unproductive. This forum has a friendly relationship with CZUSA, but we are in no way associated with CZ, CZUSA or any affiliate. There is no evidence that anyone from CZUSA monitors these threads... ever. If you want to take action that has real hopes of getting a result, then I suggest you call CZUSA, form a relationship with one of their appropriate representatives, and send them a video of your gun having the issue. That way they can see it for themselves. If you can demo the same issue with several brands of ammunition then you have a real chance of them taking positive action.

But if you're posting words and photos here hoping to get CZ's attention, it just ain't gonna happen.  ;)
« Last Edit: September 04, 2020, 09:53:53 PM by Wobbly »
In God we trust; On 'Starting Load' we rely.

Offline Magsz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #27 on: September 04, 2020, 10:18:43 PM »
CZ can choose to sweep the issue under the rug and reference a "successful" video like MAC's....


Not a single person here is saying that CZ is sweeping the issue under the rug.


OK.


I'm not saying your gun doesn't have a problem. I'm not saying you don't have a right to be upset. I'm not saying you don't have a right to voice your disapproval.

All I'm saying is this thread reads like there's a giant conspiracy to cover up a single issue with one model. While I agree several owners are having trouble, no one has proved it's all related to a single item. While several guns fail to eject, there are so many contributors to proper ejection that 7 guns could all have 7 completely un-related causes which all result in the same outcome.

Secondly, while "blowing off steam" may feel good, it is unproductive. This forum has a friendly relationship with CZUSA, but we are in no way associated with CZ, CZUSA or any affiliate. There is no evidence that anyone from CZUSA monitors these threads... ever. If you want to take action that has real hopes of getting a result, then I suggest you call CZUSA, form a relationship with one of their appropriate representatives, and send them a video of your gun having the issue. That way they can see it for themselves. If you can demo the same issue with several brands of ammunition then you have a real chance of them taking positive action.

But if you're posting words and photos here hoping to get CZ's attention, it just ain't gonna happen.  ;)

Your interpretation of my posts seems very skewed...

I posted two hypothetical situations above based upon experiences as a consumer that i've had over my lifetime.  Car companies for example are notorious for not honoring their warranties which you have to fight for in order to have honored.  Its a "thing".

Once again, i'm not saying that CZ is going to do anything of the sort, I merely laid out two possible hypothetical responses on a forum where we talk about these things.

I have already sent my gun back to CZ.  They did not assist me the first time around.  They did not respond to the letter I included, or the offer to send video and pictures.  I'm also not the only one that has had a similar experience.  I'm not implying that CZ is sweeping anything under the rug.  As I mentioned earlier, whomever is looking at these guns simply may not be aware of what they need to be looking for.  There are also inconsistencies that need verification.  MAC's post 2000 round test and subsequent response from CZ affirmed that these guns were MADE TO SHOOT LACQUERED STEEL COMBLOC AMMO.  Some users have reported that the tech's are sending guns back indicating that the chambers were "filled with lacquer".  So, what is the REAL information?

Like the forum owner, I too am also very busy and haven't had a chance to send the gun back just yet.  I also haven't had a chance to put more rounds through it to once again thoroughly document my findings post warranty service.

None of this is personal and none of this is "blowing off steam" for the "feels".  My findings are not anecdotal and they are not second hand.  Its my time on the range, my ammo and my sample size of two guns.  Its a forum where we are supposed to talk about CZ guns and our experiences? No?  If that's not the case then ill stop posting in the manner that I do if its not in the spirit of the forum.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2020, 12:43:23 AM by Magsz »

Offline czkyle1776

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #28 on: September 04, 2020, 10:43:55 PM »

Your interpretation of my posts seems very skewed...

I posted to hypothetical situations above based upon experiences as a consumer that i've had over my lifetime.  Car companies for example are notorious for not honoring their warranties which you have to fight for in order to have honored.  Its a "thing".

Once again, i'm not saying that CZ is going to do anything of the sort, I merely laid out two possible hypothetical responses on a forum where we talk about these things.

I have already sent my gun back to CZ.  They did not assist me the first time around.  They did not respond to the letter I included, or the offer to send video and pictures.  I'm also not the only one that has had a similar experience.  I'm not implying that CZ is sweeping anything under the rug.  As I mentioned earlier, whomever is looking at these guns simply may not be aware of what they need to be looking for.  There are also inconsistencies that need verification.  MAC's post 2000 round test and subsequent response from CZ affirmed that these guns were MADE TO SHOOT LACQUERED STEEL COMBLOC AMMO.  Some users have reported that the tech's are sending guns back indicating that the chambers were "filled with lacquer".  So, what is the REAL information?

Like the forum owner, I too am also very busy and haven't had a chance to send the gun back just yet.  I also haven't had a chance to put more rounds through it to once again thoroughly document my findings post warranty service.

None of this is personal and none of this is "blowing off steam" for the "feels".  My findings are not anecdotal and they are not second hand.  Its my time on the range, my ammo and my sample size of two guns.  Its a forum where we are supposed to talk about CZ guns and our experiences? No?  If that's not the case then ill stop posting in the manner that I do if its not in the spirit of the forum.

I find it interesting that CZUSA says the problem is ammunition related, but they're testing guns and ruling it ammunition related based on only one ammo type being used for testing. The CZ rep on reddit basically stated that they don't have much ammo right now and the tester essentially ran 80 rounds of a single type ammo to test the gun. What if the gun does run well with that one particular type of ammo, but all other ammo runs like crap? Would that be ammo related? Sure, but are you then required to only run that one specific ammo from now on? He did state that they're trying to source more to test multiple ammos, which is good, but then wouldn't it be premature to blame lacquered ammo when they didn't have any to test with? Just thought it was interesting. I am glad an actual rep is updating people on what's being done. Most companies wouldn't do that.

PSA: I'm not accusing the CZ gun testers of some conspiracy. Im not even trying to accuse CZ of doing something wrong. I'm merely hypothesizing if their methodology is flawed. Questioning a methodology and questioning their reasoning and even speculating possible courses of action =/= a "trial by Oprah."

Offline MeatAxe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1758
Re: POLL: 7.62x39 Bren 2 Failures to Extract / Eject / Stovepipes -- Or Not
« Reply #29 on: September 05, 2020, 12:34:02 AM »
I'm fortunate that I haven't had any reliability issues with my Bren 2Ms -- so far(knock on wood). If anything, my gun probably verges on being undergassed as it only kicks spent shells out 6 or 8 feet.

However, I've run all types of "dirty Soviet steel case garbage" 7.62x39 ammo through it: Tula, Barnaul, Monarch, Wolf (lacquer & polymer), Golden Tiger, etc. as well as SST, SSA/Nosler and Winchester ballistic tips.

So, I think the "shoddy ammo" excuse is a bunch of bs. These are (supposedly) military guns with an "adverse condition" gas setting for a dirty gun/ammo, so they SHOULD be able handle a wide array of ammunition brands. I've never experienced any "over pressure" com bloc ammo that would otherwise lead to these type of overpassing failures.