How to destroy a VZ 58

[briang2ad]

https://www.vz58usa.com/product/vz58-rifle-16-tactical-side-folder-fde-cerakote-series/

Maybe I’m nuts and maybe I’m the one who doesn’t understand, but over 8 1/2 Lbs without the mag is defeating the purpose of the VZ58.  Oh yes that’s with no optics, mounts, lights etc.  an infantryman’s nightmare.

[Hammer Time]

https://www.vz58usa.com/product/vz58-rifle-16-tactical-side-folder-fde-cerakote-series/

Maybe I’m nuts and maybe I’m the one who doesn’t understand, but over 8 1/2 Lbs without the mag is defeating the purpose of the VZ58.  Oh yes that’s with no optics, mounts, lights etc.  an infantryman’s nightmare.

Agreed.

And not unlike the way that so many people destroy perfectly good ARs.

[MeatAxe]

https://www.vz58usa.com/product/vz58-rifle-16-tactical-side-folder-fde-cerakote-series/

Maybe I’m nuts and maybe I’m the one who doesn’t understand, but over 8 1/2 Lbs without the mag is defeating the purpose of the VZ58.  Oh yes that’s with no optics, mounts, lights etc.  an infantryman’s nightmare.

I’m sure you could accomplish the same upgrades for less money and probably less weight than the one pictured, but its optics, mounts, lights and ergonomics, etc. are light years ahead of the now 64 year old original. What would be the nightmare would be someone armed with the 1958 original having to confront somebody else with an upgraded, modern version. Of course, appealing as the Vz58 is, there are several modern platforms that have eclipsed it.

[RSR]

https://www.vz58usa.com/product/vz58-rifle-16-tactical-side-folder-fde-cerakote-series/

Maybe I’m nuts and maybe I’m the one who doesn’t understand, but over 8 1/2 Lbs without the mag is defeating the purpose of the VZ58.  Oh yes that’s with no optics, mounts, lights etc.  an infantryman’s nightmare.

Not sure of exact share of market, but A LOT of new gun owners/consumers are driven by Instagram.  That there is what they want for aesthetics and at nearly $3k is more than double current ridiculously high MSRP of base military model.  Think of it like the CZ and hipster associations, but tactical hipsters.

[RSR]

I’m sure you could accomplish the same upgrades for less money and probably less weight than the one pictured, but its optics, mounts, lights and ergonomics, etc. are light years ahead of the now 64 year old original. What would be the nightmare would be someone armed with the 1958 original having to confront somebody else with an upgraded, modern version. Of course, appealing as the Vz58 is, there are several modern platforms that have eclipsed it.

What 7.62x39 modern carbines available to US consumers have eclipsed an optimally modernized Vz58? 

CMMG Mutant/variants?  Only if you need to mount variably magnified optics -- and I'd argue not as durable.

Beyond that, what?  Bren 2 7.62x39 has had major reliability issues.  SCAR -- really?

Standard 7.62x39 ARs and AK variants both have major and unrecoverable limitations to even get into the same league -- primarily in regards to ergonomics, weight, or reliability.  Same for modernized SKS.  Same for Ruger Ranch. 

What am I missing?

MAC has an hour long vid regarding 5.56 being "less than ideal" from today -- haven't watched the whole thing -- but 7.62x39 is superior in destroying urban cover like cinderblock and thinner and less dense third world concrete vs 5.56/5.45:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WphhrYEsjco

[MeatAxe]

I’m sure you could accomplish the same upgrades for less money and probably less weight than the one pictured, but its optics, mounts, lights and ergonomics, etc. are light years ahead of the now 64 year old original. What would be the nightmare would be someone armed with the 1958 original having to confront somebody else with an upgraded, modern version. Of course, appealing as the Vz58 is, there are several modern platforms that have eclipsed it.

What 7.62x39 modern carbines available to US consumers have eclipsed an optimally modernized Vz58? 

CMMG Mutant/variants?  Only if you need to mount variably magnified optics -- and I'd argue not as durable.

Beyond that, what?  Bren 2 7.62x39 has had major reliability issues.  SCAR -- really?

Standard 7.62x39 ARs and AK variants both have major and unrecoverable limitations to even get into the same league -- primarily in regards to ergonomics, weight, or reliability.  Same for modernized SKS.  Same for Ruger Ranch. 

What am I missing?

MAC has an hour long vid regarding 5.56 being "less than ideal" from today -- haven't watched the whole thing -- but 7.62x39 is superior in destroying urban cover like cinderblock and thinner and less dense third world concrete vs 5.56/5.45:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WphhrYEsjco

Robinson Armament XCR-L

PWS

Faxon ARAK

CZ Bren 2 (with the correct sized gas port).


The main problems with the Vz58 are the squishy trigger, inability to change barrels, extremely low iron sights, no adjustable gas system and limited optics choices (no full sized scopes, except maybe “scout” scopes on the forend). Optics rails and railed handguards can be added for $$$.

[jwc007]

I've customized/modified mine to suit my needs, but I don't consider it destroyed. 
It's also not heavier than with the original laminate furniture.


Customized Vz2008

Of course I did keep all of the original furniture and could put it back to it's original shape, IF I wanted to, but I very much like it, the way it is now.

[hogzilla]

I've customized/modified mine to suit my needs, but I don't consider it destroyed. 
It's also not heavier than with the original laminate furniture.


Customized Vz2008

Of course I did keep all of the original furniture and could put it back to it's original shape, IF I wanted to, but I very much like it, the way it is now.

true

[RSR]

Robinson Armament XCR-L

PWS

Faxon ARAK

CZ Bren 2 (with the correct sized gas port).


The main problems with the Vz58 are the squishy trigger, inability to change barrels, extremely low iron sights, no adjustable gas system and limited optics choices (no full sized scopes, except maybe “scout” scopes on the forend). Optics rails and railed handguards can be added for $$$.

All of those listed except CZ Bren 2 require use of the 7.62x39 AR mags, which are not continuous curve and have long been known to have serious reliability issues.  Robinson even mentions in FAQs and discusses how b/c C Products is only manufacturer to work reliably, they use them exclusively.  Effectively, the 7.62x39 AR mags are the same unreliable condition as AR15 mags pre-GWOT.  Certain configurations/manufacturers are reliable, but given mass market lowest bidder gov't contract ARE NOT going to be reliable...

Bren 2 7.62x39 mags have also had their share of durability and reliability issues as reported on the Bren forums here.

Additionally, PWS has what looks to be the same overbored/under-reinforced bolt as most 7.62x39 standard ARs.  Robinson and Faxon look to be slightly more robust, but w/ 7.62x39 having ~80% of chamber pressure of 5.56, don't know if they're fully equivalent given largely aligning to AR15-sized upper receiver/barrel extensions dimensions...

I generally agree w/ your gripes about the Vz58, but in carbine configuration, I think variable magnified optics matter less in such a role. 
The higher/standard height upper rails and railed top covers were made to cowitness with forward red dot w/ magnifier or night vision on rear.  And there have been monorails made that allow for rear mount variable optics in both military prototype and consumer versions.  Brass/case deflectors for optics are available as well.

But like with the US military keeping the AR15 for now over 50 years.  The M16A2 (Marines 1983, Army 1986) was effectively contemporary with the Vz58 at the fall of the Berlin Wall (1989/1990) and dissolution of the Warsaw Pact.  So consider the Vz58 as we know it to be the M16A2.  While M4A1 (1994) followed a couple years after that, widespread conversion of base M4s to M4A1s for general military troops didn't begin until 20 years later, 2014.  I'll grant you the early SOPMOD/MWS (starting late 80s) is probably similar to Vz58 "upgrades" coming out of Canada and the Czech Republic during the GWOT, but the Vz58 is still at least a couple decades of MAJOR development and investment in modernizing the M4/M16.

Just imagine how much more refined the Vz58 could be if instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water, greater meaningful resources were directed to improving and modernizing the weapon system into Vz58 mk 2 or 3 or similar evolutions!

Point being, while the newer weapon systems you mention do have features the Vz58 lacks, I don't believe that the sum of any of their parts is inherently superior to the Vz58.  They lack the track record of reliability; they lack the long-term parts support/gov't surplus parts inventory of the Vz58; and they too all have inherent compromises in their design. 

[MeatAxe]

Robinson Armament XCR-L

PWS

Faxon ARAK

CZ Bren 2 (with the correct sized gas port).


The main problems with the Vz58 are the squishy trigger, inability to change barrels, extremely low iron sights, no adjustable gas system and limited optics choices (no full sized scopes, except maybe “scout” scopes on the forend). Optics rails and railed handguards can be added for $$$.

All of those listed except CZ Bren 2 require use of the 7.62x39 AR mags, which are not continuous curve and have long been known to have serious reliability issues.  Robinson even mentions in FAQs and discusses how b/c C Products is only manufacturer to work reliably, they use them exclusively.  Effectively, the 7.62x39 AR mags are the same unreliable condition as AR15 mags pre-GWOT.  Certain configurations/manufacturers are reliable, but given mass market lowest bidder gov't contract ARE NOT going to be reliable...

Bren 2 7.62x39 mags have also had their share of durability and reliability issues as reported on the Bren forums here.

Additionally, PWS has what looks to be the same overbored/under-reinforced bolt as most 7.62x39 standard ARs.  Robinson and Faxon look to be slightly more robust, but w/ 7.62x39 having ~80% of chamber pressure of 5.56, don't know if they're fully equivalent given largely aligning to AR15-sized upper receiver/barrel extensions dimensions...

I generally agree w/ your gripes about the Vz58, but in carbine configuration, I think variable magnified optics matter less in such a role. 
The higher/standard height upper rails and railed top covers were made to cowitness with forward red dot w/ magnifier or night vision on rear.  And there have been monorails made that allow for rear mount variable optics in both military prototype and consumer versions.  Brass/case deflectors for optics are available as well.

But like with the US military keeping the AR15 for now over 50 years.  The M16A2 (Marines 1983, Army 1986) was effectively contemporary with the Vz58 at the fall of the Berlin Wall (1989/1990) and dissolution of the Warsaw Pact.  So consider the Vz58 as we know it to be the M16A2.  While M4A1 (1994) followed a couple years after that, widespread conversion of base M4s to M4A1s for general military troops didn't begin until 20 years later, 2014.  I'll grant you the early SOPMOD/MWS (starting late 80s) is probably similar to Vz58 "upgrades" coming out of Canada and the Czech Republic during the GWOT, but the Vz58 is still at least a couple decades of MAJOR development and investment in modernizing the M4/M16.

Just imagine how much more refined the Vz58 could be if instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water, greater meaningful resources were directed to improving and modernizing the weapon system into Vz58 mk 2 or 3 or similar evolutions!

Point being, while the newer weapon systems you mention do have features the Vz58 lacks, I don't believe that the sum of any of their parts is inherently superior to the Vz58.  They lack the track record of reliability; they lack the long-term parts support/gov't surplus parts inventory of the Vz58; and they too all have inherent compromises in their design.

As time goes on, the AR platform and its piston variants have steadily improved, including in 7.62x39 / 6.5 Grendel calibers: better metallurgy of the bolts and better magazines (e.g.: C-Products, Elander) are pretty bleeped reliable now and getting better.

Unfortunately, even the top of the line CSA Vz58s are dependent on used surplus internal parts. Nice as the Vz58 is, future development is effectively dead at this point, production confined to one boutique manufacturer (CSA). Century, et al? Too sketchy.

Don’t get me wrong, my CSA Vz58 is a great, handy rifle, especially as a brush gun with a 3x PA prism scope, but there are other, IMO, better options for self defense as technology advances.

[RSR]

As time goes on, the AR platform and its piston variants have steadily improved, including in 7.62x39 / 6.5 Grendel calibers: better metallurgy of the bolts and better magazines (e.g.: C-Products, Elander) are pretty bleeped reliable now and getting better.

Unfortunately, even the top of the line CSA Vz58s are dependent on used surplus internal parts. Nice as the Vz58 is, future development is effectively dead at this point, production confined to one boutique manufacturer (CSA). Century, et al? Too sketchy.

Don’t get me wrong, my CSA Vz58 is a great, handy rifle, especially as a brush gun with a 3x PA prism scope, but there are other, IMO, better options for self defense as technology advances.

While metallurgy has improved, I don't agree that forcing bigger cases into a 5.56 bolt dimensions can be overcome with just superior metallurgy -- at least at the consumer level with according cost constraints that profitability necessitates.  Especially in event of catastrophic failure, bolts with metallurgy on the margins jeopardize shooter safety, above and beyond reliability concerns.  Not all of those weapons you mention use the 5.56 AR bolt as the base, but some appear to.

And with the 5.56 AR15 spec magwell, the significant taper of the 6.5 Grendel is, for instance, why the military is looking at 6mm ARC, 6.8 SPC, etc., instead of that caliber, as well as .300 BLK instead of 7.62x39 which has taper similar to 6.5 Grendel, etc.  Trying to force banana mags into the straight AR15 magwell is square peg round holing it in a variety of ways.  The AR15 magwell being designed for thin disposable aluminum mags, also limits the extent of improving mag durability.

I think the vast majority of Vz58 parts now are new production, which may be good, or bad.

I agree the Vz58 needs to be modernized to again become a broadly issued modern military weapon.  But in 7.62x39 (I don't "get" the appeal of 5.56 Vz58s -- and believe there are a variety of 5.56 guns that are superior and certainly a better value) vs. its historical contemporaries (SKS, Vz52, AK, etc) and modern production guns with significant compromises (pushing 7.62x39 into ARs, etc.), I think the Vz58 remains a legitimate serious use contender and that it holds its own is limiting selection to 7.62x39 in caliber and use case to self-defense carbine. 

I think it's also worth remembering that much of the 7.62x39 AR appeal was cheap Russian ammo, which is likely going to remain a think of the past for the foreseeable future given the current Ukraine war, sanctions, and anti-2A white house.  It was also largely before .300 BLK was more widely available.  At that time, 5.56 was 50%+ more expensive with 7.62x39 typically at 20-25 cents per round vs equivalent 5.56 at 30-40 cents per round...  Yes, Russian 7.62x39 remains available at ~40 cents per round (or double what it was), but once authorized imports evaporate, cost will likely then correspond more closely to .300 BLK -- or maybe even higher given greater demand (I suspect other foreign producers will fill the gap, but that'll take a couple years most likely).  And 6.5 Grendel shooters will also see that ammo increase in price as cheap Russian ammo dries up and reduced supply encounters increased demand.

[briang2ad]

Happy I started a halfway interesting thread.  Good input here.  Interesting post (I still have to watch) of MAC who thinks the VZ 58 is too unreliable.

I do believe that 7.62 is somewhat better, and especially as a 2A cartridge, quite adequate and lethal. 

The VZ 58 could be modernized well with JUST a few things.  Higher sights (really about .25" is all) would change the dynamics totally and allow all manner of inline stocks - it already has a better system then the AK except for angle.  Redesign the front handguard for a longer system to accommodate a micro AND a light in easier fashion like the Ultimak.  Then establish a new ejection and top cover like the AK to allow a long optic rail hitched to the siderail.  This would be the only extensive change, but doable for a good engineer. 

[RSR]

Happy I started a halfway interesting thread.  Good input here.  Interesting post (I still have to watch) of MAC who thinks the VZ 58 is too unreliable.

I do believe that 7.62 is somewhat better, and especially as a 2A cartridge, quite adequate and lethal. 

The VZ 58 could be modernized well with JUST a few things.  Higher sights (really about .25" is all) would change the dynamics totally and allow all manner of inline stocks - it already has a better system then the AK except for angle.  Redesign the front handguard for a longer system to accommodate a micro AND a light in easier fashion like the Ultimak.  Then establish a new ejection and top cover like the AK to allow a long optic rail hitched to the siderail.  This would be the only extensive change, but doable for a good engineer.

That rabbit hole is here for anyone who wants to explore it: https://czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=117368.0

I think it's worth remembering that MAC's response vid was an attempt to play the algorithm.  If you pay attention to his channel, it appears to be shadow banned on YT, so he's trying different formats...

Vid in question, Garand Thumb had a half million views or so first 24 hours, vs MAC at ~10% of that.

[MeatAxe]

As time goes on, the AR platform and its piston variants have steadily improved, including in 7.62x39 / 6.5 Grendel calibers: better metallurgy of the bolts and better magazines (e.g.: C-Products, Elander) are pretty bleeped reliable now and getting better.

Unfortunately, even the top of the line CSA Vz58s are dependent on used surplus internal parts. Nice as the Vz58 is, future development is effectively dead at this point, production confined to one boutique manufacturer (CSA). Century, et al? Too sketchy.

Don’t get me wrong, my CSA Vz58 is a great, handy rifle, especially as a brush gun with a 3x PA prism scope, but there are other, IMO, better options for self defense as technology advances.

While metallurgy has improved, I don't agree that forcing bigger cases into a 5.56 bolt dimensions can be overcome with just superior metallurgy -- at least at the consumer level with according cost constraints that profitability necessitates.  Especially in event of catastrophic failure, bolts with metallurgy on the margins jeopardize shooter safety, above and beyond reliability concerns.  Not all of those weapons you mention use the 5.56 AR bolt as the base, but some appear to.

And with the 5.56 AR15 spec magwell, the significant taper of the 6.5 Grendel is, for instance, why the military is looking at 6mm ARC, 6.8 SPC, etc., instead of that caliber, as well as .300 BLK instead of 7.62x39 which has taper similar to 6.5 Grendel, etc.  Trying to force banana mags into the straight AR15 magwell is square peg round holing it in a variety of ways.  The AR15 magwell being designed for thin disposable aluminum mags, also limits the extent of improving mag durability.

I think the vast majority of Vz58 parts now are new production, which may be good, or bad.

I agree the Vz58 needs to be modernized to again become a broadly issued modern military weapon.  But in 7.62x39 (I don't "get" the appeal of 5.56 Vz58s -- and believe there are a variety of 5.56 guns that are superior and certainly a better value) vs. its historical contemporaries (SKS, Vz52, AK, etc) and modern production guns with significant compromises (pushing 7.62x39 into ARs, etc.), I think the Vz58 remains a legitimate serious use contender and that it holds its own is limiting selection to 7.62x39 in caliber and use case to self-defense carbine. 

I think it's also worth remembering that much of the 7.62x39 AR appeal was cheap Russian ammo, which is likely going to remain a think of the past for the foreseeable future given the current Ukraine war, sanctions, and anti-2A white house.  It was also largely before .300 BLK was more widely available.  At that time, 5.56 was 50%+ more expensive with 7.62x39 typically at 20-25 cents per round vs equivalent 5.56 at 30-40 cents per round...  Yes, Russian 7.62x39 remains available at ~40 cents per round (or double what it was), but once authorized imports evaporate, cost will likely then correspond more closely to .300 BLK -- or maybe even higher given greater demand (I suspect other foreign producers will fill the gap, but that'll take a couple years most likely).  And 6.5 Grendel shooters will also see that ammo increase in price as cheap Russian ammo dries up and reduced supply encounters increased demand.

7.62x39 AR15 bolts cracking was an issue 8-10 years ago when x39 ARs first hit the market. You don’t hear about it much anymore, if at all, with improved bolt materials. Also, Colt and Bill Alexander pioneered “deeper dish” AR15 bolt faces for the x39 and 6.5 Grendel, respectively, which bolstered their strength and reliability, that other early manufacturers didn’t use. I don’t think anyone can deny that 6.5 G has been hugely successful in the AR15 platform. But if you were worried about it, just inspect your bolt periodically and pick up a spare bolt assembly for peace of mind. Same thing with the 7.62x39 AR mags, as time goes on they’ve sorted out reliability issues, as the entire AR platform has improved over time to a pretty bleeped reliable system, even the majority that still bleep where they eat.

With all the weapons in circulation, from the 1980s $69 SKS, the $189 Norinco AK, the lowly WASR on up, 7.62x39 ammunition isn’t going anywhere, either, even if you didn’t have the foresight to buy cheap and stack deep over the past several decades. It’s the best all around urban SHTF ammo around - plentiful, still relatively cheap and deadly effective - you can easily shoot all the way through both sides of a car to kill the bad guy on the other side. Try that with your 5.56.

There’s still a lot of Russian ammo in the importation pipeline as we speak, though the importers are smart enough to double the price with the embargo panic. There are plenty of former East Bloc ammo manufacturers around, ready willing and able to fill the void in the US market left by Russia’s exit. Not to mention, large mfg./importers from Turkey, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, etc.

[RSR]

7.62x39 AR15 bolts cracking was an issue 8-10 years ago when x39 ARs first hit the market. You don’t hear about it much anymore, if at all, with improved bolt materials. But if you were worried about it, just inspect your bolt periodically and pick up a spare bolt assembly for peace of mind. Same thing with the 7.62x39 AR mags, as time goes on they’ve sorted out reliability issues, as the entire AR platform has improved over time to a pretty bleeped reliable system, even the majority that still bleep where they eat.

With all the weapons in circulation, from the 1980s $69 SKS, the $189 Norinco AK, the lowly WASR on up, 7.62x39 ammunition isn’t going anywhere, either, even if you didn’t have the foresight to buy cheap and stack deep over the past several decades. It’s the best all around urban SHTF ammo around - plentiful, still relatively cheap and deadly effective - you can easily shoot all the way through both sides of a car to kill the bad guy on the other side. Try that with your 5.56.

There’s still a lot of Russian ammo in the importation pipeline as we speak, though the importers are smart enough to double the price with the embargo panic. There are plenty of former East Bloc ammo manufacturers around, ready willing and able to fill the void in the US market left by Russia’s exit. Not to mention, large mfg./importers from Turkey, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, etc.

Completely concur with potency of 7.62x39 -- especially against barriers like concrete, cinderblock, stone, brick/mud walls, etc, where momentum is critical to destruction of barriers/eventual penetration.  That said, 5.56 will penetrate through car doors -- where lighter 5.56 has an issue is with deflection against auto glass (a different side of brush deflection IMO). 

@20 min here, Mr Guns and Gear in this 2019 vid details the bolt -- his concern is just reliability for self-defense.  Mine is that there are little to no margins for safety in event of catastrophic failures caused by ammo or barrel, not bolt in and of itself.  While I hope no nonsense is occurring with Russian ammo in the pipeline to the US, I wouldn't be surprised if official or unofficial sabotage is randomly occurring like with the US's Project Eldest Son in Vietnam, since there is zero guarantee any US imports reach US consumers...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yalGIq6I5u4

On ammo, I bought cheap and stacked deep -- given current market conditions and now broadly applied online sales tax, wish I'd put away another 10k rounds a couple years ago, but am comfortable with current inventories. 
I very much disagree with you on 7.62x39 ammo availability -- my rough estimate (have seen no official #s) is 2/3rds of US consumer  7.62x39 market was Russian-sourced.  And domestically, the US government is looking at restarting WW2 to end of Cold War ammo factories that have been shuttered for decades.  Those factories make a variety of munitions above and beyond small arms, but there's indisputably a supply gut and unprecedented demand of small arms ammo.  Russian ammo was so cheap precisely b/c they had all the raw materials for ammo cheaply available locally for assembly to export at a premium to raw.  IMO, only normalcy bias can construe that 7.62x39 will remain dirt cheap -- b/c any continuation of cheap ammo will require tapping into Russian materials surpluses, surpluses that are likely vertboten to any NATO member.

*Also, covered in threads here but IIRC, non-steel 7.62x39 for California ranges was +50% if not double standard Ruskie bimetal jacket FJM/ball prices.  Decent rough estimate for where standard ammo is going pricewise IMO.

But my point was that b/c of the rising price of 7.62x39 ammo, much of the appeal for it in alternative platforms like the AR will diminish -- sort of like how rising gas prices nudge/force folks into small SUVs and sedans from large SUVs and trucks, if only for longer roadtrips...  And we've seen similar with folks abandoning/selling .40 S&W handuns to less knowledgeable shooters/buyers.