CZ Line-up

[armoredman]

The BREN 2 has not been discontinued at this time. One of the problems for that firearm is the sheer number being sold in Europe, something about an invasion somewhere and countries needing small arms...but the BREN 2 rifle as we know it, while might be hard to find, is at this time, based on my conversations with those who know, is not discontinued at this time.
The rest of the list is pretty accurate. Remember, it's all about profits and losses - as much as we would hate to lose some of our favorites, (CZ 527M, looking at you), the company has to make money, and slow movers that take up production time for little return won't be kept around.

[RSR]

The BREN 2 has not been discontinued at this time. One of the problems for that firearm is the sheer number being sold in Europe, something about an invasion somewhere and countries needing small arms...but the BREN 2 rifle as we know it, while might be hard to find, is at this time, based on my conversations with those who know, is not discontinued at this time.
The rest of the list is pretty accurate. Remember, it's all about profits and losses - as much as we would hate to lose some of our favorites, (CZ 527M, looking at you), the company has to make money, and slow movers that take up production time for little return won't be kept around.

This is CZ-USA's discontinued list for the US market, not CZ-UB's.  All of those "pistols" not subject to 922r now fall under BATF's ban list for pistol braces (and require 922r parts to SBR), and the carbines would likely have to be "converted" from sporter to carbine configuration (w/ 922r parts) by Colt in their CT factory.  Hence, why they were discontinued for the US.

I do not believe that many of the items being discontinued would classify as "slow movers."  More options means more spending/repeated purchases from same # of customers, not less, as Sig's huge success and continued profitability w/ their classic P series lineup perfectly illustrates. 

[RSR]

Looks like the rumors were true abt the discontinued products. CZ-USA website looks pretty empty. No threaded barrel pistols, no TSO, no bunch of stuff.

You do realize, CZ released the TS2 Orange like 2 months ago.
Same with the Checkmate, it's getting upgraded too.
Why would they continue to the produce the same gun but different generations of it.

The threaded barrel models will be missed, suppressors are getting more popular every year.

Color options are now expected these days -- even Glock now offers in colors other than black -- as well the Omega's superior decocker location for metal framed guns...  And remember the Omega supposedly required less labor/easier assembly, not more, which was why it was supposedly (IIRC) to become CZ's new standard trigger across both polymer and metal framed guns, so that simply makes zero sense to argue that discontinuation was due to cost savings reasons.

[armoredman]

The BREN 2 has not been discontinued at this time. One of the problems for that firearm is the sheer number being sold in Europe, something about an invasion somewhere and countries needing small arms...but the BREN 2 rifle as we know it, while might be hard to find, is at this time, based on my conversations with those who know, is not discontinued at this time.
The rest of the list is pretty accurate. Remember, it's all about profits and losses - as much as we would hate to lose some of our favorites, (CZ 527M, looking at you), the company has to make money, and slow movers that take up production time for little return won't be kept around.

This is CZ-USA's discontinued list for the US market, not CZ-UB's.  All of those "pistols" not subject to 922r now fall under BATF's ban list for pistol braces (and require 922r parts to SBR), and the carbines would likely have to be "converted" from sporter to carbine configuration (w/ 922r parts) by Colt in their CT factory.  Hence, why they were discontinued for the US.

I do not believe that many of the items being discontinued would classify as "slow movers."  More options means more spending/repeated purchases from same # of customers, not less, as Sig's huge success and continued profitability w/ their classic P series lineup perfectly illustrates.

Allow me to clarify - per CZ-USA leadership to me, the BREN 2 is not discontinued for the UA market at this time, not specified as to which models. Also, all CZ BREN carbines brought into the US are already being converted to 922(r) compliance prior to being offered for sale, other wise they would be ten round only models to meet existing federal law. I did not receive any further clarification on any other models discontinued, merely offering one business reason for not continuing to provide a specific product at a specific time.

[RSR]

Allow me to clarify - per CZ-USA leadership to me, the BREN 2 is not discontinued for the UA market at this time, not specified as to which models. Also, all CZ BREN carbines brought into the US are already being converted to 922(r) compliance prior to being offered for sale, other wise they would be ten round only models to meet existing federal law. I did not receive any further clarification on any other models discontinued, merely offering one business reason for not continuing to provide a specific product at a specific time.

Odd that the only model being disputed on this list, which I believe to be legit and accurate, is the Bren 2... 
Coincidentally it still has inventory in the US for the carbine, as well as pistols: https://gun.deals/search/apachesolr_search/cz%20bren%202

Would imagine it would be difficult to sell this already slow-moving inventory if they were to widely broadcast.  Maybe it's planned for discontinuation later this year, but not official as of yet?

The sporter magazine requirement is actually single-stack 10 rounds, not just 10 rounds.  But if imported as a double-stack pistol, it can be converted to a rifle as well AFAIK while achieving 922r compliance w/ much less need for machining/modifying the receiver/magwell (just swap barrel and adequate # of 922r parts).

Yes, I recognize the 922r conversion is necessary for retailed/consumer RIFLES, but not PISTOLS.  That's why for instance, the CZ Evo is transitioning to the EVO 3+ model per my understanding -- in part, for easier 922r conversion (perhaps also since now more similar to AR15 for easier wrenching by AR15 specialists of Colt?).  BUT note that only pistols are currently being imported and offered for sale: https://cz-usa.com/product-category/scorpionbren/
And that the carbine evo scorpion model is discontinued w/ no evo 3+ carbine yet available: https://cz-usa.com/product/cz-scorpion-evo-3-s1-carbine/
*And further if the pistol brace ban is upheld, I wouldn't be surprised if the new BATF definitions of what constitutes an SBR if used w/ pistol brace results in import bans (which the executive branch can do w/o Congress) for qualifying "pistols", such as both the Evo and the Bren.  In which case, I think it's EXTREMELY unlikely that Colt would consent to domestic manufacture of these weapon systems.

So there appears to be a lack of ability or willingness to 922r/carbine convert any new imports to carbines due to the Colt merger, at least at this time, for both the Bren 2 and the Evo...
There is still Evo carbine inventory as well, but they also sell much more/faster than the Bren: https://gun.deals/search/apachesolr_search/cz%20scorpion%20carbine

I think the allegation that Colt CT won't be 922r-ing/converting to rifles CZ-UB pistol or sporter imports is legit as those operations have or are being move from KC to CT.  BUT CZ Evos have sold enough to at least continue importing them as pistols -- Colt can't make a credible argument for stopping the Evo's import to instead prioritize their 9mm AR offerings...

It's possible something changed from issuance of that discontinued letter/notice in regards to the Bren 2, and also hopeful for the Bren 2 that the Evo 3 is now using a close copy of its lower receiver, but I still think odds are, more likely than not, that that platform is on its last legs in the US.  I have zero confidence in Colt to be flexible to CZ's conversion needs or even more generally to be responsive to consumer demand...  ESPECIALLY since the CZ-UB Bren is a direct competitor to Colt's bread-and-butter, its ARs, including various next-gen configurations that remain extremely rare on the consumer market.  And don't forget that Colt's ARs are also likely to see a precipitous drop in US consumer demand due to the Sig SPEAR being adopted as the US Army's next rifle and squad weapon -- just look at the relative decline in demand for both Glock and the Beretta 92s vs Sig P320s once the Army adopted the Sig P320 as its new sidearm.

Here's the discontinued list again for easy reference:

[MeatAxe]

Allow me to clarify - per CZ-USA leadership to me, the BREN 2 is not discontinued for the UA market at this time, not specified as to which models. Also, all CZ BREN carbines brought into the US are already being converted to 922(r) compliance prior to being offered for sale, other wise they would be ten round only models to meet existing federal law. I did not receive any further clarification on any other models discontinued, merely offering one business reason for not continuing to provide a specific product at a specific time.

Odd that the only model being disputed on this list, which I believe to be legit and accurate, is the Bren 2... 
Coincidentally it still has inventory in the US for the carbine, as well as pistols: https://gun.deals/search/apachesolr_search/cz%20bren%202

Would imagine it would be difficult to sell this already slow-moving inventory if they were to widely broadcast.  Maybe it's planned for discontinuation later this year, but not official as of yet?

The sporter magazine requirement is actually single-stack 10 rounds, not just 10 rounds.  But if imported as a double-stack pistol, it can be converted to a rifle as well AFAIK while achieving 922r compliance w/ much less need for machining/modifying the receiver/magwell (just swap barrel and adequate # of 922r parts).

Yes, I recognize the 922r conversion is necessary for retailed/consumer RIFLES, but not PISTOLS.  That's why for instance, the CZ Evo is transitioning to the EVO 3+ model per my understanding -- in part, for easier 922r conversion (perhaps also since now more similar to AR15 for easier wrenching by AR15 specialists of Colt?).  BUT note that only pistols are currently being imported and offered for sale: https://cz-usa.com/product-category/scorpionbren/
And that the carbine evo scorpion model is discontinued w/ no evo 3+ carbine yet available: https://cz-usa.com/product/cz-scorpion-evo-3-s1-carbine/
*And further if the pistol brace ban is upheld, I wouldn't be surprised if the new BATF definitions of what constitutes an SBR if used w/ pistol brace results in import bans (which the executive branch can do w/o Congress) for qualifying "pistols", such as both the Evo and the Bren.  In which case, I think it's EXTREMELY unlikely that Colt would consent to domestic manufacture of these weapon systems.

So there appears to be a lack of ability or willingness to 922r/carbine convert any new imports to carbines due to the Colt merger, at least at this time, for both the Bren 2 and the Evo...
There is still Evo carbine inventory as well, but they also sell much more/faster than the Bren: https://gun.deals/search/apachesolr_search/cz%20scorpion%20carbine

I think the allegation that Colt CT won't be 922r-ing/converting to rifles CZ-UB pistol or sporter imports is legit as those operations have or are being move from KC to CT.  BUT CZ Evos have sold enough to at least continue importing them as pistols -- Colt can't make a credible argument for stopping the Evo's import to instead prioritize their 9mm AR offerings...

It's possible something changed from issuance of that discontinued letter/notice in regards to the Bren 2, and also hopeful for the Bren 2 that the Evo 3 is now using a close copy of its lower receiver, but I still think odds are, more likely than not, that that platform is on its last legs in the US.  I have zero confidence in Colt to be flexible to CZ's conversion needs or even more generally to be responsive to consumer demand...  ESPECIALLY since the CZ-UB Bren is a direct competitor to Colt's bread-and-butter, its ARs, including various next-gen configurations that remain extremely rare on the consumer market.  And don't forget that Colt's ARs are also likely to see a precipitous drop in US consumer demand due to the Sig SPEAR being adopted as the US Army's next rifle and squad weapon -- just look at the relative decline in demand for both Glock and the Beretta 92s vs Sig P320s once the Army adopted the Sig P320 as its new sidearm.

Well, you see what’s wrong with this picture, don’t you? We’re talking about things that Colt will “consent to” regarding CZ’s business since CZ “took over” Colt — actually, it seems that CZ paid Colt a bunch of money to take over CZ and run “Colt CZ” in their usual merry way into bankruptcy again.

What should have happened is that CZ should have kicked Colt’s management to the sidewalk, closed the CT factory down and sold it for real estate redevelopment, and taken the trademark and whatever salvageable machinery down to Little Rock and built a brand new state of the art manufacturing facility down there — including fixing the Bren 2s problems with no fuss Then CZ could have done anything they wanted, including sending more weapons to the Ukraine while feeding the hungry US market with products we like (like the Bren 2 and Scorpion, etc.) and lived happily ever after.

But nooooooo….

[RSR]

Well, you see what’s wrong with this picture, don’t you? We’re talking about things that Colt will “consent to” regarding CZ’s business since CZ “took over” Colt — actually, it seems that CZ paid Colt a bunch of money to take over CZ and run “Colt CZ” in their usual merry way into bankruptcy again.

What should have happened is that CZ should have kicked Colt’s management to the sidewalk, closed the CT factory down and sold it for real estate redevelopment, and taken the trademark and whatever salvageable machinery down to Little Rock and built a brand new state of the art manufacturing facility down there — including fixing the Bren 2s problems with no fuss Then CZ could have done anything they wanted, including sending more weapons to the Ukraine while feeding the hungry US market with products we like (like the Bren 2 and Scorpion, etc.) and lived happily ever after.

But nooooooo….

Yes, from what I have seen to date, it appears that Colt's management is now hugely influential, if not the the biggest voice, in CZ-USA's future operations...  And again, I hope I'm wrong.

There may be political, tax incentive, etc. reasons to keeping that CT factory open right now considering Sig's relatively recent major gains in the US Defense Department's new small arms weapon systems/acquisitions (I'm genuinely curious as to the though process there), but moving much of CZ-USA's operations to that gun-unfriendly state and under-invested if not neglected factory instead of moving to a gun-friendly state with new, state-of-the-art facilities seems like a major misstep.

[RSR]

As I stated could happen...  BATF is forcing destruction or surrender of any and all import "pistols" w/ brace due to new shoulder brace rule whether done by the user or importer -- so if you have a foreign-made "pistol" weapon that had a pistol brace, then adios to your firearm per BATF. 

From Military Arms Channel 4 hours ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tK4gJeJ_CI4

[MeatAxe]

As I stated could happen...  BATF is forcing destruction or surrender of any and all import "pistols" w/ brace due to new shoulder brace rule whether done by the user or importer -- so if you have a foreign-made "pistol" weapon that had a pistol brace, then adios to your firearm per BATF. 

So basically, from this moment, the Aft is retroactively declaring foreign pistols to be contraband “rifles” by adding a brace, even though they’d approved braces on pistols (as pistols) for over a decade. Therefore, according to the atf’s proclamation, by virtue that these newly proclaimed “rifles” are assumed not compliant with 922(r) they cannot go back in time to be compliant with 922(r), thus have to be surrendered or destroyed…because they were originally atf approved pistols with atf approved pistol braces, so therefore these pistols didn’t have to comply with 922(r) as per the atf…until they just declared them to be “rifles” and therefore retroactively “illegal” and therefore tainted and needing forfeiture and destruction — or severe criminal prosecution — with no recourse to the atf’s own bureaucratic incompetence and malfeasance.

So what happens if these pistols had the requisite number of US-made parts promulgated under 922(r), as most do, when the (US-made) brace was added? I guess they became legal as “rifles” under 922(r) from the moment the braces were added, right? Even though they were declared to be legal  “pistols” with legal pistol.braces up to this very moment.

Aside from the unconstitutional aspects of all this, making rules with the force of law retroactive, etc., the bureaucratic overreach and administrative muddle on the part of the atf is so beyond Constitutionality that they’re just begging the Courts to kick them in the nuts and strip them of their power to create regulation. Even libtard anti-gunjudges are going to find this abhorrent.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EV4N2dk0cMk

[RSR]

Yes -- I think they think it's sort of like how you cannot ever convert an original "rifle" to a "pistol," only SBR it...  So I think the BATF's position is that any item improperly "converted" to an NFA item while also in violation of 922r is always and therefor contraband, so does not qualify for this "SBR/brace-only" amnesty.  IIRC, they specifically address 922r compliance for NFA items and in what order such must occur.  So any relevant firearm would have had to been first NFA-ed while 922r non-compliant and then converted back and delisted from the NFA to be able to remedy any 922r noncompliance issues while maintaining "legal" ownership of the item...

For 922r, I think the burden of proof would have to be on the gov't to actually prosecute if not charge, but that doesn't necessarily stop seizures of even debraced "pistols" that are not 922r compliant -- or even those believed to be braced at any point, current or past, and therefor noncompliant...

No pun intended, but this is all the more reason to brace yourself for add'l restrictions on what can be imported as pistols moving forward (BATF makes clear here they already have a target on commonly-braced pistol designs and their new revised definition as to what constitutes a pistol) -- so if any rifle or "pistol" facsimile is not "manufactured" here in America, then an unfriendly executive branch can prohibit import of entire classes of weapons, per my understanding.  Semi-auto "sporters" of various makes/configurations or entirely can also presumably be banned for import, but even if going that route instead until such ban it still requires at least some US-made parts and labor to disassemble and reassemble them by importer before reaching distributors and consumers...  And that's why CZ-USA's apparent changes to the Evo and Bren line-ups with/due to Colt are concerning.

[MeatAxe]

So basically, from this moment, the Aft is retroactively declaring foreign pistols to be contraband “rifles” by adding a brace, even though they’d approved braces on pistols (as pistols) for over a decade. Therefore, according to the atf’s proclamation, by virtue that these newly proclaimed “rifles” are assumed not compliant with 922(r) they cannot go back in time to be compliant with 922(r), thus have to be surrendered or destroyed…because they were originally atf approved pistols with atf approved pistol braces, so therefore these pistols didn’t have to comply with 922(r) as per the atf…until they just declared them to be “rifles” and therefore retroactively “illegal” and therefore tainted and needing forfeiture and destruction — or severe criminal prosecution — with no recourse to the atf’s own bureaucratic incompetence and malfeasance.

So what happens if these pistols had the requisite number of US-made parts promulgated under 922(r), as most do, when the (US-made) brace was added? I guess they became legal as “rifles” under 922(r) from the moment the braces were added, right? Even though they were declared to be legal  “pistols” with legal pistol.braces up to this very moment.

Aside from the unconstitutional aspects of all this, making rules with the force of law retroactive, etc., the bureaucratic overreach and administrative muddle on the part of the atf is so beyond Constitutionality that they’re just begging the Courts to kick them in the nuts and strip them of their power to create regulation. Even libtard anti-gunjudges are going to find this abhorrent.

Yes -- I think they think it's sort of like how you cannot ever convert an original "rifle" to a "pistol," only SBR it...  So I think the BATF's position is that any item improperly "converted" to an NFA item while also in violation of 922r is always and therefor contraband, so does not qualify for this "SBR/brace-only" amnesty.  IIRC, they specifically address 922r compliance for NFA items and in what order such must occur.  So any relevant firearm would have had to been first NFA-ed while 922r non-compliant and then converted back and delisted from the NFA to be able to remedy any 922r noncompliance issues while maintaining "legal" ownership of the item...

For 922r, I think the burden of proof would have to be on the gov't to actually prosecute if not charge, but that doesn't necessarily stop seizures of even debraced "pistols" that are not 922r compliant -- or even those believed to be braced at any point, current or past, and therefor noncompliant...

No pun intended, but this is all the more reason to brace yourself for add'l restrictions on what can be imported as pistols moving forward (BATF makes clear here they already have a target on commonly-braced pistol designs and their new revised definition as to what constitutes a pistol) -- so if any rifle or "pistol" facsimile is not "manufactured" here in America, then an unfriendly executive branch can prohibit import of entire classes of weapons, per my understanding.  Semi-auto "sporters" of various makes/configurations or entirely can also presumably be banned for import, but even if going that route instead until such ban it still requires at least some US-made parts and labor to disassemble and reassemble them by importer before reaching distributors and consumers...  And that's why CZ-USA's apparent changes to the Evo and Bren line-ups with/due to Colt are concerning.

One point Mark Smith makes on attacking this ruling on the Constitutional side is that the atf had registered all these guns, including foreign-made guns complete with pistol braces as “pistols” throughout the importation, distribution and final sale on the 4473. It says “pistol” on 4473, as well, I’m sure, on whatever forms accompanied the weapon from importation to distribution. The atf officially approved them as pistols — until they didn’t.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fKRrAYgei9E