CETME...Educate Me

[Olympus]

What's the story on these guns? I like the looks of them and the fact that they shoot the 7.62 NATO. The ones I've seen around around $700+, is that the going rate or am I just not looking in the right spots? What exactly is it about them that makes them cost that much? I'd like to have a fun semi-auto gun to play with at the range and this looks like it would definitely fit the bill. I don't want to go with an SKS or a bolt gun and I like to go for things that aren't so common, like ARs and AKs. So what are my other options besides a CETME? Also, how come some of them have wooden furniture and others don't? I prefer the wood, so it is a specific variant that has the wood or is it aftermarket? I'm pretty clueless on these guns.

 

[Travis Bickle]

This from Wikipedia:

CETME .308 battle rifles are widely available on the civilian market in the United States. However, they are virtually all cobbled together from various surplus and American-made parts, which are often of highly questionable quality. The CETME rifles put together in this fashion by arms importers such as Century and Hesse are notorious for some of these rifles having poor quality and disastrous reliability issues. These rifles are often sold to unsuspecting buyers who are under the impression that they are purchasing a "clone" of the Heckler & Koch G3 rifle, which is absolutely false. After many frustrating attempts to fix up the rebuilt CETME rifles, they are often resold by the now-jaded owner, who would be lucky to break even on the sale, to another unknowing or inexperienced gun buyer, who will in time become just as frustrated with the rifle and re-sell it again. This cycle goes on and on, ad infinitum. For this reason the CETME kit-built rifle has acquired a notorious reputation among American gun enthusiasts as a real whore of a rifle.

If you absolutely have to have an HK-91 clone, spend the extra money and get a PTR-91. Cheap is dear.

 

[amd6547]

Wikipedia...must be true...not.
Yes, they are "cobbled together", but those who own them tend to make them work if there are problems. My own has been faultless out of the box. Unfortunately for the OP, they used to be $350 when I bought mine.
You should try militaryfirearm.com for accurate info on the cetme. It used to be known as cetmerifles.com, and those guys know every problem and every fix.
The latest batch of cetmes is said to be much nicer than the earlier ones.
As far as stock material, get whatever cetme you can get a good deal on...wood stock sets are fairly cheap.

 

[ChromeLibrarian]

Most aftermarket Cetmes have synthetic stocks. If it has a wood stock, chances are good (but not 100%) that it is a military surplus weapon. These are good weapons, assuming the particular gun is not worn out.

Sythetic stocked Cetmes are primarily from Century Arms, built by putting imported parts on a US made receiver. They can be quite variable in quality and reliability. I have no idea what going rate on a Cetme is right now. I know my local shop has a PTR-91, which is a commercially produced Cetme/G3 clone. They want something like $1100 for it, but it's considered yards above the CIA cetmes.

Having said that, I owned a CAI Cetme, the one with the synthetic stock. After a little fiddling to fix functionality problems, it was a great gun, fun to shoot, and I'm sorry I had to get rid of it. I paid $350 or so for it, but that was probably five or six years ago? Maybe?

 

[Olympus]

I had read that Century guns were not known to be reliable. But I've seen a lot of them that sound like they're decent. $350 sure would be nice! I doubt I find something like that. I'll take a look at the website you listed and see if I can find some more information there.

 

[eye5600]

The article certainly does not comply with Wikipedia's standards for a neutral point of view. The author could easily have said that many of the rifles were unreliable without the colorful editorializing. The subjectivity reduces confidence in the what he has to say.

I don't know anything about Cetme rifles.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

I've handled many and shot none. Some look and feel very good, others look and feel like junk. The rifles had a reputation a decade ago in some informed circles for shooting themselves apart under the 7.62x51 cartridge, perhaps loaded heavier than the original specifications called for way back when. Not all rifles are designed for the same load, despite being chambered for the same cartridge. e.g., Commission 1888 rifles can chamber a 7.92 Mauser MG load, but would probably blow themselves apart under the pressures (some did). You need to shoot downloaded J loads in the Commissions, and preferably cast bullets through them today. CETMEs may be similar.

 

[saturno_v]

Yes yes...


For CETME, the ongoing rate around here (Western WA) last spring was $350-400 (wood stock)...you could buy a FAL for $600-700, a WASR-10 for $399 and put together an AR for $600.

These times are long gone and insanity took over..I lost my chance at buying a .308 assault rifle and an AR..I'm not going to buy at these ridiculous prices, no way..

Next step, I think, is the rise in value of any semi-auto centerfire rifle....get your Remington 740-742-7400 till you can....around $250 for a godo used one at the moment.

 

[ChromeLibrarian]

The thing about Century Arms Cetmes is that almost all of them could be made reliable, if you didn't mind fiddling around with them, and sometimes replacing worn parts. They use a lot (but not all) of the same parts as a G3.

Mine had problems with the recoil rod hanging up and locking the action open until I did some reshaping on the end of the guide rod. After that it fired perfectly.

 

[ChromeLibrarian]

The rifles had a reputation a decade ago in some informed circles for shooting themselves apart under the 7.62x51 cartridge, perhaps loaded heavier than the original specifications called for way back when.

The main problem wasn't 7.62x51. The real problem was using commercial 308 that was loaded hotter than milspec. The Cetme can handle milspec ammo just fine. They couldn't handle much more, so if you reloaded, it had to be to mil-spec for 7.62x51.

 

[Mikee Loxxer]

Most aftermarket Cetmes have synthetic stocks. If it has a wood stock, chances are good (but not 100%) that it is a military surplus weapon. These are good weapons, assuming the particular gun is not worn out.

Are you sure about that? The CETME was a select fire rifle. Meaning that a true military surplus weapon would be a machine gun.The registry for transferable machine guns was closed in 1986.

Wood stocks just mean that is what was used during the build. It would not make it any more authentic than a parts rebuild semi-auto with synthetic furniture.

 

[swing2hard]

Better off to buy a real HK91 or PTR instead of a frankensteined version.

 

[ChromeLibrarian]

Assuming you have major bucks to spend.

 

[ChromeLibrarian]

Double post

 

[Olympus]

I don't...which is why I was looking at the CETMEs instead of the PTRs and FALs. It sounds like it's going to be hit or miss with selecting a good one. I'm not much of a DIY gunsmith so I'd hate to pick a bad one.

 

[N003k]

I bought a used CETME going on a year ago, put quite a bit of ammo through the thing, and have had 0 problems with mine. It's got a Century stamp on it, I dont know if the previous owner had problems but fixed it and then sold it, or what, but I love the thing. The ONLY problem mine has is the breakdown pins are a pain to get out for cleaning. I just need to look into replacing them, then it should be fine.

 

[W.E.G.]

Talk to the guys at http://www.militaryfirearm.com/Forum/forumdisplay.php?f=23 about CETME rifles.

 

[amd6547]

There is ALOT of mis-information in this thread.
Suffice it to say that a cetme is alot of fun to shoot, will not shoot itself apart using the ammo it was designed for, is not a genuine surplus rifle if it has wood stocks, and is functionally equivalent to many other 7.62 NATO MBR's.
Oh, and mags are cheap.

 

[az_imuth]

I have one of the early Century built CETMEs that came with the cast stainless steel receiver. I have never had any problem with it at all. It is suprisingly accurate and a blast to shoot. I looked into buying another one (or two) a couple of years ago, but just didn't like the newer ones as well as the SS one that I have. I'm very happy with mine and have no regrets about the purchase. If you do buy one, be sure to invest in GOOD ear protection. The models with the barrel brake are L-O-U-D.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I bought a Century back in 2003, when you could get the south african surplus for $150/case (those were the days, huh?). Anyway, it has been quite reliable, the only issues related to feeding. I weeded out the magazines it didn't like, and it has been fine. I topped it with a B-square mount and Simmons ATV 4.5-14x scope. With most surplus and commercial stuff, it shoots 2-3 MOA. However, I can get it to shoot sub-minute with handloaded 150 grain Hornady and Sierra FMJ-BT.

 

[SoCalShooter]

I have a ptr-91 its an awesome gun cost me 1500 bucks, YOU COULD get an FN SCAR if you had 2700 bucks.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

I agree totaly. Ive had two and have shot a few others and other then problems from running ammo i knew better then to use ive never had a malfunction with one. Most of the people badmouthing them are just quoting storys on the internet. In all actuallity there one hell of a good bang for the buck

There is ALOT of mis-information in this thread.
Suffice it to say that a cetme is alot of fun to shoot, will not shoot itself apart using the ammo it was designed for, is not a genuine surplus rifle if it has wood stocks, and is functionally equivalent to many other 7.62 NATO MBR's.
Oh, and mags are cheap.

 

[gotmine]

cetme modelo c

I have two of these I've built and love them. They shoot well and have little recoil for this cal. rifle. It took me a bit to tune and clear minor issues, but now performance is perfect.
The differences between these and the g3 are minor....The problem lies in the fact that most of the cetme rifles have seen extensive service whilst many of the g3 models have not suffered an equal amount of wear and tear. The Spanish craftsmanship is every bit as good as anything HK has produced...If you look at a CAI cetme take your feeler gauges and dial caliper with you.

 

[Calhoun]

Mine was fairly accurate, had a very effective muzzle brake, but had serious reliability issues as far as magazines go. I had 4 mags but only one of them fed correctly. And that one had to be wrestled in and out. The roller block system is pretty cool though.

I had the opportunity to sell it to fun the purchase of a FAL. Only weapon I ever sold that I didn't regret. They used to run about $300, $350; now I see them for almost $700!!! Even at inflated prices that's a little steep.

It did make a GREAT noise though. You could feel the concussion when someone shot it beside you. LOUD!

 

[rbernie]

I have owned three CETMEs. I still have two. None of them have failed to fire commercial ammo, none of them have gone KaBOOM, none of them have done ANYTHING other than place lead in close proximity to where I was pointing the rifle.

CAI in fact did cobble together a LOT of CETMEs from parts kits. Most of them are just fine. Some of them are not. Earlier builds had wood furniture and later ones had the synthetic furniture. There are, as best I can tell, at least three generations of CETME builds by CAI.

The issue with the CAI builds is that CAI tried to press some worn-out receivers (front trunnions, actually) into service when they should not have. These worn trunnions allowed the rollers in the bolt to stick out too far, and the telltale bolt gap to disappear. CAI compensated for these worn out trunnions by milling the back of the bolt flat to bring the bolt gap back into spec. But the gap is a metric of trunnion health, and the trunnions should not have been used.

It is very easy to tell if the CETME you're looking at is safe/good/worth its cost or not. Remove the magazine and flip the rifle over so the magwell is facing up. You will be staring at the bottom of the bolt and bolt carrier. If the back of the bolt (where it bottoms into the carrier) is completely flat, do not buy it. If the back of the bolt has a chamfer at the bottom, it is likely fine and you then should check the bolt gap. If you can slam home the bolt and then barely slip a paper business card in the gap between the bolt carrier and bolt, you are absolutely GTG. If you cannot, then you are OK but you'll may need to replace the rollers to bring the bolt gap into spec. This is a very inexpensive fix.

That's it.

On the plus side - they shoot 308 (just stay away from the Hornaday Light Magnum and you'll be fine; I like the Prvi stuff for moderate power loads), mags are dirt cheap, and the rifles are surprising accurate for military hardware.

On the con side - the ergonomics of the HK91/CETME rifles are an acquired taste (most think that the FAL and such have better ergos), and they're not light. There aren't many cheap ways to get a side folding stock, if you're so inclined, and scope mounting can get creative.

There is no reason to be afraid of CETMEs and many reasons to think well of them. You just have to respect them for what they are.

Oh, and you will find the occasional mag issue related to the fact that CAI had to (by ATF edict) replace the G3/HK91 magazine paddle assy with a button mag release. The CAI drunken monkeys didn't always take the time to properly chamfer the bottom edge of the new mag catch, and sometimes you have to remove this bit and do it yourself to get the mags to insert and release cleanly. Doing this detail allowed me to use allow G3 mags in my CETMEs with no undue force needed to seat the mags, allowed the mags to readily drop free, and stopped the gouging that the CAI mag stop was making in the light alloy G3 mag bodies.