Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
Member |
I may have an answer on this shortly. I’m headed to a local gun shop that has a couple on the wall. If they feel nice and light & handy, then I’ll take one home and post a weight in a little bit. Roswell Crash - July, 1947, CIA Formed - Sept, 1947 | |||
|
Frangas non Flectes |
The gun would have to be as wide as the rounds are long for it to work, and then some if you were going to cop the P90 feed system. People would bitch to no end. ______________________________________________ “There are plenty of good reasons for fighting, but no good reason ever to hate without reservation, to imagine that God Almighty Himself hates with you, too.” | |||
|
| Member |
Sooooo... Is this a G36 that people are excited about just because it's not a G36, and is therefore exempt from (T)G36 pricing and a high-temp accuracy scandal? I think this Carmel is butt-ugly in both it's military and 922R garb. Not to mention everyone just recently boarded the Bren train, because it's "combat proven" now; surely we're not going to hastily disembark in pursuit of an ugly, plastic, "unproven", G36 copy. If we're going to go crazy for a plastic rifle, we'd probably do well to stick with the ARX160; at least it's been in military service, and was "proven" in the GWOT. I use the word copy loosely; insofar as this, the G36, and the 160 are all largely plastic; I don't know if meaningful internal design features are similar or not. Full disclosure: I do own a TG36, but, if I had a time machine, I'd opt not to take on that project and it's associated expense. It's a neat rifle, but not for what it costs Joe Blo. That being said, I don't have a "dog in the fight", so to speak. I do think the G36 looks nicer and has more novel design features than this thing though. Hell, the overwhelming majority of short stroke guns I've seen look nicer than the Carmel; gunfights aren't won on looks though. | |||
|
| Member |
I just checked one out in the flesh. It doesn’t feel very heavy. It’s close to Bren 2 in the handling dept. heading home to weigh it. $1,798 plus tax. They had 2 in stock. Roswell Crash - July, 1947, CIA Formed - Sept, 1947 | |||
|
| Member |
I don’t see this in any way related to the G36, and had never heard anyone comparing it to a G36. If anything, it may be closer to the ARX, and I haven’t heard that either. These civilian foreign military guns aren’t for everyone. For many, any one of the dozens of decent ARs will do what they want at a much lower price. At least it seems to have a suppressed gas setting, unlike the no settings on the G36, and the second setting on the ARX being adverse. | |||
|
| Member |
I did concede that my comparison to the G36 and ARX were based on the shared largely plastic construction, and little else. I agree on the gas settings being a perk; I modified the piston on my TG36, to allow earlier gas venting, when using a silencer; I also use an OSS on it. An ARX, and likely most other guns, can probably be similarly tuned, so long as the parts are available, in order to retain an unmodified spare. When comparing the plastic fantastics, the ARX likely has them all beat; not only due to it's military tenure and GWOT service, but also due to it's true ambidextrous nature. The Carmel boasts controls that you can configure, but not ejection. | |||
|
| Member |
I put up a tabletop review. https://youtu.be/1HZsPPxoTFE Roswell Crash - July, 1947, CIA Formed - Sept, 1947 | |||
|
| Member |
Just got back from LGS with one. Did you get a manual in the box with your Carmel, or just piece of paper with QR code to download the manual from IWI’s page? All I got in my box was the gun, 30 rd Magpul mag in wrap, cable lock, and a bag with the QR code paper, two sling swivels, IWI pull tab, and a M-Lok QD mount. I don’t mind the AR grip, but do hope that Manticore or HBI come out with a new handguard. I don’t mind it being slim, or having M-Lok slots, but don’t like that the gas regulator is under the rail and accessed through a window in the rail. Much prefer the military one with the shorter angled front that allows direct access to the regulator. Also, is anyone else finding it had to get to stock to relatch after it’s been folded? I’m having to snap it closed with a bit of force to get it to latch. Had tried a second one at the shop, that was the same. The manual even mentions that “you may need to press the Buttstock Catch forwards with some force to lock it into place”.This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dwill104, | |||
|
| Official forum SIG Pro enthusiast  |
I REALLY like the way that Carmel looks on the first page. If one was sold that looked just like it I would buy one. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The price of liberty and even of common humanity is eternal vigilance | |||
|
"Member" |
Ah, I don't mind that either. But I can't buy either of them. | |||
|
Member |
Why do you say that? | |||
|
| Member |
I would also like to know. | |||
|
| Member |
So MAC has an update and initial review up. I found it interesting that the initial pictures and marketing of the Carmel were just pre-production prototypes. The final design is what you see being sold now. | |||
|
| Member |
I watched that, and think that MAC is just drinking the Kool-Aid that his “contact”, who was pushing the IWI-USA narrative, was selling. My issue with the theory is that the IWI-Israel web page is still showing only what he’s been calling “prototypes”, of which only 10 or so exist. If you look at the Carmel brochure and catalog links on that page, dated 2021 and 2021-2022 respectively, they also only show the “prototype” configuration. You would think that they would have updated to page and information to show the new “current” configuration, if what MAC said was true. Isn’t IWI trying to sell these things around the world? Wouldn’t they update their sales stuff to show what those people would actually buy? Also, at one point in the video, he says that the aluminum handguard weighs less than the original handguard/rail cover system. No way. The IWI brochure says the 16” OG Carmel weights 3.44 kg, which is 7.6 lbs. the US 16” weighs over 8 lbs. The main difference is the handguard. Also, the IWI-US designers has gone on record as saying that they made changes specifically for the US market, like the handguard, because they felt that US shooters would rather have m-Lok instead of pic rails, and would want the extra rail space created by extending the rail to cover the gas plug. Also, they felt that civilian shooters didn’t need the QC barrel of the original. The changes made were driven by IWI-US for the US market, not design changes made by IWI in Israel. Even in this video, the IWI-US guys said they made the changes from the Israeli version. Nothing about the others being prototypes, or that this was going to be the only configuration available, even in Israel. https://youtu.be/xZATFgDhyt0?si=c3zip5CV96Syz0ub IWI-Israel is going to have to update their pages and docs to show that the US configuration is the only way that the gun is available to everyone before I’m really going to buy the story. | |||
|
| Member |
Tim has floated hot air before in his videos, especially his side of the FEG SVD pre-order kerfuffle. He's more of an entertainer than a historian. Hopefully we'll get some more information from additional sources to get a better idea. I like the looks of the original version with shorter rail and picatinny myself. | |||
|
| Member |
Sounds similar to the Galil ACE lifecycle. The first ones were cool: picatinny accessory rails with integrated covers, and nice iron sights. The following ones were lame, with ugly MLOK handguards without fixed sights (or picatinny BUIS). | |||
|
| Member |
From what I remember, when the Gen 1 ACE was out, many people hated the thick handguard covers, and couldn’t wait to swap it out a MI M-Lok handguard. They also hated the proprietary stock with the weird shaped tube that you couldn’t use an AR stock on. And the sights got in the way when running an optic. You could remove the rear sight, but not the front. Seems like IWI changed out a lot of stuff that people complained about, but now people are complaining that they changed it. | |||
|
| Member |
I never complained, and never owned one of any iteration. If I did have one, it's be one of the early 7.62x39 ones. People gravitate toward these foreign offerings because they're different. What the hell is the point of a unique Israeli assault rifle, if you just want to put a bunch of AR stuff on it? I learned my lesson with the 55X guns: you just leave it alone; it's not going to supplant an AR-type rifle, as most folks practical weapon. Just get it in it's cool, indigenous configuration, and shoot it for fun. | |||
|
| Frangas non Flectes |
Exactly. If you’re going to just make an AR, make an AR. If someone wanted something different, the original configuration of this would have checked that box. Now it doesn’t. Conversely, if you want an AR, then buy an AR. Not everything on the market needs to accept AR buffer tubes and pistol grips. ______________________________________________ “There are plenty of good reasons for fighting, but no good reason ever to hate without reservation, to imagine that God Almighty Himself hates with you, too.” | |||
|
| Sigless in Indiana  |
I actually prefer the longer handguard. And the ability to swap grips. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024