I'm making a separate thread for this because it needs one, and it will get clogged up and lost in the other thread as it's 60 pages long. This is my post from that other thread;

So I believe the problem with the bren 2 fte is actually the ejection port thickness (width of the receiver) and the brass deflector angle in combination with the moment of inertia (or center of gravity) of the spent shell casing and the 7.62x39 case taper. All of these design elements come into play to create the perfect intermittent failure storm.

The back end of the 7.62x39 casing is so thick and heavy and the front of the casing is light by comparison, and what I believe is happening is the moment of inertia of the casing is too close to the primer end of the casing and the extractor claw is trying to whip the casing out of the gun, but with the angle of the shell casing being tapered , and the weight of the casing being concentrated closer to the backside of the shell, the thickness of the ejection port and the angle of the brass deflector are actually impinging on the front or middle of the shell, and this is causing the shell to rotate back around and get jammed up bouncing around in the ejection port, and occasionally interfere with the closing of the bolt on a new round.

I hope that was clear. To simplify, the problem as I see it can be solved by redesigning the brass deflector to remove the flat spot that the shell is impinging on upon ejection and causing the spent shell to rotate back around it's moment of inertia and causing it to get jammed up in the ejection port.

This may completely solve the problem, or it could be that an angle needs to be put on the back of the ejection port on the receiver itself also.

Regardless of how it is accomplished, the rear of the ejection port/brass deflector in combination with the moment of inertia and taper of the 7.62x39 casing is the problem.

If someone wants to get on a 3d printed replacement brass deflector we can solve this problem immediately. Maybe one could even be whittled out of a chunk of plastic.

I'll try to upload a few pics and illustrations so this is easier to understand.


This flat area is the problem, or the part where the two flats meet, forming the point is the problem. It's too far out away from the action of the rifle, and the shell casing is impinging on it just right, causing it to rotate back around the other way and back into the action;


One option to fix this is to extend the deflector ramp as drawn below, or down further in this thread I've made a mock up with tape and a bracket;


Another option is to remove the deflector and cut, grind, or file a smooth, flatter face that angles back a little more and/or gets rid of the flat spot at the ejection port:


The last option is for a completely redesigned brass deflector made by a professional engineering outfit that incorporates all of the proper design elements previously described.


You can clearly see that this is very close if not the exact balance point of the spent casing:


When the round is stripped and ejected, the upper tapered part of the shell is impinging on the deflector/receiver flat and the round begins to rotate around its center of gravity or moment of inertia. This causes it to be deflected back into the front side of the ejection port and intermittently jam up the action, causing what we are referring to as fte (failure to eject), but it is not failing to eject, it's finding its way back into the rifles action.


I have arrived at this from studying my slow motion video for a couple hours, even though my rifle has not exhibited a failure of this kind yet (only 100 rounds shot so far). My rifle has however exhibited the shell bouncing around in the ejection port on three of three rounds fired with the slow motion camera rolling. I have posted it already, but I'm hesitant to refer to it because the version that I've uploaded to youtube does not consistently show the phenomenon. Apparently it's happening too quickly for the resolution of youtube to display it consistently. I can however, see this phenomenon repeated in my original footage that I took with my phone on my phone. The video is below, and sometimes it can be seen bouncing around in the port when viewed at 1x speed on youtube, but when I slow it down to 1/4 speed it seems to skip frames. I don't understand the video resolution thing, but the mechanics of this problem with the gun I do understand. Watch the video yourself several times in several speeds and even switch up the resolution and see if you can see what I'm talking about. Here it is:


This guys video is very clear and shows exactly what I am talking about, this shows every jam is indeed a result of the shell bouncing back into the ejection port :


I am confident that this is the mode of failure on these guns.

If a brass deflector could be made that offered NO flat spot at all (even covering up the flat of the receiver, or angling the port of the receiver so there was no flat on it), and a sharper angle, this problem would cease to exist.

CZ needs to add one more item to their "caliber change kit" when it becomes available, this deflector won't work with 556 and 762 simultaneously. One may be designed that does, but this one isn't it.

UPDATE 9/23:
I trialed the extended brass deflector and all brass action occurred further out of the ejection port. Notice of these 6 shots fired with the extended deflector, not a single one of them rattled back and forth inside the ejection port. In my prior two videos in stock form, all six slow motion shell shots captured, EVERY one of the spent brass casings rattled back and forth inside of the ejection port. One of those videos that show the ejection port phenomenon is up in this post, it shows three shots, all with the poor ejection characteristic.  This video below shows six shots fired by an accomplice that NONE of the shells show the undesirable phenomenon. One of the six shells does however, bounce off of the deflector and hit the front of the ejection port slightly. This is nothing like what it was doing though.

In my opinion, this conclusively shows that those people with rifles that exhibit the undesirable phenomenon of ejection port bounce phenomenon with 7.62x39 ammunition can get back to shooting their rifles without fear of fte or the rifles action jamming from errant spent casings finding their way back into the ejection port, with just a simple change in brass deflector angle and/or extension. I will have some more ideas and discussion for this later, but I wanted to put this video out as soon as I could. After analyzing steel case wolf in addition to the brass shown here in this thread, it is obvious that the ejection ramp angle must be altered as theorized. The steel case ammo with it's heavier steel cases gets back into the port moreso than the brass cases shown in these videos.

I'd like to see a brass deflector made that extends into the ejection port and makes the ejection angle of the deflector more acute by about 5 to 10* and see what that yields.

Enjoy.


Super slow motion single ejection:

I have this angle bracket that can be hot glued in place, or screwed to the deflector with a pilot hole and a screw, or can be double side taped in place with some 30psi 3m tape. This will effectively extend the angle of the deflector into the ejection port and allow for testing of the problematic rifles. I think this will be quick and dirty way to determine if this solution will work.




It worked:

Subbed, let’s see where this goes.

Thank you for the excellent support.

I am assuming that you would need an engineering drawing or a part in hand? What would it take to get a prototype?

Just need someone make some 3D models and mass-produce molds for Brass Deflector 2.0 and I'm gonna pay $50 to make this problem go away.  

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bren2/comments/iy3man/1000000_idea/

My question from all of this is, why did the first run of these Bren 2's with an identical brass deflector angle not share these failures.  What part changed internally that allowed the ejection or extraction to be altered in such a way that it compounded the effects of this poor design?  

This seems to make sense as guns with slight signs of use, 500-2500 rounds start experiencing the same FTE's over time.  We are seeing more cases of 5.56x45 guns having this failure now, which points to a bad batch of common parts between the designs.  Could it be caused by less spring pressure on a batch of 5.56/7.62 ejector or extractor springs?    

Anyways I'm very happy to see that a possible solution was found, I was absolutely skeptical at first that this could cause every FTE.  This happens so quickly, in a split second, it's almost impossible to catch on film without a specialty camera that films much higher frame rates than 60fps.

I can only assume this will happen to all the Bren 2's eventually without a change of this brass deflector design.  Even to the early models once they have a high round count.

Thank you again OP for your contribution to the community.

Op updated with new proof video.

Thanks for pushing that out to other forums. I can't believe there are 15+ replies on Reddit and just a few on a gun forum.

Feel free to post my proof video there. I see someone was doubting my theory. That video should put them at ease.

That one at :54 still bounced forward and hit the front of the ejection port though.
Might be different if the deflector was made of polymer?
A lot of folks are hoping you are right on this though.

It did bounce forward, but it didn't enter the port, and this was just a proof of concept. The angle of the deflector hasn't been altered as I initially said was likely needed.

All I need now is for someone to replicate the deflector with an extension and a 5 to 10* change in angle (more acute) and machine it out of delrin and I'm buying one.

And this could be completely encompassed by the deflector angle alone, it might not have any part at all to to with the flat spot between it and the receiver. I'm speculating on the exact point of impact because I don't have a bunch of equipment and I'm not getting footage to that fidelity.

Am I crazy or do those ejections look horrible? You almost had a stovepipe on one of them.

You almost replicated it at 0:54

That's exactly the point.  The 7.62 Bren suffers from Failure to Eject malfunction, because the casings are flying right back into battery.

Can you take off the brass deflector entirely and record yourself firing without it?  People are interested to see the results.

I already posted one of those:



See all of the brass bounces around in the ejection port in that video. None of it does in the mod deflector video.

Oh you meant remove the entire nub completely. No I'm not gonna do that right now.

All that proves is that the flat where the receiver and the deflector meet is not the actual point of case impingment (at least not all the time), and that the angle of the deflector is the real culprit. Due to the variance of the ejection, I would want a deflector that addressed both issues though.

I wouldn't get too hung up on what the video looks like on youtube...I stated earlier that uploading this to yt is causing artifacts and it's not even playing the same frames every time. The video slow motion suffers greatly from whatever yt is doing. The video on my phone is much clearer frame by frame. If you know a solution tell me, because I don't.

Where exactly are you referring to? Maybe I can cut that out and upload it separately and see if it looks better.

So I've heard stuff from several other forums, and comments in youtube, and whatnot. I'm using this thread to consolidate it all because I don't want to mess with keeping up five different media/forum sites. I've posted links or there are links to this thread in those other threads and other media sites already.  I'll address the concerns that I've heard all in this thread.

One comment was: I've had stovepipes that didn't even leave the action, so your theory about shells bouncing back into the action is debunked.

No, this is not a theory. Shells are INDEED bouncing back in, and it's been shown on several videos, in slow motion and full speed. I don't need any more proof than what few rifles that I've seen to know that the shells bouncing in and around the ejection port IS a problem with these rifles. Is it the only problem? I have no idea. I'm not contending that it is, or that I have a solution for any other problem than what I have outlined in this thread.  This is happening, and a physical mitigation is definitely possible. Just taping a popsicle stick on the deflector shows that this behavior is modifiable. So if you want to be able to shoot your $$$$ high dollar gun and eliminate this fte issue (not really fte as we've noted earlier in this thread) while others hypothesize about the gas levels, spring rates, timing, etc., then stick around.

As I've also pointed out before, if you don't have it in a high frame rate recording, you're missing stuff that has to do with the rifle action. Maybe you have had a stovepipe that didn't ever leave the gun action, but I won't believe it until I've seen it on a slow motion video with a high frame rate.

Some people are saying the rifle is overgassed, and/or not timed right.

I don't know. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. It's not been a concern of mine. I've never approached this problem with those thoughts in my mind. I don't know about rifle gas and timing. I'm a mechanical engineer and I see that there is a physical occurrence that is definitely happening, and it can definitely be countermeasured.

Here is my second iteration for a brass deflector alteration. Instead of spending 2 minutes taping a metal bracket to the brass deflector, I've spent 10 minutes cutting a piece of nylon to a shape that I think will achieve a proper deflection of the spent shell casing.

I've cut this piece of nylon with a 7* down facing slope on the face of the deflector.
I believe this will conclusively show that the brass can be deflected down away from the port enough so that it never accidentally get back into the ejection port. If this works like I expect it to, this can be made of a wafer thin piece glued on with cyanoacrylate glue. Both mating sides can be roughed up with sandpaper and the nylon can be made of black stock, and the edges trimmed down to make it almost invisible. This will get you back shooting without fear of fte until all the finer points of timing and spring rate and material choice can be ironed out by the OEM, assuming that they do fix whatever may be wrong.




It's raining right now, so the video upload and test session will have to wait until this weekend.

This downward directing 7* angle should get this done without completely redesigning the deflector, that can wait until later.

While I think this can help. I still feel this may start a secondary isssue. I think sometimes if the case gets drug back or a little hooked on the extractor that this will make things worse. Just like in the video you should a few rounds started to bounce back like they were gonna go back into the chamber. I think if this modification was done we would need to also add a little spacer to the back of the black buffer plastic thing in order to keep the BCG from going as far back as it does. This would move the BCG’s farthest point rearward, slightly forward in order to keep the point at which the BCG stops in line with adding material to the defector part.

I've got a bunch of videos uploaded and I'll make a longer post here when I get some time, but I wanted to post this video in the mean time.

Slow this video down in the youtube player to 1/4 speed and you can very clearly see what is happening. I've attached a 10* plastic piece on the brass deflector to alter the angle of defector. This caused 3 jams in three shots with this brass ammo that I was using. Now keep in mind that my particular rifle hasn't jammedon me in OEM form yet. This video illustrates how the brass deflector angle plays a big role in these jams, depending on the ammunition casing used (brass or steel) and the powder charge of the shell as well as other dynamics of the rifle likely do as well. The steel cases are heavier than the brass cases and they have very different dynamics and react differently when bouncing off of the deflector.

Sure you changed the angle of deflection but I think you’re forgetting that now when the case contacts the deflector, the point at which it makes contact is moved forward making it much easier for it to stay hooked onto the extractor and bounce back in. If you’re going to add material to the deflector you need to add a little material to the black plastic buffer piece in order to keep the BCG for going back as far as it does. If you limit it’s travel just a little bit (about the same amount you added to the deflector) it should start to deflect better. I’m sure how this is the answer of a rifle that exhibits no issues now HAS issues.

I'm not forgetting that at all. I'm just doing the quickest easiest least intrusive thing to make progress on my ideas.

You're other idea about limiting the travel of the bolt carrier is the opposite way that I want to go with this. Now that I've taken a ton of video and watched what is happening, and seen what angle deflection does what to what kind of ammo, I want to make the deflector further back than it is now. Look at this illustration below to see what I'm talking about.



The ping pong paddle (deflector) should probably be behind the action of the rifle.

The angle that worked best to keep shells away from the ejection port was actually the opposite of what I was expecting to work. The more 90* I went towards, the better the ejection was at keeping out of the "port bounce".  This is a trial where I added 10* of angle towards to ejection port. No brass came close in this scenario. See below:



Our Tavor 7 deflector is probably closer to what it should look like on this rifle;



Or this;

Some wear notes in my inspection of my 500ish rounds of firing this rifle;



Part:


Peening of the hammer face on the firing pin is not what I expect;

I literally have about ten videos uploaded, several trials of several different angle pieces taped onto the deflector.  Ten round video taped trials. Feel free to ask questions if something isn't clear, I know this is a lot of "stuff" to take in, and there is some odd phenomenon taking place with the ejection besides getting the angle of the deflector right. As can be seen in the video below, my rifle functions fine with brass or steelcase in this video in oem configuration, but the first few rounds of brass that I shot with it a couple weeks or days ago, the brass was bouncing in the port on every shot. Well it's not happening now.
It's also important to note that I am able to get a perfect stovepipe jam every time I fire the rifle with the 10* back angle piece taped on. This suggests that the randomness of ejection isn't so much an ejection port/mechanics randomness, but more a randomness of the angle of the shell contacting the deflector in very minor variances. In other words, the ejection isn't so random if I can get a perfect stovepipe looking jam every time with the same ammo and a 10* deflector angle modification in place.



The deflector should be blunted and moved back like this imo;




Also the other suggestion of blunting the deflector with fuzzy stuff or something that dampens the bouncing action may be all that some of you guys' rifles need for the time being to get reliable performance out of your guns until CZ does something (don't hold your breath) or a prototype deflector is available. A thick piece of rubber tape might be enough dampening to keep all the brass out of the ejection port without making any modification to the deflector angle at all.

I think I've shown that there is a lot of promise by squaring off the deflector. Granted I only trialed five rounds of steel and five rounds of brass, but on the inverse, I was also able to jamomatic the rifle going the opposite way by 10*, and with the deflector blunted, none of the shells came anywhere near the port.

If anyone wants to send me their deflector, I'll make a drawing and we can get Sven something to prototype. I'll give it back after a few weeks, but I'm not taking mine off while my rifle works fine. I'd buy one if one were available, but I won't hold my breath on a spare part from cz right now.

Bren ejection looks a lot better than this:
Go to 6 minute mark.

Thanks for posting that video. Love my Ace pistol in 7.62x39. Maybe I'll sell the Bren and get a .308 ACE rifle.

I like my 762x39ace but it's very heavy. The ace308 would be even more so.

Saw this on Reddit

You cannot take any video of "stovepipe" at face value unless it is extremely high frame rate and you can be sure that is what is happening. I would bet a large sum of money that it isn't a stovepipe at all, but is simply doing this;



I wish more people would read my entire thread. This really is a simple issue imo.

The ping pong paddle (brass deflector) needs to be pushed back and lower profile. These shells are bouncing straight back into the action just like I've documented, and others have documented as well. I have yet to see and slow motion that truly shows a stovepipe.

I've made and tested several angle pieces as I've mentioned before. I taped these pieces to a board and used a compound mitre saw to make angles in the vertical and horizontal planes. Some compound and others just a single angle. These are just a few of the samples.

After my experiment, it is my strong opinion that the deflector is too close and too prominent with respect to the ejection port.

The deflector should be staggered back further from the port opening.

When I added a 10* angle towards the port, I got no bounce back into the port. When I added a 10* angle away from the port, every single shot fired bounced back into the ejection port and stuck.

I've probably tested 500ish rounds of ammunition to solidify my opinion on this. Feel free to prove me wrong. Or likewise feel free to do your own testing to confirm. Like kedzie has said, someone remove the deflector altogether and see what happens. I highly doubt you have another malfunction of this type.

You're not really proving anything other than that making extreme changes to the deflector angle changes the behavior of ejected shells (which is fairly obvious).

You haven't proven that the current problem's root cause is the deflector nor that changing the deflector is the best solution.

What you've done is taken a backfiring car and said "let's see what happens if I rip the muffler off or stick a potato in the end".

If this was being caused by the deflector it would have been apparent in testing before the gun was ever released as I'm sure CZ put more than the 500 rounds you did through more than the one gun you did.

My guess would have been the ejector.  I don't own a bren2, and have not seen the inside of one.  So maybe I'm speaking out of school here.

But my thinking is, the bolt is traveling backwards and pulling the case with it.  At some point, the case hits the ejector and gets pushed out and flings into the deflector.  And in this case, its bouncing back into the gun.
If the case hits the ejector 0.5mm sooner or 0.5mm later, then the empty case is at a different point in its rotation when it hits the deflector and maybe it doesn't bounce back into the gun.

My first attempt would be to make the ejector a little bigger on the front side, so the case hits it a smidge sooner.  It will then start being flung out sooner, and by the time it hits the deflector it has been rotating around longer.

What does the ejector look like in these guns?  Is it easy to pull out and swap a different one in to fiddle around?

Deflector is not the problem, or has ever been the main problem.  It is a symptom of the problem, which is out-of-spec ejection & extraction.  

It's not a question that these firearms were tested thoroughly, likely over 20,000 rounds in each model before going into production.  

Here is a public military trials test, 24,000 rounds in total between two Bren 2's: Torture Test

Notice the wear pattern on the brass deflector, 7.62 on top.  This is after 12,000 rounds: LINK

This.  100%.

I have had true stovepipes, regardless of what the OP wants to say about a lack of video being proof that evidence does not exist.

I showed that deflector angle plays a huge part in this problem, and that small changes, not extreme like you’ve said, can make a gun go from no failure at all, to 100% failure. I’d say that 5*, 7*, and 10* were small changes, relative to the OEM deflector. If it was so obvious, please show me out of the dozens of pages of talking about this problem, where ANYBODY AT ALL had even identified the true physical characteristic of what was happening. Everyone was so bent on “failure to extract” and I came along and showed that it wasn’t a failure to eject, but it was that shells were bouncing back into the ejection port due to the physical phenomenon that I described very clearly in my first post.


I’ve shown that, as my title states, there is a workable solution to this problem. Where in the hell do you get that I have the time to fuck with this firearm and prove out a “best” solution? I’m just some dude who ran into this and saw something that apparently everybody else has missed. IMO, the deflector is poorly designed for this casing and this ejection port. I’ve found a solution. Take it or leave it. You didn’t pay a dime for it.


That is not even a remotely accurate description of what I have done. I’m pretty sure you know it, and you’re just being a troll. Read what I’ve done, and think about it again if you want to sound intelligent, because this statement of yours is anything but intelligent.


It is my understanding that this gun has been out for several years, or at least a year. CZ has no idea what the hell is going on. I’ve made more video and analysis of this issue than anyone else that I’m aware of. If your gun is malfunctioning, I’ve made a road map to END that issue. Will it work for most rifles? I don’t know. It’s better than any solutions posited by anyone else, as far as I know.

Feel free to ponder the finer points of gassing, ejectors, and all other things that you are apparently doing nothing to change.  If you have a gun and it’s fucking up, I’d suggest taking the deflector off completely and seeing if it still fucks up. The deflector is poorly designed for this gun.

How would you even know that though? It's clear that this happens too quickly for the human eye to digest, so why would you even put that out there? I for one, had to watch a lot of video to figure this out, slow motion video. I don't know why you'd put it out there that you knew something was happening without proof.

Tell me why you believe that. Convince me.

If you're so convinced, just take out your deflector and test the theory.

what is "in spec"? The ejection on my gun, and every other Bren 2 that I've seen looks a lot better than the ejection of the ACE 308 that I posted itt.

The testing done showed me that the ejection port bounce phenomenon is very dependent on the powder charge and the weight of the casing (in addition to the  angle of the 762x39 cartridge). This means that you might not get the problem ever with x ammo, but with y ammo it happens quite often. I don't know what they tested the bren 2 with. Do you? Was it a high round count with multiple ammo types?

For the "in spec" crowd, tell me why the Galil ACE looks like such unkempt crap when ejecting. Here is a pic of the innards, and go to 5:45 in macs video and see what that yields.





I don't know, I'm not trying to say I know, but I want to hear theories.

308 Galils have had some gas port issues (being undergassed from the factory), and AKs in general have two distinct ejection paths from the influence of the magazine.  That gun looks to be cycling pretty weak, so I'm guessing the port is undersized.

The last round never exiting the ejection port, never hitting the deflector.  Just a spent shell, sitting in the open ejection port area with the bolt locked back.

Unfortunately, I cant test this theory by removing the shell deflector as my gun is being sent back to me from CZ for the second time and I have no clue if they're replacing my gun or if they fixed/changed/altered anything.

I really doubt that its the shell deflector man.  I think that may be contributing to the problem but it is not the sole source of it.  This gun has been around for YEARS now without any issue with the SAME shell deflector.  I'm willing to be proven wrong but thus far, you haven't really convinced anyone but yourself.

Ultimately, CZ will solve the issue so we will see.

Removed.

It seems that you hold an opposing viewpoint without ever watching the stovepipe in slow motion.  The OP and some others posted really good videos of the shell bouncing off the deflector back into the action.  Is the culprit the extractor spring, gas pressure, deflector, or all of them? The slow motion highly suggests that if deflector alone was removed or adjusted, the rifle would cycle without stovepipes. That's the point of this thread.

Do you have a Bren 2 with issues??

I did.  I have video where the spent shell just SITS in the ejection port, having never left it.

I'm not unwilling to say that the deflector isn't part of the problem.  I am however, unwilling to say its the sole source of the issue.  If at the end of the day, we all find out what the solution to the problem is and it happens to be the deflector, cool, ill eat crow and say good on the OP for figuring it out.  Until then, I'm out of the discussion because my formerly busted ass 9 inch 7.62X39 gun has since been replaced.  The new gun appears to be working just fine but I have less than 200 rounds through it.

Also, cursory examination between my 556 gun and my new 7.62X39 shows no visual difference in shell deflectors.

I do, in fact, have a Bren that stovepipes randomly.  I even sent it in for warranty repair back in March and it still stovepiped.  CZ said they adjusted my extractor spring...

Link?

Gents - new to this forum but subscribed becuase I also have a pair of Bren 2 MS pistols. One is the 5.56 11" barrel which is about 3 weeks old and zero malfunctions.
The other is a 2020 DXXXX SN 7.62X39 9" barrel with exactly 400 documented rounds maybe 6 months old. In that time period I have seen 4 stovepipes which appear to resemble the OP's port bounce re-entry into the action.

1% is not epidemic but it seems like you either have the problem or you don't. I seem to have the problem. The front of my EP is dinged up and my ejection pattern is indicitive of over gassing. Brass actually hits my support hand as it flings forward to 1-o-clock.

I reached out to CZ USA and got a response today that I can apply for a full refund or engage in the circle jerk whereas I send in my gun to their warranty and they have no idea how to really fix it (yet).

My feeling (not fact) is that the angle of thr deflector is a symptom - not the root cause.
If gassing is the issue, it seems like an obvious fix. My guess is that CZ USA simply does not have the parts to fix these guns and does not have the voice within CZ global to represent us. Basically wasting time until the issue is made a priority for the US and the Czech sides equally.
I can say that CZ USA is trying but still a mess on this issue. Years after the introduction....
- No spare parts (0) except magazines
-Web store shut down for weeks - finally back up
-No clue how to fix a prevalent problem known about for months, maybe years given the SN's date back to 2018
-CZ USA basically abdicating any control over supply of parts, replacement rifles and a true solution. Responses from them all basically a shoulder shrug and finger pointing to CZ Corporate. They're basically a distributor with no real power.

My point in writing this is to offer another unit in the record of defective guns with a bit of data for people to see. Also send a message to CZ USA that they really do need to make this a priority.