Armory Sponsor
The IWI carmel (Page 2 of 12)
|
Originally Posted By Solo_: I was just noticing how on IWI's advertisement of the Carmel (that stamp shaped thing that appears on some gun sites), the barrel is DEFINITELY shorter - to offset the frankly weird balance of longer, 16.1" barrels (plus muzzle devices) that also were affecting many other rifles (ARX, ACR etc.) Have a look - seems like probably a pinned and welded barrel I don't blame them, it's a US federal thing but still https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/326068/Screenshot_2023-09-03_at_11_29_09_AM-2941232.png That doesn’t look shorter to me. The handguard has the same number of slots, 4 on the bottom, and 2 on the top, with the cutout for the gas adjustment still needed because the handguard goes past the plug. The uncovered portion of the barrel still seems about the same to me. Think the image may just be a little distorted in that stamp. |
|
Originally Posted By 556Cliff: So given similar dimensions aluminum would be heavier. At least that's what I'm hearing you say? Originally Posted By 556Cliff: Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: Originally Posted By 556Cliff: Originally Posted By NoDakWolfPack: Originally Posted By Jm11513: I suspect because more people would have made noise about the handguard. I'm still holding out hope they'll release a version with the correct handguard. You know, an aluminum copy of the correct handguard would probably be lighter than both of the current variations. Hopefully we can get that, at the very least. I wonder about that. Is aluminum really lighter than polymer given the same dimensions? I know with the ARX when you remove the barrel and BCG that the polymer upper (with stock) and lower are like a feather. I believe if the ARX had it's upper machined out of aluminum that it would end up being heavier. I think the reason that the ARX is the lightest of the 3rd Gen rifles is because it's mostly polymer. A PMAG is heavier than an aluminum mag, but the dimensions are very different. Aluminum is 2-3 times denser than the polymers typically used in firearms. Sven Manticore Arms So given similar dimensions aluminum would be heavier. At least that's what I'm hearing you say? @556Cliff Yes, if you made the polymer handguard out of aluminum (assuming you even could, as the polymer handguard is molded and would likley have features that could not be replicated in extruded/machined aluminum) it is going to be significantly heavier. There are areas you could likely lighten/thin a bit due to the higher rigidity and material strength of aluminum, but generally speaking, an aluminum forend is going to be heaver than the equivalent polymer forend. That is the reason there is the big push for going from steel to aluminum, and aluminum to polymer in firearm design If you can use the lightest material where it can handle the associated stress, you can lighten a gun significantly. That is why the AR-15 is so ingenious, all the locking stresses are in the bolt and barrel extension, and you can make the receiver from aluminum. The next step was guns like the AUG, X95 where you have a minimal aluminum receiver and mostly polymer, and then you see really crazy things like the ARX-100 which is almost completely polymer (to the point of feeling a bit flimsy IMHO). Sven Manticore Arms |
Advanced Fighting Gear for the AR, AK, AUG, Tavor, and Scorpion EVO! www.manticorearms.com
|
Originally Posted By FullAssault: Are you by chance going to make some that at least looks similar to the OG hand guard? Originally Posted By FullAssault: Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: Aluminum is 2-3 times denser than the polymers typically used in firearms. Sven Manticore Arms Are you by chance going to make some that at least looks similar to the OG hand guard? @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) We have a Carmel in house as of last week and are a taking a look at it. I am kicking around the idea of an external replica of the OG forend (non removable panels as the underlying picatinny adds a lot of weight and a ton of complexity and cost to the molding, just matches the extranal profile and that is it) or maybe an external visual replica of the OG forend that has removable panels and M-LOK underneath as that is more current and modern (obviously this would have some screw heads visible on the external side panels, maybe picaitnny on the removable underside panel, or just picatinny slots on the underside as they are not as visible). Everything would be polymer to lighten it up over the aluminum M-LOK forend that everyone hates on.  I definitely want to capture the nice lines of the sides and also that cool top angle that makes the gas regulator much easier to access. But until I really get into it and see what we have to work with and mold costs, not sure quite what the final plan is. Of course, some people are going to freak out if it isn't an exact replica of the original, but that simply isn't possible with some of the modifications they made to the receiver and top rail on the U.S. version of the gun, not to mention that plastic picatinny under cover panels is heavy and, well, dumb and outdated IMHO.  Sven Manticore Arms |
Advanced Fighting Gear for the AR, AK, AUG, Tavor, and Scorpion EVO! www.manticorearms.com
|
Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) We have a Carmel in house as of last week and are a taking a look at it. I am kicking around the idea of an external replica of the OG forend (non removable panels as the underlying picatinny adds a lot of weight and a ton of complexity and cost to the molding, just matches the extranal profile and that is it) or maybe an external visual replica of the OG forend that has removable panels and M-LOK underneath as that is more current and modern (obviously this would have some screw heads visible on the external side panels, maybe picaitnny on the removable underside panel, or just picatinny slots on the underside as they are not as visible). Everything would be polymer to lighten it up over the aluminum M-LOK forend that everyone hates on. I definitely want to capture the nice lines of the sides and also that cool top angle that makes the gas regulator much easier to access. But until I really get into it and see what we have to work with and mold costs, not sure quite what the final plan is. Of course, some people are going to freak out if it isn't an exact replica of the original, but that simply isn't possible with some of the modifications they made to the receiver and top rail on the U.S. version of the gun, not to mention that plastic picatinny under cover panels is heavy and, well, dumb and outdated IMHO. Sven Manticore Arms I’d definitely be a buyer. I absolutely understand not replicating the system of the OG forend with the sliding covers covering a pic rail block. My vote would be for a polymer forend that mimics the look/shape of the OG forend with the M-Lok slots just cut into the non-removable polymer sides. Like on the X95, you kind of ruin the look when you remove the slide covers, but if you always leave the slide covers on, why bother having anything underneath them? Also, slide covers don’t make as much sense with M-Lok as they do with pic rails. I’d go M-Lok all around, bottom in addition to sides. If you do pic on the bottom, then a sliding cover for that. I hate gripping uncovered pic rails, especially metal ones. I’ve got a fortune invested in the Magpul ladder pic rail covers. |
|
Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) Thanks for asking, but I’m not the one to provide feedback as I fall into the following camp... Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: Of course, some people are going to freak out if it isn't an exact replica of the original... I prefer my military type replicas to be as true to the originals as possible. For me, that’s the biggest part of the appeal. So much so, that I accept their flaws too, for example, I think the ARX100 sling mount are ridiculous. It doesn’t bother me though as I’m happy to have it in the first place. I’m not one that wants 1 rifle that’s perfect, instead, I want all of the rifles as they were designed/intended. |
|
Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) We have a Carmel in house as of last week and are a taking a look at it. I am kicking around the idea of an external replica of the OG forend (non removable panels as the underlying picatinny adds a lot of weight and a ton of complexity and cost to the molding, just matches the extranal profile and that is it) or maybe an external visual replica of the OG forend that has removable panels and M-LOK underneath as that is more current and modern (obviously this would have some screw heads visible on the external side panels, maybe picaitnny on the removable underside panel, or just picatinny slots on the underside as they are not as visible). Everything would be polymer to lighten it up over the aluminum M-LOK forend that everyone hates on. I definitely want to capture the nice lines of the sides and also that cool top angle that makes the gas regulator much easier to access. But until I really get into it and see what we have to work with and mold costs, not sure quite what the final plan is. Of course, some people are going to freak out if it isn't an exact replica of the original, but that simply isn't possible with some of the modifications they made to the receiver and top rail on the U.S. version of the gun, not to mention that plastic picatinny under cover panels is heavy and, well, dumb and outdated IMHO. Sven Manticore Arms So I am going to tell you this - you come up with a sexy forend for the Carmel and I'm buying one (Carmel AND forend of yours). I'm serious as I can be. Yes, aesthetics shouldn't be so important (function comes first) but I am merely a collector who enjoys both aesthetical (first) AND functional aspects of great firearms. ETA the following picture was posted on the other thread but FullAssault; IF THAT was the Carmel, I'd buy today. If a similar handguard (futuristic, light, streamlined, compact) could be had, I'd be in.  |
|
Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) We have a Carmel in house as of last week and are a taking a look at it. I am kicking around the idea of an external replica of the OG forend (non removable panels as the underlying picatinny adds a lot of weight and a ton of complexity and cost to the molding, just matches the extranal profile and that is it) or maybe an external visual replica of the OG forend that has removable panels and M-LOK underneath as that is more current and modern (obviously this would have some screw heads visible on the external side panels, maybe picaitnny on the removable underside panel, or just picatinny slots on the underside as they are not as visible). Everything would be polymer to lighten it up over the aluminum M-LOK forend that everyone hates on. I definitely want to capture the nice lines of the sides and also that cool top angle that makes the gas regulator much easier to access. But until I really get into it and see what we have to work with and mold costs, not sure quite what the final plan is. Of course, some people are going to freak out if it isn't an exact replica of the original, but that simply isn't possible with some of the modifications they made to the receiver and top rail on the U.S. version of the gun, not to mention that plastic picatinny under cover panels is heavy and, well, dumb and outdated IMHO. Sven Manticore Arms I would also prefer a different handguard. That said, I don't think the original is bad it is just I would like to look like the gun since I heard about from IWI and has been following since 2019 . I replaced the Quad rail on my X95 with the Manticore Arms Optimus Forend because it looked like the original X95 forend and put the Luma safeties because they are comfortable. |
|
Originally Posted By CJofFL: Thanks for asking, but I’m not the one to provide feedback as I fall into the following camp... I prefer my military type replicas to be as true to the originals as possible. For me, that’s the biggest part of the appeal. So much so, that I accept their flaws too, for example, I think the ARX100 sling mount are ridiculous. It doesn’t bother me though as I’m happy to have it in the first place. I’m not one that wants 1 rifle that’s perfect, instead, I want all of the rifles as they were designed/intended. Originally Posted By CJofFL: Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) Thanks for asking, but I’m not the one to provide feedback as I fall into the following camp... Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: Of course, some people are going to freak out if it isn't an exact replica of the original... I prefer my military type replicas to be as true to the originals as possible. For me, that’s the biggest part of the appeal. So much so, that I accept their flaws too, for example, I think the ARX100 sling mount are ridiculous. It doesn’t bother me though as I’m happy to have it in the first place. I’m not one that wants 1 rifle that’s perfect, instead, I want all of the rifles as they were designed/intended. @CJofFL, Totally understand, for some of us we are collecting firearms because of their historical significance, and the Carmel not being in its "original" configuration is just not going to do it for you. I have AUG A1's in my personal collection for the same reason- sure the AUG A3 M1 does the same thing, but it isn't the "original" version of the iconic gun that I want. I understand why IWI decided to go with AR-15 grips and an aluminum M-LOK forend, they are trying to market this to LEO/MIL and consumers as a piston driven rifle that can compete on against the BREN 2, SCAR, etc, etc, as they likely think (or have calculated) there is more market and money to be made for that than for just collectors, but obviously collectors kinda get screwed in that deal if they want an original gun. I personally don't know if they made the right call, but I guess time will tell, and in the meantime it does leave a market niche open for us to make a new forend for the gun. P.S. Thanks for your feedback, (even if it is that a replacement forend isn't going to do it for you- that is still a valuable data point) trying to "backdate" the forend is a bit of a tightrope to navigate to try and make as many people happy as possible while including modern function and making it a reasonable endeavor on the financials. Sven Manticore Arms |
Advanced Fighting Gear for the AR, AK, AUG, Tavor, and Scorpion EVO! www.manticorearms.com
|
Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) We have a Carmel in house as of last week and are a taking a look at it. I am kicking around the idea of an external replica of the OG forend (non removable panels as the underlying picatinny adds a lot of weight and a ton of complexity and cost to the molding, just matches the extranal profile and that is it) or maybe an external visual replica of the OG forend that has removable panels and M-LOK underneath as that is more current and modern (obviously this would have some screw heads visible on the external side panels, maybe picaitnny on the removable underside panel, or just picatinny slots on the underside as they are not as visible). Everything would be polymer to lighten it up over the aluminum M-LOK forend that everyone hates on. I definitely want to capture the nice lines of the sides and also that cool top angle that makes the gas regulator much easier to access. But until I really get into it and see what we have to work with and mold costs, not sure quite what the final plan is. Of course, some people are going to freak out if it isn't an exact replica of the original, but that simply isn't possible with some of the modifications they made to the receiver and top rail on the U.S. version of the gun, not to mention that plastic picatinny under cover panels is heavy and, well, dumb and outdated IMHO. Sven Manticore Arms Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: Originally Posted By FullAssault: Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: Aluminum is 2-3 times denser than the polymers typically used in firearms. Sven Manticore Arms Are you by chance going to make some that at least looks similar to the OG hand guard? @FullAssault @CJofFL ( tagged you guys as you seem to be the strongest proponents of a replacement forend and would like your feedback) We have a Carmel in house as of last week and are a taking a look at it. I am kicking around the idea of an external replica of the OG forend (non removable panels as the underlying picatinny adds a lot of weight and a ton of complexity and cost to the molding, just matches the extranal profile and that is it) or maybe an external visual replica of the OG forend that has removable panels and M-LOK underneath as that is more current and modern (obviously this would have some screw heads visible on the external side panels, maybe picaitnny on the removable underside panel, or just picatinny slots on the underside as they are not as visible). Everything would be polymer to lighten it up over the aluminum M-LOK forend that everyone hates on. I definitely want to capture the nice lines of the sides and also that cool top angle that makes the gas regulator much easier to access. But until I really get into it and see what we have to work with and mold costs, not sure quite what the final plan is. Of course, some people are going to freak out if it isn't an exact replica of the original, but that simply isn't possible with some of the modifications they made to the receiver and top rail on the U.S. version of the gun, not to mention that plastic picatinny under cover panels is heavy and, well, dumb and outdated IMHO. Sven Manticore Arms  |
|
Originally Posted By FullAssault: @Sven, I appreciate the opportunity for feedback! A perfect replica of the OG handguard would be my 1st choice. (out dated polymer rails and all) I think there are many who want exactly that. I dislike mlok and will continue to use pic rails until I find something I like better. Now with that said . personally any of those options you stated sounds good to me. I like the idea of the removable panel versions but one with no rails that is a very close match off the OG would be enough to buy a Carmel. Many of the people I've saw post want the OG HG but are not opposed to something that keeps the OG look. https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oWts7Sk2I6A/XlWkUQvXV2I/AAAAAAAAIlI/momFlIEKBrEtGCdxxRRMg4cN6sMB_khBACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Carmel%2Brail%2Bpicatinny%2Bplate.jpg Oh and "moar real estate to place your attachments?" What can one possibly need other than a light on the side, a handstop/grip below and maybe a laser on top? That room was already there on the OG |
|
Originally Posted By Solo_: Fantastic. Oh and "moar real estate to place your attachments?" What can one possibly need other than a light on the side, a handstop/grip below and maybe a laser on top? That room was already there on the OG Originally Posted By Solo_: Originally Posted By FullAssault: @Sven, I appreciate the opportunity for feedback! A perfect replica of the OG handguard would be my 1st choice. (out dated polymer rails and all) I think there are many who want exactly that. I dislike mlok and will continue to use pic rails until I find something I like better. Now with that said . personally any of those options you stated sounds good to me. I like the idea of the removable panel versions but one with no rails that is a very close match off the OG would be enough to buy a Carmel. Many of the people I've saw post want the OG HG but are not opposed to something that keeps the OG look. https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oWts7Sk2I6A/XlWkUQvXV2I/AAAAAAAAIlI/momFlIEKBrEtGCdxxRRMg4cN6sMB_khBACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Carmel%2Brail%2Bpicatinny%2Bplate.jpg Oh and "moar real estate to place your attachments?" What can one possibly need other than a light on the side, a handstop/grip below and maybe a laser on top? That room was already there on the OG I can't find the pic, but the photoshopped Costa c-clamp grip with the super-long arm comes to mind. 
|
Support the Firearms Policy Coalition and help save the Second Amendment: https://www.firearmspolicy.org
|
Originally Posted By ChickenDaddy: Id want the more original with pic rails. I hate mlock and use it only as a last resort. curious as to why you hate m-lok? It is lighter, lower profile, simpler, and arguably more sturdy than picatinny. Sven Manticore Arms |
Advanced Fighting Gear for the AR, AK, AUG, Tavor, and Scorpion EVO! www.manticorearms.com
|
Mlock is too much dicking around with bolts and screws. Its like adjusting the gas system n a FAL, which I also hate. A pic rail is good enough for me. I did like the MI evolution? Rail from what a decade ago as it gave you choices for panels but those were pre threaded and didn’t require too much dexterity. |
|
Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: curious as to why you hate m-lok? It is lighter, lower profile, simpler, and arguably more sturdy than picatinny. Sven Manticore Arms I hate mlok too, I have a box of keymod and mlok accessories I never use. I alway go back to QD pic rail accessories if I need to a light or VFG just for simplicity. 99% of the time I don’t run any accessories beyond an optic anymore anyways. That why I like IWI set up so much. You have a unique grip and lines unless you need to run a light then the cover just slides off until needed again. I had a few QD mlok accessories but they are either flimsy or end up weighing more than a QD on a pic rail. Honestly I know very few people who like mlok. |
Joined:
Jan 2023
Posts:
187
EE: 100% (5)
OR, USA
|
Originally Posted By Manticore_Arms: curious as to why you hate m-lok? It is lighter, lower profile, simpler, and arguably more sturdy than picatinny. Sven Manticore Arms I also prefer pic. I own very few mlok items and everytime I have to go looking for the little mlok fastners just makes me hate it more. simpler? I have no idea how you can back that up vs pic. |
|
Originally Posted By TheSadPatriot: I also prefer pic. I own very few mlok items and everytime I have to go looking for the little mlok fastners just makes me hate it more. simpler? I have no idea how you can back that up vs pic. It's definitely simpler/cheaper to go with MLok slots in a poly HG mold. You can always use high strength thread locking compound when mounting pic rails to MLok slots & make them relatively permanent. I like the original Carmel, but an MLok HG format would be an improvement. As it is, the "new" iteration is just trying to be like an AR instead of being what it is (was), in my view. |
| I might end up with one of these. With FN almost doubling the price of the SCAR the past few years I think they’ve priced themselves out of a logical medium. The Bren carbine is nearing vaporware status these days and the JAKL is really it’s only significant competition for me. |
https://instagram.com/_odiegreen_?igshid=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA==
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: I might end up with one of these. With FN almost doubling the price of the SCAR the past few years I think they’ve priced themselves out of a logical medium. The Bren carbine is nearing vaporware status these days and the JAKL is really it’s only significant competition for me. Agree. New Scar pricing is crazy. Used ACR pricing is absolute lunacy. I couldn’t convince myself to get one of those when they were $1,500. On the Scar, Spear LT and APC223, there’s just no reason to pay the asking prices they fetch new. If PSA and IWI can develop new rifles going for $1,200-$1,400, so should everybody else. |
|
Originally Posted By Citizen904: Agree. New Scar pricing is crazy. Used ACR pricing is absolute lunacy. I couldn’t convince myself to get one of those when they were $1,500. On the Scar, Spear LT and APC223, there’s just no reason to pay the asking prices they fetch new. If PSA and IWI can develop new rifles going for $1,200-$1,400, so should everybody else. It’s likely supply and demand. Sales drop and bean counters only see numbers, so prices get increased for the loss of volume to compensate. The reverse is true of the AR15 where it’s not a cheap rifle to make, but the production numbers are so high that it’s a refined process and even crazy low profit numbers yield significant return. Make $150,000 selling 100 rifles versus make $1,500,000 selling 10,000 rifles. I think it’s a good sign the SCAR is teetering on the edge of complete failure. Even with inflation and material costs factored in there’s no justification for their price change. |
https://instagram.com/_odiegreen_?igshid=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA==
|
I handled a Carmel today at a LGS and just wasn’t that impressed. Seemed awfully bloated, unnecessarily oversized. I thought the same about the FN-FS2000 I bought years ago. However, lately I’ve been comparing everything to the JAKL SBR I bought/assembled. Anything much bigger is uncomfortable to me now. |
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: I might end up with one of these. With FN almost doubling the price of the SCAR the past few years I think they’ve priced themselves out of a logical medium. The Bren carbine is nearing vaporware status these days and the JAKL is really it’s only significant competition for me. FN has obviously more business than it can handle on the military contract side of the business. So it makes the civilians guns so expensive that it is worth the hassle to dealing with 1 to 2 guns per client. I do this in my contracting at work. If you buy 5000 square feet of pavers, we install at $7.99-8.99 per foot. Under 1000 square feet and its $10.99 per foot. |
|
Originally Posted By ihon: FN has obviously more business than it can handle on the military contract side of the business. So it makes the civilians guns so expensive that it is worth the hassle to dealing with 1 to 2 guns per client. I do this in my contracting at work. If you buy 5000 square feet of pavers, we install at $7.99-8.99 per foot. Under 1000 square feet and it’s $10.99 per foot. I’m skeptical. They make an asinine amount more AR pattern rifles than SCAR’s, yet the SCAR is their only firearm across the board military or civilian that has seen such a crazy increase in cost. If the Carmel is a good rifle it’s going to dent their SCAR sales significantly too. |
https://instagram.com/_odiegreen_?igshid=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA==
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: If the Carmel is a good rifle it’s going to dent their SCAR sales significantly too. I don’t see it impacting SCAR sales one bit. The SCAR alternate is the Bren 2. I can see even a used Bren 805 being more desirable than the Carmel as a SCAR alternative. Aside from the Brens and SCAR being lighter than the Carmel, they have a lot of aftermarket support. I think it’s true that the SCAR is probably pricing itself out of the market, but I just don’t see people flocking to the Carmel as a replacement. |
A closer look at the OG Carmel Israel's New Battle Rifle From IWI: The Carmel |
|
Originally Posted By willi3d: I don’t see it impacting SCAR sales one bit. The SCAR alternate is the Bren 2. I can see even a used Bren 805 being more desirable than the Carmel as a SCAR alternative. Aside from the Brens and SCAR being lighter than the Carmel, they have a lot of aftermarket support. I think it’s true that the SCAR is probably pricing itself out of the market, but I just don’t see people flocking to the Carmel as a replacement. The Scar is the better gun but at the current pricing of $1,399, the Carmel feels like the better value to me. |
|
Originally Posted By FullAssault: A closer look at the OG Carmel  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOsLkWPhj5E |
|
Originally Posted By willi3d: I don’t see it impacting SCAR sales one bit. The SCAR alternate is the Bren 2. I can see even a used Bren 805 being more desirable than the Carmel as a SCAR alternative. Aside from the Brens and SCAR being lighter than the Carmel, they have a lot of aftermarket support. I think it’s true that the SCAR is probably pricing itself out of the market, but I just don’t see people flocking to the Carmel as a replacement. That may be true for the 16S, but not for the 17S. It's still one of the top dogs in the battle rifle segment. I personally find the Tavor 7 a very close and formidable competitor having owned both, but not as many people will warm up to a bullpup. Unless CZ brings over the Bren 2 BR there really won't be any good competitors to compete with the SCAR 17S in terms of an AR-180 style battle rifle. |
|
Originally Posted By Solo_: Terrific. Granted I buy the designs I like the most aesthetically (it's just me, I'm here for collecting), I would have purchased this one with a click. Originally Posted By Solo_: Originally Posted By FullAssault: A closer look at the OG Carmel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOsLkWPhj5EMost definitely! |
|
Originally Posted By willi3d: I don’t see it impacting SCAR sales one bit. The SCAR alternate is the Bren 2. I can see even a used Bren 805 being more desirable than the Carmel as a SCAR alternative. Aside from the Brens and SCAR being lighter than the Carmel, they have a lot of aftermarket support. I think it’s true that the SCAR is probably pricing itself out of the market, but I just don’t see people flocking to the Carmel as a replacement. The non-AR market is not a typical market. The idea that the question " I don't want an AR, so what's the best value in a non-AR platform?" is getting asked a lot is probably not accurate. People buy SCARs because they want SCARs, not because there is a driving need for a piston driven non-AR in the market. While you can certainly compare the SCAR, Bren, ARX, ACR, etc., I don't see the comparison making whole lot of difference to someone who wants a SCAR or Bren specifically. Most of these buyers are collectors and the comparison is probably driving little more than the order of purchase. JMHO. |
http://www.guntechtips.com
| I have a Bren 2 and just bought the Carmel today. Range time tomorrow. I see them as almost the same. The adjustable cheek riser as the advantage to the Carmel. Dry firing the Carmel revealed the trigger to be pretty good. The Bren already has the HBI up grades so It wont be a fair comparison. |
|
Originally Posted By chucku: I have a Bren 2 and just bought the Carmel today. Range time tomorrow. I see them as almost the same. The adjustable cheek riser as the advantage to the Carmel. Dry firing the Carmel revealed the trigger to be pretty good. The Bren already has the HBI up grades so It wont be a fair comparison. Interested to hear your opinion, from the looks of it, it seems chunky looking. And that height over bore 
|
|
Originally Posted By ken_mays: The non-AR market is not a typical market. The idea that the question " I don't want an AR, so what's the best value in a non-AR platform?" is getting asked a lot is probably not accurate. People buy SCARs because they want SCARs, not because there is a driving need for a piston driven non-AR in the market. While you can certainly compare the SCAR, Bren, ARX, ACR, etc., I don't see the comparison making whole lot of difference to someone who wants a SCAR or Bren specifically. Most of these buyers are collectors and the comparison is probably driving little more than the order of purchase. JMHO. I’d say the JAKL and BRN180 are pretty good evidence to the contrary. In the case of the JAKL they got overwhelmed and it took almost a year before they could keep them in stock. If the SCAR was still $1700, I don’t think many of those people would have bought the PSA at $1300. Regardless, the Carmel will sell well just like the Tavor. Being a military design and cheaper than the major competition is a successful combination for moving a lot of product. |
https://instagram.com/_odiegreen_?igshid=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA==
|
Originally Posted By -OdieGreen-: I’d say the JAKL and BRN180 are pretty good evidence to the contrary. In the case of the JAKL they got overwhelmed and it took almost a year before they could keep them in stock. If the SCAR was still $1700, I don’t think many of those people would have bought the PSA at $1300. Regardless, the Carmel will sell well just like the Tavor. Being a military design and cheaper than the major competition is a successful combination for moving a lot of product. When was the FN SCAR L or H ever $1700? |
|
Originally Posted By Master_Blaster: When was the FN SCAR L or H ever $1700? Yeah, you can go back years on the classifieds section of the fn forum and see them changing hands in the $1,700’s back in the day. I bought (and unfortunately sold) a couple for my collection back then. |
|
Hmm, the latest issue of IWI US Close Quarters is out. https://mailchi.mp/iwi/close-quarters-vol-9-issue-9 Made from superior steel, aviation-grade aluminum, and high-strength impact-modified polymer, the CARMEL rifle has proven itself over and over again worldwide. This rifle is designed to meet the needs of the end users with outstanding performance in any kind of environmental condition. With maximum safety for the user in mind, this rifle features a rotating bolt system. The CARMEL is easy to customize for the user's needs with a fully ambidextrous platform and is equipped with mil standard 1913 Picatinny rails on all sides. The 100% interchangeability allows the CARMEL to use any available sights, devices, or accessories, which reduces the overall cost of the system. It is designed with ergonomics in mind and built to last a lifetime. First, who’s using the rifle such that it’s “proven itself over and over again worldwide”? And then it says it’s “equipped with mil standard 1913 Picatinny rails on all sides”. The ones you’re selling certainly aren’t, IWI US. |
|
Originally Posted By willi3d: Hmm, the latest issue of IWI US Close Quarters is out. https://mailchi.mp/iwi/close-quarters-vol-9-issue-9 Made from superior steel, aviation-grade aluminum, and high-strength impact-modified polymer, the CARMEL rifle has proven itself over and over again worldwide. This rifle is designed to meet the needs of the end users with outstanding performance in any kind of environmental condition. With maximum safety for the user in mind, this rifle features a rotating bolt system. The CARMEL is easy to customize for the user's needs with a fully ambidextrous platform and is equipped with mil standard 1913 Picatinny rails on all sides. The 100% interchangeability allows the CARMEL to use any available sights, devices, or accessories, which reduces the overall cost of the system. It is designed with ergonomics in mind and built to last a lifetime. First, who’s using the rifle such that it’s “proven itself over and over again worldwide”? And then it says it’s “equipped with mil standard 1913 Picatinny rails on all sides”. The ones you’re selling certainly aren’t, IWI US. |
|
Originally Posted By Citizen904: Originally Posted By Master_Blaster: When was the FN SCAR L or H ever $1700? Yeah, you can go back years on the classifieds section of the fn forum and see them changing hands in the $1,700’s back in the day. I bought (and unfortunately sold) a couple for my collection back then. I meant new, not used. |
The IWI carmel (Page 2 of 12)
Armory Sponsor