Anyone here have any experience with the CZ 805? I'm looking

>>34361475
The only complaint anyone has is that it is heavy. Otherwise it's good to go. I'm hoping to pick one up when I get back to my home state.

It does have a bit of heft to it but its pretty spread out aling the feciver and forearm. Fit and finish is great, very solid rifle. I didnt get mych trigger time with it but overall, i liked it. Im really interested in the bren 2, which is supposed come to the civilian market late 2017, but who knows

>>34361571
The Bren 2 is projected for late 2018, not 2017 and it's not a guarantee.

Anyone have any recommendations on other short stroke 5.56 rifles? I was looking into the Sig MCX and FS2000 a few months back, but if I'm going for a bullpup I'd rather have an AUG because they're cooler and I'm not really in one camp or the other between the MCX and 805

>>34362079
FS2000s are cool, but keep in mind they can only use USGI AR-15 magazines in their standard configuration. You'll have to remove the gasket from the magazine well if you want to use anything else. If you want to collect, I would say the FS2000 is a good choice to buy right now since they are discontinued and prices are only going up. The AUG is cool, too, (my favorite, in fact) but I don't see their production being halted by Steyr any time soon and Lithgow is importing their version of the rifle at the end of the year.

Between the MCX and the 805, the 805 wins hands down for me. It's a SCAR lookalike that's better than the SCAR for like half the price.

>>34361475
It's heavier than my scar 17

>>34364786
It's probably stronger. Not to mention it won't have its warranty voided if you put a suppressor on it :^).

File: 1467379986.jpg (27KB, 850x357px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 850x357px

>>34361475
I shot an sbr'd version of the pistol. It's heavy, but solidly made. The finish was good, it felt fine ergonomically, accuracy was ok but I was only really messing around and not trying to see how well it shot. It ate crappy ammo fine with the only ftf being the result of a shitty mag. We only used aluminum STANAGs, but I think others will work fine. The only thing I disliked was that the handguard got pretty hot, pretty fast. I think that's only because it was an sbr, and I'm not sure if the gas system was messed with beforehand, that same range lets you rent out suppressors for their guns. After only 500 rounds over the course of an hour had us using our gloves to comfortably hold the rifle. Overall I thought it was a good gun, I also think the metal receiver looks better than the 806s but that's personal preference.

>>34361475

It's already being replaced in their military with the 806.

>>34361475
I'm waiting for the 806 to hit shelves. Supposedly it's got a lot of fixes and is lighter.

>>34362361
I do not understand all the love the AUG gets. It is mediocre at best. It is my least favorite bullpup out of all that I own.

>>34362361
>Between the MCX and the 805, the 805 wins hands down for me. It's a SCAR lookalike that's better than the SCAR for like half the price.

Also the MCX is far lighter than the 805 and does everything else the same.

>>34367650
A lot of fixes being a bolt release and being lighter. That's it. It prevents you from using G36/Czech magazines, which is annoying. I think a lot of the flak the controls for the 805 get are from people who want it to be an AR. It was never designed to be an AR, it was designed to help people transition from the AK style Vz. 58. The lack of a bolt release, reciprocating charging handle, and paddle magazine release make this obvious. Military manuals even recommended right handed shooters move the the charging handle to the right side of the weapon, just like the Vz. 58.

All I'm saying is, if you want a Bren now, go for it. There's no telling when we'll actually see the Bren 2. You can always have both.

Mil and LE 805 users complain about overall weight, balance, the fire selector, and the stock. Associated Mil and LE armorers complained about price per unit and complicated (dis)assembly. The 806 purportedly addresses all of these problems.

>>34361571
Q4 2017 is the "pistol", carbine is Q2 2018.

>>34367970
>the fire selector, and the stock.
These have both been upgraded, unless there were complaints about the selector and stock that weren't about length.
>complicated (dis)assembly.
What? It breaks down exactly like a SCAR.
>Q4 2017 is the "pistol"
Source? That's exciting, if true.

>>34367619
Because the 805s that they got were literally a field test paid from the pockets of taxpayers, and army was the guinea pig.

>>34367658
Personal preference. I find that most "bullpup guys" I let shoot or borrow one of my AUGs (the a3 sa) end up loving it and buying one, or re-buying one after having sold a preban years ago.

Only other rifles I'd consider in the same league are the tavor sar and fs2000 so it's not like there are a whole bunch of choices anyway.

>>34367650
Don't forget that there's a midterm election between now and the suspected release date.

If you want a bren there's really no better time than the present.

The 805 is flawed. The 806 might not be coming here.

Both are trying to copy the SCAR anyway. Just get an AR or the SCAR and don't be a beta tester.

>>34370573
>The 805 is flawed.
Besides the weight, how is it flawed?

>>34367663
The MCX is made by SIG. That is reason enough not to buy it.

>>34370645
There will be a Legion version. Just get that so you can be a real operator. Molon labe

>>34370645
This

>>34370645
I like my MCX, and I don't understand the hate it gets.

>>34372583
It's pretty fucking ugly.