The history of the roller cam-operated rifle, from the CETME to the HK91, is a thrice-told tale. German engineers’ epic escape from Nazi Germany (just ahead of the Russians) and refuge in Spain led to the CETME rifle. The CETME (Centro de Estudios Técnicos de Materiales Especiales) was first adopted in Spain. The successful CETME served in a time when the M14 and FN FAL were in wide use. The rifle was adopted by a re-arming Germany as its G3. The rifles also become known commercially as the Heckler & Koch HK 91. The G3/HK 91 has served long and well and achieved recognition as both an accurate and reliable firearm.
The rifle operates by use of a roller-cam mechanism. Rather than using gas operation or a recoiling barrel, the HK 91-type rifle operates by use of cams on the bolt that run into a trunnion inside of the receiver. When the rifle fires, the bolt is held steady by the force of the bolt on the roller cams. Once the bullet exits the barrel and pressure subsides, the bolt unlocks and operates in the normal fashion, moving to the rear under spring pressure, then traveling forward to strip a round from the magazine. The spent case is ejected during the bolt’s travel, and the new cartridge is fed into the chamber. This occurs much faster than I can describe here.
With the high price of the original HK 91 moving it out of the reach of many of us, there have been a number of attempts to produce a clone of it. Some of these clones use surplus military parts from nations that once used the HK 91. Others are built on modern machinery. The Century International Arms C308 is a combination of surplus and new parts. The C91 is a 9½-pound rifle with an 18½-inch barrel chambered for the 7.62 NATO or .308 Winchester cartridge. The rifle uses 20-round box magazines. The C308 and the virtually identical C91 rifle are good all-around shooters for those of us wishing to obtain and use an HK 91-type rifle without paying thousands of dollars to do so.
The C308 has advantages over the earlier yet similar CETME rifle. The rifle is assembled from surplus parts. The receiver is welded, and there is evidence that the receiver was originally a fully automatic type, but the selector switch is removed or modified. The rifle’s safety is an ergonomically designed lever on the left side of the receiver. The fitting of the bolt, cams and trigger mechanism seems good. The rifle features HK 91-type sights and the same stock configuration as the HK rifle.
The CETME was generally serviceable. However, the flip-up rear sights, with an open aperture for short-range use and a smaller aperture for long ranges, are not as useful as the HK 91-type drum sight. The HK 91-type sight uses an open sight for short-range use and smaller apertures for 200 to 400 meters. This is among the best combat sights ever used on a battle rifle, in my opinion. The front sight is a shrouded post. The longer-range settings offer a tight sight picture for precision shooting.
To use the rifle, first lock the operating handle to the rear. The operating handle is beside the barrel. The handle is raised, and the operating rod is moved to the rear. This moves the bolt to the rear and cocks the action. The bolt may be locked to the rear with the operating rod by moving the rod handle into a mortise in the barrel cover. A loaded magazine is then inserted. The operating rod is released, and the bolt travels forward, stripping a cartridge from the magazine and into the chamber. The operating rod does not reciprocate as the rifle is fired. The rifle’s safety is then placed in the Safe position after loading. The bolt does not lock open on the last shot.
The synthetic forearm features vents to facilitate barrel cooling. There is a checkered portion of the forend about 4¼ inches long that offers excellent adhesion when firing. The firing grip features a modest thumb riser that allows excellent handling. This handle fits most hands well. The stock is adequate for most uses, with a 14¼-inch length of pull. The magazine well allows rapid magazine changes with practice. The magazine release is positive in operation. Trigger compression is heavy but relatively smooth and consistent. The RCBS registering trigger pull gauge reads 10½ pounds.
There is little takeup in the trigger action, and reset is rapid. In firing quickly at close range and at man-size targets to 100 yards, the trigger and fixed sights gave good results. When firing for absolute accuracy off of a solid benchrest firing position, the rifle gave credible results. The Century rifle is comfortable to fire and use. It is recommended that it 100 rounds or so be fired for a break-in. This is a common requirement for roller cam-operated rifle actions, including the C308, the PTR 91 and the HK 91. However, many will come out of the box running. One of the author’s rifles did so, but another required a modest break in. The second rifle suffered short cycles during the first 60 rounds, then operated normally. This is SOP for HK 91-type rifles. Also, all magazines do not fit, function and lock properly. Magazines specific to the C308 are best. The original G3 featured a paddle release similar to the HK P7M8 handgun. Parts kits that end up as the C308 feature the push-button release.
Among the primary loads used in this test was the Winchester White Box USA 147-grain loading. Accurate enough for most chores, clean burning and reliable, this is a good resource for initial tests of any military-grade rifle. Also fired was a quantity of Portuguese surplus loads. This ammunition is comparable in quality and accuracy to commercial ammunition. Despite the power of the .308 cartridge, recoil remained manageable. The roller cam action seems to soak up a portion of the recoil of this powerful rifle cartridge. When firing offhand, the rifle proved lively, tracking targets quickly and responding to a trained shooter. When firing from the benchrest for absolute accuracy, the 200-meter aperture was used, although we fired at 50 and 100 yards. This was for best accuracy. However, the rifle fired several inches high with this setting. When firing for accuracy at 50 yards, the rifle exhibited excellent accuracy. Firing off of the bench with a heavy trigger and iron sights produced average groups of 2 inches. A few, with the Winchester 168-grain Match load, were better.
We also fired a number of three-shot groups at a long 100 yards, using my handloads with the Sierra 168-grain MatchKing and Varget powder. The effort showed that the rifle has good accuracy potential, with a 2.5-MOA group. Most groups, however, were in the 4-inch range at 100 yards. Quality optics would change the equation. I simply cannot hold what it should accomplish at football-field range. During one exciting effort, I did slam three of the Winchester Match loads into 2¼ inches.
The military stock is OK as far as it goes; however, I elected to go for improved fit in chasing greater accuracy potential. The PRS2 stock from Magpul Industries allows adjustment of the length of pull from about 15 to 16¼ inches. The cheekpiece allows changes up to 1.8 inches vertically and fore and aft adjustment of .65-inch. The C91 class of rifle has a forward weight bias, and the heavier-than-standard Magpul stock results in an excellent feel. After some adjustment and range work, I rate this stock a first-class addition to the C308. For those wishing to mount optics and use the rifle for precision work, including hunting, the PRS2 is a good option.
After using the rifle for several months, I am impressed. The C308 is military grade and heavy duty, the build quality seems good, and the rifle is a link with the great rifles of the past. This is a good all-around .308 for those preferring the roller-cam system.
How does Century’s C308 rank among battle rifles in your book? Are you a .308 fan? Share your opinion of, or experience with, the C308 or HK91 in the comment section.
[bob]
The c308 is not a clone of the HK91. It is a reassembled Cetme C with american parts. The HK 91 is a clone of the Cetme C. The Germans borrowed the design from The Spanish in which modified the design slightly to meet their needs. This is why many of the parts are interchangeable.
PTR began reassembling the the c308 for Century Arms because if quality control issues. These c308s are much better.
I got my century arms c308 5 years ago. Maybe I’ve put 500 rounds through it.
Last weekend with a new 3x burris, i was tagging 10 inch steel from 200 yards like it was commonplace. Never had any issues really. Interior of the charging handle needed cleaning. Break in period period maybe. The rifle doesn’t extract brass, it chews it up and spits it out. It’s heavy.
I’ll never get rid of it, just improve.
Can anyone provide an accessories site for the C308? I would appreciate it.
Got a brand new c308 this weekend and am not impressed. First 3 rounds fired were disastrous. I’m not sure of the part names but the bolt has a guide grove on the bottom, and the metal piece that is supposed to fit in there and keep it straight jumps outs the grove and stops the action hard, fails to eject the round, and I have to manually push it back into the grove to get the bolt to close. Ammo used was federal premium factory loads.
HK93 would be very cool and cheaper to shoot……… great now you got me thinking of getting one …..just what I need buy another rifle tehehe..
I wouldn’t sell it. If it works reliably then it’s a keeper. Even my problem guns which again were older versions, were actually pretty accurate and soft shooting when they worked. And I had put the wide forearm on one of mine as well, Looked a lot better than the G3 guard, more surface area to hold on to. I had a C93, even with its problems I wish I had held onto it.. Maybe I can find a cheap HK93 to go with my HK91
Like I mentioned earlier I love my C308 and it performs flawless.
It’s as accurate as you would expect from any battle rifle…. how bolt action rifles got into this thread is beyond me…… like comparing bananas to watermelons.
Anyway I only shoot .308 win ammo not 7.62 NATO just because of what I’ve read on the differences, though slight they are different.
There’s no way I would even consider selling mine.
extremely fun to shoot. Only mod is brand new wide forearm which is more comfortable and gives look of early model HK91. Scope of course.
The cetme I had was one of their lemons. Got it cheap & fought failure to feed & failure to eject issues like crazy. Cleaned it like a crime sceen, took it to gunsmith twice, & bought tons of new magazines to fix the issue… All w/ only a modest improvement.
Supposedly the G3 magazines for it had some seating issues that caused the feeding problems.
Also has issues w/ brass casings getting stuck inside, so had to shoot steel.
Wound up selling it off at a loss, & that guy wound up selling it off as well.
Yup my CETME, stamped Hesse, was never a reliable weapon. Like I mentioned, I tried all sorts of mags, I think the problem was in the stamped receiver, particularly in the areas where the lower grip housing met the receiver. I played around with it and got it to where it would only jam every 7-10 rounds, and sold it so cheap that the next guy could part it out lol. And I let him know about the jamming. Now all those mags I had worked perfect in my PTR and my HK. So if Century is now contracting through PTR for receivers, that would be a good thing. Now while I found the recoil more of a big comfortable push, there are different stocks and buffers out there, as well as rubber butt pads that replace the hard plastic end cap on the stock.
The only reason you see bad articles on the older versions of this rifle is I think through the years they used Hesse and Vulcan to make their rifles. I have no proof, just a guess, as I also had a Hesse CETME and I had the same problems and shoddy workmanship. If Century is now using PTR, then they should be excellent rifles. Even if there are a few surplus parts, or NOS,that shouldn’t be a problem as the G3 was a sturdy rifle.
A little off point,but you brought up Hesse. Had an AK from Hesse, chambered in .223. Out of the box, the head-space was off. Fired 1 round from it, ruptured the case and it blew the dust cover off. Packed it up, sent it back to Hesse, 6 weeks later it was back, with corrected head-space. Never owned anything else from Hesse. Don’t remember who made my CETME, was never any problem with it, except for the recoil.
I have an original HK91, well the HK911 that was stamped during the Clinton era ban. It’s my go to battle rifle and is always reliable. I changed the stupid looking stock they put on to pass as a non listed riffle. I went with the wood look and a Bradly Cheek Rest, Leopold VXR Patrol mounted on the PEPR quick release scope mount. This thing is my absolute die with it in your hands riffle.
Don’t get me wrong I have several ARs, not even the same animal by a long shot. My only real change I’m doing is having the trigger assembly worked over to make it a smother break and eliminate the trigger creep. It hits hard and it hits what I shoot at. I’m not going to start the whole biggest fish that got away story but 300 meters is minimal work out to even better ranges but I think it’s better than me. I limit it, my HK doesn’t limit me. It’s heavy but it’s a BATTLE RIFLE no a BB Gun.
Shane
Parker AZ ( a free state )
Hello, this is a nice article, however I’m not sure Mr. Campbell received a current c308. The receiver is new, by PTR, as well as the trigger housing. I’m not sure about the actual trigger and internals, though I don’t think they’really PTR. Also, the sight is a CETME, it rolls like a tiny ferris wheel for the various ranges. I have an actual hk sight i need to install, just the used components cost about $40, including the mount. At $650 shipped, that’s why CIA used the CETME sight I think. The barrel is also new, that’s about it as far as I can tell. I’m pretty sure it’s a small hk buffer in the stock, small people can get the beefy buffer I guess.
That being said, good luck finding a bad review of this rifle. I’ve owned one for several months now, and I freaking love it. It’s a tank, and parts maybe made of recycled tanks. I was concerned when I first fired it (the thing just exploding or getting hit with a mach 2 shell ejection) but that was totally unfounded. Next time at the range I unleashed a hell of .308’s and 7.62’s, all flawless. Ar-15 people kept sneaking by to see wtf I was shooting, it’s very loud! And yes, being a tank it’s not light. Accuracy is fine for me (I suck) and was great with a crap scope. The recoil also seems fine to me, and adds to the ‘assault canon’ experience. I have 10 mags additional mags coming in the mail from CT Dirt, $25!
As an owner of numerous battle rifles, including original Oberndorf HK-91 (A2 & A3), PSG-1, HK-93s, 94’s, FAL’s, etc, I can say that the HK pattern and all it’s clones are the closest you can get to a disposable weapon system. Stamped sheet metal and plastic can work very well, and in this case they do. However, it is an archaic design with poor ergonomics and limited features as originally designed. Lack of a bolt hold-open feature, the need to shift one’s grip when moving the safety lever, poor cheek weld when using original stocks, heavy weight as required for the bolt design, and one of the worse triggers ever are the negatives. On the plus side is the reliability factor of the originals and ease of field stripping. Inexpensive magazines cost less than the ammunition they hold, and in cheaper aluminum versions they are next to throw-away.
A previous poster mentioned the SCAR-17, a much better option, if you can pony up the $$$. A second place alternative would be a version of the M1A, as produced by Smith Enterprises, followed by versions produced by Springfield Armory. Just my 2 cents.
With a good scoped Bolt action rifle a 2.5 inch group is less than desirable but with Iron sights that’s a different ball game. Some exceptional shots with great vision could maybe do 2 inch or less but 2.5 I don’t think is so bad as some insist from a semiauto with iron sights. Yea, many off the shelf bolt guns will get you 1 MOA or close out of the box but that’s using a scoped rifle off a bench rest out of a bolt gun. There may be some exceptional semiauto’s out there but one’s I’ve fired with a scope just don’t have the same consistent accuracy as a bolt rifle. Why do you think that 90% of long range rifles are bolt guns? Just my 2 cents.
I bought my C308 because always wanted and loved the style of the HK91..
The price is great for what you get. I added a brand new HK forearm which will fit perfect with minimum work and looks awesome.
Personally I didn’t buy this for super tight grouping ….. I got it for fun shooting and love it.
AR and AK style rifles are getting boring and everybody has one.
But just my opinion.
This thing looks exactly like an original HK91 ….at least to the untrained eye.
Bottom line with the forearm and scope I for one am extremely happy.
The author also mistakenly states that the receiver was once one of the fully automatic types. That would actually make it an illegal firearm according to the ATF. The receiver on this style of firearm is the “upper” stamped housing. He was probably referring to the grip housing, which is not considered a receiver by the ATF. The front disassembly ears are cut off the grip housing and on the receiver, there is a metal “shelf” welded in place to engage a slot on the front of the grip housing. Basically so you can’t easily pop on a full auto grip housing and trigger group.
How’s the headspace on these? Ground bolt heads?
I have one of their cetme`s with all the good ground and faked headspace still sitting in my closet. With new bolt parts it sits at .002 clearance so it’s still unsafe to shoot as the day CAI built and sold it to me.
Hopefully they did better this time around, they refused to fix the older ones so I will never buy from them again. Just hope that these are safe and built properly for the average Joe out there spending their hard earned money…
My two C91s did have some serious problems, I was told the typical bs of it has to break in with 100 rounds, they incredible lame and stupid excuse that people fall for, to include me. My second C91 had over 100 rounds through it. Still reliable jammed every 3rd round. I tried different mags, alloy and steel, no help. Bolt gap was off, I had tried different rollers but it never helped. And I noticed the bolt had been ground. Years later, I had bought a C93, similar jamming problems but not nearly
as bad. I really liked the HK93, and the C93 was pretty close, to include HK parts in it. After sending it back twice, I got my money back from a very understanding dealer. Now I’m not going to beat up on Century, just these early rifles. I bought a Century C-15 that has been a very reliable and accurate and old school M16-A1 semi clone, and a few of their AKs that run nice.
Maybe the C91 has improved over the years but the first two I had were crap. Jammed 2-3x every mag. No gunsmith would touch them around here. I went with a PTR after that, no jams, better trigger and quite a bit more accurate. Only got rid of it to fund a nib HK91 that a gentleman had in his closet since the 80s. It is also very reliable, accurate although the trigger is a bit heavy, but fine for what the rifle was designed for. For some reason I am not sure why, the recoil was pretty mild for all the rifles, with the HK being real soft, but I have an SG1 dual buffer stock on it.
I love mine so far.1/2 min. groups with iron sights out of the box @50yds.Lots of accessories available.
I get 1MOA with 30 year old surplus Hirtenberger NATO and Siler Bear 308. Just shot 2″ groups with same at 200 yards yesterday. Guess I’m a Jedi, or I have a real fine unit. I use a 3X9 BSA scope. Their inexpensive model. The iron sights are not as accurate, tools are not available, so I took a 5/16 bolt, cut off the threads and gun drilled it. I then milled the posts to fit and wala, I now have a site tool too.
To Joe and T Chaney,
Thanks for sharing. As is often the case I have learned something from knowledgeable readers, and thanks for sharing your experience with these very interesting rifles.
Regards,
Bob Campbell
According to Century,the receiver and barrel are both new,American made.I had this same rifle,a G-3 made by century about 10 yrs. ago,and it was a pussycat as far as recoil.I did rebuild the bolt with a new set of rollers and a new locking piece.Parts are easy to obtain with RTG Parts.The only drawback to mine was,IT IS HEAVY.! Will be adding this version to my collection,for the price it can’t be anything but a good move.
Great battle rifle once uon a time, and today it is still an suffecient killing tool, yet I have old pump and semi Winchester and Remingtons that have extendedmags that will place moa out to 400, do not weigh a ton and are easier to sling for hpurs over hill and dale, are no wheres.near as.nulky and do not bruise these old shoulders near as bad as those relics from
the past.
Can see as a curiosity but not much else, and my old rifles are mow worth more than the clone HK; For that is what it is a replica.
Of course.we with tons of extra cash will buy one for bragging rights at the range, but do not bet when challenged by newer stule AR 10’s or off offshoots on 308 for accuracy.
I really like my HK91, but you are right, my Scar17 will outshoot it all day. The Scar is quite a bit more accurate, weighs less, and had better trigger, easier to clean too.
I just finished reading this article. Really? In the past I have read and respected the author’s view. Although I don’t believe the author meant to mislead or misrepresent this rifle but 2 1/2″ group at a hundred yards with a .308? I feel as if you are trying to sell an item regardless of quality. I’ll pass.
Sir,
I do not quite understand your surprise. This is average work for a trained shooter from a solid benchrest using proper marksmanship habits and good ammunition. 2.5 inches at 100 yards is so so for a modern rifle, in my opinion. The Remington 700 SPS bolt action rifle, as an example, with the Redfield Battlezone scope under the same conditions will consistently shoot 1 MOA (1 inch or less.) This rifle is about in the same category with the Springfield M1A1 for accuracy although the M1A1 may be tuned for better accuracy. The PTR rifle, a similar rifle, is more expensive and often a bit more accurate. As I said, 2.5 MOA is not anything earthshaking. A World War Two Mauser or NAgant will do about that, a Lee Enfield on a good day, and a Springfield 1903 is much better. So, — 2.5 MOA is credible but not anything exceptional. The average bargain hunting rifle-the Savage Axis or Mossberg ATR- is more accurate.
Of is capable of itself, the .308 sub moa, even at 100 yrds. in the right rifle. I’m not sure about the CETME and it’s clones, though 2 1/2 inches sounds about right for a main battle rifle. I am no fan of these rifles, but they all have respectable accuracy out to about 500 meters.
Had a CETME, love it, but the recoil was brutal. The article said that the C308 is comfortable to shoot. Perhaps is this new incarnation, the recoil was tamed some. Too, on my CETME, I was always concerned about the fragile seeming charging handle. It worked very well, but I always worried about breaking it. Hope they correct this, also. Give me a gas operated, or rotating bolt .308 any day. Was never particularly recoil sensitive, but the G3, HK91, CETME had harsher recoil than I would want to deal with in a prolonged firefight .
Sir,
I find the CETME and C91 HK 91 and PTR class quite controllable. Having spent a lot of time with the M1 Garand and Springfield 1903, each in .30-06, I do not find the .308 offensive.
I would agree the .223 is much more pleasant for firing 2-300 rounds in a session, if you wish, but a hundred rounds of .308 over the course of an hour or so did not leave eddies in my skin.
@Bob Campbell:
I totally agree with you that firing any kind of .308 is NOT harsh on recoil. The only recoil I’m ever concerned about is a 12 gauge.
But can you please see what you can do with CTD getting access to the Zastava Pap M77PS? This is an AK style .308. Besides bringing together a great caliber with the most reliable assault rifle architecture, it’s also the coolest looking assault rifle I’ve ever seen. I’m ready to buy one like RIGHT NOW, but I can’t seem to find one.