Would a 100% factory (pre-89 ban) FMP G3 be considered a clone or an original?

[p712k]

Would a 100% factory (pre-89 ban) FMP G3 be considered a clone or an original?

[boomfab]

Clone. FMP is not HK.

[eric10mm]

How about Original Clone? :D

[HaloMann213]

Yup, not German HK sadly...still pretty decent gun

[AGG]

Maybe not an original clone (CETME) but a very good one if a G3S (or maybe XG3S) as all were imported 1989.

[Landpimp]

made on German HK tooling/machines.......its as close to a HK as they come, except not made in Germany.

I have a greek/Ebo Spingfield SAR8 and IMOP its as good or better than my german made HK's

I would rank them(FMP or EBo) as closer to HK than a PTR.

[edman99]

In addition to what's been said, those are somewhat collectible because there weren't that many true pre-89 ban ones imported.

[AGG]

Agree totally with LP, with the SA "G3" being very rare! To expand on E99's observation, the G3S ("1/89" marked) are the "true" pre-89 rifles and are much rarer than the XG3S ("3/89" and "5/89" marked).

[AK43]

Agree totally with LP, with the SA "G3" being very rare! To expand on E99's observation, the G3S ("1/89" marked) are the "true" pre-89 rifles and are much rarer than the XG3S ("3/89" and "5/89" marked).

REPLY: I totoally agree also.A Greek or Port, G3 type rifle is as close to a factory gun as your going to get without buying HK. Germany was not the only country to use or manufacturer HK style weapons. Greece G3's EBO Early G3,SAR3,SAR8. Portugal G3S,XG3S just to name a few. There are far more. I've had 2 very early SAR3's(Greek) and there is not one difference in the gun whatsoever besides the markings. Function and finish were the same if not better.I had a FMP G3S Vollomer 51 SBR conversion and really there is no difference in it and the V51 I got from Vector except the price. Some of these third world countries did not have the cash to get a 5.56 weapon for their military so they kept the HK G3 wether it was Greece,Portugal,ETC>>>

[BIGDUKE60]

Remember guys FMP Made and sent guns to Hk to go to the German army.(about 50.000 gun's sent to germany)
as Hk contract agmt....made on German Mech to German Spec..just not stamped Hk IS ALL! all the same...take all you FMP guns and all you Hk guns and all parts will swap...mix and match...even all the greek guns will do the same...as per HK contract agmt and spec.. just not stamped Hk is all..

try that with the us made clones..dont work.....to bad so sad...

[Landpimp]

same with others, like Norway, Denmark etc......sent back to germany as part of the lic agreement.


Remember guys FMP Made and sent guns to Hk to go to the German army.(about 50.000 gun's sent to germany)
as Hk contract agmt....made on German Mech to German Spec..just not stamped Hk IS ALL! all the same...take all you FMP guns and all you Hk guns and all parts will swap...mix and match...even all the greek guns will do the same...as per HK contract agmt and spec.. just not stamped Hk is all..

try that with the us made clones..dont work.....to bad so sad...

[sanoss]

REPLY: I totoally agree also.A Greek or Port, G3 type rifle is as close to a factory gun as your going to get without buying HK. Germany was not the only country to use or manufacturer HK style weapons. Greece G3's EBO Early G3,SAR3,SAR8. Portugal G3S,XG3S just to name a few. There are far more. I've had 2 very early SAR3's(Greek) and there is not one difference in the gun whatsoever besides the markings. Function and finish were the same if not better.I had a FMP G3S Vollomer 51 SBR conversion and really there is no difference in it and the V51 I got from Vector except the price. Some of these third world countries did not have the cash to get a 5.56 weapon for their military so they kept the HK G3 wether it was Greece,Portugal,ETC>>>

Portugal is NOT a third world country.

(Ressurecting way old thread just for you to know that)

[Shattered Mind]

How about Original Clone? :D


That works for me.:14000000:

[HKEsq]

I agree with BigDuke - HK contract is not "clone." A "clone" is a copy that is made without a license from HK (my definition). FMP parts are made under a HK license. HK is a corporation (e.g. a name on a piece of paper) that exists because people are authorized to carry out tasks on its behalf.

But HK contract parts are not "HK" and they are not "German" or "all German" (which is how I often see them advertised).

I think it is most accurate to refer to an FMP G3 as an "FMP" G3 or maybe as a "contract" G3. My 2 cents.

[SudS]

Clone.

The flats from Turkey were made on HK equipment. Many were completed with German parts kits...still a clone.

After a period of time, many of the countries that HK set up, started to make changes to their processes and quality of materials. Clone.

[HKind]

Who was the importer? Could be a parts gun. Matt

[AGG]

Who was the importer? Could be a parts gun. Matt

The only Portuguese "G3" that I am aware of would be a "parts" gun!!! :eek:

1. Left receiver- "FMP";
2. Right receiver- "Imported by CAI Georgia VT/Manufactured by Indep/Portugal/SN 1 021X-1 641X/G-3"
3. "SF" lower.

Tony

[edman99]

Pars International was the importer of a few pre and a good many post 89 import ban Portugese rifles, G3S and XG3S, respectively.

[Ataim0002]

Most defintions are dna related, however, dictionary.com has the "jargon definition" as:

1. An exact copy of a product, made legally or illegally, from documentation or by reverse engineering, and usually cheaper.

My friend just got back from his honeymoon and the catch phrase in shops in Europe was "Genuine Fake".

[AGG]

Aren't ALL "clones" of the Mauser-designed, StG45??? :D:D:D:D:D:D

Tony

[Shattered Mind]

Aren't ALL "clones" of the Mauser-designed, StG45??? :D:D:D:D:D:D

Tony


Wish they were, wouldn't that be something? I'd love to have one of the WW2 guns....but....

No, they're not, not even a clone of the CETME. The CETME is just an earlier ancestor. Everyone is cloning one specific model, the HK G-3. The original parent is the German G-3. ALL others, including the 91 are actually clones of the G-3.

[Lt CHEG]

Clone.

The flats from Turkey were made on HK equipment. Many were completed with German parts kits...still a clone.

After a period of time, many of the countries that HK set up, started to made changes to their processes and quality of materials. Clone.

I disagree. I would say that it's more akin to a licensed product. The example I would use is that B&T made some MP5's under license for HK. They are WITHOUT QUESTION the complete equal to HK made MP5's if not superior. The B&T MP5's were made on HK equipment, just like the POF produced flats. Factor in the fact that HK Obendorf has used some licensee produced products itself for production of HK marked products and I think that you can start to see that there is a difference between a product produced under license and guidance from HK and a product reverse engineered.

I don't begrudge assigning a collector value on something marked Hk because it is so marked. It's along the same lines as assigning a collector value of a small amount on a coin minted on a press in San Francisco or Denver, over one minted in Philadelphia. The coins are the functional equivalent, as the licensed MP5 is to the one that's marked Hk. My incoming IGF built MP5 utilizes a torn down HK MP5, every single part is taken off of a factory HK MP5. The receiver was made from a licensed MP5 flat produced on HK machinery. It was assembled by someone at least as skilled, almost certainly much more so than some assembly worker in Obendorf. So I restate my assertion that my IGF built MP5 built on a POF receiver flat is a licensed MP5, completely the functional equivalent of any Obendorf produced MP5.

[AGG]

Wish they were, wouldn't that be something? I'd love to have one of the WW2 guns....but....

No, they're not, not even a clone of the CETME. The CETME is just an earlier ancestor. Everyone is cloning one specific model, the HK G-3. The original parent is the German G-3. ALL others, including the 91 are actually clones of the G-3.

Technically, order of production:

1. StG45 (1945)- though a "prototype"
2. CETME Model 58 (1958)
3. HK G3/FA (1959)
4. HK G3/SA (1962-1964)- Santa Fe import
5. HK 41 (1966)
6. CETME Models B and S/SA (late 1960's/early 1970's)- "Sporter"
7. HK 41 (1974)
8. HK 91 (1974-1989)
9. CETME Model C (1974)- strengthened to handle NATO round
10. Springfield Armory G3/Portuguese FMP (1980's).

So, WHICH is the "clone"? :confused:
YOU DECIDE!!! ;)

Tony

[SudS]

If you take a 1909 VDB Lincoln cent and add the "S" mint mark, it may still be a cent, but you now have a FAKE!

Did HK license the making of these semi-autos for export to the US? I can't say for sure, but I'd bet against it. As I said before, after a period of time, many of these licensed countries started to make changes to the HK German prescribed standards. Do you think all these products are of the same quality? If you had a 20+ year history behind you, you would know that certain "licensed" country parts were notorious for having been poorly made, out of spec, and subject to failure.

The point is, just because HK at one time set up a country to make military weapons in their country, doesn't mean that those weapons, when adapted to the civilian market a number of years later, carried with them the "Obendorf" seal of quality and approval.

Clone.



I disagree. I would say that it's more akin to a licensed product. The example I would use is that B&T made some MP5's under license for HK. They are WITHOUT QUESTION the complete equal to HK made MP5's if not superior. The B&T MP5's were made on HK equipment, just like the POF produced flats. Factor in the fact that HK Obendorf has used some licensee produced products itself for production of HK marked products and I think that you can start to see that there is a difference between a product produced under license and guidance from HK and a product reverse engineered.

I don't begrudge assigning a collector value on something marked Hk because it is so marked. It's along the same lines as assigning a collector value of a small amount on a coin minted on a press in San Francisco or Denver, over one minted in Philadelphia. The coins are the functional equivalent, as the licensed MP5 is to the one that's marked Hk. My incoming IGF built MP5 utilizes a torn down HK MP5, every single part is taken off of a factory HK MP5. The receiver was made from a licensed MP5 flat produced on HK machinery. It was assembled by someone at least as skilled, almost certainly much more so than some assembly worker in Obendorf. So I restate my assertion that my IGF built MP5 built on a POF receiver flat is a licensed MP5, completely the functional equivalent of any Obendorf produced MP5.

[Lt CHEG]

If you take a 1909 VDB Lincoln cent and add the "S" mint mark, it may still be a cent, but you now have a FAKE!

Did HK license the making of these semi-autos for export to the US? I can't say for sure, but I'd bet against it. As I said before, after a period of time, many of these licensed countries started to make changes to the HK German prescribed standards. Do you think all these products are of the same quality? If you had a 20+ year history behind you, you would know that certain "licensed" country parts were notorious for having been poorly made, out of spec, and subject to failure.

The point is, just because HK at one time set up a country to make military weapons in their country, doesn't mean that those weapons, when adapted to the civilian market a number of years later, carried with them the "Obendorf" seal of quality and approval.

Clone.

Well in the case of the build that I am referring to, every single part but one is actually made in Obendorf. The receiver flat itself is made by POF. POF is still using HK or former HK engineers as consultants to ensure that they are meeting licensure standards by all accounts. I know in the case of the flat that I purchased I compared various measurements, thicknesses etc. to those of real MP5's, not converted 94's, but real honest to goodness MP5's. The quality is most certainly consistent. Is there a chance that some other countries licensed to produce HK products have cut back on the QC, sure. It doesn't appear to be the case with POF, and if you know anything about Swiss Craftsmanship, I'm sure you'd agree that B&T likely never cut their standards either.

I guess what I am driving at is that there is a distinction between something prodcued with all actual MP5 parts except for the receiver which is produced by an HK licensee and something that is reverse engineered. When I think clone, I think of something like Coharie or Vector, and I am not diminishing the quality of either of those company's products. But those companies were never licensed to produce HK products, POF was and is. So I believe that there is a distinction made between a Coharie MP5 clone and an IGF built MP5 built out of all factory parts. For the record, it appears that only MP5 flats are somewhat readily available, and it is for that reason my incoming MP5 build is the only one not built in Obendorf and imported. I do believe that there is a distinction between an HK 93 and a SW or Coharie version and that is why I own an HK factory 93. Ultimately I guess I would say that there is more than just two categories to accurately describe the weapons that we enjoy here on this forum. There is more than just HK Obendorf guns and clones. There really is a separate category for licensee built firearms such as the Greek SAR 3's etc.

[SudS]

There really is a separate category for licensee built firearms such as the Greek SAR 3's etc.

I can live with that. So now you have the opportunity to name this third category for licensee built firearms. "Licensee" guns just doesn't have a good ring to it. "Franchise" guns?

[Lt CHEG]

I can live with that. So now you have the opportunity to name this third category for licensee built firearms. "Licensee" guns just doesn't have a good ring to it. "Franchise" guns?

I like the sound of that. I think it's a solution that satisfies everyone and what could sound more American than "Franchise". Good call