Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner

Brno Model 1 Machining wonder!

779 Views 17 Replies 9 Participants Last post by  TOU
I am in the process of cleaning up two more of the Century imports. I currently have them knocked all the way down.

While I have often marveled at the quality and quantity of machine cuts on these guns, this morning I tryed to count them. I kept getting lost. Then I did some comparisons to other PRE CNC old world milled and machined .22 rifles.
Before I was through I had 8 guns out of the wood to include an Anschutz 54, Mauser KKW, Mauser 410b, Walther Sportmodell, and a Suhl 150.

Nothing comes close.

I would like to challenge any machinist amongst us affectionados to determine how many set ups were required to make all the cuts on this action. I can't do it and frankly have no experience other than watching some professionals and touring industries.

I have also come to the conclusion that only under a Communist system could such a gun have been produced in such quantity. There is no way that the labor envolved could have been cost effective enough for a Capitalist system to produce a gun that would be marketable.

I can not imagine Brno making any profit on these even with dirt cheap labor.

After the war there was a surplus of material, skilled labor, and manufacturing capability sitting idle and they had to do something. The world being predominantly at peace they did find a few markets for military arms and rework of German arms and utilization of left overs in addition to sporting arms.

All the references I have indicate this was a time when pursuit of world markets for sporting guns naturally became a priority for Brno.

Still, there is no way this gun could have been a money maker. It helped get them going, established new markets, and went on the father the finest line of .22 rifles marketed world wide at affordable prices. So in the end it paid off for ???

With the exception of the incorporation of the gas porting system I see no real improvements in subsequent models. Only attempts to reduce production costs.


What do you think it would cost to manufacture one of these today using those old methods.

I think I am gonna order some more.
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

· Registered
596 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
I am failing to convey some of my meaning here.

Granted they were marketed world wide at AFFORDABLE prices. How could that price been sufficient to cover costs?

It could not have worked under any other circumstances except those existing in Czechoslovakia in the late 40's It was surplus material, facilities, and skilled labor sitting idle or the gun would never have gone into production.

Consider that the steel, facilities, wood, distribution and marketing costs were all nothing (they were not) to pay the labor enough to eat and produce this gun could not have been done in the post WWII industrial and economic boom in the United States or any other country I can think of.

From the 1950's onward with the exception of a very few high end models all manufacturers world wide cheapened .22 rifles to be competive. This only reversed to some degree with the advent of CNC maching and new methods. Even with that, look at what a new Kimber, Cooper, or Anschutz cost and compare them.

· Registered
596 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 · (Edited)
This is great! I welcome all feedback.

I want to learn something out of this.

I did not mean to infer that is a "complex" desigin. It is a wonderfully simple and rugged design. But look at the individual pieces and the number of machine operations that were envolved.

Somebody give me an example of a Bolt action .22 caliber repeating rifle that has more machine cuts or seperate milling operations than a Brno Model 1. (Pre CNC produced guns).
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.