# C-7 trials



## onecat (6 Nov 2004)

Not sure if anyone here will know this or not, but I was hoping to find out more about the C-7 trials in the early 80's.  How did the C-7 compare to FNC or any of the other AR's that were tested.  Was the C-7 picked bext it was best choice, the Canadian made choice; or like the G-wagon the only AR still in the biding.


----------



## KevinB (7 Nov 2004)

Best choice.

 I am in Ottawa for the next few weeks but when I get back to Edmonotn I can post a bit of stuff on the trial.


----------



## MG34 (7 Nov 2004)

The FNC suffered from chronic firing pin breakage,and the folding butt could not with stand a 2 meter drop without collapsing,these are 2 of the reasons it failed. To call the rifle used in the trials a C7 would be stretching it to say the least as word on the street is that the test rifles were actually a Colt made firearms as Diemaco was not tooled up in time for the trials,so they had Colt make the rifles up to their specs.


----------



## Kampfhamster (8 Nov 2004)

Would be interesting to know which other rifles were tested. 

Was the SIG 550 trialed as well?


----------



## Lance Wiebe (8 Nov 2004)

And the Aug, was it part of the trial?


----------



## a_majoor (8 Nov 2004)

One of the old "Rumor Control" things about the AUG was it was rejected because "you couldn't do drill with it". More likely the plastic construction and the rather odd trigger mechanism (squeeze for single shots, snatch or pull the trigger to trip the automatic sear) may have been the contributing factors. I had a chance to try one in Cyprus, and rather liked it on short exposure, but not long enough to make any definitive judgements.

Another rumor I heard was the AK-74 was the control weapon, and it was, in fact, superior to all the other candidates. Once again, it is more funny than true (a Galil using an AK action is far more accurate than the real thing...)

It would be interesting to see how the upgraded versions of the C-7 compare to newer weapons like the FAMAS G-2, FN-2000, H&K G-8 etc.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (8 Nov 2004)

I fired a few hundred rounds through the Aug, but all in one day.

I also liked it, once I got used to the sounds of the action right beside my ear.  Quick and easy to point, light, and accurate enough.  We didn't experience any stoppages, either.


----------



## Kampfhamster (8 Nov 2004)

I've fired the AUG on several occasions, but only the civilian semiauto-version. 
It's very short, the optic is quite good even though it's more then 20 years old. Reliability isn't a factor. 

The only thing I don't like is the strange trigger, which rather sucks compared to the AR15 and the SIG 550. 

But it's still a bullpub which I actually don't like, because I'm used to the "normal rifles"


----------



## KevinB (8 Nov 2004)

The control was not the AK.

 Canada also had the data from doing the NATO 5.56mm Arctic testing in which a number of weapons systems were trialed (basically we got a number of guns for free to test - this gave us a lot of ground to start from with SARP.

IIRC the Sig was not trialed.


----------



## onecat (9 Nov 2004)

KevinB if you could post that data, that would cool.


----------



## KevinB (9 Nov 2004)

Fact odder than fiction
It appears that FN has won the US SCAR-L trial with the "SUPERFNC"
 Official announcement and pictures should be available by weeks end.


----------



## KevinB (9 Nov 2004)

Yep
I spoke to a FN Engineer that I know, and confirmed with a few other folks.


----------



## Scooby (11 Nov 2004)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Fact odder than fiction
> It appears that FN has won the US SCAR-L trial with the "SUPERFNC"
> Official announcement and pictures should be available by weeks end.



Kevin,

Thanks for the information on the SCAR-L competition. As you seem to suggest, the choice of the 'SuperFNC' is interesting and something of a surprise given everything I've ever heard about the FNC and it's somewhat lacklustre competition and sales record until now. 

Until pictures are forthcoming are you able to pass on any details on the 'SuperFNC'? My understanding of SCAR-L was that the contenders had to be able to accept all current SOPMOD accessories. To that end I presume that it has been adapted to include M1913 rails on the receiver and handguard but has the stock been revised from the FNC's folding type to an adjustable length of pull type as found on the M4, C8 and C7A2? If I am correct about the SOPMOD requirement the other question that occurred to me was whether the FNC flash suppressor been replaced with a KAC QD style one to allow the use of currently issued sound suppressors?

In line with MG34's points about the FNC's disappointing performance in the initial NATO 5.56mm small arms trials back in the late seventies, do you have any idea what has been improved to get it to where it appears to be now?

Thanks again

Max


----------



## KevinB (12 Nov 2004)

I spoke to two people in volved in SCAR and a former KAC engineer who now works for FNMI.

 The upper is a one piece system (think LMT MRP type system but a different "QCB" system and a removeable lower section) but with removeable M1913 rail at 3 and 9 O'clock the 12 and 6 are fixed (but the 6 panel removebale as mentioned before)
The lower is folding with and adjustable cheekpiece and some variation for length of pull.

The lower is not a FNC/AK5 but similar.
Norgon Ambi catch - ambi firecontrol are also characteristics.

I will post the full specs when I get the pics and the ok to do so...


----------



## Scooby (12 Nov 2004)

Thanks Kevin. I look forward to seeing the specs and pictures if you get the ok to post them.

One other thing while I think of it. Following your use of C8 SFW uppers it seems clear to me that you still favour a 16" barrel for the standard issue rifle over that of the current 20" C7 one. I was interested as to whether your thoughts on a 'C7A3' with a mid length gas system (As per your proposal posted on Night Op's) have changed, or whether the short gas system has shown any weaknesses in active service? Personally I favour the mid length gas system but the Diemaco SFW and US SeAL recon rifle both seem to favour the short M4/C8 one. I'd be interested in your thoughts on this one.

Thanks again

Max


----------



## KevinB (13 Nov 2004)

Max,
 5SFG tested the mid-length versus the standard carbine gas tubes and the mid-length won out -but other than one of and a limited run of 50 or so 6.8SPC carbines the midlength is not catching on in USSOC circles.

I favour the midlength as it will be both more reliable and result in longer life - plus it looks "righter" on a 16" gun that the carbine gas tubes.  However like most things just cause it is better does nto mean it will be adopted.  The LMT or KAC 2nd bolts due wonderful things for the bolt life - and the PRI"FATBOY" gas tube does a great deal for the shorter carbine gas tube - but due to standardization they have not make a ripple - the System as it were seems more interested in buying more of the current system than getting a better system.

I have an update to my rifle and carbien I am working on that included my ecperiecnes with the 16" SFW bbl and issues revolving around the TRIAD-I and M203A1 etc.  If I can get off my ass over the next while I will put them into a logical sequence and demo a more feasible system.

Trick is as always $

I figured if I shot Bin Laden in Afghan - I'd spend about half the money re-equipping our small arms  ;D


----------



## Scooby (16 Nov 2004)

I don't know about spending half, I imagine most of the servicemen here would be happy to have just the interest on Osama's bounty spent on replacing the L85 and L86  .

I couldn't agree more about the midlength carbines Kevin, better reliability and improved life would seem a clincher to me but I would imagine you have long since ceased to be surprised by nonsensical decisions.

If and when you get the opportunity I for one will certainly be interested in what you come up with on the SFW.

Do you have any further clues as to when pictures and/or details of the SCAR-L are likely to be available?

Thanks again for the information.

Max


----------



## KevinB (1 Dec 2004)

SCAR-L pic

More details to follow tomorrow and SARP stuff - no home computer right now slows me down...


----------



## Scooby (4 Dec 2004)

Thanks Kevin ;D , I look forward to seeing the details. I have to say that the stock would seem to come into the 'aquired taste' category!


----------



## KevinB (5 Dec 2004)

Okay - finally got home access back.

 SARP - 

The CF got 37 examples of each
"LMG's"
7.62mm MAG-58 (which was the control LMG in 7.62mm)
7.62mm MG-3E
5.56mm MINIMI
4.85mm XL65E4
4.85mm XL69E1 (left hand eject)

Rifles
5.56mm FNC
5.56mm MN1 (Dutch AK clone - well they called it a Galil clone...)
5.56mm FA-MAS
7.62mm G3 (control rifle 7.62mm)
4.7Caseless G11
4.85 XL64E5
4.85 XL68E2 (left hand eject)
5.56mm M16A1 (control rifle 5.56mm)

and we had our own FN C1A1 in 7.62mm as well

This was for the arctic trials on the NATO weapons of the 80's (timeline 1977-1980)  We alos conducted limited summer and endurance, precision and user trials.


----------



## wpns421 (9 Dec 2004)

Your best bet is to call the Wpns school in Borden and ask if they could give you a copy of their SARP video (they probabbly will if your a wpns tech).  It explains all/why etc...  And no, the AUG was not involved.  The trials were contended mostly between the FNC1A1, Colt M16 (Diemaco was not tooled as of yet to produce the CDN design specs we wanted) and the new version FNC (at the time).  As well as the LMG.  Altimatley, the M16 won out due to dependability and superior design.  The LMG (now designated C9) won for the same reason.  Also another contributing factor was the push for wpns that used 5.56mm ammo the Nato as a whole was leaning towards.


----------



## KevinB (10 Dec 2004)

wraithe,

 It was a bit more to it than that - as during the winter testing of the "weapons of the 80's" program we noted that the 5.56mm system were much more accurate and reliable than our beloved C1A1 - which at that time we had just confirmed we were keeping - enter the gov't jump switch and SARP was born.

 I do agree however that we did get the best pics out there.


----------



## wpns421 (10 Dec 2004)

KevinB,

Your absolutley correct.  I only stated a few points pertaining to the SARP Program to save myself from going completely into detail as my main point was for him to contact the Wpns School in Borden to see if he could get a copy of the video.  My bad.


----------



## Scooby (5 Jan 2005)

For anyone interested, attached is a picture of what I presume is an FN advertisment with further details of the FN SCAR rifle.







Max


----------

