# Search for New Canadian Ranger Rifle (merged)



## The Bread Guy (13 Jul 2011)

Harry Angel, Andrew Morton, Chris Ste-Croix, Brian Mangan, and Paul Vilhena, "CANADIAN RANGER RIFLE: HUMAN FACTORS REQUIREMENTS VALIDATION," DRDC Toronto CR-2010-174, 31 August 2010 (101 page PDF)

Abstract:


> The Directorate of Land Requirements (DLR) is engaged in an acquisition process that will deliver a new Canadian Ranger Rifle (CRR) capability to the  Canadian Forces (CF). The aim of this project was to assist the DLR in assessing the draft operational requirements and better define the overall CF requirement for a new CRR. Eight half-day workshops were held with 135 Canadian Ranger (CR) personnel from four of the five Canadian Ranger Patrol Groups (CRPG). The workshops were broken down into five modules: background information, weapon use inventory, performance requirements, basic technical requirements, and detailed technical requirements. The in-service Lee Enfield No 4 Mark 1* rifle is generally considered a durable, reliable, and accurate weapon but is faulted for its weight, age and availability of parts, and magazine. *Protection from predators,  hunting/survival tool, and a symbol of Canadian sovereignty/CR were the most important roles of the CRR. Reliability, accuracy, and durability in extreme environments were most important performance criteria.* The basic and detailed technical requirements modules collected CR preferences on specific characteristics and features wanted in the new CRR. *Results suggest the new CRR should be a bolt action of .308 Winchester / 7.62mm calibre that is shorter and weighs less than the current Lee Enfield. Further technical requirements are presented and discussed.  Overall, the results from these workshops indicate that the CR require a reliable, durable, and accurate rifle, with updated features that is lighter than the current Lee Enfield.*



More in attached Abstract/Executive Summary.


----------



## medicineman (13 Jul 2011)

What do Canadian Rangers Need in a New Rifle?  
Ammo.

MM


----------



## Wookilar (14 Jul 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Ammo.



lol

I have to wonder...I've never really heard any of the Rangers I've worked with (which are admittedly very few) complain about the old bang stick. Pretty easy to maintain, doesn't break in the cold, etc.

Is this the bright idea fairy coming to roost or is there an actual requirement for this?

Wook


----------



## OldSolduer (14 Jul 2011)

It maybe that .303 ammo is becoming scarce. SWAG!!


----------



## Jimmy_D (14 Jul 2011)

Caliber 7.62 NATO (.308 Win) 
Operation Bolt Action 
Length 44.3 - 47 inches  
Weight 14.33 lbs (6.5kg) empty without telescope 
Barrel Length 24 inches  
Twist, Right Hand 1 turn in 12 inches  
Magazine Capacity/td>  10 or 12 round detachable box magazine  
Maximum Effective Range 1000 yards 


The L96A1 is the British Army designation of the standard AWC PM. The L96A1 won a British Army competition by a slight margin over the Parker-Hale M85 to become the standard sniper rifle for the British Army. The PM utilizes an aluminum frame over which is placed a high impact plastic stock. An adjustable Parker Hale Bi-Pod is fitted as standard. An uprated version, the AW, features many minor improvements, including an easier bolt action, frost proof mechanism, muzzle brake and a 10x42 hensoldt telescopic sight. The L96A1 is capable of sub MOA with military ammo, and gets to about half of that with good match grade ammo. The AW is imported to the US by Accuracy International, and is for sale to the public.
Other Models in use: PM Counter-Terrorist Rifle, PM Covert Sniper Rifle, and the PM Super Magnum Sniper Rifle

Compared to:

-  Mark 1  Mark 3  No. 4 Mark 1  
-  Barley Corn foresight
Tangent Leaf Rear  Blade foresight
Tangent leaf Rear  Blade foresight
Vertical leaf Rear  
Operation  Bolt Action  
Caliber  .303 in, Rimmed cartridge, 2.15in case length  
Muzzle velocity  2060 fps  2440 fps  2440 fps  
Ammunition  Mark 6 ball, 215 grain bullet, 33 gr charge 
Mark 7 ball, 174 grain bullet, 36.5 gr charge  
Capacity  detachable box magazine, holding 10 rounds in two columns 
Normally loaded from stripper clips  
Weight  8.12 lbs, unloaded  8.62 lbs, unloaded  8.8 lbs, unloaded  
Overall length  44.57 in overall, 25.2 in barrel  
Rate of fire  20 aimed rounds per minute  


Yes it the L96a1 may weigh more and be an Arctic sniper weapon system, but reliability is where its assets are.


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (14 Jul 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> What do Canadian Rangers Need in a New Rifle?
> Ammo.
> 
> MM



LoL


----------



## NavyShooter (23 Jul 2011)

Ammo   Tee hee!

I understand that part of why they're looking for a replacement rifle is that, believe it or not, the military is running out of old #4's.  I was told that the CF actually purchased a bunch of surplus #4's a couple of years back (from Italy I think it was?) to extend the supply a bit, but even those are running low.

What do they need?


A rifle that is:

Durable

Reliable

Reasonably accurate (predator defence) 

Reasonably powerful (predator defence)

Easily maintained.

And the rest  of the stuff is mostly in the paper...

NS


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Sep 2011)

Next step in the process:  whaddya got for us, industry, for how much (but it's not a bid just yet) - this from MERX:


> .... The Canadian Forces (CF) are looking to replace the current Canadian Ranger Rifle (CCR) with a newer weapon and is gathering information on the price and availability of weapons that meets our requirements and the number of potential contenders as part of its planning and budget process. The current CF service Canadian Ranger Rifle is a .303 calibre, No 4, Lee Enfield.  These weapons were manufactured during the early 1950s and becoming increasingly difficult to support.
> 
> The New Canadian Ranger Rifle (NCRR) is seen as a robust bolt action hunting rifle with minor customization that can fire both commercial .308 Winchester and 7.62 x 51mm NATO ammunition. It is used in the Canadian Arctic, (in extreme cold) and on the eastern and western seaboard in (a salty/ corrosive environment). This procurement will occur as part of the Small Arms Modernization (SAM) project and is expected to occur along  these approximate timelines:
> 
> ...


More details on what's wanted in attached bid document.


----------



## RangerDanger (16 Sep 2011)

Basically:

The Rangers need a new rifle as upkeep of the Enfield is becoming harder. With the stock of parts and magazines dwindling, equipping a Ranger with working Enfield is becoming quite difficult. 

Serving as a Ranger I was issued only 1 mag as opposed to the mandatory two.


----------



## Container (16 Sep 2011)

I agree the Rangers need a new rifle but im glad to see they are staying in the area they are. I've had good experiences with Rangers and their management out of Yellowknife but I've also had numerous run ins with drunken rangers and their duty weapons. I'd hate to see me any further outgunned in these situations.

The firearm proposed seems reasonable for sustenance hunting and their duties.


----------



## Angry56789 (29 Sep 2011)

Container said:
			
		

> I agree the Rangers need a new rifle but im glad to see they are staying in the area they are. I've had good experiences with Rangers and their management out of Yellowknife but I've also had numerous run ins with drunken rangers and their duty weapons. I'd hate to see me any further outgunned in these situations.
> 
> The firearm proposed seems reasonable for sustenance hunting and their duties.



I was going to suggest something that we already have in stock....perhaps C7, but then I saw this....I had no idea they were permitted to carry their rifles home with them.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Oct 2011)

A Sun Media reporter's column on the search (and his preference) for a new Ranger rifle (highlights mine) shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the _Copyright Act._


> So the Canadian Rangers — the Arctic militia — are getting a new rifle to replace the iconic Lee-Enfield Mk4 that they've carried since they first stood up in 1947.
> 
> According to the army, the supply of parts to repair or replace damaged or lost weapons is completely exhausted.
> 
> ...


_Toronto Sun_, 1 Oct 11

Not sure why a picture of a .50 cal round, though  ???

_- Edited to add links to options mentioned by reporter - _


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Oct 2011)

Remember, you read it here first.

Process for finding a new Canadian Ranger rifle firing alright, process - STOPS!


> Solicitation W8476-123195/A - PW-$$BM-027-21790 has been cancelled.



Not the only new weapon process halted, either - more here.


----------



## Jimmy_D (6 Oct 2011)

so thats the general service pistol and the new ranger rifle both halted on the to do list?? whats next?


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Oct 2011)

Jimmy_D said:
			
		

> so thats the general service pistol and the new ranger rifle both halted on the to do list?? whats next?


Good question - no word out yet re:  why, or what's next instead.  We'll have to wait and see.


----------



## The Bread Guy (12 Oct 2011)

Here's the answer DND came up with re:  why the process has been halted (complete response attached):


> As part of the Small Arms Modernization (SAM) project, the Department of National Defence (DND) is assessing options for the replacement of the 9mm Browning High Power and the 9mm Sig Sauer Model 225 pistol with a new
> General Service Pistol (GSP), as well as the replacement of the Lee Enfield rifle with a New Canadian Ranger Rifle (NCRR) .... The DND Small Arms Modernization (SAM) Project Management Office (PMO) requested that Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) cancel both the GSP and the NCRR Price and Availability (P&A) requests on MERX as a result of questions, and requests for clarification, from industry.  The feedback from industry brought the DND SAM PMO to re-evaluate its procurement strategy. The DND SAM PMO is now focusing efforts on clarifying the procurement strategy for the GSP and NCRR with the intent to facilitate future communication with industry.  The comments and observations received from industry in response to the P&A requests will be considered when the final requirements are written.  The replacement of the GSP and NCRR remain a priority for DND.  The next step of the project will be to obtain Preliminary Project Approval (PPA). No additional solicitations will be posted on MERX until after PPA is obtained and an approved procurement strategy is in place ....


----------



## MedCorps (17 Oct 2011)

Look like the problem is the weapons manufactures (or DND depending on how you look at it): 

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Military+cancels+planned+weapons+purchase/5558920/story.html

---- 
The short of it: 

But DND also stipulated that any firms wanting to bid on the two contracts would have to turn over their technical data and proprietary information to the government, which in turn would pass it on to Colt Canada. Colt would then manufacture the weapons at its plant in Kitchener, Ont.

But defence sources say companies told the government they had no intention of turning over the details of their firearms designs to a subsidiary of the U.S. small arms giant Colt, a key competitor for many of the firms on the international market.

The government then hastily retreated, cancelling its request to the companies for information about prices and availability.

---

MC


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (1 Dec 2011)

Angry56789 said:
			
		

> I was going to suggest something that we already have in stock....perhaps C7, but then I saw this....I had no idea they were permitted to carry their rifles home with them.


Rangers being photographed handling CF weapons is a big taboo and a no no.  It's a politically charged topic because then First Nations people think we're shipping their sons/fathers/uncles/brothers off to war somewhere.  The Rangers are not an Offensive tool within the Canadian Forces and they have a very specific job.  Their greatest success is staying within their community and being a CF presence there, so them being issued a CF assault rifle would never happen as there is no need for them to use it... ever.

As for the NCRR project, it is moving forward.  I'm going to the first of many working groups in May, and as of 2 months ago finished our proposal for the budget requirements to do the testing on the NCRR proposals.  So far the hiccups in the contracting are not slowing us down, this project is still creeping forward.


----------



## MedCorps (1 Dec 2011)

I think that the NCRR was eaten up by the Small Arms Modernization Project (SAMP)  as one of the 11 items in this component.  If that is the case the time line may have increased as the implementing is between next fiscal year and FY 18/19 for all of these componets. 

Not sure where the ranger rifle will fit on this time line, but the other items in the SAMP are also very important for the operational CF.  The SAMP consists of: 

C6 / C7 / C8 / C9 (maybe) upgrades 
Pistol / Ranger Rifle / M203 / .50 HMG replacement 
Improved sights and accessories 
Sharpshooter introduction 
Reduced weight ammunition 

So when you look at that list I would suggest that it is hard to put the ranger rifle to the front of the line. 

MC


----------



## dapaterson (1 Dec 2011)

MedCorps said:
			
		

> I think that the NCRR was eaten up by the Small Arms Modernization Project (SAMP)  as one of the 11 items in this component.  If that is the case the time line may have increased as the implementing is between next fiscal year and FY 18/19 for all of these componets.
> 
> Not sure where the ranger rifle will fit on this time line, but the other items in the SAMP are also very important for the operational CF.  The SAMP consists of:
> 
> ...



Actually, given that the Ranger Rifle will be an off-the-shelf purchase, it can go to the front of the line - no development work needed.  It's other efforts where we need R&D, tech co-operation or evolution of doctrine that will take more time to be ready to procure; may as well let the procurement folks get started witrh the easy one.


----------



## MedCorps (1 Dec 2011)

Agreed... you think it would be easy to pick off the procurement list. 

Many of the other parts of this project are also COTS I suspect and should be easy to pick off the list also.  Last time I talked to the guys at DLR they said:

C6 - new SF kit, night vision attachment system, rail system of some sorts.

C7 / C8 - rail system, new cocking handle, back up sight, cam system, new rear sling attachment, maybe a power rail / battery system. 

C9 - they are unsure -- needs a full user survey. 

Accessories:  New slings, magazines, soft belt carriers for the C6 / C9, flashlights, cleaning kits, lasers, collimators, suppressors.  All COTS. 

The weapons sight may or may not be COTS: Combined close quarter and magnified sight, maybe with a new reticle pattern. Sounds a bit like the ACOG-ECOS, but I am sure there are other COTS options available. 

The procurements will be long - pistol (which as already had problems in the procurement system), M203, HMG, reduced weight ammunition (although this could be COTS, I am not sure what is on the steal case market).

Sharp shooter capacity will be long I suspect unless someone has good vision.  It is not meant to complete with Sniper Systems Project, so we will see what comes out of it as the SSP is a pretty comprehensive vision.  Anyone care to comment? 

MC


----------



## midget-boyd91 (1 Dec 2011)

Wookilar said:
			
		

> lol
> 
> I have to wonder...I've never really heard any of the Rangers I've worked with (which are admittedly very few) complain about the old bang stick. Pretty easy to maintain, doesn't break in the cold, etc.
> 
> ...



The Enfield is built to last. There is an old I believe it was made between 1939-41 in the closet here at home that ended up being used for hunting etc for decades after the war. Still in perfect firing condition today (except lack of ammo).  
The Lee Enfield is like the original Nintendo of firearms: It ain't gonna die unless you try to kill it yourself... And then it'll probably still keep working.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Dec 2011)

uncle-midget-Oddball said:
			
		

> The Enfield is built to last. There is an old I believe it was made between 1939-41 in the closet here at home that ended up being used for hunting etc for decades after the war. Still in perfect firing condition today* (except lack of ammo).   *
> The Lee Enfield is like the original Nintendo of firearms: It ain't gonna die unless you try to kill it yourself... And then it'll probably still keep working.



The ammo is readily available, even at stores like Canadian Tire.

You just need an invasive government issued license (PAL) to purchase it.


----------



## Tank Troll (2 Dec 2011)

I have a Lee Enfield #5 Mk 1 great hunting rifle, just bought a couple hundred rounds for it 3 weeks ago no shortage of hunting ammo. How ever the military hard point might be in short supply, but that could be rectified by getting some one to make it. The Rangers I worked with and talked to wouldn't trade there Lee Enfields for any thing. That being said a lot of us felt the same about the FN.


----------



## Rheostatic (2 Dec 2011)

uncle-midget-Oddball said:
			
		

> The Lee Enfield is like the original Nintendo of firearms: It ain't gonna die unless you try to kill it yourself... And then it'll probably still keep working.


Except that you don't have to blow on the cartridges to make them work.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (2 Dec 2011)

This is pulled right out of the Statement of Operational Requirement:
"Canada can no longer sustain the current Canadian Ranger Rifle (CRR) – the .303 Lee Enfield Mk 4 No1 Star in service. The Lee Enfield ceased production after the end of WW II in 1950 and replacement stocks are no longer available on the international used arms market. The Director Land Procurement (DLP) has confirmed that the world-wide source of used Lee Enfield is now exhausted and certain replacement parts such as rear sights and magazines are virtually impossible to obtain in the quantities needed.  The CF Lee Enfield fleet is being maintained by using parts stripped from other disabled small arms.  The age of Lee Enfield rifle, its general condition, the lack of spare parts and the ad hoc method of support combine to convey a very negative message to the members of the Canada Ranger community."

A lot of our Rangers do like their Lee Enfield, but it is also an aging weapon that needs to be replaced.  We have a hard time keeping up with the abuse they take and keeping them going.


----------



## Stoker (2 Dec 2011)

Canadian.Trucker said:
			
		

> This is pulled right out of the Statement of Operational Requirement:
> "Canada can no longer sustain the current Canadian Ranger Rifle (CRR) – the .303 Lee Enfield Mk 4 No1 Star in service. The Lee Enfield ceased production after the end of WW II in 1950 and replacement stocks are no longer available on the international used arms market. The Director Land Procurement (DLP) has confirmed that the world-wide source of used Lee Enfield is now exhausted and certain replacement parts such as rear sights and magazines are virtually impossible to obtain in the quantities needed.  The CF Lee Enfield fleet is being maintained by using parts stripped from other disabled small arms.  The age of Lee Enfield rifle, its general condition, the lack of spare parts and the ad hoc method of support combine to convey a very negative message to the members of the Canada Ranger community."
> 
> A lot of our Rangers do like their Lee Enfield, but it is also an aging weapon that needs to be replaced.  We have a hard time keeping up with the abuse they take and keeping them going.


So why has MARSTAR a canadian company just imported containers of unissued stocks and parts, there are parts out there if they're willing to look for them.


----------



## dapaterson (2 Dec 2011)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> So why has MARSTAR a canadian company just imported containers of unissued stocks and parts, there are parts out there if they're willing to look for them.



How long will they be available?  How reliable are the suppliers?

Better to start a replacement project while there are still options for sustainment than to wait until it's a crisis.


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (2 Dec 2011)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Better to start a replacement project while there are still options for sustainment than to wait until it's a crisis.



Well, now....that's just sillly!
You're a silly-talker.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (2 Dec 2011)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> So why has MARSTAR a canadian company just imported containers of unissued stocks and parts, there are parts out there if they're willing to look for them.


Because the NCRR is still at least 4+ years away from being delivered, we need to keep the current Enfields going.  This however is just a short term solution.


----------



## Tank Troll (2 Dec 2011)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> How long will they be available?  How reliable are the suppliers?
> 
> Better to start a replacement project while there are still options for sustainment than to wait until it's a crisis.



STOP STOP RIGHT THERE ! We in the Canadian Forces are _reactive_ not _proacvtive_


----------



## PMedMoe (3 Dec 2011)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> STOP STOP RIGHT THERE ! We in the Canadian Forces are _reactive_ not _proacvtive_



 :goodpost:

Too true.   :nod:


----------



## OldSolduer (5 Dec 2011)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> :goodpost:
> 
> Too true.   :nod:



Agreed 100%


----------



## chrisf (5 Dec 2011)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> So why has MARSTAR a canadian company just imported containers of unissued stocks and parts, there are parts out there if they're willing to look for them.



For the same reason we (the Canadian Forces) have had to buy artillery sights from museums, and we had to source batteries for a communications system via e-bay from a surplus dealer in the states... among other things...

Those parts are antiques now, and priced as such...

Buying old parts for old weapons just leaves you with even older weapons to buy even older parts for....


----------



## camouflauge (5 Dec 2011)

medicineman said:
			
		

> What do Canadian Rangers Need in a New Rifle?
> Ammo.
> 
> MM



 :nod: LOL


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 Dec 2011)

The equivalent unit to our Rangers, in Denmark, is the Sirius Patrol; the Navy dog sled teams that patrol northern Greenland for months on end in the winter time. 

Guess what they use as their issued weapon? 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1917_Enfield

Yup, that's right, an ancestor of the Mk4 Lee-Enfield. With 10mm Glocks as a backup.

"Recently I hunted seals here in North East Greenland with 2 members of the military Siriuspatrol. One of the most strange military units in NATO. At least the only one that is transported by dog sledge, since it is still the best way of transport up here!

Well, the two soldiers carried Glock pistols to be used against polarbears. A common threat here! But for rifles they have for many years used the old american P17 30-06 from WW I since it can take the cold, that no modern rifle seem to be able to!"

http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?2718-List-of-famous-users-of-swedish-guns.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Dec 2011)

Ammo is easy, hell even making new parts would be easy if the will is there. 

The problem I have heard is that even rifles like the Ruger Scout  may have issues with the extreme cold thanks to the type of stainless they use. Even a "off the shelf rifle" may require modifications to make it work in the varied climates the Rangers work in. I suspect they are going to find it much harder to replace then they think. The Lee Enfield is the results of 40-60 years of evolutionary firearm design based on a significant amount of users experience throughtout the globe.

Frankly I think having a company here buys the rights to the AIA rifle, change a few things that were claimed to be wrong with it and the process will be a lot faster and more successful than what they are planning. Allow the rifle to be made commercially and exportable as well.


----------



## Stoker (6 Dec 2011)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Ammo is easy, hell even making new parts would be easy if the will is there.
> 
> The problem I have heard is that even rifles like the Ruger Scout  may have issues with the extreme cold thanks to the type of stainless they use. Even a "off the shelf rifle" may require modifications to make it work in the varied climates the Rangers work in. I suspect they are going to find it much harder to replace then they think. The Lee Enfield is the results of 40-60 years of evolutionary firearm design based on a significant amount of users experience throughtout the globe.
> 
> Frankly I think having a company here buys the rights to the AIA rifle, change a few things that were claimed to be wrong with it and the process will be a lot faster and more successful than what they are planning. Allow the rifle to be made commercially and exportable as well.



I guess they were already looked at

Excerpt from a Canadian government document concerning the military's Small Arms Replacement Project II (SARP 2):

13. A company based in Australia, Australian International Arms (AIA), markets a M10 No.4 Mk IV Modern Short Magazine Lee Enfield (SMLE) Rifle in 7.62mm NATO calibre. This rifle is a replica of the Lee Enfield but in appearance only. The cost of this rifle, less ancillaries is approximately $800.00 (Cdn). The CF technical authority for small arms, DSSPM 5, on 24 Jul 08 conducted an initial examination of the AIA rifle because in appearance it closely resembles the current Lee Enfield. The technical authority concluded that the rifle would not meet the Canadian Ranger’s requirement without significant modification and re-engineering because it is cheaply made.

14. The Australian International Arms M10 No 4 Mk IV SMLE Rifle fires a 7.62 x 51mm NATO cartridge and at first glance appears to meet the CF requirement as a replacement for the Canadian Ranger Rifle. The rifle is assembled from parts manufactured from throughout South-East Asia in locations such as as Viet Nam, Thailand (teak stocks) and Indonesia.    The barrel is hammer-forged in Australia. The general assessment is that the rifle is accurate and attractively priced, but it was clearly designed for the civilian recreational shooting market and it is not a military product. Many parts of the rifle are cheaply made and would likely fail under testing.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (6 Dec 2011)

The NCRR is not strictly an off the shelf purchase.  There are very specific criteria that it must meet and will go through rigorous testing in order to see how it will stand up.  The Rangers in our patrol group do not baby their rifles, so they'll be tested well and thoroughly.


----------



## Tank Troll (7 Dec 2011)

Canadian.Trucker said:
			
		

> The NCRR is not strictly an off the shelf purchase.  There are very specific criteria that it must meet and will go through rigorous testing in order to see how it will stand up.  The Rangers in our patrol group do not baby their rifles, so they'll be tested well and thoroughly.



I really hope that "rigorous testing"will be the case. I don't want to sound skeptical...............but that song has been sung before. Just about everyone here can think of a least a couple of pieces of equipment in our current inventory that is less than what was needed. For our Rangers safety and well being the testing needs to be "well and thorough" any thing less would be a great disservice to them.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (7 Dec 2011)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> I really hope that "rigorous testing"will be the case. I don't want to sound skeptical...............but that song has been sung before. Just about everyone here can think of a least a couple of pieces of equipment in our current inventory that is less than what was needed. For our Rangers safety and well being the testing needs to be "well and thorough" any thing less would be a great disservice to them.


Since I'm going to be one of the guys out there when the testing is going on along with my OC and CSM I can assure you it will be rigorous.  However, what you're referring to (I think) is that even after the testing an inferior product was chosen.  Not much I or anyone else testing a product can do about that, if the powers that be make a decision contrary to advice that's their prerogative.  All we can do is give them the best advice possible.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Dec 2011)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> I guess they were already looked at
> 
> Excerpt from a Canadian government document concerning the military's Small Arms Replacement Project II (SARP 2):
> 
> ...



Yes I have seen that assessment, and their comments would apply to every rifle on the market. I have used and shot the AIA, the basic gun is very sound and heavier built than the Lee Enfield. Buying the licence would gain you the receiver, barrel and mag plans, which are the key components, everything else can be modified to suit. The mag is almost a straight copy of the M14 mag, which has seen much combat. I suspect the biggest issue with the AIA is that it's to much like the rifle it would replace, they want something "New and Modern" A 21st century solution!! The reality is that firearm devolopment in regards to bolt actions really hasn't changed that much, just the materials and manufacturing techniques have evolved.


----------



## Tank Troll (7 Dec 2011)

Canadian.Trucker said:
			
		

> However, what you're referring to (I think) is that even after the testing an inferior product was chosen.  Not much I or anyone else testing a product can do about that, if the powers that be make a decision contrary to advice that's their prerogative.  All we can do is give them the best advice possible.



You are quite right in that regard, lets see if the end product is what is need as apposed to what some one thought was needed or what could be made do with.


----------



## Mr.Neville (9 Jan 2012)

Me personally, I love my Lee-Enfield No.1 Mk.3 to death , and I would take it into battle over any gun any day EH! I think the .303 round has the perfect amount of stopping power, yet still reasonably accurate and controllable. I have a British Small Arms 3-9x40mm scope on it and I have no problems hitting chest sized targets out to 300 meters. (I know that's not great, but I'm not the best shooter.


----------



## NavyShooter (9 Jan 2012)

I have one of the AIA Enfields, and am generally impressed with it's manufacture.  (Bear in mind, I look at it from a machinist and competitive shooter's point of view.)  

How well would it stand up to the rigors of rough use?  Probably not as well as the #4's that have been trucking along for decades.  

The real question in my mind though is, what rifle on the market today *WOULD* be best?

NS


----------



## Colin Parkinson (10 Jan 2012)

I doubt they are going to find one, the market price for standard bolt action rifles is pretty tight and long term life and the ability to be pounded about is not really in the makers minds. There are some beautifully made rifles out there, but the price will be way out of reach. 

I suspect that after much gnashing of teeth and wailing, they will have to do  a stop gap buy that is meant for 4 years and does 20. Plus they will buy on a scale of 1 for two and spare parts for 5% failure rate. They will need 3 to 1 and spare parts for a 35% failure rate.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (10 Feb 2012)

Some pictures I took of the Ruger scout rifle. Seems to be a standard mauser action.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (11 Jul 2012)

Update:
Just had a working group in Esquimalt in May to further discuss the requirements of the rifle.  Testing should begin next year with expected production/distribution taking place in 2014.  Should have more info this Fall as there is another working group in November in St.Jean, QC.


----------



## daftandbarmy (11 Jul 2012)

It makes you wonder if there's a big enough market out there for a rugged, cheap, reliable bolt action rifle like the Lee Enfield to justify starting up production of the No. 4 again? They're doing it with aircraft like the Twotter, why not 'real man guns'?


----------



## QORvanweert (11 Jul 2012)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> It makes you wonder if there's a big enough market out there for a rugged, cheap, reliable bolt action rifle like the Lee Enfield to justify starting up production of the No. 4 again? They're doing it with aircraft like the Twotter, why not 'real man guns'?



I would be willing to pay a premium if I knew I was getting 'original' quality. I have done the bolt action rifle search in the surplus market and it would be a godsend if I could just buy an old design but newly manufactured.


----------



## Ostrozac (11 Jul 2012)

Well, for new build rifles, the AIA M10 is a knock-off of the No 4 Lee-Enfield, but at $800 retail I wouldn't call it cheap. At that price you may as well pay $900 for a Ruger Scout.

You can get a refurbished M1903 or M1917 for $1600 from Miltech south of the border. So again not cheap.

If you want cheap, you can get new build Chinese SKS for $200, or a Chinese M-14 for $400.

I think the only way you'll get a new build WWII quality rifle at Wal-Mart prices is if the Chinese start exporting something like a 308 Scout Rifle with a mauser-style action, price it at $300, and aggressively market it as "the world's gun".


----------



## daftandbarmy (11 Jul 2012)

Ostrozac said:
			
		

> I think the only way you'll get a new build WWII quality rifle at Wal-Mart prices is if the Chinese start exporting something like a 308 Scout Rifle with a mauser-style action, price it at $300, and aggressively market it as "the world's gun".



Nice business plan. All we need now is an angel with a bejillion dollars....


----------



## Ostrozac (11 Jul 2012)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Nice business plan. All we need now is an angel with a bejillion dollars....



That angel is Norinco. But it's more of a fallen angel. Our business plan may be to widely distribute Jeff Cooper's books, translated into Mandarin, and watch China turn into devotees of large bore bolt actions. But, quite frankly, "To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak The Truth" would be viewed as so subversive by the Chinese government that it would make the crackdown on Falun Gong look like a sideshow.

Seriously, if you're going to build the new Ranger rifle with North American (or EU) workers, it won't be cheap, it'll be priced like a Ruger. If you want cheap, durable, and off the shelf, Norinco M-14 may be the answer, but is that doable? Do Chinese companies even bid on MERX? The original proposal specified a bolt-action 308, but what options are out there for a new build 308 bolt action battle rifle? Ruger Scout? Steyr Scout?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Jul 2012)

You can get arsenal refurbed Mosin Nagant M-44s & M-38s for around $200. Just like new and pack a wallop with the 7.62x54R cartridge. Just as solid as anything Lee Enfield made.

Makes a good scout rifle also. 

This is one I built for my daughter from an M-38 with a long relief scope. Less than $350 total. Polymer stock, scope and action. Plus I've got the original bits (stock, sights, etc) that went to rebuild a frankengun.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Jul 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> You can get arsenal refurbed Mosin Nagant M-44s & M-38s for around $200. Just like new and pack a wallop with the 7.62x54R cartridge. Just as solid as anything Lee Enfield made.



That makes alot of sense as I'm guessing the Russians would build a reliable cold weather rifle. Wouldn't it be fun to watch Uncle Sam light up after we do a deal with the Russkies for a few hundred of these?

Nice work by the way. You've got me thinking about good ideas for presents for my daughter (and my wife will hate it, of course)  ;D


----------



## medicineman (12 Jul 2012)

One of the bear monitors we had on a job I was on up North a number of years back was packing a Mosin-Nagant...looked a little mangy, but I watched him test fire it and it did the business.  

MM


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Jul 2012)

Luckily it has a huge bayonet, my personal criteria for a proper rifle.

Intersting to note that they were made in the US at one point:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant

United States

U.S. Rifle, 7.62 mm, Model of 1916: Due to the desperate shortage of arms and the shortcomings of a still-developing domestic industry, the Russian government ordered 1.5 million M1891 infantry rifles from Remington Arms and another 1.8 million from New England Westinghouse in the United States. Some of these rifles were not delivered before the outbreak of the October Revolution and the subsequent signing of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk which ended hostilities between the Central Powers and Russia. When the Bolsheviks took over the Russian government, they defaulted on the Imperial Russian contracts with the American arsenals, with the result that New England Westinghouse and Remington were stuck with hundreds of thousands of Mosin–Nagants. The US government bought up the remaining stocks, saving Remington and Westinghouse from bankruptcy. The rifles in Great Britain armed the US and British expeditionary forces sent to North Russia in 1918 and 1919. The rifles still in the US ended up being primarily used as training firearms for the US Army. Some were used to equip US National Guard, SATC and ROTC units. Designated "U.S. Rifle, 7.62mm, Model of 1916", these are among the most obscure U.S. service arms. In 1917, 50,000 of these rifles were sent via Vladivostok to equip the Czechoslovak Legions in Siberia to aid in their attempt to secure passage to France.

During the interwar period, the rifles which had been taken over by the US military were sold to private citizens in the United States by the Director of Civilian Marksmanship, the predecessor agency to the current Civilian Marksmanship Program. They were sold for the sum of $3.00 each. If unaltered to chamber the US standard .30-06 Springfield rimless cartridge, these rifles are prized by collectors because they do not have the import marks required by law to be stamped or engraved on military surplus firearms brought into the United States from other countries.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (17 Jul 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> This is one I built for my daughter...



Uh huh... sure you did


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Aug 2012)

.... from The Canadian Press (no sign of the briefing note being shared, so no indication what else is in there)





> They went toe-to-toe with the Taliban in the dusty laneways of Kandahar without batting an eye, but it's the mighty polar bear that's giving the Canadian army pause for thought.
> 
> The military had been on the lookout for an "anti-predator weapon" with which to equip both Arctic Rangers and regular force units whenever they operate on their own in the North.
> 
> ...


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (27 Aug 2012)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> ...the program has been held up over concern about who holds the design rights on certain weapons ....


True story.  The issue is there has been discussion that whoever ends up getting selected as the NCRR competition winner, they would give their design to Colt Canada and Colt Canada would manufactur the new rifles.  You can understand how this has not been met by the other manufacturers with applause and hugs.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (12 Oct 2012)

Update:
New approval cycle is to begin this upcoming December.  What this means?  The trials are now moved into 2014 with potential delivery moved into 2015, this constitutes a delay of a year.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 Oct 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> You can get arsenal refurbed Mosin Nagant M-44s & M-38s for around $200. Just like new and pack a wallop with the 7.62x54R cartridge. Just as solid as anything Lee Enfield made.
> 
> Makes a good scout rifle also.
> 
> This is one I built for my daughter from an M-38 with a long relief scope. Less than $350 total. Polymer stock, scope and action. Plus I've got the original bits (stock, sights, etc) that went to rebuild a frankengun.



Looked a Tula made one beside my Izhevsk one, I noted the receiver where the bolt turns down to lock is radiused on the Tula, making it much easier to close the bolt on surplus ammo which seems to vary a fair bit in OAL.


----------



## Bbqznbeer (8 Nov 2012)

A trained shooter on the No4 will have 5 rds down the tube before the Mosin shooter will have 2. 
I've been shooting/hunting with a '43 longbranch for over 40yrs .
I've had to replace "zero" parts , but after restoring a couple , I can find parts no probs...E bay for example.
A man can place pieplate sized groups at 300yd using the battlesights.


----------



## Bluebulldog (8 Nov 2012)

Ruger has made a new design, called the RAR ( Ruger American Rifle). New design on the bolt. Synthetic ergo stock. Lightweight and available chambered in .308 ( 7.62 NATO). 

Economical even at retail pricing of $400 per unit. I wonder if DND is perhaps making this more onerous than it has to be.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Nov 2012)

By the time they struggle through a full competition, they could make enough spare parts to keep the No.4's going for another 20 years. Take any new parts they have check them for fit and then laser scan them and there are your specs. Does not solve the ammo issue, but again lot's of companies will make the ammo for you, it's not like all .303 are going disappear anytime soon.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Nov 2012)

Colin P said:
			
		

> By the time they struggle through a full competition, they could make enough spare parts to keep the No.4's going for another 20 years. Take any new parts they have check them for fit and then laser scan them and there are your specs. Does not solve the ammo issue, but again lot's of companies will make the ammo for you, it's not like all .303 are going disappear anytime soon.



At least they'll be able to replace this weapon system faster than the Sea King... right?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Nov 2012)

Well, maybe.......... 8)
Hey it's complicated when trying to justify a space age bolt gun that is really a knock off of a gun of the same era as the one you are replacing, and like how is anyone going to get promoted or noticed ordering Bolt Actions? Clearly there is no magic command level pixie dust attached to this buy.


----------



## GnyHwy (17 Nov 2012)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Clearly there is no magic command level pixie dust attached to this buy.



Maybe if someone could define the Ranger's requirements, that could equate to pixie dust.  A Ranger in DLR?  Is there one?  Ranger tasks - aside from looking for lost Russians, the Ranger's rifles need to kill stuff so you can eat it, and rightfully so.  Has anyone seen the price of perishables up there? 

Our attempt at purchasing Ranger's rifles is right up there with snowmobiles.  We're trying to give them racing machines when all they need/want is a simple 2 stroke that won't break down when they're 100 miles from surviving.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Nov 2012)

Has anyone asked the Rangers what they want?


----------



## medicineman (17 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Has anyone asked the Rangers what they want?



Stop making sense...you should know by now that "if it makes sense, do the opposite" is the motto of Canadian government procurement agencies, and in fact most of the Canadian Civil Service  ;D

MM


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Nov 2012)

In my magic world I would send a simple questionare out to all the Rangers with the ID number requested so we are sure no one is skewing the results. Send as many as possible to home addresses to avoid influences and have the responses sealed. 

Is a bolt action more useful than a semi-auto?

What magazine capacity do you want to see?

Does .303 need replacing, if  so pick form list.... Any other calibres?

Plastic vs wood stock?

Scout setup or traditional Iron sights?

Adjustable trigger?

So on and so forth.

Last question: "What rifle would you choose?" 

Take all the responses send them to a survey company to tabulate the response. No one in the Ranger organization will know who picked what.

survey could be offered by e-mail to help reduce costs


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Nov 2012)

Colin P said:
			
		

> In my magic world I would send a simple questionare out to all the Rangers with the ID number requested so we are sure no one is skewing the results. Send as many as possible to home addresses to avoid influences and have the responses sealed.
> 
> Is a bolt action more useful than a semi-auto?
> 
> ...



You know there is no way that certain people would let that survey go forward without it being translated into, at least, Inuktitut, Inuinnaqtun and Inuvialuktun, right?

Of course we're talking another five years to accomplish that, and another five to ensure the questions were sufficiently translated for the english words that have no meaning in their language.  ;D


----------



## Tank Troll (22 Nov 2012)

recceguy said:
			
		

> You know there is no way that certain people would let that survey go forward without it being translated into, at least, Inuktitut, Inuinnaqtun and Inuvialuktun, right?
> Of course we're talking another five years to accomplish that, and another five to ensure the questions were sufficiently translated for the english words that have no meaning in their language.  ;D



Do any of those languages even have a written version? Can any one other than the person writing it read it? As far as I can recall there was no Native American written language. So you can add a few more years on to that to teach every one said language.


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Nov 2012)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> As far as I can recall there was no Native American written language.


I can't speak with certainty for the _FAR_ North, but I know a couple of Aboriginal languages in northern Ontario sure have written elements....
Online Cree Dictionary
Ojibway Dictionary
Oji-Cree online dictionary



			
				recceguy said:
			
		

> Has anyone asked the Rangers what they want?


Yeah, they can use the same model used to ask CF troops what hardware they want/need.... Oh, wait ....


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Nov 2012)

Funny story about getting English put into Northern Languages.  I worked with a fellow 20 years ago who had come to Calgary from Goose Bay.  At the time they were having trouble with the Dene people over the flights, land use etc etc.  There were in those days if you remember numerous incidents of demonstrators getting onto the runways and becoming a hazard to themselves and aircraft.

The base decided to have the ubiquitous "no trespass" signs translated into Dene and installed on the perimeter fenceline at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars.  They were apparently quite pleased at their accomplishment until one day when a visiting RCMP member who was of the Dene people came home on leave.

He read the new signs and came into the Guardhouse to speak to them.  He asked what the new signs were supposed to say and was told that it was a translation of the no trespassing signs we all know and love and that a local Dene elder had provided the translation.  The RCMP member laughed and said, "no, it doesn't.  It says " This is Dene land that was stolen by the White Man and they want their rightful land back"

The signs came down right quickly.  Lots of red faces in some quarters.


----------



## Bluebulldog (22 Nov 2012)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Funny story about getting english put into Northern Languages.  I worked with a fellow 20 years ago who had come to Calgary from Goose Bay.  At the time they were having trouble with the Dene people over the flights, land use etc etc.  There were in those days if you remember numerous incidents of demonstrators gettting onto the runways and becoming a hazard to themselves and aircraft.
> 
> The base decided to have the ubiquitous "no trespass" signs translated into Dene and installed on the perimeter fenceline at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars.  They were apparently quite pleased at their accomplishment until one day when a visiting RCMP member who was of the Dene people came home on leave.
> 
> ...



 :rofl: 

Almost should migrate the thread to the funniest thing you've heard today........


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (5 Mar 2013)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Has anyone asked the Rangers what they want?



Yes, and both Canadian Ranger Instructors and Canadian Rangers from all 5 Patrol Groups are going to be involved in the testing phase of the procurement of the NCRR.



			
				Colin P said:
			
		

> In my magic world I would send a simple questionare out to all the Rangers with the ID number requested so we are sure no one is skewing the results. Send as many as possible to home addresses to avoid influences and have the responses sealed.
> 
> Is a bolt action more useful than a semi-auto?
> 
> ...


Good idea for the questionnaire but it will never happen.  Why you ask?  Because to have something mailed into the North and expect it to be opened, read, filled out and then sent back in a timely manner is a pipe dream.  You might as well ask for the Federal Government to invest in flying cars and then buy those cars for everyone.

All of these questions have been asked and discussed verbally over the past couple years, we get plenty of feedback.  Bolt action is definitely the preferred type of action as it is simple and operates well in the colder/wet environments.

Unfortunately the trials were supposed to start in a month, but the entire Small Arms Project was delayed which delayed the NCRR, so trials will not begin until next year.


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Aug 2013)

PM gets to try the old stuff during his latest road trip up North - highlights mine.


> Stephen Harper took up arms — albeit antique arms — on the Arctic tundra late Tuesday in a round of target practice meant as a show of solidarity with Canadian Rangers.
> 
> Both the prime minister and newly appointed Defence Minister Rob Nicholson went shooting with the First World War vintage .303 Lee Enfield rifles.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Aug 2013)

The latest, from the PMO, via Postmedia News...


> .... Wednesday the PMO said a new “ruggedized” 7.62mm bolt-action rifle would be procured, beginning in 2016 ....


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Aug 2013)

Mr. Den Tandt should learn what's required of a rifle, to be of use in those conditions, before he starts running his gob about off the shelf purchases from Cambodian Tire.

What am I talking about! :facepalm: 

The whole Canadian journalistic cabal is the most woefully ignorant group on the face of the earth when it comes to discussing firearms.


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Aug 2013)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Mr. Den Tandt should learn what's required of a rifle, to be of use in those conditions, before he starts running his gob about off the shelf purchases from Cambodian Tire.
> 
> What am I talking about! :facepalm:


Dare to dream ....


----------



## Haletown (22 Aug 2013)

Tank Troll said:
			
		

> Do any of those languages even have a written version? Can any one other than the person writing it read it? As far as I can recall there was no Native American written language. So you can add a few more years on to that to teach every one said language.



The Roman alphabet is widely used.

Syllabics, in invention of an RC missionary has some traction in the Eastern Arctic.

99% of current Rangers would do fine in English ( my guess, I am out of date)

The survey would yield a lot of diverse opinions.  

The guys I knew way back when were exceptionally good shots because they were exceptionally good hunters.

300 yards, standing,  they would drop a Caribou with the first shot 95% of the time.  Uphill, downhill, big winds . . .  they were great shots.  Dinner depended on it

Don't  know if the current Rangers has the same amount of practice and skill as the guys back in the 80's.  


.303 very suitable but 7.62 is plentiful and I doubt they would mind the change.

Semi auto is up to them.  Not like they need to put lots of rounds down range. These guys would stay distant and snipe.


----------



## NavyShooter (22 Aug 2013)

Haletown said:
			
		

> The guys I knew way back when were exceptionally good shots because they were exceptionally good hunters.
> 
> 300 yards, standing,  they would drop a Caribou with the first shot 95% of the time.  Uphill, downhill, big winds . . .  they were great shots.  Dinner depended on it
> 
> ...


Some of them are indeed OUTSTANDING shots with those rifles.  Watching them get into a modified Hawkins position with the butt dug into the ground and get 10 rounds rapid out....impressive.

For the rest...

Nope.

They should observe and report....I don't think they are intended to be snipers, or even to really engage in open warfare.  Not their mandate.

NS


----------



## Haletown (22 Aug 2013)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Some of them are indeed OUTSTANDING shots with those rifles.  Watching them get into a modified Hawkins position with the butt dug into the ground and get 10 rounds rapid out....impressive.
> 
> For the rest...
> 
> ...




Agreed.  Shooting means they have been spotted.

I was trying to make the point "if" they engaged they would do so to their advantage . . .  Long range, placed shots, no need for volume fire.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Aug 2013)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Some of them are indeed OUTSTANDING shots with those rifles.  Watching them get into a modified Hawkins position with the butt dug into the ground and get 10 rounds rapid out....impressive.
> 
> For the rest...
> 
> ...



Of course the problem is that the other side rarely supports your vision on how things should happen. A stupid incident happens up there, it's a good chance that it may be these guys who get dragged into the middle of it.


----------



## UnwiseCritic (26 Aug 2013)

I own a lee enfield, love it to death. (built in 1943). The mag needs a new spring and that's about it. Ammo is expensive and I could see it being difficult to find in bulk for a good price. Also I'm sure replacements parts on a large scale is becoming difficult. 

I know Russia has a bunch of mosin nagants hanging around, I like it. But if we're going to replace our .303s for the above problems. It wouldn't be my first choice. Also I hate shooting that thing from the prone. And I think it is too long. Not preferable for slinging it on your back. Let alone in the woods on a snowmobile in three feet of snow.

If I were to go work as a ranger some of the specifications I would want.

60 degree bolt throw (faster follow up shots to put down dangerous game)

Short bolt so that I would not have to lift my face up and lose sight picture to reload.

Barrel length of no more than 22 inches, no less than 20.

Stopping power (30-06 would be good. It is readily available and comes in a huge variety) plus it would have some good range on it. Similar trajectory to the .303 as well as recoil. So it wouldn't be new to the users. 

The rifle should be able to hold 1-2 inch groups. Those guys can shoot so let's give them a rifle they can really put to use.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Aug 2013)

UnwiseCritic said:
			
		

> I own a lee enfield, love it to death. (built in 1943). The mag needs a new spring and that's about it. Ammo is expensive and I could see it being difficult to find in bulk for a good price. Also I'm sure replacements parts on a large scale is becoming difficult.
> 
> I know Russia has a bunch of mosin nagants hanging around, I like it. But if we're going to replace our .303s for the above problems. It wouldn't be my first choice. Also I hate shooting that thing from the prone. And I think it is too long. Not preferable for slinging it on your back. Let alone in the woods on a snowmobile in three feet of snow.
> 
> ...



Mosins were alreadt discussed here.

There are shorter versions than the infantry model.

Look up the M38 Mosin Nagant seen below


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Aug 2013)

I am impressed with mine, but the bolt is no easy thing to use. I noticed the Tula versions have a slight bevel on the front of the receiver (or bolt) to make turning the bolt easier to turn down. Mine is a Izhevsk.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Aug 2013)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I am impressed with mine, but the bolt is no easy thing to use. I noticed the Tula versions have a slight bevel on the front of the receiver (or bolt) to make turning the bolt easier to turn down. Mine is a Izhevsk.



I've built up a few and have two sporterised Tulas left in my collection.

I've posted the one I did for my daughter before, but will again 'cause it came out so well ;D


----------



## UnwiseCritic (26 Aug 2013)

That is indeed a nice build. I just don't like taking follow up shots on that action.

 IMO, I still think 30-06 would be the way to go with my above specifications. Plus what would the cost associated be with converting the rifles? And the only ammo I know for it uses copper cases. And the cost of copper is rising rapidly. And when used in any semi-auto rifle the extractor tears through the base of the casing. I have not yet witnessed this on a bolt action gun. 

I know Russia has experimented with modifying the mosin nagant. (see link)

http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sniper-rifles/rus/ots48-e.html


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Aug 2013)

Lots of ammo available out there that's not copper cased. It is also far from an anemic cartridge and can preform on par with the .303, being almost identical including a bullet dia of .311.

Just a tidbit, the 7.62 x 54R was designed as an MG round then used for rifles.

Read the earlier parts of the thread for discussion on semi vs bolt.

Let's not forget also, the Mosin was designed for that environment that the Rangers operate in.

However, the Mosin won't be the replacement and we've beat that horse to death already.


----------



## UnwiseCritic (26 Aug 2013)

I believe I just haven't seen  them. I worked with them up north and I think bolt is the way to go. I guess let's just see if the government uses common sense or gets in bed with the wrong contract to advance their political party.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (26 Aug 2013)

What about commissioning India to produce some more 7.62x51 2A1 Lee Enfields with some extra parts. They still have the machinery, they just produce sporting rifles with it now so it would only take a little bit of retooling for them to be able to reproduce the 2A1. The advantages are 7.62x51 is a standard cartridge, so tons of ammo is available at a cheaper rate than .303 British (also gives the rangers more options for what type of round they want to use), little retraining for the rangers (same gun just some slight cosmetic differences). Maybe give them a little better sight (the 2A1's have a notch sight so give them a aperture sight or something of the like). I could also see this working for the government as they want to make stronger ties with India.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Aug 2013)

The Munitions Supply Program (despite the less than stellar 2007 audit from CRS http://www.crs-csex.forces.gc.ca/reports-rapports/pdf/2007/12581014-eng.pdf) has DND going to Colt Canada (formerly Diemaco) for all small arms.



Munitions Supply Program (MSP)

Some degree of weapons support shall be conducted by Canada's Small Arms Strat- egic Source and Centre of Excellence under the Munitions Supply Program, currently Colt Canada. [E]ventual bidders will be required to enter into an agreement to provide a Technical Data Package (TDP) to the Crown with the understanding that the TDP will be passed to Colt Canada in order that:

a.  for National Security reasons, the [New Canadian Ranger Rifle] will be produced in
     Canada by  Colt Canada under license; and

b.  3rd  line depot-level maintenance and Life Cycle support can be provided to this
     [New Canadian Ranger Rifle] weapons fleet by Colt Canada.


Source: http://www.casr.ca/doc-pa-ranger-rifle.htm


----------



## Ostrozac (26 Aug 2013)

And the involvement of Colt Canada complicates matters greatly, just as it does with the pistol replacement, since Colt currently doesn't make a large-bore bolt action rifle. Whichever company provides the Canadian Ranger Rifle will have to do it in partnership with Colt Canada, and I suspect that Colt's major North American competitors will be none too keen to help Colt expand into the bolt-gun market. I expect that the usual places we would look to for off-the-shelf bolt guns (Ruger, Remington) may not be keen to get involved.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (27 Aug 2013)

Ostrozac said:
			
		

> And the involvement of Colt Canada complicates matters greatly, just as it does with the pistol replacement, since Colt currently doesn't make a large-bore bolt action rifle. Whichever company provides the Canadian Ranger Rifle will have to do it in partnership with Colt Canada, and I suspect that Colt's major North American competitors will be none too keen to help Colt expand into the bolt-gun market. I expect that the usual places we would look to for off-the-shelf bolt guns (Ruger, Remington) may not be keen to get involved.


And that right there is one of the main reasons the project was initially hitting some significant roadbumps even before the SAMP was delayed, because a firearms company is not very happy after winning a contract to then hand over the designs to another company to have their rifle built.  The initial plan was to have a new rifle in our Rangers hands next year, but the plan is now to have it pushed North starting in 2015 (yes, I know the government announcement said 2016).

As for the discussion of the .30-06 round, it isn't happening.  We're going the route of 7.62 (.308) since we already have FMJ in the system, and we're looking to get soft-point as well for use in the rifle for predator control.

I also have to chuckle at the talk about the "sharpshooters of the North", because if you see how many of the Rangers shoot/hunt you would get a good laugh.  Granted some of them are pretty crack shots, but I have also seen them miss targets at 50m by over 3 feet to the left or right.


----------



## daftandbarmy (27 Aug 2013)

Canadian.Trucker said:
			
		

> I also have to chuckle at the talk about the "sharpshooters of the North", because if you see how many of the Rangers shoot/hunt you would get a good laugh.  Granted some of them are pretty crack shots, but I have also seen them miss targets at 50m by over 3 feet to the left or right.



To be fair though, you were probably on an ATV  ;D


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Aug 2013)

Sad to think that we seem currently unable to produce locally the parts for a No.4. Considering the terms for the contract, buy the license and plans off of AIA (who likely need the cash anyways) and have Colt make them here.


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (27 Aug 2013)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> To be fair though, you were probably on an ATV  ;D


If only that was a viable excuse, sadly it wasn't.  And it wasn't me that was shooting d&b


----------



## dapaterson (27 Aug 2013)

Canadian.Trucker said:
			
		

> If only that was a viable excuse, sadly it wasn't.  And it wasn't me that was shooting d&b



Reminds me of a solider who was always a terrible shot on the range.  Finally, someone realized that he was always closing his right eye - hard to get a sight picture when you close that eye.


----------



## Ostrozac (27 Aug 2013)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Sad to think that we seem currently unable to produce locally the parts for a No.4. Considering the terms for the contract, buy the license and plans off of AIA (who likely need the cash anyways) and have Colt make them here.



Do we even need to buy them? Patents expire after 20 years -- government copyrights after 50 years. Are the designs for the Lee-Enfield already in the public domain, as far as Canada is concerned?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Aug 2013)

Really what you are buying is the redesign of the receiver and mag, which is based mostly on a M14 mag, but lacking certain critical features fr that role. It's a good question, as i recall the AIA rifles came out early 90's, so you may be right and the copyright might be defunct by now.


----------



## Lightguns (31 Aug 2013)

Ruger has developed a militarized bolt action called the M77 Gunsite Scout. Laminate stock, flash suppressor, 10 round detachable box mag and 16 inch barrel all in 7.62mm. It may be a good contender.  May need to loosen the tolerances for the winter arctic but interesting none the less.


----------



## CombatDoc (31 Aug 2013)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Ruger has developed a militarized bolt action called the M77 Gunsite Scout. Laminate stock, flash suppressor, 10 round detachable box mag and 16 inch barrel all in 7.62mm. It may be a good contender.  May need to loosen the tolerances for the winter arctic but interesting none the less.


I have thought that the Ruger Scout rifle, developed from the concepts espoused by Saint Jeffrey of Gunsite, would be an obvious choice for a suitable bolt action replacement to the Lee Enfield. But the folks at Ruger are likely not enthused at handing over the production data to Colt Canada.


----------



## Lightguns (3 Sep 2013)

For sure, which brings us back to the silly decision of going with COLT to make a rifle they do not even have in inventory.


----------



## dapaterson (3 Sep 2013)

The strategic intent is to maintain an armaments industry in Canada so that, in the event of conflict, the defence industrial base remains available and we do not have to rely on foreign sources of supply.


----------



## Ostrozac (3 Sep 2013)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The strategic intent is to maintain an armaments industry in Canada so that, in the event of conflict, the defence industrial base remains available and we do not have to rely on foreign sources of supply.



That's a legitimate policy goal. The problem is that Colt manufactures a limited range of weapons, too limited to meet the complete needs of the CF, and yet because Colt is such a major player in the world's arms industry, many competing companies (Ruger, Sig, Glock) seem reluctant to closely cooperate with it. So we're probably going to have to show some flexibility on this project if we want the best rifle available. 

Or else we are stuck with hoping that some company submits a weapon design that vaguely meets the requirements. Or find a design that is open-source that Colt can make in Kitchener.


----------



## dapaterson (3 Sep 2013)

I'm not arguing the reality on the ground, merely trying to provide the context in which that decision is made.


----------



## KevinB (19 Sep 2013)

NO Firearms Manufacturer is going to willing hand over their TDP to Colt Canada.

IF the Canadian Government is serious about maintaining Small Arms capability, then it needs to re-invest in Dominion Arsenals.


----------



## Mr. St-Cyr (19 Sep 2013)

Don't forget North American Arms out of Quebec City either!


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Sep 2013)

KevinB said:
			
		

> NO Firearms Manufacturer is going to willing hand over their TDP to Colt Canada.
> 
> IF the Canadian Government is serious about maintaining Small Arms capability, then it needs to re-invest in Dominion Arsenals.



And with the very small numbers (relatively speaking) of rifles we're talking about, we could probably handle the Rangers' needs through a UOR and head down to a Cabela's and pick up what we need next weekend  ;D


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (20 Sep 2013)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> And with the very small numbers (relatively speaking) of rifles we're talking about, we could probably handle the Rangers' needs through a UOR and head down to a Cabela's and pick up what we need next weekend  ;D


Oh how I wish it were that easy.

I have not received an update since 23 July 13 where I was informed the SOR was signed, but the expectation is to begin the trials in the Spring of 2014.

Keep in mind though that the NCRR is not going to be used exclusively by the Rangers, but will be used by units deploying North for predator control.  The ARCG in 4 Cdn Div has already been training on the Lee Enfield so they have the internal capability when North.  Just something to think about, not that it changes things all that much.


----------



## wildman (9 Jan 2014)

Here is the final report from the Human Factors study comissioned in regards to the New Ranger Rifle from 2010 which surveyed Rangers in person all over the country http://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc111/p535161_A1b.pdf (be forewarned it is long and dry reading but well worth it).  It includes rates of part failures on the enfield, requirements both desired and chosen, statistics on use by Rangers and also what types of firearms an average Ranger already owns in addition to his or her service rifle as well as a whole lot more.  Also Id like to add that I work in a gun shop and own a Ruger Scout.  I know of at least 4 other Rangers who own the Scout rifle privately, we all like it alot.  Of everything commercially available nothing else in that price range comes close to what our mandatory requirments are, in fact I cant even think of a more expensive match...


----------



## Canadian.Trucker (10 Jan 2014)

wildman said:
			
		

> I have previously read this thread and re-read it entirely today, there is little alot of misinformation and hearsay.


I don't think your comments were directed towards myself (hopefully), but I can assure you that everything I post in regards to the NCRR is coming from a position of knowledge and fact and is not misinformation or heresay.

I have a copy of the new amended SOR that was signed Nov 2013.  Unfortunately since my last update dates have once again shifted and trials are not expected to begin until 2015 with hopeful delivery in 2016.  We are going to have a meeting in St-Jean in the Spring, but no specifics or details have been pushed out yet.


----------



## Lightguns (10 Jan 2014)

Mossberg has just brought out the MVP patrol in 223 and there is talk of one in 308, both to use STANAG magazines.  Cheap magazine portable and militaryish


----------



## Fabius (10 Jan 2014)

Based off of the problems previously encountered with the requirement to have the TDP of what ever rifle selected provided to Colt Canada for manufacture and maintenance and the firearms industry's justifiied reluctance / refusal to do so, what part of the requirement has changed that will actually see firearms manufactures willing to put their rifles up for the selection?

Is this going to be a straight COTs purchase?
Is or can Colt Canada be cut out of the whole process?
Any idea what rifles have or are going to be submitted for testing? If some of the big players don't want to participate then our options are going to be restricted.


----------



## KevinB (10 Jan 2014)

I'd argue the survey methodology was flawed.  Clearly biased towards what the Ranger's already new/had - and not giving option for other systems that could make the actual technical requirements.

My other comment is the SME base - may be deep in patrolling experience but given the QA answers don't really have a clue when it comes down to kitting out a weapon system.

For argument sake - Brass Rod for Cleaning, what should be written is non-ferrous cleaning rod which whatever requirements they have - I'd argue that a carbon fiber rod would probably suit them better, weigh less and not stick to their hands in the cold...
  But hey what do I know.


----------



## wildman (10 Jan 2014)

Canadian.Trucker, I did not aim that comment at anyone in particular and on second look it was alittle rash.  Just frustrated with the here say and suggestions of platforms that are completely unsuitable and I know first hand because they are sitting on the shelf in the shop right now.  LightGuns, have you handled an MVP?  They are a very cheaply built rifle, shoots decent but the action itself is horendous, remember this rifle will probly be in service another 60 years in extreme conditions down to -45 at least and the MVP isnt upto the task at all...  Kevin.B, a carbon rod is an awesome idea except for one hitch, I dont know of any field expedient carbon rods on the market(small sections), a one piece is out of the question for field use.  On that note the string pull through weve been issued may or may not remove snow from the bore but a coated cable pull through will always poke it out because its stiff.  Its is specified the rifle be issued in a hardcase with a soft case as well, I would highly recommend something like the Nomar gun scabbard http://nomaralaska.com/gunscabbard.htm .  It is durable and floats when the top is rolled down properly just like a dry bag, this would prevent rifles from going to the bottom of the river which has happened alarmingly often over the years...


----------



## Ostrozac (10 Jan 2014)

The hard part isn't selecting a weapon that can do the job. The hard part is either:

1. Finding something that Colt can actually manufacture
or
2. Making the decision to buy something that is not manufactured in Kitchener

We have a similar problem with the pistol replacement project.


----------



## suffolkowner (12 Jan 2014)

I was under the impression that Colt (Colt Canada?) was partnering with Cooper Arms to provide a rifle?
Doesn't Colt (not Colt Canada) already produce a 7.62 bolt action rifle as well?


----------



## Ostrozac (12 Jan 2014)

suffolkowner said:
			
		

> I was under the impression that Colt (Colt Canada?) was partnering with Cooper Arms to provide a rifle?
> Doesn't Colt (not Colt Canada) already produce a 7.62 bolt action rifle as well?



You are correct. Colt now offers the M2012 in 308 on their website -- which is produced in partnership with Cooper Firearms.

I hadn't heard of this rifle before today. Based on a press release I found on the Colt website, it looks like this was rolled out this past September. It looks like MSRP starts at around $2700, so it's more expensive than something like a Ruger.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (12 Jan 2014)

Civvie Question:  How does the contract work with Colt Canada?  They have an exclusive term for manufacture and maintenance of all infantry weapons?  Can someone elaborate?


Thanks in advance, Matthew


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Jan 2014)

Ostrozac said:
			
		

> You are correct. Colt now offers the M2012 in 308 on their website -- which is produced in partnership with Cooper Firearms.
> 
> I hadn't heard of this rifle before today. Based on a press release I found on the Colt website, it looks like this was rolled out this past September. It looks like MSRP starts at around $2700, so it's more expensive than something like a Ruger.



It's more expensive than their AR-15.


----------



## Fabius (13 Jan 2014)

I had not heard of the M2012 either until just now.

My initial impression is that it is designed and built to perform the role of a long range precision rifle. Given that assumption the $2700 dollar bill is not actually that different from what a lot of other higher end precision / semi custom guns would run.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Aug 2014)

Canadian Rangers' 67-year-old rifles kept in original boxes: document 

FORT SMITH, N.W.T. - Like any true collector's item, the Cold War-era rifles still used today by the Canadian Rangers come in their original boxes.Prime Minister Stephen Harper was assured in a newly released memo that the Lee Enfield weapons, which were purchased in 1947, are in mint condition."While Rangers are given rifles in pristine condition (i.e. new from the box from special storage), Canada's stock is diminishing and a replacement needs to be identified within the next four to five years," says the memo, which was sent to Harper last October.The Canadian Press obtained the memo under the Access to Information Act.The prime minister, who is on his annual tour of the North, is no stranger to the rifles. During last year's visit, Harper got down on the ground, sniper-style, and fired off a few shots during target practice with the Rangers.The Lee Enfield rifles are standard-issue weapons for the roughly 5,000 reservists scattered across 200 communities who comprise the Rangers. The weapons work well in the North because they don't freeze up or jam.But the military has for years been trying to replace them because there are so few manufacturers left who make spare parts for the rifles, first introduced to the British Army in 1895.Harper himself has acknowledged the weapons should be replaced."I am told there is no difficulty in servicing the weapons at this time, but this is a concern and we believe is it time," he said a year ago in Hay River, N.W.T."The Department of National Defence is in the process of scoping out the program for replacement and I expect that to happen over the next few years."The replacement weapons probably won't be that much different from the 67-year-old Lee Enfields, says the memo to Harper."It is important to note that despite the date of manufacture, rifle technology has not changed significantly over the past 60 years and the replacement rifle will likely be very similar to the Lee Enfield."The Prime Minister's Office has said the government plans to begin replacing the rifles in 2016.In 2011, Public Works put out a call to companies for specifications for 10,000 replacement rifles, but defence industry sources have said that the program has been held up over concern about who holds the design rights on certain weapons.The Canadian Forces did not immediately respond to questions about the rifles. - See more at: http://www.timescolonist.com/canadian-rangers-67-year-old-rifles-kept-in-original-boxes-document-1.1325822#sthash.w4ugIPvo.dpuf

http://www.timescolonist.com/canadian-rangers-67-year-old-rifles-kept-in-original-boxes-document-1.1325822#sthash.w4ugIPvo.dpuf


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Sep 2014)

Next step:  Colt Canada issuing RFP 


> .... Canada intends to sole source the manufacturing of the New Canadian Ranger Rifle (NCRR)through a Manufacturing Licence Agreement to Colt Canada under the auspices of the MSP (Munitions Supply Program) .... Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) would like to advise interested rifle and ancillary equipment Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) that the Request For Proposal (RFP) for the New Canadian Ranger Rifle has been posted on MERX by Colt Canada ....


This, from Colt Canada:


> .... The Government of Canada and the Department of National Defence with Colt Canada, under the Munitions Supply Program (MSP) will replace the original Lee Enfield rifle fleet with a commercially available hunting rifle. The replacement will be a calibre .308 Winchester, bolt action, magazine fed rifle. Ancillary items, such as a sling, cleaning kit, trigger lock, soft case and hard case for each rifle will be procured at the same time. Rifles and each ancillary item are considered to be separate biddable entities.
> 
> This is a Request For Proposal (RFP) and individual bidders for the rifle replacement or each ancillary item will provide the Government of Canada, through Colt Canada with samples, (15 rifles, 5 of each ancillary item) for test and evaluation. The main document is "NCRR Bid Package August 2014" followed by Annexes A through M.
> 
> The issuance of this RFP is not to be considered in any way as a commitment by the Government of Canada or Colt Canada, or as authority to undertake any work which could be charged to Canada or Colt Canada ....


More from proposed Colt specs here (32pg PDF via Dropbox.com).

And this from Metroland News:


> After decades of service, the military’s last Lee-Enfield rifles are finally getting close to retirement.
> 
> Colt Canada of Kitchener has been picked to design modern rifles to replace the vintage firearms used by the Canadian Rangers.
> 
> The military will get a chance to test out 125 of the new weapons next summer during its annual Operation Nanook training exercise ....


----------



## KevinB (4 Sep 2014)

Not one to nitpick, but...

Who wants to give Colt Canada their TDP.

The CAF will never buy enough guns for anyone to warrant giving a TDP up to CC.  Back when it was Diemaco a part of DH Aero and a large CF rifle contract it made sense, now with Colt Defense buying them and making it Colt Canada, your just making CC smarter, and Gary C and the boys there are plenty smart on their own.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Sep 2014)

I shudder to think what they will do with those surplus Lee-Enfields.


----------



## jpjohnsn (4 Sep 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I shudder to think what they will do with those surplus Lee-Enfields.


Personally, I'm hoping that some of them get set aside for cadet use - either as DPs or brought back for use in large bore training.  DPs, in particular, are hard to come by at the corps/squadron level.


----------



## Lightguns (4 Sep 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I shudder to think what they will do with those surplus Lee-Enfields.



Canadian law requires us to cut em up as I recall unless the Government has a use for them as military aid to a friendly nation.


----------



## BadgerTrapper (4 Sep 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I shudder to think what they will do with those surplus Lee-Enfields.



Is there any legislation or paperwork stating that they cannot be sold for civilian acquisition? I'd love to acquire a couple more Lee-Enfields for parts. Maybe even finally attempt to have a Tanker made. One can only hope.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Sep 2014)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Canadian law requires us to cut em up as I recall unless the Government has a use for them as military aid to a friendly nation.



laws can be changed if MP's and Ministers get enough letters


----------



## GAP (4 Sep 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I shudder to think what they will do with those surplus Lee-Enfields.



Arm the polar bears....the WWF isn't cutting it!!


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Sep 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> laws can be changed if MP's and Ministers get enough letters, or if they want to in spite of a lot of letters


FTFY - I know, so young to be so cynical I be  



			
				GAP said:
			
		

> Arm the polar bears....the WWF isn't cutting it!!


 :rofl:


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Sep 2014)

I'm no expert in Polar Bear busting, but isn't .308 a little on the small side?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Sep 2014)

It can work, shot placement and all that, life is always a balance.


----------



## dapaterson (4 Sep 2014)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Canadian law requires us to cut em up as I recall unless the Government has a use for them as military aid to a friendly nation.



I'm curious - what legislation or regulation specifies this?


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Sep 2014)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Canadian law requires us to cut em up as I recall unless the Government has a use for them as military aid to *a friendly nation*.


Makes you wonder what kind of "friend" Canada would be seen to be giving bolt-action rifles from WW2 to a country we want to "help".


----------



## cphansen (5 Sep 2014)

I've been going thru this thread and am absolutely amazed that no one has stated the obvious answer'
 What the Canadian Rangers need in a new rifle is the same thing they need in an old rifle.

They need bullets, without bullets the rifle is just an ineffective club, they might as well just throw snowballs, they'll be just as effective as a bullet less rifle.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (5 Sep 2014)

We have lots of bullets. 



			
				SherH2A said:
			
		

> I've been going thru this thread and am absolutely amazed that no one has stated the obvious answer'
> What the Canadian Rangers need in a new rifle is the same thing they need in an old rifle.
> 
> They need bullets, without bullets the rifle is just an ineffective club, they might as well just throw snowballs, they'll be just as effective as a bullet less rifle.


----------



## Old EO Tech (5 Sep 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> I'm curious - what legislation or regulation specifies this?



If there is anything it would be CTAT/Demilitarization/Controlled export regs etc.  That being said since these are not US rifles in origin, I don't see a reason they could not be sold by Crown Assets to anyone with a FAC....but that's not to say some bean counter is not making up some stupid rule.

I'd actually have to look up the De-mil code tomorrow on the CGCS to say for sure.


----------



## stealthylizard (5 Sep 2014)

jpjohnsn said:
			
		

> Personally, I'm hoping that some of them get set aside for cadet use - either as DPs or brought back for use in large bore training.  DPs, in particular, are hard to come by at the corps/squadron level.



Many moons ago.....  When I was a cadet we trained with the FNC1A1.  Then they took those away and gave us the Lee Enfield No. 7 (chambered for a .22 round).  Last I heard, less many moons ago, my old corp had switched to pellet guns for range practice.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Sep 2014)

They should just buy Mosin-Nagants. There are tons out there in new condition, complete with spare parts, warehouses full of surplus ammo.

The rifles are made for the harsh northern climate and the ballistics are comparable to the .303 British.

From the right dealer, you could get 500 new rifles and ammo that would last them 50 years for under $200,000 for the lot.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (5 Sep 2014)

A lot in my AOR have gone to air rifles because of restrictions and lack of working ranges. 




			
				stealthylizard said:
			
		

> Many moons ago.....  When I was a cadet we trained with the FNC1A1.  Then they took those away and gave us the Lee Enfield No. 7 (chambered for a .22 round).  Last I heard, less many moons ago, my old corp had switched to pellet guns for range practice.


----------



## jpjohnsn (5 Sep 2014)

stealthylizard said:
			
		

> Many moons ago.....  When I was a cadet we trained with the FNC1A1.  Then they took those away and gave us the Lee Enfield No. 7 (chambered for a .22 round).  Last I heard, less many moons ago, my old corp had switched to pellet guns for range practice.


When I was a cadet, we trained up on the No. 7 using the indoor range in our armoury.  The Grey and Simcoe Foresters ran a course for senior cadets to use the FNs and we did range weekends in Borden before it was deemed that shooting large bore was an army cadet thing and air cadets weren't allowed to any more.  

Because approved indoor ranges - and ranges in general - available to cadets are rarer than hen's teeth we now train them on basic marksmanship with pellet rifles.  The ones we use top out at 495 fps so they aren't firearms under the Act and we can set up a range pretty much anywhere there's room.   I'll admit that pellet rifles have a stigma attached but I can run a range day pretty much any time I want with 10-12 cadets firing _each relay_ with the air rifles on the main floor of the armoury vs the dozen-ish cadets _per night _ using .22s on the 3 person indoor range we used to have.  When we do get to put a .22 in their hands for biathlon (or the army cadets who get an opportunity to fire the C7s), they have some basic skills when they begin training.

Mind you, I'll take .22s, C7s or even .303s over pellet rifles every day of the week but, as it stands, using the air rifles, my cadets shoot 10 times more often in a year than I ever did when I was a cadet shooting the .22.

If thousands of Lee-Enfields suddenly get freed up, we could start putting them in the hands of cadets as DPs - which are becoming hard to come by in our supply system - or, better still, expanding the big-bore shooting program.


----------



## Lightguns (5 Sep 2014)

The other issue is the incredible lack of 303 ammo available these days, unless the CF has a huge horde, there is none available.  I spent 3 months looking for 150 grain to take apart to build a moose round for my SKS and it cost me way more than I thought I would ever pay for 303!


----------



## KevinB (5 Sep 2014)

If is did not have to be bolt action...
 (some bright bulb decided that fact)
If it could have a suppressor
 (sound travels mighty well across the snow/ice)


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Sep 2014)

No, No Kev :tsktsk:

They also use them for hunting. Canada, being one of the few uncivilized countries, does not mandate silencers for that past time and as we all know are prohibited. Donkeys making laws based on 1940-50s gangster movies.

It would have to be easily detachable so they could have it on for military duty, but they would have to take it off and switch to a 5 round magazine for hunting 

 ;D


----------



## KevinB (5 Sep 2014)

It's a Duty Gun -- you can do anything with a duty gun...

The problem I see with this, the Pistol etc programs coming out of Canada, is no one actually know how to write a proper requirement document (and beleive me its just as bad down here).

By specifying characteristics beyond performance thresholds and objectives you will end limiting the possibilities.


This SOW could have been done so simply.

Rough Scratch Pad

Weight with iron sights and 1 empty magazine 4.5kg (T) 3.5 (O)
Will Shoot Military and Commercial ammunition that is capable of:
 Accuracy 2 MOA @ 300m (T) 1 MOA @ 300m (O)
 Performance thru intervening barriers as per (FBI/NIJ Spec [which I forgot] of 12" with 86 PER of expansion of 155% original caliber and 92% retained weight  (T) with MOTS ammunition
 Performance in bare gelatin of 18" and 86 PER expansion to 175% original caliber with COTS Hunting ammunition (T)
Mount MOTS Day Sight via 1913/STANAG mounting rail (T)
 Chuck in the boiler plate for operational temperatures and environmentals, and add a X MRBS and Y MRBF
Manual of Arms similar to current CF in Service Weapons Fleet (O)
 (someone could have an awesome CTA .300WM that could be ideal for this role - so don't shut a door that may help).
FINISH TREATMENT: LOW IR, MATTE Non Black coloring, that will not freeze to skin above -65C

Took me around 5 min to type and within an hour I could give you about 400x better than the current shlock.


lastly Colt Canada TDP is a non starter for most Arms Companies for reasons I ranted on before.  Hint Canada - want a Center of Excellence for Small Arms to preserve national production - CROWN CORP -- by CC back and remain it Canadian Arsenals..


----------



## Fabius (5 Sep 2014)

From looking at the required specifications I am left wondering how many commercial off the shelf hunting rifles actually meet them.
In particular the requirement for the rifle to have a fully adjustable (windage and elevation) protected rear sight with the elevation hand selectable out to 600m and be able to mount a 3-9x optical sight. Looking at my various hunting rifles, I don't see room for anything like that on the receiver.  My only conclusion is that they are looking for something like the Ruger Gunsight Scout Rifle, with the ability to mount an optic forward of the receiver.

I am very interested to see who they manage to convice to actually place a bid.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (9 Sep 2014)

KevinB said:
			
		

> It's a Duty Gun -- you can do anything with a duty gun...
> 
> The problem I see with this, the Pistol etc programs coming out of Canada, is no one actually know how to write a proper requirement document (and beleive me its just as bad down here).
> 
> ...



My apologies if I missed it, but what are Canadian Government contractual obligations to Colt Canada?

How quickly could we transition to a government arsenal crown corporation if the political decision was made?


Thanks in advance, Matthew.


----------



## RedcapCrusader (9 Sep 2014)

Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> My apologies if I missed it, but what are Canadian Government contractual obligations to Colt Canada?
> 
> How quickly could we transition to a government arsenal crown corporation if the political decision was made?
> 
> ...



Regardless of whom the contract is awarded to, PWGSC will require that the parts and plans are given to Colt Canada to be assembled in Canada. Why this is, not sure, possibly a security measure but it causes much of the potentially excellent competitors that won't give the parts and plans to Colt to be disqualified in favour of a lower bidder that will.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Sep 2014)

In case you're interested, some Q's from potential bidders, and some A's, attached.


----------



## Ostrozac (11 Sep 2014)

Fabius said:
			
		

> My only conclusion is that they are looking for something like the Ruger Gunsight Scout Rifle, with the ability to mount an optic forward of the receiver.



Agreed. It seems to me that someone in the procurement world really wants the Ruger, but since Colt and Ruger don't see eye to eye, we are going to continue this song and dance for another decade or so.

Seriously, this isn't a fighter plane. It isn't an icebreaker. It's not even a hand grenade. Canadians buy bolt action rifles from LeBaron every day. As procurement issues go it should be a no-brainer.

But still it drags on.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (11 Sep 2014)

The army can make wiping your arse complicated, why do expect this to be any different?


----------



## KevinB (15 Sep 2014)

Ostrozac said:
			
		

> Agreed. It seems to me that someone in the procurement world really wants the Ruger, but since Colt and Ruger don't see eye to eye, we are going to continue this song and dance for another decade or so.
> 
> Seriously, this isn't a fighter plane. It isn't an icebreaker. It's not even a hand grenade. Canadians buy bolt action rifles from LeBaron every day. As procurement issues go it should be a no-brainer.
> 
> But still it drags on.



Honestly Canadian's (Tax payers - and the Ranger's) would probably be best served by a rifle allowance.

It appears to me the CF is trying to buy a hunting rifle more than anything - and have it follow the same method as a service rifle.
  IF it is to be truly a Northern Service Rifle - then perhaps more thought and a less constrictive box should have been used.


----------



## medicineman (15 Sep 2014)

KevinB said:
			
		

> IF it is to be truly a Northern Service Rifle - then perhaps more thought and a less constrictive box should have been used.



Kevin, you know better than trample on someone's leading change bubble with common sense... :tsktsk:

 ;D

MM


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Sep 2014)

Latest Q&A in the seemingly-never-ending saga that is replacing a Lee-Enfield with another bolt action rifle attached.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Oct 2014)

I was just fondling the FR-8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FR8 Based on the Mauser in .308 (sort of) a unique feature of this rifle is that it was designed to fire NATO rifle grenades. Having the new Ranger rifle capable of firing a rifle grenade or attaching a underslung grenade launcher might be a useful feature. We have no idea what's going to happen in the next 20-40 years these rifles are going to be around for. I know Rangers only do "blah,blah" and Canada will never fight a COIN style ground war in Afghanistan either...

Civilians already own 37mm launchers and like playing with them. Launchers/practice rifle grenade can be kept at the training facilities and taught as opportunity dictates. The launcher version would also be good for illumination and signalling rds and kept on a sled during patrols. I would support this idea if the costs per rifle were small and didn't add anymore delays. If we buy a commerical design, then don't do this, but if they decide to design a rifle from scratch, then it might be a worthwhile feature to include the mounts.


----------



## KevinB (1 Oct 2014)

If they need a launcher - it should be a stand-alone -- the mounted GL is really not the best practice.  The cons outweight the pro's


----------



## NavyShooter (1 Oct 2014)

I can see it morphing into something like this if they added a GL requirement:


----------



## Ostrozac (2 Oct 2014)

To my completely uneducated eyeball, it looks like the Ruger Scout Rifle's available flash suppressor might already be capable of launching 22mm rifle grenades.

There. Done. Fitted for, but not with, rifle grenades.


----------



## Mr. St-Cyr (2 Oct 2014)

They need a compact rifle that they can safely carry slung without interfering with anything as they ride their ski-doos at 100 + KM/H through the tundra. Some Rangers take out polar bears (1 shot most of the time; take out the brain and they mostly die) with their personal bolt action .223's (not to mention their venerable 303's and I've even worked with a Ranger who carried his Nork M305 along with us) already so .308 is plenty sufficient for them. Otherwise, mobility and reliability is what they need. 

I see them best served with something like a Ruger Gunsight or Mossberg MVP carbine, etc. 18'' barrel at most. .308 cal.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (2 Oct 2014)

Perhaps people are confusing Canadian Rangers with soldiers.  The main purpose of the rifle is to keep alive in the wilds and self defence, not to engage an enemy army.  Grenade launchers?  Seriously?  There has to be a million surplus Lee Enfields out there.  I own 4 of them and paid less than $100 apiece, although some years ago.  I think they already have a good rifle.  

I looked up what people are asking for Lee Enfields and the cheap ones are $ 300 - $ 400.  Wow!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Oct 2014)

I am quite aware what the current tasks are for Rangers, but are you aware what there tasks might be in a decade or even 20 years out? The only constant is that we get into things we never planned to do. Russia, South Africa, Korea, Croatia, Afghanistan and now perhaps Iraq. It's entirely possible that with the way our equipment is going, the only response we can generate is those guys on ski-doos to counter some unforeseen threat. Since we have already screwed this contact up, might as well think out of the box we have built for a bit, before we screw the lid back on for another 20 years.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Oct 2014)

If I had to face down a Polar Bear an M203 would seem too small...


----------



## Mr. St-Cyr (2 Oct 2014)

And yet 55gr FMJ .223 gets them done.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (2 Oct 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I am quite aware what the current tasks are for Rangers, but are you aware what there tasks might be in a decade or even 20 years out? The only constant is that we get into things we never planned to do. Russia, South Africa, Korea, Croatia, Afghanistan and now perhaps Iraq. It's entirely possible that with the way our equipment is going, the only response we can generate is those guys on ski-doos to counter some unforeseen threat. Since we have already screwed this contact up, might as well think out of the box we have built for a bit, before we screw the lid back on for another 20 years.



If the only response we can generate is those guys on Ski-Doos then the battle is already lost. The quality of training they have varies person to person, as does the rifles they choose (note I used the word choose not issued) to use. The quantity of ammo is also extremely limited up there as well so any response will be very limited if only due to lack of ammo to resupply themselves with. 

They are NOT soldiers, they are not guerillas, hell I am not even sure why we have them besides to add a larger native population to the CF and say we are doing 'something' for Arctic sovereignty. All they need for a rifle is something to defend themselves from the wild animals in the region. So make a simple bolt-action in 7.62 Nato and make a fair bit of spare parts to keep them going, it isn't rocket science, most designs that would work are already over 100 years old (M1917 Enfield would be a good choice as the Danish version of the Rangers still use it, a remade K31 in 7.62 Nato would also be a good choice, or just make a 7.62 Nato Lee Enfield as there have been multiple designs made off that action).


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Oct 2014)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> I can see it morphing into something like this if they added a GL requirement:



It looks like these will meet the 'new Ranger rifle must be ugly' requirements at any rate...  ;D


----------



## NavyShooter (4 Jan 2015)

Ugly....?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (5 Jan 2015)

I hope that was already sporterized


----------



## NavyShooter (5 Jan 2015)

I think the owner said it was....

NOT mine.   I don't have the heart to do this to an Enfield.


----------



## Mr. St-Cyr (5 Jan 2015)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Ugly....?



The horror, the horror.


----------



## dapaterson (5 Jan 2015)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Ugly....?



Don't go giving DLR any ideas...


----------



## NavyShooter (6 Jan 2015)

The only 'good' part of this (in terms of Canada) is that this is a mod based on the No1 Mk 3 action (note the rounded rear portion of the receiver, and the lack of a rear receiver mounted sight) and these are so old (believe it or not!) that Canada no longer holds any in service.

So, we *should* be safe....unless someone comes back with a No4 MK1 version of this....


----------



## NavyShooter (6 Jan 2015)

I am going to be sorry I ever put this on the internet....


----------



## Lightguns (6 Jan 2015)

DO you have any idea how many Gunnutz fanboys will be cutting up enfields to make this crap now!  You sir, are now part of the problem.  The "Free NavyShooter" campaign will grind to a halt!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Jan 2015)

It has begun


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Jan 2015)

That's just so wrong :facepalm:


----------



## KevinB (8 Jan 2015)

That's a PEQ-15 not a -5 BTW


----------



## expwor (8 Jan 2015)

A question, and just a question for my knowledge.  Why not just issue the Canadian Rangers the C7, the same rifle issued to the Canadian Army

Tom


----------



## Brasidas (8 Jan 2015)

expwor said:
			
		

> A question, and just a question for my knowledge.  Why not just issue the Canadian Rangers the C7, the same rifle issued to the Canadian Army
> 
> Tom



.303 is better at stopping polar bears than 5.56.


----------



## expwor (8 Jan 2015)

Brasidas said:
			
		

> .303 is better at stopping polar bears than 5.56.



OK...Thanks  Makes Sense
Now a real dumb follow up question then.  What does the Canadian Army used when deployed up North
BTW in all seriousness I'm asking for my knowledge/education

Tom


----------



## dapaterson (8 Jan 2015)

Rangers also keep their weapons at all times, hence no C7s.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Jan 2015)

I'll say again. Mosin Nagant 38's or 44's. Tons of spare parts and rifles everywhere. Cheap, plentiful and *powerful* ammo, quite on par with .303 Brit. Very little, if any, orientation.

And the rifles are cheap and there's tons of armoury rebuilds that are like new.

I don't see a problem. Cut out the contractors, lobbyists and assorted oxygen thieves that make it impossible for us to procure anything.

They can even be put into a modern non wood stock. $200 for a rifle and another $125 for the stock. Easy peasy and likely much cheaper for a mass buy.

Picture description - M44 on top and a M38 below.


----------



## GK .Dundas (9 Jan 2015)

7.62 MM Galil comes with 10 round magazine as well as the standard 25 round magazine . During tests by the Alaskan State Police it was the only rifle tested that functioned  in the extreme arctic conditions without a hic up ( it was however not adopted ).


----------



## Fishbone Jones (9 Jan 2015)

The Mosin was designed to fight in the deep winters of Russia. Which can be crueler than our own.


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Jan 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I don't see a problem. Cut out the contractors, lobbyists and assorted oxygen thieves that make it impossible for us to procure anything.


You wild-eyed dreamer, you - the orange bit answers the yellow bit  ;D



			
				recceguy said:
			
		

> The Mosin was designed to fight in the deep winters of Russia. Which can be crueler than our own.


 :nod:


----------



## captloadie (9 Jan 2015)

But, but, what happens when the Great Red Surge invades? How will be able to distinguish friend or foe?


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Jan 2015)

captloadie said:
			
		

> But, but, what happens when the Great Red Surge invades? How will be able to distinguish friend or foe?


Easy peasy - the good guys'll be in red hoodies ....





.... and the bad guys'll be in unmarked combat clothing saying (in accented Innu) they're NOT Russian troops, but local defence militia forces  ;D


----------



## Mr. St-Cyr (9 Jan 2015)

expwor said:
			
		

> OK...Thanks  Makes Sense
> Now a real dumb follow up question then.  What does the Canadian Army used when deployed up North
> BTW in all seriousness I'm asking for my knowledge/education
> 
> Tom



At ARCG we issue C7s to all as personal weapons. Pl and Coy HQ's are allocated a number of No.4's and Remington 870's (usually a pair of both for each HQ). These are not issued to individuals in particular. They are Pl and Coy assets that are deployed at the commander's pleasure after threat assessment.


----------



## expwor (9 Jan 2015)

Mr. St-Cyr said:
			
		

> At ARCG we issue C7s to all as personal weapons. Pl and Coy HQ's are allocated a number of No.4's and Remington 870's (usually a pair of both for each HQ). These are not issued to individuals in particular. They are Pl and Coy assets that are deployed at the commander's pleasure after threat assessment.



Thanks

Tom


----------



## Mr. St-Cyr (9 Jan 2015)

No problem.

I will also add that we sometimes don't deploy with weapons if the threat is at zero or if the mission parameters dictate it. In those cases, they are left with the RQ. Rangers are attached to us in all cases (I've never been without them, YMMV). The Rangers are Coy and Pl assets as well and they are assigned to callsigns at the commander's pleasure. SOP has generally been 2 per Pl HQ. They carry either No.4's or their personal rifles.


----------



## Lightguns (15 Jan 2015)

expwor said:
			
		

> OK...Thanks  Makes Sense
> Now a real dumb follow up question then.  What does the Canadian Army used when deployed up North
> BTW in all seriousness I'm asking for my knowledge/education
> 
> Tom



In 18, we had a bear patrol in camp on Resolute Island, 2 men with C1s with 10 rounds on soft point 7.62.  They were a hard lead soft point, I seem to remember the CQ saying 220 grains.  Mags on but round up the spout.  My history lesson for the day!


----------



## Loachman (15 Jan 2015)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> In 18



1918?


----------



## KevinB (16 Jan 2015)

68, 78, or 88 - (time the C1A1 was in service) -- though nowhere in my C1A1 pam do I see that ammunition authorized.

220 Gr is usually subsonic in .308 - most SP loadings are from 165-180gr


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (16 Jan 2015)

The rangers currently get Brit 303 SP
cartridge case 210 grains
bullet 215  grains
propellant 40 grains


----------



## Loachman (16 Jan 2015)

KevinB said:
			
		

> 68, 78, or 88 - (time the C1A1 was in service)



I figured "81".

For some people, there's little perceived difference between 1918 and 1981 anyway.


----------



## Lightguns (16 Jan 2015)

81, that typing numbers and letters backwards has been happening a lot since I passed 50.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Jan 2015)

KevinB said:
			
		

> 68, 78, or 88 - (time the C1A1 was in service) -- though nowhere in my C1A1 pam do I see that ammunition authorized.
> 
> 220 Gr is usually subsonic in .308 - most SP loadings are from 165-180gr



I had 180gr Dominion soft points when I did polar bear overwatch in '76, with a C1. I was told that if I had to shoot one, there better be powder burns on the fur. 8)


----------



## daftandbarmy (17 Jan 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I had 180gr Dominion soft points when I did polar bear overwatch in '76, with a C1. I was told that if I had to shoot one, there better be powder burns on the fur. 8)



Looks like the Noggies can arrange that for you as they seem to hand feed them, thus associating people with easy food! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZH0T8v0eD0


----------



## KevinB (6 Feb 2015)

I've been reliably told that the Mk319 Mod0 130gr "SOST" bullet works well against them...


----------



## Jed (6 Feb 2015)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> I am going to be sorry I ever put this on the internet....



You have one sick sense of humour.


----------



## Eland2 (11 Feb 2015)

Rather than agonize over what rifle should replace the existing Ranger rifle, why not have a company like Prairie Gun Works design and develop a rifle with an action based on a reliable, rugged and simple Mauser, Mosin-Nagant or even Enfield action, chambered in .338 Lapua and married up with a commercial-off-the-shelf stock that can handle Arctic conditions without cracking or breaking? I can't imagine something like this being terribly complicated or expensive to produce.

The advantage is that .338 Lapua is a very common and easily found calibre. Hunters use it all the time to take moose and other big game, so it will definitely drop polar bears with no problem. Plus, it is a very flat-shooting cartridge that has a pretty long range. That would be an advantage to Ranger members in that they will be able to put more distance between themselves and an enemy if push came to shove, since the Rangers are really meant to operate as more of a trip-wire than anything else.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Feb 2015)

338 Lapu is expensive and there is plenty of 303 SP in the system still


----------



## Lightguns (11 Feb 2015)

Seen a thing I never seen before, the Globeco Mohawk.  SVT action imported into Canada in the '50s and barrelled for .303.  Interesting Ranger rifle given the volume of SVT laying around now.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (11 Feb 2015)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Seen a thing I never seen before, the Globeco Mohawk.  SVT action imported into Canada in the '50s and barrelled for .303.  Interesting Ranger rifle given the volume of SVT laying around now.



interesting, learn something new every day


----------



## KevinB (11 Feb 2015)

.338LM is a long range sniper round -- not practical for the application of the Rangers.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (11 Feb 2015)

Not to mention the price of ammunition when qualifications time comes around. Imagine the cost of a "mad minute" in 338


----------



## KevinB (11 Feb 2015)

A rifle chambered for $10 bills...


----------



## George Wallace (11 Feb 2015)

KevinB said:
			
		

> A rifle chambered for $10 bills...



Paper cuts.  Nasty.


----------



## Mr. St-Cyr (23 Jun 2015)

> NEWS RELEASE
> Minister Fantino Announces Contract Award for the Ranger Rifle Replacement and Upgrade Project
> 
> Contract will help create and support over 120 jobs and economic growth in the Kitchener-Waterloo region
> ...


----------



## RocketRichard (23 Jun 2015)

This looks to be an excellent piece of kit.  Sako makes great rifles.  

_*- mod edited (added new link) IAW army.ca policy -*_
http://www.tikka.fi/rifles/tikka-t3/t3-compact-tactical-rifle


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Jun 2015)

I wonder whether the Enfields will be collected and sold as surplus to the civvie market?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Jun 2015)

I fear for their safety, likely to be crushed  :'(


----------



## RedcapCrusader (24 Jun 2015)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I fear for their safety, likely to be crushed  :'(



They deserve a better fate than the FNs had. Both are beautiful pieces of engineering, there's still time to save one of them.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (24 Jun 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I wonder whether the Enfields will be collected and sold as surplus to the civvie market?



Can't it is actually in the Firearms Act that Government firearms cannot be sold to civilians. It really is too bad as I would love to have one.


----------



## quadrapiper (24 Jun 2015)

Lee Enfields are still used by cadets for drill: the Ranger rifles represent a motherlode of spare parts and rifles to keep the fireable ones at summer training facilities going (used for e.g. feu de joie, etc.), and anything NS can be deactivated and issued to local units.


----------



## Underway (24 Jun 2015)

Did they say at all which version of T3 they are getting?  The 260 or the 308 calibre?  I'm assuming the 308...


----------



## Sig_Des (24 Jun 2015)

Underway said:
			
		

> Did they say at all which version of T3 they are getting?  The 260 or the 308 calibre?  I'm assuming the 308...


.308 Winchester.

Which actually has me thinking about their ammo procurement. Will they source .308 for the Patrols, or will they try to go with NATO 7.62x51?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (24 Jun 2015)

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> Lee Enfields are still used by cadets for drill . . .



Why should a traditional weapon with an historical connection to our military heritage be relegated to cadets?  It is only logical that our serving soldiers have the appropriate legacy items to complement pips and crowns, Elliot's eye and silver insignia.  If we want them to look like they did before unification, let's do it right.

[/sarcasm] . . .

P.S.  _the photo is from 1961 St. John's NF  . . . guess the RCAF weren't trusted with FNs_


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Jun 2015)

Chrome plated Sniders-Martini-Henery's-Lee Metfords-Ross rifles-Lee Enfields and FNC1's for the honour guards.  ;D


----------



## dangerboy (24 Jun 2015)

Beadwindow 7 said:
			
		

> .308 Winchester.
> 
> Which actually has me thinking about their ammo procurement. Will they source .308 for the Patrols, or will they try to go with NATO 7.62x51?



Part of the contract was .308 ammo, there was an allocation of X number of rounds per rifle.  I just can't remember the number off the top of my head.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Jun 2015)

It looks like each rifle is coming with two cases. A soft case and a huge, custom engraved Pelican case.  That hard case will probably cost $800-$1000 on its own lol   

Also seen something about each rifle coming with a trigger lock and a cleaning kit.  I wonder if it will be like the shitty $41 C7 cleaning kits we get issued now. Probably some fancy $100-$200 job.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Jun 2015)

Can I swap my C7A2 for one of those :nod:? Please?


----------



## Ostrozac (24 Jun 2015)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Can I swap my C7A2 for one of those :nod:? Please?



Sure you can, just move to a small town and transfer!

CFSAC just got a lot more interesting.


----------



## Privateer (25 Jun 2015)

What are they doing for optics?


----------



## dangerboy (25 Jun 2015)

Privateer said:
			
		

> What are they doing for optics?



It has iron sights but has a rail on it so if in the future optics can be mounted on it, or if the ranger unofficially happens to mount a sight he can do so without modifying the weapon.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 Jun 2015)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> It has iron sights but has a rail on it so if in the future optics can be mounted on it, or if the ranger unofficially happens to mount a sight he can do so without modifying the weapon.



If we were able to knock off a few hundred more of these and issue them to the infantry we would have a nice little 'designated marksman' rifle.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jun 2015)

You, back in the box!!! 

No thinking allowed


----------



## Privateer (25 Jun 2015)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> It has iron sights but has a rail on it so if in the future optics can be mounted on it, or if the ranger unofficially happens to mount a sight he can do so without modifying the weapon.



Thanks.  The picture on the link posted by RocketRichard did not show iron sights, which is why I asked.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jun 2015)

one of the pictures I saw showed it with what looks like LPA sights


----------



## medicineman (25 Jun 2015)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Can I swap my C7A2 for one of those :nod:? Please?



Trying to go all Lord Lovat with your troops?   ;D

MM


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jun 2015)

Next he will want a Claymore and Bow & Arrows


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 Jun 2015)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Next he will want a Claymore and Bow & Arrows



Oh pshaw...

The only thing missing from this new rifle, that would make me happy as a clam, is a bayonet of course.


----------



## PuckChaser (25 Jun 2015)

Here's an Army.ca-friendly link to a news article showing the new rifle in its shiny case. Looks pretty sweet.

http://www.netnewsledger.com/2015/06/23/canadian-rangers-have-new-rifle/


----------



## shootemup604 (4 Jul 2015)

I want, I want!


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Aug 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I wonder whether the Enfields will be collected and sold as surplus to the civvie market?


Here's at least part of what will happen ....


> ... members of the Canadian Ranger Patrol Groups, who are adults and meet the requirements prescribed by law to hold weapons will be gifted their Lee Enfield rifles when the new C-19 Ranger Rifles are issued ...


I wonder if that'll cover _all_ the Lee-Enfields in the system?


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Aug 2015)

Good idea.  Minimal cost disposal, and it should be pleasing to the Rangers.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Sep 2015)

http://www.army-armee.forces.gc.ca/en/news-publications/national-news-details-no-menu.page?doc=canadian-rangers-approve-of-smaller-more-powerful-new-rifles/ievvvdk2


----------



## Dissident (24 May 2016)

Rumor (Single source, credible) is that CAF snipers are interested in the weapon system. Anyone care to weigh in on this?


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Sep 2016)

Team Blue, June 2015:  "We're happy to announce buying some rifles for testing, then buying more once any glitches are sorted out." (a.k.a. "first contract" in the newest Backgrounder)
Team Red, today:  "We're happy to announce buying a whole swack of rifles." (a.k.a. "second contract")
Rehash?  New news?  Discuss  >


----------

