# C7A2



## CT554 (8 Dec 2004)

yeah I've been issued the new C7A2, i was wondering which one you guys prefer,i personally prefer the A2,couple facts i don't like is that doing drill(like present arms) is gonna be hard, it's like doing drill with a C8, and as for the cocking handle, it will probably get caught into our DEU's!!


----------



## Da_man (8 Dec 2004)

I think very few will actually be able to answer this poll.


btw are you on tour in a-stan or did they start issuing it in Canada?


----------



## m_a_c (8 Dec 2004)

Will we be doing drill with the C7A2, the same as the C7 and C7A1?  Or will we be doing SMG drill as per the C8?  Just curious?  How does the cocking handle get caught on your DEU's?  Never seen that before?


----------



## foerestedwarrior (8 Dec 2004)

Is the cocking handle larger than on the A1???


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (8 Dec 2004)

Moved to _Weapons_


----------



## CT554 (8 Dec 2004)

m_a_c said:
			
		

> Will we be doing drill with the C7A2, the same as the C7 and C7A1?   Or will we be doing SMG drill as per the C8?   Just curious?   How does the cocking handle get caught on your DEU's?   Never seen that before?



Well the cocking handle is longer on one side just so you can cock it faster and with only 1 finger.


----------



## m_a_c (8 Dec 2004)

ok didn't know that, I guess that would make it possible to catch your deu's, that sucks...maybe we should just use standard C7's for drill only?


----------



## Q.Y. Ranger (8 Dec 2004)

What do you mean, prefer. As in drill only, or combat effectiveness. Or both. Personally I would take a C8, I find that carbines are most affective, especially if you're armoured.


----------



## CT554 (8 Dec 2004)

Q.Y. Ranger said:
			
		

> What do you mean, prefer. As in drill only, or combat effectiveness. Or both. Personally I would take a C8, I find that carbines are most affective, especially if you're armoured.



yeah but the new C7A2 is the same butt as the C8


----------



## George Wallace (8 Dec 2004)

CT554 said:
			
		

> yeah but the new C7A2 is the same butt as the C8



It may have the same butt, but it also has the same barrel as the old C7A1; not the shorter barrel of the C8.

GW


----------



## KevinB (8 Dec 2004)

C8SFW  ;D


----------



## Armymedic (8 Dec 2004)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> It may have the same butt, but it also has the same barrel as the old C7A1; not the shorter barrel of the C8.



Sorry for pulling your quote George,

But FTR, the butt on the C7A2 is not the same as the C8. It appears close to it, but there are 4 positions for the butt to be put in(All the way out, 2 middle, all the way in). The furthest makes the A2 the same length as the C7.

Other changes...Charging handle is larger, protruding more to the left, ambidextrous mag release, attachment rails in front of hand guards.

Fired may rounds last week. Its nice and compact with butt fully in but the C7A2 is front heavy due to the rails. Also many of us had more difficulty seating the fully loaded mags in the weapon. 

Overall for left handed firers the C7A2 is a better weapon. And no drill will not be any different (just remove the charging handle)


----------



## Yeoman (8 Dec 2004)

KevinB said:
			
		

> C8SFW   ;D



me too.
pretty much all but dukes company has the new a2's in 1 RCR. dukes doesn't have them yet is because they're out in the field and they don't have time to clean rifles till next week, so in the new year 1 RCR will have converted over to the c7a2's, and supposidly by the end of the year, we should have the new c9a2's as well.
Greg


----------



## AmmoTech90 (8 Dec 2004)

Armymedic said:
			
		

> Overall for left handed firers the C7A2 is a better weapon. And no drill will not be any different (just remove the charging handle)



How would one do drill that requires the weapon to be cocked then?


----------



## MCpl Burtoo (8 Dec 2004)

I remember seeing that this might happen a couple of years ago...but like new things in this Army thought it was a "PIPE DREAM"....I like the look of them. 


here is a link too..........

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/101-c7a2.htm


----------



## KevinB (8 Dec 2004)

ALL I can say is I was undewhelmed by my time with the C7A2 

 Eventually we will all get the C8SFW upper along with the C7A2 upper (this is reg 031's I am talking about here)  I had the SFW in Afghan and it was much more useful than the A2.

 I tossed the "Tactical"  : Cocking handle right away though - it sucks and is a hazard.


----------



## CT554 (9 Dec 2004)

you got good points there ARMYMEDIC........does anybody as a pic of the c9a2? It would be interesting to see!


----------



## KevinB (10 Dec 2004)

DO a search I have posted a bunch prior...


----------



## lockedandloaded (21 Dec 2004)

I would be interested in hearing about field evaluations using the Elcan optic. Good/Bad/Ugly?


----------



## KevinB (21 Dec 2004)

I WON"T use a C79 or C79A2 ELCAN - I have used an Aimpoint M2, issued EOTECH 552, and TA31 ACOG.

 The Elcan is to fragile for field usage as the way the mount is designed.


----------



## Gayson (4 Jan 2005)

I would personally go for the C8 any day.

It sucks when your trying to fire the C7 out of the back of an Iltis and the barrel keeps raming into the roll bar as you try to aim.

For Armour I say the C8 is the best.  

Still, the new buttstock on the C7A2 will make things a bit better.


----------



## Fraz (6 Jan 2005)

Yes, for Armour and Urban Ops the shorter barrel is better for confined spaces, but for accuracy and rugged dependability the Infantry need rifles... That is where the main requirement is for pers weapons and for armoured pers to sing the praises of the carbine over the rifle is just plain silly... Granted I like the C8 family of wpn's having used some of them in the past. However, u can't beat having a smaller grouping @ 300 metres with a rifle... I still prefer my LMG tho...  ;D Pro Patria


----------



## Infanteer (6 Jan 2005)

http://nightoperations.com/Doc/Infantry-Rifle-Carbine1.pdf

Actually, look at Mr Boland's paper on the C-7 upgrade - you'll see that a shorter barrel won't reduce accuracy.


----------



## KevinB (6 Jan 2005)

Fraz,

 You have fallen for the Party line...


----------



## 48Highlander (6 Jan 2005)

Fraz, this summer I had the chance to fire an american M4 carbine on a reactive range with targets going out to 400 meters.  I ended up dropping one target more than I had 2 years earlier using a C7.  Unless you consider yourself a sniper and intend to engage targets at 600 meters, a carbine is more than sufficient for your needs.


----------



## McAllister (7 Jan 2005)

> I have used an Aimpoint M2, issued EOTECH 552, and TA31 ACOG



Can the average soldier equip his issued rifle with his/her choice of optics?


----------



## mudgunner49 (7 Jan 2005)

Can anyone who knows KevinB say that they think he is "average"??? ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Fraz (7 Jan 2005)

Sorry KevinB, I just did that to stir up the pot, myself being #1 LMG I'm happily awaiting the moment that I unwrap my new C9 A2... not to mention that I have a soft spot for the C7, although I did get a chance last year to play around with the C8 CQB, that's one nice piece of kit as well...


----------



## noreaga808 (10 Feb 2005)

KevinB, when do you foresee DND issuing the C8 SFW upper along with the C7 upper? Or do you or anyone else know of an actual timeframe when this is to occur? Hopefully soon, it just makes so much more sense to have the shorter barrel. Personally I'd like to see the option for even shorter barrels for Riflemen for FIBUA but I'm sure that would only be available to JTF-2. In my opinion they should phase out the 20" and make the SFW upper the standard and also issue an 11.5" as an option or the 10". It'll make for a large flash with the shorty but makes it much more compact to move around. If anything the SFW upper is the way to go.


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (10 Feb 2005)

;D The way I see it I would be happy with a sling shot and a spoon.

But in all seriousness, I don't believe anyone (with the exception of the infantry) require something with the ungainly length of the C7 A1/2
Myself as a signaller, ive got enough on my plate with the radio/MSG logs to have to worry about slinging that long POS around everytime i have to go for comms gear.  Or a laptop  8)


----------



## Navalsnpr (10 Feb 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> you'll see that a shorter barrel won't reduce accuracy.



Agree fully.  This years DCRA National Service Conditions Competition Winner (Civilian) had a short barrel and still was able to pull off a 559v46 out of a possible 600HPS.


----------



## recce4life (20 Sep 2006)

Does anyone have a good source on a vertical foregrip for the C7A2?  Send me a PM please


----------



## Darth_Hamel (20 Sep 2006)

Is anyone aware if the C-7A2 without front rails loaded is lighter then the regular C-7? I used one all summer in Gagtown and that was a constant debate. It's hard to tell because of the balance being much different. Personally I found the A2 to be a superior weapon, but generally more irritating. Especially the "tactical" sound of always half cocking your weapon on patrol every time the handle got snagged, and not being able store your cleaning kit on the weapon.

Being a jimmy I would prefer the C-8, but I also realise that the infantry are the primary user and they have some different requirements [most I have talked to wish we didn't ditch the 7.62 round].


----------



## George Wallace (20 Sep 2006)

Darth_Hamel said:
			
		

> Is anyone aware if the C-7A2 without front rails loaded is lighter then the regular C-7?



I imagine, without the Elcan, and all its' weight, the C-7A2 would be lighter....... ;D


----------



## brihard (20 Sep 2006)

So for those in the know, are unit QMs retaining the old cocking handles and replacing them on request on the new A2s? If not, I can see a lot of guys ordering a normal cocking handle off of MarStar, or whatever their preferred source may be. I've heard nothing but grief over that elongated POS.

Also, what's the approximate status of the fielding of the A2 to land force? I'm sure it's still making its way through the regs, but is it into non-combat arms use now? Have any reservists received it? I've found no info about the scale of replacement for the system.


----------



## paracowboy (20 Sep 2006)

Brihard said:
			
		

> If not, I can see a lot of guys ordering a normal cocking handle off of MarStar, or whatever their preferred source may be.


and being charged for doing so? :


----------



## Nug (20 Sep 2006)

When you turn over weapons to the system IE swapping A1 for A2 you have to turn over the complete weapon. You are not allowed to keep bits and pieces.


----------



## brihard (20 Sep 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> and being charged for doing so? :



People have been charged for less- and have gotten away with more, based on things I've read here. I'm simply asking the question to enlighten myself. So is there any alternative available to troops in theatre or are they stuck with the snagging one? It simply strikes me as a simple problem with several simple solutions- I'd be surprised if it's not been addressed, based on feedback I've heard about this particular part of the system...


----------



## paracowboy (20 Sep 2006)

I can't speak for what the boys in theatre have done/are doing about the problem, but mine still has a honkin' snago-matic on it.


----------



## HItorMiss (20 Sep 2006)

Some Weapons tech's on my roto had available the old cocking handle at request, but in Bn everyone had the Snag-omatic


----------



## brihard (22 Sep 2006)

That answers that. Thanks.


----------



## paracowboy (22 Sep 2006)

checked around BN for ya. Ever'body still has the snag-o-matic. Forgot why I was doing it, though. Thanks for reminding me.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2006)

The Snag-O-matic and the Drop-the-Mag are parts to the C7A2 (and all A2) weapon series.
 All units issued them (conventional) are required to use them.

Of course they suck - this is what happens when you let a non enduser implement end user requirments...


----------



## brihard (27 Sep 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> The Snag-O-matic and the Drop-the-Mag are parts to the C7A2 (and all A2) weapon series.
> All units issued them (conventional) are required to use them.
> 
> Of course they suck - this is what happens when you let a non enduser implement end user requirments...



LOL. Oh well, I'll have to live with it I guess. I take sick satisfaction in knowing that eventually even Ceremonial Guard will have them, and that Parliament Hill, Elgin, Wellington, and Laurier streets will be littered with 30 round mags during the summers from much botching of present arms, and change arms on the march.  > Maybe then someone at the puzzle palace will have a change of heart.

I'll go back to sucking my militia thumb and cynically quoting Tennyson... "Ours not to make reply, ours not to reason why" and so on and so forth.


----------



## KevinB (27 Sep 2006)

The idea is that left handed users use them and you leave the righty's alone -- of course only units with half a brain or more do that.
  So short of SOF units you will not see it or so I hear, and you dont get to see those units much anyway...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (27 Sep 2006)

Orrrrrrrrrrrr
you could make nice with someone back home prior to going and aquire one made from parts.   ^-^  I'd never do that as what the CF provides it fighting men is beyond reproach.  Just saying... >


----------



## brihard (27 Sep 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> The idea is that left handed users use them and you leave the righty's alone -- of course only units with half a brain or more do that.
> So short of SOF units you will not see it or so I hear, and you dont get to see those units much anyway...



I can see it now...

"In light of concerns regarding the ease of use of discarded right-handed weapons by left handed soldiers due to casualties, equipment failures, etc., all weapons will be thus modified."

Actually, now that I think of it, is there a specific department within the CF I could apply to years down the road where I can apply my talent for creating such BS? There's gotta be some half dozen people with a cushy desk job justifying stupidity...


----------



## KevinB (27 Sep 2006)

My Take on it -- DLR and Soldier System would be proven stupid in public if they reversed themselves...
  So the troops suffer and curse DLR in private (or public forums  )


----------



## brihard (27 Sep 2006)

A Maj from my unit works DLR, so I'm gonna maintain a diplomatic silence, LOL.

I can't talk down on the guy though... Because of him I got to play with an EOTech, AN/PAS-13B, and put more rounds downrange in about twenty minutes than I'd put down in the past year or two... You know how special and rare even three or four mags of ammo is to a reservist- imagine getting to dump 15.  

So, if someone would be willing to enlighten me, what's the process that units (By which I mean regs) follow when a piece of kit is issued that really doesn't cut it? If the issues with the A2 were to be resolved, how would it happen? I gather that a UCR would be submitted, but what happens after that? No more than the necessary minimum of sarcasm and irony, please.


----------



## KevinB (27 Sep 2006)

UCR's are submitted and in theory actioned by DLR -- or an approved command will authorise a unit to do what it wishes to do so.
  - the similar process is for a unti that wants to paint its weapons in combat.

The 15 mag dumps are the reason we get stupid things like a 2" drop on the M203A1 and the C8SFW's heavier than necessary barrel.  My "guess" is DLR 5-5 and the LCMM SA "may" be a bit more effective if they had any actual combat experience.

The LCMM SA lied straight faced to the TF1-06  Battle Group when he said the reason they don't have the KAC RAS is that it overheats the weapons (in average it give 20% more rounds before the weapon reaches its cook off temp...)  
  Sadly this is what happens when the Tail wags the dog and 'specs' its fangs.


----------



## brihard (27 Sep 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> UCR's are submitted and in theory actioned by DLR -- or an approved command will authorise a unit to do what it wishes to do so.
> - the similar process is for a unti that wants to paint its weapons in combat.
> 
> The 15 mag dumps are the reason we get stupid things like a 2" drop on the M203A1 and the C8SFW's heavier than necessary barrel.  My "guess" is DLR 5-5 and the LCMM SA "may" be a bit more effective if they had any actual combat experience.
> ...



For the record it was extra ammunition after a system trial that required live firing to confirm boresighting. they wanted us to get rid of it so they didn't have to return it, and we were happy to oblige.

So who's accountable when things like that occur? If someone straight up lied, is there a means to call them on it?


----------



## KevinB (27 Sep 2006)

No one seems to care...


Many officers and senior senior NCO's have been caught in lies and deceptions at DLR -- no one ever does anything 


Except once trying to charge a little old corporal that point it out once


----------



## brihard (27 Sep 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> No one seems to care...
> 
> 
> Many officers and senior senior NCO's have been caught in lies and deceptions at DLR -- no one ever does anything
> ...



Story time?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Sep 2006)

How much time you got.


----------



## HItorMiss (28 Sep 2006)

Lone Wolf Quagmire said:
			
		

> How much time you got.



Months and Months brother....Months and Months  ;D


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Sep 2006)

Please don't get Army.ca's token attention whore started.


----------



## HItorMiss (28 Sep 2006)

Well ok, but that doesn't mean I don't have the time LOL


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Sep 2006)

Once he gets started.... ;D

it may actually be on this board somewhere.


----------



## HItorMiss (28 Sep 2006)

OH OH where, where???

So excited


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Sep 2006)

unlike yourself my time is limited (should be sleeping)
1000 things going through my mind


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Sep 2006)

no slam intended


----------



## HItorMiss (28 Sep 2006)

absolutely none taken Quag, I wish I had someting to occupy my time more, I envy you I truely do.

Get some sleep you have things to do!


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Sep 2006)

roger.  out


----------



## KevinB (29 Sep 2006)

:

You called it Lerch

The CT series are boat anchors and have been dropped by the CF -- they are heavy and offer a minisule improvement in accuracy (5% according to the testing - for a near double weight increase)  CT series was designed by "tech" folk with no combat experience.

Nolanz -- please STFU


----------



## Kal (29 Sep 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> The CT series are boat anchors and have been dropped by the CF -- they are heavy and offer a minisule improvement in accuracy (5% according to the testing - for a near double weight increase)  CT series was designed by "tech" folk with no combat experience.




With that said, what is filling that role now, if anything?  In 5.56mm that is.


----------



## KevinB (30 Sep 2006)

Seems the Army in its infinite wisdom  : has decided there is no doctrine for a DM system and the AR10's and C7CT's are no longer to be procured.

DLR is aboout inside the box (and they prefer it closed with the light off..) as you can get...


----------



## Bartok5 (30 Sep 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Seems the Army in its infinite wisdom  : has decided there is no doctrine for a DM system and the AR10's and C7CT's are no longer to be procured.
> 
> DLR is aboout inside the box (and they prefer it closed with the light off..) as you can get...



Kev,

Don't be so sure.  Despite all DLR institutional intent to the contrary, the low-shoe-wearing, completely-out-of-touch-with-operational-reality DLR types have apparently been sorted out WRT the AR-10s.  Just last night I was told by someone who definitely knows, that certain DLR types have been been given a big (figurative) wedgie from the field force, and been told by the Army's leadershp (who are now thankfully listening to the coal-face) to get on with rebarrelling the existing AR-10 fleet.  "42 Enemy KIA" appears to have provided  some justification for sustainment of the AR-10 fleet pending a "better" DLR solution.....  

The "Sniper" versus "Designated Marksman" debate continues to rage.  Which is a good thing, provided that we finally reach institutional consensus after 10-odd years of debating the issue.  But for now, the in-theatre value of the AR-10 and the maintenance of same appears to be a "done deal".  As it ought to be.  

On a related note, DLR may not have yet received their "marching orders" regarding the Tactical Vest, but the time is fast approaching based on 3 PPCLI's impending CLS-directed trial of a variety of COTS tac vests.  C Coy 3 VP (TF 1-07) had a fortuitous visit fom MGen Leslie recently, during which the manifest shortcomings of the existing vest were pointed out in no uncertain terms by the rank and file.  To the CLS's credit, he immediately (as in right there, right then) authorized a "buy and try" of COTS vests for C Coy.  The DLR "Soldier Systems" types wedded to their personal pet project were predictably in a snit.  To frigging bad.  The trial is going to happen, and good things are on the horizon.  3 PPCLI's fully UCR-documented complaints regarding the inadequacies of the Tac Vest (submitted 2 years ago, and never acknowledged by DLR) are about to be superseded by CLS-directed COTS trials.  That is a good thing, if long overdue.  I suspect that with MGen Leslie in charge, DLR are about to be summed the frig up.  Lets not forget that these are the same operationally-disconnected staff weenies who have in recent years champioined removal of the .50 HMG and 60mm mortar from the Infantry inventory.  Only to see those same systems employed (and shown on network news) as essential enablers during current operations....   :

Good things are happening, despite entrenched institutional idiocy.  Keep the faith.


----------



## KevinB (1 Oct 2006)

Mark,  Good to hear -- Last week I was fed up listening to the technobabble of ill founded ideas spewing forth from that area...

  I am a firm beleive in every PL having 2 AR10 (or Mk11) rifles -- preferbale kitted out a little better than how the in-service ones are.
After listening to comments made by the LCMM SA and others I am extremely glad they are getting reality forced down their throats -- I would not let up until those people retire...

I am back in Edmonton -- I have a few toys you have to see


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (1 Oct 2006)

How is it decided who the AR 10 shooters are?


----------



## KevinB (1 Oct 2006)

Sniper Det.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (1 Oct 2006)

Seen.


----------



## KevinB (1 Oct 2006)

IF you listened to DLR's justification for the AR10T -- it was an interim until the C14 (Timerwolf) entered service -- now if you can see that logic (7.62 Semi auto = .338LM boltgun) you too can work for DLR  ;D

The C7CT and AR10T where IOR purchases to fill a missing capability for the snipers.

What the C7CT should have been...


----------



## Dissident (24 Jan 2007)

Last week, I shot the C7a2 for the first time in rapid fire.

Had 2 stoppages: one on repetition and one on auto. 

After we were done and I policed up my brass, I had 2 rounds in the mix with bullets that had been pushed back into the casing. 

Not impressed.


----------



## George Wallace (24 Jan 2007)

Dirty Weapon?

Wrong Oil for the cold?


----------



## Dissident (24 Jan 2007)

It was cold, but not nearly cold enough to even pretend that was a factor. (-10C at worst)

And no, my weapon was not dirty. That is kind of insulting, but I can understand where it comes from.


----------



## aesop081 (24 Jan 2007)

Dissident said:
			
		

> That is kind of insulting



Get over yourself......It happens to everyone


----------



## Dissident (24 Jan 2007)

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> It happens to everyone



Sure, but I am talking about one day at the range, and I had cleaned my rifle properly.


----------



## geo (24 Jan 2007)

coulda been a couple of bad bullets in the batch

problem with two outa how many?

Anyone else have similar problems?


----------



## Dissident (24 Jan 2007)

2 out of 270

I saw one other have the same problem on a different day with the same batch of ammo. That day was much colder (-20C at best) and I will not vouch for his weapon cleaning skills. He showed us the round that showed the same problem as mine.

Other might have experienced the same problem, but rounds/casing fell in the snow. No one else repoted anything.


----------



## KevinB (24 Jan 2007)

bullet setback is a relatively common issue.
  happens when the bullet is not properly crimped into the casing up manufacture.


----------



## geo (24 Jan 2007)

Dissident said:
			
		

> 2 out of 270
> 
> I saw one other have the same problem on a different day with the same batch of ammo. That day was much colder (-20C at best) and I will not vouch for his weapon cleaning skills. He showed us the round that showed the same problem as mine.
> 
> Other might have experienced the same problem, but rounds/casing fell in the snow. No one else repoted anything.



so.... 3 outa 540?   0.5%   not perfect but, not bad.  Remember the story of the Brits with their 50 cal ammo?


----------



## Dissident (24 Jan 2007)

I heard something about .50 cal brit ammo (saw a clip on the news) but I never saw details. Link?

But as contrast, I never had stoppages like those with my C7A1. Thats why it came as a shock.


----------



## George Wallace (25 Jan 2007)

Dissident said:
			
		

> It was cold, but not nearly cold enough to even pretend that was a factor. (-10C at worst)
> 
> And no, my weapon was not dirty. That is kind of insulting, but I can understand where it comes from.



Talk about insulting.  Where does "it come from" is just as insulting.

Like I asked.  It could have been a dirty weapon, and perhaps your weapon cleaning skills are up to snuff, as we all know there is always dirt or carbon to be found in a weapon.  I have inspected enough to know that.  Besides, did you do your 'cleaning before firing' or just take them off the rack?

More likely though it could have been the lubricant that you may have used to oil you weapons before firing.  It could have 'gummed' up.  

There are many possibilities as to what may have been the cause.


----------



## geo (25 Jan 2007)

Dissident said:
			
		

> I heard something about .50 cal brit ammo (saw a clip on the news) but I never saw details. Link?
> 
> But as contrast, I never had stoppages like those with my C7A1. Thats why it came as a shock.



Note that we were not going thru as much ammo before KAF and as such were not making huge demands on our supplier - formerly CAL / Lavalin... a company that also makes ammo for the US military.  With the sudden surge in demand, their Mfg uality control might have let a couple thru.  As I6 pointed out, he too has seen some crimping problems.


----------



## PhilB (25 Jan 2007)

I think it is somewhat asinine to only shoot a weapon once, and then attempt to brand thousands of rifles based on your limited experience with one. Not that there arent better system out there, but I used my C7a2 in theater for 9 months with no issues.

Maybe your issues were related to your rifle in particular, the ammo you had, or some sort of user error. That being said if you never had a stoppage on the C7a1 you have clearly not shot it that much.


----------



## Dissident (25 Jan 2007)

It is not that I never had stoppages with the the A1, I just never had that kind before.


----------



## KevinB (25 Jan 2007)

Bullet setback is typical caused by a multiple of issues -- 1) improper crimp on the bullet cannelure (manufacturing issue) 
2) bullet impact with magazine or barrel extention during the chambering phase - this can be corrected by a) new magazine b) M4 feedramps 

As in most things you can get by with a defect in one or two areas -- but when they are compilied all at the same time that is when you have stoppages.


----------



## Desert Fox (2 Feb 2007)

sorry, nm...


----------



## DirtyDog (23 Feb 2007)

HitorMiss said:
			
		

> Some Weapons tech's on my roto had available the old cocking handle at request, but in Bn everyone had the Snag-omatic



I know this is a somewhat late reply and maybe not very well informed since I am only a recent BMQ grad, but any A2 cocking handles that were broken during training on our course were replaced by the old style handle by the weapon's techs.  I had mine replaced, it just came apart during wepaons training one day, and I know of several guys that purposely broke the cocking handles on their weapons to have them replaced.

As fars as drill goes.... Obviously the A1 is much better balanced and suited for drill.


----------



## MJP (23 Feb 2007)

DirtyDog said:
			
		

> As fars as drill goes.... Obviously the A1 is much better balanced and suited for drill.



Cause that is what we look for in a rifle......


----------



## DirtyDog (23 Feb 2007)

MJP said:
			
		

> Cause that is what we look for in a rifle......



Well, obviously.


----------



## Desert Fox (23 Feb 2007)

That evil "d" word (drill) appears over a dozen times in this thread... I have to agree with MJP, drill is a secondary, no not even it more along the lines of a tertiary concern when it comes to a rifle... this is a Weapons and Ammo thread... not a "my life is over because the C7A2 doesnt look as pretty for drill" thread... 

Rant ends, questions in one minute!

the cocking handle is total junk, i've chambered a round by un-slinging my weapon because that wide peice of crap snagged onto my piece of crap vest, but i wont get into the tac vest issue here...


----------



## DirtyDog (23 Feb 2007)

From my limited viewpoint, I know if I was stuck with that POS handle, I'd either ask permission through the CoC to purchase and use my own cocking handle, or I'd break the current one I had and see what I got for a replacement.

The A2's we had in BMQ weren't all that beat up and those cocking handles were falling apart all over the place.


----------



## KevinB (23 Feb 2007)

I junked mine when I had it and put an aftermarket PRI GasBuster on -- its a littel beefier than the normal one and has a slightly larger latch -- but one that does not snag...


----------



## DirtyDog (23 Feb 2007)

Heh, I never realised that C8 to C8SFW pic I see everywhere was yours.

Someday when I make it through training and face deployment I'm going to have to ask you just how the hell can I buy bits of kit and mod the hell out of my weapon.  Is it even possible in a regular Regiment/Battalion?


----------



## Dissident (2 Mar 2007)

DirtyDog said:
			
		

> Someday when I make it through training and face deployment I'm going to have to ask you just how the hell can I buy bits of kit and mod the hell out of my weapon.  Is it even possible in a regular Regiment/Battalion?



Domestically? I would venture that you have no chance in hell.

In theater, it depends who you work for.

In my trade, as long as you keep things color coordinated, most people won't notice the difference. those that do notice a difference are probably trying to get away with as much as you are.

I'm adding things as I go along, waiting for someone to tell me to take it off. I'm canibalizing my poor rifle from home, the girlfriend isnt too happy about that, since she cant shoot it anymore... (Thank you Morpheus)


----------



## DirtyDog (3 Mar 2007)

Dissident said:
			
		

> Domestically? I would venture that you have no chance in hell.
> 
> In theater, it depends who you work for.
> 
> ...



Maybe this isn't the appropiate thread or place to ask this, but how do I go about buying bits of C7 (AR) kit?

What liscenses do i need to buy an upper receiver?

I have a PAL but I thought the AR15 was prohibited?

I assume stuff like an ACOG, aftermarket front handguards, and a vertical front handgrip are easily obtained provided you have the money?

I know getting WAY ahead of myself, but if/wehn I ever see deployment I would definitely like to go carbine with optics other then the Elcan.  I'm just curious as what is possible.  Food for thought more then anything.


----------



## Dissident (3 Mar 2007)

PM inbound


----------



## V (30 Mar 2007)

We were issued the C7-A2 and there were many problems with them.  Magazines were falling off, stoppages, stoppages, stoppages, safety's falling off etc.  Bonus features seems more of a balanced weapon, folding stock accomodates different shooting positions.   And yes it looks fancy...

  V


----------



## Nfld Sapper (30 Mar 2007)

V said:
			
		

> We were issued the C7-A2 and there were many problems with them.  Magazines were falling off, *stoppages, stoppages, stoppages*, safety's falling off etc.  Bonus features seems more of a balanced weapon, folding stock accomodates different shooting positions.   And yes it looks fancy...
> 
> V



Maybe bad batch of ammo? and not the weapon.


----------



## TCBF (30 Mar 2007)

Dissident said:
			
		

> Last week, I shot the C7a2 for the first time in rapid fire.
> 
> Had 2 stoppages: one on repetition and one on auto.
> 
> ...



- The old 'SARP Newsletter' from the eighties, IIRC, stated a MRBF of 1000, so if you got 2 stoppages doing a PWT, bad luck.  Impacted cartridges however, can be bad crimps, or dropping the full mag or cardboard ammo box on it's nose.  Military ammunition generally has good crimps on the projectile (and the primer) to prevent such things from happening through 'normal' abuse.

Remember to clean the 'ledge' in your bolt carrier and space the gaps in the bolt rings.


----------



## Gunnerlove (30 Mar 2007)

Weapon myth alert : spaced gas rings. Swat magazine had an article on AR-15 myths, and they said off setting the gaps was a myth as the rifle only needs one ring to operate. I stripped all but one off of my bolt and it kept working and working. I have since swapped new ones on so it does not flop cock around in the groove, but I maintain this one is busted.


----------



## TCBF (30 Mar 2007)

Interesting, thanks.

I bought an AR-15 SP 1 in 1973, acquired a TM for it, and loyally spaced my gas rings all of these years.  I sold it when they became too mainstream.  

A quote from another website: "If it doesn't have at least 300 linear feet of Picatinny rail, it ain't tactical."


----------



## TheHead (12 May 2007)

I've never done Drill with a C7A2, an intelligent RSM/CSM (Whoever is in charge of the drill team) will just re-issue C7A1 rifles back to you.   Also I've seen no difference in the stoppages of the weapon. It fires fine.  Yes the cocking handle is junk, just try and get an old C7A1 cocking handle.  

Also with "pimping your gat"  always depends on your CSM in country and out.   Ours was a typical dinosaur and we were told we could bring our own weapons when we were IN theater (While A Coy was walking around with far superior kit). Kind of late isn't it  :


----------



## DirtyDog (20 May 2007)

TheHead said:
			
		

> I've never done Drill with a C7A2, an intelligent RSM/CSM (Whoever is in charge of the drill team) will just re-issue C7A1 rifles back to you.   Also I've seen no difference in the stoppages of the weapon. It fires fine.  Yes the cocking handle is junk, just try and get an old C7A1 cocking handle.
> 
> Also with "pimping your gat"  always depends on your CSM in country and out.   Ours was a typical dinosaur and we were told we could bring our own weapons when we were IN theater (While A Coy was walking around with far superior kit). Kind of late isn't it  :



When you say "own weapons" do you mean actual weapons or just accessories?


----------



## KevinB (20 May 2007)

He means parts and accessories.


FWIW a little tech note I stole from elsewhere -- not just C7 specific.



> 2.  Firearm performance in adverse conditions:  Firearms do not perform reliably when sand, dust, snow, or water are blown into the mechanism by wind, moving vehicles (helicopters!) or by muzzle blast. Local conditions and exposure to contaminants must dictate the extent of cleaning and the number of times that cleaning will need to be carried out during the day.  It just takes more work to keep a firearm operating under extremely bad conditions.
> 
> 3.  Cleaning and lubrication in adverse conditions: U.S. Forces have followed a long tradition of leaving firearms dry of lubricant during desert operations under the belief that less sand adheres to a dry surface more than to a lubricated one.  This tradition has been proven incorrect.  The need for good lubrication even in the desert has been well established during desert training and peace keeping operation, during the Gulf conflict, and by trials in a variety of climatic conditions.
> 
> ...


----------



## DirtyDog (20 May 2007)

So I-6, do you beleive in that advice?  obviously lube is a good thing but is it wise with all the sand?

Also, what cleaner/gun oil would you reccomend?  I've heard of some miracle lube/cleaners out there......


----------



## KevinB (20 May 2007)

My M4A1 here is wet, quite wet...

   I use CLP predominantly -- since the US mil uses it.   I have some MPro7 cleaner that I will use occasionally to scrub the barrel on my Stainless Steel match barrel.  For a Chrome lined barrel -- just brass brush and a CLP and a patch thru later.

The only time I remove carbon is when its baked on -- carbon will not bake on until the CLP hase been burnt off from the heat of firing multiple round.  

I dont clear my weapon very often   - so there is not a lot of palces for dirt to enter my weapons -- I put a foamy earplug in the muzzle and am good to go.
  The PITA is dependant on the chopper crews as some have you clear on Adm flights -- so then you get some ick from the dust.

Keep in mind I roll in an armoured suburban - and only crack my door to get out and give someone some love -- so I'm not the best example for dust and dirt accumulations.

That said in Afghan with the CF -- I never had problems with dirt build up (the outside looked grim -- but never the inner)


----------



## KevinB (20 May 2007)

FWIW -- In Kabul  - MJP and I where on a range where we tried just about every method under the sun.
 Dry, Graphite, Littel bit of CLP, Lot of CLP, Militec etc.

Dry is fine for a few rounds -- go over 150 and your having troubles
Graphite -- -- well lets not try that one again..

I tried dry telfon as well later on.


The best method I believe is CLP - and a heavy coat.

MJP can relate his experiences later from TF1-06 too


----------



## Dissident (20 May 2007)

Yeah, I am a firm believer in the gospel of [Infidel-6]. 

However, it is unfortunate that this will be an uphill fight against common wisdom. I don't see this being an easy sell the the CoC.


----------



## MJP (20 May 2007)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> FWIW -- In Kabul  - MJP and I where on a range where we tried just about every method under the sun.
> Dry, Graphite, Littel bit of CLP, Lot of CLP, Militec etc.
> 
> Dry is fine for a few rounds -- go over 150 and your having troubles
> ...



Ahh yes I remember that range....good fun especially the iltis shoot.  I'll second Kev's assesment and say go with a wet weapon.  It makes for more work at times overseas for you to keep sand from gumming everything up but it's worth knowing your weapon will fire.  No matter what precautions you take sand/dust will find it's way into your weapon.  Especially if your vehicle based.  Driving around will force the sand into your weapon so at the end of the day or during make sure ya give a quick 2minute wipe down of any grit.  It just became part of our daily procedure when we stopped to quickly wipe and reoil down the Pintle and Co-Ax MG and then our own weapons.  Took 2 minutes and it was good to know that a) the weapons were good to go for anything that could happen at night and b)good to go for the next day.





> However, it is unfortunate that this will be an uphill fight against common wisdom. I don't see this being an easy sell the the CoC.



I don't understand what you are getting at?  It has nothing to do with your CoC and everything to do with doing your job as a soldier and/or leader to make sure your weapon(s) work.  Like you said it is common wisdom and for the most part soldiers will do this on their own.


----------



## Dissident (21 May 2007)

We are getting way off topic here, but you have to take a look at what trade I am in. My CoC is not one to let people deviate much from the straight and narrow on minor technicalities.

Sure, I will be doing this and I will pass it on back at home. But if I get caught teaching this, or if corporal Bloggings gets caught doing it and points back to me:"But sir, I read it on the internet" just won't cut it. 

It doesn't matter if it is true or not. Pushing stuff from the bottom up is notoriously hard, especially if it flies in the face of what superiors have "known" all their life. Making a WO, without a combat tour, come too terms with the doctrine he has learned/taught being wrong, is not an easy thing to do. 

Like I said: I try, but it is an uphill battle, from the sgts to the major.


----------



## KevinB (21 May 2007)

Diss -- which is why the CF really needs to come up with BN or Bde drive S7 (Force Modernization) cells.

 A few checked out NCO's under a young but intelligent Capt.   
Info gets pushed up and out to the others.


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (15 Jun 2007)

I went through about 1100rds on my A2  the range @ CJ in 05.  It was all rapid/auto practical stuff, prone, kneeling, walking doubletaps ect.  Stoppages were NIL  I kept it almost dry for the 1st 300 and I gave it a couple squirts of CLP throughout the afternoon. Worked pretty well, but dirty as hell after.
ab


----------



## MG34 (19 Jun 2007)

In A'stan my platoon ran all of our weapons with the same moly grease that the 25mm cannon uses. The GPMGs ran like a charm, as did the C7 and C8s. No stoppages that were not directly magazine related were seen on any C7/C8,the C6s were easy to clean and ran like tops. I recommend this stuff to anyone  going overseas. best part every LAV has a few tubs of this stuff so it's an easy re-supply.


----------



## Brockvegas (25 Jun 2007)

Hey guys, just out of curiosity, has anyone tried using Hoppes No.9 after cleaning as a lube? Having yet to do my training, I have no experience with gas operated firearms, but I've never found a better oil for any of my hunting rifles.


----------



## 1feral1 (25 Jun 2007)

The only authorised lubricant for small arms is CLP. In theatre, there can be some relaxing to this.

Bringing your civvy stuff to trg will only drawn the heat. Just use what they give you.


Wes


----------



## Brockvegas (25 Jun 2007)

Wes, I didn't mean to imply that I was bringing any to training, I've got a bit more common sense than that. I was only wondering if anyone had used it with positive results.


----------



## KevinB (25 Jun 2007)

Its more of a cleaner than a lube.

 I've used it to clean my personal AR's -- but not to lube --- I've pretty much settled on the MPro7 series of stuff now -- cleaner - copper remover - and a lube.  Best bet unlike a lot of others is not hazmat so you can mail it (and consequently order it while in theatre) -- the lube has a better consistency than CLP (IMHO) -- but really if CLP is provided I would not fell hard done by.


----------



## Soldiers-wear.dk (7 Jul 2007)

Hey all!!

Does anyone of you have experience with the C7A2?

I´m in the danish army and we are going to get some in the near future 

please pm me if you have some pictures and movies about the weapon or some tips

brian

ps check out my webshop www.soldiers-wear.dk 

please email photos and movies to kontakt@soldiers-wear.dk


----------



## -rb (7 Jul 2007)

There should be no shortage of people here with experience on the C7A2, have a read through the forums as there are many topics that already cover thoughts and opinions on the weapon by members here. As for pictures, check out http://www.combatcamera.forces.gc.ca , you'll find tons of pics on there of the C7A2 in action overseas.

cheers.


----------



## Dissident (8 Jul 2007)

Soldiers-wear.dk said:
			
		

> Hey all!!
> 
> Does anyone of you have experience with the C7A2?
> 
> ...



Did you even bother reading the thread?


----------

