• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

UK Clothing and Equipment of the Infantry compared with CA

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,444
Points
1,160
Loachman said:
I scrounged some range time with an L85A-Nothing at a nice little RM establishment in Poole in early 1990. It shot alright, I liked its compactness, and I don't remember any handling problems, but it struck me as flimsy and fragile and I'm not a fan of descending-post sight reticles, beginning with the one on my No 4(T) (but that is a minor annoyance only). Yes, I know that HK fixed some stuff and jazzed it up a bit, but there's good reason why more countries issue M16/M4/C7/C8 family weapons than L85.

HK just put ear rings on a pig. There's a reason the SAS et al use Canadian C7s...
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
4,113
Points
1,260
daftandbarmy said:
HK just put ear rings on a pig. There's a reason the SAS et al use Canadian C7s...

So, a Canadian-designed defence item that's not a piece of crap?  They should be trumpeting that as part of their advertising  >:D
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
4,113
Points
1,260
PongoCadet said:
I'm proud to be a Canadian citizen, even if it is as bad as some people say and I'd find myself stepping back 40 years compared to the Brit military (which I doubt its that bad).

One of my friends was posted to Suffield for a while and had experience working with BATUS.  He certainly didn't think the CAF was 40 years behind the Brits.
 

JWJ

New Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
Loachman said:
I scrounged some range time with an L85A-Nothing at a nice little RM establishment in Poole in early 1990. It shot alright, I liked its compactness, and I don't remember any handling problems, but it struck me as flimsy and fragile and I'm not a fan of descending-post sight reticles, beginning with the one on my No 4(T) (but that is a minor annoyance only). Yes, I know that HK fixed some stuff and jazzed it up a bit, but there's good reason why more countries issue M16/M4/C7/C8 family weapons than L85.

HK did alot of work internally and externally, to the point the only real issues now are the fact it ejects rounds to the right, and its hard for a leftie to learn to shoot right handed. I've not got experience with earlier L85s so I couldn't comment on how flimsy or fragile they were, though the A2 seems solid and doesn't shake or rattle (depending on how abused its been of course), I think that came from the removal of the green handguard and altering the production method of the trigger mechanism housing.

Dimsum said:
One of my friends was posted to Suffield for a while and had experience working with BATUS.  He certainly didn't think the CAF was 40 years behind the Brits.

I'd be interested to hear his (or your) POV, as all I've heard is negatives about the CAF compared, which though I understand a large amount will be due to the idea that the grass is always greener, there is a huge amount of complaints and worries, with it being called the British Army in the 1980s often, in a lot of threads on alot of forums.
 

Loachman

Former Army Pilot in Drag
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
452
Points
980
Dimsum said:
So, a Canadian-designed defence item that's not a piece of crap?  They should be trumpeting that as part of their advertising

US-designed, by Eugene Stoner, improved many times over many years, and produced to a high standard by Colt Canada. It's cold-forged barrel initially set the C7 and C8 apart from others, but that feature is no longer unique.
 
Top