New rifle for the Rangers.

[gitrdun]

Betcha they're gonna love the old LE's even more.

[dgitz]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

They could lock it in a drag bag just as easily, I think.
The only time the Pelican might be handy would be in aircraft transport IMO, when on the land or in a boat space is always an issue , and Pelican take up a lot of room.
The problem with my thinking of course, is it is my opinion ( which has no bearing on what the people thought who designed this kit)
I have logged thousands of miles over the years in rough country with dog teams, snowmobiles , trucks float plains and in boats using a military prototype drag bag and some aftermarket style soft cases, but as I said, it has no bearing on a study and subsequent kit designed by somebody else!
Cat

Scrolling down further in the article it looks like they get a nice red one.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by dgitz

Scrolling down further in the article it looks like they get a nice red one.

It could be the craziest camo made or the most flaming colour of hot pink/ the cases will end up in the same place !
Cat

[quasi]

funny the article didn't mention Alan Rock had all of Canada's stockpile of #4 Lee Enfield rifles destroyed, thus requiring this over priced P.O.S.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by quasi

funny the article didn't mention Alan Rock had all of Canada's stockpile of #4 Lee Enfield rifles destroyed, thus requiring this over priced P.O.S.

I don't think Rock did because they have been using the Enfield long after he was gone.
Also, he would not be able to order their arty to do anything as far as destroying rifles go , that would be up to the mister of Defence and the military themselves
Cat

[airbornedeerhunter]

Originally Posted by quasi

funny the article didn't mention Alan Rock had all of Canada's stockpile of #4 Lee Enfield rifles destroyed, thus requiring this over priced P.O.S.

That's because it never happened. Please explain how a Minister of Justice could order the DND to destroy anything?

[quasi]

the Rangers are not just an Arctic force, there are Rangers in Alberta.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by quasi

the Rangers are not just an Arctic force, there are Rangers in Alberta.

I'm not sure why you are mentioning this because no one said they were high Arctic only, in fact in another thread about this rifle I mentioned they they patrol both coasts and the Athabasca area as well.
Some if my friends in Ft. Chipewyan are Rangers on fact, and a few of my Newfy friends here were attached to the Rangers in Newfoundland .
I also have shot a Winchester 94 that was stamped with the Rocky mountain Ranges insignia
Cat

[dgitz]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

It could be the craziest camo made or the most flaming colour of hot pink/ the cases will end up in the same place !
Cat

Sorry I was unclear, looks like they get a red drag bag as well.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by dgitz

Sorry I was unclear, looks like they get a red drag bag as well.

Oh yeah I saw that the other night but it didn't register !
That may end up on the same place as the Pelican however!!
Cat

[colroggal]

I wonder what happened to the ruger prototype? I saw pix somewhere of an m77 with a red composite stock, 20 inch med contour barrel and what looked like the accuracy int. Mag off the gunsite scout.

Aside from the flaming red stock I could have gone for one of those. Seems to me a crf action would be more reliable in the extreme conditions these gents face.

Colin

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by colroggal

I wonder what happened to the ruger prototype? I saw pix somewhere of an m77 with a red composite stock, 20 inch med contour barrel and what looked like the accuracy int. Mag off the gunsite scout.

Aside from the flaming red stock I could have gone for one of those. Seems to me a crf action would be more reliable in the extreme conditions these gents face.

Colin

I never heard of any issues with the push feed Enfields, I doubt that it would make a huge difference
Cat

[Unregistered user]

It's just a gun.
Why is Made in Canada even a requirement?
NAFTA has essentially destroyed manufacturing in Canada, don't believe me? Go to Oshawa and talk to thousands of permanently unemployed former auto-workers.
Made in Canada replaced the Jeep with ILTIS, after that fiasco failed in Afghanistan it was replaced with a German built SUV.
And this is just a gun.
We are told $6k per rifle, how much more was spent on all the committees and meetings over the years? Why not an off the shelf NAFTA nation made product? We bought a gun from Finland?
A Savage bolt gun that Joe blow can buy at retail for $500 could be had in bulk for the same$500 even if a government "Procurement specialist" was involved.
A semi auto only AR in .308 could be had for $1k a pop.
What a golden opportunity to de-restrict the AR and kill the stupid and pointless mag. capacity restrictions, after all the Rangers are civilians and wouldn't we all benefit?.
Subjected to harsh use how many months will each gun last?
We are told the Rangers are not combat troops, merely a presence and filling an observer's role and the gun will usually be used for the individual's protection and sustenance. Fine, why involve the army mind set? Why do all guns have to be the same?
Much more sensible would be to give each Ranger a "Gun allowance" and let him/her choose the rifle most suited for that individual. A set amount could be given each Ranger which must be applied to the purchase of a gun, whether they choose to top up the amount and get something spendier is up to the Ranger as he is going to live with his decision on a daily basis. The arrogance of politicians to think they know what's best for them is so damned typical when the Ranger knows what is really best.
After a year or 3 or whatever let the Ranger keep the rifle to do with as he pleases as a thank you and let him buy a new one.
It's just a bloody gun ladies, quit wetting yerselves.

[catnthehat]

I have to agree, 6 grand is way to steep but the Gubment is involved!
One must also remember that the Rangers are reservists, and attached to the RCR, they train with the regulars and shoot competition with them as well.
To that end, they need to shoot uniform ammo, to leave it up to the individual to buy his own kid would end up as nothing short of a FUBAR.
This way the Forces can fly in ammo as needed and keep each company supplied .
Cat

[colroggal]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I never heard of any issues with the push feed Enfields, I doubt that it would make a huge difference
Cat

True. Suppose I'm just thinking of the high quality of workmanship we tend to see in mass produced firearms these days. Its doubtful that Sako would allow these to be cut from that cloth.

[sikwhiskey]

Originally Posted by colroggal

True. Suppose I'm just thinking of the high quality of workmanship we tend to see in mass produced firearms these days. Its doubtful that Sako would allow these to be cut from that cloth.

Colt Canada is tooling up and making the receiver, bolt and barrel under license from Sako. Not sure where they are getting the stocks. Colt Canada makes quality guns, no doubt they pull through for the Rangers.

[Hotwheels81]

And people complained that the .303 was useless as a big game cartridge... Now they get stuck with a paltry .308.... Tisk tisk...

Maybe it's the gooberments way of starting a new cartridge debate among the armchair generals.... Some folks remember when the FAL was dropped for the lil pop gun 5.56 now a whole new generation can complain about how the polar bear stopper .303 was dropped for a deer rifle... Haha


Hmmmmm gotta ask a few buddy's to see if anyone up here gets one to play with! I wanna see one close up!!

[Got Juice?]

I hope they make these available to the gen public.... I could only dream.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Hotwheels81

And people complained that the .303 was useless as a big game cartridge... Now they get stuck with a paltry .308.... Tisk tisk...

Maybe it's the gooberments way of starting a new cartridge debate among the armchair generals.... Some folks remember when the FAL was dropped for the lil pop gun 5.56 now a whole new generation can complain about how the polar bear stopper .303 was dropped for a deer rifle... Haha


Hmmmmm gotta ask a few buddy's to see if anyone up here gets one to play with! I wanna see one close up!!

Over on CGN there is an epic thread on this new carbine.
After a pile of posts criticizing everything from the sights to the barrel length to the colours to the bolt a member popped up and said that
" this Ranger had a hand in designing this rifle and it meets all of the criteria - your input means nothing , I like it.
And I get one and you don't"
Or something very close to that!
Bottom line is the Rangers had a hand in building their own rifle and I like it as well - not that that means anything
Cat

[quasi]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I don't think Rock did because they have been using the Enfield long after he was gone.
Also, he would not be able to order their arty to do anything as far as destroying rifles go , that would be up to the mister of Defence and the military themselves
Cat

then what happened to the #4's and the C-1's that were in reserve. The #4 is a controlled feed rifle, not a push feed.

[gbart]

Does anyone actually know for certain what the final cost of this procurement will be?

Quick google search shows:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitche...fles-1.3124932

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

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by quasi

then what happened to the #4's and the C-1's that were in reserve. The #4 is a controlled feed rifle, not a push feed.

The Lee Enfield #4,the last time I checked, will single load manually without using the mag .
A true control round feed bolt action will not , such as an un-altered 1917 Enfield, P14, pre-64 M70, of an un-altered 1898 Mauser .
As was already pointed out, a Justice minister has no authority over the DND
Cat

[JimPS]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

As was already pointed out, a Justice minister has no authority over the DND
Cat

The procurement cost is way too steep.

It looks like the military - industrial complex procurement gravy train is alive and well in Canada.

On Jan. 17, 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower gave the nation a dire warning about what he described as a threat to democratic government. He called it the military-industrial complex, a formidable union of defense contractors and the armed forces.

Why not give the Rangers a nice voucher so they can purchase their own rifles and accessories anywhere they want. It would be a great economic shot in the arm for local gun shops and Canadian online gun retailers. An ongoing after sales repair and maintenance contract would also be a great opportunity for qualified gunsmiths to expand the trade and share the gravy.

All this would save the taxpayer a bundle.

Heck, there would be enough money in the proposed procurement to provide the Rangers family with a nice voucher to travel south and go mall shopping while dad goes out and buys his rifle.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by JimPS

The procurement cost is way too steep.

It looks like the military - industrial complex procurement gravy train is alive and well in Canada.

On Jan. 17, 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower gave the nation a dire warning about what he described as a threat to democratic government. He called it the military-industrial complex, a formidable union of defense contractors and the armed forces.

Why not give the Rangers a nice voucher so they can purchase their own rifles and accessories anywhere they want. It would be a great economic shot in the arm for local gun shops and Canadian online gun retailers. An ongoing after sales repair and maintenance contract would also be a great opportunity for qualified gunsmiths to expand the trade and share the gravy.

All this would save the taxpayer a bundle.

Heck, there would be enough money in the proposed procurement to provide the Rangers family with a nice voucher to travel south and go mall shopping while dad goes out and buys his rifle.

They do not supply their own rifles because the Government needs to ensure that all rangers have uniform ammo, many places where the rangers are prevalent have no ready access to ammunition.
They need to have reliable firearms, which can be ( if need be) serviced if need by by an armorer- back to the point about uniform firearms .

The fact that these rifles will likely be way overpriced has nothing to do with how reliable and serviceable they will be.
The Canadian Rangers had a hand in the design and development of this firearm, so in essence they got what the wanted.
Cat

[Morpheus32]

I don't think some of you understand what is included in the total procurement price. It is not just a rifle and the case. It includes spare parts, tooling for the weapons techs to repair, but most of all it will include the technical specifications which allow DND to "own" the design. It will also likely include at least one life cycle management run, that is the rebuild and refit ofthe rifles at a specific point in the weapons life. That is normally included in the costing of the rifle. I can guarantee that the replacement cost of the rifle itself is not $6K but more likely in the price range we would expect. The same goes for just about everything the military buys, it is not a one off cost but rather the life cycle (10, 20 or 30 years) of service. When we purchased the C7 series of rifles, they included rebuilds as part of the life cycle, the same for the radios we use.

So make sure you understand what the costs truly are before you go off half cocked. Buying a rifle for $900 then not being able to repair it makes no sense to the military. Weapons have life cycles measured in decades.

[Deer Hunter]

There will most likely be more caribou or seals killed with this weapon than anything else. Its hardly a front line small arm and doesn't need to be procured as such.

[Morpheus32]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

There will most likely be more caribou or seals killed with this weapon than anything else. Its hardly a front line small arm and doesn't need to be procured as such.

It is the standard issue rifle to the rangers, so yes it does. It has to be managed and life cycled or it is a waste to even purchase the rifle in the first place. Unless that is your point. It is not a one time issue and then walk away. The rifle is going to last generations of Rangers throughout the country. They need to have parts and they need to have the ability to repair them. We do this for every piece of equipment we purchase unless DND decides it is a one time purchase and we get rid of it if it breaks. In this case, we are not going to ditch the rifle because the stock gets a crack or the barrel damaged.

[sikwhiskey]

Originally Posted by Morpheus32

I don't think some of you understand what is included in the total procurement price. It is not just a rifle and the case. It includes spare parts, tooling for the weapons techs to repair, but most of all it will include the technical specifications which allow DND to "own" the design. It will also likely include at least one life cycle management run, that is the rebuild and refit ofthe rifles at a specific point in the weapons life. That is normally included in the costing of the rifle. I can guarantee that the replacement cost of the rifle itself is not $6K but more likely in the price range we would expect. The same goes for just about everything the military buys, it is not a one off cost but rather the life cycle (10, 20 or 30 years) of service. When we purchased the C7 series of rifles, they included rebuilds as part of the life cycle, the same for the radios we use.

So make sure you understand what the costs truly are before you go off half cocked. Buying a rifle for $900 then not being able to repair it makes no sense to the military. Weapons have life cycles measured in decades.

Yes, also as I undesta it, the price covers the initial cost for colt to Start building rifles, once the first thousand or so are paid for I would think the production cost will drop to normal, 1-2k. Hopefully they make 1000's and offer something similar to the public offsetting initial costs

[Okotokian]

So I attempted a little self-education and perused the rangers website. Though they are a branch of the Reserves, in purpose/role they seem to be primarily a search and rescue/ eyes and ears sort of force. They aren't trained to take on foreign military forces they might encounter, hence the bolt action hunting rifle rather than an automatic or sniper variant. Makes sense. HOWEVER, that said, I would think the weapons needed would be no different than the rifle that would be supplied to park wardens, conservation officers, etc. to deal with problem bears, angry elk, moose, etc. I'm pretty sure they don't get $6,700 rifles. Strikes me any quality rifle with a synthetic or laminate stock with stainless steel barrel/action would do the trick.

Problem with the current purchase is that we aren't even buying it from the manufacturer. We are buying it from Colt, who will then have to pay licensing fee etc. to Sako. Should have just gone to Sako, or better yet, order 6500 Sakos through Cabelas.

[Morpheus32]

Originally Posted by sikwhiskey

Yes, also as I undesta it, the price covers the initial cost for colt to Start building rifles, once the first thousand or so are paid for I would think the production cost will drop to normal, 1-2k. Hopefully they make 1000's and offer something similar to the public offsetting initial costs

Normally does not work that way. The costs of production, spare parts and tech specs are for the entire run of the rifles to include the provision of the "kit" as shown in the pictures. As the military will own the "specs", Colt or anyone else can not produce it without the military's permission.