The New Canadian Ranger Rifle

Leonidas said:
No it doesn't, as members of the CF the rangers could lawfully be issued full auto chain guns and surface to air missiles if that's what was deemed appropriate. A bolt gun has been specified as what's required however the legal classification is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

not true,,,,The rangers keep there guns at home, so it has to be non-restricted because of the firearms act.
 
Leonidas said:
No it doesn't, as members of the CF the rangers could lawfully be issued full auto chain guns and surface to air missiles if that's what was deemed appropriate. A bolt gun has been specified as what's required however the legal classification is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Possession and storage are two different things. The concept has always been that Rangers kept their rifles throughout the year. They are just not paid throughout the year. Like any Reservist in the South, Pte Jones might be a qualified .50cal gunner but that doesn't mean he gets to keep it in his suburban townhouse year round in between exercises. [Sigh, wouldn't that be nice .... :) ]
 
In a previous post someone quoted why is the Canadian Government so in love with Colt Canada .nowadays most buisness that is done behind closed doors - Government and the rest is all kick back related . you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours . and to those that have said in previous posts that Lee Enfield rifles are not accurate you don't know much . I had an old mark 1 and I could hit pop cans at 50 yards with out even trying .

as far as I'm concerned most modern made firearms can't hold a candle to stuff made in the past . Lee Enfield- Mauser Nagants-etc now it's all about spraying bullets . and the new rifles jam easier with a little bit of sand . there's an old saying don't fix what is'nt broken . new parts could be made and if they - the Government look hard enough they could find lots of parts or have them made .

look at the Submarines we bought what a laugh . they sat in salt water for what 10 to 12 years and we payed 869 Million plus for them and they are junk . what a laugh - no it's not funny . I can hardly wait to see the junk they come up with .
 
Thresher said:
No parts base for them. Plenty of spares left over from the war in stock to support the enfield still, not so much so for the moisin. App-ox on you for even suggesting a communist rifle be used to patrol our sovereign north from... well... the communists! ;)
Click to expand...

Getting shot with your own gun is the truest form of irony. ;)
 
maple_leaf_eh said:
Always an interesting read whenever the Ranger rifle is mentioned. Everyone has THEIR favourite rifle and thinks it is the solution. After all they argue, the government will only screw up the contract. Then there are the nostalgists who pine for container loads of nicely wrapped parts, and perfectly specified new in the grease Lee Enfield No.4s to somehow magically appear, like cargo cults of the South Pacific. They reason that because the No.4 is good enough for their once or twice a year trip to the covered firing point, that men in extrordinary conditions can't possibly have a better knowledge than themselves. Finally, there are a scant few realists who have actually read the call for tender. They know the government is insistent on the final choice being currently commercially available, easy to maintain and capable of being supported by, yes, a government designated strategic technical entreprise that happens to be named Colt Canada. This last group know full well that the specification is for a 7.62x51 bolt action with other features and a bunch of useful accessories. Who knows what will happen to the stocks of .303BR and the condemned No.4s? Frankly, I don't really care, because the Rangers are getting a new rifle for a reason.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. I find it sad how many people here want to lumber some guy who gets a hoodie and a few bucks a year with a vintage rifle thats relegated to the milsurp forum, and that he may have to stake his life on. Hopefully they get the best the loonie can buy.
 
Dosing said:
Pretty much. I find it sad how many people here want to lumber some guy who gets a hoodie and a few bucks a year with a vintage rifle thats relegated to the milsurp forum, and that he may have to stake his life on. Hopefully they get the best the loonie can buy.
Click to expand...

a lot of people depended on those rifles with their lives they work new sporting guns are not designed with reliability in sub zero temps in mind
 
smellie said:
Sure give you a whack of information.

Bolt action. Gee whizz! Schmitt? Ross? Lee? Savage? Mauser? Mannlicher? Paravicini? Vetterli? Beaumont? Chassepot? Gras? Berdan? Moisin?

Or something else? Gawd knows there are enough something-elses!

Likely it will be some aluminum-and-plastic abortion of a thing that breaks in half the first time it hits 50 below.

The Lee rifle has been around since 1879.

When are the "experts" going to get it through their heads that there just might be a REASON for that?

The only rifle which can successfully replace a Lee is..... another Lee.

It is the simplest, most robust and trouble-free firearm ever constructed. It has proved that over the past 136 years.

Some day, they might learn!
Click to expand...

and in 136 years it still will be the best all around rifle ever made.
 
cement head said:
In a previous post someone quoted why is the Canadian Government so in love with Colt Canada .nowadays most buisness that is done behind closed doors - Government and the rest is all kick back related . you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours . and to those that have said in previous posts that Lee Enfield rifles are not accurate you don't know much . I had an old mark 1 and I could hit pop cans at 50 yards with out even trying .

as far as I'm concerned most modern made firearms can't hold a candle to stuff made in the past . Lee Enfield- Mauser Nagants-etc now it's all about spraying bullets . and the new rifles jam easier with a little bit of sand . there's an old saying don't fix what is'nt broken . new parts could be made and if they - the Government look hard enough they could find lots of parts or have them made .

look at the Submarines we bought what a laugh . they sat in salt water for what 10 to 12 years and we payed 869 Million plus for them and they are junk . what a laugh - no it's not funny . I can hardly wait to see the junk they come up with .
Click to expand...
submarines sit in salt water all the time…..
 
infideleggwelder said:
submarines sit in salt water all the time…..
Click to expand...

Yes, but crappy deisel subs, sitting because the owners didn't want them is another matter. The work was so slipshod on the first one (chicoutimi) the contract the brits contracted the other three to be built in another yard. Of couse, we bought them, and paid and paid and paid to convert them and justify the purchase, instead of paying a fraction the cost to get surplussed Los Angeles class nuke boats from the states (nuke boats are baaadddd) AN aquaintance of mine died in 2004 on that boat. The frikken things spent more time in the air than the sea kings, and with the crash in the baltic, the sea kings spent more time underwater than the subs did. A good friend of mine told me about the shaft seal leaks. I said "Screw being in a submersible, with a limited reserve of boyancy that leaks!" He said "It's allright, the pumps keep up with the ingress of water". Screw that noise!
 
maple_leaf_eh said:
Possession and storage are two different things. The concept has always been that Rangers kept their rifles throughout the year. They are just not paid throughout the year. Like any Reservist in the South, Pte Jones might be a qualified .50cal gunner but that doesn't mean he gets to keep it in his suburban townhouse year round in between exercises. [Sigh, wouldn't that be nice .... :) ]
Click to expand...

If you have a loan card from the CF you can.
 
A lot of the Rangers use their service rifles for providing food for their families by hunting. For that reason alone, I hope they stick with something chambered in .308 or similar rather than a .223 which I don't think would work well against a bull-caribou
 
DiMP said:
A lot of the Rangers use their service rifles for providing food for their families by hunting. For that reason alone, I hope they stick with something chambered in .308 or similar rather than a .223 which I don't think would work well against a bull-caribou
Click to expand...

The New rifle is a stainless 308 win, 10rd detachable box magazine, iron sights with a picatinny rail, wood laminated stock.
 
homeboy1 said:
As much as I too would love to see a new Lee Enfield being produced I don't think that will ever happen. I would think only India still has tooling for it. I'd be very surprised is anybody else held onto their tooling or if it was in decent enough shape to make anymore anyway. That only leaves a Mauser 98 action. The real sad part here is Colt Canada will simply be reinventing the wheel either way. I will bet that whatever the Rangers are given will cost in excess of $1500 per unit. All this because in a global economy we are unwilling to seek foreign builders such a Zastava to build us a rugged Mauser 98. I am certain they could have provided one for $1000 per unit and then sold 5000 more to guys on this site who would have happily bought one as well.In the end we will have wasted large amounts of money to reinvent the wheel. I would hazard a guess that what ever we end up buying will be inferior to what the Rangers have now. I can't help wondering how many good solid Lee Enfields were ground up in the '80s just to get them out of war stores. I personally saw 100's and 100's of them in boxes during my time in the service.
Click to expand...

India never had tooling for the No.4 rifle. Their Rifle Factory Ishapore (RFI) made the No.1 rifle and later their own variant in 7.62mmNATO. As smellie said in post #50, Pakistan got the No.4 tooling for Pakistan Ordnance Factory (POF) when the U.K. ended production and sold it surplus.
 
Last edited:
Mosin Nagant M 38. Millions on the market in factory condition. Cheap, easy to maintain and operate. Hundreds of millions of spare parts. The 7.62x54R ammo is hugely cheap and as powerful as the .303 British.

And it was designed for the cold and snow of Siberia.

This, except for the corporate bidders and the gullible government, is a no brainer. For a portion of the development costs of a new rifle, we could have thousands of rifles, ammo and spare parts in stock, and on issue.

Besides, it's been mandated that only Colt Canada will build the new rifle. So if the winning bidder is, say, Remington, they have to turn over their plans, prints and privileged info over to a competitor, so the Feds will give them the contract.

Does that sound like sound business sense to you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom