C-19 Canadian Ranger rifle will be available to the public

Dorian Gray said:
As long as I get the rifle and at least half of that two million rounds of ammo for my 4000$, I'm happy.
Click to expand...

Well, lets make it more clear:

1) $28 million or $4,000 per rifle = 7000 rifles + case and ammo.
2) almost two million rounds / 7000 = 286 cartridges per rifle

Does a Tikka T3 + case + 300 rounds sound appealing for $4000?
 
Canada tail said:
Can't wait to see who d spend $4000 for this rip-off. oh wait the government has already.
Click to expand...

In case you missed it, $4000 per rifle is the TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP for 2 full years, including training, maintenance, ammo, accessories, etc.

The Rangers are going to abuse these god-awful looking things like a horny crackhead with a blow-up doll. $4000 does not surprise me at all.

That said, I think it's an awful rifle, looks worse, and will be universally reviled compared to the Enfield. That front sight assembly is an abomination and the stock logo just looks tacky. They should have just engraved "Canadian Armed Forces" somewhere on the receiver.

the remington-esque trigger is a stupid choice. In extreme temperatures, they should have gone with a much simpler mechanism like a 2 stage military Mauser trigger or a pre-64 Model 70 trigger. The "thing" they did choose looks like it will be an achilles heel to me.

I also do not like the little hunting sling studs. Nobody uses those anymore in military applications. Some big rugged snap-rings would have been better for keeping these across a man's back as they snowmobile through heavy brush.

That mag release on the front of the TG looks flimsy and will be hard to get at with gloves when the mag is inserted. The mag is also un-necessarily big for a bolt action. A flush-mount mag would have been a better choice IMHO - I doubt many rangers need a whole bunch or rounds at bolt-action speeds, but I can at least buy the argument that maybe they wanted that feature for some reason I'm not grasping. It's the least objectionable of their questionable design choices to me.

Would it have killed them to flare or enlarge the ejection port? What does a jam-clearing drill look like for these?

I hope no rangers have to find out why CRF > Push Feed when dangerous game is around...

Finally, that trigger bow does NOT look like it was designed with gloved fingers in mind.

CASR = THUMBS DOWN.



bg-ncrr-new-canadian-ranger-rifle-lg.jpg
 
Claven2 said:
In case you missed it, $4000 per rifle is the TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP for 2 full years, including training, maintenance, ammo, accessories, etc.

The Rangers are going to abuse these god-awful looking things like a horny crackhead with a blow-up doll. $4000 does not surprise me at all.

That said, I think it's an awful rifle, looks worse, and will be universally reviled compared to the Enfield. That front sight assembly is an abomination and the stock logo just looks tacky. They should have just engraved "Canadian Armed Forces" somewhere on the receiver.

the remington-esque trigger is a stupid choice. In extreme temperatures, they should have gone with a much simpler mechanism like a 2 stage military Mauser trigger or a pre-64 Model 70 trigger. The "thing" they did choose looks like it will be an achilles heel to me.

I also do not like the little hunting sling studs. Nobody uses those anymore in military applications. Some big rugged snap-rings would have been better for keeping these across a man's back as they snowmobile through heavy brush.

That mag release on the front of the TG looks flimsy and will be hard to get at with gloves when the mag is inserted. The mag is also un-necessarily big for a bolt action. A flush-mount mag would have been a better choice IMHO - I doubt many rangers need a whole bunch or rounds at bolt-action speeds, but I can at least buy the argument that maybe they wanted that feature for some reason I'm not grasping. It's the least objectionable of their questionable design choices to me.

Would it have killed them to flare or enlarge the ejection port? What does a jam-clearing drill look like for these?

I hope no rangers have to find out why CRF > Push Feed when dangerous game is around...

Finally, that trigger bow does NOT look like it was designed with gloved fingers in mind.

CASR = THUMBS DOWN.



bg-ncrr-new-canadian-ranger-rifle-lg.jpg
Click to expand...

Actually CASR thought the rifle was a good choice other than laminated stock. I have a CTR and have not had the issues that you mentioned with ejection port size, also it is easy to load single rounds and the magazine release is not a problem.
http://www.casr.ca/bg-ncrr-new-canadian-ranger-rifle.htm
 
rhino62 said:
Actually CASR thought the rifle was a good choice other than laminated stock. I have a CTR and have not had the issues that you mentioned with ejection port size, also it is easy to load single rounds and the magazine release is not a problem.
http://www.casr.ca/bg-ncrr-new-canadian-ranger-rifle.htm
Click to expand...

We will see. The few guys I've talked to personally (actual Rangers who go out in the field north of 60) are not fond of the new rifle.

I know a lot of guys (i.e. recreational users) like the Tikka, but how many of you have operated it for days on end up in the high arctic, or in salt water conditions?

To me, as someone who has been north of 60 for work, it looks like it was specified by a cadpat-wearing (as opposed to a red sweatshirt wearer) item manager whose deployments have included NDHQ and a few supply depots.

Time will tell and I sincerely hope I am wrong. If I go up into the snow tomorrow, I'll not be chomping at the bit to acquire this product as my primary arm.

PS: The CASR website is not populated by end users. It's maintained by NDHQ. If you really want to know what people think of the CASR, put in an access to information request to see the front-line unsatisfactory condition paperwork.
 
Last edited:
From what I understand, this rifle was the best of the available options. I would have liked to compare it to the CZ rifle, but for whatever reason, the military chose this one. it looks like a functional, reasonable replacement of the Lee Enfield. it does not need to look good, just work. I believe it will do the job.
 
I never let the look of a rifle be a deciding factor, i will buy one when available but one thing i have to say is it aint pretty... JP.:rolleyes:
 
I like it.... But I am an engineer and sometimes things look "pretty" to me when they don't to others..... But I agree with the poster above in regards to the small ejection port...... Never understood these.....

As for the poster who questioned why controlled round feed wasn't used, I love Crf myself, but in an extremely sub zero environment, no thanks.... One more moving part to freeze up.....

And for the poster questioning the LOP...... Looks like it has spacers available just like the Ruger scout......
 
I love the Canadian ranger rifles, i all ready have the
Scout Steyr 308 ( runner up)
CZ 557 (runner up)
And hopefully i can buy the real deal... JP.
 
Oh ffs now I have to buy this gun

good thing my idea of making one in .338 just turned into an peep sighted .338.
 
Longwalker said:
I would have liked to compare it to the CZ rifle, but for whatever reason, the military chose this one.
Click to expand...
part of the requirement was it had to be made in Canada for serviceability, Sako has licensed Colt Canada to produce these (probably why they are $4000). CZ does not have a Canadian plant from my understanding

A stainless Tikka CTR (which is really what this rifle is can be bought from CGN vendors for $1299)
 
Is it true that the main issue was production license? And CZ and Steyr didn't want to sell a license to Colt Canada while Sig and other germans didn't even enter the bid on these terms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom