Canadian Armed Forces looking to retire BHP by 2026

XRAYGUY said:
Hey Fellas. Listen, I never served, am not a "high speed/ low drag" type or an "operator"... I'm just a lifelong redneck firearms enthusiast... and I just don't know why COLT Canada has a monopoly on firearms issued to the CF?

I understand, I think, that the intent is to have secure domestic production... but why Colt Canada, and not Glock Canada, or Sig Canada etc...?

As always, I enjoy the informative threads and unsubscribe from the ones infested with the keyboard warriors...

I L-O-V-E hearing from ACTUAL men who have served and who know.
Click to expand...

I don't know the specifics, but some time after the government closed Canadian Arsenals Ltd. in the 1970s, what was then Diemaco (and is now Colt Canada) became the contractor for CF small arms and spares.

The current arrangement seems overly favourable to Colt Canada. It might be reasonable to build C7s domestically, because there is sufficient demand between the CF and export sales and licensing is not a problem, but it is completely nonsensical for something like pistols. The quantity needed is small and nobody wants to provide their proprietary TDP to a potential competitor. This is one time where commercial off-the-shelf is the way to go. If strategic availability is a concern, lots of spares could be sourced for what it costs to set up domestic production.
 
tjhaile said:
I don't know the specifics, but some time after the government closed Canadian Arsenals Ltd. in the 1970s, what was then Diemaco (and is now Colt Canada) became the contractor for CF small arms and spares.

The current arrangement seems overly favourable to Colt Canada. It might be reasonable to build C7s domestically, because there is sufficient demand between the CF and export sales and licensing is not a problem, but it is completely nonsensical for something like pistols. The quantity needed is small and nobody wants to provide their proprietary TDP to a potential competitor. This is one time where commercial off-the-shelf is the way to go. If strategic availability is a concern, lots of spares could be sourced for what it costs to set up domestic production.
Click to expand...

Thank you, sir.
 
Dsiwy said:
I still have flashbacks of the day Timmies ran out of coffee...


tumblr_mswusbhv1V1rik5jvo1_500.gif
Click to expand...

HAHAHA The struggle is real. I won more on roll up the rim there, then I ever did in my whole entire life drinking TH coffee in Canada.

I won 100$, a camera, dozen doughnuts and coffee.

How you know your Canadian? Running to the nearest bunker, while double fisting TH coffee..
 
OkayShooter said:
HAHAHA The struggle is real. I won more on roll up the rim there, then I ever did in my whole entire life drinking TH coffee in Canada.

I won 100$, a camera, dozen doughnuts and coffee.

How you know your Canadian? Running to the nearest bunker, while double fisting TH coffee..
Click to expand...

You think that was by chance or smart marketing by Tim's. We were all proud of you boys serving over there. Support comes sometimes in strange ways.

Take Care

Bob
 
I hope they don't throw them in the smelter. it would be nice if they went on the market at a reasonable price . to us Canadians of course. and only us. LMAO. it's called wishful thinking .
 
tjhaile said:
I don't know the specifics, but some time after the government closed Canadian Arsenals Ltd. in the 1970s, what was then Diemaco (and is now Colt Canada) became the contractor for CF small arms and spares.

The current arrangement seems overly favourable to Colt Canada. It might be reasonable to build C7s domestically, because there is sufficient demand between the CF and export sales and licensing is not a problem, but it is completely nonsensical for something like pistols. The quantity needed is small and nobody wants to provide their proprietary TDP to a potential competitor. This is one time where commercial off-the-shelf is the way to go. If strategic availability is a concern, lots of spares could be sourced for what it costs to set up domestic production.
Click to expand...

This.

The procurement strategy is nonsensical. No question that it's a big order - but we're talking about he number of sidearms (approximately) to equip The Toronto Police Service. No company (that produces a design that complies with the New CF pistol specifications) is going to hand over manufacturing information to Colt for a run that small.

This is a decent order to be sure, but not worth giving away the keys to the store.

Run a trial, grind the suppliers, and place an order. Buy a bunch of spares. Or, do the smart thing and go Glock like everyone else. Then you don't have to worry about spare parts in 20 years.
 
tjhaile said:
I don't know the specifics, but some time after the government closed Canadian Arsenals Ltd. in the 1970s, what was then Diemaco (and is now Colt Canada) became the contractor for CF small arms and spares.

The current arrangement seems overly favourable to Colt Canada. It might be reasonable to build C7s domestically, because there is sufficient demand between the CF and export sales and licensing is not a problem, but it is completely nonsensical for something like pistols. The quantity needed is small and nobody wants to provide their proprietary TDP to a potential competitor. This is one time where commercial off-the-shelf is the way to go. If strategic availability is a concern, lots of spares could be sourced for what it costs to set up domestic production.
Click to expand...

There you go. Using common and sense and logic to solve a government issue.

They could buy 30,000 Glocks, using the 10,000 surplus as complete parts kits. What part of $400 each would be hard to understand?
 
The primary concern when it comes to procurement is politics and the item being made in Canada, ergo "Canadian jobs". That's why we just blew millions and millions of dollars on boots that rip when you try them on.

Secondly is optics and if a .4 foot 400 pound midget with 3 fingers on each hand can use the gun

Third Canada still employs the pistol as a status symbol and something to carry around an office because a rifle is too heavy rather than an offensive/defensive weapon. Quality and function not important.
 
The US Army and Air Force are also taking forever to pick a new handgun.



"Currently there are twelve bidders for the contract, including the Beretta APX, Ceská Zbrojovka's CZ P-09, FN Herstal's Five-Seven Mk 2, General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems (GDOTS) and Smith & Wesson's M&P polymer handgun; the Glock 17 and 22; and Sig Sauer's P320. An updated version of the M9, the Beretta M9A3, was rejected by the Army and won't be involved in the competition. "

http://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...my-air-force-closer-to-selecting-new-handgun/

Now it's apparently down to only 3 choices "The only truly modular (serial numbered chassis, with swappable frames and top-ends) handguns remaining in the competition are Sig Sauer’s P320, Beretta’s APX, and the long-shot Sphinx SDP."
 
Last edited:
The irony is that, with all the established polymer strikers out there (plus all the new ones coming), you can literally pick one among G17/19, PPQ, VP9, M&P9, etc and all of them will be cheaper, lighter, better ergo, better sight, higher cap and safer (as in you can safely carry in condition 1 and then when you need to use it in an emergency, you can just draw and fire without messing with any safety or having to rack the slide... but again I guess safety is really a training issue) than the HP, and will do what it needs to do. So unless they ask for something stupid like an external safety (LOL, as funny as it may sound... and even then), the project cannot fail like the used subs, the non-offroad trucks, the F35, the new ships...

But again, between the pistol that is the last thing you'll use (and a lot/most wouldn't be able to hit #### with it under any stress anyway) and the tactvest that you'll wear all the time but can only hold 4 mags in front, it's probably more urgent to replace the chest rig first.
 
1riot1ranger said:
This.

The procurement strategy is nonsensical. Run a trial, grind the suppliers, and place an order. Buy a bunch of spares. Or, do the smart thing and go Glock like everyone else. Then you don't have to worry about spare parts in 20 years.
Click to expand...

.... assuming the Glocks last for 20 years .....
 
Ganderite said:
There you go. Using common and sense and logic to solve a government issue.

They could buy 30,000 Glocks, using the 10,000 surplus as complete parts kits. What part of $400 each would be hard to understand?
Click to expand...

You mean what part of - $300 each (max)...... - not kidding. It isn't so long since that number was $197 on orders over 10K - Glocks are everywhere for a reason.
 
I'm glad I'm not in anymore, I would hate to be issued a Glock, I can't stand that weird grip angle that old Gaston decided to use. Knowing how DND procures things, the only pistol that could win is one that Colt Canada already has right to build.
 
Silverback said:
I'm glad I'm not in anymore, I would hate to be issued a Glock, I can't stand that weird grip angle that old Gaston decided to use. Knowing how DND procures things, the only pistol that could win is one that Colt Canada already has right to build.
Click to expand...

Because we use the pistol so frequently and being good with it has a large impact on your career? I can think of a lot of reasons to move on to civilian employment, the issued pistol of choice isn't one of them.
 
Sharps '63 said:
Remember the number of NDs that Glock users in PDs had when the Glocks first came on line? The same thing will happen if we adopt the Glock. Training, training, training ..... Nothing is fool proof in the hands of a fool.
Click to expand...

I was thinking just that. Glocks require pulling the trigger to disassemble, which is just asking for trouble with barely (if at all) trained clerks and non-combat personnel.
 
maxman1 said:
I was thinking just that. Glocks require pulling the trigger to disassemble, which is just asking for trouble with barely (if at all) trained clerks and non-combat personnel.
Click to expand...

Almost every gun in the CAF requires you to pull the trigger before you field strip...

Why? Because it is written in to the BG-L that before any soldier field strips their weapon, they must conduct safety precautions which is follow by dry firing the action.
 
We are the Glock.
Lower your pistols and surrender your magazines.
You will add our technological and ergonomical distinctiveness to your own.
Your military or law enforcement agency will adapt to service us.
Resistance is futile.

1cb0_borg_cube_fridge_closed.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom