Why The C2 and Not a Converted BREN?

A before and after pic of a Bren receiver.

Grrrrrr.......why can,t I post images off the net anymore ???
 
Last edited:
stencollector said:
I was still issued a C5A1 for my APC here in Shilo right until 1997. All the rest of the Battery got 50s....I didn't complain though. It was a lot easier hauling the 30 up to the top than the M2QCB.
Click to expand...

97! :-0

I assumed the C5 on our M113 was the last one in existence, on RV92! Certainly it was the only one I saw in the battalion, never saw one again after that ex. One time I even got it to work (in a cloud of CLP) Victory!. I stand corrected.
 
dangertree said:
97! :-0

I assumed the C5 on our M113 was the last one in existence, on RV92! Certainly it was the only one I saw in the battalion, never saw one again after that ex. One time I even got it to work (in a cloud of CLP) Victory!. I stand corrected.
Click to expand...

I had a weapons tech assigned to me as co-driver then, who was freshly posted in from Ontario. He was also surprised to see them still in service as they had long been withdrawn in the units he worked with back in Ontario. While we had C6s, there were no proper mounts at that time to afix them to the top of the carriers. Well perhaps there were elsewhere, but not in Shilo, the land that time (and sometimes the army) forgot.
 
Nobody has mentioned parts support. Since Canada had Canadian Arsenals, where the C1 and C2 were made, we could make our own new parts to support the weapons, not to mention complete new weapons.

As for supporting Brens? Inglis was back to making fridges by then weren't they?
 
Inglis did not have a monopoly on making Bren parts....Cdn arsenals made parts for the Inglis pistols, these days Diemaco made parts for the Lee Enfields. The military has access to the drawings which it will provide to the contractors. I have also seen some JI marked parts on the M3-AC-Basic 50 cals. I suspect, as many have mentioned in this thread, that it was just a matter of modernizing and streamlining that led to the C2.
 
scott585 said:
is this true, any supporting documentation? I ask because I would love to see how they would be made on modern machines and what parts they made. Is the finish different? markings? tooling marks?
Click to expand...

There were photos on the milsurps.com forum a couple years ago (I believe that's where they were...if not it was on this site) of front sight blades for the no4s that were diemaco marked, and if I recall, extractors as well. . In all likelihood it is much cheaper for the life cycle managers to purchase surplus parts off the world market. There was a time in the CF back around 2000 that rear sight assemblies being provided by the supply system were actually for the no5 jungle carbines, and there have been purchases of complete rifles by the CF to supplement the dwindling stocks. But when those sources dry up, then you have to go the manufacturing route. .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom