C-19 Canadian Ranger rifle will be available to the public
- Thread starter CanadaBoy
- Start date
Which is a pretty admirable condition. Kudos to whoever added that clause into the bid, even though that is one hideous rifle.
I am looking forward to hearing how it stands up in field use. A larger trigger guard might have been better for a one finger mitten... but not sure it is any different that the No.4 being replaced. The mauser extractor and ejector we have become so fond of because of "controlled round feed" has another significant advantage in cold weather in that there is no spring loaded ejector plunger buried in the bolt face where it can corrode or freeze and no small spring buried in the side of the bolt to press the extractor against the cartridge rim... the 98 style places these items were they are readily accessible, full proof and very strong ... I dont like the Tikka implementation of these necessary components. The CZ was FAR superior in this regard. I also agree that the trigger is a problem waiting to happen when a rifle like that gets dropped in the bottom of a skiff on its way out into Hudson Bay or off the coast of Labrador...as it will. But I want to be surprised and proven wrong... time will tell. And I personally don't want to second guess the guys who had to handle this procurement as I am certain is was not easy!! and I am confident they got the best firearm they could with the constraints they were dealing with.
The CZ Ranger rifle is based on the CZ557 action which is a very different action to the CZ550 i.e no Mauser type extractor or ejector
https://www.czub.cz/en/news/news/606-the-new-cz-557-centerfire-rifle.aspx
Assembled, built, whatever....It's important to the DND, but not to me, which is why if I wanted a rifle like this I'd save myself a few thousand and buy a Ruger GSR.
Wait what? I mean.... tell me, I fail to understand. If Colt Canada can make barrels and bolts and receivers. Why they license ANYTHING from Sako. I don't get it. It's not a jet fighter.
If Colt Canada can't think of how make a new rifle, just ####ing copy this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0i3Rn36UzO8
all patents expired, all blueprints are public domain.
It's like Famae building SG 540 and 542's under license from Sig, not sure what you fail to understand.....Colt never entered their own rifle to the trials, Sako won the contract with their rifle design, not Colt.
I do not understand why would you need to license a budget Tikka T3, if you have manufacturing capacity to begin with.
I do not understand why can't you take a half a dozen KNOWN and PROVEN actions which are 100-50 years old and make any rifle you need. Starting as I said I hinted with Mauser M98.
I do understand that Chile produces SG 540 under a license. It had no capacity to design and manufacture modern military firearm at the time. SIG had patent on SG 540 and all design testing donw AND provided tooling and expertise needed to setup production in Chile.
What is so complex in making a bolt action rifle if you already have an ability to manufacture barrels and bolts and receivers and its 2016 so bolt actions have been 100 years old. Why do have to pay Sako for cheapest action in their lineup?
I do not understand why can't you take a half a dozen KNOWN and PROVEN actions which are 100-50 years old and make any rifle you need. Starting as I said I hinted with Mauser M98.
I do understand that Chile produces SG 540 under a license. It had no capacity to design and manufacture modern military firearm at the time. SIG had patent on SG 540 and all design testing donw AND provided tooling and expertise needed to setup production in Chile.
What is so complex in making a bolt action rifle if you already have an ability to manufacture barrels and bolts and receivers and its 2016 so bolt actions have been 100 years old. Why do have to pay Sako for cheapest action in their lineup?
seems you re not the only one ....
if it s in the news paper .... cant wait to see made in Canada Tikka ....
you think the assembly alone is what is making a $1300 dollar rifle $4000? If so, our military is not very smart.
Colt would not need to be licensed to manufacture the rifles if all they are actually doing is assembly
for sure that contract has been made by smart people paying 4000 a rifle that worth 1300 .... at the end like some others i m waiting to see how well they will last .. end users are not known to be nice with their tools ....
- Location
- The Conservative part of Ontario
They wanted a Canadian built rifle, but none built here matched the specs. So, they arranged for Colt to build a foreign rifle here. Nice Conservative compromise. I wonder what kind of slingshot the Liberals would have given them?
Having actually seen and handled one of these rifles, I have to say they're not as ugly and non-functional as some would have it, there are in fact many things I liked about the one I looked at. It's all very well to say they could buy a standard rifle off the shelves at Canadian Tire, but that's not how military type supply works: you have to have control of production and of parts supply and inventory and not be dependant on the whims and business success of some foreign company overseas. I certainly would resist the colour of the rifle and the logo on the stock but having done that on CGN some months ago, it provoked severe reaction that the Rangers are not a true military force and will never ever use the rifles in anger. One can imagine the orange colour and the logo will discourage theft, I mean since these firearms will be out in the gen pop. Me, I did not find them ugly, just strangely bright. I guess they're unlikely to be left at a campsite just for that reason. I do hope actual production will proceed as stated here, but I've heard bad things about that.
