- Location
- Ontario defense force (ODF HQ)
Calum said:
I agree with you that it is a great(Tuff) weapon, but compared to the mighty 303 it is a pelet gun.
Canadian Rangers and the No.4 rifle
- Thread starter x westie
- Start date
I agree with you that it is a great(Tuff) weapon, but compared to the mighty 303 it is a pelet gun.
stencollector said:
A reliable source, who lived in Iqaluit, told me that a common occurrence was that a Ranger would lose his LE.
Upon reporting for a replacement rifle, it would go like this...
"Well Pte Ikagulawattituik, you've lost your rifle. Well here's another one... did you want a snowmobile to go with that?"
A touch facetious, perhaps, but I'm also told that the Feds have recently been haunting gun shows and snapping up LEs, therefore artifically driving up the price.
This goes along with the absolutely stupendous cost of ramping up Nunavut... billions of dollars to support a population of about 26,000.
- Location
- Victoria, BC
Rule 303 said:
Sorry Guys....I think I can give you guys some info on this. Being a Ranger Instructor for the Canadian Rangers, I can definitly shed some light.
While the rules governing the issue of the No4 are a lot less restrictive then the rules about the C7A1; I assure you, if a Ranger loses their No4, there is an RCMP/MP investigation. If negligence or criminal intent is suspected, the Ranger is investigated and if the charges are founded, then the member is released with disgrace from the CF and chaged under the Criminal Code of Canada. (Sadly this has happened on occasion) We take a grim view of "losing your rifle" in the Military.
Now to be fair to your source, it does happen that a rifle is occasionaly lost by falling overboard or off the side of mountain and is beyond recovery. A replacement will be issued once it is deemed that its loss was a training mishap and not negligence. But it isnt as easy as just handing out another rifle. Endless paperwork, statements and an investigation have to occur and then a rifle is eventualy re-issued to the Ranger. It is the nature of the type of training that we do that rifles and equipment do from time to time get destroyed or lost due to extenuating circumstances.
As for the sniffing around gun shows, That also, is a rumour.
There are very strict guidlines in the CF about purchasing Firearms outside of special contracts. A No4 bought privately through a gunshow by DND would have to be inspected, proved sound and be subject rebuild prior to entry into our supply system. Lets not forget the endless bureaucracy surrounding getting approval to make a DND Federal purchase and the public relations disaster if word got out. (Headline Globe and Mail:"Liberal Government goes shopping at gunshows to buy WW2 rifles to equip our Canadian Soldiers"
)Up untill last month, DND had a contract for the production of new parts for the No. 4. (not sure which company but I will try to find out for you folks) I know this because we have shelves full of spare parts with manufacturing dates like ranging from 1942 - 1996 etc. (Being an Enfield fan and collector, I start to vibrate like a kid in a candy store every time I walk past the parts cage)
Sadly, I just found out last week that DND is not renewing the contract. Parts are going to start to dry up but the good thing is that the No 4 is so tough that it doesnt usually break. Whew!!!! That was rather long winded but I hope that helps shed some light on the Canadian Ranger No 4s still in service.
Last edited:
Bobo-the-monkey said:
I wonder... would it be worthwhile for someone to manufacture *new* reproduction LE's... I mean... all the specs are available.
If the damn rifle is such a good one 'just tool up and start making them again...
stencollector
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
The first reason would be that what cost just over $30 in WW2 would likely cost about $800++ in todays world. And for the short run the Cdn government would need, the tooling costs would be enourmous.667 said:I wonder... would it be worthwhile for someone to manufacture *new* reproduction LE's... I mean... all the specs are available.
If the damn rifle is such a good one 'just tool up and start making them again...
The second reason is that there are still surplus rifles available through friendly nations like Britain and India, and as long as these exist, why go to the cost of making new rifles.
The last reason would be the embarrassment associated with the Cdn government building more WW2 era rifles. I don't think the press would read very good on that one. 6 years back, when some of the German Army Training Establishment Shilo (GATES) personal were taking a tour through our workshop, a couple of them noticed some Enfields in our weapons shop. They were somewhat incredulous when they recognised what they were, and had to ask if we were still using those in a first line unit.
There is a company in Australia, which was mentioned earlier in this thread, that makes the Lee Enfields still. They are not cheap, and I would suggest their production price would be realistic as to what to expect.
Re the DND contracts for Enfield parts. Although I have seen a lot of newly packaged parts, they have all proved to be NOS from various countries surplus. For instance, if one was to order a rear sight for a no4, you would get a #5 Jungle Carbine Birmingham marked sight. They are only graduated to 800 yards but would fit the purpose. I would be very interested to hear of parts actually newly manufactured for the Canadian Forces.
Last edited:
I don;t know why it would be so bad to admit we have front line acrtic troops using LE's. They are arguably the best choice for the job even today. Why is that a bad thing?
It's not like we issue them to troops headed for afghannistan...
It's not like we issue them to troops headed for afghannistan...
stencollector said:
Not PC but...I would have pointed out that those Enfields can still get 'Minute of Nazi accuracy' at 1200 yards!
The only thing that embarrass me about the old Enfields is how some Canadians talk about them in such a derogatory fashion...pretty shamefull.
IMHO they are still damn fine rifles.
