Colt Canada/Diemacao?

browningautorifle said:
I didn't say these countries were ARMED with our rifles. I said they bought some of our weapons. They use them in special purpose. Along side their own.

TimC Are you sure about the timeline?

Yes, I was in when the weapons changed over and 15 years on each side of that. We did the change from 84-87 and they were in production for that.
Click to expand...

I was at wainwright in 86 and the pats were completing training with the C1. We were about to swap to the L85A1 but it was delayed at least a year.
 
nemesisincanada said:
I would be surprised if the UK did not replace the SA-80 with a rifle built under license in the UK. They will probably make it a requirement of the tender.
Click to expand...

I would like that too but we have prescedence for overseas with all of our UOR work and the refurb to A2 version at H&K in Deutschland. I suspect the same will happen again. Funny how Canada could get license built colts but Australia couldnt or is there more to that than meets the eye?

As for lack of facilities, many refurb parts for our existing stocks of GPMGs and .50 M2 are made here locally to me but they make parts and are a small company with smaller subbies.
 
Difference between re-furb with at the time a British owned company and manufacture of 200000-300000 rifles is not insignificant. At the very least I think it will be a eurozone company. It may well be BAE land systems building something under license.
 
It will have to go to competition but building it may be completely outside of UK. Nothing new there, we dont seem to want a defence industry anymore.
 
I'd probably be a lot more supportive of Colt Canada if they were allowed to sell semi auto firearms to Canadians other than just military/police contracts.
 
Slightly OT from the OP, and I'm sure this has been asked many, many times, but why didn't Diemaco (then Colt Canada) not sell to civilians? I assume it was a requirement of the Canadian government contract, but can anyone shed a little more light?

Thanks,

-- L
 
I strongly suspect there isn't really any legal clause in contract or law that actually prohibt Diemaco from selling to civilians. It is most likely a silent understanding that they will not go into that territory, and hence an internal policy. After all, it is the same mentality that put all the old weapons into the smelter. It is just not worth the potential agruement and unwanted publicity.

Afterall, they have no problems of selling barrels to KAC for civilian usage in the US. Also, there were no issues for their receivers ending up in firearms destined for civilian sale.

Back in the old days, you can actually purchae C1 off the factory but of course not many people can afford it. A 500 bucks rifle was a lot of money back in the early 60's.
 
greentips said:
I strongly suspect there isn't really any legal clause in contract or law that actually prohibt Diemaco from selling to civilians. It is most likely a silent understanding that they will not go into that territory, and hence an internal policy. After all, it is the same mentality that put all the old weapons into the smelter. It is just not worth the potential agruement and unwanted publicity.
Click to expand...

Pretty close! ;)
 
TimC said:
I was at wainwright in 86 and the pats were completing training with the C1. We were about to swap to the L85A1 but it was delayed at least a year.
Click to expand...

Yes Tim, this is my point. I was posted to Wainwright from 85 to 89 and we changed over to the C7 last. After everyone else. My rifle was 85AA00105 and I got that one end of 87. I had a JLC course through fall of 87 and we had C7s. The change started in the Battallions earlier.
 
The reason the number sticks is it was the 105th one made. My first carbine was 86AB00950, which was the 950th carbine made. That is I think they started them in 86.
 
browningautorifle said:
Yes Tim, this is my point. I was posted to Wainwright from 85 to 89 and we changed over to the C7 last. After everyone else. My rifle was 85AA00105 and I got that one end of 87. I had a JLC course through fall of 87 and we had C7s. The change started in the Battallions earlier.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, our divisional depot started training recruits on the L85A1 but on posting to Bn in Ulster they had to do NI Reinforcement trg with L1A1. What a shock that was especially for the draft that arrived the month we converted, talk about confusing!
 
I haven't seen a single Diemaco rifle made prior to '86. The C7 entered service in '87 with production starting in '86 I believe.
 
Colt Canada has a license agreement with the USG and Colt and the Cdn Gov no to sell to the public in Canada -- at least 4 years ago they still need to get export approval for sales to non DND entities in Canada.

UK SOF is doing a 5.56mm gun program next year -- and that will likely influence their larger procurement.
 
What?

Leg said:
I haven't seen a single Diemaco rifle made prior to '86. The C7 entered service in '87 with production starting in '86 I believe.
Click to expand...

So...I'm lying? Who cares what you saw. I'm telling you of an experience. Maybe you we'nt in early enough to see that sort of thing.
 
KevinB said:
Colt Canada has a license agreement with the USG and Colt and the Cdn Gov no to sell to the public in Canada -- at least 4 years ago they still need to get export approval for sales to non DND entities in Canada.

UK SOF is doing a 5.56mm gun program next year -- and that will likely influence their larger procurement.
Click to expand...
That seems so messed up. Canadian company needs US permission to sell Canadian rifles to Canadian LE.

I also don't see why the government doesn't want Canadian rifles in Canadian civilian hands. One would think of it as a pride thing... but no...
 
where have you been??? the RCMP does not trust Canadians with guns.
The QPP even less . armed civilians can defend them selves.
we had C1's in Cornwallis in Nov 85 and had C7's at Gagetown the following summer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom