Not necessarily. Look at the Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone, that thing is a debacle, and most of its problems come from 'Canadianization'
M16s of the Great White North
- Thread starter X-man
- Start date
Not necessarily. Look at the Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone, that thing is a debacle, and most of its problems come from 'Canadianization'
![-[Crosshair]-](/forum/data/avatars/m/31/31565.jpg?1718745216){kind=avatar}
Infanteer90
CGN Regular
- Location
- Where you all want to be... Alberta
Yes, they are the same barrels. Colt Canada only makes one standard of components which is mil spec. There are some great articles about (one in Calibre magazine which can be read online) the high standard achieved by Colt Canada. Don't let the name fool you. While Colt Defense LLC owns Colt Canada they are not the same company as far as the quality of the products manufactured. CC manufactures their firearms to the higher standard originally required by the Canadian Forces. The barrels are probably the greatest difference. Not only are CC barrels cold hammer forged around a mandrel that imparts both the bore and the chamber in one process which subsequently increases accuracy and durability but they also use a thicker chrome lining that is more ductile than what their American counterparts utilize. Then there is the magnetic particle inspection.... the list goes on. Although the SA20 and SA15.7 offerings look just like any other AR they are far from it. While they may not have all the fancy colors and add ons that some of the commercial AR's have they do have all the durability and accuracy that a civilian shooter requires and then some.
There have been concerns about the durability of the M-16 A2 rear sight parts... and it may be that it was seen as not enough improvement over the A1 to justify that fragility. How valid those concerns were, I do not know, but I've heard this from Americans too.
The A1 style sight, meaning C7 / M-16A1, served me well in service conditions out to 500m, so I never really felt the need for a M-16A2 rear iron setup.
Last edited:
Its my belief that the CC DIEMACO barrels have an unusually long barrel life. I do not know why they last longer, but I suspect the cold hammer forging, high quality steel, and something about the chrome lining seem to add up to high performance for much longer round count than the competition. I do recall this was a selling point too, saw a printed paper one time describing how accuracy was still quite high even after 25,000 rounds, group dispersion only doubling. This is amazing considering how much rapid fire and full auto use really punishes a barrel.
The descriptions I have read in Janes Infantry Weapons of some other nation's 556 LMG's and rifles are downright pathetic... 3000 rounds of full auto and the barrel is toast. The article pointed out this was a concern since your soldiers would show up to battle with burned out barrels on day one!
The descriptions I have read in Janes Infantry Weapons of some other nation's 556 LMG's and rifles are downright pathetic... 3000 rounds of full auto and the barrel is toast. The article pointed out this was a concern since your soldiers would show up to battle with burned out barrels on day one!
Infanteer90
CGN Regular
- Location
- Where you all want to be... Alberta
It's simple, the barrels on C7/C8 rifles are the same barrels on the C9 LMG just with a different profile. Any barrel that can withstand firing 1200 rounds per minute should last a long time on a rifle that seldom fires full auto.
