New Ranger Rifle

old enfields said:
Thats right the last batch of rifles were purchased in Pakistan to keep the Ranger's No.4s working.

I also heard a sickening runour that the War Stock FNs cost the government less than 20 thousand a year to maintain and store, yet they were scraped as being too expensive to keep.

This same person also told me the concept of "war stocks firearms" died with the FNs. All they keep is what they need right now, nothing extra.
Click to expand...

I love rumours. The facilitate that stored the FNs cost in the millions annually not even including the personally that manned the facility. The cost of bringing the FNs to long terms storage condition including mags/equipment was also in the millions. We currently have war stock firearms in the thousands but instead of keeping the older issue rifle, we have surplus holdings of the current firearm. Makes a bit more sense don't you think? Besides a sentimental linkage to the FNs, it makes much more sense to have more service rifles of the current vintage than paying millions to keep the old ones.

The decision to replace the Enfield was a proper one. I would rather they take their time and get it right than rush out and get something. Our track record on emotional purchasing is unfortunately not very good. The decision has not been made on what firearm to get so anyone suggesting otherwise is purely feeding the rumour mill.
 
My well aged cynicism makes me think the final purchase will be way over priced rifles made by PGW or Diemaco/Colt that take another 10 years to get in to full service.
 
.. I sincerely hope not ! I'm convinced that "our sovereignty" of the Arctic is likely to be sorely tested, in the not too distant future. The Natural Resources alone, make it incredibly valuable ! That means "we " have to have a viable presence in this area, and an early "trip wire presence' and the Ranger program, achieves this at minimal cost. ...... Clearly, money spent equipping and training the Rangers, particularly those in the "Frozen North" is a priceless investment, and one that should not, and must not, be squandered, over penny pinching equipment replacement's. .... The design parameters are clearly laid down, BUT, the Tendering, is I believe, currently on "hold" and no doubt, the issue of Licensing and Canadian Manufacture/ support is going to be a stumbling block. Perhaps, a total Canadian design, may end up being a viable alternative? Perhaps, with a Mauser 98 action, forming the basis ? ..... David K
 
Option A: The Mosin-Nagant in 54R

Option B: Pay the Ranger to provide his own wpn. He gets paid extra for boat/quad/dogs anyway. Specify the options, and he brings his own. added bonus: He needs to get a PAL, and the screening should cut down on some 'social' issues some patrols have.
 
Last edited:
Haha the government could probably buy the TDS from AIA for the improved Enfields for pennies on the dollar and buy up all the rifles that were made for the US market cheap.

With that being said, I'd still prefer the scout rifle.
 
There needs to be a new rifle to replace or better yet supercede the No.4 Lee Enfield.
I know the No.4 reasonably well. I have had one or more of them since 1956. They have been working rifles for me for hunting,rifle practice and competition on DND ranges at either the Lakehead or Ottawa at Connaught. I shot CFSAC/NSCC in 1998 with my 1950 Long Branch with the assembled tbrong including the Rangers. It is stlll today a great rifle but its major flaw in my estimation is the "logistical ammo train" for .303 British match grade and/or accurate mil spec ammunition of fresh manufacture. Essentially the need for current 308 or 223 rifles is clear so that there is a seamless resupply from the Canadian Armed Forces. I think the Rangers would apreciate that too
The larger question is what the Rangers will have available fifteen years from now. Wd do need to equip the Rangers as the front scouting line of our Arctic Sovereignity. It is not a case of "Can we offord it?" But really that we should afford it!
 
The problem with the Ranger program is that the majority of the Vegan Granola Crunchers who live in cities have no idea who, what or where the Canadian Rangers are. If you went to downtown Toronto and asked I'm sure at least 8 out of 10 men would say something to the effect of Special Forces, and the same number of women would say they're the guys who patrol National Parks, and care for wildlife. There's very little doubt that the program is cost effective and essential, but it doesn't really 'sizzle' and that's the tough part. As far as the rifle for them goes, I really can't see an easy way out - except there are a number of containers sitting in Ontario full of new Enfield spares, and there were more where that came from - The same government just crushed some new in the grease Springfield 03's- if we were perhaps actually looking, we'd be finding parts - we aren't. If there are no weapons techs train some, it can't be any tougher than training them on a new system. The only rifle I can think of off the top of my head that is proven to work in the same conditions as the Enfield is the Nagant - the Mauser doesn't, ask any Eastern Front Wehrmacht vet.
 
Rocket Surgery said:
Haha the government could probably buy the TDS from AIA for the improved Enfields for pennies on the dollar and buy up all the rifles that were made for the US market cheap.

With that being said, I'd still prefer the scout rifle.
Click to expand...

The government in it's wisdom has examined the AIA and has declared them not suitable for service, citing a number of small parts that are easily broken which is strange since the majority of small parts (bolt head, extractor, springs, pins etc. are swappable between the Enfield and AIA).

PS Canada already has the plans for the Enfield, the Government doesn't want to make more Enfields as it would be expensive.
 
maddawg said:
Hey Guys
LOL well they have decided on the remington, 700 in 308. As far as the Enfields well they will be here years and years. Yes there is shortage of parts (well sort of), however there are a lot of fully already made Enfields still in war stocks, tons of them litterally.
Click to expand...

They have (?) decided on the Remmy 700 in .308 :confused: I gotta keep reading more!

Now have a look at this document I found: http://pubs.drdc.gc.ca/inbasket/Peralta63.101109_0839.Toronto_cR_2010_174_Final.pdf

Very informative.. maybe it's been posted up here before! My apologies if it's been up in the past. I'm new to this issue! :D

:cheers:

Barney
 
Hungry said:
They have (?) decided on the Remmy 700 in .308 :confused: I gotta keep reading more!

Now have a look at this document I found: http://pubs.drdc.gc.ca/inbasket/Peralta63.101109_0839.Toronto_cR_2010_174_Final.pdf

Very informative.. maybe it's been posted up here before! My apologies if it's been up in the past. I'm new to this issue! :D

:cheers:

Barney
Click to expand...

Just skimmed through it.
4.3.3 had something interesting to say about ma limits.

With respect to the magazine, participants wanted a 10 round detachable magazine. The merits of
different capacity magazines were debated during the workshops, with the legal implications of
magazines greater than 5 rounds discussed; however, in the end the 10 round magazine was favoured
as the extra capacity is appreciated and it is what the CR are used to.
Click to expand...
 
Fremen said:
Just skimmed through it.
4.3.3 had something interesting to say about ma limits.
Click to expand...

Well, as long as it's not a semi-automatic, there are no legal mag limitations.
Besides, the Rangers are members of the CF and since this is a duty weapon, it could be full auto with no mag or barrel restrictions, etc.
 
Shelldrake said:
Well, as long as it's not a semi-automatic, there are no legal mag limitations.
Besides, the Rangers are members of the CF and since this is a duty weapon, it could be full auto with no mag or barrel restrictions, etc.
Click to expand...

Wrong. It is kept in their homes and cannot be classified the same as a service weapon. They are essentially reservists - that would be like saying that one of my soldiers can take their C7 home...
 
Shelldrake said:
Well, as long as it's not a semi-automatic, there are no legal mag limitations.
Besides, the Rangers are members of the CF and since this is a duty weapon, it could be full auto with no mag or barrel restrictions, etc.
Click to expand...

Unlikely - Holy Liability Batman

I think Shelldrake might be saying that civy rules might not necessarily be applied equally because Canadian Rangers are members of the CF and the nature of their work may require a platform a bit different from your average hunting rifle.
 
Shelldrake said:
Well, as long as it's not a semi-automatic, there are no legal mag limitations.
Besides, the Rangers are members of the CF and since this is a duty weapon, it could be full auto with no mag or barrel restrictions, etc.
Click to expand...

As it have been mentioned a number of times in the Doc that they will be going with a bolt action rifle, mag limit is a non issue. Also note that their current rifle already has a 10 round mag without any legal issues.
 
Fremen said:
As it have been mentioned a number of times in the Doc that they will be going with a bolt action rifle, mag limit is a non issue. Also note that their current rifle already has a 10 round mag without any legal issues.
Click to expand...

A 10 rd mag in any non-SA rifle is a non-issue, so long as it isn't originally intended/manufactured for an evil semi-auto.

And the Lee-Enfield 10rd mag ws specifically exempted from the regs IIRC...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom