British Army Rangers looking for new rifle

[MistAgain]

Some of the companies named Dave, are importers and distributors. Although “big names” are missing, including the entitled child that is H&K, they may very well be being represented by these agents.

H & K would appear to be represented by these guys ..........NSAF Ltd

[SeaMonkey]

It doesn't matter how good the standard-issue rifle is, the units that see themselves as 'special' will want - if not a completely different rifle - a different version of the same rile. Here in New Zealand we bought the Lewis Machine & Tool (LMT) ARs in 5.56mm and the Designated Marksman's Weapon (DMW) in 308 Win. Both excellent weapons. The SAS got a different, special, version of both of the LMT rifles with improved bolts, different barrels, etc.. They are already wanting something completely different.

Being Canadian originally, knowing people on the Small Arms Replacement Programme (SARP) team, and having been issued the C7 (in its original form) I have a soft spot for that rifle. But even I have to admit the LMT is just a little bit better.

As for this procurement, I have never heard of half these companies - and I keep my ear to the ground - and this surprises me. There are some companies that I would have expected to see (like LMT & SIG Sauer(, that are not there - and that surprises me too. Very odd this.

In regard to the procurement list, in the UK, LMT are represented by Law Enforcement International.

[Sim G]

Personally, I would love to see the contract go to Colt Canada. And yes, for political reasons as well as it being a top quality piece of kit already established in HM Forces.

[DaveB]

What put me off Colt Canada in the trials that were held here in NZ, was that the standard adjustable buttstock they supplied was basically identical to the US Army collapsible buttstock from the Viet Nam era, except that it was polymer. It was awful. The damn thing rattled and when you shouldered the rifle and tightened your muscles the back of the rifle shifted enough to move the sights off target. When we complained about it, they did nothing to improve the situation. I would have thought anybody who was serious about the trial would have had their representatives (who were on-site throughout the trial) get some MAGPUL or other better quality aftermarket stocks and swap them out "Look, we can supply any stock you want.". That they did not take this very simple step, told us a great deal about them.

[Mattnall]

Looks like an AR platform is what they're after

That's what the details of the contract asked for when it came out last July:

The AIW system will be a 5.56mm Armalite Rifle (AR) platform, optimised for use with L15A2, a 62gr 5.56x45 NATO ball round, equivalent to SS109. An AR platform is defined as being gas operated with a rotating, locking bolt. The rifle should have a non-reciprocating charging handle. The rifle’s controls are to include: a magazine release, working parts release and a rotating selector lever that incorporates a safe setting.

[Airbrush]

What put me off Colt Canada in the trials that were held here in NZ, was that the standard adjustable buttstock they supplied was basically identical to the US Army collapsible buttstock from the Viet Nam era, except that it was polymer. It was awful. The damn thing rattled and when you shouldered the rifle and tightened your muscles the back of the rifle shifted enough to move the sights off target. When we complained about it, they did nothing to improve the situation. I would have thought anybody who was serious about the trial would have had their representatives (who were on-site throughout the trial) get some MAGPUL or other better quality aftermarket stocks and swap them out "Look, we can supply any stock you want.". That they did not take this very simple step, told us a great deal about them.

USGI stocks are gash.

[BamBam]

Personally, I would love to see the contract go to Colt Canada. And yes, for political reasons as well as it being a top quality piece of kit already established in HM Forces.

I would prefer if the contract went to Beechwood Equipment.

[JS569]

As an outsider, does this suggest there's no confidence in the L85 system?

I appreciate SF groups might have different needs so have a wider range of systems when compared to standard infantry, and I understood that the SAS etc decided to use the AR platform due to early issues with the SA80 in it's initial guise.

[BamBam]

UK SF were using the M-16 before the adoption of the L85.