Topic: Guns of the Horde

Here's my AK. I'm going to get a better pistol grip for it and a rail on top for a red dot site, or maybe that one Ogre posted about specifically for AK's. When I got it the wood was pretty battered, but I re-finished it. With the exception of the red dot, this is as 'tactical' as it's going to get. (Though I might want to change the stock to a synthetic version of the original.

Get rid of that weird wood and go with simple synthetics. TAPCO sells it cheap.
Then camo up the whole thing with some simple Krylon. Done. That's all it needs.

I like the weird wood. It adds character. Also, that weird little handle is really comfortable and as close to the mag well as an AK handle will get. I have looked at Tapco and they got great stuff. Besides, the wood shows its a weapon of the REVOLUTION! I will go to Tapco for grips and possibly the stock.

Those are some very nice guns.......

Love the Luger especially. Nice green on the AK.

You guys have such lovely collections.

Mine is in its humble beginnings.

If the British military M-16's were "Canadian versions" they were still M-16/AR-15 platforms, not even the level of difference between an AKM and a Vz58.

-skaramine

Can't believe I missed this topic.

Anyway, skaramine, at the time there were significant differences between the Canadian made rifle, called the C7 and the American rifle, the M-16, though not as much as the AK vs Vz as you say.

The C7 was made under license but with notable improvements. It was the first to have a brass deflector behind the ejection port and an integrated pic rail, features which are now pretty much standard on AR's. The barrel was also heavier in contour than an M16 and it was never issued with triangular hand guards, the ribbed round ones were there from the start.

I think theirs were the first to be topped with dedicated optics.

-madogre

Correct. The Elcan. A lot of guys going on rotation to Afghanistan these days though privately buy Eotechs.

That had been kind of my point. They LOOK alike, but the difference between the C1 (that's what they call it) and the M-16 are minor. They might have been the first flattop AR's.

-skaramine

No. The C1 is an FN-FAL rifle. It is actually called the C1A1, which means: Canada One Amendment One. The Amendment is the design difference between the Canadian service rifle and the FN factory model. The major changes in the Amendment are a smooth plastic carrying handle instead of a grooved one, and a cocking handle that folds against the receiver.

AR type rifles are C7's and C8's.

Seanp - I said the differences between the Canadian '16 (the C7, not the C1, my bad) and the American '16 were no where near the same difference between the Russian and CZ rifles. "Not even..."

And thanks for correcting the C7 designation.

Seanp - I said the differences between the Canadian '16 (the C7, not the C1, my bad) and the American '16 were no where near the same difference between the Russian and CZ rifles. "Not even..."

-skaramine

Yes, and I acknowledged that.

The point that I would emphasize though, is that there were "significant" design differences. Differences enough that the SAS selected the Diemaco made AR's over all US made products of the time. It's kind of a moot point now, as all of the Diemaco "improvements" are standard features on ARs, and Diemaco has actually become Colt Defense Canada.

Oh. Okay. Different company. I figured that the M16A2 improvements weren't part of Colt's ideas anyhow.