I posted some questions regarding some of the details of the C7ct back in 2017.
https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=62244
Finally got around to finishing this clone! I went through four receivers to get the engraving as close as possible.
Printable View
I posted some questions regarding some of the details of the C7ct back in 2017.
https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=62244
Finally got around to finishing this clone! I went through four receivers to get the engraving as close as possible.
Yep, I have to say that receiver is marked just the way I remember them. Is there an alphanumeric serial number? Nice piece.
Thank you! Regarding the serial number, it is the same alphanumeric pattern as original receivers. First two numbers are "19" representing the year of manufacture. Then two letters, followed by the weapon number. I took some liberties with the serial number to customize it. Instead of "AA" to denote the C7 series. I used the initials of my LLC.
My first C7 was numbered 85AA00105. That was the lowest I ever observed next to the one presented to the CDS held in NDHQ, which was #1. My first C8 Carbine was 86AB00950. The C7 was in '87 and the carbine was in '97, both in Wainwright AB.
Fantastic!
In your experience, how were most of the C7ct rifles setup with respect to optics? I've primarily seen the ARMS mount with Leupold or the Diemaco rail with S&B. My inspiration came from the photos below:
Attachment 132451Attachment 132452
I finally did find the Diemaco rail! Which has me wondering which setup I should go with.
Attachment 132453Attachment 132454
Great now I need another AR.
Very nice work
If you mean me, we simply didn't have any at that point. We had A1s and that was about it. There were no special breeds at that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Molonlave
For our American friends, the Canadian C7A1 was nearly the same as the American M16A2 except the C7A1 still fired full auto. The C7's I carried were either iron sights only or had the Elcan C79 optics mounted.
Yes, the C7 had carry handle and iron sights as the C7A1 had the C79 optic and flat top. They never got round to general issue of the attachable sight, plastic and stopped teaching shooting iron sights. The sights were available however...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapper740
My personal favourite is the C8 surplus upper I have on a civilian made colt canada lower. Unfortunately due to our laws at the moment I haven't been able to use it in years. Shame really, made a great rifle to introduce people to shooting with and was a ton of fun. Looks good OP
I agree, they were the way the gun was designed and nice to handle. I asked when the whole thing came out why we didn't just adopt carbines anyway instead of making a rifle as well. Then years later the C7A2 comes out...except the front end is heavy. The little C8 would have worked fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eaglelord17
I actually quite liked the original C7, I have a upper set up along those lines as well (surplus C7/C8 upper receiver with a 20" barrel on it). Both the original C7 and C8 I found quite handy and fairly light. Personally I would take a original C7 over a C7A2 any day as my job in support trades weight and not having to worry about losing my zero matters more than the front heavy and heavy rifle the C7A2 is. Agreed the simple adoption of the C8 would have saved the effort of both, and seems to be where they are heading today.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
I had a C7 clone myself back then and carried it daily without any notice...shot PWT with it. I'd show up for a bugout and be the first man ready, storeman notice someone with a rifle while his keys were still in hand, then saw it was me. I used to sign out C8 lowers for training when the females were trying to qualify, the short butt was still too long. All said we didn't need the C8. I reminded them of the AK's similarities that had dominated the battlefield for 40 years at that point. Yes, they finally realized we didn't need a bigger model.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eaglelord17
Realistically it brings not much benefit for the size difference. With irons there is a bit of a argument due to longer sight radius, but with all the fancy optical sights in existence now it really doesn't matter. Either way the C7 isn't a big rifle, smaller than many of the bolt action carbines I have. What I can't wait for them to get rid of is the C79 sight, much better and lighter options in this day and age (no need for a 3-4lb sight on there). 25 years ago it was a pretty solid choice, now there is much more effective sights available.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
Aimpoint PRO is far better, except the need for a sight picture without battery function. Perhaps the ACOG. Yes, almost anything would outshine it. Even when it started there were so many problems, they went with the cheap one instead of making the good one cheaper and buying tons. Specter was a far better choice. There were SO many shortcomings and problems with the C79...Quote:
Originally Posted by Eaglelord17