Thomas Lee Cape Gun - 2000 yards in the 19th Century?

In late 2015, the Canadian Historical Arms Museum was the very pleased recipient of a rather unusual firearm known as a "Cape Gun." In general terms, a Cape Gun is a combination gun, specifically a side-by-side with one barrel rifled and the other smooth bored.

The Cape Gun derived its name from its particular use in the southernmost part of Africa, i.e., South Africa. These arms were retailed in the Eastern Cape of South Africa where there was apparently much conflict between the British settlers and the local tribesmen which lasted up to the early 1880's.

Most Cape Guns were built for African game hunting. They offered the flexibility of having both a shotgun and a rifle in the same firearm. This allowed intrepid hunters to take whatever game presented itself with a single gun, rather than having to carry two. Yes, they were heavy, but they did offer a convenience that had a definite appeal to the African hunter. And, given the calibre of many Cape Guns, a little excess weight was probably welcome to dampen some of the recoil. Given these firearms were used to take everything from birds to Cape Buffalo, they had to have some substantial poke, undoubtedly at both ends.

It's also worth noting that a Cape Gun is simply one format of what's known as a combination gun; a break-action firearm that combines a shotgun and a rifle in one. Cape guns are typically defined as combination guns where two barrels are positioned in a side-by-side format. In an over-under format, they're simply refered to as combination guns, while the addition of a second rifled barrel (for a total of three barrels) is known as a Drilling. If the gun has two shotgun barrels and two rifled barrels, for a total of four barrels, it is best known as overkill... or (properly) as a Vierling. Coincidentally, drilling is German for "triplet," while vierling is German for "quadruplet."

The firearm in this discussion is a Cape Gun made by Thomas Lee, who was a Birmingham gun and rifle maker. He had a shop in London and was in business for a relatively short period, opening in 1834 and closing down again just 11 years later, in 1845. Both lock plates are marked with his full name and the word "LONDON" is marked on the top rib.

This is a relatively massive firearm in percussion ignition with side locks, double triggers and double hammers. Its damascus barrels are 29-5/8" (752mm) long. Like many guns of the era, the gun is quite embellished, with engraving all over the sideplates and with hammers styled to look akin to fish; a common nod to the lavish sportsmen that typically purchased these firearms. When originally delivered, it must have been gorgeous, especially when the damascus barrels were new. Even today, over a 150 years later, there is no mistaking the quality of this firearm.

The stock is walnut, and in exceedingly good shape, given (again) the age of the firearm. The checkering is still reasonably crisp and in good shape both on the forestock and the grip area, and there are very few marks on either. Given this, and the completeness of the entire setup (including the ramrod, case, and all the accessories), this firearm has evidently been taken care of extremely well.

Taking the gun down is a process typical of the era. First, a small, flat, tapered pin is removed from the forestock by simply pushing it through from one side, which releases the forestock from the barrels and allows the barrels to be tipped forward and removed from the receiver. The process is not entirely disimiliar from disassembling any modern break-action firearm. However, being a percussion ignition, muzzleloading firearm, it looks dramatically different as there are no cocking appendages, latches, nor firing pin holes in the breech face. The breech is simply a flat-faced hunk of steel.

But all this is typical of the average Cape Gun. Where this particular gun diverts from the norm is in the sighting system. A very unusual feature of this particular gun is its top rib, which is one inch wide, runs the full length of the barrels and has graduations across it marked from one to twenty. This rib forms a sort of rail for the included sliding-type sight attachment that the user can affix to the rib (it simply snaps in place), and move fore and aft to accommodate the desired range for the rifled barrel.

This apparatus can certainly be compared to a type of "volley sight" arrangement. The gun also has a more conventional three leaf express sight for more... normal shooting activities. After all, one does not usually hunt with volley fire.
The right side shotgun barrel is .710" bore, while the rifled left barrel, which is proofed at "23," has a bore diameter of .592." The rifling consists of three broad grooves with a depth of .006." This gun weighs in at just under 14 pounds total. Again, certainly not a light firearm.

Information on this particular type of Cape Gun is sketchy to say the least. While much is known about conventional Cape Guns, the sighting apparatus on this gun makes it incredibly uncommon. From research, it has been reasonably determined that the concept of using groups of riflemen to deliver volleys of concentrated rifle fire for long range effect, much like that of artillery, must have been considered as viable based on the existence of such Cape Guns as exemplified by this example.

It is assumed that the rib markings are graduated for ranges up to 2,000 yards, quite a feat even by today's standards. However, very little accuracy would be expected at those ranges. Not only did the contemporary understanding of ballistics leave something to be desired, but in the accompanying photos on page 23, you can see the angle required to align the rear and front sights when the sight is moved to the 2,000 yard mark. In this position, one would expect the gun's stock to be placed on the ground, and essentially used as a mortar to send volleys in a (at best) general direction.

I did find an interesting piece of information in W.W. Greener's book, "The Gun and its Development," where he is explaining the origins of "Express" sights. He mentions the fact that his father, W. Greener, was engaged along with a few other makers, in building a rifle suitable for South African sport. The "Cape Rifle" as he explains it, was a true double rifle in that both barrels were rifled. These guns had two groove rifling with one turn in 30 inches; the grooves being broad and deep, in order to admit the bullet easily. The rifles were sighted up to 2000 yards. Greener makes no comment as to what exactly was being shot at, at such distances via volley fire, but given the historical frame of reference one can probably draw their own conclusion.

The Thomas Lee gun came to us with a custom made oak carrying case with its carrying handle and latches all intact. The label on the inside of the top cover is marked "Universal Fire Arm Works" and "Robert Hughes." Research has revealed that Robert Hughes was a Gun and Rifle Maker in Birmingham dated 1855 to 1890 with the factory known as the "Universal Fire Arm Works" from 1868.
This firearm would appear to be a very rare item in North American terms and is the first such example of this type of Cape Gun that the Museum has ever encountered. Additional information on the maker or the firearm would be most welcome by CHAM.

Black Creek Laboratories BCL102: Black Creek Cracks the Code

The Black Creek Laboratories BCL102 may be the most anticipated gun Calibre Magazine has ever covered. Never have so many of our suppliers, so many of our contacts, and so many of our readers said the exact same thing in response to our announcement that we had one to test, and this is the comment that we have heard, over and over and over:

“This will either be the greatest victory in that company’s history, or they’re done for. No middle ground.”

We agree. This is a gigantic moment for Black Creek Labs. But to explain why will take a few moments, so bear with us until we get back to the rifle. We promise you, it’s worth the wait.

The Armist Formerly Known as NEA

Black Creek Labs is a new entity, which bills itself as a “Global Defense Company.” But their small arms manufacturing wing, at least, was previously a well-known Canadian manufacturer of AR15s and accessories: Northeastern Arms, or NEA. NEA has a complicated history in its own right: they began as a small manufacturer of popular accessories for the Vz.58 series of rifles, and expanded over several years into the AR15 market, ultimately launching their own AR15, which they called the NEA15.

The NEA15 was built in Canada, and priced below a thousand dollars, which at the time was a scorching bargain. Only mass-produced Chinese guns came close in price, and NEA15s flew off the shelves and into the hands of Canadians. But quality control problems abounded as NEA frantically sourced parts to meet the surging demand, and accusations of shilling and other questionable marketing manoeuvres gave NEA’s reputation a serious beating.

Overseas, sales remained steady, and the fact that NEA’s rifles were not controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR, allowed the company to build on its somewhat shaky Canadian foundation and grow into a well defined, though at times still controversial, brand.

During this phase of growth, NEA quietly pursued a goal that many thought impossible: the development of a non-restricted AR10. The concept hinged on what was for most a long-forgotten tidbit of gun lore: the fact that the AR10 was developed before the AR15. This is important for one simple reason: the AR10 is restricted in Canadian law only because it is listed as a variant of the restricted-by-name AR15. And, to be fair, the overwhelming majority of AR10s in production today are, in fact, scaled-up renditions of AR15s.

But the minds at NEA were restless. What if, they wondered, someone were to start over? What if the very first, theoretically non-restricted, AR10 design became the foundation of a whole new rifle? Would it not be non-restricted? And if a non-restricted semi-automatic rifle, retaining many of the features that make the AR series so popular, could be made…the achievement would be singular. A modern hunting rifle, with all of the advantages of the modular AR system. Finally, Canadians would have access to a rifle equivalent to the gun that utterly dominates the market just south of the border. That is, if it could be done. If the RCMP firearms lab agreed with the manufacturer’s legal arguments. If the rifle worked.

NEA, BCL, FRT, FTW

The news that a non-restricted entry for the NEA102 semi-automatic rifle in .308 Winchester had made it into the RCMP’s Firearm Reference Table, the legal master list of the Canadian gun universe, exploded across the internet within hours of its publication. Jeff Hussey, the mad genius behind Northeastern Arms, had been right. He had persuaded the RCMP firearms lab that his research was correct, his timeline was accurate, and his design was independent of the restricted AR15. The new rifle was a reality. Almost immediately, NEA reorganized, and was purchased by Black Creek Laboratories, who immediately registered the BCL102 with the RCMP as a rebranded version of the original, non-restricted NEA102. The classification is rock solid. After years of work and countless setbacks, the legal war was over. The rifles began production. But would they work?

The BCL102: Heavy Hitter

By the time our test rifle arrived, the first generation of 102s had already made it into the hands of a few buyers who’d committed to a presale. The second generation is currently being manufactured, with minor changes to the original design, although nothing that will affect its legal status. We’d hoped to get a look at the second generation guns, but they likely won’t be complete until well after this issue hits the stands. Instead, BCL’s distributor, SFRC (everyone involved in this industry is heavily acronym-dependent) sent us their olive drab-cerakoted sample gun, which came outfitted with a Vortex PST 2-10x32 optic mounted, a Phase5 ambidextrous charging handle, and which is otherwise functionally stock.

Out of the box, we had two immediate responses: it’s beautiful, and it’s heavy. With the optic on there, it’s a twelve pound rifle. The lightest configuration you’d be able to shoot would be a nine pound gun. It’s no mountain rifle. But boy, oh boy, it’s beautiful.

The 102 comes equipped with a 14” rail cerakoted to match the gun. The finish on upper and lower receivers as well as the rail is even and smooth and the aesthetics are a serious improvement on the early NEA rifles, while still retaining a few nods to their first builds such as the diagonal cuts on the front of the magazine well, which sports NEA’s characteristic angular flare, and the NEA griffin logo (although rather than a simple line cut into the side of the magwell, the logo is now a positive relief in the same position.)

Somewhat surprisingly, the upper and lower receiver don’t line up perfectly. It’s a meaningless aesthetic detail, but the projection on the left side of the magwell that allows for the retention bump on the magazine is slightly misaligned with the corresponding projection on the upper. Given that the section on the upper has no use to begin with, it’s an odd oversight, and one that led us to begin looking in detail at the upper receiver in general.

The surface texture is slightly different than the lower or the rail and as such, the cerakote has a more matte texture. It’s subtle, but it’s there. With the bolt carrier out and the charging handle removed, the rather cavernous forging displays smooth surfaces throughout, with wear areas that are even and appropriate for a gun that’s seen a bit of use. The feed ramps are cut from the barrel extension into the upper with no discernible lips to interfere with feeding; this is a traditional point of evaluation on AR15s and it’s encouraging to see it done well.

The bolt carrier group is typical of the AR-10, although the entire platform suffers from competing standards: DPMS and Armalite. Looking at the upper receiver, the rounded rear edge would ordinarily cause us to conclude the 102 is using DPMS specs, but the handguard thread is Armalite-type, so there’s no guarantee aftermarket parts from one side of the aisle or the other will align properly. As such, casually swapping bolts and carriers is definitely not recommended; the parts may work but improper matching of the two standards can result in dangerous headspace issues. It’s also worth pointing out that although similar, DPMS uppers will not safely pin to the BCL 102: the upper lug is too narrow, and while the pins align, there’s excessive side-to-side play. We strongly recommend sticking with bolt carrier groups sourced directly from the manufacturer in this case.

One downside to single-sourced parts, of course, is that the owner is at the mercy of the manufacturer to produce quality parts. Our tester rifle is beginning to show signs of premature gas ring failure. We’ll get to the range trip shortly, but on the bench, the bolt now flops freely back and forth inside the carrier under its own weight. That’s a clear indication that the gas rings are no longer sealing well enough against the inner wall of the carrier, and it will definitely begin to cause ejection failures before too long. To be fair, we don’t know the exact round count of this rifle, although it’s well over a thousand, but it clearly hasn’t had enough use to wear out gas rings unless the rings are defective, or the internal surface of the carrier is too rough. The bolt carrier feels relatively smooth inside, but the machining on the carrier seems a little rougher than the rest of the rifle, so it’s possible there’s a combination of factors involved. New rings will solve this, and BCL warrantees these guns for life so they will sort you out if you get bad rings. We’ve also checked with the distributor, and we’re assured that the problem was discovered and corrected very early in production. But to be let down by a part with manufacturing costs that have to be under a nickel, it’s a little annoying.

The lower receiver is very nicely finished. Like the upper receiver, this first generation lower is machined from a forging; we’re told subsequent generations will be billet aluminum. Technically a forging ought to be stronger, although this can vary depending on the application, the alloy, and the heat treatment. Billet manufacturing is a popular way to do runs of custom rifles, so it’s not as though this should interfere with the product in any reasonable way. But people who insist on forged upper and lower receivers might be a little disappointed. The magazine well is nicely chamfered for smooth insertion, although the next generation has an even more generous flare, and the fence around the magazine release button is well executed. The BCL102 plays well with magazines of almost every manufacture, from Magpul to IMI. We’re hearing reports of some trouble when using steel DPMS magazines, but these days, we hardly see anyone using anything but polymer mags, all of which work just fine.

This rendition of the lower has an integral trigger guard; early pictures of the next generation lowers show a more standard arrangement with a guard that is pinned in place. The first generation rifles are supplied with a standard bolt catch, but generation two will have an ambidextrous bolt release. The safety is already ambidextrous and the stock, a polymer six-position adjustable job branded with the familiar griffin logo, is lightweight and effective, although the butt is a little slippery and thin for this beast. Still, there’s no point in supplying it with something more expensive: like the classic A2 grip, most buyers even remotely familiar with the platform will probably replace the stock and grip before it even warms up after getting dropped off by the mail truck. The factory stock rides on a buffer tube that fits a milspec AR15 stock perfectly, although it’s about an inch longer than a typical carbine tube. But aside from preventing a standard stock from collapsing fully, it’s basically the same six-position tube used on adjustable-stocked AR15s.

The railed handguard is of the tube variety, with a full length picatinny rail at twelve o’clock and seven rows of slots cut to fit the popular M-Lok modular mounting system accessories. The M-Lok cuts are set at 45 degree increments all the way around the barrel, so mounting options are plentiful. At first glance, it appears to have integral quick-disconnect sockets for attaching a sling, but confusingly, although the diameter of these holes, cut just forward of the rail mounting screws at three and nine o’clock, is exactly right for a QD socket, they’re just holes. There’s no way to put a QD swivel in them. The rail wall is also extremely thick and is probably contributing a bit to the weight of the rifle, although we’re told that plans for a lighter rail are in the works. The second generation rail, however, won’t be a significant weight savings. We’re hoping it has working QD sockets because that’s exactly where we mount our sling. If not, well, there’s always the M-Lok modular mount, which typically installs in about the time it takes to say “KeyMod is dead”.

Of course, the weight of the rail is nothing compared to the weight of the barrel, and the BCL102 is sporting a pretty heavy barrel, at .800” in diameter forward of the gas block, at which it steps up to .875”. For comparison’s sake, the GI M14 barrels were around .595” for most of their length, so a free-floated barrel at the size BCL has used should be extremely rigid. It’s lightly fluted, which both reduces the weight and increases the surface area for heat dissipation, so that’s a bonus. If the accuracy is good enough to warrant the heavy barrel profile, the 102 starts to move into legitimate sharpshooter territory.

The next round of barrels promises to get really interesting. Not only will a 6.5mm Creedmoor be offered in mid-2018, but an entirely new barrel with a thin profile and carbon fibre tube is scheduled for release in late 2018.

The barrel nut is an interesting setup: it’s a two-piece design which seems to allow for precise torquing during installation. Interestingly, despite using Armalite-type thread on the upper receiver, the barrel extension is DPMS-type, which makes replacing the barrel easier if you get the urge. But we’re not thinking about replacing barrels at this point: the chamber is described by Black Creek as a “match” chamber and we’ve heard reports they’re cut fairly tight, and between that and the accuracy we’ve seen on older NEA guns, we’re moderately hopeful, so we’ll take this one out to the range, and see how she does.

Hammertime: Shooting the BCL102

Right out of the box, we knew the BCL102 was going to check a lot of boxes for us. It had the modularity, it had the looks, and it had that sweet, sweet non-restricted status that made it an almost guaranteed home run for Black Creek Labs. The only way for things to go wrong would be if it didn’t run. It had to be reliable, and it had to be accurate. Not custom bolt gun accurate, but it had to be a rifle. We hit up Vancouver’s Reliable Gun for ammo, and we went a little…crazy.

We bought hunting ammo. We bought target ammo. We bought surplus ammo. We bought blasting ammo. We bought meatgun ammo and we bought precision ammo. We walked out with a bag of bullets worth half as much as the gun, and we went to town.

We started off shooting surplus. The chamber having been described to us as tight, we had to know: will it shoot steel cased ammo?

Yes it will. We put old green box Norinco through it for a while, and even the prematurely aged gas rings didn’t stop it from extracting and ejecting. So we switched to Barnaul. Its lacquered exterior gets stickier than Stalin’s moustache after a May Day after hours party, and anything as freedom-loving as a non-restricted AR was bound to hate it. But the Barnaul was fine. We tried Hornady Steel Match. It ran without issue. Whatever match chamber rumours you’ve heard, they don’t seem to be causing any issues with extraction. None of our guaranteed-to-cause-problems steel case had any failures at all, on a gun with dying gas rings. This gun runs as designed.

And so we began to shoot groups. We didn’t put on a reference optic intended for bench rest shooting; we didn’t clamp the BCL into a hundred pound lead sled. We just laid it in a Caldwell Stinger rest to eliminate as much of the shooter issues as we practically could, and shot it with the Vortex PST 2-10x32 that was on it. We shot five rounds at a time, and made no specific effort to cool the gun off between strings of fire. Every group was shot at 100 yards. Any time we called a miss, we shot a whole new group. Any “flyer” that wasn’t called was included, and if it seemed egregious, we shot another group and compared results. We therefore feel absolutely, positively confident that these groups could be replicated with no issue by anyone willing to spend a bit of time with the gun.

We settled in behind the rest, and loaded up a magazine of Remington Core-Lokt. And then disaster struck. The trigger would not reset. We put the rifle on safe, which made a horrible clunk. We removed the magazine. We extracted a round. Suddenly the trigger would reset again. Something was not right. We separated the upper and lower, and saw the problem immediately: the hammer was sitting cockeyed. The hammer pin had snapped.

Friends, it gets no more frustrating than this. Two hours of driving, hundreds of dollars in ammunition, a rifle and an optic that combine for three thousand dollars, and what is letting us down? Parts with a total value of about a quarter.

Thankfully, we’re prepared individuals. And the BCL takes AR15 trigger components. And to swap a hammer pin takes a skilled individual only seconds to replace. At least, we assume. It took us a few minutes. But we were back on the bench.

The full results are tabulated for you, but here’s the meat and potatoes of it: this rifle loves Federal Gold Medal Match, hates Nosler Accubonds of a similar weight, and it will happily shoot plain-jane hunting ammo into a two and a half inch group at a hundred yards with little effort. With the crunchy, heavy factory trigger (which we would replace with something a little slicker anyway, even if this one hadn’t broken a pin leaving us very suspect about the remaining small parts) we could easily shoot the Federal GMM into groups under an inch and a half. Those are excellent real-world results. The 168 grain GMM had a standard deviation of under half an inch, which is to say that you can realistically be confident that, at 100 yards, your rounds will land within a half an inch of your point of aim. With a good trigger and tailored hand loads, this gun is going to be capable of extremely accurate fire.

The Verdict

This gun drove us insane because it came so close to sheer perfection, and was let down by two of the silliest small parts issues we’ve seen. But for us here at the magazine, the end result doesn’t change. Would we buy one? Absolutely. In fact, we’re buying two. The gas ring issue has already been dealt with, and the accuracy potential with no modifications other than a better trigger is too good to ignore, so replacing the trigger group with something better doesn’t bother us. We’re interested to see the new handguard, because a few improvements could definitely be had there, but in the end, this is a rifle that we feel every Canadian should own. Even the first generation is good, verging on great, but the improvements found in BCL102: The Next Generation, namely the ambidextrous bolt release, the 6.5mm Creedmoor option, the possibility of carbon fibre barrels, and the high-speed magazine well ought to really bring out the best in the rifle.

And, of course, the pure joy of owning what is effectively a non-restricted AR10, designed and built in Canada by a company committed to turning the firearms registry on its head, is something no one should pass up.

Kel-Tec RDB: An Affordable Tavor-Killer?

I am not a bullpup guy. Two reasons for that: First off, I've spent a pretty reasonable amount of time shooting guns where reloading involved inserting a magazine into a hole in front of the trigger, and secondly, I'm left handed. And in case you blessedly unaware righties haven't noticed, most bullpups involve a bolt whizzing back and forth past the meat of your cheek. If there happens to be an ejection port there... well, it's not a ton of fun. I'm looking at you, Norinco Type 97.

But there have been some exceptions to the rule. Obviously the Tavor springs to mind, with its ability to switch from right- to left-handed operation with the correct parts, but a left-handed Tavor will set you back somewhere north of $2,500... if you can lay hands on the relatively rare left-handed bolts. And then of course there's the Kel-Tec RFB. Like the now defunct FN FS2000, the RFB throws its spent cases forward out of a small chute, meaning the receiver is enclosed on both sides. But the RFB shoots .308 Winchester at a dollar per bang, and the FS2000 is perhaps the ugliest gun ever conceived by mankind. And again, the RFB is no cheaper than a Tavor, and the FS2000 is still, for some ungodly reason that should defy anyone with a working pair of eyes, even more expensive.

But now there's this: The Kel-Tec RDB. A non-restricted, fully ambidextrous, downward-ejecting bullpup chambered in 5.56 that's set to hit the market for around $1,500.

What it is

In Kel-Tec's own (seemingly Canadian Forces inspired) nomenclature, the RDB is a "Rifle, Downward-Ejecting, Bullpup." Sort of like how CF socks are "Socks, Wool, Grey, Itchy" and underwear is "Underwear, Green, Always Too Hot." Or something like that.

Anyway, it is literally that simple; it's a bullpup rifle that dispenses its spent casings through an ejection port behind the magazine well, on the bottom of the gun.

Obviously doing this involves a bolt that travels a bit farther than the average rifle's, as the bolt needs to traverse the entire distance of the magazine well, and then at least a case-length's span beyond that in order to eject the spent casing through the ejection port. To do this, the RDB relies on an adjustable short-stroke gas-piston system that utilizes a combined gas piston/bolt carrier/op-rod/op-rod guide that houses a sort-of-AR-15ish rotating bolt, albeit with the rounded lugs that are becoming so en vogue and dual plunger-style ejectors.

Those ejectors are mounted at the 12 o'clock position, directly opposite a very healthy extractor that works to keep the spent casing on the bolt face until it reaches the rear of its travel, where the dual ejectors throw the spent casing down the ejection port. And in case you were wondering, the rifle doesn't rely on gravity whatsoever; the ejectors are forceful enough to eject rounds upwards with the rifle held upside-down.

Why that's awesome

This means the RDB is fully ambidextrous, and that's a claim shared only by those aforementioned forward-ejecting exotics. Now before you Tavor owners/enthusiasts/fanatics out there take to your keyboards to tell us to stop making such spurious comments about the Hebrew Hammer, let me explain: Fitting a Tavor with a left-handed conversion kit does not make it ambidextrous. It makes it left-handed. A right-handed person cannot shoot a left-handed Tavor with any more ease or grace than a left-handed person can shoot a right-handed Tavor.

The RDB is different. Since it ejects downward, the rifle can be shot by both lefties and righties alike. The magazine release is central, so it too doesn't discriminate, and both the 45-degree safety and simple bolt release are present on both sides of the rifle. The only thing that needs to be adapted is the charging handle, which is simply pulled out of the rifle and inserted on the other side.

And all those things work extremely well. The safety is precisely where your thumb goes, the magazine release operates easily, and the non-reciprocating charging handle is easy to use and sprung to fold flat when not in use. It even features a retention notch, so if you don't want to operate the bolt hold-open (which can be difficult given the gun's format and layout) you can just pull the handle rearward and lift up. Given how hard it can be to insert a fully loaded mag on a closed bolt, we found ourselves using that notch a lot when first loading the gun, and then charging it with a satisfying H&K MP5-style slap to the charging handle. Of course during firing strings, the bolt locks open on the empty mag so reloads are done using the bolt release, which falls directly under the thumb when inserting a fresh mag. Very handy.

And magazine release, always a point of contention on bullpup rifles, is like the Tavor's in that you can either bump it with your trigger hand or grab it as you strip a mag out of the rifle. And yes, like damned near everything that shoots from a STANAG mag, the magazines do drop free. Using a 30/5 round USGI magazine provides quite a nice quasi-monopod effect when shooting from the prone position, too, as the bottom of the magazine is basically directly opposite your cheek weld.

Rounding out the RDB's exterior features are a myriad of sling attachment points; two MASH hook points on each side, two molded in loops on the front of the handguard, and one molded loop on the back.

The Construction

As with all bullpups, the small explosion that propels the bullet downrange happens right under your face, so it's somewhat more important that such a gun be built from quality materials to assuage any concerns that an untoward kaboom moment might turn you into Two Face of Batman fame. In the case of the RDB, that comfort comes from a 1.5 millimetre thick (just shy of 1/16th inches) piece of sheetmetal bent into a u-shape, which forms the upper receiver. Inside this u-shape piece, two reinforcing strips are installed on either side, and serve as guide rails for the abbreviated bolt carrier (while also providing purchase for the screws holding the cheekrest onto the receiver's exterior). The rear of the receiver is given additional rigidity via a small piece that's welded along the bottom the receiver to form a box. Inside the box, a small stud is installed to locate the end of the operating rod, and a nylon buffer is fitted.

The lower, tasked with nothing more than holding the magazine, ejection port, and trigger assembly, is more familiar Kel-Tec technology; being made of two clamshell polymer moldings screwed together. Inside, the areas surrounding the magazine well, ejection port, and hammer are all reinforced with a web of stamped steel the same gauge as the upper receiver. This is primarily to support the trigger operation... but more on that later. The lower also houses the two or three take-down pins that must be removed to strip the gun. We say two or three because removing all three will break the gun down to its component parts completely, while removing the front two will allow the upper and lower to hinge apart, allowing the bolt to be extracted. The pin through the handguard only serves to retain the handguard.

Finally, we come to the last components: The bolt and barrel. On the model pictured, which is the commercial US model imported and sent to the RCMP for examination, the barrel is 17.4 inches long. On Canadian non-restricted models, the barrel will be 20 inches long, and will feature a 1 in 7 twist rate (this early production sample is 1:9). For the truly geeky, the barrels are AISI 4140 steel, have six grooves in the rifling that twist to the right, and have a corrosion-preventing salt bath nitride treatment internally.

More interesting is the way the barrels are assembled. They use an AR-15 style barrel extension that's threaded onto the breech, and then locked in place by a lock nut, allowing headspace to be set in much the same way as it is set on a Savage bolt action rifle. This allows for manufacturing tolerances to be compensated for while still obtaining appropriate headspacing. Conversely, AR-15s are more like Remington 700s, where precisely made barrel extensions are threaded onto precisely machined barrel tenons and tightened up against a shoulder machined onto the barrel profile. Also, due to the inability to thread the full length of an AR-15 barrel tenon right up the shoulder, a rebated area between the threaded portion and the shoulder creates a weak point in all AR-15 barrels where the chamber wall is both thinner and unsupported by the barrel extension. This isn't so on the Kel-Tec RDB barrel, as it is threaded beyond the extension and lock nut, meaning there is no rebated, thinner portion and the lock nut and barrel extension can completely support almost the entire chamber. In short, this is very strong gun.

Even more interesting still is that throwing a micrometer on what threaded portion of the breech tenon we can (most of its threaded length being inside the barrel extension and locknut) would seem to indicate that it's 13/16" in diameter, making it the same diameter as an AR-15 barrel tenon, meaning it is likely the same thread pitch as well. However, due to the locknut method of retention, the threaded portion of the barrel is substantially longer than an AR-15 tenon, at roughly one inch long (an AR-15's tenon is precisely 0.62" inches long before reaching the shoulder that the extension is tightened against). This, combined with what appears to be a gas port drilled (near as we can tell without removing the gas block) the same distance from the breech as you'd find on a rifle-length AR-15 barrel, would seem to indicate that the RDB barrel is little more than a rifle-length AR-15 barrel with a fancy profile to support the gas block and sight rail/pin attachment points.

The bolt was clearly made with similar logic. Borrowing from the AR-15's bolt head obviously saves engineering time, but Kel-Tec has rounded the lugs; a feature many high-end AR-15 manufacturers are adopting to increase reliability. It operates on a cam pin that forces the bolt to rotate inside the carrier as the carrier is pushed fore and aft, and the cam pin is retained by the firing pin. If any of that sounds familiar, it should: It's basically the exact same principle as the AR-15's bolt operation. The only substantive differences are that there's a small spring between the bolt body and firing pin (serving to keep the firing pin to the rear during operation), and that the carrier is just an inch and a half long and suspended from an operating rod. Due to the bolt needing to traverse such a distance to eject a spent round, the shorter the bolt assembly, the shorter the receiver can be. The operating rod, by the way, also forms the gas piston and cycles fore and aft on a captive guide rod that lives inside it. The recoil spring driving the gun's operation is also captive, inside the operating rod.

Shooting Impressions

With most bullpups, the problem with them is twofold: The manual of arms is weird and the triggers are varying degrees of "remind me again why this is a better platform than a conventional gun." Generally, it seems like the farther a trigger is from the thing it's triggering, the worse it feels.

Not so with the RDB. Truth be told, were we to close our eyes, the RDB trigger would be nearly indistinguishable from the well broken-in GI trigger in our Colt Canada rifles. Nearly. The break is uber-crisp, right around 4.5 pounds, and very consistent. There's no weird flexy-feeling hitchiness in it, nor any grit to be found; you pull back and after enough pressure is exerted, it just breaks. But, there's more overtravel than an AR-15's (not that it's excessive, just different), and the reset is both farther away and a lot less pronounced. There's none of the AR's nice tactile reset that you feel in the trigger, and even the faint audible snap the sear makes is noticeably far away, literally. It's like five inches from your ear and you'll never hear it with ear protection on. But, with that one caveat, it's fantastic.

And that's because Kel-Tec put a lot of thought into it. The trigger's important bits, the ones that contribute to feel, are packed right into the space above the trigger in a steel cage that completely encloses all the relevant components. When squeezed, the trigger releases the sear, which in turn releases a massive action bar that is pulled forward by dual parallel hammer springs housed above the pistol grip. This action bar splits ahead of the magazine well, runs down either side of the receiver, and intersects the hammer. As these action bars are pulled forward, they pull the massive (and weird) hammer forward, which pivots from somewhere near the bottom of the receiver and traverses damn near two and a half inches before it meets the firing pin at the back of the bolt carrier. It's very strange, but everything is contained within a steel substructure, and is obviously kept very rigid. It works and it works well.

In terms of operation, we did have some trouble with the RDB that we initially and incorrectly thought was the result of certain magazines not feeding correctly. As it turns out, the issue lie with the gun's almost infinitely variable gas regulator. As delivered from the RCMP evaluation lab, the gas pressures were turned up as high as possible, leading to an issue with double feeds or rounds simply being driven into the breech face rather than the trigger. It reminded us of the issue we initially had with the Type 97, which was also caused by the regulator being turned up too high, so we simply adjusted the RDB's gas system until it worked. But, we should note that owners would be well served to find a magazine they like and stick to that one type, as doing so will really let you dial the gas system in. Gen 3 Pmags were the most widely reliably (they worked across the most gas settings), but Lancer mags let us turn the gas down the lowest for the softest recoil.

And boy, was it soft. Even with Pmags or USGI mags and the gas system turned up slightly, the RDB is a pussycat. Is it softer than an AR? Well, that's really difficult to say. We would lean towards "probably," if only because it did feel a bit softer and logically, all that extra bolt travel is just giving the gun a better chance to bleed off energy that'd otherwise be introduced to your shoulder. Fitted with some sort of compensator or brake, this thing would be absolutely hilarious in CQB matches; already comes back on target quickly and points like we wish our dog would and that's with an A2 birdcage on the end.

In terms of accuracy, this one is what we'd call rack grade with most of the bulk ammo we shoot most of the time, but we'd like to see what it could do with some 77-grain pills... especially with the commercial 1:7 twist barrels that consumer models will come with. However, due to the way the barrel is pinned to both the sight rail and chassis, it's quite the opposite of free floated so that may prove the limiting factor on the RDB's accuracy. But if it'll shoot into two inches with generic 55- or 62-grain ammo? Well, that's what we expect from most service rifles (including those aforementioned far more expensive bullpups, so this doesn't disappoint.

Conclusion

And that brings us to the big question: The price. After all, a $3,000 rifle that shoots into two inches with bulk M855 ammo isn't as impressive as, say, one that accomplishes that same feat for $1,400. Which is precisely what the RDB is. With pre-sale prices hovering right around that mark, the RDB is roughly twice as expensive as the cheapest centerfire bullpup rifle on the market (the Norinco Type 97), and roughly half the price of probably its closest competitor, the Tavor X95. And in terms of shooting performance, quality, intelligence of design, and overall "goodness," the RDB punches well above its price point. It's definitely far closer to the Tavor end of the spectrum than the Type 97 end of the spectrum, and even if you ignore the bullpup format completely, at $1,400 the RDB represents a pretty damned good deal for a non-restricted, STANAG-fed black rifle of any shape.

Four Affordable European Exotics

If there are two words that don’t commonly get paired up in the lexicon of firearms terminology, it’s “European hunting rifle” and “affordable.” With storied brands like Sauer & Sohn, Holland & Holland, Purdey & Sons, and of course, Mauser, being some of the continents best-known producers of hunting guns, the expectation is that one must spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to get a good, high-quality hunting rifle from a European manufacturer.

CZ 557 Ranger Rifle – Shooter’s Choice

We won’t beat around the bush: If you’re looking for a rifle that you plan to shoot first and foremost, and hunt with second, then the $1,225 CZ is absolutely the gun for you. Developed for the Canadian Ranger rifle procurement program that closed last year, the CZ 557 Ranger rifle is a sort of hodge-podge of other 557 models, all combined to try and make a “universal centerfire rifle intended for use by professionals who use their weapon for everyday work.” First, the rifle begins with the rail-equipped, box-magazine fed action of the 557 Varmint, and pairs it with the iron sight-equipped barrel of the Lux, FS, and Synthetic models, before adding the two things that are unique to the Ranger rifle: A factory-adjusted two-stage trigger and a beechwood stock styled after their 557 Sport’s walnut stock, albeit with a third sling swivel and a slightly straighter forestock.

In the hands, the CZ sets itself apart from the other rifles in this test by being, quite simply, beefy. Now, we don’t mean it’s heavy; unloaded and bereft of optics the rifle is the heaviest here at 8.06 lbs but that’s hardly overweight. What we mean is that everything feels very durable. From the receiver’s polished and blued finish to the aluminum baseplate on the steel magazine, to the heavier barrel profile, the entire gun just seems overbuilt in a manner that some would say is typical of an Eastern European manufacturing effort. In fact, while many of these rifles feature various polymer or plastic components, we found but one in the CZ: The magazine release. And then of course there’s the mass that’s simply added by the features this gun has that the others don’t, like the 10-round magazine, and rifle sights.

So why do we say this is the shooter’s choice? Well, as mentioned, the design of the CZ 557 is basically that of a push-feed, pre-64 Winchester Model 70… and if there was ever a rifle that defined the term “shooter’s rifle,” those early Model 70s are certainly worthy of the title. CZ’s addition of a fantastic two-stage trigger and a 10-round magazine just improves upon that formula even more. Plus, with a heavy barrel profile and coming in either .243 or (our choice) .308, it’s a flexible gun that’s as comfortable spending hours on a shooting bench perfecting technique as it is afield looking for game. In our testing, it certainly proved accurate, and with the wide variety of .308 factory ammo and the limitless possibilities of reloading such a popular cartridge, it’s a great gun for someone that is looking for one single rifle that can do as much as possible. Unfortunately, it is still the heaviest gun here, and with the protruding magazine, it was the worst gun here to carry afield and the hooded front sight grabbed the most foliage on the way through the bush. Not that it was unbearable… just, it wasn’t as good as the others when it came time to move rather than shoot.

But, like pretty much everything CZ builds, the quality of the machining and assembly is excellent… if there’s one rifle here that’s likely to be appreciated by future generations, this is it. It just has that certain feeling of personality that only good craftsmanship, wood stocks, and a lustrous blue finish can impart.

Merkel R15

If your idea of an ideal European rifle is one that follows in the great German gunmaking tradition, then look no further, because the Merkel R15 is the most prototypically German rifle here. Formerly produced by and branded as the Haenel Jaeger 10s (a German gunmaker owned by Merkel), Merkel added the rifle their brand in order to add a more affordable option to a lineup that otherwise starts at around $4,000.

And like most German rifles, the $920 R15 is undeniably handsome, from the lines of its cold-hammer forged receiver to its racy swept-back bolt handle. Like the receiver, the barrel is also cold-hammer forged, and the entire assembly is brought into battery by a three-lugged bolt that features a full-diameter bolt body and a sliding extractor. Like the Anschutz 1771 we tested earlier this year, the extractor is retained and sprung by a simple spring steel wire that comes out of the extractor, passes through the bolt lug the extractor rides in, and is wrapped around the bolt body.

Even though our test rifle came chambered in .30-06 and was, as a result, a longer action than all but the Sauer (which was also a long action), the Merkel managed to tip the scales as the second lightest rifle in the lot; weighing just 7.12 lbs empty and sans optics. That’s surprising, given the action itself is very robust, with a bolt body that measures 0.79” across and receiver walls that are a whopping 0.28” thick. To put that in perspective, the beefy CZ’s bolt body is 0.70” across, and the receiver is just 0.19” at the bolt raceways. Of course, Merkel’s saved a lot of weight by using polymers and plastics in place of steel for the three-round magazine baseplate, magazine well, trigger guard, and magazine release. And the barrel profile is a conventional sporter profile, so it tapers down to its minimum diameter quite rapidly. So what little weight the Merkel is carrying, is mostly within the action itself, which gives the gun an excellent feel in the hands. It carries easily thanks to the smooth, flush-fitting magazine, and balances excellently from the shoulder. Simply put, it feels lively.

In terms of additional features, the rifle has an incredibly good single-stage trigger that breaks at a scant 3 pounds. Is has no creep, and a hair of overtravel, but for a field gun the bang switch is absolutely second to none. The two-position safety acts directly upon the sear rather than the trigger, which supposedly enhances reliability, but it’s the chamber lock that we’re impressed by. When the safety is switched on, a small tab is revealed below the safety’s off position, and pushing the tab down allows the gun to be unloaded without taking the safety off. It’s a nicer solution than many of the three position safeties on the market. Oh, and the stock is crossbolted in the style of the original Mauser, just to help the stock deal with the gun’s recoil.

Which is good, because as tested in .30-06, this thing has some significant punch. It knocked the entire ocular/eyepiece out of the Vortex Golden Eagle scope we use to shoot test groups. Of course shooting off a bench tends to exaggerate recoil, but even compared to every other rifle tested, the Merkel was significantly more punishing. Likewise, we found the action to be less slick than the others, due to it taking more effort to open than the rest, and the bolt handle actually bumping the safety when we put it back into battery. But given how well the rifle carried and its lively nature, it’d be a great choice for someone that wanted a seriously handsome, accurate rifle for their next hunt.

Bergara B14 Timber

Probably the best-known rifle here, the rifles from Spanish firm Bergara have been attracting plenty of attention since they broke cover a few year ago, including being awarded with more than a few awards. But in this company, their B14 Timber rifle is something of the odd man out, being easily the most “conventional” rifle here. In fact, if one were to simply glance at it, one might think it was little more than yet another Remington 700 clone.

And if we’re blunt, functionally, that’s almost exactly what it is. In fact, a B14 should drop into most Remington 700 stocks, and is compatible with most other Remington 700 components, including triggers and sight rails (we used an MDT Remington 700 rail for our accuracy testing). Likewise, it handles, and feels a lot like a 700. The safety is a two-position in the same place as you’d find a 700’s, and the traditional floorplate of the Timber model is released the same way you’d release a 700’s.

Of course, there are some differences, the most obvious being the bolt. Where a Remington 700 uses a spring steel collar contained within those vaunted “three rings of steel” to contain and extract a round, the Bergara uses a more conventional layout with no ring on the bolt face ahead of the bolt lugs, and a sliding-type extractor. Likewise, Bergara touts the recoil lug as “improved,” and boasts a Melonite finish, and a large, European-style nylon bolt handle.

But all that pales compared to the Bergara’s biggest departure from the Remington 700 from which it borrows so much: The barrel. Bergara is, and remains, a barrel maker. They’re very proud of their performance as a barrel maker, and like our own Colt Canada, are quite happy to flaunt their barrel making prowess as one of their key selling features. And like Colt Canada, one of their biggest claims to fame is their ability to produce a smooth, consistent bore; in Bergara’s case that comes as the result of using three diamond-tipped honing spindles rather than a reamer to initially bore the barrel. This ensures a smooth bore for the ensuring button-rifling process, and results in a bore that’s good enough for Bergara’s sub-MOA guarantee at 100 yards with match ammunition.

And that level of attention-to-detail really dominates the B14. Sure, it may look, work, and handle like a Remington 700, but the reality is that it feels, in every way, about 20% better in every way than the average Remington you’ll find at the Bergara’s $1,200 price point. The Melonite finish is nicer than the parkerizing of your average 700 at this price point. The 3 pound trigger breaks just a bit more cleanly. The action feels slicker. And of course, there’s the added confidence you get from having a rifle with absolutely zero plastic parts, as opposed to the plastic trigger guard you’ll find on Remington 700 SPS. In fact, even in this heady European company, the Bergara was the only one of these four rifles to feature entirely steel construction. That, combined with the performance put up on the range, and its familiar feel made it an easy contender for the title as the best field rifle here. In fact, if you want a finely made hunting rifle, but don’t care if it’s particular European in style or design, this would be the one we’d pick. It’s a truly great value.

Sauer 100

Which brings us to the Sauer 100. Like the Merkel, the Sauer is a thoroughly German rifle, albeit one with something of a twist. Where most German manufacturers will lean heavily on tradition and convention, Sauer is unabashed in their acceptance of modern techniques, in case the nylon stock didn’t make that abundantly clear. But Sauer doesn’t stop there. They’re happy to admit that the $1,120 Sauer 100 is machined almost entirely on thoroughly modern CNC machines, and has almost none of the “hand-made,” or “artisanal” mystique of other German rifles.

And you know what? We like the honesty. In fact, we like it enough to jump straight to the conclusion that the Sauer 100 is our pick for the best overtly European hunting rifle in this quintuplet. Why? Well, because it’s quite apparent that the money Sauer saved on things like the stock and appearance of the rifle has been spent on the manufacturing and design of this rifle. We won’t lie: In our opinion this is definitely the ugliest rifle here, what with its oddly shaped ejection port, relatively crude engraving, plastic stock, and mix-n-match barrel and receiver finish… but it’s also a great marriage of typically smart German design features with some nods to modern rifle manufacturing.

And so we end up with a rifle action that almost mirrors that of other German rifles, with a three-lugged bolt, full-diameter bolt body, and sliding, wire-spring actuated extractor. However, the Sauer’s bolt features two plunger-type ejectors where most rifles feature two, leading to extremely potent and consistent ejection of spent rounds. It’s also easily opened and cocked, and is extremely smooth, due in so small part to the extremely well machined surfaces of the bolt. In terms of additional features, the rifle obviously features a nicely textured bolt handle (which features the Sauer logo on the bottom, a nice touch we thought), a well-knurled three-position safety in the conventional position, and a detachable, flush-fitting five-round polymer magazine.

So where does the Sauer differ? Well, unlike every other rifle here, the Sauer’s bolt locks directly into the barrel… not the receiver. The lug recesses are milled directly into the barrel, and the barrel and receiver are fitted together by “heat shrinking,” wherein the receiver is expanded with heat and pressed together with the barrel. This may turn off some that expect to replace a barrel in their lifetime, but for most hunters, it’s a perfectly adequate method of building a gun. Likewise, where most of the Sauer’s competition feature a recoil lug hung from the receiver/barrel joint, the Sauer features a series of slots milled into the receiver itself, which then interface with corresponding slotted aluminum blocks in the stock. They call this the “Ever Rest” system.

The result of all this is that the Sauer, which only comes in a long-action format (our .308 featured an internally shortened magazine to take up the difference in length), is the lightest rifle here at 6.875 lbs and feels absolutely fantastic. The three lug design, receiver shape, and bolt handle all ensure it still feels thoroughly European, while the flush-fitting magazine and rounded bottom metal all make it extremely comfortable to carry. Likewise, the nylon stock takes some of the stress out of carrying it afield, and the texturing of the grip panels was a real boon in both dry and wet conditions. The 3-lb trigger is the best out-of-the-box single-stage trigger here, due largely to the complete lack of overtravel, and the wide shoe makes it extremely comfortable to shoot.

We did have one problem with the Sauer though: It was picky. Accuracy was well beyond “acceptable” standards for a field gun pretty much across the board, but we had difficulty chambering any ammunition that wasn’t simply brass-cased; specifically nickel plated cases gave us fits. We suspect it was simply an issue with a recalcitrant extractor making trouble with the less slippers case rims of nickel-plated cases, but nonetheless, it was frustrating.

Conclusion

Obviously there’s no winner here; these rifles are all too different to warrant awarding any individual rifle the clear title of “winner.” But there are some standout take-home lessons learned. The CZ is, without a doubt, the shooter’s choice. If you want a rifle you can shoot year-round, and drag out into the woods come hunting season, that’s your gun. If you want a rifle you can tinker with, or that marries a typically European emphasis on quality with a familiar American design and handling, the Bergara has to be your jam. The Merkel is the Germanic rifle of the bunch; beautiful, lithe, lively and full of personality. And the Sauer? Well, that’s the Jack of all trades, master of none in this company, as it’s neither the most satisfyingly European, nor the most flexibly useful, what with its great performance afield but largely irreplaceable barrel. And so, the only conclusion we can reach is that we’re damned glad these rifles aren’t more expensive than they are, because at least that way we can figure out a way to keep ‘em all somehow.

Can I carry a firearm for self defence in Canada?

As with so many questions surrounding firearms law in Canada, the answer is; it depends.

There are three terms within this question which we'll need to address separately: carry, firearm and self defence.

Carry

The term carry conjures up images of loaded handguns holstered on hips. But, of course, it can also mean a hunting rifle slung over a shoulder in the bush.

Before we go any further, it is important not to confuse carry with transport. If you are transporting a firearm from one place to another - regardless of whether it is non-restricted or restricted - then it must be unloaded. No exceptions. Therefore it would be useless for any type of self defence.

If however, instead of transporting the firearm, you are using it and as part of that use you are carrying it, then the firearm may be loaded as long as you are in a place where you are legally allowed to discharge it and you deem it safe to do so.

For example, if you are on crown land, unrestricted by local by-laws etc., and you deem it safe to do so, you may carry your non-restricted firearm loaded. As always, be sure to follow the firearms safety rules!

Firearm

Firearm can mean either non-restricted or restricted. In the case of restricted firearms, the answer to the above question is almost always no. It is, however, possible to obtain an Authorization To Carry (ATC) from the CFO of your province. These are notoriously hard to get though. Generally, the only people who qualify for an ATC fall into one of these three categories:

1 - those who require a firearm for the purpose of their job; such as armoured car guards - this is the most common reason an ATC is issued.

2 - those whose job requires them to spend a lot of time in remote wilderness areas where they are likely to be at risk from predator attack, and are not able to carry a larger, non-restricted firearm (e.g. due to quantity of equipment they need to carry); such as surveyors or trappers.

3 - those who have a genuine, verifiable threat against them and live in an area where the police are unable to provide adequate protection (and this needs to be a police assessment, not your own!) - as you may imagine, ATCs for this reason are almost never issued.

In order to apply for an ATC you must also undergo approved live fire training and demonstrate your competency with the particular firearm you will be authorized to carry.

In the case of non-restricted firearms, you may be able to carry it for self defence depending on the following:

Self Defence

This last term is perhaps the most important. It depends on what you intend to defend yourself from. If you're thinking about people then, with the exception of an ATC granted for such a purpose, the answer is absolutely not. Unlike our neighbours to the south, Canada does not allow it's citizens to carry - or even own - firearms for the purpose of self defence against human beings with many people opting to use other forms of self defence like pepper spray to make them feel safe. They often use things like Guardian pepper spray reviews to ensure that they get the best spray for their safety situation.

If, however, you own firearms for a legitimate purpose - such as target practice or hunting - and you choose to employ them in a self defence situation against a person, and whether or not you would be considered righteous in court, is a can of worms that I am neither qualified nor willing to open. Suffice it to say that, at best, it would be a painful process.

So what about predatory wildlife? Bears, cougars, wolves etc. In this case, as long as it's a non-restricted firearm, and you're carrying it in a legitimate place in a safe manner then; yes, you may carry a firearm for self defence.

When carrying a non-restricted firearm for predator defence in the bush, my recommended best practice is to have the magazine loaded and inserted, but to keep the chamber empty. This way you reduce the risk of an ND, while still keeping the firearm in a reasonable state of readiness.

In Summation

Can I carry a firearm for self defence in Canada?

A non-restricted firearm for bear defence in the wilderness? Usually, yes.

ANY firearm for defence against people? Almost certainly not.

Of course, Law Enforcement Officers, Peace Officers, and members of the Canadian Forces, are exempt from all of this whilst performing their duty.

So you may now be wondering "What is the best firearm to carry for predator defence?" and I'll cover that in the next issue.

Eddie Banner is a regular columnist for Calibre. The owner and operator of Instinct Canada, a personal safety, firearms, and first aid training company located on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Eddie has extensive training and experience with firearms through both professional and private channels, and is an avid outdoorsman. He is not a lawyer and nothing in this column should be interpreted as legal advice. Any questions pertaining to firearms training or safety for Eddie can be directed to info@calibremag.ca.

Bill C-71: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

The much anticipated gun reform Bill C-71 has arrived. Its aims, directly lifted from the Ministry of Public Safety's press release:

Enhance background checks on those seeking to acquire firearms - by eliminating the existing provision that focuses those checks primarily on just the five years immediately preceding a licence application.
Enhance the utility of those background checks and the effectiveness of the existing licensing system - by requiring that whenever a non-restricted firearm is transferred, the buyer must produce his/her firearms licence, and the vendor must verify that it is valid.
Standardize existing best practices among commercial retailers to maintain adequate records of their inventories and sales. These records would be accessible to police officers on reasonable grounds and with judicial authorization, as appropriate.
Ensure the impartial, professional, accurate and consistent classification of firearms as either "non-restricted" "restricted" or "prohibited" - by restoring a system in which Parliament defines the classes but entrusts experts in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) to classify firearms, without political influence.
Bolster community safety in relation to restricted and prohibited firearms (mostly handguns and assault weapons) - by requiring specific transportation authorizations to be obtained whenever restricted or prohibited guns are moved through the community, except between a residence and an approved shooting range. The rules for transporting unrestricted weapons (such as legally owned rifles and shotguns) will not change.

So in plain language, those with PALs and RPALs can look forward to complying with application-level background checks throughout our license period, in order to maintain the validity of our licenses. Likewise new license holders will have a larger length of time preceding their application scrutinized.

We will also be expected to affirm the state of a buyer's license, not only by physically seeing it, but by calling the Firearms Office to confirm the license. It's unclear what other details will be required during this license check procedure, such as if the gun make, model, or serial number will be required as some rumours have indicated.

Retailers will be required to maintain the infamous "book;" essentially tracking purchases and inventory.

The RCMP will be tasked with classifying firearms, wholly, completely, and without the oversight of the Ministry.

Long-term Authorizations to Transport will be limited in scope to cover residence-to-gun range transport only. All other purposes previously covered, such as border crossings, gunsmiths, and gun shops will no longer be allowed.

"Bill C-71 not so bad."

If you were expecting the bill to read "empty the contents of your gun safe immediately into the back of this dump truck," no. It's not bad. Which is precisely what makes this bill bad.

Firstly it contains, within it's proposed background check component, the expansion of the government's ability to take a PAL away from a gun owner or potential gun owner. By making the required background check basically limitless, a new applicant with a 10-year old prescription to antidepressants may be put under additional scrutiny, or simply turned away. Depending on the severity of these background checks and the resources available to the CFO in chasing them down, as well as the invasiveness of their application, these new checks may significantly reduce the number of PAL and RPAL holders in Canada.

Likewise, the decision to reduce the scope of the LTATT again seems to be little more than a measure aimed at adding additional layers of bureaucracy to the process of owning guns. No criminal has ever obtained an ATT to use a gun for a criminal act. Shootings are not carried out in the locations existing LTATT verbiage allows guns to be transported to (when was the last time you heard about a shooting in a gun shop, gun smith's, or border crossing?). This is pure and unadulterated lip service for those voters that do no know what the existing laws are, with a side of making gun ownership more onerous, and less appealing to would-be sport shooters.

Reclassifications Incoming

But while the above issues are certainly going to have an effect, the big thing gun owners will be talking about is the decision to move all classification powers over to the RCMP.

To be clear: This is not a component aimed at allowing the RCMP to re-reclassify the Swiss Arms and CZ858 rifles. That ability was granted to the RCMP when the government rescinded Minister Blaney's directive protecting said rifles in 2016. As a result, we can infer that this component is more sweeping, and looks to fully remove all government oversight over firearms classification. This move represents a gross abdication of the government's responsibility to the electorate.

Moving forward we can expect the RCMP to classify firearms based on the legislation dictating their classification. Unfortunately, the legislation dictating prohibited and restricted classes both conclude with the unfortunate catch-all lines "a firearm of any other kind that is prescribed to be a [restricted or prohibited] firearm." In other words, the legislation the RCMP will be forced to adhere to does not force them to adhere to any actual limitations when making their determinations. The RCMP can (and will) simply prescribe a currently non-restricted firearm to be prohibited, and so it shall be, with no oversight on these decisions coming from the Ministry of Public Safety.

The CBC is reporting that CZ858 and Swiss Arms rifles will be reclassified as prohibited.

The Wording is Released

The wording of the bill has been released, and includes immediate action to remove the Swiss Arms and CZ858 rifles previously reclassified from the non-restricted classification. This movement includes, sadly, the replacement of the existing non-restricted firearm definition to read simply "non-restricted firearm means a firearm that is neither a prohibited firearm nor a restricted firearm; (arme à feu sans restriction). It previously included an additional line allowing non-restricted firearms to be prescribed. The removal of this line means classification is a one-way trip, again. A firearm can only be classified in a more restrictive manner.

Furthermore, the prohibition of the Swiss Arms and CZ rifles includes provisions wherein owners of Swiss Arms and CZ rifles will be able to continue to possess them. Said grandfathering laws also appear to at least allow owners to transport them to and from "specified places." According to the new law, "the specified places must — except in the case of an authorization that is issued for a prohibited firearm referred to in subsection 12(9) — include all shooting clubs and shooting ranges that are approved under section 29 and that are located in that province." Subsection 12(9) in this case refers, effectively, to the Swiss Arms and CZ858 rifles. It remains unclear, as a result, if owners will be able to obtain some sort of specialized ATT granting permission to transport their newly prohibited rifles to crown land, or not.

Other news in the wording further expounds on the transfer of non-restricted firearms. Sales of all non-restricted firearms will be called into the Firearms Centre, where the seller will be issued a reference number, not unlike the process for restricted firearms. The buyer will call in, confirm their identity, and provide the reference number. There are no stipulations on the Firearms Centre's handling of any data procured through this new transfer system.

Also within the wording lay one clause that will require "The Commissioner of Firearms shall — for the purpose of the administration and enforcement of the Firearms Registration Act, chapter 15 of the Statutes of Quebec, 2016 — provide the Quebec Minister with a copy of all records that were in the Canadian Firearms Registry on April 3,2015 and that relate to firearms registered, as at that day, as non-restricted firearms

Non-application — subsections 6(1) and (3) of the Privacy Act (3) For greater certainty, by reason of subsection 29(3) of the Ending the Long-gun Registry Act, subsections 6(1) and (3) of the Privacy Act do not apply as of April 5,2012 with respect to personal information."

In other words, all personal data contained within the supposedly destroyed former Long Gun Registry will be provided to Quebec's government, including all data for those residing outside Quebec.

Long Branch Lee Enfield Sniper Rifles

Photos by Ellie Krete

Few firearms capture the imagination as wholly as those from the Second World War. Hailing from an era recent enough to be easily remembered but distant enough to be comfortable, the guns used in that terrible war remind many Canadians of a country at its best; a country fighting a war for all the right reasons. From the Sten guns to the Bren guns and everything in between, all the guns Canadians carried throughout the Second World War are cherished by their collectors, but none are as highly prized as this: The Long Branch No. 4 Mk. 1* (T).

Throughout the war, Canada's Small Arms Ltd. at Long Branch was responsible for the production of Lee Enfield-pattern rifles for the Canadian military, and Sten submachine guns for the Canadian, British, and Chinese militaries. Throughout the Second World War, Long Branch would churn out between 25,000 and 32,500 rifles each month. Initially costing a relatively steep $62.30 to produce in 1941, by 1943 the plant's efficiency was so improved that each rifle bore a cost of just $32, and by 1944 some 815,473 No. 4 Mk. 1* rifles had been built.

Beginning in 1943, Small Arms Ltd. was contracted to build a small volume of Lee Enfield sniper rifles equipped with telescopic sights, following the pattern laid out by the storied British gunmaker Holland & Holland who was responsible for the early production of Lee Enfield sniper rifles. These rifles were hand selected due to their accuracy, and would then undergo a variety of modifications before being encased in secure transit boxes and shipped to their respective users. While just over 25,000 Lee Enfield rifles underwent this treatment, those from Canada's Long Branch arsenal remain the rarest, with literally just a handful every year being produced. For example, during that first year the (T) variant was produced by Small Arms Ltd., over 230,000 standard No. 4 Mk. 1* rifles were made... just 71 were selected to become sniper rifles. And by 1944, only 644 of the 815,473 rifles produced left the factory with the telltale telescopic sights affixed. Due to this, anyone that was wanting a sight on their Lee Enfield would have had to look into getting an after-market scope attached. This meant they had more choice of which scope they'd use, like the ones offered on scopeguides.com (find more here), but it also meant that there was very little chance to find one with the original scopes included.

But obviously building a (T) was a bit more involved than simply bolting on a sight. The process began as rifles were tested. Those that demonstrated above-average accuracy were set aside and considered for modification. If a rifle was selected, it was disassembled and all parts inventoried so that they could be reunited with the correct rifle upon re-assembly.

Then, the left side of the action was milled flat and the battle aperture removed from the rear sight to allow enough clearance for the scope to be fitted. With that done, two small metal tabs (known as pads) were placed onto the newly-flat left side of the receiver, and fixed in place with five raised-head screws; three on the front pad and two on the rear pad. Then, still attached to the receiver, the pads were machined to ensure they were true to the rifle's bore, and then the drilled and tapped with a 1/4" British Standard Fine hole to accept the scope mount screws. Finally, all five pad screws were staked to prevent them from backing out.

Coincidentally, among collectors, those stake marks are seen as one of the best indicators of a Lee Enfield sniper rifle's provenance as a single stake mark indicates a rifle that was newly converted and never repaired nor refinished... or, among critical collectors, that the rifle is a replica. Conversely, multiple stake marks indicate the rifle was overhauled or repaired during the war, as many of these extremely valuable sniper rifles were.

With the receiver prepared, the cast scope mount was fitted, and machined to accept the large thumbscrews that held it place. Then the mount was machined and fitted with matched rings to hold the optic in place, which in the case of the rifles made by Canada's Small Arms Ltd., would take the form of either a military optic from the Leaside, Ontario-based manufacturer Research Enterprises Limited (of which there was no less than six different derivatives) or the consumer-market Lyman Alaskan. Only 350 Lyman Alaskan optics were purchased by the Canadian military on 2 December 1943, due to R.E.L. being unable to produce enough No. 32 optics to meet demand, which makes the Lyman Alaskan-equipped sniper rifles like the one pictures here some of the rarest of the rare today.

Finally, the scope was collimated to the rifle, and serialized. From this point forward the rifle and scope formed a matched pair and would never be separated nor interchanged with other components.

In order to allow the sniper to make the best use of the extensive modifications made to the rifle's action, the stock was treated to the addition of the most obvious and unique modification: The cheekpiece. The only sniper rifle issued in the war to be fitted with such a useful device, the Beechwood cheekpiece was screwed to the rifle's comb with a 1-1/4" brass wood screw in the front, and a 1-1/2" brass wood screw in the rear. Giving the sniper a proper cheek rest not only contributed to better accuracy, but also decreased shooter fatigue, and literally made the rifle easier to shoot well. Likewise, for all rifles produced after 1944, a third sling swivel was fitted ahead of the magazine in order to allow the shooter to make use of more sling and shooting positions afield.

The Optic Fiasco: Sewing Needles to Blame?

During wartime, the allied nations had little trouble producing firearms. With plenty of existing steel foundries to rely on, the base materials were easy to come by, as were the necessary machining facilities required to produce rifles the handguns the war effort required. And with little threat of aerial bombardment, many of the North American facilities like those at Long Branch were excellent examples of 1940's technology; seamlessly and literally marrying research, development, and production in a way that only global conflict seems to be able to. In the case of Long Branch, this took the form of Canadian Small Arms Ltd. being literally built next to the Long Branch rifle range, where many of the Canadian arsenal's firearms were tested and trialed.

But optics were another story.

A comparably dark art requiring a unique skill set as well as some very specific (and delicate) materials and equipment, producing good, rugged optics for the war effort was an incredibly difficult task. Even here on the relative safety of the North American continent, manufacturers of optics struggled to meet the demands of their military contracts, both in design and production. R.E.L., contracted to produce the optics for the Long Branch No. 4. Mk. 1* (T) rifles produced a number of iterations of their optics, never making more than 400 before moving on to the next evolution of the design. And in 1943, when the Canadian army gave the British military 350 of their Canadian-made R.E.L. optics and accompanying mounts to meet what the Canadians deemed to be a greater need across the pond, our army subsequently found themselves short of 350 optics... and with Ontario's R.E.L. unable to produce enough to satisfy that demand.

So, an extremely impromptu trial was undergone, with Colonel McAvity of the National Defence Headquarters taking delivery of two No. 4 rifles; one fitted with a Lyman Alaskan optic and the second fitted with a Weaver 330 optic. With strict instructions to test and return both rifles promptly, Colonel McAvity, as head of the Directorate of Vehicles and Arms, telegrammed Canada and stated; "We consider Alaskan best choice. It has tapered posts with cross-wire and luminosity ahead of (No.)32. In these tests we were able to distinguish targets 15 to 20 minutes later in the evening than with the 32."

And so, Canada placed an order for 350 of the Lyman Alaskan optics. However, Lyman could not provide a reliable date of delivery, due to two factors: Difficulty procuring glass lenses, and the reticle required by the Canadian military. Originally obtaining their lenses from Bausch & Lomb, the demands of the war required Lyman find alternate sources for lenses, and so eventually contracted Plummer & Kershaw of Philadelphia to produce lenses for their optics. The reticle issue was somewhat more interesting. While Lyman's standard reticle was of the conventional cross-hair variety, the Canadian contract stipulated a tapered post with a cross-wire format.

To produce these reticles, Lyman used No. 12 sewing needles to form the tapered post, but were unable to find enough needles to produce the 350 scopes required. The Canadian Department of Munitions and Supply located a cache of needles in the UK, and arranged to have them delivered to Lyman, so as to allow Lyman to complete the order.

Within a month of that cache's discovery, Lyman had the order complete, and was prepared to made an immediate delivery of 350 Lyman Alaskan optics with the Canadian tapered post and cross-wise reticle. To quote the excellent reference book on Lee Enfield sniper rifles "Without Warning" by Clive Law, "an army memorandum, dated 10 May 1944 outlined that the formal contract should show 350 each; Lyman Alaskan 2 1/2x telescopic sight, No.8 Mk.I cases converted to carry the Lyman sight (these were later designated Case, No. 18, Mk.I), SAL mounts, No.4(T) rifles and No.15 Mk.I chests. The model designation was "Telescopic, Sighting C No.32, Mk.I(TP)" with the TP representing Trade Pattern."

Why Guns Are Political: A Case Study

We do not have a gun crime problem in Canada. At the government’s own summit on Guns and Gangs, held mere days ago, it was admitted that less than one half of one percent of all police reported crimes involve firearms. And yet, annually, the RCMP budget dedicates almost $120 million dollars to the maintenance of Canada’s gun control regime through the Canadian Firearms Program. $52 million of those dollars go to the maintenance of the licensing program alone. To put that in perspective, the RCMP budget only allocates $70 million to their Criminal Intelligence division, dedicated to the disruption of organized crime in Canada… even though another fact gleaned from that aforementioned summit tells us that organized crime is directly responsible for some of the largest increases in violent gun crime in Canada in recent years. The number of gang homicides in major cities have almost doubled since 2013.

But even in light of this seemingly disparate dedication of funds, the government is yet again preparing to launch a new round of gun control laws, this time putting both gun owners and their own rural caucus in a state of some consternation. Why are they doing this, when Canada doesn’t have a gun problem? Because we’re going to the polls next year.

Now, many Canadian gun owners refuse to engage with the political sphere, saying that they’re hunters, hobbyists, sport shooters or just general gun owners, not politicians. They say all politicians are the same. They say nothing will ever change. They’re idiots.

Because every gun in Canada in essentially a political football.

It’s no coincidence that our current government is keen to announce gun legislation after weeks of constant beatings at the hands of the media a nd reports of relatively large losses in the polls. A strong gun control package shores up support with a base that’s otherwise been eroded by headlines around NAFTA negotiations, fighter jet purchases, a recent trip to India, and any number of other issues. Combine that with the large response to the shooting in Florida, and a more complete picture emerges; whatever is coming isn’t about guns… it’s about votes, polls, and political capital.

And who, or what is to blame for this situation? Recent headlines proclaiming that so-called “crime guns” are now being sourced domestically. Shoddily run polls indicating that over 80% of Canadians support a new gun ban. A national media machine that is so entrenched in their vilification of the firearm that they suffer lapses of critical thought when such headlines and polls are announced. Cowardly politicians that prefer to toe the party line rather than vote according to their conscience or their constituency.

And us. Yes, us.

Because we don’t push back. There’s two million of us in this country. That’s over 5% of the total population. That makes us one of the largest voting blocks in the country. And we do not speak up. We do not demand action from media outlets repeating questionable poll results. We do not publicly and vehemently boycott companies that denigrate our hobby and our possessions. We do not email, call, and build relationships with our elected officials. We allow ourselves and our possessions to be thrown left and right by political parties looking to curry favour with groups far smaller than our own… because they know we won’t unify and cooperate, that we won’t take control of the rhetoric, that we won’t produce consequences for our mistreatment at their hands. They know all we’ll do is launch a personal slacktivist campaign in our preferred echo chamber, be it reddit, Canadian Gun Nutz, Gun Owners of Canada or any number of Facebook pages, and we’ll preach to our choir. Or maybe we’ll hit the occasional CTV poll of the day. “I’m helping.” But we won’t put up any real fight.

And it is time for that to stop. It is time for all of us to take responsibility for ourselves tell these politicians, media outlets, and companies that we will not stand for it any more. Because if we do not stand up and make ourselves heard we will be the last generation of Canadians to own firearms.

http://www.ourcommons.ca/parliamentarians/en/constituencies/FindMP

B+T APC223: NON-RESTRICTED EXCELLENCE... AT A PRICE

Look, we get it. The AR-15 works, probably as well as any .223 ever will. It’s got a rich history and decades of product development behind it; it’s been deployed in countless battlefields by every non-former-Warsaw Pact country that could field a unit of serious trigger pullers. The AR-15 is just fine.

But do you ever just want to shoot something…different?

What if we told you there was a rifle of exacting quality, which took the same magazines as the AR-15, a rifle which Larry Vickers called “the sleeper of SHOT Show 2015”, and it’s available in Canada?

And you can get it in a non-restricted version?

That, friends, is the Brugger and Thomet APC223.

For years, people wanting a quality alternative to the AR have looked at the more established Swiss fighting rifle, the Swiss Arms 55X series, and for good reason. They’re accurate, dependable, attractive machines. But they were designed a long time ago now. Mounting optics or accessory lights is an issue; they’ve got cheek weld issues; they’ve had their legal battles. They’re almost a throwback to the battle rifle era: they’re just not modular in the way we now expect service rifles to be.

But nobody disputes the quality. No, if there’s one thing we know for certain, it’s that great rifles come out of Switzerland.

Well, once again, the Swiss have done it, although this time, the company with the non-restricted alternative is Brugger and Thomet (or, technically, B&T AG, although the abbreviations and model numbers get a bit confusing if you just start piling up letters and numbers a few at a time.) A boutique manufacturer of quirky exotica, B&T got their start building sound suppressors for the domestic market in Switzerland, where not going deaf is apparently a value understood even at the government level. The profits made on their suppressors were rolled back into the company, and thirteen years after their initial launch in 1991, B&T shifted into the design and manufacture of their own firearms.

Fast forward another thirteen years for good luck, and you’re back in the present day, when the notoriously picky Canadian Firearms Laboratory has officially put the non-restricted stamp on the 18.8” barrel version. And a day when the importer of these rifles has bravely entrusted a Swarovski Z6i-equipped model to a horde of wild-eyed gun writers, and hoped something good would come out of it.

Unwrapping the Swiss Miss

On popping open the case, our first reaction was “this is a big rifle.” It’s very much a product of the current era of rifle design, which tolerates a bit of extra bulk in exchange for parallel mounting surfaces. The receiver is longer and taller than an AR-15, housing a hefty bolt driven by an operating rod in a conventional short stroke piston design, and gives the APC a somewhat boxy appearance when viewed from the side.

This reaction, however, overlooks the slim profile of the APC223. Aside from the charging handle, which naturally projects from the receiver, the widest point on the entire gun is the magazine well, and the vertical bulk disappears once the rifle is shouldered. It’s a heavy machine, with an official listed weight of 4.1kg, or nine pounds, although B&T includes the weight of the magazine in that figure. The balance is a little nose-heavy, but that can be partly attributed to the 1:7” twist Lothar Walther factory match barrel.

Controls are interesting: the fire control in particular is rather nice. In fact, once one gets into the operation of the APC223, the appeal becomes clear. The trigger is excellent for a service rifle: fairly short, very crisp, not overly light but very manageable at around five pounds, and extremely smooth. Reset is very positive, with a pronounced but inoffensive “clunk” as the sear resets. The ambidextrous magazine release is accessed with the index finger, as is the bolt stop, which is engaged by pressing upwards on the button while racking the slide. The bolt can also be easily released with the index finger without breaking the grip, making this one of the best rifles we’ve ever seen in terms of layout.

The charging handle can be oriented right or left, and it reciprocates with the bolt carrier, a feature which seems almost ancient now. But it’s entirely reliable and the ability to change the orientation of the handle makes the reciprocating handle a non-issue in all but the most fervently dogmatic.

But we would be remiss, while in the region of the charge handle, if we did not direct you towards the feel of the action.

If you buy an APC223, we are willing to bet that the first time you cycle the action by hand, your jaw will literally drop. It is the most obscenely smooth action we have ever felt on anything which wasn’t a full custom bolt gun. We couldn’t stop racking it. It’s just staggering. It feels as though it rolls on ball bearings. It’s unreal.

But none of this means anything if the gun doesn’t run, so the next step was obvious: to the range!

Shooting the B+T APC223

We settled in at the Abbotsford Fish and Game, and started warming up. The APC223 as shipped had a spectacular optic on it: the superlative Swarovski Z6i 2-12, which is near perfection as far as field scopes go on a general purpose rifle. We began to punch holes at everything from pistol distance on out, but once we felt good and loose we began to focus on real rifle work. The APC is, frankly, too heavy to run fast in close; if you’re looking for a quick-handling carbine, this is not your huckleberry. The weight and length make it feel more like a battle rifle, but then these days, the .223 is getting run out to battle rifle range, so why not treat it as such? With a nearly 19 inch barrel, it’s certainly closer to the original M16s than to the shortened renditions so many of us default to these days. Buy a rifle, get rifle performance. That doesn’t seem unfair.

One thing we can certainly say about the APC223: nothing we did affected its reliability. There were no magazines it did not like, and we tried LAR Grizzly mags, second and third generation Magpul P-mags, pinned-for-your-safety Beowulf mags, aluminum D&H mags, everything. Every magazine locked in, every magazine fed perfectly, every magazine ejected perfectly. We’ve got some “tier one,” as the kids say, AR15s that can’t say the same, so we’ll give a point to the APC223 on that score. It runs like a champ.

Accuracy results were, however, mildly disappointing. All groups were fired at 100 yards from a rest in minimal wind, and while as always we can’t claim that they are the actual theoretical limit of mechanical accuracy, they’re very likely as close as any normal user will ever see.

The best group came from Remington Premier Accutip 50 grain polymer tipped boat tails, at 1.53 MOA. That’s pretty decent accuracy, of course; the mechanical limits of the gun could be close to 1 MOA. The mean radius was 0.61 inches, so you should be confident that the point of impact will be within two thirds of an inch of your point of aim at a hundred yards. That’s really nothing to sneeze at. But the action is so absurdly smooth and the barrel so nice, we thought we’d see laser-like precision.

The APC223 also shot Federal Gold Medal Match 69 grain bullets fairly well; the Sierra Matchking boat tailed hollow points turned in 1.71 MOA, and we’ll take that. Again it’s not the sub-MOA grouping that the internet always seems to generate, but for an off-the-shelf service rifle, it’s pretty solid.

Also of note is the 20 round group we fired with plain-jain Freedom Bucket ammo. With four sadly neutered Pmags, we drilled out a bullseye just to see the patter than would develop when steadily shooting plinker ammo. The end result was a 2.57 MOA group and again, that’s really pretty decent. The unvalidated claims we often hear of half-MOA performance from rack-grade rifles are…well, unvalidated. But we have generated our numbers with a skilled, but human, shooter, and they aren’t nearly as far out of line for a quality service rifle as many might expect.

One surprise in store for us, however, was the finish on the bolt carrier surrounding the cam pin cutout. The finish in this area appeared to be flaking away. We can’t discern if this is the result of deformation of the metal or a quirk of the manufacturing; word from the manufacturer is that it’s not indicative of an issue, but we were a little surprised to discover it on a rifle retailing for $3900 plus taxes et cetera.

In the end, the question always boils down to this: is it worth it? Well, it’s a beautiful piece of machinery. It’s equivalent in accuracy to most non-specialized, high quality AR-15s, and we found it to be very easy to shoot, and it drew a crowd every time we took it out of its case. There’s a premium on all non-restricted rifles and this is one of the best you’ll ever see. But it’s on the heavy side, although its slimness makes it pretty packable.

It’s a judgement call but if you can afford it, go for it! If there’s a more exotic service rifle you can rely on, we’ve never seen it.