Colt Canada L119A2

l119a2

Colt Canada is advertising an L119A2 variant of their L119 rifle intended for UK special forces. The rifle features a monolithic upper receiver, new prong flash hider, ambidextrous controls, and a partial 1913 rail handguard. No word yet on whether these rifles have been or will be adopted by the British armed forces.


Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a long time firearms enthusiast who enjoys refining his understanding of small arms both on the range and in the drafting room. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to small arms design and theory.


Advertisement

  • Dracon1201

    Well, okay, that is pretty damn sexy! I want the upper!

  • Anthony

    I’d buy that for a dollar.

  • Jeff Smith

    I love that hand guard. Any word on a civilian version for the states?

  • Mr Mxyzptlk

    Is the bottom of the handguard removable to fit an L17A1 UGL, because if not the UK wouldn’t want it.

    • sianmink

      It looks like it attaches to the existing rail so, yeah, I’d assume it’s removable.
      Also I want one.

      • Mr Mxyzptlk

        No, not the rail cover, the whole lower part with the bottom rail would need to be removed in order to fit an L17A1 as is. The only way that you can reliably attach an HK GLM to a rail is if there is a second point of attachment, such as on the hk416 which has a bracket built into the handguard which a cross pin goes through. This might have a similar system (there might be a hole for this purpose behind the sling swivel but if so you would end up with the launcher awkwardly far forward on the standard model), but if there is no prevision for the existing GLM it would be a non-starter for UK adoption.

        • sianmink

          ah, ok, I’m more used to the M203A2 and AG36/M320 that just need a full-length rail to clamp onto. I thought the L17A1 was pretty much identical to the AG36. Couldn’t a cross-pin adapter be attached to the rail near the magwell?

          • Mr Mxyzptlk

            With the M320 for the US army it isn’t attached directly to the rail, with both the M4 and M16 you have to remove the bottom half of the handguard and it has a rear bracket that braces against the barrel nut (much like on an M203), and a front catch that locks it against the bayonet lug at the front (there are different brackets for the M16 and M4, this is the difference between the M320 and M320A1 I believe).

            Having said that the L17A1 doesn’t attach to the bottom rail, come to think of it I think I may be mistaken. I have some vague recollection of a bodged fix that involves a stronger steel gas block and a diferent lower rail on the handguard that fixed in place more securely, as the relative flex between the two kept snapping off the bayonet lug in testing (this might have been a different country that uses the C8 SFW AG36 combo though, like Norway or something, I can’t remember). As this is monolithic there should be less of an issue attaching directly to a rail, but it would still need some second attachment point to stop the wobble between the launcher and the rail.

          • Akex

            The L17A1 attaches to the picatinny rails. Hence the reasoning for the KAC UK-SAS rail.

          • Rusty Shackleford

            It looks like it works with the L119A1, so I’d assume it with be compatible with the A2 model.

            Scroll down to the 3 Brits in Desert DPM: http://forum.militarist.ua/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=49733

          • Mr Mxyzptlk

            The L119A1 has a bayonet lug to attach the launcher to, the L119A2 doesn’t. In order to get it to attach properly you would need to have either a cross pin type locking like on the HK416/417, or come up with some new front bracket of some sort proprietary to this gun. It might be that you don’t need the second point of attachment with a monolithic upper but I kind of doubt that, as it would still have some play to it and I doubt the catch that attaches the launcher to the RIS would be up to the job by itself.

          • Joshua

            Maybe they have caught up to us and figured out the M320 sucks as a weapon mounted launcher, Big Army still has not fully figured it out but SOCOM learned much quicker that it is a far better standalone system than weapon mounted.

          • Mr Mxyzptlk

            Nah, Britain likes the H&K GLM. There is barely a difference so don’t quite know why there is such a difference in opinion, possibly due to the fact we didn’t have a UBGL before so troops were not able to miss the good old days of the M203. Besides, I cant see them ever doing a mid life upgrade on something that would remove a big function like that, and if they went for another launcher instead this would add a lot in terms of not only the launcher cost, but also the cost of training and maintenance as you are loosing the commonality with the L123A3 on the L85A2.

          • Geodkyt

            ALL weapon mounted grenade launchers suck a sgrenade launchers, when compared to their performance as stand-alone systems.

            The point of them is simply so the squad/fire team grenadier doesn’t have to juggle two personal shoulder weapons – GL and rifle/carbine. SOCOM guys are generally brighter (or at least more experienced and better trained) than your average line infantry PFC or SPC.

  • UnrepentantLib

    Got a dumb question for ya. I’ve seen the term “monolithic upper receiver” a few times. I don’t quite get what they mean by that.

    • Ross Parker

      continuous top rail bridging the gap between the receiver and handguard on a normal AR-15 variant, where the delta ring is.

      • UnrepentantLib

        Thanks.

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      The term monolithic means it is made from a single piece, so in this context it means that the upper receiver and handguard are combined into a single piece of metal without a join between the two.

  • TV-PressPass

    Personally I’m not sure what’s custom about magpul, but that’s their gig not mine.

    When they’re thinking about selling to Canadian civilians . . . that monolithic upper looks pretty slick

  • I was told to pick a name

    The grip and stock look photoshopped, lol.

    • gunslinger

      i’ve seen a lot of ‘shops in my days

  • LCON

    Just in Time For Bikini season

  • Joshua

    This was requested by the MoD in July of last year as a mid life upgrade to the L119A1.

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      When that was announced it was supposed to be to refurbish the existing rifles and the only big external difference was the front sight. If this really is the L119A2 than that is one hell of a case of mission drift, as the only part that would be reused would be the lower recevier and some of the internals.