Comments on: SA80 – the Most Accurate Assault Rifle

By: G.A.Mackinlay

G.A.Mackinlay — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:48:34 +0000

As an additt, the following is a link that may be of interest :
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/The%20Next%20Generation.htm

Its author Mr Williams has written much over the years, and the article links to some articles of his.

His comments re the L7 GPMG is of interest, the so called “Super Minimi” in 7.62mm was hailed as the answer to the weight problem with the L7, unfortunately the lightweight construction of the weapon means that after a protracted contact in which a couple of thousand rounds fired, the weapon has to be rebuilt by a armourer. The USN SEAL Teams and the UKSF enthusiastically adopted the weapon, but, it would appear that British arms manufacturer Manroy new variant using ultra-lightweight materials for bipod, butt, pistol grip, handle, dropping the weight by 2.4Kg is a more effective solution.

By: G.A.Mackinlay

G.A.Mackinlay — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 03:56:09 +0000

A member of this forum who acquired a copy of my book “A Moment In Time – A Look At The British Army”, took task with me regarding my entry on the L85A2 (SA80 means “Small Arms Family for the 1980′s). In particular telling me of Greg’s message 17th JAN.
Being one who was involved with the hot/dry, hot/wet trials here in Australia late 1975-early 76 with the 4.85mm Individual Weapon and Light Support Weapon, I am capable of making informed comment.
The prototype weapons (hand made of course)were made to the highest standards. They performed superbly in every single trial, which were of extreme standards. Problems were identified, rectifications being planned. The engineers who designed the weapon, can only be described as totally dedicated and extremely competent and inovative engineers, with support from the equal highly skilled specialists of the Small Arms School Corps. The 4.85mm round was very good, but, not a killing round, the intention by the political masters being to wound the Soviet hordes invading West Germany, so the many casualties would clog up their logistics system. But, in close combat, urban/jungle the kinetic energy of a three round burst would kill.
RAW Steve. The Last Enfield. SA-80 The Reluctant Rifle. Collector Grade Publications, Coburg, Ontario, Canada, 2003.
Gives a good description of the woes of the weapon system, although his description of the politics and financial aspects is very limited and he has no knowledge of the participants, it also completed in 2002 so is nine years away from operational use. And these woes can be firmly placed upon the British Civil Service, politicians who followed their advice. Poor quality ammunition, the dramatic decrease manufacturing standards from a workforce being laidoff, poor quality components made by the cheapest quote, all contributed.
The H&K rebuild was not some brilliant German inovation, it was basically the rebuild to the standard laid down by the weapons designers and developers.
The L85A2 has been in combat use in Iraq/Afgan since 2001,and those baggyarse infantrymen who carry it upon a two way rifle range, make none of the silly and stupid comments made here. Having a great deal to do with the Royal Marines, the comments made re the weapon are incorrect, and probably refer to wanting of a smaller weapon (the RM SBS uses the DEMACO (now Colt Canada) C8 Carbine, that have been extensively rebuilt.) Having fired some 300 rounds on the range at Brisbane in 2010, from a standard A2. Left out in direct sunlight (@ 40 degree Cent)lying on thick dust, for two hours. It fired perfectly, incrediabily accurate, the problems of balance solved by the new foregrip and attachments. It feels right, it looks right and in the words of every actual user from recents operations, it is right.
Such as the G36, HK417, have not worked well in the talcum powder dust of AFGHAN, whilst the Austrian Army, which took the SG550 to Chad with the European Community peacekeeping force had equal problems.
You will never get a rifle that everyone likes (like boots, field webbing or Camouflage)but a weapon that does what it is intended for, killing or wounding the enemy in battle in constant manner the L85A2 does the job. But, the 5.56mm ammunition is another story.

By: J

Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:15:47 +0000

I worked with some Royal Marines on one of my deployments to Iraq. They said they hated the SA-80 and preferred the M4. Here is a thread with some input from an American who was temporarily assigned to the Royal Marines, http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=92848

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:39:34 +0000

Ah, the SA-80. That’s the rifle that was designed by the ignorant, built by the incompetent, and issued to the unfortunate. The rifle called the ‘civil servant’, because it doesn’t work and you can’t fire it. The M16\M4 family runs rings around it in terms of reliability and accuracy. Sorry chaps.

By: John

John — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:05:12 +0000

Just looking at some of the video’s and noticing that the ejector for the spent cartridges is only on the right side beside the marksman’s cheek. Just a thought, I’m pretty sure that would make it difficult to fire from the left should around cover without getting an empty cartridge in the face. Unless you were to lean out from cover, but that would only result in making yourself a bigger target. It’s just a thought. The SA80 has come a long way regardless. I just don’t find that all the quirks and flaws have quite been worked out yet. None the less it seems as though the ejector is the only technical flaw with the gun. If fixed it could make the SA80 that much more versatile and useful.

By: USMC LCPL

USMC LCPL — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 23:12:50 +0000

the USMC bootcamp range i shot on was the only range in the USMC that was measured out in meters instead of yards ( i am takeing this from a 22 year old memory so if im wrong im sorry but im just going by old memorys) the max range is 500m on edson field and 500 yards on eery other range i think edson range was measured out when the US was trying to convert to the metric standard but it did not stick even our fuel went from gallons to lieters then back to gallons. at the 500 yd (M) line we shot prone at the 200 and 300 we had to do a standing, kneeling sitting and prone shots plus a rapid fire at a dog target. i did shoot at army ranges at scholfield barracks and the army just uses the 100 yd range with smaller targets for distance shooting i dont think it helped with really learning the effects of windage and eleation but i was a cadet at the time and just geting my hands on a M-16 was a thrill its just we used the older A1 models and they were a pain to use compared to my experence with the A2 i never got to use the M-4 being they just introduced the A2 when i was in the USMC but i myself would prefer a longer barrel for accuracy at a distance even if i had to cope with the weapon being longer thats the one thing the SA80 has over the 16 is you can get in a amtrack and you dont have to deal with the extra length im not bagging on any 1 rifle every one has its good and bad points i just liked my rifle i was issued. i tend to try and make my own opinion on things but being i cant get ahold of a SA80 i gotta rely on the words of what im reading and try and gleen out whats what and try and form sort of a opinion on things

By: Brian C.

Brian C. — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 21:48:51 +0000

I will start off by saying I have no knowledge of the SA80 what so ever. I would love to try one out (probly have to be airsoft, better than nothing) but i have a problem with so many of you saying the M16/M4 series is unreliabe and crap. That weapon has been in every theater of war since its inception. I personally put more than 300 rounds of blanks, on a beach, mags stuck in the sand for quick access on a training exercise with not 1 failure, and it wasn’t a well maintained rifle to begin with. Keep it clean it’ll go bang everytime. Also to compare accuracy between an M4 carbine and SA80 really isnt fair as the SA80 has a longer barrel, better comparison would be an M16. I believe the US Marines need to qualify at 600m to pass boot. My issue with the SA80 would be ergonomics, just doesn’t look universally friendly to me like other weapons. Would I buy 1? Damn skippy, without hesitation if I could get a semi only one here in the US. Butt ugly IMHO but as a confirmed gun nut who cares?

By: Sam

Sam — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:29:55 +0000

Having used L85a2s for years i love it accurate, reliable, small enough to fit in a scimitar turret use of bayonet and has a full automatic function.
I have worked with USMC in afghanistan and did a weapon swap for 10 minutes ona range
M4 is a miniture m16 and neither rifle that this squad had full auto
Both M4 and M16 fired repitition or 3 round burst they loved the L85 A2 (SA80)
P.s. call of duty cannot be taken seriously as most of the weapons fire the same calibre round 5.56mm yet have completely different statistics
The L86a2 Lsw has never and will never have a drum magazine

By: Rich

Rich — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 22:27:13 +0000

The SA80 is not a real weapon, it was hastily cobbled together to boost the share price of Royal Ordinance when it was privitized, it was put into front line service without basic testing, thats just corruption. It was an unauthorized copy of an Armalite AR18, ( the first prototype is made out of one, i’ve seen it )and so was full of faults that had already been solved by Armalite, and it’s licenced manufacturers ( sterling uk ). So it’s not really fair to compare it with properly designed and competently manufactured weapons.

When you have a rifle with the fire selector ON THE BUTT, you know something has gone very wrong !

According to the government there has never been anything wrong with it, however the £92 MILLION pound contract to Heckler and Kock involved a complete re engineering and replacement of most of the working parts !

You cannot polish a turd gentlemen.

By: USMC LCPL

USMC LCPL — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 00:57:17 +0000

i never tried the SA80 but being a relic of the cold war the one thing that comes to mind is how is the SA80 used with a bayonet being bayonet training was mandatory in the USMC while i was in bootcamp and looking at the SA80 i cannot concive of how it would be held since with the M-16 we had one had at the base of the buttstock and the other by the slip rings that held the handgaurds on . but being at the time they used the bayonet training to make us more aggressive in my opinion. im curious about the SA80 since there is so much conflicted things being saied here and over the web. as for reliability i used the M-16A1 and the A2 variant and loved the A2 being im left handed i had to use a special clip devloped for the A1 to prevent hot brass from hitting my face. the A2s brass deflector was a Godsend for me and ive noticed in what little ive read about the SA80 its not left handed frendly like the M-16A. with the A2 on 3 round bursts i roughly guess ( my memory of how many magazines i had at the time is forgotten with time) i had run about 10 30 round magazines and had a round cook off and it damaged my rifles chamber (this was my fault being 20 of us had 1500 rounds to get rid of and i wanted to see what it could do if i really had to put rounds downrange and the gass tube that cycles the bolt was glowing red hot) sadly i got a used rifle barrel off a damaged rifle as a replacement from the guys working in the armory so even in the 90s when the M-16 was improved over its early problems there was things that arose after the improvements so i see every rifle has its problems you just gotta learn the limits of what your weapon can and cannot do.