Printable View
The LMG version of the rifle, the L86 was always a pig-in-a-poke and really was never going to be anything else. It is little known that one of my former bosses, Lt Col Andy Xxxxxx was head of the trial-to-acceptance team for it and it never passed anything except for the interchangeability of 80% of components criteria! He wouldn't sign it off. But we're not talking about the LSW.
When the SA80 ( Individual weapon (I.W.) and light support weapon (L.S.W.)) were first on the drawing board, and the first mock ups were put in the hands of some troops. It was a very different type of weapon. Firing from the open bolt when automatic fire, closed bolt when on single shot, inclined bolt, and obviously a different caliber....
The conversation of the AR180s was just to trial the practicalities of a bullpup weapon ( aperantly it was "NEVER" intended to copy and past the working parts to make the new gun).... if you believe what is reported in the book
The 1st weapons that were made for the troop trial were well made by people with an interest in getting some government work. After that many parts were out sourced to small machine shops and quality and reliability went out the window...
. I would say reliability went in cycles from initially Good through to poor, depending on who was making the parts at the time, at one point we were changing 150 firing pins a month ( basic training regiment very high use)
faults also went up with the move to Nottingham! ( Different maker for the pressed steel parts)
We had about half a dozen common faults that would really affect reliability, all easy fixes and no weapon was out of use for longer than 1 hour for repair... only some of these faults have been " designed out" with the A2 ( plastic bits will always crack and fall off when given to the infantry! DO OTHER COUNTRY'S SOLDIERS EAT THE PLASTIC BITS?????? it's a common problem in the British army)
The user has been better educated in the care and use of the weapon, during the first Gulf war we were told to dry clean and use oil sparingly ( as we did with the L1A1) ....now with the A2 we have been shown it needs more oil....and it works.....
As a Yank this has been a very interesting thread. Made me go buy the book, which will get here in another week.
Thought it worth mentioning, that it took the better part of a decade to get the M16 right from the 1962 version.
1) Improved magazine (1963)
2) Needed to change out the firing pin for a lighter assembly (1963)
3) The bolt release needed to be beefed up slightly (1964)
4) The bolt needed to have the heat treatment changed. (1965)
5) The gas tube had to be changed from regular to stainless steel. (1966)
6) Because of the need to use a different powder, the buffer weight needed to be raised (1966)
7) The chamber (1968) and bore (1972) needed to be chrome lined. Bore for life, chamber for functioning with the dirty W846 powder.
8) The requirement to remove the calcium carbonate from the powder to limit the fouling. (1969)
All these minor changes made what was a functionally not all that great rifle into a pretty decent design that is still with us as a front line rifle 55 years after introduction.
I'm not really qualified to say F10, I'm sure Peter, Mike and Skippy can give you a definitive answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
My personal opinion, for what it's worth, the concept of designing a weapon system that's "all this be to all men" is, and always will be flawed logic.
We have seen this time and time again, the General Dynamics F111 (cancelled Navy variant), the F35 (finally getting there) are two examples of this folly from the world of aviation.
The basic idea of the bullpup, having a compact weapon with a barrel that's longer than would be the case with a conventional layout, makes good common sense to me as a layman.
As Peter said, the L86 was a pig in a poke and it should have been cancelled and replaced early on.
Unfortunately the whole programme was wrapped up in lawyers of all pervasive Political and civil service meddling right off the blocks... As we all know these people run their own agenda...
For anyone reading Skippy's post #102 below is a link to a pic of the Individual weapon a lot of folk confuse this with the ES2 (which is a bull pup design but probably the only similarity)
http://www.historyofwar.org/Pictures...d_4_85_IW.html
Forgot to mention its on page 46-47 of the book "an Ilustrated guide to Rifles and Sub Machine Guns" ( Major Frederick Myatt M.C.) have had my copy since I was a kid, the days when a beret was worn with cap badge above the left eye and not the left ear.......
We can discuss back and forth forever the good the bad and the ugly of the SA80 but I think the UK purchasing AR's for some of their units and not giving them the new 80 tells the real story.
Maybe someone can explain the logic in this, but doubt it.
Some specialist units will NEVER accept what the regular force has. It's all to do with their inferred or aural air of superiority. I could go on but I won't..........
It's same in the US military as well......
I would guess that U.K. special forces are still trained to use the SA80 rifle; I would be surprised if they are not.
You could maybe argue that some UK SF have a choice of what to use and some prefer a HK to an AR.
I'm sure part of the issue with the SA80s reputation is the lack of a civilian market to vindicate it. The AR has proven itself on the commercial/civilian side as the dominate modern semi auto because it is easy to fix, cheap to run, and is proven reliable with a wide range of ammo in virtually all conditions. Most of the time you buy an off the shelf AR, from a $400 DPMS to a $2000 Daniel Defense, or if you build one from parts, you expect it to run. It's not viewed as a jamomatic death trap anymore. The people who espouse it is crap today are typically the type who will find something damning with everything that isn't their gun, whatever it is (AK, FAL, whatever), or someone who just doesn't have a high opinion of any semi auto due to whatever beliefs they have.
The SA80/L85 obviously never got that chance. I think if the A2 was widely adopted by a civilian audience who got to run with it in matches, shoot it recreationally, or whatever for 40 years most of the mythos would go away if personal experience and public consensus proves it is a good gun. There are multiple rare guns that are ranked among the best of all time that I suspect would have a far different reputation if millions were in circulation privately getting run day in and day out... I love the StG44 but it's the first one that comes to mind.
Unfortunately it seems the era of automatic surplus being chopped up into parts kits and brought to the civilian market is coming to a close due to changing times... it's too expensive for importers due to high labor costs, other countries are often willing to buy complete guns, and is generally much more difficult on the paper work side. Thus it seems unlikely this family of rifles will get a second chance with civilian shooters, but you never know.
Edit: A gun with a very poor service reputation but seems to have been embraced later on just came to mind. the CETME-L. Heard very few complaints with HMG or privately built guns, when they are put together with the care required in assembly and with a few tweaks or adjustments here and there they apparently run very well.
History may be repeating itself with guns that try to be everything to everyone. The Modular Handgun System was an expensive process and the more I dig into them the more I question how good of an idea it is on the scale of a national army. A consumer maybe, but I just don't get it for a military. Time will tell.
The SA80 WAS available to the public and was widely advertised for sale in the UK by Royal Ordnance. Alas, it was in its standard issue/auto/semi-auto format. Also, it was about the time when semi-autos and rifles easily convertable were about to be banned so there were very few sales. That event also put the stop on any other variations of it in the UK
Well, when I get time, as I have just been given a mechanically broken Airsoft SA80 which was intended for mounting on a plaque but now not required, I may look at measurements and see if a Ruger 10/22 will match up and drop in without too much messing about.
The SA80 looks quite robust body wise all metal, with all the usual plastic bits in green thereon.
As long as the trrigger/bolt/pistol grip/magazine/safety catch and off course the rounds get chucked out correctly could be a novel body change.
Talks of someone doing it on the web with a Marlin 60.
Following on from Peter's post #112, here are some of the contemporary adverts for sales of the SA80. Pat Walker was advertising them from Jan through to Nov 1986.
There is also an article in the pictures attached, from Guns Illustrated from April 1986, showing Pat Walker actually shooting one.
Attachment 84857Attachment 84858Attachment 84859Attachment 84860Attachment 84861Attachment 84862Attachment 84863Attachment 84864Attachment 84865Attachment 84866Attachment 84867
those were the days David, back then we had great firearms laws, thanks for posting, pure misty eyed nostalgia
Nope....., cannot be. According to those experts operating in another universe within the MoD, they were not available outside the UK MoD. They'll be apoplectic at seeing these ad's. There's none so blind as he that will not see I say.
Yep, this advert could well prove to be very useful to a good many people who are currently suffering under the MOD's current Spanish Inquisition on all things SA80 ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
Me being one of them..........:(Quote:
Originally Posted by mrclark303
---------- Post added at 02:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:19 PM ----------
PeterQuote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
Of course they weren't! And thus a certain dealer (who shall remain anonymous) definitely didn't buy around 250-300 surplus L85 and L86's direct from HK (UK) circa 2000...........!
Since we were also having a good time in those days, I wonder if this could be where ours came from? The ones that may appear here in Canada...? Very few but I expect there would have been a few individuals that ordered them from far. I'll bet Warren will know a couple of people from back then that did that, if he surfaces here.Quote:
Originally Posted by David TS
I remember the Pat Walker adverts in Guns Review, (not for the SA80 though) but for others such as the Sten, Sterling etc. looking at the small print on the third page along, L1A1 with plastic furniture £360 or with Wood Furniture £280.......... I doubt you get just the wood furniture for under £100 now. Some interesting adverts amongst them pages, anyone see The EM2 for £6000 ( also third page along) serial Number 2.
Having seen any number of rebuilt military arms with new action bodies, from G3 type rifles, 1 STGW 57, AK variants what I see is a fair number of them are pretty poor.
In the case of the roller hesitation lock rifles, three defects appear:
1) worn trunions, so they are not unlocking correctly point. In the case of the STGW-57, to the point it was shooting itself to pieces.
2) misaligned trunions, so they do not zero in the adjustment range of the sights (or barely do)
3) poorly heat treated trigger components, which were replaced to allow the arm to sell.
In the case of AK variant, the number of misaligned truinon blocks seems to be pretty high, rarely does one see an AK here in the US that does not have a problem with the point of aim moving as it heats up. I have been told this is due to the need to individually set up each trunion with the associated receiver, but when the manufacturers have made their own trunions form new (like century) there have been numerous cases of heat treatment issues.
The really successful arms were those made by the original factories, with the military quality control NRE covered by the large military contracts for commercial sale. Those are the ones that show up on the range and seem to work well enough to be used in some kind of actual semi match use.
Reading the "last Enfield" it seems that a lot of the defects of the original rifle had to do with the closing of the Enfield facility and the movement of the design to Nottingham, in the point of development where normally new rifles deployed are found to have defects, which are then rectified in the original facility. Added to the difficulties was the cost to manufacturer and the cost charged to the government were out of kilter, so that all sorts of short cuts were made. Had the L85A1 been made in one factory where a long term contract was assured, with a price to match, you would have likely seen a lot of the defects worked out in short order.
The story kind of reminded me of the M14 saga here in the US, which saw the design perfected between 1959 and 1961, by which time the rifles were pretty good. Unfortunately the damage was done that the design was canceled a few years early, with only 1.38 million made by 4 manufacturers. It seems with a service rifle, no matter how much testing occurs ahead of time, it generally takes a few years of production to work out the bugs. The AK, the AR, the M14 and the L85A1 all seem to have had issues on initial deployment, the L85A1
Imagine, the deactivation would cost far more than that nowdays.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
JimQuote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
Pat Walker probably sold more (if you can use 'more' to describe what was probably only a handful) than any other dealer at the time, but I suspect they were largely destined for the UK.
The story here goes that the SA80's that went to Canada were exported by the manufacturer, at the time depending on the exact date that would probably have been Royal Ordnance Nottingham, in a bid for export sales.
Having said that, when the 1988 semi auto firearms ban (post Hungerford) was looming, Pat Walker certainly offered a service where he would handle potentially banned semi autos and export them for owners (see attached).
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
Set of L1 wooden furniture Geoff, you will struggle to find a good set for under £350 these days .... unless you know a man who might have some of coarse:thup:
That advert shows just how far our hobby has been squeezed here in the UK in the last 30 years, its a pale imitation of what it once was unfortunately ...
I wonder where that EM2 is now???
I quite fancy one of the Sherman tanks @ £10K, 3rd advert from last, Post114. In fact at only 10 grand I may have a couple.
And following on from that the GPMG below it. I was standing in a UK dealer's armoury only two or three years ago looking at a brand new, unfired, fully functional GPMG!Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
---------- Post added at 06:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:26 PM ----------
Note they were 'collect' :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
Obviously before the pallet carriers we have today. Sherman tank delivery from Gateshead to Suffolk? That'll be £70 overnight on a pallet sir :madsmile:
I'm not sure of the price of a Sherman now, but am sure the last one I seen was around the £350,000.00 mark, a couple back then would of been a good investment......Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrclark303
Bit of typo John but I would of said £150....... never realised the price of the timber for the L1A1, will keep my eyes peeled at the War & Peace show, I seen a pistol grip and the hanguards last year, just when I was going to enquire someone picked them up and paid £40.00
Quote:
Originally Posted by David TS
The pallet couriers today are a hell of a saving, My milling machine come form London to Liverpool for £60.
Something tells me a standard pallet may be a bit small for a Sherman, plus they would charge for any overhang.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
Yes, on pallets amongst other things I have had a 400kg lathe from Kent for £65, and a similar weight 23hp lawn tractor from Scotland for £60!
When we leave the E.U. :wave: will Euro-pallets no longer be available in the U.K.? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
Only if they arrive with goodies on! :cool:
To honour our proud tradition of going off on a tangent and in the spirit of the previous fascinating post by David, showing what used to be available here in the UK, here's a couple of AR15's that survived the gas torch and passed through my hands about 5 years back now.
The AR15 sporter was used for a few years by its owner at Bisley and when the ban came in he had it very carefully deactivated and kept it as a reminder.
The second is an AR15 A2 HBAR, this came from a chap (A true gentleman if there ever was one) who used to import AR15's and M1A's to the UK before the ban, it was absolutely mint and un-fired bar factory test and UK proof...
It hung around a Sec 5 armoury for many years before finally being deactivated in 1995, the owner again keeping it to remind him of happier times.
That one came to me with everything Armalite related (unresticted) he still had in the back of the stock room, hammers, trigger sets, go, no go gauges, cleaning kits etc etc.
All just thrown in, a really nice guy!
It's a shame both got the chop, but its better than facing a cutting torch! Today, the HBAR is in a Museum collection and the A1 Sporter is in a private collection.
I shot a HBAR A2 a few years back, I thought they might shoot well and I wasn't wrong, superb rifles, I would dearly love one!
Attachment 84890Attachment 84891Attachment 84893Attachment 84892Attachment 84894Attachment 84895Attachment 84896
With trying to keep within the tangent, Regarding Davids posts on Pat Walkers adverts, I was doing a search and found something related to them, it involved a lad who had a 7.92 mm rifle on his ticket, I suppose back then it didnt raise too many eyebrows but the Said "rifle" was in fact a MG42....... I cant find the page were I read about it, but he come to renew his ticket and the routine security check the MG42 stood out...... All his stuff was seized etc, but his dad was a top Judge..... The Firearms dept was trying to get the MG42 working on full chatter, but little known to them the owner had never shot it as he couldnt get it working from day one.... In the end the Cheif Constable took caution regarding the Judges letters etc, so his stuff was returned, the owner being the kind of bloke he was sent a letter to the Firearms dept thanking them for the return of all his firearms and a big thanks for getting his 7.92mm rifle working again.........
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
That's hilarious Geoff, I would pay good money to see the FEO's face hit the floor when an MG42 buzz saw was produced from the cabinet!:lol::lol:
I just found this - apologies if it has been posted before:
British Enfield SA80 Part 2: XL60 series Armament Research Services
David, do you think that there is any likelihood of your deactivated SA80 ever being returned to you or of you receiving compensation for having it taken away from you? Has it been destroyed now?
When I read it John I was in stitches.......of course this was the early 80's........... it really has brought some memories back reading the adverts in David's posts, the 86 date was something else as I was counting the days until I was 17........ ready to start driving, get the bike test done and to get my Shotgun Cert.....Quote:
Originally Posted by mrclark303
F10Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
It wasn't a deact...........
What was the basis for taking it? The L98 would never have been a S5 firearm.Quote:
Originally Posted by David TS
I think we should appreciate someone not wanting to go into detail on something such as this and I can imagine it's not a section 1 vs section 5 issue but following the gist of the thread, how an allegedly only military owned firearm made it onto civvie street.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick S
I think the previous posts illustrate how that's perfectly feasible. Makes you wonder how far such illogical thinking could go? Reclaiming L42's?
Hope it all gets sorted for you David.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick S
Way too long a story to even scratch the surface of, and much of it is sub judice.
---------- Post added at 09:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:02 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by desperatedan
Kev
There's talk that some of the more 'interesting' L1A1 straight pull conversions have now been investigated.
I was rummaging in some old Target Gun magazines today, and what did I find but another piece of the information about the 'ones that got away'!
I knew about them, but had never seen this article before.
Attachment 85182Attachment 85183Attachment 85184
Very interesting indeed David. A bit more information for the folder!Quote:
Originally Posted by David TS
I have a vauge dusty memory of seeing what I would assume was that rifle many years ago at the range.
I would have thought the L86 barreled examples must be very rare pieces indeed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrclark303
John
The 'folder' indeed!
You may well have seen it, I believe both have been out regularly.
Rare pieces? Well, there are these two (the article says one, but there are two), another one according to Steve Raw's book that allegedly 'escaped' from RO Nottingham being sold by them, and the one pictured in Steve Raw's book, which I am fairly certain is NOT the third one that RO sold, as it is unique to the others and immediately distinguishable.
I know the one pictured in Steve Raw's book was on the range circuit until recently, I have seen photos of it.
Mine also originally had a long barrel upper as well as the normal one. I know where that long barrel is (and if the MoD Police are reading this, please don't come knocking on my door, it is - genuinely - out of the UK), once the current mess is sorted I have first dibs on that upper, providing the provenance checks out.
So that's definitely three, possibly four, plus another upper.
There will be more out there, doubtless.
Afternoon all,
A while ago a UK company was selling a cutaway L85A1, I missed the boat (a very expensive boat) and would have absolutely loved it to join my collection. They still have an image of the piece ghosted into the background on their site
http://dwsuk.org/
With a mind to the current issues with the MOD Police and all things SA80, do you think the current owner should expect a knock on the door???
Nope they'd probably bring their own key, a big red one. :yikes::yikes::yikes:Quote:
Originally Posted by mrclark303