I like the SA80

[enfield303t]

So from that article that is linked above it looks like the SA80 was adopted so that RSAF Enfield would have a full order book when the government was trying to flog it off:



So who actually designed the thing?

Do you think Lucas the Prince of Darkness was involved?

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Well, the Lee Metford was adopted with a black-powder .303 cartridge in 1888. Thirty years later, at the end of the "First Great Unpleasantness" what was all the go?

The SMLE, STILL in .303, albeit the high-velocity Mk7 round, but still basically the same action and cartridge it started out with. There was a mind-boggling series of redesigns, tweaks and doctrinal changes in those thirty years. Not to forget a bewildering array of "upgraded" older-pattern rifles, to make up the required numbers.

Scroll through another thirty years, (and another Great Unpleasantness), and there we see the sons and grandsons of the "original" users, STILL clutching a rifle (or carbine) that would be instantly understood and appreciated by the lads of 1888, and within another two years, off to ANOTHER war in North Asia with much the same gear. And let’s also not forget the wonderful L-42 series that just about had to be beaten from the hands of its users, to field a replacement, not THAT many years ago.

And in the "other" corner, large chunks of the "Red" Army STILL carry and use a direct, lineal, descendant of Mikhael Kalashnikovs "agricultural" little "attitude adjuster". Seventy years, and counting!

[Bruce_in_Oz]

And, speaking of "geriatric" equipment / systems:

There's this: The Army found a Browning M2 .50 caliber still shooting perfectly after 90 years - Business Insider

[browningautorifle]

There's this:

Those old things... Sort of anti climactic though, I'd take 'er out and warm it up for them. I can still "Struggle" through headspacing and timing one of those guns.

[Flying10uk]

Worst thing BL ever did F10 was to end the relationship with Honda.

Yes, in my opinion Honda were a very good business partner to B.L. and I've not heard much criticism of the Triumph Acclaim, on reliability grounds, over the years.

enfield303t, have you served in or with U.K. armed forces over the last 30 years? Is this how you formed your opinion of the SA80 rifle, from first hand experience?

[enfield303t]

Yes, in my opinion Honda were a very good business partner to B.L. and I've not heard much criticism of the Triumph Acclaim, on reliability grounds, over the years.

enfield303t, have you served in or with U.K. armed forces over the last 30 years? Is this how you formed your opinion of the SA80 rifle, from first hand experience?

Never served in any UK force did a couple years in the Saskatchewan Dragoons (armoured) but my attendance was about as often as you will see a whooping crane. Had to attend a min. of one parade a year to keep my status as a DCRA shooter which entitled me to lots of free stuff (transportation/lodging/food/competitions) and all the ammo I wanted to use. Also able to draw a FN C1 which was a great gun IMO.

Was accepted into the USMC in 1962 and all went well till I was told with what they were offering I had to renounce my Canadian citizenship and immediately apply for US citizenship. That came about two months before I was to report to San Diego and it was a deal breaker.

Have formed my opinion from reading volumes on troubles from the start of the SA80 and always found it interesting that it was defended by the hierarchy. It is well know that your gov't is purchasing AR's for special units and considering how reliable they are why keep pouring money into a gun that really doesn't live up to expectations. A bull pup is a good gun for CQB but Colt builds a Commando model that is perfect in size/weight and not a bull pup. As before if you want a bull pup go with a Tavor it is a better gun.

Then my son took a trip the Vietnam/Cambodia/Thailand last year and spent the better part of three weeks with a retired Royal Marine Sgt. That Sgt. just confirmed what my son and I thought, the SA80 was a inferior firearm and he hated it. From what I gathered from my son he didn't have a single nice thing to say about it.

I understand it is tough to admit you built a bit of a dud compared to what was available from a different maker but even Ford accepted the Edsel was a huge mistake and dumped it after 4 years. There is a article on how H&K was paid 400 pounds/gun to do mods and that makes no sense when you consider what a AR will cost.

There is so often a lack of common sense and that "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" attitude when stepping back and taking a thoughtful approach would be the way to go. Now your military are stuck with them, for how long who knows Nato might want a new cartridge and I bet dollars to donuts it will be easier to adapt a AR to it than a 80 variant.

I know many disagree with me but that's OK just my 2 cents.

[bigduke6]

from first hand experience?

Hmm.... Interesting thread, as F10 says above, I think that would override any article thats published......... Post #1 certainly enjoyed himself........ But I think we have all been guilty at some point of reading something and put our own feelings towards it, Myself I said my bit sometime back in post 10 in the link below and only following on from Brit Plumbers post #5, (still love the quote he said)

Although since the link below I have had the opportunity to do this ....... and ......and ........and ......... to it and to be honest it operated flawlessly, only problem at one stage was due to a magazine.

One things for sure if I ever have to use it in anger (which I hope I don't but you never know what would happen if Kim Jong-un ever sees his a**e etc) I've every faith in it.


https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=57466&page=1

[skiprat]

I worked on the A1 in 1987 ( two years after its introduction) at the Guards Depot (infantry basic training) where it got a real hammering, with lots of use by inexperienced, young users.... We worked flat out to keep the rifles in the hands of the user as well as filling in all the equipment failure reports ( the start of any proposed modification).
We had problems with the quality control of many of the spares supplied, many made by small engineering firms with little or no firearms experience. ( And the same part could be made by a few different companies in a short time)
We Armourers identified the common problems early in its service but there felt like there was an unwillingness for change ( modification) There was one "special" stepped bolt that failed regularly ( bipod leg pivot) we replaced it with a standard m6 bolt and it was accepted as a modification ...... Until the manufacturer made a new "special" stepped bolt and we had to replace all the m6 bolts!!!!
I didn't like to shoot the A1 ( ergonomics, I don't like changing magazines under my armpits...) bit did not have any reliability problems with my A1 and I did more shooting than most as I was part of the shooting team.

With the introduction of the A2 the quality of the parts improved and the common faults were removed by modification. And the work load of the Armourer reduced drastically.... It's now a very reliable platform ( if your Armourer is aware of what to look for in the annual inspection , as some of the parts are nearly 30 years old)

I still don't like it, It's boring to repair!!!!! ...... But can get it to perform out to 600m

[Flying10uk]

We are where we are with the SA80 rifle, a rifle that, today, most people seem to say is reasonably ok. It may not be perfect, it may not be the best available bull-pup rifle, it may not be everyone's cup of tea but it does at least work reasonably well or so we are led to believe. The fact that it may have cost us poor U.K. tax payers shed loads of money is no great surprise. The U.K. has a long history of equipment procurement costs spiralling out of control, something that we are use to in the U.K., nothing new.

[bigduke6]

I don't like changing magazines under my armpits...

Could this have something to do with being in the field a few days in hot climate (obvious not Yorkshire)