Viewpoint - British Army Contract for L96A1 Sniper Rifle (by Gil Boyd B.E.M)

[Gil Boyd]

Steve,

00245F - Hand built and assembled 4th March 1988 by Bill Smallwood Parker Hale Factory fitted with a Schmidt & Bender sight 12x42
Trigger adjusted for single pull 2 and 1/4Ibs.
17.7mm Grouping of 10 rounds at 100 yards
Fitted with NATO Green Furniture
Issued to the Sri Lankan Royal Air Force

Nigel,

00150F - Hand built and assembled 29th January 1988 by Bill Smallwood Parker Hale factory fitted/ordered with NO scope
17.8mm Grouping of 10 rounds at 100yards
Fitted with Black Furniture
UK Civ Sales

Before you ask and something I meant to put in my article F stands for FIELD
More info on each M85 rifle to read and if I come across anymore on your respective rifles will inform you. Currently wading through the total number made as well as the:
"M85 MOD Hybrid"

Hope this will suffice for now
Gil

[chosenman]

Interesting, confusing but definitely interesting.

Cheers
Gil.

[Gil Boyd]

Dan,

00408F - Hand built and assembled 23rd January 1990 by Bill Smallwood at Parker Hale factory, no scope requested.
19.1mm Group 10 rounds at 100yards
Fitted with NATO Green Stock
Home (UK) Civ sales no name logged

Gil

[DanL96a1]

Gil many thanks for this, is there any information on 00409F?

[sd4f]

Really nice article, much appreciated for doing the work and submitting this.

I'm glad I got my M85. While there are certain aspects that I find not very impressive, it's a great collectors rifle. I certainly would like to collect more rifles, including the L96, but I think that just won't happen here.

What I'm not understanding is this whole idea of maintenance. I've no military experience; I'm a target shooter and occasional hunter. I've fired plenty of rounds to get a good idea of what goes on over years of weekly use, but beyond changing a barrel when it's worn out, and regular cleaning and oiling, I struggle to see what maintenance is required? If a well regulated M85 rifle leaves the factory, I can't see anything that needs to be done to it, beyond shooting and cleaning. Any parts, if they break, can easily be replaced as most of the parts are fastened on or pinned. So i find it a bit perplexing as to what could possibly be any different between the rifles.

I know that the M82 rifle which was used here in Australia, hasn't got a good reputation amongst some vocal but anonymous internet personalities, but I've struggled to get anything more than the typical "it's a tomato stake" when I've tried to prod the issue.

[Peter Laidler]

SDF, you're honest enough to admit in para 3, sentence 2, the answer to your querie! Sniper rifles ain't target rifle and never will be - and nor are snipers target or competition shooters. The two are absolutely and totally different. A sniper rifle is a one-man-dog and has to be maintainable at unit level except under the strictest conditions when it'll be sent away. At that simple criteria, the No4T and the L96 reigned supreme. The trials team, in their wisdom and after taking advice from Canada and Australia decided that maintainability was not one of the PH rifles greatest attributes. And it's not all about target shooting accuracy either.

But you can be sure that when they did arrive at the conclusion they did, all of the rifles on trial had been 'put through the wringer.....' Snipers don't simply arrive at the point from which they observ and shoot by, say Land Rover or whatever...... Nope there's hours and hours of stalking and that includes crawling over rough ground, in destroyed buildings and all sorts of unimaginable stuff AND when it's cold and wet to boot. Out in the field the rifles dont even get dry, let alone maintained......

Just a few points to ponder. But I am biased, having worked on the P-H L81 and the AI L96. And guess which I chose to own? Yep....... got it in one!

[Gil Boyd]

The good old Parker, sorry mate couldn't resist it

[sd4f]

SDF, you're honest enough to admit in para 3, sentence 2, the answer to your querie! Sniper rifles ain't target rifle and never will be - and nor are snipers target or competition shooters. The two are absolutely and totally different. A sniper rifle is a one-man-dog and has to be maintainable at unit level except under the strictest conditions when it'll be sent away. At that simple criteria, the No4T and the L96 reigned supreme. The trials team, in their wisdom and after taking advice from Canada and Australia decided that maintainability was not one of the PH rifles greatest attributes. And it's not all about target shooting accuracy either.

Maybe I should have added that I am a mechanical engineer. I understand what you're saying but some detail would be more useful in explaining the issue.

I've seen other posts where you've provided a PC OS analogy to the L81, and it seemed that a big part of the problem with the maintenance was that the infrastructure around the rifle didn't appear to be well equipped to carry out maintenance.

I've seen M82 maintenance manuals, which appear to have a lot of material and instruction on how to do things to ensure proper function, but since that was just a plain old commercial M98, many of the repairs just seem like as if they address things which don't go wrong, because lets face it, the M98 went through two world wars with numerous nations, lots of custom gunsmithing, modification, dangerous game rifles, exhibition grade rifles, whatever, and there isn't anything known to really go wrong with a well regulated action. So it makes me wonder, what problems did they have that would cause such grief?

Main thing to remember is that this discussion is academic, we all know the history, so just in case I sound like as if I'm flogging a dead horse, I'm just using this discussion to learn about the perceptions and design aspects of these rifles. Main point is, I didn't get a M85 because I think it's better, it's just a cool, unique rifle, and one that is very rare and collectable.

[Cold_Zero]

The M85 as configured for the Canadian Forces was still being used in a training role as recently as 2011, topped with the Unertl 10x "C3 Sniper" marked.

Attachment 49655

Canadian Forces Base Valcartier, Quebec 20 Sept 2011
Observation of enemy activity
Canadian Snipers survey enemy activity at an Observation Post before an assault during Exercise Tireur Accompli.

Exercise Tireur Accompli is the final exercise on the basic sniper course. It aims at enabling candidates to apply the variety of skills and techniques that were taught during the course, such as the setting of observation posts, stalking, materiel destruction and engaging targets. The exercise was held at CFB Valcartier from 19-23 September 2011.
Canadian Forces Image Number IS2011-5022-03
By Corporal Jax Kennedy with Canadian Forces Combat Camera

The picture and description were pulled from flickr:

Observation of enemy activity | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

couple more pics

https://www.flickr.com/photos/world_...9W4GzL-9W1TT8/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/world_...9W1BcZ-9W4rVh/

[Gil Boyd]

DanL96a1,

Dan,
Here are your results on your M85 -00409F
Built by Bill Smallwood at Parker Hale on the 19/12/1989 in NATO Green stock and requested fitted with a Schmidt & bender sight 6 x 42 serial number: 78652
Range Test result : 16.6mm group at 100yards with 10 rounds
Sold to WINAMEX, Austria

Regards
Gil