I lived in Dagenham close to the works at Eastbrook Dagenham . Their QC was second to none and skip raiding often resulted in harvesting the 40 round mags with minor feed lip problems that just required a little work . They proved very popular in the US during the AWB . At their demise I owned a FAL ,a River Mini 14 and Colt Sporter 1 but the '88 Amendment put paid to ownership of semi autos but not many of Sterlings superb products developed by Frank were used in Practical Rifle Minor . I met Frank a while after the Sterling works was transformed into the Sterling Trading Estate , he hasn't moved far down Rainham Road South and had begun a business building bespoke air rifles with 2 apprentices in a small workshop . This rifle was a great design which overcame many of the M16 platform shortcomings . LH cocking , easy may release , ambi safety , multi choice mags , short gas piston ( no blast in the face) , and a folding stock version carried over from the 180 . Accuracy was superb , heavier barrels and Sterling had just sourced a manufacturer for the plastic furniture to replace the plywood handguard . What Sterling had really pinned their hopes on was the 9 mm/38 Special revolver for use by police and some military units . Most police forces had revolvers as side guns for such events as terrorist activities as in the Iranian Embassy Siege and Trevor Locke ( also a Dagenham boy who grew up with my much older brothers Dougy and Graham ) was armed with a 38 Special import . The Sterling was to replace all revolvers in the police inventory to enable either 38 or 9mm 2ZZ ( the military round produced en masse) to be used . In November 1985 I bought a Glock 17 , a pistol that was laughed at by most Beretta 92F and Colt Gold Cup owners but a pistol that left both of them wanting in competition . I carried out a number of mods which made the gun capable of handling +P rounds and by 88 just about the whole of the UKPSA pistol owners had a Glock 17 on their ticket which prompted the Met Police to adopt semi automatic pistols and dump the whole idea of replacing US made revolvers with great quality 9/38 Sterlings built in Dagenham . I was lucky to have had the chance to shoot one of these fine handguns with both 9mm and 38 Special hot handloads and they were extraordinarily accurate up to Korth standards in 38 and better than any 9mm pistol on the market . Sadly large capacity magazines won the day and Sterlings final attempt at marketing a quality small arm was done . Sterling had survived WW2 ( a V2 landed at the gate of their works in WW2 with minimum casualties) , the fickle post war development programmes having won the SMG contract only to have the quality of their products entirely overlooked in favour of the disastrous and unreliable bullpup produced by their rivals at Enfield as demonstrated in the desert in the first Gulf War . Everyone in the British Army had to be trained to shoot right handed regardless as the cocking handle would knock your teeth out , the magazines were garbage compered to Sterlings ( their 40 round mags could hold 40 rounds and of STANAG design) the L85A1 mags swelled at 30 and jammed, they were prone to discharging if dropped and eventually the whole rifle underwent redisgn at a cost of millions when RO E bought H&K to resolve the issues . Even the bayonet had to go out to tender at excessive cost for a now defunct piece of kit . Now 40 years on after further development , the L85 platform could be considered a decent rifle if a little heavy . In hindsight the Sterling Arms 87 had none of those issues and the folding stock version , would have met the British Army's requirements without the problems . The tendency now is to move away from bullpup designs for modern warfare and as seen on numerous occasions , Sterlings designers and Dagenham Engineers would have been there with new designs for new calibres to suit today's modern warfare probably with the revival of the 7mm NATO ( ,280 British ) cartridge so successful back in the 50s .
A former owner of Sterling Armaments Company, (1970 -1982) Mr James Edmiston, wrote two books on his experiences which are well worth reading, they are still available on line - The Stirling Years and The Sterling Redemption. Includes details of the chicanery of the Brit Govt. It is so rare to find books written by the actual arms manufacturer. Last I heard, Mr Edmiston was involved in the manufacture of high grade shotguns for the civilian market.
Whenever one sees an iteration of a firearm where a simple, highly effective, extremely cost efficient solution is replaced by a more complicated, less reliable or effective, more expensive solution *do to exactly the same thing* (rather than as an attempt - however brilliant or misguided- to add an new capability or feature), the answer is invariably someone had fears of a patent suit, or the designer is working in the engineering equivalent of a "publish or perish" work environment.
Another take is: if it already exists you have to try to do something else, else they'll just buy the other thing that already exists and is well proven. It's not "publish or perish", it's "sell or perish" which is basically capitalism.
It's odd how you can see the design cues from other designs around the time add up to this interesting look that to my eyes looks a lot like the kind of "legally different" designs you see in film/video games to avoid having to license an existing design.
Assault rifle basic concept and format haven't changed that much since the original Stg (apart from bullpups) Since people can't see inner details they focus on external design cues like the M16-AR15 front sight (which really aren't that essential to the design)... From there there's only some many ways to make a front sight/ barrel cover/butt stock that don't look the same...
Thanks again, Jonathan and team, for another really fascinating episode. Unfortunately for Sterling, their work on the SAR 87 more or less coincided with the unfortunate events at Hungerford and the subsequent loss of any UK civilian market for semi-auto rifles. With that and the political stitch up that guaranteed the British Army adoption of Enfield's SA 80, they really only did have export markets to play for. Given all those obstacles, they could really only have succeeded off the back of genius level designers and marketeers.
Given the tortured history of the SA80 it’s unfortunate that the government didn’t seriously consider a Sterling-made AR-18 variant. I really like the looks of that first one here, despite it being bulky. Thanks for the history and this series on the Sterling rifles.
the APE mechanism in this gun massively reduces friction. This is probably mechanically superior to the SA80 just from a design standpoint, ignoring build quality. This is the only Sterling designed gun that's ever impressed me.
If you have a read of Sterling owner (at the time) Mr James Edmiston's book, The Sterling Years, he describes how the prototype SA80 were made from AR18 receivers highly modified, when shown one at a Defence industry event during its early development years, he noted the modified AR18 reciever still had the telltale manufacturing processes on these SA80 prototypes. Mr Edmiston wrote two books on his experiences - The Sterling Years, and the Sterling Redemption. He successfully sued the Brit Govt over their underhanded decisions while he was the owner. The case resulted in the largest payout in British civil law history. His second book which was published within the last twenty years give details of this court case. I was very interested to hear from this vid that Mr Edmiston has resurrected Sterling recently.
I am so interested in everything this channel produces. I loved the smg my personal weapon for many years, and I hadn't realised that Sterling also produced other weapons. Jonathan mentioned the SA80, I only fired it a couple of times on the ranges as it was towards the end of my service. My lasting memory is that I didn't like it and it drove our Guards GSM to distraction because it was rubbish for drill. Mind you I'm such an old fart I hated the SLR, you can't beat the Lee Enfield .303 in my book, but then I probably fired that more than any other rifle.
I love the sterling and lancaster smg's. If I were rich I'd totally try to get one. Owning guns at all is an often prohibitively expensive hobby, but automatic's is a rich man's game...
Rivalry between Enfield & Stirling? How dare you, it was more like open warfare... As ever a fascinating dive into a very early prototype of a lost weapon. (Indeed it always fun to see an early prototype of almost anything)
It's funny I don't own any firearms and don't plan to ever own any but I find guns fascinating in the same way that I find mechanical watches fascinating. I love all the clicks, thunks and snaps well machine mechanical parts make. Love these videos.
Hey. A bit of a critique for the channel: It would be nice if you actually included the weapon names in the titles of the videos. In this video for instance Jonathan mentions earlier videos with the LAR and SAR 80. Now I found those videos, it's not that hard, but it'd be nice if it was easier to get a quick overview of which gun each video is about.
The Australian Leader Dynamics T2 rifle is such a good comparison because that design actually sought to simplify the AR18 further, while this thing Sterling was working on seemed to have just complicated things for seemingly no other reason than complicating them.
I remember when Leader tried to interest the Aussie Army with their rifle in the 1980s. I saw one in the trials unit armoury at Maribyrnong near Melbourne in the early 2000s. The guys running the trials unit told me the Leader had several shortcomings and its then current form, not suited for use in combat by the ADF. To my mind, the shortcomings can be sorted out if the interest exists. I suspect with Aussie Army trialing the Steyr AUG and the M16A2 in the 1980s then opting for the Steyr AUG, they had no interest in what was then an unproven Leader rifle. I was told years ago by member of Small Arms Fleet Management section of the ADF, that the reason for choosing the Steyr over the M16A2 is that Steyr agreed to licenced manufacture in Australia, Colt Defense would not agree. There was a report years later that management of Colt Defense came to regret their decision. Apparently both rifles were acceptable to the Aussie Army after the trials.
@@keithad6485 The M16 and AUG were definitely much more mature products than the Leader. Not agreeing to licensing production was one of Colt's many blunders at the time.
@@0neDoomedSpaceMarine The context of the Colt Defense decision is that in the late 1970s, (I think) they had licensed manufacturing of the M16A2 to a South Korean manufacturer which included they could not export any rifles or parts. Colt discovered, the Koreans were exporting parts and I feel certain this affected their later decision not to allow Aussies to make the M16A2. I owned and managed a defense manufacturing company for ten years some years ago. Now getting back into the industry.
@@0neDoomedSpaceMarine Back then, we were manufacturing mostly spare parts for the Aussie army's German made Krauss Maffei Leopard 1A4, US made FMC M113A1 and the Canadian made LAV-25 8 wheeled armoured car. I will be looking at manufacture parts again, but will research this market first, There are other products and equipments we will be looking at, Defense Department is a peculiar beast to deal with but if the time is taken to understand how the procurement process works, there is good money to be made.
To my knowledge Sterling (or was it the Chartered Industries of Singapore) manufactured a version of the SAR 80 with a FN Para/Galil style folding stock and if they had also added this left side non-reciprocating charging handle to the SAR 80 they would've gotten a great rifle.
Learning about guns IS Archaeology. People wrote and recorded far less of their rationale behind things and how they did it than you'd expect, and sometimes hid it. So all you have are the physical details sometimes. It's also kinda like paleontology, because you can connect rifles you'll hear nothing about being related by looking at the geometry of them (in a similar manner to dinosaur bones) and seeing what's similar.
Sterling produced a bull pup rifle to compete against the infamous Enfield SA80 rifle. The reports of how it faired against the SA80 rifle were never released to the General Public. I wonder why ?
Been a great series thank you. Really interesting to see some of the things that were never meant to be; funny how a company/designer can make something as iconic as the "Sterling SMG L2" then fail so badly on that "difficult 2ⁿᵈ album". The Sterling was there all through my formative years, on the news & in the papers, anywhere the country got involved in trouble there'd be a chap with a beret, 'tache & a Sterling. Succeeded in popular culture too obviously in the Star Wars films as Imperial-issue E-11 blaster rifle. Hopefully as you say the company will see a resurgence in its favours. PS, Every time you said "Sterling rifles" in the video I got the chorus of The Jam's "Eaton Rifles" echoing 'round my head... it'll be there for days now.
just a further note on what Jonathan says @ 4:47 about the receiver being a single stamping or "pressing" as used to be called in the U K : This nomenclature also contributed to troops calling the AR 18 and M 16 "toys by Mattel". "Pressing" was largely associated with shaping tin ( or tin alloy ) toys from the early twentieth century through after WWII. While stamping is largely the same process, the result of stamping does include hardening the metal and can include adding stiffening items/materials ( which did not happen in usual "pressing" process ). The end results can look similar, but stamping adds more detail and rigidity and can be used on stronger steel and steel allow materials. Thank you to Royal Armouries and Jonathan Ferguson for a very interesting series on the development of the Sterling Automatic Rifle ( their attempted uses of the AR 18 / AR-180 rifle system ). Not surprised that Jonathan started in studying archeology, given his thoroughness and detailed presentations. ☺
Another great video from Jonathan and the Royal Armouries. Never knew of this rifle but I like the look very much. Edit: "I'd have had to have banged the butt" new Jonathan soundbite? Edit 2: my my, curious to know more about your archaeology!
Nothing too exciting, BA from Exeter, during which just two weeks field experience in the Somerset clay was enough to have me looking for a nice indoor role!
Genuinely interesting look at a niche of development.. and those guns are soooo 80's; the crude plastics, the use of wood, the screws, the aesthetics...
You mentioned the Leader: if you have an example it would be great to see it and hear about Leader Dynamics/Australian Automatic Arms and their triangular bolt-face !
An anti-preengagement device would give theorical better reliability by reducing friction between the receiver and bolt carrier. Reliability was probably something they kept on mind seeing that they went for a long-stroke piston. On what the bolt carrier running inside receiver? Welded on rails, a stamped surfarce(like the G3) or it's just the geometry of the receiver(like the AR-15)?
That's right, in fact the EM2 rifle's bolt also has an overt APE device on it, although I doubt Sterling paid attention to that. Good question on the bolt carrier contact surfaces; I'd have to check again to be sure but I think it's a pair of tack-welded rails.
@@JonathanFergusonRoyalArmouries The AK, FNC, Garand, QBZ-95, QBZ-191, ARX160, etc have APE. It is a huge factor in the abnormal durability and reliability of the AK, far larger than the piston. AR15s and AR18s generally don't have a proper APE mechanism. This means it takes more force to feed the gun. AR15s are generally very reliable anyways, but better is better. It is not an insignificant amount of force. Look up Nate F's video on it, it's the equivalent of a few pounds fighting gravity working against your gun's action.
Frank and the Gang... Is that Sterling's in house band? Looks like for a right handed shooter, the magazine release could be accidentally pressed. It lacks any sort of fencing like early m-16 rifles or early L85A1 rifles.
Hi Johnathon. Busy serving in Ukraine now. Rumour has is were getting a maxim for our defensive positions soon. I'll try and upload a video of it in use. Hopefully before a tank destroys me and it.
When did you serve in the Singapore army? I remember reading from somewhere that the Singapore army replaced the SAR 80 in the late 1980s or 1990s with a different rifle.
Perhaps the peculiarities of the bolt carrier/bolt arrangement involves the avoidance of patents held by others and new patents in your name. Coming up with a new assault rifle/battle rifle, a better one, was relatively easier in the olden days because there weren't 100 000 000 c#nts with CAD and CNC milling machines in their sheds working on it.
Sterling (Stirling?) is making new fireams! They're producing an AR-18/AR180b derivative for the Canadian market. Since the restriction and subsequent ban of AR-15s, AR-180b pattern guns have become a sort of defacto successor to the now prohibited AR-15/AR-10 family of guns.
The overhead cam is too far away. You'd usually want to show what you look at yourself, you describe the side facing you and the close up is 90° to what is facing you. The overall cam setup of the front facing cam also too far away and the lighting needs work as well. The background with the racks is nice, but what is important is you and what's on the table.
My cousin has a variant of this, but plastic furniture and slightly more simplified design compared to this, great except that the hammer spring is too weak and gives light strikes often. Alu receiver, all plastic furniture, the rest is the same.
Seems much if not all of this rifle's features are borrowed from a half dozen or more platforms from it's time & a few that weren't even current production quite yet at the time. A bit strange in appearance but I believe the designers were on a somewhat forward thinking plot. Outstandingly interesting to get a close look 👍
Seems like a basically good design that needed a good bit more refinement, but really it came too late to the game and didn't offer enough of an improvement over the competition.
Jonathan, how have I never noticed your incredibly 80s calculator watch???!!! Please produce a video IMMEDIATELY, as it clearly should be in the museum…
If these prototypes made it to trial, how reliable were they? Sometimes the political motivated choices for firearms are not the best. The rifle prototype you detailed seems sound in design, needing some tweaking.
The only two things where this rifle offers a genuine mechanical improvement (or at least something that could be argued that way) are: 1. The long stroke piston (can increase reliability, although it's less of an issue than with a belt fed MG, where "long stroke piston" really should be your starting point, at the expense of potential accuracy - which is why the starting point for a rifle should generally be "DI, Stoner internal piston pseudo-DI, or short stroke piston/tappet" unless you have reason to suspect reliability issues.) 2. The non-reciprocating charging handle (both reduces bits cycling back and forth that could hang up the rifle in the field, say if literally firing from inside a heavy bush, *and* reduces the opportunities for dirt to get in). Pretty much all of the rest of the operating bit "improvements" appear to be a step *down* from the AR18. That screams, "trying to avoid patent issues or trying appear innovative to potential customers".
You know what APE is! Even more surprisingly, you don't know why this is better than a shelf in the receiver. Basically, it's because it massively reduces friction, making the gun disproportionately more reliable. The AK, Garand, FNC, ARX160, QBZ-95, QBZ-191, and a few other types have this feature, which lets their actions succeed even if they have less mechanical advantage. Gives a much better range of reliability than not having it. It also massively reduces wear. In an AK, for instance, improperly made guns can start eating their trunnion (like the PSAK-74) from the amount of torque the bolt lugs apply to whatever they're grinding against if the APE mechanism is malfunctioning in some way and not preventing the rotation long enough. I think this feature is extremely notable. It gives it a mechanical reliability advantage over all other AR18s, including the SA80, and seems very cheap to do in this form. This is the first Sterling-made rifle that has EVER impressed me.
Titling your video "The Gun That Killed Sterling" (on the thumbnail), definitely gave me the wrong idea for a second lol! Because I am familiar with the channel, I quickly understood what you meant, but it's a GUN-- a KILLING machine! My first thought was definitely closer to "Oh my! This is going to be a dark episode!" Lol..
I think Britain would've been better off if they had adopted the SAR 80 with a FN Para/Galil style folding stock instead of the bullpup SA 80. With the folding stock they would've still gotten the compactness where necessary without the problems of a bullpup design. The SA 80 because of it's location of the ejection port and charging handle is impossible to fire from behind right hand cover or from the left shoulder in general. Also the location of magazine on the SA 80 makes magazine changes awkward.
All these Sterling rifles are looking like action models of some movie guns. A start-up idea: film a cult action movie with this guns, then sell this guns to your cult action movie fans. :DDD
Can anyone explai why are british weapons so unsightly? Prototype or not, british and australian designed weapons looks like something made of scrap pieces from darkest depths of grandpa's garage.
I lived in Dagenham close to the works at Eastbrook Dagenham . Their QC was second to none and skip raiding often resulted in harvesting the 40 round mags with minor feed lip problems that just required a little work . They proved very popular in the US during the AWB . At their demise I owned a FAL ,a River Mini 14 and Colt Sporter 1 but the '88 Amendment put paid to ownership of semi autos but not many of Sterlings superb products developed by Frank were used in Practical Rifle Minor . I met Frank a while after the Sterling works was transformed into the Sterling Trading Estate , he hasn't moved far down Rainham Road South and had begun a business building bespoke air rifles with 2 apprentices in a small workshop .
This rifle was a great design which overcame many of the M16 platform shortcomings . LH cocking , easy may release , ambi safety , multi choice mags , short gas piston ( no blast in the face) , and a folding stock version carried over from the 180 . Accuracy was superb , heavier barrels and Sterling had just sourced a manufacturer for the plastic furniture to replace the plywood handguard .
What Sterling had really pinned their hopes on was the 9 mm/38 Special revolver for use by police and some military units . Most police forces had revolvers as side guns for such events as terrorist activities as in the Iranian Embassy Siege and Trevor Locke ( also a Dagenham boy who grew up with my much older brothers Dougy and Graham ) was armed with a 38 Special import . The Sterling was to replace all revolvers in the police inventory to enable either 38 or 9mm 2ZZ ( the military round produced en masse) to be used . In November 1985 I bought a Glock 17 , a pistol that was laughed at by most Beretta 92F and Colt Gold Cup owners but a pistol that left both of them wanting in competition . I carried out a number of mods which made the gun capable of handling +P rounds and by 88 just about the whole of the UKPSA pistol owners had a Glock 17 on their ticket which prompted the Met Police to adopt semi automatic pistols and dump the whole idea of replacing US made revolvers with great quality 9/38 Sterlings built in Dagenham .
I was lucky to have had the chance to shoot one of these fine handguns with both 9mm and 38 Special hot handloads and they were extraordinarily accurate up to Korth standards in 38 and better than any 9mm pistol on the market . Sadly large capacity magazines won the day and Sterlings final attempt at marketing a quality small arm was done .
Sterling had survived WW2 ( a V2 landed at the gate of their works in WW2 with minimum casualties) , the fickle post war development programmes having won the SMG contract only to have the quality of their products entirely overlooked in favour of the disastrous and unreliable bullpup produced by their rivals at Enfield as demonstrated in the desert in the first Gulf War . Everyone in the British Army had to be trained to shoot right handed regardless as the cocking handle would knock your teeth out , the magazines were garbage compered to Sterlings ( their 40 round mags could hold 40 rounds and of STANAG design) the L85A1 mags swelled at 30 and jammed, they were prone to discharging if dropped and eventually the whole rifle underwent redisgn at a cost of millions when RO E bought H&K to resolve the issues . Even the bayonet had to go out to tender at excessive cost for a now defunct piece of kit . Now 40 years on after further development , the L85 platform could be considered a decent rifle if a little heavy . In hindsight the Sterling Arms 87 had none of those issues and the folding stock version , would have met the British Army's requirements without the problems . The tendency now is to move away from bullpup designs for modern warfare and as seen on numerous occasions , Sterlings designers and Dagenham Engineers would have been there with new designs for new calibres to suit today's modern warfare probably with the revival of the 7mm NATO ( ,280 British ) cartridge so successful back in the 50s .
A former owner of Sterling Armaments Company, (1970 -1982) Mr James Edmiston, wrote two books on his experiences which are well worth reading, they are still available on line - The Stirling Years and The Sterling Redemption. Includes details of the chicanery of the Brit Govt. It is so rare to find books written by the actual arms manufacturer. Last I heard, Mr Edmiston was involved in the manufacture of high grade shotguns for the civilian market.
Whenever one sees an iteration of a firearm where a simple, highly effective, extremely cost efficient solution is replaced by a more complicated, less reliable or effective, more expensive solution *do to exactly the same thing* (rather than as an attempt - however brilliant or misguided- to add an new capability or feature), the answer is invariably someone had fears of a patent suit, or the designer is working in the engineering equivalent of a "publish or perish" work environment.
Well put.
Don't forget corruption and fleecing tax payers.... see Sig NGSW in current times!
Scar vs FAL
@@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIAL but yet the SCAR is still being sold
Another take is: if it already exists you have to try to do something else, else they'll just buy the other thing that already exists and is well proven.
It's not "publish or perish", it's "sell or perish" which is basically capitalism.
I actually had a Sterling/Armalite AR,-180 rifle approx 35yrs ago. Wish I had held onto it.
It's odd how you can see the design cues from other designs around the time add up to this interesting look that to my eyes looks a lot like the kind of "legally different" designs you see in film/video games to avoid having to license an existing design.
Looks kinda like the rifle diamond dogs use in mgsv
Could totally picture it in late 80s Video game cabinet/box art
Assault rifle basic concept and format haven't changed that much since the original Stg (apart from bullpups)
Since people can't see inner details they focus on external design cues like the M16-AR15 front sight (which really aren't that essential to the design)...
From there there's only some many ways to make a front sight/ barrel cover/butt stock that don't look the same...
I'm glad someone thought to donate all(?) of Sterling's one-off prototypes to a museum. It's always sad when one of a kind things are destroyed.
This happens time and again with aircraft.
Fantastic as always Jonathan.... keep them coming 👍
Thanks again, Jonathan and team, for another really fascinating episode. Unfortunately for Sterling, their work on the SAR 87 more or less coincided with the unfortunate events at Hungerford and the subsequent loss of any UK civilian market for semi-auto rifles. With that and the political stitch up that guaranteed the British Army adoption of Enfield's SA 80, they really only did have export markets to play for. Given all those obstacles, they could really only have succeeded off the back of genius level designers and marketeers.
Given the tortured history of the SA80 it’s unfortunate that the government didn’t seriously consider a Sterling-made AR-18 variant. I really like the looks of that first one here, despite it being bulky. Thanks for the history and this series on the Sterling rifles.
the APE mechanism in this gun massively reduces friction. This is probably mechanically superior to the SA80 just from a design standpoint, ignoring build quality. This is the only Sterling designed gun that's ever impressed me.
@@grievuspwn4g3 money!
If you have a read of Sterling owner (at the time) Mr James Edmiston's book, The Sterling Years, he describes how the prototype SA80 were made from AR18 receivers highly modified, when shown one at a Defence industry event during its early development years, he noted the modified AR18 reciever still had the telltale manufacturing processes on these SA80 prototypes. Mr Edmiston wrote two books on his experiences - The Sterling Years, and the Sterling Redemption. He successfully sued the Brit Govt over their underhanded decisions while he was the owner. The case resulted in the largest payout in British civil law history. His second book which was published within the last twenty years give details of this court case. I was very interested to hear from this vid that Mr Edmiston has resurrected Sterling recently.
Digging the top down camera shots. Thanks for the videos Jonathan and crew, really enjoying them.
I am so interested in everything this channel produces. I loved the smg my personal weapon for many years, and I hadn't realised that Sterling also produced other weapons. Jonathan mentioned the SA80, I only fired it a couple of times on the ranges as it was towards the end of my service. My lasting memory is that I didn't like it and it drove our Guards GSM to distraction because it was rubbish for drill. Mind you I'm such an old fart I hated the SLR, you can't beat the Lee Enfield .303 in my book, but then I probably fired that more than any other rifle.
Unfortunately for you, if you are carrying a Lee Enfield, everyone will beat you. There's a reason for why we moved on to Battle/Assault rifles.
@@azynkron oh I know, but it was a lovely weapon to fire and easy to maintain.
@@noele6588 We used .22 until we were 12, then moved to the .303. We did use .22 on the schools indoor range though Noel.
I love the sterling and lancaster smg's.
If I were rich I'd totally try to get one. Owning guns at all is an often prohibitively expensive hobby, but automatic's is a rich man's game...
Have a vague recollection the RN used the Lancaster?
It looks like a gun my "Action Man" figurines would have used
Harsh, but fair.
Delighted to see this finally come up, I've oft wondered about this 'could have been'.
Rivalry between Enfield & Stirling?
How dare you, it was more like open warfare...
As ever a fascinating dive into a very early prototype of a lost weapon.
(Indeed it always fun to see an early prototype of almost anything)
It's funny I don't own any firearms and don't plan to ever own any but I find guns fascinating in the same way that I find mechanical watches fascinating. I love all the clicks, thunks and snaps well machine mechanical parts make. Love these videos.
Hey. A bit of a critique for the channel: It would be nice if you actually included the weapon names in the titles of the videos. In this video for instance Jonathan mentions earlier videos with the LAR and SAR 80. Now I found those videos, it's not that hard, but it'd be nice if it was easier to get a quick overview of which gun each video is about.
i've been waiting for this one, thanks Jonathan!
That makes two of us at least!
The Australian Leader Dynamics T2 rifle is such a good comparison because that design actually sought to simplify the AR18 further, while this thing Sterling was working on seemed to have just complicated things for seemingly no other reason than complicating them.
I remember when Leader tried to interest the Aussie Army with their rifle in the 1980s. I saw one in the trials unit armoury at Maribyrnong near Melbourne in the early 2000s. The guys running the trials unit told me the Leader had several shortcomings and its then current form, not suited for use in combat by the ADF. To my mind, the shortcomings can be sorted out if the interest exists. I suspect with Aussie Army trialing the Steyr AUG and the M16A2 in the 1980s then opting for the Steyr AUG, they had no interest in what was then an unproven Leader rifle.
I was told years ago by member of Small Arms Fleet Management section of the ADF, that the reason for choosing the Steyr over the M16A2 is that Steyr agreed to licenced manufacture in Australia, Colt Defense would not agree. There was a report years later that management of Colt Defense came to regret their decision. Apparently both rifles were acceptable to the Aussie Army after the trials.
@@keithad6485 The M16 and AUG were definitely much more mature products than the Leader. Not agreeing to licensing production was one of Colt's many blunders at the time.
@@0neDoomedSpaceMarine The context of the Colt Defense decision is that in the late 1970s, (I think) they had licensed manufacturing of the M16A2 to a South Korean manufacturer which included they could not export any rifles or parts. Colt discovered, the Koreans were exporting parts and I feel certain this affected their later decision not to allow Aussies to make the M16A2. I owned and managed a defense manufacturing company for ten years some years ago. Now getting back into the industry.
@@keithad6485 Cool, what will you be producing?
@@0neDoomedSpaceMarine Back then, we were manufacturing mostly spare parts for the Aussie army's German made Krauss Maffei Leopard 1A4, US made FMC M113A1 and the Canadian made LAV-25 8 wheeled armoured car. I will be looking at manufacture parts again, but will research this market first, There are other products and equipments we will be looking at, Defense Department is a peculiar beast to deal with but if the time is taken to understand how the procurement process works, there is good money to be made.
To my knowledge Sterling (or was it the Chartered Industries of Singapore) manufactured a version of the SAR 80 with a FN Para/Galil style folding stock and if they had also added this left side non-reciprocating charging handle to the SAR 80 they would've gotten a great rifle.
Learning about guns IS Archaeology. People wrote and recorded far less of their rationale behind things and how they did it than you'd expect, and sometimes hid it. So all you have are the physical details sometimes. It's also kinda like paleontology, because you can connect rifles you'll hear nothing about being related by looking at the geometry of them (in a similar manner to dinosaur bones) and seeing what's similar.
Sterling produced a bull pup rifle to compete against the infamous Enfield SA80 rifle.
The reports of how it faired against the SA80 rifle were never released to the General Public.
I wonder why ?
Money my friend, why pay more than you need to if it just dose the job which it didnt and ended up costing more..
Wait, i subbed to this channel? Ah no matter, i get to learn more about guns and watch more from johnathan.
I hope you'll stick with us Corey :)
that looks so much like a movie/videogame gun
PS2 era?
Been a great series thank you. Really interesting to see some of the things that were never meant to be; funny how a company/designer can make something as iconic as the "Sterling SMG L2" then fail so badly on that "difficult 2ⁿᵈ album". The Sterling was there all through my formative years, on the news & in the papers, anywhere the country got involved in trouble there'd be a chap with a beret, 'tache & a Sterling. Succeeded in popular culture too obviously in the Star Wars films as Imperial-issue E-11 blaster rifle. Hopefully as you say the company will see a resurgence in its favours.
PS, Every time you said "Sterling rifles" in the video I got the chorus of The Jam's "Eaton Rifles" echoing 'round my head... it'll be there for days now.
just a further note on what Jonathan says @ 4:47 about the receiver being a single stamping or "pressing" as used to be called in the U K : This nomenclature also contributed to troops calling the AR 18 and M 16 "toys by Mattel". "Pressing" was largely associated with shaping tin ( or tin alloy ) toys from the early twentieth century through after WWII. While stamping is largely the same process, the result of stamping does include hardening the metal and can include adding stiffening items/materials ( which did not happen in usual "pressing" process ). The end results can look similar, but stamping adds more detail and rigidity and can be used on stronger steel and steel allow materials.
Thank you to Royal Armouries and Jonathan Ferguson for a very interesting series on the development of the Sterling Automatic Rifle ( their attempted uses of the AR 18 / AR-180 rifle system ). Not surprised that Jonathan started in studying archeology, given his thoroughness and detailed presentations.
☺
Another great video from Jonathan and the Royal Armouries. Never knew of this rifle but I like the look very much.
Edit: "I'd have had to have banged the butt" new Jonathan soundbite?
Edit 2: my my, curious to know more about your archaeology!
Nothing too exciting, BA from Exeter, during which just two weeks field experience in the Somerset clay was enough to have me looking for a nice indoor role!
@@JonathanFergusonRoyalArmouries I don't blame you! Clay is a right pain to deal with
Genuinely interesting look at a niche of development.. and those guns are soooo 80's; the crude plastics, the use of wood, the screws, the aesthetics...
You mentioned the Leader: if you have an example it would be great to see it and hear about Leader Dynamics/Australian Automatic Arms and their triangular bolt-face !
The matrix armoury backdrop is mouth-watering!
An anti-preengagement device would give theorical better reliability by reducing friction between the receiver and bolt carrier. Reliability was probably something they kept on mind seeing that they went for a long-stroke piston.
On what the bolt carrier running inside receiver? Welded on rails, a stamped surfarce(like the G3) or it's just the geometry of the receiver(like the AR-15)?
That's right, in fact the EM2 rifle's bolt also has an overt APE device on it, although I doubt Sterling paid attention to that. Good question on the bolt carrier contact surfaces; I'd have to check again to be sure but I think it's a pair of tack-welded rails.
@@JonathanFergusonRoyalArmouries The AK, FNC, Garand, QBZ-95, QBZ-191, ARX160, etc have APE. It is a huge factor in the abnormal durability and reliability of the AK, far larger than the piston.
AR15s and AR18s generally don't have a proper APE mechanism. This means it takes more force to feed the gun. AR15s are generally very reliable anyways, but better is better. It is not an insignificant amount of force. Look up Nate F's video on it, it's the equivalent of a few pounds fighting gravity working against your gun's action.
@@superfamilyallosauridae6505 I've seen it, albeit I'm probably due a rewatch :)
"Mom, can we have an AR18?"
"We have AR18 at home."
The AR18 at home: THIS
Not sure about the SAR 87 but the SAR 80 I think looks much better than the AR-18.
This looks pretty Solid. Shame is never became a long term solution.
Frank and the Gang... Is that Sterling's in house band?
Looks like for a right handed shooter, the magazine release could be accidentally pressed. It lacks any sort of fencing like early m-16 rifles or early L85A1 rifles.
Singapore sold quite a few SAR 80 to the Croatian Army during the Yugoslavian wars. Also my favourite LMG, the Ultimax 100.
Still keen to hear about those l86’s prototypes in the corner of the shot 😉
Hi Johnathon. Busy serving in Ukraine now. Rumour has is were getting a maxim for our defensive positions soon. I'll try and upload a video of it in use. Hopefully before a tank destroys me and it.
I think the fore grip is close to the Taiwan T91. Or wolf a1 for the civilian market.
I never seen a SAR 80 when I was serving in the Singapore army
When did you serve in the Singapore army? I remember reading from somewhere that the Singapore army replaced the SAR 80 in the late 1980s or 1990s with a different rifle.
@@hendriktonisson2915 yes we replaced it with the SAR 21... 2019 - 2021
I sure would love to Jonathan sitting behind me when I play escape from tarkov. He could tell me what all attachments do!
I'd be interested in a video on the crossover between bike and gun manufacture - Smith and Wesson, BSA, maybe there are others.
FN
Izhmash formerly and Degtyaryov plant in Kovrov to this day, as well.
weird how similar that muzzle looks like one from a FG-42 type 2, but with holes all around
Another rifle influenced by the AR 18. The most influential failure ever.
Perhaps the peculiarities of the bolt carrier/bolt arrangement involves the avoidance of patents held by others and new patents in your name. Coming up with a new assault rifle/battle rifle, a better one, was relatively easier in the olden days because there weren't 100 000 000 c#nts with CAD and CNC milling machines in their sheds working on it.
Love the vid, but the audio is a bit quiet
I think you have one of my dream jobs 👍😎. I would read a manual over a novel any day.
Do you have examples of the Sterling police carbine?
... Maybe he is referring to the Stirling bull pup !. Are you familiar also with the ST Kinetics BR18 assault rifle ?.
Sterling (Stirling?) is making new fireams! They're producing an AR-18/AR180b derivative for the Canadian market. Since the restriction and subsequent ban of AR-15s, AR-180b pattern guns have become a sort of defacto successor to the now prohibited AR-15/AR-10 family of guns.
The overhead cam is too far away. You'd usually want to show what you look at yourself, you describe the side facing you and the close up is 90° to what is facing you. The overall cam setup of the front facing cam also too far away and the lighting needs work as well. The background with the racks is nice, but what is important is you and what's on the table.
My cousin has a variant of this, but plastic furniture and slightly more simplified design compared to this, great except that the hammer spring is too weak and gives light strikes often. Alu receiver, all plastic furniture, the rest is the same.
this rifle is better than the Bull pup thing
Audio kinda sucks. Awesome video.
We do seem to have quite the echo going on, not sure why. I'm sure the team are on it for next time.
Sterling in its death throes, even tried breaking into the air rifle market.
Seems much if not all of this rifle's features are borrowed from a half dozen or more platforms from it's time & a few that weren't even current production quite yet at the time. A bit strange in appearance but I believe the designers were on a somewhat forward thinking plot. Outstandingly interesting to get a close look 👍
Is the anti-rotate mechanism designed because of the thin stamped sheet metal reciever could not accomadate the groove needed in the other designs?
Seems like a basically good design that needed a good bit more refinement, but really it came too late to the game and didn't offer enough of an improvement over the competition.
Ah yes! The "other thing". Well that would be an episode of a short series of its own if its the "other thing" I'm thinking of... :)
Jonathan, how have I never noticed your incredibly 80s calculator watch???!!! Please produce a video IMMEDIATELY, as it clearly should be in the museum…
Is there SR88 among your collectibles？It's more scarce than red diamonds.
Didn’t the ‘new’ Sterling buy the Sabre Defence assets and carry on building ARs?
If these prototypes made it to trial, how reliable were they? Sometimes the political motivated choices for firearms are not the best. The rifle prototype you detailed seems sound in design, needing some tweaking.
The only two things where this rifle offers a genuine mechanical improvement (or at least something that could be argued that way) are:
1. The long stroke piston (can increase reliability, although it's less of an issue than with a belt fed MG, where "long stroke piston" really should be your starting point, at the expense of potential accuracy - which is why the starting point for a rifle should generally be "DI, Stoner internal piston pseudo-DI, or short stroke piston/tappet" unless you have reason to suspect reliability issues.)
2. The non-reciprocating charging handle (both reduces bits cycling back and forth that could hang up the rifle in the field, say if literally firing from inside a heavy bush, *and* reduces the opportunities for dirt to get in).
Pretty much all of the rest of the operating bit "improvements" appear to be a step *down* from the AR18. That screams, "trying to avoid patent issues or trying appear innovative to potential customers".
*Morgan Freeman voice* "They did not make it to trial."
@@geodkyt I could not agree more :)
You should start a gaming channel where you play Escape From Tarkov
You know what APE is! Even more surprisingly, you don't know why this is better than a shelf in the receiver. Basically, it's because it massively reduces friction, making the gun disproportionately more reliable. The AK, Garand, FNC, ARX160, QBZ-95, QBZ-191, and a few other types have this feature, which lets their actions succeed even if they have less mechanical advantage. Gives a much better range of reliability than not having it. It also massively reduces wear.
In an AK, for instance, improperly made guns can start eating their trunnion (like the PSAK-74) from the amount of torque the bolt lugs apply to whatever they're grinding against if the APE mechanism is malfunctioning in some way and not preventing the rotation long enough.
I think this feature is extremely notable. It gives it a mechanical reliability advantage over all other AR18s, including the SA80, and seems very cheap to do in this form.
This is the first Sterling-made rifle that has EVER impressed me.
The tea and crumpets version of Ian McCollum. I dig it.
Can I ask. Why don't we like pistol grips here in the 🇬🇧.?
Reminiscent of the SCAR
what about AR180?
Ah, the Big Boss rifle.
Titling your video "The Gun That Killed Sterling" (on the thumbnail), definitely gave me the wrong idea for a second lol! Because I am familiar with the channel, I quickly understood what you meant, but it's a GUN-- a KILLING machine! My first thought was definitely closer to "Oh my! This is going to be a dark episode!" Lol..
Did it have a Sterling reputation eh? Eh?
Eh? 😅
You joke, but that's literally where the company name comes from. 'Sterling' as in 'first rate', 'top hole' etc etc.
I think Britain would've been better off if they had adopted the SAR 80 with a FN Para/Galil style folding stock instead of the bullpup SA 80. With the folding stock they would've still gotten the compactness where necessary without the problems of a bullpup design. The SA 80 because of it's location of the ejection port and charging handle is impossible to fire from behind right hand cover or from the left shoulder in general. Also the location of magazine on the SA 80 makes magazine changes awkward.
SAR 80, perhaps. The 87 is a backwards step in my view.
@@JonathanFergusonRoyalArmouries Yes I agree but I think the left side non-reciprocating charging handle on the SAR 87 was not a bad idea.
Looks like what a 10 year old would draw if told to draw a machine gun.
British gun design in the 1980s seems to have reached the nadir, with stuff like this and of course the SA80 :)
All these Sterling rifles are looking like action models of some movie guns.
A start-up idea: film a cult action movie with this guns, then sell this guns to your cult action movie fans. :DDD
Interestingly these are now imported from Singapore as straight pull uk legal. Available from oakrise arms.
Here I'd been thinking, 'Hmm, I rather like that polymer front handguard with the woodgrain pattern in it...' -- It *is* wood! LOL
odd
Can anyone explai why are british weapons so unsightly? Prototype or not, british and australian designed weapons looks like something made of scrap pieces from darkest depths of grandpa's garage.
Bayo is a day a maco...lol
it's pronounced die ma co.
Die. Making company.
Now colt canada
Lol..looking for there own design they steal from stoner and Browning lol..Classic
Too bad that British didn’t adopt this awesome and cool rifle instead they choose whacky and useless sa80.
Their air rifle was shit too.
There is no such thing as an "assault weapon" of any kind.....🤣🤣🤣