If you would be so kind as to share this video on your social media such as Facebook and so on I would REALLY appreciate it :-) Gotta show my love for the gun that everyone loves to hate haha! Have a good day everyone! :-)
Didn't know they updated it again. Has particular interest after shooting the ACF version and LSW. Like the new mounting feature as I can see how it certainly adds to flexibility. A little fun vid as payback. Cheers. ua-cam.com/video/6dxm_W3uNYw/v-deo.html
Matsimus If/When the A4 comes out, I hope they change up the charging handle and include a reliable bolt release so you don’t have to reach around in some awkward way to get you gun going.
Umm okay I don’t wanna have to explain like how the sa80a2 when made was the best and most accurate on the market Or that the sa80 a3 is even better and still considered the most accurate rifle Cause then I’d feel really dumb And then I bet I’ve only used ar’s or m4 Which then I’d have to explain that the sa80 a3 is better as a bass infantry rifle However I will agree it’s better for special forces like the sas To use the l119a1/2 But as a standard riddle man soldier the sa80 a3 can’t be compared in accuracy
The new foregrip kind of looks like the one from the AUG A3, gotta say, it makes the gun look cooler too! But being able to put on a grip as standard I think is a good thing… that could make a big difference and making it even more modular is not bad either…
I'm pretty sure the main reason the MoD isn't considering a new rifle is the fact that the Americans are considering a new standard calibre for their next gun, and that Britain will likely want to follow suit with what the Americans decide.
I would argue it's a pretty good bet the British military is waiting to buy a new service until the US military selects and puts into full scale production and service its Next Generation Squad Weapon (Rifle) and NGSW (Automatic Rifle). The US military has already selecet the 6.8mm bullet, but has left the type of 6.8mm cartridge up to the winning bidders. There is a lot of info out there now about them three competing designs and I'm hoping General Dynamics is selected with its fully ambidextrous bullpup rifle and infantry automatic rifle with theie 6.8mm semi-composite cartridge that save ~30%+ per equivalent brass cartridge.
I think the mod are being smart, allowing the Americans to test their new M5 rifle , this means any kinks only soldier usage will show in the gun and ammo will be lessons we never had to pay a penny to learn, if the m5 is shown to be the correct weapon for the United States to proceed with I suspect we might very slowly transition to the weapon
Hi Matsimus, good review for the time but experience in service has shown you were wrong on one point. You say it was not much of an upgrade. A serving friend (like you my service has ended) who is a competitive service shooter tells me he groups the same at 600m as he used to at 300m with the A2 variant. Doubling the individual shooters effective range is a hell of an upgrade in my book! BTW will American commenters please stop going on about HK sorting out the A1 version; it is rather silly when it took HK to sort out the M4 into the HK416 and get rid of that engineeringly incontinent direct gas impingement.
@@89tonstar "It is actually an internal piston system, not direct gas impingement" To quote Churchill 'This is the sort of semantics up with which we will not put'. The M4/AR 15 system still injects hot gas full of carbon into the internal working of the rifle; moreover, it is frequently referred to as a gas impingement system by knowledgeable commentators such as Maj Gen (Retd) Robert Scales here: www.diffen.com/difference/M16_Rifle_vs_M4_Carbine. I am well aware across the internet there are knowledgeable operators that claim the M4 is the hammer of Thor or Spear of Achilles just as I am aware there are equally knowledgeable operators that would not give it house room given a choice. The fact remains, however, that the M4/AR15 has question marks over its reliability that will not go away. "the M4a1 with M855a1 is still putting bodies down all over the sand box". So? No matter how unreliable a system if enough people use it then it will work eventually. Nobody is saying the M4 never works; only that its reliability is can be called into question - and far more authoritative people than I have done so. As for the M855A1 I would agree that it is a storming round but it also raises chamber pressure by 10K psi with no modifications to the rifle increasing all the variables (temp, bolt speed etc) that affect wear, erosion and ultimately reliability. It will have adverse affects on all of the rifle components especially the barrel and working parts in a rifle where reliability is already suspect. Good luck with that.
I have always been curious. How could you serve in the UKs military and then switch to the Canadian's Army? Dual citizenship? Why would you do this? What would happen to your retirement? Would the years add on? So many questions. Thanks
Probably because of all the publishacian of the problems and because of how the government & military reacted (They fumbled the whole thing honestly). Knowing the British though, the L85 will probably go up A10 or more before they make any kind of major new shift. They did exactly that with the enfield and that rifle only really got replaced after WWII but was introduced several years before WWI. The British have a hard time letting go of the past man, just look at all their former colonies and dominions now.
I am in the Grenadier Guards and I can tell you that this weapon is a vast improvement. Although it feels heavier than the previous version it is actually slightly lighter. The weapon system is more balanced as the the A2 was front heavy. Firing the L85A3 feels exactly the same as the A2. All in all, a great weapon, one of the best but I am biased, I thought the A2 was a really good weapon system too. People go on saying there is a flaw by not being able to fire in the left shoulder as well as they right but a skilled operator will be able to do so.
You are correct I have never fired an SA80 rifle I have far to much respect for my face. I only have partial sight in my right eye and a gun that ejects spent cases into the left side of my face with the damage the cocking lever reciprocating I recon five rounds max before thousands of pounds on plastic surgery on the face.
I think what the British is doing with the LA80 is what the Russians have done with a lot of there platforms, make small improvements until they have an almost flawless system.
For all the hater- many of whom have never used any L85. Yes, the A1 was an all- around disaster but the A2 was a marked improvement. The A3 will be better. Very good video and information.
da ve Pre or post redesign? The early M4s were pretty horrible, but once they re-designed the bolt and feed systems, all the early teething problems disappeared.
It's Heckler&Koch's HKey version of the free KeyMod which is apparently just in the opposite direction. I wonder if they demand license fees from equipment manufacturers. It's the British's problem as customers if they don't demand the also free M-lok.
Leslie B much of the testing that was done by the US Army is stuff a normal grunt would do. Such as dropping the rifle, hitting it against things, and rezeroing the laser for night vision (mostly SF on that one). Also keymod doesn't have quite as much support behind it anymore.
Very interesting video, nice to see the British Army is continuously upgrading their rifle ; yes, in the beginning it was not a very reliable rifle, but since the A2 version, it's now a very reliable rifle. The Daniel Defense rail was very nice, but the new HK type handguard seems to be more suitable to the new requirements of modern battlefield. The new color is nice too, it's a more effective camouflage than a full black rifle, and the full lenght Picatinny rail with an Elcan Specter/piggy back mini red dot sight is a very nice update! I'm French so we don't have the FAMAS anymore, HK416F now, we lost our "typical visual identification" with our domestic rifle, cool to see Great Britain has decided to keep the L85 :) (Sorry for my English, i'm French) Greetings from Lyon, France !
realistically, rifles aren't all that important in the overall scheme of things. I've used FALs, M16 variants and L85s, and I would be happy to go to war with any of them. If you look at statistics rifles don't actually cause that many casualties. If you have good machine guns, mortars, artillery and tanks, the individual soldier could be armed with Lee Enfields and Sten guns, and still win the battle. The most lethal weapon on the modern battlefield is the radio.
Take every edge you can, using a rifle that is actually made with the mindset of how the individual soldier will maneouver there's no reason to toss your money at a l85 it's made fucking upside down, and jams horribly..C8IUR A4- MCX, M4, m16.. I don't even have to explain why they'll beat tha l85 out of the park.
Well, one of the things that has been improved on the upper receiver to make it more reliable is the improved welding that method, which you can actually see at 06:10. Those "C" shaped welds are there to affix the barrel trunnion, which is a considerable improvement to the previous spot-welding techniques. way more reliable and rigid. Ian McCollum from Forgotten Weapons has a really good video covering the A2 and A3 differences.
The main difference on the upper recivever is as far as I know a different kind of welding (deep penetration welding or some such) and some tolerance work. I only got to use it for a couple of days a few months ago. All of the recievers and bits are brand new but kind of interchangable with the A2, marked up as A3 though and not really to be used in an A2. It disassembles the exact same way. It also doesn't necessarily come with the quad rail and the pic rails. It does come with the plastic foregrip and a longer length of weaver rail to allow adjustment of the carryhandle sight.
MegaAndyman101 makes sense for the parts of the A2 and A3 to be interchangeable as it allows for 'conversion kits' to be distributed to troops rather than brand spanking new rifles, probably significantly cuts down on the cost
Don't scroll down just watch the video, give it a like and move on, whole battalions of warriors in the comments arguing the toss like it's going to change anything at this point.
Hey Matsimus, I think you slightly misunderstand Keymod. Keymod and M-Lok are both rail ad on attachment systems developed to replace full piccatiny quad rail systems. The way they generally work is to provide a space on a fore end that allows to attach various length sections of piccatiny rail to the handguard, only as much as needed in order to save weight and provide a smother grip surface. there are a few accessories out their that attach directly to Keymod or M-lok slots, but the vast majority still attach to piccatiny rails which are mount on to the handguard via the Keymod or M-Lok slots.
Sad Doggo I feel like you didn't actually read the Crane report in it's entirety. It said that empirically M-Lok is stronger, not be a huge degree though. M-Lok is a stronger design, but part of the reason why it had better results is that Keymod is an open source design thus there were no qualitative standard to which they were required to be made to unlike M-Lok which is licenced from Magpul. Don't get me wrong I prefer M-Lok but it's not like Keymod is completely useless or obselete.
Sad Doggo that is literally the exact opposite of what I said, I meant that because Keymod is open source there is no quality standard to which it must be made unlike a licenced design like Magpul.
After nearly 30 years they finally got it right .. May be the best carbine in the world even .. But can it fight George Groves in Wembley stadium in front of 90.000 fans
The A3 receiver uses a new upper receiver with improved welding technology, also the bolt, bolt carrier, trunion and gas piston are of new improved desing. I saw the changes made, and I can tell it improves reliability a lot. Of course, the new picatinny rails on top will make mounting new optics much easier.
If you're already replacing everything, just adopt a new rifle. M4s are $400 a pop on contract, cheaper than the ORIGINAL L85A1. Britain tried making their own rifle, spent more than the Americans, and made a disaster of a rifle...
@@markrainford1219 the AR-15 has proven to be one of the most reliable firearms of the day, and are MUCH more accurate than the L85 which is based on the AR-18 short stroke piston. Also they shoot the exact same round so I have no f idea what you're talking about lol
Speaking as an American firearms enthusiast, the L85 should not be as divisive as it is, at least not today. The A1 iteration of the weapon was certainly a disaster, I don't think anyone will disagree with that. But the A2 has certainly brought it up to snuff with its contemporaries and transformed into an effective fighting rifle. But it was not transformed into an excellent rifle. Everything that it does, it does adequately; in no aspect is it generally considered a cut above its contemporaries, and certain minor flaws in the original design still remain. While Heckler and Koch was able to smooth out the function of the rifle, certain aspects of the rifle mostly relating to its form were unable to be reconciled without simply designing an entirely new weapon. The most glaring example of this is the ejection system, a problem shared with a number of other bullpup designs; the location of the ejection port combined with with the rifle's ejection pattern means that the weapon must be shot right-handed in order to avoid having hot brass kicked into the shooter's face. Not only does this require soldiers to learn to shoot right-handed regardless of the hand or eye dominance, but this prevents the user from being able to shoot lefty around corners, forcing the shooter to have to adopt an unnatural stance in order to perform this task, one that is not conducive to proper recoil management, thus causing accuracy to suffer. This is also exacerbated by the fact that unlike nearly every other bullpup that suffers from this problem, there is no option to at least reconfigure the weapon to eject from the opposite side, thus enabling left-handed use (although still not allowing a quick change of firing hands in a pinch). There is good reason why the SAS and SBS have chosen to field primarily AR-15 pattern rifles (Colt Canada C8 carbines and LWRC International UCIWs, specifically) to their personnel instead of L85s, as well as some G36s and some of the older roller-delayed blowback HK rifles. But none of the L85's current issues are what I'd call particularly major or potentially life-threatening to the soldiers who use them, at least when it comes to standard infantrymen. But they are issues nevertheless. In short, the L85 is merely an adequate rifle, not a great one, nor a poor one (discounting the A1, of course) I do, however, totally understand why the L85A3 is being adopted instead of a brand new service rifle. As stated in the video, a large amount of investment has already been sunk into the L85 family of weapons, and the UK government would be wise to squeeze every last ounce of life they can out of the platform before looking to a move to something new. But there's more to this being cheaper than what is stated in the video. With the L85A3 still in fact being an L85, that means that the British military already has armorers who know how to repair and maintain it, and that they already have 90% of the weapon's parts already in their inventory should something break and need replacing. That's a significant amount of cost that now completely does not have to be worried about. So overall I think that the L85A3 is a sensible move on the part of the British MoD, and those of you who do truly enjoy the rifle will get to see it remain in service for a bit longer yet.
Good assessment. The A1 was a disaster. There was a Pathfinder platoon that used them in the Lungi Lol confrontation, a book called Operation Mayhem, documented it. The A1s jammed quite a bit in the battle that occurred only well trained single-shots and the GPMG prevented anyone from dying, The Pathfinders after wining a firefight in a village, went after the African terrorists through the jungle and huts. (a lesser trained force would have lost life thanks to the terrible A1), I really do think that the British would have been better served with WW2 Bren guns and L1A1s than the SA80s back then as they performed well in the Falklands War. The A2s and A3s are fine rifles though.
While your points are taken well, I think the "commonality" and "cost-effectiveness" of the upgrade are FAR overstated, and that the decision is mostly a political one, not a functional or cost one. (Note I'm going to say "AR" when I mean the M16-class, but, more generally, ANY of the other current generation infantry assault rifles, e.g. G36, et al). Firstly, the cost to upgrade existing inventory to A3 standard is VERY significant, as it was from A1 to A2 standard. The quoted prices to do so are nearly that of a whole new AR platform. Thus, the idea that upgrading the existing A2 inventory to A3 standard would be noticeably cheaper is simply wrong. The same goes for buying new A3s - the cost is MORE than buying new AR platforms, because AR platforms have economies of scale that the L85 simply cannot match. Secondly, when upgrading a A2 to A3, you're taking a USED rifle and replace SOME parts on it. When you replace that with a new rifle (A3 version or another rifle altogether), you get a rifle that is just beginning it's lifespan. Thus, the A2 -> A3 refit upgrade doesn't buy you much. You're taking a used rifle and comparing that to a new one? Thirdly, the "existing parts inventory" is pretty much pointless. The number of parts changed between the A2 and A3 is significant enough that you don't want to be using most of the A2 parts in an A3 model. So what's the point of having that inventory is you can't use it in your new A3? You have to buy a whole bunch of new parts to support the A3 model, so how is that any different than for a whole new rifle platform? Fourthly, while yes, current armorers are "used to" the A2, the difference for them to swap to servicing some other rifle is very low. This is about the only place where there is some sort of significant cost-savings for going to the A3 vs a new rifle. But again, it's likely an overstated cost, as the A3 will require some training as well. It's not a "free" upgrade. Fifthly, there is very little reason to NOT phase in a new rifle at this time. The same argument for the A3 could be used to advocate that Paras and SAS should not be allowed to change from the A2 to something else (which, they obviously have). The UK military is not some monolithic force that once you decide to change a rifle, you have to suddenly buy it for EVERYONE in the entire military the next year. It's a specious argument to assert that this is a problem when buying a new rifle. Lastly, there is very little training costs to be done to swap a soldier between A2 and AR platforms. You're not talking about having to have the average infantry man spend a month to become proficient with using and servicing their new weapon. More like, a week, at best. I've fired both, and with a couple hours of instruction in maintenance added in, I think the difference is a couple of days to move smoothly from the L85 to an AR. That's a trivial (and mostly on-paper-only) difference. Note we're also talking about the "average" infantry guy, some some super-high-proficiency SAS operator. The standard "good enough" marksmanship doesn't take very long to achieve, if the infantryman was already taught the basics of good marksmanship. Fact is, moving the A2 into the Territorials and other reserve formation is entirely reasonable, as is leveraging the existing inventory for use in non-frontline infantry units. This was done when the A1 itself was introduced, and is how ALL major upgrades are handled. You do end up with a small amount of logistical costs to running 2 different rifles, but, frankly, it's overstated significantly, as the vast majority of those folks not only are never deployed outside the UK, but even when they are, they tend to use the equipment that the previous unit left them. So the probability that the UK will have IN THEATER problems with having to support 2 different infantry rifles is very, very small. I really fail to see any cost-based argument that isn't really based on "it's OUR rifle, we can't replace it with someone else's!" political crap. The truth is that the UK could easily get themselves a top-notch current generation rifle for about the same cost as the A3 upgrade. This new rifle would perform better, and would remove the necessity of having to get a new rifle in 10 years. Which, even with the A3, is going to happen. The A3 is simply throwing good money after bad - the truth is that the A2 should never have happened, and something else should have been bought to replace it then. The UK is repeating the same mistake again, with about as weak an excuse as for the A1 -> A2 upgrade.
@@leod-sigefast Look, the only reason I believe the A1 was horrible was because of the feedback from soldiers in the Gulf War. So i believe whatever the british soldiers who used them say. Are you a former brit soldier? And if so is the A2 reliable and good? Genuinely curious.
Don’t they teach recruits how to correctly load rounds in to a mag anymore. Used the mk1 and it was shite especially after the SLR. I hope the upgrades work well. Can it be shot left handed now.
There was an A3 at my cadet camp I've just came off and i got to hold it. It seems to be a huge improvement over the A2 just based on it's feel in the hands alone
Damn accidentally posted before finishing writing. Considering the SLR was designed during the second world war, but wasnt out into production as they couldn't fford the down time in the factories to replace the tooling and it was still in service in the 80s, is there really a need to procure a completely new rifle? Apart from in the jungle it's a highly reliable rifel in all climates, its very accurate. I've only ever used the SA80, but I would hate trying to soldier with a non bulpup rifle, the extra weapon length would be such a ball ache in most circumstances! I understand that a bulpup rifel is more complex, but I can't understand why all militaries aren't using them due to the shorter weapon length making it far more practical in all environments.
The SA80 a2 to me was like marmite “ you love it or you hate it “ and personally I loved it from basic training to Afghan I never had any real dramas with mine
I loved the SA 80 A1.. Never had problems with it. LSW gunner, Two Tours op Banner. I think the SUSAT sight was great.. Easy to use. Good vid and info.. Cheers
A1 bits fell of it and super glue was issued to glue on come of it this is not acceptable in combat their was no reason the SLR could have been modernised like dsa arms has done.
I have never had the pleasure of using this weapon but I have always loved the design and it's a shame they didn't come out with a left-hand version. However, the weapon I used when I was the Cdn army, the legendary FN C1A1 will always be my favorite, (7.62 mm straight downrange).
Here in Ireland we've used the steyr since the late 80s. Originally the F. N. And the Bren etc. There's only 7 parts to it and it works and cleans a treat👍 I heard from lads in 1st desert storm that the standard issue for the Tommies kept seizing up? 🤔I hope that's being rectified. Respect to you all lads. Regardless of the uniform worn.
First gulf you mean. Desert storm was the operation name. We were also not tommies, that was a term used during WW2. However, your comment shows no respect, if you cannot even get basic facts correct.
Seemed respectable enough to me. He acknowledged that what he was saying was second hand information and wasn't just stating it as fact, and clearly there are still places where they call us Tommies. It's not like the name was an insult. The tone of the post was well natured, so why not accept it as such? Respect right back at you Gerard
I feel the biggest drawback with the current l85 is its heavier weight. Personally though I kind of like that. A larger mass helps against recoil so the l85 is very controllable on full auto.
Well I still haven't seen this or officially heard anything about it. I actually tried telling someone on UA-cam about 6 months ago that the British Army didn't have the A3 and that Heckler and Koch had designed an A3 upgrade off their own back and tried unsuccessfully to sell it to the British Army as that's what I had heard through the millitary. First up if your numbers are correct then it means it's costing just over £500 per rifle for a new grip, a blob of welding by the change lever which isn't needed, a paint job a 1 of the working parts being upgraded. The A2 upgrade cost just over £200 per rifle and saw the majority of the working parts modified or redesigned, the gas parts modified and Teflon coated, a new cocking handle, redisigned locking splines in the breach and on the bolt as well as other things and that was around 15 years ago so inflation wouldn't mean you get far less for 2 and a half times the price! Also with the new foregrip, it doesn't look like you can gain access to the gas parts without removing the foregrip, if that's the case then it's a serious design floor! Admittedly the current foregrip features a top cover hich has been made to such poor tolerance levels that it either pops open when cocking or firing the rifle, or needs to be levered open with the combi tool as its too tight.
nope, heckler and Koch redesigned the whole system, this was the L85 A, the first model with all this issue, they made al this improvement, and because H/k was a subsidiary company from Enfield it make sense to ask them for help. watch forgotten weapon, but you find also other reliable sources
6 років тому+1
that chopper at around the 2 min mark......hate to see his grouping with that shit stance and trigger snatch!
Good day sir I was wondering if you will cover the buccaneer jet, I read alot of Tom Clancy and just want to know more also will you ever cover weird and quirky vehicles that were in service like the Atomic Anny Nuclear Cannon, I think it was called the M-51 Atomic cannon
Thank you so much mate I would like to say that you keep me motivated to pursue my dream to become a piper in the Royal regiment of scotland Because of you now run a 7 min mile every day and do 40+ press up and sit ups Thank you for helping me become my best
The A3 designation came before the HK handguard and FDE paint came along, it started as the A3 upper receiver. The changes came after the upper receiver contract in early 2017. Changes to the upper receiver are as follows: Better welding (Deep Penetrating Welding) mainly to improve overall sturdiness and prevent the guide rail from warping. Longer weaver mount with pressed in tabs and lateral welding to improve sutrdiness (was later improved to a picatinny rail).
The welding on the upper receiver has been changed to a different type of welding. So it doesn't fall apart over time. They are all new receivers. That's pretty much the only part and some furniture. The rifles alright but not the best. Might as well stick with it until something significantly better comes along. There isn't anything that much better. They are better off with getting better boots and uniform to be honest.
Although I enjoyed shooting the L85 series, I did work with the German ,Norwegian and Danish armies, I still think the G36 system or even the HK 416/417 series would be a great replacement, or how about the C8 carbine from DeMarco, SAS and marines use the C8 so we know it works.
Man Brit's should have switch to the Canadian C7 Rifle or back to the L1A1 modern style with picatinny rails, and wow L85A3 is better but it took some "Similar" looks from the Aug bull-pup series 🤔
German worth work in it. 🇩🇪👍 But the A2 version foregrip looks way better in my mind. Now the L85 have the same foregrip like the new G36's. Everything new from Heckler&Koch.
*What?* The M16 solved it's problems after only a few years in service with the M16 to the M16A1. The fact people blindly believe myths is saddening. The issues were a result of meddling with the rifle by the the Army Ordnance, they were upset the M16 was privately developed unlike their government headed M14. So they decided to screw it over (allegedly), by using cheap surplus powder that radically changed pressure and bolt velocities, leading to malfuntions, and not chrome lining the barrel. These being fixed with the M16A1 directly after, and even years before by using new buffer springs on M16's. Soldiers liked the M16 substantially more than the M14, and their combat effectiveness were statistically improved. The Brits took 10 years for SOMEONE else to fix their rifle, and it's still a dog. The modern AR-15/M16 system is one of the most reliable systems, and it's why its still one of the world's most popular rifles
Fair well oh faithful carrying handle :'/ Would have liked to see a polymer/high density nylon upper receiver.. from what i can see there isn't much that addresses the weight.
What many people overlook is, that changing the rifle platform does come with a whole lot of follow up problems and costs - it's not just the rifle cost but the whole technical package (Maintenance, vehicle mounts....) and then don't forget the whole re-training and changes to tactics etc. That's a whole lot of costs without much gain - it's the same with the US trying again and again to replace the M16 but sticking with the platform or all those NATO countries which did stick to 7.62x51 for ages (where the practical difference is much bigger than between one 5.56 assault rifle and the other). I would guess the British military will take a good look onto how well France manages going from a bullpup to normal design and include that in its own plans. And knowing militaries around the world its more than likely that the A3 will be in British service till 2035. 😂
pwrserge Aaaannndd the uneducated speaks. Too heavy? Depends on what you're used to. The weight distribution is all at the back so you barely notice it, and it balances nicely. Don't like it? Get on your arms and get bigger. Unreliable? Still beats most other service rifles on the market in reliability tests, and has confirmed this in the last 2 major conflicts, with excellent reliability after action reports.
"Get stronger" is a retarded answer. Infantry loadouts are a zero sum game. Every pound I'm carrying in rifle is one pound less I could be carrying in something else.
pwrserge it was a tongue in cheek answer. Seriously, I have carried the SA80 for almost 3 decades, most of that as an infantryman. I've carried it over many thousands of miles over the years on about a dozen operational deployments as well as on countless exercises in desert, temperate, jungle and arctic conditions. It really makes me scratch my head when people complain about the weight of the weapon. It's a couple of pounds more than a M4 but really not that heavy. Its like anything - you get used to it quickly.
You should do a video on the Sea King helicopter that has been in use for the maritime since 1963, they have these really cool pods they drop sonobuoys that can detect underwater movement like submarines and such. They are a really cool anti submarine helicopter.
I wish the US military was allowed to pain our rifles. Black rifles stand out from such a distance and really draws the eye. Only SOF units are allowed to paint their rifles.
The L85, in any flavour, has been a joke to the world. Ask anyone who has fired it in anger and they will nearly all want something else other than this toy rifle. The rifle started off on paper as a great fire arm. The early prototypes of a UK bullpup, EM1 & EM2, had massive potential. By the time the XL60 (L85) project got of the ground, all the expertise had gone because they knew that the Royal Enfield Small Arms factory had been sold. The guns were designed and made by non gun engineers and to a budget that would have made the rest of the world laugh. This new sham of a battle rifle is a joke, as can be seen in the numbers that are being upgraded!! Read 'The Last Enfield' and you'll read what went wrong, because not much went right.
2:20 - This is a human-specific problem. If the British Army were made of Terminators, you could give them any hodgepodge of guns and even change the mix over time, and the army would fight flawlessly.
I still take a SLR over any L85 variant i like my guns to have stopping power which probably explains why my unit got L85a1 I switched to GPMG I always hate a pea shooter
Being Brazilian myself, and witnessing the 2+ decades long saga of the Brazilian Army searching for a 556 replacement for the FAL rifle, I can fully understanding the British MOD decision of still sticking with the same platform. Changing the service goes beyond just buying a new gun and plopping it on the laps of every service personnel, it involves retraining thousands of armorers, buying a whole new suit of tools to service the firearm, reprinting new instruction manuals, revising doctrine, retraining hundreds of thousands soldiers, it just costs too much.
The Lieutenant they should adopt a P90-esque magazine feeding system through the internal body of the rifle. Imagine the mag being at the front like a normal rifle, but when the gun is loaded the rounds get fed to the rear of the gun and into the chamber. It would fix the awkward mag changes. Hell directly copy the P90 style mag on to a bullpup and it would be perfectly easy to use.
Have you seen the DPRK's AK74s? They have these extended drum mags that hold like 150 rounds, slap on of those on an L85, heaviest thing you gotta carry
I used the SA80 for over 16 years, never had no problems with the ergonomics, most people I see who complain about Bullpups being awkward have never used them - they may have fired one but they have not carried and used them.
Why do they keep spending money on the gun. For the price they have put into the upgrades they could have bought more C8 (Canadian built M4). The going price a few years ago for a M4 was $640. The gun has gotten better since the A2 upgrade fixing the reliability problems but the gun is heavy and the ergonomics are trash; even for a bullpup. And I do love my Tavor bullpup. I have meet a few Royal Marines and most have said they all prefer their C8 over the L85s.
Brabble Master if we were to by a AR type rifle I would assume we wouldn’t by a direct gas impingement one but the 416 by H&K but seeing as it wouldn’t really increase the British army’s lethality by doing so I can’t see why they would whenever a rifle is replaced it should really offer something more and to be honest it wouldn’t
If you would be so kind as to share this video on your social media such as Facebook and so on I would REALLY appreciate it :-) Gotta show my love for the gun that everyone loves to hate haha! Have a good day everyone! :-)
Didn't know they updated it again. Has particular interest after shooting the ACF version and LSW. Like the new mounting feature as I can see how it certainly adds to flexibility.
A little fun vid as payback. Cheers. ua-cam.com/video/6dxm_W3uNYw/v-deo.html
Matsimus moar Abrams
A2 vs A3 uppers: ua-cam.com/video/js4d8c7KzCQ/v-deo.html
Can you make a video on HAL Tejas
Matsimus If/When the A4 comes out, I hope they change up the charging handle and include a reliable bolt release so you don’t have to reach around in some awkward way to get you gun going.
L85 A1- NOBODY LIKES YOU
L85 A2- Come closer child
L85 A3- I'll always love you Senpai
@Sparrowhark Based on personal experience....?
I agree
Umm okay I don’t wanna have to explain like how the sa80a2 when made was the best and most accurate on the market
Or that the sa80 a3 is even better and still considered the most accurate rifle
Cause then I’d feel really dumb
And then I bet I’ve only used ar’s or m4
Which then I’d have to explain that the sa80 a3 is better as a bass infantry rifle
However I will agree it’s better for special forces like the sas
To use the l119a1/2
But as a standard riddle man soldier the sa80 a3 can’t be compared in accuracy
Replace some I’s with u’s autocorrected them if u have half a brain ull know where
Why doesn’t anybody love the l86a3 LSW
The new foregrip kind of looks like the one from the AUG A3, gotta say, it makes the gun look cooler too!
But being able to put on a grip as standard I think is a good thing… that could make a big difference and making it even more modular is not bad either…
Love this gun! The look, the sound, everything!
I love the AR15, but I love the bullpup design. You get a full length barrel in a package that's only as long as a short barreled rifle.
I have always loved the L85. I will be sick the day it gets replaced with an AR-15...
I'm waiting for the L85A4, with another foregrip
I'm pretty sure the main reason the MoD isn't considering a new rifle is the fact that the Americans are considering a new standard calibre for their next gun, and that Britain will likely want to follow suit with what the Americans decide.
I would argue it's a pretty good bet the British military is waiting to buy a new service until the US military selects and puts into full scale production and service its Next Generation Squad Weapon (Rifle) and NGSW (Automatic Rifle). The US military has already selecet the 6.8mm bullet, but has left the type of 6.8mm cartridge up to the winning bidders. There is a lot of info out there now about them three competing designs and I'm hoping General Dynamics is selected with its fully ambidextrous bullpup rifle and infantry automatic rifle with theie 6.8mm semi-composite cartridge that save ~30%+ per equivalent brass cartridge.
I think the mod are being smart, allowing the Americans to test their new M5 rifle , this means any kinks only soldier usage will show in the gun and ammo will be lessons we never had to pay a penny to learn, if the m5 is shown to be the correct weapon for the United States to proceed with I suspect we might very slowly transition to the weapon
Do you think the LWRC in .308 would be a great choice to replace the British’s current battle rifle?
Hi Matsimus, good review for the time but experience in service has shown you were wrong on one point. You say it was not much of an upgrade. A serving friend (like you my service has ended) who is a competitive service shooter tells me he groups the same at 600m as he used to at 300m with the A2 variant. Doubling the individual shooters effective range is a hell of an upgrade in my book! BTW will American commenters please stop going on about HK sorting out the A1 version; it is rather silly when it took HK to sort out the M4 into the HK416 and get rid of that engineeringly incontinent direct gas impingement.
It is actually an internal piston system, not direct gas impingement and the M4a1 with M855a1 is still putting bodies down all over the sand box.
@@89tonstar "It is actually an internal piston system, not direct gas impingement" To quote Churchill 'This is the sort of semantics up with which we will not put'. The M4/AR 15 system still injects hot gas full of carbon into the internal working of the rifle; moreover, it is frequently referred to as a gas impingement system by knowledgeable commentators such as Maj Gen (Retd) Robert Scales here: www.diffen.com/difference/M16_Rifle_vs_M4_Carbine. I am well aware across the internet there are knowledgeable operators that claim the M4 is the hammer of Thor or Spear of Achilles just as I am aware there are equally knowledgeable operators that would not give it house room given a choice. The fact remains, however, that the M4/AR15 has question marks over its reliability that will not go away.
"the M4a1 with M855a1 is still putting bodies down all over the sand box". So? No matter how unreliable a system if enough people use it then it will work eventually. Nobody is saying the M4 never works; only that its reliability is can be called into question - and far more authoritative people than I have done so. As for the M855A1 I would agree that it is a storming round but it also raises chamber pressure by 10K psi with no modifications to the rifle increasing all the variables (temp, bolt speed etc) that affect wear, erosion and ultimately reliability. It will have adverse affects on all of the rifle components especially the barrel and working parts in a rifle where reliability is already suspect. Good luck with that.
I have always been curious. How could you serve in the UKs military and then switch to the Canadian's Army? Dual citizenship? Why would you do this? What would happen to your retirement? Would the years add on? So many questions. Thanks
But can it run Crysis?
hahahaa
Best comment, underrated.
Lol I have not seen this comment in a looooong time!
The joke now is...can it run minecraft
Crysis can run it hehehehe
Love how everyone hates on the L85A2 for the A1’s downfalls, but everyone forgets how shite the M16 was when it was first introduced.
Ikr good point mate
I was saying that to people for a long long long time, thank you for agreeing with this controversial topic.
Probably because of all the publishacian of the problems and because of how the government & military reacted (They fumbled the whole thing honestly).
Knowing the British though, the L85 will probably go up A10 or more before they make any kind of major new shift. They did exactly that with the enfield and that rifle only really got replaced after WWII but was introduced several years before WWI.
The British have a hard time letting go of the past man, just look at all their former colonies and dominions now.
Just clean it and you'll be fine the A1 however just fell apart
The m16 problem was the gunpowder and the army wanting to save money than lifes, just look at the xm16
I am in the Grenadier Guards and I can tell you that this weapon is a vast improvement. Although it feels heavier than the previous version it is actually slightly lighter. The weapon system is more balanced as the the A2 was front heavy.
Firing the L85A3 feels exactly the same as the A2.
All in all, a great weapon, one of the best but I am biased, I thought the A2 was a really good weapon system too. People go on saying there is a flaw by not being able to fire in the left shoulder as well as they right but a skilled operator will be able to do so.
Does it have a free floating barrel?
The gun is beautiful my question is are they making complete new L 8 series or they remanufacture old weapons maybe making improvement on old weapons?
Thumbsfr ee serious question : what happens on Public Duties...?
Really front heavy? I’ve held the L98A2 and the L85A2 and I always feel as if it was rear heavy
@@para_magnus2200 not really mate, the pitcatany hand guard made it balance quite well, unless you had all your bits and bobs attached.
So many ‘experts’ in the comments, I’m gonna guess 99.9% have never used the SA80,
Pretty much
And this new one is a British improvement on that German design
@john martin H&K was British owned at the time.
john martin Wrong numbnuts, H&K were owned at the time by BAE Systems, a British company.
You are correct I have never fired an SA80 rifle I have far to much respect for my face. I only have partial sight in my right eye and a gun that ejects spent cases into the left side of my face with the damage the cocking lever reciprocating I recon five rounds max before thousands of pounds on plastic surgery on the face.
Forgotten weapons gives a full explanation of the A3 upper mods.
Yep.
I think what the British is doing with the LA80 is what the Russians have done with a lot of there platforms, make small improvements until they have an almost flawless system.
yep and its way more cheaper than making/designing/buying a new rifle for the whole army.
Ronald Pradesya Money is important.
L85 or SA80. Not L80 XD
dernwine
shit, my bad.
keith moore
what...
For all the hater- many of whom have never used any L85. Yes, the A1 was an all- around disaster but the A2 was a marked improvement. The A3 will be better. Very good video and information.
Yeah... funny how most of us who have gone to war with the M4 or M16A4 have very few negative things to say about them.
pwrserge i know enough people who hate the m4.
da ve
Pre or post redesign? The early M4s were pretty horrible, but once they re-designed the bolt and feed systems, all the early teething problems disappeared.
One key selling point of the l85 is how short it is- Which is an advantage to mechanized and Urben ops
pwrserge So the selling point is not really strong?
Is H&K basically just redesigning everyone's rifles now?
@Haribo 73 dogs are reliable
The A1 was not.
Don't insult dogs lmao
@Arsene Who? Best in the field... They're selling American rifle derivatives. Half of their guns use American operating systems.
yes
Rule of Acquisition number 34: war is good for business.
Not Israel's tevor rifle
probably still be use the L85A2 when the rest of the world moves to atomising rail rifles lol.
They'd probably have rail rifles in the shape of an L85.
that actually sounds bad ass
Yeah but still get the jobs done. British military is one of the best militarys in the world. It's not about numbers.
Exactly.
Well great Britain still used the Lee Enfield until the 1980s so that may be fair
They clearly didn't get the memo that M-lok won the battle...
It's Heckler&Koch's HKey version of the free KeyMod which is apparently just in the opposite direction. I wonder if they demand license fees from equipment manufacturers. It's the British's problem as customers if they don't demand the also free M-lok.
Emilio yeah strange they went that way. M lock is a lot better. You don't want your parts falling off in a stress full situation.
Emilio saving that for the A4😂
Leslie B much of the testing that was done by the US Army is stuff a normal grunt would do. Such as dropping the rifle, hitting it against things, and rezeroing the laser for night vision (mostly SF on that one). Also keymod doesn't have quite as much support behind it anymore.
M lock isnt better its just popular right now. Keep in mind there have been many rail systems but we still use the 1913 picatinny rail.
Very interesting video, nice to see the British Army is continuously upgrading their rifle ; yes, in the beginning it was not a very reliable rifle, but since the A2 version, it's now a very reliable rifle.
The Daniel Defense rail was very nice, but the new HK type handguard seems to be more suitable to the new requirements of modern battlefield.
The new color is nice too, it's a more effective camouflage than a full black rifle, and the full lenght Picatinny rail with an Elcan Specter/piggy back mini red dot sight is a very nice update!
I'm French so we don't have the FAMAS anymore, HK416F now, we lost our "typical visual identification" with our domestic rifle, cool to see Great Britain has decided to keep the L85 :)
(Sorry for my English, i'm French)
Greetings from Lyon, France !
your English is perfect!
Unfortunately, there is a possibility that the British Army General Corps will stop using the L85 and replace it with the Knights & Stoner AR-15.
@@youtuber12148luckily that's on for the Royal marines and sf so the sa80a3 is being kept
realistically, rifles aren't all that important in the overall scheme of things. I've used FALs, M16 variants and L85s, and I would be happy to go to war with any of them. If you look at statistics rifles don't actually cause that many casualties. If you have good machine guns, mortars, artillery and tanks, the individual soldier could be armed with Lee Enfields and Sten guns, and still win the battle. The most lethal weapon on the modern battlefield is the radio.
Minute Man better off with Nokia
I agree with you with alot of that
Chris Spencer+ Fun fact: Nokia started out making military radios.
Meme Master yes but I think it was the bowman system which people joked stood for "Better Off With Map and Nokia"
Take every edge you can, using a rifle that is actually made with the mindset of how the individual soldier will maneouver there's no reason to toss your money at a l85 it's made fucking upside down, and jams horribly..C8IUR A4- MCX, M4, m16.. I don't even have to explain why they'll beat tha l85 out of the park.
Well, one of the things that has been improved on the upper receiver to make it more reliable is the improved welding that method, which you can actually see at 06:10. Those "C" shaped welds are there to affix the barrel trunnion, which is a considerable improvement to the previous spot-welding techniques.
way more reliable and rigid.
Ian McCollum from Forgotten Weapons has a really good video covering the A2 and A3 differences.
The main difference on the upper recivever is as far as I know a different kind of welding (deep penetration welding or some such) and some tolerance work. I only got to use it for a couple of days a few months ago. All of the recievers and bits are brand new but kind of interchangable with the A2, marked up as A3 though and not really to be used in an A2. It disassembles the exact same way. It also doesn't necessarily come with the quad rail and the pic rails. It does come with the plastic foregrip and a longer length of weaver rail to allow adjustment of the carryhandle sight.
MegaAndyman101 makes sense for the parts of the A2 and A3 to be interchangeable as it allows for 'conversion kits' to be distributed to troops rather than brand spanking new rifles, probably significantly cuts down on the cost
Don't scroll down just watch the video, give it a like and move on, whole battalions of warriors in the comments arguing the toss like it's going to change anything at this point.
Thanks for the warning mate, I saw a bit of what you mean
Looks like at Bisley Range, bad hole in his pouch.
Ah yes, a late night matsimus video to prolong my procrastination
Same
Same here
a level coursework and exams be damned
“Good morning, i love you”
But Matsimus makes it worth watching. He's always pleasant and makes military videos educational AND fun to watch.
That intro should be the official British army advert
Hey Matsimus, I think you slightly misunderstand Keymod. Keymod and M-Lok are both rail ad on attachment systems developed to replace full piccatiny quad rail systems. The way they generally work is to provide a space on a fore end that allows to attach various length sections of piccatiny rail to the handguard, only as much as needed in order to save weight and provide a smother grip surface. there are a few accessories out their that attach directly to Keymod or M-lok slots, but the vast majority still attach to piccatiny rails which are mount on to the handguard via the Keymod or M-Lok slots.
Sad Doggo Yes, indeed it is.
Sad Doggo I feel like you didn't actually read the Crane report in it's entirety. It said that empirically M-Lok is stronger, not be a huge degree though. M-Lok is a stronger design, but part of the reason why it had better results is that Keymod is an open source design thus there were no qualitative standard to which they were required to be made to unlike M-Lok which is licenced from Magpul.
Don't get me wrong I prefer M-Lok but it's not like Keymod is completely useless or obselete.
Sad Doggo that is literally the exact opposite of what I said, I meant that because Keymod is open source there is no quality standard to which it must be made unlike a licenced design like Magpul.
Sad Doggo sorry dude, will amend the previous coment.
Welcome to the Canadian Army brother. The C7A2 will serve you well like it did for me. Support your CCFR as well!
After nearly 30 years they finally got it right ..
May be the best carbine in the world even ..
But can it fight George Groves in Wembley stadium in front of 90.000 fans
Fuck, the notification was late. thank god for Discord
1:07 totally didn’t se that guys face
You cant make out his face when hes aiming, but he blurred it for when he stood up showing is whole face.
Good video buddy, I’m looking forward to testing the improved rifle 👍
The A3 receiver uses a new upper receiver with improved welding technology, also the bolt, bolt carrier, trunion and gas piston are of new improved desing. I saw the changes made, and I can tell it improves reliability a lot. Of course, the new picatinny rails on top will make mounting new optics much easier.
If you're already replacing everything, just adopt a new rifle. M4s are $400 a pop on contract, cheaper than the ORIGINAL L85A1. Britain tried making their own rifle, spent more than the Americans, and made a disaster of a rifle...
@@weasle2904you have to retrain all your troops as well on manual of arms
@@weasle2904 But the M4 is less reliable, less accurate and less powerful?
@@markrainford1219 the AR-15 has proven to be one of the most reliable firearms of the day, and are MUCH more accurate than the L85 which is based on the AR-18 short stroke piston. Also they shoot the exact same round so I have no f idea what you're talking about lol
@@weasle2904 L85 less prone to jamming than M4. Same round yes, except L85 is propelling it down a 21 inch barrel= more power. More accurate? lol
Speaking as an American firearms enthusiast, the L85 should not be as divisive as it is, at least not today. The A1 iteration of the weapon was certainly a disaster, I don't think anyone will disagree with that. But the A2 has certainly brought it up to snuff with its contemporaries and transformed into an effective fighting rifle. But it was not transformed into an excellent rifle. Everything that it does, it does adequately; in no aspect is it generally considered a cut above its contemporaries, and certain minor flaws in the original design still remain. While Heckler and Koch was able to smooth out the function of the rifle, certain aspects of the rifle mostly relating to its form were unable to be reconciled without simply designing an entirely new weapon. The most glaring example of this is the ejection system, a problem shared with a number of other bullpup designs; the location of the ejection port combined with with the rifle's ejection pattern means that the weapon must be shot right-handed in order to avoid having hot brass kicked into the shooter's face. Not only does this require soldiers to learn to shoot right-handed regardless of the hand or eye dominance, but this prevents the user from being able to shoot lefty around corners, forcing the shooter to have to adopt an unnatural stance in order to perform this task, one that is not conducive to proper recoil management, thus causing accuracy to suffer. This is also exacerbated by the fact that unlike nearly every other bullpup that suffers from this problem, there is no option to at least reconfigure the weapon to eject from the opposite side, thus enabling left-handed use (although still not allowing a quick change of firing hands in a pinch). There is good reason why the SAS and SBS have chosen to field primarily AR-15 pattern rifles (Colt Canada C8 carbines and LWRC International UCIWs, specifically) to their personnel instead of L85s, as well as some G36s and some of the older roller-delayed blowback HK rifles. But none of the L85's current issues are what I'd call particularly major or potentially life-threatening to the soldiers who use them, at least when it comes to standard infantrymen. But they are issues nevertheless.
In short, the L85 is merely an adequate rifle, not a great one, nor a poor one (discounting the A1, of course)
I do, however, totally understand why the L85A3 is being adopted instead of a brand new service rifle. As stated in the video, a large amount of investment has already been sunk into the L85 family of weapons, and the UK government would be wise to squeeze every last ounce of life they can out of the platform before looking to a move to something new. But there's more to this being cheaper than what is stated in the video. With the L85A3 still in fact being an L85, that means that the British military already has armorers who know how to repair and maintain it, and that they already have 90% of the weapon's parts already in their inventory should something break and need replacing. That's a significant amount of cost that now completely does not have to be worried about. So overall I think that the L85A3 is a sensible move on the part of the British MoD, and those of you who do truly enjoy the rifle will get to see it remain in service for a bit longer yet.
Good assessment. The A1 was a disaster. There was a Pathfinder platoon that used them in the Lungi Lol confrontation, a book called Operation Mayhem, documented it. The A1s jammed quite a bit in the battle that occurred only well trained single-shots and the GPMG prevented anyone from dying, The Pathfinders after wining a firefight in a village, went after the African terrorists through the jungle and huts. (a lesser trained force would have lost life thanks to the terrible A1), I really do think that the British would have been better served with WW2 Bren guns and L1A1s than the SA80s back then as they performed well in the Falklands War. The A2s and A3s are fine rifles though.
You have got to be a civvie.
Yes a 'knowledgeable American' who has of course fired and fought in combat with the SA80....mmmbbuullshit.
While your points are taken well, I think the "commonality" and "cost-effectiveness" of the upgrade are FAR overstated, and that the decision is mostly a political one, not a functional or cost one.
(Note I'm going to say "AR" when I mean the M16-class, but, more generally, ANY of the other current generation infantry assault rifles, e.g. G36, et al).
Firstly, the cost to upgrade existing inventory to A3 standard is VERY significant, as it was from A1 to A2 standard. The quoted prices to do so are nearly that of a whole new AR platform. Thus, the idea that upgrading the existing A2 inventory to A3 standard would be noticeably cheaper is simply wrong. The same goes for buying new A3s - the cost is MORE than buying new AR platforms, because AR platforms have economies of scale that the L85 simply cannot match.
Secondly, when upgrading a A2 to A3, you're taking a USED rifle and replace SOME parts on it. When you replace that with a new rifle (A3 version or another rifle altogether), you get a rifle that is just beginning it's lifespan. Thus, the A2 -> A3 refit upgrade doesn't buy you much. You're taking a used rifle and comparing that to a new one?
Thirdly, the "existing parts inventory" is pretty much pointless. The number of parts changed between the A2 and A3 is significant enough that you don't want to be using most of the A2 parts in an A3 model. So what's the point of having that inventory is you can't use it in your new A3? You have to buy a whole bunch of new parts to support the A3 model, so how is that any different than for a whole new rifle platform?
Fourthly, while yes, current armorers are "used to" the A2, the difference for them to swap to servicing some other rifle is very low. This is about the only place where there is some sort of significant cost-savings for going to the A3 vs a new rifle. But again, it's likely an overstated cost, as the A3 will require some training as well. It's not a "free" upgrade.
Fifthly, there is very little reason to NOT phase in a new rifle at this time. The same argument for the A3 could be used to advocate that Paras and SAS should not be allowed to change from the A2 to something else (which, they obviously have). The UK military is not some monolithic force that once you decide to change a rifle, you have to suddenly buy it for EVERYONE in the entire military the next year. It's a specious argument to assert that this is a problem when buying a new rifle.
Lastly, there is very little training costs to be done to swap a soldier between A2 and AR platforms. You're not talking about having to have the average infantry man spend a month to become proficient with using and servicing their new weapon. More like, a week, at best. I've fired both, and with a couple hours of instruction in maintenance added in, I think the difference is a couple of days to move smoothly from the L85 to an AR. That's a trivial (and mostly on-paper-only) difference. Note we're also talking about the "average" infantry guy, some some super-high-proficiency SAS operator. The standard "good enough" marksmanship doesn't take very long to achieve, if the infantryman was already taught the basics of good marksmanship.
Fact is, moving the A2 into the Territorials and other reserve formation is entirely reasonable, as is leveraging the existing inventory for use in non-frontline infantry units. This was done when the A1 itself was introduced, and is how ALL major upgrades are handled. You do end up with a small amount of logistical costs to running 2 different rifles, but, frankly, it's overstated significantly, as the vast majority of those folks not only are never deployed outside the UK, but even when they are, they tend to use the equipment that the previous unit left them. So the probability that the UK will have IN THEATER problems with having to support 2 different infantry rifles is very, very small.
I really fail to see any cost-based argument that isn't really based on "it's OUR rifle, we can't replace it with someone else's!" political crap.
The truth is that the UK could easily get themselves a top-notch current generation rifle for about the same cost as the A3 upgrade. This new rifle would perform better, and would remove the necessity of having to get a new rifle in 10 years. Which, even with the A3, is going to happen. The A3 is simply throwing good money after bad - the truth is that the A2 should never have happened, and something else should have been bought to replace it then. The UK is repeating the same mistake again, with about as weak an excuse as for the A1 -> A2 upgrade.
@@leod-sigefast Look, the only reason I believe the A1 was horrible was because of the feedback from soldiers in the Gulf War. So i believe whatever the british soldiers who used them say. Are you a former brit soldier? And if so is the A2 reliable and good? Genuinely curious.
Don’t they teach recruits how to correctly load rounds in to a mag anymore. Used the mk1 and it was shite especially after the SLR. I hope the upgrades work well. Can it be shot left handed now.
Still rather have the SLR 7.62 real stopping power and soldier proof.
So old and antiquated.
Verry cool edit at the start!
Yeh but he didn't make it
Matsimus look at forgotten weapons video called SA80 history. He goes into what they changed about the upper
Owain richards yh I saw that video. The difference between l85a2 and l85a3 is small
all new parts were sprayed red i was told
I'm just glad our forces don't have sub par weapons anymore, there's no excuse for that!
There was an A3 at my cadet camp I've just came off and i got to hold it. It seems to be a huge improvement over the A2 just based on it's feel in the hands alone
Damn accidentally posted before finishing writing. Considering the SLR was designed during the second world war, but wasnt out into production as they couldn't fford the down time in the factories to replace the tooling and it was still in service in the 80s, is there really a need to procure a completely new rifle? Apart from in the jungle it's a highly reliable rifel in all climates, its very accurate. I've only ever used the SA80, but I would hate trying to soldier with a non bulpup rifle, the extra weapon length would be such a ball ache in most circumstances! I understand that a bulpup rifel is more complex, but I can't understand why all militaries aren't using them due to the shorter weapon length making it far more practical in all environments.
The SA80 a2 to me was like marmite “ you love it or you hate it “ and personally I loved it from basic training to Afghan I never had any real dramas with mine
I loved the SA 80 A1.. Never had problems with it. LSW gunner, Two Tours op Banner. I think the SUSAT sight was great.. Easy to use. Good vid and info.. Cheers
A1 bits fell of it and super glue was issued to glue on come of it this is not acceptable in combat their was no reason the SLR could have been modernised like dsa arms has done.
I have never had the pleasure of using this weapon but I have always loved the design and it's a shame they didn't come out with a left-hand version. However, the weapon I used when I was the Cdn army, the legendary FN C1A1 will always be my favorite, (7.62 mm straight downrange).
L85A3 doesn't exist. It's just an L85A2 with the "HK A3" upper receiver. The military designation is still "L85A2".
And the upgraded weapons are known as what in the CORE (MoD logistical accounting) system?
That's right, the A3.
🤷🏻♂️
Here in Ireland we've used the steyr since the late 80s. Originally the F. N. And the Bren etc. There's only 7 parts to it and it works and cleans a treat👍 I heard from lads in 1st desert storm that the standard issue for the Tommies kept seizing up? 🤔I hope that's being rectified. Respect to you all lads. Regardless of the uniform worn.
First gulf you mean. Desert storm was the operation name. We were also not tommies, that was a term used during WW2. However, your comment shows no respect, if you cannot even get basic facts correct.
Seemed respectable enough to me. He acknowledged that what he was saying was second hand information and wasn't just stating it as fact, and clearly there are still places where they call us Tommies. It's not like the name was an insult. The tone of the post was well natured, so why not accept it as such? Respect right back at you Gerard
Has Ireland been in a war that didn't involve a car bomb?
Tell that to the protestant loyalists.
@oyinbo peppe that your mums a mattress?
I feel the biggest drawback with the current l85 is its heavier weight. Personally though I kind of like that. A larger mass helps against recoil so the l85 is very controllable on full auto.
If it does it’s job it’s good
If the l85 was never adopted into the British armed forces then we would be using crappy m16's
Well I still haven't seen this or officially heard anything about it. I actually tried telling someone on UA-cam about 6 months ago that the British Army didn't have the A3 and that Heckler and Koch had designed an A3 upgrade off their own back and tried unsuccessfully to sell it to the British Army as that's what I had heard through the millitary.
First up if your numbers are correct then it means it's costing just over £500 per rifle for a new grip, a blob of welding by the change lever which isn't needed, a paint job a 1 of the working parts being upgraded. The A2 upgrade cost just over £200 per rifle and saw the majority of the working parts modified or redesigned, the gas parts modified and Teflon coated, a new cocking handle, redisigned locking splines in the breach and on the bolt as well as other things and that was around 15 years ago so inflation wouldn't mean you get far less for 2 and a half times the price!
Also with the new foregrip, it doesn't look like you can gain access to the gas parts without removing the foregrip, if that's the case then it's a serious design floor! Admittedly the current foregrip features a top cover hich has been made to such poor tolerance levels that it either pops open when cocking or firing the rifle, or needs to be levered open with the combi tool as its too tight.
Floating barrel and the weight decrease will be worth it. Takes range from 400m to 1000m. They haven’t rolled out to us yet, b I can’t wait tbh.
nope, heckler and Koch redesigned the whole system, this was the L85 A, the first model with all this issue, they made al this improvement, and because H/k was a subsidiary company from Enfield it make sense to ask them for help. watch forgotten weapon, but you find also other reliable sources
that chopper at around the 2 min mark......hate to see his grouping with that shit stance and trigger snatch!
Good day sir I was wondering if you will cover the buccaneer jet, I read alot of Tom Clancy and just want to know more also will you ever cover weird and quirky vehicles that were in service like the Atomic Anny Nuclear Cannon, I think it was called the M-51 Atomic cannon
Thank you so much mate
I would like to say that you keep me motivated to pursue my dream to become a piper in the Royal regiment of scotland
Because of you now run a 7 min mile every day and do 40+ press up and sit ups
Thank you for helping me become my best
piper. MILK you are making the effort!! Well done
Matsimus thank mate
do you like your wobbly bits swinging in the breeze? That much
They have completely reworked the upper receiver inside and out
Why couldn't the m.o.d not be racist against left handed shooters?
Because they aracoed that idea of left handed version of sa80 in the 70s with the xl70s
Can’t help but recall L85 in the anime Upotte!!
Blaze the Amazing u have ur opinion and I have mine don’t push urs on me
Blaze the Amazing ur the first person to answer me honestly when I pull that response thanks man
I'm here for the L85 chan
I literally buy a SA80A1 AEG because this anime
She is my Waifu. She trys her hardest, it's not her fault she's clumsy.
Mandalorian Gaming its not her fault her firing pin keeps breaking
The A3 designation came before the HK handguard and FDE paint came along, it started as the A3 upper receiver. The changes came after the upper receiver contract in early 2017.
Changes to the upper receiver are as follows:
Better welding (Deep Penetrating Welding) mainly to improve overall sturdiness and prevent the guide rail from warping.
Longer weaver mount with pressed in tabs and lateral welding to improve sutrdiness (was later improved to a picatinny rail).
HKey is pretty much only compatible to HK’s attachments and products
The welding on the upper receiver has been changed to a different type of welding. So it doesn't fall apart over time. They are all new receivers. That's pretty much the only part and some furniture. The rifles alright but not the best. Might as well stick with it until something significantly better comes along. There isn't anything that much better.
They are better off with getting better boots and uniform to be honest.
Although I enjoyed shooting the L85 series, I did work with the German ,Norwegian and Danish armies, I still think the G36 system or even the HK 416/417 series would be a great replacement, or how about the C8 carbine from DeMarco, SAS and marines use the C8 so we know it works.
That intro. .. thats why i love weapons
Music, you mean that you love music! :D
Galvars and guns :D
I suspect someone watched Baby Driver when syncing the shots to the music.
Man Brit's should have switch to the Canadian C7 Rifle or back to the L1A1 modern style with picatinny rails, and wow L85A3 is better but it took some "Similar" looks from the Aug bull-pup series 🤔
German worth work in it. 🇩🇪👍 But the A2 version foregrip looks way better in my mind. Now the L85 have the same foregrip like the new G36's. Everything new from Heckler&Koch.
Just write "Wertarbeit" or " German craftsmanship" "woth work" doesn't make any sense gg^^
Got an old school Steyr AUG A1 for myself the other day. Unf*cked from day one.
All the L85A3 prototypes are built on LSW receivers, for some reason. I wish they'd just destroy all the crow cannons to be honest.
LSW aka crow canon 🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢 love the A2 but i fucking hate the LSW
Always had that one guy who let his spring go flying across the room
Such a sexy design ❤️❤️
I love the Austeyr F88, but I'd like this over an AR-15 type rifle...
Don't feel too bad. There are still Yanks who haven't gotten past the M16's problems from the 60s!!
*What?* The M16 solved it's problems after only a few years in service with the M16 to the M16A1. The fact people blindly believe myths is saddening. The issues were a result of meddling with the rifle by the the Army Ordnance, they were upset the M16 was privately developed unlike their government headed M14. So they decided to screw it over (allegedly), by using cheap surplus powder that radically changed pressure and bolt velocities, leading to malfuntions, and not chrome lining the barrel. These being fixed with the M16A1 directly after, and even years before by using new buffer springs on M16's. Soldiers liked the M16 substantially more than the M14, and their combat effectiveness were statistically improved. The Brits took 10 years for SOMEONE else to fix their rifle, and it's still a dog. The modern AR-15/M16 system is one of the most reliable systems, and it's why its still one of the world's most popular rifles
Fair well oh faithful carrying handle :'/
Would have liked to see a polymer/high density nylon upper receiver.. from what i can see there isn't much that addresses the weight.
What many people overlook is, that changing the rifle platform does come with a whole lot of follow up problems and costs - it's not just the rifle cost but the whole technical package (Maintenance, vehicle mounts....) and then don't forget the whole re-training and changes to tactics etc.
That's a whole lot of costs without much gain - it's the same with the US trying again and again to replace the M16 but sticking with the platform or all those NATO countries which did stick to 7.62x51 for ages (where the practical difference is much bigger than between one 5.56 assault rifle and the other).
I would guess the British military will take a good look onto how well France manages going from a bullpup to normal design and include that in its own plans.
And knowing militaries around the world its more than likely that the A3 will be in British service till 2035. 😂
There is literally nothing wrong with the A3 staying in service.
jugganaut33
Other than the fact that it's an overweight piece of shit with all the reliability of a Hugo... yeah... "nothing wrong"
pwrserge Aaaannndd the uneducated speaks. Too heavy? Depends on what you're used to. The weight distribution is all at the back so you barely notice it, and it balances nicely. Don't like it? Get on your arms and get bigger. Unreliable? Still beats most other service rifles on the market in reliability tests, and has confirmed this in the last 2 major conflicts, with excellent reliability after action reports.
"Get stronger" is a retarded answer. Infantry loadouts are a zero sum game. Every pound I'm carrying in rifle is one pound less I could be carrying in something else.
pwrserge it was a tongue in cheek answer. Seriously, I have carried the SA80 for almost 3 decades, most of that as an infantryman. I've carried it over many thousands of miles over the years on about a dozen operational deployments as well as on countless exercises in desert, temperate, jungle and arctic conditions. It really makes me scratch my head when people complain about the weight of the weapon. It's a couple of pounds more than a M4 but really not that heavy. Its like anything - you get used to it quickly.
You should do a video on the Sea King helicopter that has been in use for the maritime since 1963, they have these really cool pods they drop sonobuoys that can detect underwater movement like submarines and such. They are a really cool anti submarine helicopter.
Usually the?
Are you able to talk about your transition into the Canadian Military ?
I wish the US military was allowed to pain our rifles. Black rifles stand out from such a distance and really draws the eye. Only SOF units are allowed to paint their rifles.
ALL HAIL ARE LORD AND MONG SAVIOR MATSIMUS 🙏🙏🙏
#bringbacktheEmpire
The L85, in any flavour, has been a joke to the world. Ask anyone who has fired it in anger and they will nearly all want something else other than this toy rifle. The rifle started off on paper as a great fire arm. The early prototypes of a UK bullpup, EM1 & EM2, had massive potential. By the time the XL60 (L85) project got of the ground, all the expertise had gone because they knew that the Royal Enfield Small Arms factory had been sold. The guns were designed and made by non gun engineers and to a budget that would have made the rest of the world laugh. This new sham of a battle rifle is a joke, as can be seen in the numbers that are being upgraded!! Read 'The Last Enfield' and you'll read what went wrong, because not much went right.
That is one hideous hunk of weaponized metal.
Just plain fugly'.
And they went with Keymod over MLOK?
Well.
Trigger's broom anybody?
Just let it die already
lul
2:20 - This is a human-specific problem. If the British Army were made of Terminators, you could give them any hodgepodge of guns and even change the mix over time, and the army would fight flawlessly.
Intro ends at 0:50 . Thank me later for saving you 50 seconds of your life
TX3 Ulti hahahaha cute
Why did they use keymod? Its been proven m lok is better for having the rail last.
Also lol at the people who think the scar h and m416 are the shit
[Insert edgy or awkward text here]
Just for that, I will now proceed to like the edgy or awkward text that you just posted.
Nail hit on head 😂 and I’ll match it with your gun sucks and mine is ace when compared to all others
It's not a New Rifle is it though. It's just a modification
I still take a SLR over any L85 variant i like my guns to have stopping power which probably explains why my unit got L85a1 I switched to GPMG I always hate a pea shooter
but you dont have a choice you dont just say, na sergeant im grabbing a GPMG instead.
you do when your the only one in your company trained in SF with GPMG
Gary Bromiley it's not a gun
Out of service 2025 ? It’s half way through 2024 and I’ve heard nothing about a replacement rifle .
SCAR 17 for the win!!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
SAR H
Being Brazilian myself, and witnessing the 2+ decades long saga of the Brazilian Army searching for a 556 replacement for the FAL rifle, I can fully understanding the British MOD decision of still sticking with the same platform. Changing the service goes beyond just buying a new gun and plopping it on the laps of every service personnel, it involves retraining thousands of armorers, buying a whole new suit of tools to service the firearm, reprinting new instruction manuals, revising doctrine, retraining hundreds of thousands soldiers, it just costs too much.
Personally, I just don't like bullpups, sorry man, I know it's efficient and compact, but I just hate how they feel ergonomically
The Lieutenant they should adopt a P90-esque magazine feeding system through the internal body of the rifle. Imagine the mag being at the front like a normal rifle, but when the gun is loaded the rounds get fed to the rear of the gun and into the chamber. It would fix the awkward mag changes. Hell directly copy the P90 style mag on to a bullpup and it would be perfectly easy to use.
Have you seen the DPRK's AK74s? They have these extended drum mags that hold like 150 rounds, slap on of those on an L85, heaviest thing you gotta carry
That’s actually me
Don't worry Lieutenant as long as you remember to lift with your PFC's instead of your knees the weight difference would make no difference at all :)
I used the SA80 for over 16 years, never had no problems with the ergonomics, most people I see who complain about Bullpups being awkward have never used them - they may have fired one but they have not carried and used them.
L85A3...a polished turd rolled in glitter...jeez Mat has a way with words lol😂
Matsimus: I like the L85.
Viewer who has never actually used the gun: Reeeeeeeeeee!
The SA80 is class leader. Gas piston recoil, bullpup. An excellent rifle, far superior to the M4
Why do they keep spending money on the gun. For the price they have put into the upgrades they could have bought more C8 (Canadian built M4). The going price a few years ago for a M4 was $640. The gun has gotten better since the A2 upgrade fixing the reliability problems but the gun is heavy and the ergonomics are trash; even for a bullpup. And I do love my Tavor bullpup. I have meet a few Royal Marines and most have said they all prefer their C8 over the L85s.
Since when have the Royal Marines used a C8 weapon, L85 is standard issue. Only unit that I can recall ever using C8 is the SAS and SBS.
Brabble Master if we were to by a AR type rifle I would assume we wouldn’t by a direct gas impingement one but the 416 by H&K but seeing as it wouldn’t really increase the British army’s lethality by doing so I can’t see why they would whenever a rifle is replaced it should really offer something more and to be honest it wouldn’t
Kieran Williams 43 commando use the C8
TB 2018 only for nuclear defence or ship boarding
MrTangolizard yep I know was just saying that the C8 is used by those other than UKSF.
It isn’t a battle rifle. It’s a bullpup assault rifle. A battle rifle is a full powered rifle like a G-3, FAL, M-14, etc.
You cant upgrade a gun that sucked when it was invented.
The M16?