British SA80 Rifle - Why The Hate?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 лют 2017
- British L85 Rifle otherwise known as the SA80 has been given a rough time in its time and its time to start standing up for this great service rifle for what it REALLY is. The truth about this rifle is shrouded by a past that it never seems to shake off and I want to try explain why I think this firearm performs great.
The SA80 (Small Arms for the 1980s) is a British family of 5.56×45mm NATO small arms. It is a selective fire, gas-operated assault rifle. Mechanically, it has been derived from the Armalite AR-18, which had been manufactured under licence in the UK by Sterling Armaments Company. The first prototypes were tried in 1976, and production ended in 1994. It is due to remain in service until 2025.
The L85 rifle variant of the SA80 family has been the standard issue service rifle of the British Armed Forces since 1987, replacing the L1A1 variant of the FN FAL. The A1 variant was upgraded in the early 2000s by Heckler & Koch as the SA80A2 and remains in service as of 2016. In mid-2016 a prototype A3 variant was showcased which further improved on the weapon and is reportedly being considered to extend the out of service date beyond 2025. The remainder of the family comprises the L86 Light Support Weapon, the short-barrelled L22 carbine and the L98 Cadet rifle.
The SA80 was the last in a long line of British weapons (including the Lee-Enfield family) to come from the Royal Small Arms Factory, the national arms development and production facility at Enfield Lock.
Hope you enjoy!!
💥 💣 Check out our partnership clothing brand! Attire For Effect💣 💥 www.attireforeffect.com 📸 Also follow them on Instagram: # attire_for_effect
💰 Want to support my channel? Check out my Patreon Donation page! www.patreon.com/user?u=3081754
💰PayPal: paypal.me/Matsimus?locale.x=e...
Matt’s DREAM: www.gofundme.com/f/matt039s-c...
👕 Check out my Merch: teespring.com/stores/matsimus...
📬Wanna send me something? My PO Box: Matthew James 210A - 12A Street N Suite No. 135 Lethbridge Alberta Canada T1H2J
📸 My instagram: Matt_matsimus
🎮 Twitch: / matsimus_9033
👋DISCORD: / discord
📘 Facebook: profile.php?...
🐦Twitter: / matsimusgaming
Matsimus Gaming
British L85 SA80 Rifle - Наука та технологія
Wish to donate to support my channel? - Paypal link: paypal.me/Matsimus
a channel that is for weapon lovers OMG. I am gonna puke such bullshit even got subscibers... plz guys if u have a brain thern unsubscibe
Soulshake haha little triggered are we? Cute. Have a good day :-)
no need what so ever he has his opinion which everyone is entitled to if you dont like it dont watch a video about it simple
You obviously never used the A1 then...
The LA85A1 is the reason why the weapon has its reputation. The A2 is a good weapon, the A1 was utter garbage. It was prone to jams, the magazine had a habit of falling out. Couldnt be fired dry because it would jam, in sandy conditions it would jam because sand would stick to the lubricant (and you had to lube the thing because it didnt like being fired dry.). The furniture had a habit of simply breaking, firing pins kept breaking, safety was shite and had a habit of slipping if it even thought about catching on your clothing or webbing (surely you can imagine what THAT must feel like when your weapon fucking suddenly discharges!).
Quite frankly the A1 was as much a danger to the user as it was to the enemy, probably more so. The report into the weapon reveald 50 faults, many of them serious.
The problem with the rifle was it was rushed in before it was fully tested and ready. As I said, the A2 is a good weapon, the A1 fully deserved its horrendous reputation as quite possibly the worst assault rifle of modern times.
Oh, and that reminds me, after stripping and cleaning, you ever heard of the A1's gas plug issues?
You insert the gas plug the wrong way it dropped into the chamber... but looked identical on both sides. You would have to send the damned thing to the armourer to fix!
Not saying the A2 is bad.... but the A1 deserved its reputation. It was horrible.
Given the amount of changes H&K made, especially internally, you cannot even call them the same weapon anymore. About the only thing H&K kept was the receiver. The LA85A! and A2 thing is like the Challanger 1 and Challanger 2.... same name, but very little similarities between the two.
The a1 is like a civil servant , it doesn’t work and you can’t fire it.
@@juanlilg2868 That's wrong, yeh Enfield has it's problems but since H&K took over it's got better and better. The only point you have is it used to jam or 'stove pipe' in crappy or sandy conditions but urban house to house it's always been good. That being said most incursions in this day and age are in sandy conditions so yeh it needed sorting.
@@gaberaddo7664 If you improved the allegro car it would still be crap, they took the prototype and asked enfield to make it cheap. Hence cheap magazines, springs, plastics and stamped pressed steel. They told the workers at enfield that it was closing so quality control went out the window and had to get Rover expertise in to sort out pressed steel issues. You have to wonder if they faked the A1 testing . This procurement followed a pattern, cheap crappy dms boot's, poor design caused trench foot in falklands. Panther jeep Blairs love child expensive differcult to work on , unreliable. clansman walki talky range and battery life of childs toy! Is Ajax the next one?
@@peterwait641 Hehe, Heklar and Koch are seeing to it noe anyway and it's a much better rifle, the A3.
Peter Wait How many times have you used both the A1 and A2?
@@user-xh3wr1do7k Never had jam with LMG, , Stirling SMG, Browning , beretta ect. SLR useless with crimped blanks. Not used A2
The A1 is utter shit, the A2 has been refurbished to a normal standard.
The legacy and the bad reviews are based on the A1 iteration.
Agreed :-) thanks for watching!
agreed, met that thing when I was a cadet and hated it.
Firstly I'm not a soldier or anything, my sources of information are numerous and include listening to numerous people more knowledgeable than myself and having held a realistic-weighted SA80A2 replica.
Accepting that all the reliability problems with the rifle are old news and don't apply to the A2 variant, I think the following criticisms are still valid:
1: Cost. The original intention was to build a cheap, robust rifle out of stamped metal, inspired by the Russian AKs and weapons like the Sten and Sterling SMG. Unfortunately the long development period and numerous flaws with the A1 all rapidly rendered 'cheap' a joke. Water under the bridge now of course, but I think it's important. Spending money on the now-expensive SA80 meant that money was not available for something else.
2: Failure to maintain an indigenous small-arms development capability. The reason the SA-80 was initially a failure was because the old small-arms developers with WWII experience had retired and the Army had no recent experience with small-arms development either, so we had a 'perfect storm' of inexperienced engineers and an inexperienced customer. The lack of follow on orders for additional small-arms either from HMG or foreign governments has meant that this small-arms development capability, which we won at such a high cost, has now been lost again. If we wanted to develop a new indigenous rifle we'd have to start from scratch _again_. Compare that with the Royal Navy who understand the importance of maintaining an indigenous industry to provide them with world-class equipment and support.
3. Weight. You touched on weight in your video, but it is an issue with the rifle which appears to be a pound or two heavier than the AR15 series of rifles. In addition the centre of mass is surprising far back in the frame which seemed to me to make it uncomfortable to hold, though I accept that this may not be an issue for people who are used to it.
4. Control layout. The fire selection switch is positioned far back on the left-side of the receiver and requires the operator to move his left hand a long way to switch from single-shot to full-auto. It seems awkward compared to the thumb-switches on H&K products and the AR15 series. The push-through safety is not so bad, as it can be operated by the forefinger, but is having the charging handle on the right side of the receiver really ideal? Watching video's of people using it, they usually tilt the rifle over 90 degrees and work it with their left hands, this looks very poorly thought out to me.
It would not be my pick for a rifle i would rather license HK for the 416/417 and make a local made AR/LMG/DMR/BR Platform based on that.
Akm72 and pulling a charging handle all the back towards to user on a AR is ideal? I'm sorry but how is it that people seem to make out like this rifle is so hard to use lol. It's astounding. Watch videos all you want, but it works and is great if you know how to handle it. Also, if you are using the new adapted L85A2. There is no need to do the reaching over as you can hold the rifle stead with your other hand on the handgrip and cock it with the other. As for weight, come on. Really? Ok, I'll give you that if you want. But honestly, toughen up. It's a service rifle and if incapable of operating a 10.5lb rifle for prolonged periods of time. Probably best you shouldn't be in the army.
After sighting in at 60 feet, I could easily cover 5 shots with a nickel ua-cam.com/users/postUgkxQt2uORDRfFOVSrO4idv4B90ThT6EOnEL ! Truly a pleasure to shoot! Scope was easy to adjust for eye relief. Only problem the varmints must have seen it delivered lol!Update: So impressed with shot groups at 30 yards I purchased a Hammers 3×9 with adjustable Objective scope! Now a true nail driver!
the hate is based on the original
not the A2 revision.
it was designed by good engineers but not firearm engineers
They started with the enfield EM1 and were asked to make it cheap using metal pressings instead of expensive machined parts. Think B.L. not BMW. should have been 6.2 mm caliber!
And now they got the a3
@@lonesurvivalist3147The CR2 mudflap rubber was designed by engineers, however bending carbon rubber over 90 degrees causes it to split due to the forces applied . This can occur in a couple of weeks, perhaps it needs an A3?
@@peterwait641 But it has nothing in common with either the two EM-1 (Korsac and Thorpe respectively) rifles, they were based on the FG42, or the EM-2 which was a long stroke flapper locked rifle. The L85 was a new (mostly stolen, really Royal Enfield got sued over the L85 by Colt) design based on the Stoner AR-180 which was a cheap stamped metal rifle to begin with. Think oh crap we need a weapon in 5.56mm to replace everything we have and we have no firearms designers, panic!, what can we steal and lets hope we don't get caught doing it.
@@MrTrilbe Think the new-"old ct 40" will be the same loads of hype just like when they brought out the SA80. You have to wonder why the Americans spent over 30 years trying to make it work and then ditched it? No vested interests in using the bushmaster or super 40!
Biggest flaw was the lack of left handed capacity. Never been addressed and as a result many with weak vision in the right eye could not join yet could have become marksmen using their left!
Agreed. I had a slight problem using SLR for the same reason and casings flying out used to leave marks on my Forehead on my right side.
Sounds like this gun really had some major design flaws
@@kloschuessel773Totally agree
@@kloschuessel773 Hand Held Assault Rifle......not Major just small adjustments, us Brits are particular about things like this.
It's currently getting upgraded here in the UK.
@@onlygoodstuff1055 It weighed 10 pounds and the firing pin would snap. Those ARE major problems.
Served with the A1. Didn't have to many issues with it until we got dicked to do some work for infantry trails and development unit at warminster. After the trails they let us loose with some exotic rifles from around the world. I fired the A2, stery AUG,g36 ,ak47 and the C8. The AUG and the c8 were the stand out weapons! Much better then the l85 with the AUG being my favourite. It's so light and controllable firing in the standing position was a world away from the l85.i would say the sight lacked some bollocks but that's an easy upgrade. The aussies choose well
Thanks for sharing mate! Glad you like the rifle. I agree though there are some areas where it need work. Thanks for watching!
I agree, the Steyr is my fav rifle of all time
Hmmm, the Aussie Steyer. Yeah right. Kiwis have given that the boot, hopefully better for the Aussies this time round.
Bruno Gray can only tell you what I thought at the time. Ergonomics we're good and it was very light. Didn't live with it in the field but I can tell you it had a lot of advantages on the range especially firing from the standing position. But hey each to there own if you didn't like firing the Aug I have no problem with that
Hi. In my experience with the steyer... I found the parts small and fiddly to work with especially when fatigued. It was nice to shoot on the range. In the field I found changing the gas settings when the rifle was hot without burning my fingers difficult. it was however compact and light which was a bonus. I also thought it a bit underpowered, but that may just have been the ammo, and after firing our artillery guns most infantry weapons tended to feel underpowered...
I've used all versions now including the a3 and yes a1 was bad but later versions a very good, it served me well in combat
Yeah. When I think it was H&K got to modify and improve it. It's been solid ever since. Has only ever jammed once on me
Try a Tavor X95 and let me know what you think of the SA80.
S A you see m8 you don’t get to choose in. Combative
@@SA-xf1eb The Tavor sucks pretty bad, use the AUG or F2000 as an example of a good bullpup.
Yeah but an m4a1 is better
And by “the British government tried their best to respond as quickly as possible” Matsimus of course means the British MoD spent the better part of a decade covering up, lying, and downplaying the deficiencies of the L85A1 to the media and public.
Maybe you should look at the M16's history
BritBlueBril FOREVER well if you knew the M16’s service history you would know that the M16 initially performed well in trials. After it was adopted the Ordinance Department changed the powder used and eliminated cleaning kits, which caused extreme reliability issues. When these facts came to life, an emergency congressional investigation was convened. The findings of the investigation along with technical advise from the weapons original designers, were incorporated into the improved M16A1 pattern, which virtually eliminated all of the rifles previous issues. And all of this happened in under 3 years.
Unlike the L85.
BritBlueBril FOREVER The M16 was fixed in 3 years, the L85 wasn’t fixed until 15 years later. The M16 also only needed a chrome lined barrel, cleaning kits, and cleaner ammo to start working reliably whereas the L85 had to have EVERYTHING inside replaced. Don’t compare them.
@@myusername3689
Both however remained a tarnished "unreliable standard issue" for YEARS.
The L85 however became the joke because "UK bureaucracy & Politiks", M16 was in a war where reliability for 99% of Infantry weapons of the time was already low, remove maintenance kits and other necessary implementations (chrome liners, anti corrosion protection....) And you get the M16 joke
The only reason people hate the A2 is because of the A1 lol
people hate it because its trash. Their the only country fielding this gun for a reason. A tavor is a much better gun same with the aug. Who even wants a bullpup though. Terrible design for human anatomy when reloading. I rather have a side folding stock to shorten a gun in a vehicle then be permanently limited to my stock length. Bull pups in general are a fad that will be going away.
Anybody that went from using the SLR to the SA80 knows my thoughts 😬
A POS is a POS, there's no disguising it....
Is that the L1A1? The F.N.-F.A.L. in my opinion the Best Battle Rifle ever made...
That and the fact you can't clear a right hand corner ~ US Marine
As many mentioned, it's the early issues with the weapon.
Even the M16 is regarded by some as an unreliable weapon due to a few issues with the early rifles that were very easy to fix once they were recognized. After the fixes, the reliability skyrocketed and new troops who were issued the weapon had nothing but praise.
Well, almost all of them. Most people who were dissatisfied only wanted something shorter, lighter, and handier. Go figure.
But the L85 and L85A1 is a different issue. There were dozens of problems with the L85, and basically the MoD's response was "LALALALALALALA THESE RIFLES WORK FINE LEARN TO USE THEM RIGHT BLAHBLAHBLAH", and then they acquiesced and said "Well, there is a few issues with it, I think," made the L85A1 and then went back to the previous statement. To which all the poor Tommies were left armed with a heavy scope-aiming device with a secondary function as a firearm. This process went on for years before they said "Okay, we seriously fucked up here. We should really replace them but we spent a billion pounds buying them and it would be wasteful to throw them all away. I suppose we should ship these to the Germans to sort out the issues. See what they can salvage."
Then the Germans at HK got a hold of the rifles and said "Mein Gott! What were they smoking when they made this? The only thing we can salvage is the receiver and the SUSAT scope!" and decided the best course of action was to upgrade them to the L85A2 standard. And by "upgrade", I mean "redesign everything short of the receiver". And the Teutonic touch was all the L85 needed to function properly. And the L85A2 became the rugged, reliable battle buddy that it should have been long ago.
However, the monumental degree of the issues with the rifle when it first entered service, as well as the incompetence of the MoD to fix them when they were recognized. Given the poor reputation the M16 has among some people, even though it only had a few problems in its first years in service, which only required a few fixes once these problems came about, it is unlikely the L85 will ever shed its poor reputation, given the years the fundamentally flawed L85 and L85A1 were around and the poor reputation it cemented.
The problem with the US us patents and we got lucky the market stagnated to the point where an AR configuration is almost always the right choice. The modularity is amazing, and this British guy is talking 10 lbs ?! *I would bet their 7.62 × 39 esque ammunition would be more reliable, easier to control, and lighter in an AR platform, and clearly if you have 5.56 it is clearly the best option*
Now I think ballistics is where it's at, and any new fancy cartridge they come out with will be adapted to an AR platform
But who knows, I could be wrong, I think bullpups are stupid.
The SA80 has had 2 complete rebuilds to even work reliably. The AR15 design has sold worldwide for decades..
How many other nations use the SA80 rifle in any version? Shall I tell you?... NONE!!
Now then.. What can we deduce from the FACT?
The problem with the m16 is the gunpowder and the government doesn't want spend more on the chrome line
Wanna hang out for future live stream interactions, gaming and chats with me!! Come to Twitch and remember to follow!
🎮 Twitch: www.twitch.tv/matsimus_9033
Matsimus this is why Australia uses F90
I have a question for you, that I was hoping you would address in the video. How is the handling of the rifle? How is the accuracy? How are magazine changes?
@@adamforbes1019 the weapon is essentially the same barrel length as a full size rifle so it's accuracy would be the the same. All a bullpup is doing is in being shorter. With being identical shooting characteristics of a longer rifle. So an rifle so a in less than the space of a traditions a carbine?. All achieved by moving the magazine further back along the trigger control group.. The barrel is not shortened, it is simply the placement of magazine and trigger that achieves the. A shorter full size of rifle.
Australia
Chose this over the the M16/ M4 for these reasons. Its lighter weight, compactness and a dependable see through magazine. Its reliability is well proven in the field.
Matsimus! The fact that you are telling me that it is a rifle going through changes is explanation enough in itself. A good rifle wouldn't need to go through any iterations in the first place. The fact that you think the rifle is good is also understandable because no army ever tells it's troopies that it's equipment sucks and you are expected to have faith in you gear. But at some point you need to face reality. It can shoot BUT in comparison to the AK and all it's derivatives, it SUCKS.
Now like you I am also a lifer, 36 years on the job. I did my basics with our version of the FN and dam, that thing is simply a beast with no equal. Problem was that when we used it in action in desert conditions, unless you kept it absolutely spotless, you were going to have issues. Then we converted to our version of the AK and no more problems. I missed all that heavy clout but the trade off was worth it. National pride aside, to date there just isn't a better assault rifle than the AK family. It's not the best in any specific area but the overall package is unbeatable, even gun Jesus says so.
The truth is that this rifle is a PoS. They took the short stroke gas piston operating system from the AR-18 and somehow F-ed it up. The current iterations is a reliable rifle after paying H&K to fix it. The biggest gripe about this is the ergonomics... it has the DUMBEST manual of arms ever designed I have ever seen. I say this after handling a various NATO weapons (G36, Styr AUG, G3, FN SCAR, and FN2000, and AK variants) during my time in the US Army. I can pick up a rifle and fubble-F with it for 5 minutes and think, "yeah that makes sense and works". I picked this up and after 3 minutes and thought, "who the hell designed this"!?!?!
The only reason why the British forces still use it is purely out of national pride.
If I’d bring a bull pup to battle, I’ll pick either the Tavor or Steyr Aug
I'd have the L85A3. It's the tan brown and new rails 😍😍😍🤣🤣
content until recently, it had a less than ideal mag release location
Tavor has a horrible trigger, AUG is nice though.
Tavor with an aftermarket trigger 💯 agree. Stock aug too
VHS 2 💪💪💪
#MakeSA80GreatAgain
HAHA! YES! LOVE IT! Thanks for watching!
I think they are making a SA80 A3. I'm not completely sure though...
What's your experience just curious because you mentioned you had experience with and then you said it severed you well.
he was in the armed forces, it was his service weapon i guess..
Dr_Dacosta, also interested to hear I picked up on same thing REME I belive 👍
I have a vast amount of experience with this rifle on combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is a distinctly average rifle. Not good not bad. Not the worst but not what I would pick given a choice.
PATRIOTS MC UK Same as mate,it's nothing special and I'd have rather a yank m4!
I was 3/5 USMC. Bagdad, Fallujah, Ramadi. Then Helmond over in Shitganistan. I wanted to say something but screw it. Too many video gamers. No I don't mean you. Just so long as it works every time. That's pretty crucial.
@@tomkelley7174 Are you a video gamer
Nick Willett Apparently the Yanks complain about the M4 because the short barrel kills cover penetration, the Germans complain about the G36 because it melts in the Sun and the Israelis complain about the Tavor because it burns your face with a suppressor and the magazine catch is way too vulnerable. Any bullpup that’s in any way ambidextrous seems to mean you can’t readily access the chamber if there’s a jam like an extraction failure.
I don't care how it performs..I think its the best looking and coolest rifle.
its all about looking good.
To be fair I only ever put around 300 rounds through one , but I still had two stoppages
Not good
issue ammo or purchased?
@@thekaxmax if a M4 can pump out suboptimal ammo with steel casings, the L85 has no excuse.
SLR was about 70% stoppage rate for me yet A1 I never had one stoppage in 6 yrs
shoulda just kept the fal
god damn
Agreed
The FAL kicks a lot of ass. Chamber the FAL in .280 British and you would have the perfect assault rifle.
You mean SLR
@@mrmurphypiers1241 SLR, FAL, L1A1, all kinda the same weapons platform.
Hell, yeah!
The A1 was a piece of shit with the amount of battle cleaning requirements on the ground. The A2 was given to us about 6 weeks before we went over the border in 2003 (TELIC1). It was almost like a new rifle. It had 90% internals change? It was glorious to us compared to the A1. In Afghan, with the handguard changed from plastic to a pici rail system, it allowed a lot more functionaity, plus the ACOG was a godsend. The handgrip with the flip down bipod was awesome for FS, plus the hand grip was great for CQB in clearing buildings. The Elcan is really well received and seems to be holding it's own compared to SUSAT. I've used other weapon systems including G36 varients with the police here in NI. I run some of their ARV ranges. I brought an L85A2 with me, and they loved it more than their G36. I was told they cannot choose it due to "people think it's shit". Can't do much with that tbh. Well presented video mate. FAB.
Ahhhh thank fuck an informed comment. Phew.
The reason the UK special forces use the M16 is because it was and still is, lighter than the standard issue weapon. The Marines, Gurkha's, Para's Pathfinders, SAS/SBS etc, are la light infantry type of unit who can't and don't rely on transport to get to where they have to be. They rely much, much more on being able to travel on foot, over different and taxing terrain scenario's than ordinary infantry, thus weight is a huge issue when it come to kit. If they have any part of it that can be lightened, whether it be a plastic spoon handle cut-down, a toothbrush handle cut down two thirds its length or a survival kit that weighs a few ounces, they will go over every piece of their kit to make it as light as possible. To take a weapon into battle, no matter how good it is, is not good if it weighs 3lbs more than a weapon which is if not as good as, is still efficient and reliable one.
I used the SLR, L85a1 and M16. I liked them all, had no issues with my L85a1 'though I did miss the easier weapons drill with the SLR' and the M16 which I used for a time after the issue of the L85, and I was surprised by how light it was and I remember thinking that I do so hope I don't sit on it by accident as I may bend it in the middle. But It was a good weapon. I also had the pleasure of the HK MP5 which I absolutely loved, but then the MP5 is not the type we are talking about.
@Paul Bantick: I think you are right, it is really about weight. I have an AUG-SA. Although I like it, it does seem rather heavy, with most of the weight in the barrel. Though the L85 does appear to have a lot of parts, more than the M-16 or the AUG, which cant be good for cleaning. But I have no experience with either of those weapons in the field.
+Paul Bantick The SF don't use the M16 tho... They use HK416s and other similar guns.
Nah! The C7 Canadian version of the M16. and the C8SFW carbine, British designation L119A1/A2 Special Forces Individual Weapon. Anyway, the SAS have been using the M16 type since the 1960's. The HK416/G38 is a revamp Ar15/M16 anyway!
Hello there, US Army veteran here and I just discovered your channel and I am liking what I am seeing. Just thought I would tell you that I think you are doing a great job mate.
I thought darth Vader killed you
@Tom Brown I was in the US Army Reserve from 2007 - 2012 with a deployment to Afghanistan in 2010, pretty much joined while I was still in high school since I did my basic training during my summer break between my JR and SR year of high school
I thought you were with the 242th
General Kenobi... You are a bold one.
Hello there
This reminds me of the type of people who live in a house for decades, make all types of changes mostly towards the end, sell it and start the process all over again.
Fantastic video man! I was in the Canadian Army as an infantryman, and when my unit sent over a section to compete in the Cambrian Patrol, the guys did complain a bit when they got back about having to use your weapon systems, but it was exactly what you said, as far as them just not liking the Bullpup design and being used to AR/ C7 rifle platforms.
I have been in the Regulars and Reserves since 1986, the SA80 of today is a massive improvement on the original SA80, but having handled the M4 Carbine (M16 short), and the MP5 I think they are far superior to the SA80, and significantly cheaper.
The A3 is supposed to be incredible now however... but i agree completely on the older SA80 models.
I have similar dates on service but how the heck can u even put the MP5 in there?? It’s not even a battle rifle n if you tried to use it as such u may as well just pull out a pistol. Even on the A1 the issues where mainly based on the forward hand guard cracking but I never had any issues or stoppages n I didn’t see many at all. I short my experience with the SA80 has been extremely positive n of course it’s not gonna cheap as we wouldn’t settle for something like the current Tavour n other cheap rifles in that category. It hasn’t lasted longer than most other main battle rifles for no reason. There’s nothing else I would want to take into battle. Honest n true fact
@@KingDomsKingdom85 I’m sorry but you’re incorrect.
See this is a comment I can vibe with
Most of the pro SA80 comments I see are from people who haven’t really used anything else other than other SA80 variants.
Compare it to a different platform altogether and it just doesn’t hold up
Because people don't understand how the world works. They think upgraded merely means "better" instead of changed. In many cases, upgrades can completely change a piece of equipment.
Very good point! Thanks so much for watching. Love your avatar by the way! :-) have a great day!
"No plan every survives first contact with the enemy"... No matter how much you brain storm or test something once you get into combat you will always find something you missed or that could be done better. Particularly if working with other nations and you discover some great doodad they have won't fit you rifle. The A1 was trash, yes, but the later variants are good rifles. Maybe they should have just changed the name so people wouldn't keep harping on about the original it being the same crap gun when clearly it isn't.
Better is literally what "upgraded" means. That is why its an UP-Grade not a same-change. upgrades can change a piece of equipment but by some relevant metric it must be an improvement else its a side-grade or a modification.
Has a old 7.62 rifleman the hype we got ref the new 5.56mm round and the new SA 80 fell well short. Using 7.62 you knew that when it hit the target it hit with unstoppable force, you could always tell a great shot before the target fell as the SLR had its own of telling you can't explain it but you and the rifle just became one. Swift and Bold
All hail the British/Belgian SLR (FN FAL)...
Exactly right, Derek..
@matsimus Ian over at forgotten weapons has a whole series on the whole development process on the sa80. He got access to the pattern room.
Its pretty interesting.
In all my years I never struggled with the SA80...A1 or A2
I took good care of my rifles, and they did the job for me
'Forgotten Weapons' made a very very good vid about the A1 version.
This video actually goes deeper into its mechanical problems
rolf ski wich one ?
the Matsimus one
filippinoramb Forgotten weapon version was a load of bias shit and his A1 looked like a fake. Ian is also one that loves to hate with no experience.
You can't deny Ian's knowledge though. And when it comes to antique weapons, which is what his channel is mainly about, real military experience is hard to come by anyway.
8 years with an A2, the only drama I ever had was the rear screw on my SUSAT losing it's thread. Probably due to it being 20 years old at the time.
I also got to meet one of the guys involved with coming up with fixes for it
one thing i have noticed is that the pins for the holding the rear sights sort of adjusting wheels getting stuck down could have been a 1 off but eh only a problem if your using iron sights
I recommend video from forgotten weapons regarding this rifle.
I did 22 years in the RAF. I encompassed the SLR to the L85A1 and the L85A2. I loved the SLR, The L85A1 was the bigest heap of shite I had the misfortune to ever use, and the A2 was an adequate weapon that was very inferior to the SLR. My personal gripes with the A2 are as follows;
Small Calibre - As a member of the RAF I expected limited personal weapon engagement but at that point really did not subscribe to the smaller calibre wound rather that kill philosophy.
Handedness - Lefties still cannot use the damned thing!
Magazines - We had to operate with only 20 rounds in the mag because of spring issues (The only valid reason to got ot 5.56 from 7.62 was a higher mag capacity)
Feel - You can put a knife on the end of it but it does not become a valid melee waepon because it is too damn short!!!!! (and three years of royal ceremonial taught me this).
Power - A little bit of a repeat, but the SLR could punch through a wall/Light Armoured Vehical and the L85 was sadly lacking in this regard. The Army may have been issued with other toys to compensate this lack but the RAF where not.
Sights - In the RAF we only ever had the ironsights (not SUSAT and it's descendants) and the SLR iron sight was much superior.
There are probably several others I hjave missded but that covers the major objections to the A2. I can understand how a Bullpup is a bridge between a longarm and an SMG but in my opinion this particular one was a poor compromise.
Far
Peter Gordon didn't realize the Raf were allowed Knives 😂😂😂
Yep, just not the RAF Reg. We didn't trust them with sharp things!
lol
THe bullet calbre was something forced on the UK by the US because of NATO.
I was trained on the “S.L.R.” And loved it. Use a lee Enfield once or twice. But never got my hands on an SA80. By the time I left in 1980. You love what you were trained on
I was issued with the SLR to start with then later, the L85 A1. L85 was much easier to work with, nice and short. But it did jam a lot more than the SLR despite cleaning it on a regular basis, not to mention, the magazine had a habit of dropping out.
I love the sa80a2. I'm serving with the British Army right now and the only problem I have with it is that it takes ages to clean
Thanks for your service man! Big respect. I love the rifle but I agree, its a BITCH to clean. But hey, it works ;-) Thanks for watching. Stay safe and take care!! :-D
Matsimus Gaming thanks I appreciate it. You should consider making a video about the British army Virtus body armour and load carrier system or about the British Army's New eight wheeled armoured vehicles.
Matsimus Gaming Why is it a bitch to clean? Soot is soot. I have never owned a rifle thats a bitch to clean. If you want, it cleans up with warm soap and water. Same as your pots and pans.
Бен Хиро. Well the funny thing is you can't own this rifle. Or buy it
Britishcomedy channel Good for you. Never said i owned it. All i said is cleaning a rifle is really the same shit different pile. Literally rinse and repeat. I served with a hk g36 and during training days we used an old surplus AK4(g3 swedish variant) with blanks. Which fouled it beyond functionality after just mid mag. Cleaned up just fine. One shouldnt have a problem cleaning their main service rifles. Its done everyday. As far as my hunting rifles go. Id shoot very few rounds. Yet might be a couple if days till i get to my cleaning table. So the soot is cured and really hard. Guess what... cleans fine.
My National Guard unit went to England for two weeks of Annual Training back in '97. We used the English Army's SA80 rifles, and I thought they were pretty cool little rifles, to be honest.
Scott Patterson see and that's because you have a non biased opinion and have not been jaded like most Brits are.
English army?!?are you that thick ? Do you not notice the other great countries such as Scotland,Wales and northern Ireland ??
NOOOBBB We do, just don't really care.
Christopher Brooke that's because you're an ignorant little bitch who doesn't give a shit about anyone else because he knows no one give a fuck about him
NOOOBBB Jesus Christ man chill out
Thank heavens, a serving member who HAS used it putting things right with HIS opinion. All the experts who have never used one give me the horrors. Thank you for your service Matt. All the best from an Australian veteran
I believe your bull pup rifle can be converted to left hand usage
I used the L1A1 and SA80 in the cadets in the 1980s. The thing that impresses me about the SA80 is how low the recoil is, and how easy it is to keep it nailed on target in full auto. I recently fired an M16A2, and it had more recoil and it drifted quite a bit in full auto. I would definitely be happy with a modern SA80 as a soldier. I am not sure why we are looking to replace it. Just make some new ones with even more improvements. And make them in the UK....!!!
Having used both the A1 &A2 for 17 years in the Royal Regiment of Scotland in many countries Afghan,Iraq Bosnia and on many overseas exercises I can confirm that the A1 had its faults but the A2 never let me down in some sticky CQB situations in Basra and was excellent in longer range contacts in Sangin. In did on occasion have the opportunity to use other assault rifles like the M4 carbine and the G36 whilst working with other NATO forces but can hand on heart say when the S*^t hits the fan my first choice would Always be the L85A2
ah close quart battle is that what CQB means ?
A rifle would have to be pretty bad if the one you had seventeen years of familiarity with wasn't your first choice.
Awesome, I appreciate its a really american thing to say but thanks for your service. A lot of us civvies don't appreciate your contribution enough. whether those wars were right or wrong is for the historians and politicians, that you guys served your countries is worthy of deep respect. I'd be shite as infantry I always wanted to join the RN my skills lie at sea but makes me respect the army doubly because I know I wouldn't be good at it!
dougie mc nice to hear it from someone with real combat experience with both rifles!
dougie mc Couldn't have put it better myself, served in Iraq and Afghanistan with 2nd Royal Welsh Fusiliers and when doing house clearing and esp top cover the A2 is fantastic because of the bullpup design. Even went on excerise with 101st and even they were said how good and accurate it over 200 yards and everyone knows how biased the yanks are! As you put it give me the A2 over the M4 any day!
I've shot the L85 back in 1993, IIRC, cross-training with British Paras. I liked the handiness; it's excellent for urban/trench warfare. I did have multiple malfunctions, though, and that soured me on it. If those reliability issues have now been fully addressed, I'd rate it the best 5.56mm rifle now in service.
Of course, my other issue with the L85 is precisely that it's a 5.56; I'd rather have the greater energy of a 7.62x51mm. But then, I grew up on the G3, and that's still the rifle with which I'm most familiar. And the best rifle is always the one you can use best . . . ;)
Jochen Träm
The A2 is very different. Having used other rifles i was shocked at how poor the A1 was, it was the only rifle id seen mags just fall out of, and i saw that happen a lot. It had lots of stoppages too after a lot of rounds had been fired or in dirty or dusty conditions. The newest issue mags are far better and are really strong. The A2 is very reliable and has possibly the lowest stoppage per rounds fired of any combat weapon anywhere.
The old SUSAT sights have been replaced with more modern sights that no longer get fogged up on cold wet mornings.
The only gripes about the weapon now are that its still fairly heavy and that id prefer the cocking handle on the left hand side.
I used both the SLR and SA-80 A1, i loved the SLR as you know that if you pulled the trigger...... your target would not get up. The only downside of the 7.62 round is that it's heavy and obviously you can carry a lot more which is a massive advantage.
When I converted to the SA-80, I quite liked it as it was obviously easier to carry around and easier to use but.......the A1 did have quality issues, massive quality issues. I used to have to use masking tape to keep bits from falling off and the magazines DID fall out which is a major ball ache, for obviously reasons.
Unfortunately, I never got my hands on the A2 and A3 and these are a huge improvement on the original version and are very popular with the lads.🇬🇧🇬🇧✌✌
I'm going to chip in here, I've a fairly extensive military career from '89 to '09 at the sharp pointy end of the stick. The L85 A2 is an excellent bit of kit. In fact the A1 wasn't too bad either, the only problem I had with the A1 was it used to drop the magazine out when wearing chest rigs which were in vogue in the early 90s. This was sorted out when the mag release guard was fitted. Accuracy for both the A1 and A2 is phenomenal, I personally shot a 22mm 5 shot group at 100m using iron sights with the A1. Little anecdote here, in 2005 during the DivSAM at Bisley the was a South African Sgt on the lane next to me and the other side an American S.Sgt. The Yank had a M16A2 and the South African a Galil, the South African bored the tits off myself and the Yank by bigging up his Galil saying it's a superb bit of kit used in the bush being ultra reliable accurate and soldier proof blah blah blah. He then rubbished the A2 and M16 saying they were pieces of shit and so on. With that targets up and we all leg it down to the 300m point Nice steady ripple type fire across the lanes but silence from the lane next door in fact not one round fired from him all shoot. At the end on the walk down to the butts I looked across and there's the South African fella carrying his beloved Galil in two... the bloody folding stock had snapped in two at the hinge. Hahaha how myself and the American laughed our tits off. And this was on a bloody firing range!!! Ps. S.Sgt Jefferson of the US Army you still owe me a pint if your about because I thrashed you on the the Rupelle shoot....
Youre so full of shit 😂 good try tho
Not at all mate, think I've a photo some where which a one of our Regt team members took, in it I'm actually holding the R4 Galil with the American and South African beside. So what makes you think I'm full of shit? ..... sigh another keyboard warrior...
I will also point out that the only ND I saw that day was also a SADF corporal with an,R4 ... .not that I'm knocking the South Africans... maybe they recognise the command 'Make Safe' as meaning a mag dump into the 100m point....lol
Remindes me of the criticism that the M16/AR-15 got.Except the problems we mostly had where do to with the fact that our troops were not essued with cleaning kits not design flaws.
Very valid point! I agree. But I am just happy our troops are getting rifles that now work better. Shame it takes so long. Thanks for watching!
Colt McCurry I should have more comments before making mine lol. I said something similar just now!
ohsosmooth01 At least you know the truth.
You forgot one other thing... wrong type of ammo powder, the DOD looking to save money used the same ammo powder for the M14 rifle or they were trying to sabotage the rifle.
Stoner even told the DOD before mass production of ammo don't use Ball powder it will cause heavy build up at the gas port and cause reliability problems.
M-16 needs stick powder for reliability.
Also the lack of chrome plating - once again to save money
Thank you for standing up for my favourite gun
You sir deserve all medals in the world
He deserves the Victorian Cross
I was issued the SA80 in 88 and had zero problems with it.. good rifle skiils and good drills and a competent soldier should be able to get over most problems with any weapon.
The SLR really was a different breed and an excellent weapon in any situation.
Yep...Used the SLR 7.62 in basic training in 91' the retrained on the SA80 5.56 for the next 10 years. SA80 was my preferred weapon for it balance and accuracy.
Seriously. Cocking handle enlarged and reprofiled to serve as a case deflector;
Bolt remanufactured, polished, and relieved to reduce friction;
Extractor claw enlarged;
Extractor pin remanufactured;
Ejector remanufactured to include a spring guide;
Ejector retaining pin remanufactured from solid stock;
Cam stud remanufactured to slightly greater length;
Hold open device carrier and button extended for more positive engagement;
Bolt carrier remanufactured and polished;
Firing pin remanufactured and reprofiled to prevent tip breakage;
Gas cylinder remanufactured;
Gas plug remanufactured and reinforced to prevent damage;
Hammer stop in TMH reinforced;
Hammer weight increased;
Barrel remanufactured in higher grade steel
Barrel extension (part of the body assembly and not the barrel) relieved (1.5 locking splines cut away) to ease extraction;
Ejection opening slightly enlarged;
Piston, recoil, ejector, extractor, extractor insert, hammer, and safety sear springs all remanufactured;
New steel magazine based upon H&K G41 design;
Polymer handguard redesigned with larger vents, and a new upper with large plastic hinges in lieu of the plastic-covered sheet metal upper. NB that this was introduced as a spare part only, existing A1 handguards being retained with their old markings machined away; and
’HK A2’ markings on all upgraded components, most obviously on the rear upper of the body.
Good work. I have been shooting in one form or another since 1966. In a previous life, used L1A1, L4A4, L9A1, L2A3, L7A1. More recently, up until 2021, many years of using L85 in its various guises. My first experience of it, right back in its very earliest existence, was L85A1 with iron sights and it was new to everyone and nobody yet knew how to get the best from it. However, that settled down and yes, there were reliability issues but when a round came out of that 500mm barrel supported above both the firer's hands, it tended to hit the target. When the A2 arrived, things stepped up a gear. For years, I had what turned out to be a bad one (local no 64 🤬) in terms of accuracy but still occasionally managed to get marksman scores. Later, after some major servicing and upgrades, I was issued with a better example and it was truly superb. I am reminded of Kayla Williams' book title: "Love My Rifle More Than You"! Utterly reliable and ridiculously accurate. A3 was just arriving as I left but there is another step-change in utility and accuracy. Being right-handed and right eye-dominant, I recognise that I was in a better position to harvest the L85 abilities that some others. Clearly, the non-ambidextrous design brings some problems. If in the future somebody can take the best features of the L85 and match them with an ambidextrous layout then its a winner. Compared to what we'll be spending on Tempest, that'll cost small change.
[Isn't it amusing that the American hatred for bullpups never extends to Barretts?]
H&k was owned by Britain at the time so it's not that bad ;)
*BAE Systems. BAE is a private firm and not state owned. BAE was formed via merger between Marconi Electronic Systems and BAe (or British Aerospace), the latter of which used to be state owned.
So no, Heckler & Koch had never been owned by the HM Government.
Heinrich Berndovsky still stands that it is a British firm that fixed the rifle not the Germans.
That's arguable. I've never looked into the names of people who actually worked on the A2 upgrade so I can't state whether the rifle was fixed by British or German engineers with utmost certainty - all I know is that it was done by H&K.
Liar as usual
Doesn't matter. H&K was german in that time. Only owned by british. RR is owned by BMW but the cars are still british. So the british asked the germans to fix their rifle.
I was in the last training platoon to be instructed on the SLR, SMG, LMG, GPMG as the standard infantry weapon systems. I converted to the SA80 a few months after joining my Regiment. We were supporting armoured infantry on Warrior and at first having such a short weapon was considered great. For all its virtues the SLR was an awkward thing in confined spaces. But then we started living with the thing.
I accept that every weapon has its faults when it comes into service - the failure to chrome the barrel in the M-16, the muzzle rise issue with the AK47, even the SMLE went through two marks before entering legend. I had served with a few senior ranks who had converted from the SMLE to SLR who told us the high velocity 7.62 deafened many soldiers when it first came out, threw accuracy out the window and the flash eliminator had to be redesigned to reduce the crack.
However the early faults on the SA80 were appalling, the designers clearly had no pride, no sense or no eyes. Faults have been listed ad nauseam on many sites, but a few that don't get mentioned: the build quality was so poor that after the first major exercise I could grip the SUSAT and the TMH and flex the weapon several degrees out of true. The gas parts used to turn orange with rust in mist and dew. The first LSWs bent their barrels, the zero in the SUSAT used to wander, and the cleaning!
All those gaps and holes used to clog so much and were so inaccessible the only way to clean it properly was to stand in a roaring hot shower with it. I personally suffered the mag falling out problem, the bottom of the mag falling off, double loading, reloading spent cases, my safety wore down and had to be replaced. One problem I don't see mentioned a lot: the spring loaded locking pin on the gas parts was exactly the same diameter as the gas escape port. This meant you had to remove the thing at exactly 90 degrees to the gas port or it jammed in there and you had to call an armourer with a drill to sort it out and replace. Ive known quite a few get broken that way.
These are all issues that should have been sorted before it was issued. But instead we were disciplined when firing pins broke, we were disciplined when the mags fell off, we were disciplined when our gas parts turned orange in the space of an hour. We were disciplined when we used gaffer tape to correct faults, and the head shed told us it was all our fault not the weapons.
I understand you have sound confident, I understand you have to maintain discipline and soldier on with what you have. But listening to senior ranks tell the press, the world and us that we were wrong the SA80 was in fact the best weapon anywhere in the world ever, while quoting servicemen who were delighted with weapon, well squaddies have a gut reaction to bullshit and thats where its service reputation took its dive.
I was never in love with THEM in the way many were but when the SF community roundly rejected the SA80, confidence, not just in the weapon, fell through the floor.
Many of these faults were eventually sorted, but not before loads of journalists were embedded with us for Granby. They had swallowed the MoDs bullshit, then saw us struggle with and condemn a piece of shit weapon that just stopped working in the desert. We would clean them a couple of times a day, cover the holes with tape, wrap clingfilm round the muzzle and gas ports, put them in plastic bags and leave them in the back of the wagon. When used we figured on a getting a mag off before we had to strip it down. This is when the shit hit front pages and its reputation never recovered.
I have never used the A2 so cant comment, but I don't like non-ambidextrous weapons and I don't like 5.56mm so it still has it faults for me. The A1 replaced a superb weapon, was badly designed and produced, but the real problem was when the brass couldn't keep the journalists from seeing the reality in the desert.
David Rendall i remember the days spending 3 hours cleaning the barrel where the bolt would go forward but no matter how long you tried getting carbon out. It would still be in there lol
Great to hear your thoughts David, I served during this period and agree
Buh what a list of faults. Happy my contry always handed out decent reifles, tough a bit on the heavy side..
The only time I whitnessed a proper failure the guy stored the rifel uncleand for tow years in a damp enviroment so the gaspiston an the tube rusted into one part...
Laundry rooms ar not first choices for weapons storage obviously :)
David Rendall The designers were well stuffed by Maggie Thatcher forcing the army to buy the weapon before the bugs were wrung out and then RO sub contracted the weapon out to manufacturers who had no experience of gun building.
The weapon was fixed by the original design team, now working for H&K, because they had the fixes.
Oh god the broken firing pins, I remember getting booted in the ribs on APWT because I couldn't pull the bolt back
I’d carry a l85 a2 any day! After HK got ahold of them they’re the bomb!
This is very good to know since i'm going to be using it a lot after school.
When I met a British rifleman shortly before Iraq 2003, he said that he preferred using any rifle other than the SA80. When I asked what his favourite weapon was, he said "Bayonet". He did like the Ak47 too, though.
Sounds like a walt.
Doryun yet wasn’t that with the A1 ?
The A2 is indeed a great weapon but you have to remember the A1 was total and utter junk. HK took it away and made it work with the A2. I used the A1 in the late 80's and 90's and it would jam if you looked at it in a bad way and was rubbish, that is why it has carried the negativity for so so long because it really was so crap. How it was ever accepted for service is beyond me.
I carried the A1 in the jungles of South America. Mine never jammed even in rainy season because we cleaned it every chance we got and we kept the dust cover closed and learned to cover the muzzle with a plastic cover. Keep it clean and it will work in the worst conditions.
The only difference between the A1 and A2 was the three round burst, brass deflector, and tighter rifling designed for the SS109 round. No change that would effect the reliability otherwise.
Henry Fu the firing pin on the a1 was notorious for breaking off and the mag used to fall out all the time. Just two really common issues you missed there
Guinness i can honestly say i never saw those issues despite being an infantry unit and using our weapons hard. Magazines falling out sounds like the armorer hasnt been doing his job replacing worn detent springs. Firing pin breaking off could be bad metallurgy from the batch sent by manufacturer. Our M60 gunner once lost his pistol grip on the pig due to a worn leaf spring. I wasnt a fan of the a1 until a couple of years of carrying it and having it go bang every time i pulled the trigger and in the worst conditions next to the desert.
I used it in Cyprus and the first Gulf war, over a period of 1989 and 1991. I never got more than 3 rounds through it without jamming. Dust and sand must have been its problem. The A1 was shit. I used an SLR for 10 years that jammed on me once. The A1 was junk, cleaning had nothing to do with it.
The M16 had its teething problems as well when first introduced to Vietnam, it actually led to loss of life when it failed in the middle of a firefight with Vietcong or NVA. Armed with the AK47 .
I used the L85A1 in the late '80s on exchange with the British, and indeed was pretty crappy. Even a FAMAS G1 was much better, not to mention the Steyr AUG, which I had used at that point as well. Later, I was able to shoot the L85A2 and it is such an improvement that it almost seems like a complete new rifle.
Most of the "bad rep" today is just from bullpup hating range kiddies here in the US of A, which of course know EVERYTHING better...
served recently for 5 and a half years in the royal marines carrying this rifle. very compact, for urban work it's spot on. the rifles themselves are just old and worn. some of them are literally 25 years old, so they wobble and don't fit together great. I handed my rifle to a US marine once and he just burst out laughing at how old and heavy it was. A point you missed off the video is that a British soldier will ALWAYS moan about the kit he has got.
agreed .........!!!! even though I´m nolonger serving I´ll still moan about the equipment i was issued....!!!
Which commando? I trainned with 42 at RM Bickleigh just nrth of plymouth
I operated the L96A2 and I love how compact and balanced it is ❤️ Replacement of metal for carbon fibre would make it light weight though.
When I got my SA80 and had to hand in my SLR I had a few shocks one was the fact that we could not give the magazine a final tap to secure it.
I used on in the TA with the SUSAT sight and had no problems with it, it was accurate and reliable which is all you really need in a rifle.
first time i fired the a1 lsw on automatic the tip broke off the firing pin but never had a problem with the a2
I was in the British army when we moved over from the SLR to the SA80. Unfortunately, I only ever had experience on the original version and tbh it was pants. The reliability was awful and we got a lot of misfeeds from the mags. Even worse when using the BFA for blanks. God how we longed for the SLRs again. I left the army though in 1993 and so never got to see any of the improvements made, umfortunately.
monkieie I left the army in 82, apart from the weight the SLR was excellent.
monkieie the slr was a real rifle the sa80 is an bullpup imposter!!
monkieie remember mags falling off under fire not good
Steve Marks
It was heavy.
Nice video and I remember the problems we had with the M16A1 during Vietnam when I entered the service in the USAF. I was soon introduced to the AK47 in its Type 3 milled receiver variant and came to love that gun. Its ergonomics weren't as good as the M16, but it went bang when it was supposed to go bang. The M16A1 was temperamental (moody) in that regard. The AK was also much more robust when compared to the "plastic Mattel gun" we saw the M16A1 as being. The AK also reminded me in s strange way of my old Winchester Model 1894 lever gun, which I used to deer hunt with prior to entering the service. It had a similar sight picture, a similar stock feel, similar ballistics of the cartridge, and a similar general feeling of handiness that the M1894 had. The M16A2, along with its M4 version, is a much improved and highly reliable platform today, as I'm sure the SA80 is. That said, I still love AKs for their functionality and ruggedness--they are true battlefield rifles as opposed to rifle range rifles that shine on the rifle range but fall short in the real-world arena of combat. I also really like the American Armalite AR18/180, of which the SA80 is more-or-less just a bullpup variant of. That is a disappointment I have with this video in that you did not discuss the SA80's lineage. That is, from where the SA80 came. I have always been an advocate of giving credit where due and the AR18/180 has spawned a plethora of guns in active military service today around the world, to include the SA80 and Germany's G36. Sterling was producing the AR18/180 just prior to the SA80 being developed and adopted operationally originally as the L85. I wonder how many parts, if any, are interchangeable between the AR18/180 and the SA80. The bolt carrier, bolt, recoil rods, and several other parts look identical. Again, give credit where due..............
The problem wasn't with the M16. All the issues were due to an ammunition change. The ordnance department changed the type of propellent after the rifle was adopted.
issued this in July 87. a few rounds and it jambed. triggers snapped. cheek guard melt, fore grip melt, mags falling out, mags falling apart, bolt rel;ease catch snapping off, didnt like dust or wet weather, did make for a good cricket bat. . However what we have nowdays with the HK upgrades is a fantastic bit of kit.
I used this thing in Iraq and Afghanistan to good use.
I also was a shooter and won many shooting competitions against the armed forces of various countries across the world.
This thing is accurate. It's light and the susat works well. Same barrel length as the m4.
I loved this thing, not so much the lsw.
just because something is fugly doesnt make it bad
Agreed! But she isnt ugly ;-) thanks for watching
Matsimus Gaming It might just be that i dont like stamped guns
Jon508 give us time we brits can make good firearms.
As a super example of 'ugly' (I'd say 'functionally beautiful') is the A-10 Warthog.
Razor1uk the a10 is a beauty in every way
Full heatedly agree. US Marine here and have had my chance to shoot your rifle. You are right to say we are biased but i respect the ingenuity of the riFLE
I have used both A1 and A2 and I never have any problems and served me well on operations
I can honestly say having joined the British Army in 1988 and training with and using the L1A1 SLR that it is my most loved weapon ever, I gained my marksman skill with it and grew to love its punch and accuracy and ease of clean apart from the gas plug of course :), later in 1991 I had to convert to the SA80 and I was hugely sceptical it did not feel real to me, it was lighter more compact had the kick of an air rifle, it felt just like a toy, I also found it a lot harder to get my crossed rifles with, however there came a defining moment, I was on a 300 m range shooting figure 11 targets, when we were told to go full auto firing short bursts onto target, so I aimed for dead centre of mass and fired 2 short bursts, where by said target fell in half, what had happened is that id hit the targets supporting wooden pole and cut it in half at 300m..... and so the new love affair began. :)
Somebody built target frames with the "support pole" in the CENTER of the frame, huh? Yeah. Right. I believe that like I believe abolutely perfect windage adjustment AND you eve shot a perfect ZERO with consecutive BURSTS at 300 metets. And with a SUSAT, no doubt. What does "center mass" look like on a Figure II target at 300 meters? Can you make it out behind the target pointer thingy those POS "optics" use for a "reticle"? And why would you aim at "dead center mass" of a Figure 11 unless you just wanted to shoot the guy's rifle out of his hands?
I'm still thinking on how shooting one pole in the center of the target in half caused "said target" to fall in half. But then again there are so many things I've read and heard Brits say about shooting and their military experience and other "stories" that have the ring of complete bullshit that I've pretty much given up on understanding them. Nonsense isn't called nonsense for no reason.
What's really amazing is that I've heard and read stories from other Brit "veterans" and have seen documentaries about qualifying with a service rifle and they seem to be of the opinion its too easy. There are no bullseyes or scoring rings or zones and a hit is a hit anywhere on the "target". So why someone who seems to suggest he'd previously shot "expert" with something as mediocre for accuracy and precision as an FAL would have a lot of trouble with a rifle firing a much less powerful round with a lot less recoil and FITTED WITH AN OPTIC is an interesting question.
You said your sudden ability to drill dead-center holes with BURSTS at 300 meters was a "defining moment". So what is the definition that resulted?
DEEREMEYER1 "Gave up on listening to Brits bullshit" yet here again apparently listening to it. Fucking stupid you are kid.
No offence - and fair play if you have - but have you ever actually fired this rifle? I'm ex British Army and all I'll say is when you're on exercise or on ranges all you can bloody hear is "Stoppage!" because this rifle - and the magazines are fucking shite. Sorry but it's true nd anyone who has used an SA80 frequently will agree. I despised this rifle!
Tom Gregory well I'm in the Army and unless your shit at maintaining your gat then I don't see the issue. with the switching to better quality magazines and a more reliable extractor and gas system the A2 is a decent, accurate and reliable weapon.
Tom's right they are shit
Cheers mate haha
Mate, to be honest I see your point but still think they are outdated. There is a reason SF don't use them. Anyway, I'm rejoining - be at Sandhurst soon and will have to just grin and bear it yet again. Who said stoppage?...
+Tom Gregory not mention I had a few problems with them in Afghan where annoyingly I had to switch to my MP5
I was British Army, mid to late eighties...we all loved the SLR, I remember rumours of the SA80...the biggest issue I remember was going from 7.62mm to 5.56mm....we didnt like that. Now I get it. Great video, Cheers.:-)
when i was in turkish army about a year ago, our standard military rifle was ar-10 and ar-15 based, mpt-76 and mpt-55, which is the only rifle that passed all nato torture tests, proven to be much more reliable than m16 or m4 in tests we made when we were going to replace the old G3, like you guys did with FAL. a joint training, my commander decided to put me into it since i was a gun nerd all the time. my main thoughts on sa80 was how heavy it felt compared to AUGs our vehicle crews use and love. its as heavy as an ol' faithful G3 but fires a weaker cartridge. models we used were of course A2s, but i got to shoot an a1 with old green handguards bought there for briefing, jammed 3 times in one magazine. ergonomics were weird, safety doesnt take much time to get used to but fire selector is awkward and very stiff. outer shell felt cheap and had the feeling like it was going to bend if i squeeze it too hard. charging handle is weird to operate and balance of the weapon made me want to get an AUG back. it wasnt really all that fantastic and sunshine and rainbows amazing as you put in the video, it felt like nothing special and handling required to get used to it despite the time ive spent with AUG or Tavor. it felt cheap still, doesnt scream quality or comfort in any way, felt like a bullpup sten. and honestly just because of what ive heard from older guys there who had to fight with a1 versions, i wouldnt trust this rifle to save my life. reputation plays a big role in morale and trust for the gun. id prefer a G3 with folding stock and picatinny handguard over that any day, at least it doesnt feel cheap and got designed by people who had no experince on firearms, then spent 20 years to cover up how bad it is, only to call in another country to fix it.
You missed a hell of a lot of the A1 failures. I got my information from several soldiers who were given this rifle when it first came out and that first saw combat with it in Iraq. They were all extremely critical of it and listed story after story of personal accounts on how the rifle found new ways to fail everyday.
I totally agree the current iteration is a good rifle and in many ways a superior rifle to some other AR platforms on the market. If only today's rifle was the rifle that first came out. I agree that it should be kept and it's service life extended. But in today's changing battle fields the army needs more choice in different weapon systems that meet those changing requirements.
The bottom half of this coment is a sin
couldn't agree with you more Matsimus, tired of this rifle getting slagged off. Great vid.
Thanks so much mate. Really appreciate it!
Russell I agree. I do not believe the British army would be able to continue its operations abroad with a combat rifle that was not up to the task.
Russell I agree too. I had the Sterling S.M.G , S.L.R and a1 SA80 as my personal weapons in the R.A.C. 1st choice wouldbe the S.L.R for me personally but I took the A1 to Iraq and it was fine, but I am right handed and not being infantry it didnt get as shitted up .
Loved the L.S.W. too personally, very accurate.
I am an arms dealer, and I’ve sold every platform and model mentioned in this video as well as nearly every other small-arm on the market in the last 30 years. The quick answer to your question is that Americans just don’t like bullpups. Sales of AUG, Tavor, X95, FS200 (F2000 in the trim I sold them), PS90 (I have an original select fire P90 with the 5 and 10 MW laser), FAMAS, and Desert Tech all combined is only a drop in the bucket when compared to traditional gas impingement AR15s. Most American gun lover covet the Barrett XM107, and they don’t realize it’s a bullpup until after they buy it! LOL A few shotguns have come around in the last decade that Americans are slowly taking to, but you’ve got to realize that most adults commenting on this subject have very little real-world experience with the weapons I’ve mentioned above. America is the largest market for these systems by a a huge margin, and very few people want to claim to be outside of either the AK or AR camp. You can do so much with those here, that it is a funny hobby itself.
I own 4 or 5 SINGLE DIGIT serial number Steyr AUGs. I’ve been collecting them for 30 years. I have every color, caliber, option, barrel length, select fire AND extremely rare AUTO/3 shot packs- you throw a big red lever with the trigger package out, and select AUTO or 3 shot burst when you pull the trigger all the way back. Hell, I keep a little 5.56 black Special Receiver with an AAC can next to my bed, and I could have ANYTHING.
My battery is about to die, but if you have any questions, please let me know. I’m probably one of the few guys that owns an unmolested X95 with the short barrel and no buttpad- a requirement for the OAL here in the US. I’ve had FAMAS, dozens of SIG 550s, thousands of 551, Galil Sniper rifles, and even a Walter WA 2000, so I can tell you all about this stuff.
Goodnight, and best wishes.
I was a reservist in the 90s (Army No 2491****). We backsquadded our SLRs, SMGs, and LMGs in 1993, for the L85A1 and L86A1. The main reason for the change was to simplify the ammunition logistic chain. I use the rifle on exercises, not operationally, so I can only go by that experience. I suffered one, say again one, stoppage with the rifle, in what, four years of use in the T.A.; that was a 'stovepipe' failure to eject, and was solved in two second flat by hauling out the offending bloody hot casing and dropping the sodding thing on the ground, and doing the usual (what's now known as) tap rack slap to get the rifle back in working order again. One stoppage in four years of T.A. use on an A1, I'd guess that's about what, 0.1% BTBF? Not bad. It DID require some pretty deep cleaning, all those damn holes on it let in the dirt and crap something horrid, but if you kept up on the cleaning regime like a professional should, then it was a reasonable rifle. I know of H&K G3s and M16/M4 platforms that suffered worse MTBF rates! All in all, a nice compact rifle that did well enough. Not brilliant, but it did the job.
A1 was terrible, had so many stoppages, when I used a HK53 in Northern Ireland the first thing I thought after a day on the range was "why aren't we using these?"
A2 upgrades made it a lot more reliable but I recently used a M4 carbine (or something very much like one) at a range in the states and very much preferred that.
Most of my career using the L85 (or SA80) but the non bullpup weapons I've fired I much preferred.
It's going to be pretty hard to beat the AR-15 or AR-18 variants that are out there (M16, M4, HK416). Eugene Stoner was an absolute genius. I haven't seen or shot a better rifle platform yet. I'll be excited to finally see one, so I hope companies keep working at it, but it seems crazy to me for a country to invest heavily in something new and unproven. Politics, I guess.
I thought exactly the same. HK and M4 both great weapons. Used to love the distinctive ring from the HK when you fired it
i think he is right. at the beginning saying how he HATES when people with no experience on a weapon system, bag on that system. i can admit im guilty of that to an extent myself. but focusing on the L85 system in this video. I understand the L85 has had LOTS of changes since it was made and its a totally different beast by now. But the only "complaint" i guess you can say i have. more a concern. is with the trigger linkages between the trigger and the fire control group. But again as ive never handled an L85 or any OEM bulpup rifles. it IS a bit concerning for me. BUT on the flip side. im kind of happy the UK is sticking to their guns, kinda literally, and not folding over and adopting an AR platform like everyone else is doing. I do operate a few different ARs and even AKs (i have more AKs then ARs) and the ARs from my experience. i just dont like them ergonomically and the gas system. after dropping a cheap (yeah right) gas system in my M4 it ran a bit better to what im used to with my kalashes. but still ergo for me with those is an issue. but thats just me. I like AKs. some like ARs. hell you could even like a bulpup side fed gun. this just my opinion. PS. UK pleases make and sell civi legal L85s and sell them here for a few hundred. it would be a nice lil toy to have. i have my preference of guns but i dont discriminate. #allgunslifesmatter
A1 of every standard issue rifles always just needs some time to go though teething issues.
The M16A1 issued during the Vietnam War along with the first batch of 5.56x45 ammo was shite for that reason also. Later on, when I served, I was issued the M16A2. It was awesome. We were still issued hand-me-down aluminum G.I. STANAG magazines back then (which were originally designed to be expendable after relatively light use) so we still had tilting magazine follower issues which was later focused on and resolved by Magpul.
But other than that, I remember my M16A2 never jamming thanks to its dust cover and insistently being trained and inspected to keep it clean. This included being shown hot to keep our rifle out of the water and muck .. which included being shown how to low crawl through mud while holding the rifle on top of our backs using our thumb hooked around the front sling "loop" (more of a rectangle) as our face, stomach, and groin area took on all the mud and our entire body buffering the rifle well above the mud so that it could still remain a reliable shooter. Fun times.
Didn’t the A2 receive mixed reactions.
The early m16 problem was the gunpowder and the m16a1 fixed a handful of problems. Also the m16a1 came out three years after the m16
I am in no way claiming to have much experience with this rifle or firearms in general but I remember when being in cadets and useing the gp variant (thats what they called when they took off the fire selector) and it being really temperamental but thinly about it, it was purely just our incompetence at cleaning them and the instructors not giving us oil before useing them. I think this rifle deserves more respect.
I REMEMBER THE FIRST ISSUE OF THESE GUNS WAS SO BAD THAT IT WAS RECALLED. AND ITS STUCK IN MY MIND SO I HAVE A BAD FEELING WHENEVER I HEAR THE GUN MENTIONED. i GUESS THAT'S WHY MANY WHO DON'T., LIKE ME, KNOW MUCH ABOUT IT HAVE A BAD IMPRESSION OF IT.
My main problems with it was the awkward bolt release, fiddly reloads, poor accuracy, poor reliability, long trigger pull, gritty feeling trigger, fiddly to strip and pointless storage compartment above the barrel that just flips up when it feels like it. . . . The Susat was a great sight though, I think I was one of the first people to use it and it was the main reason for me leaving the military as you should never be in a position where you can't trust your rifle.
Myself and every other squaddie I talked to at the time planned on hoping the pos would work long enough to take an enemy down and steal whatever he was using, I would have far more trust in a rusty old AK.
I think we should just have used Steyr Augs or Tavors if we really wanted bullpups.
I personally have trained with AR-15 SBR and full size and I've also worked with the Steyr Ogg 16 inch barrel and 20 inch barrel and the Bullpup was very surprising just as versatile as the AR-15 surprisingly.
The M-16 had it's trouble in the 60's but it was thought that they didn't need to be cleaned. Once a proper cleaning kit, manual, and chrome lined barrels were issued it was problem solved. The universal problem with bullpup rifles is the triggers. It is a great rifle, it only has a 20lb trigger pull with 5 inches of up take.
Was a young soldier in '78/ '79 doing our training at the range in Bisley. A group of civvies and Officers show up and selected our group to test fire a new rifle, turns out it was this rifle. They wanted raw recruits to test it out, and for me it was a far more accurate and pleasure to fire than the standard SLR we were issued with.
Just a little history from my youth.
My dad, who actually served in the British Army with the SA80, told a story of a time when the plastic on the cheekrest melted to the indoor table that he left it on.
I trained with the L85 some when I trained with the Brits back in 97. It shot well + the optic was nice. However, I never got used to being a right handed shooter while in the UK
Had a few issues with the A1 when the empty case would catch the cocking handle and bounce back in but the A 2 was spot on...oiled right I never had a stoppage ..great weapon...
please please please do the same video on the AUG or G36.
I look forward to more weapon reviews!
AnonymerBaum The Aug already has a great reputation. However the G36 platform is a good shout.
Yeah exactly, poor Germany is still getting shat on because of it :(
3:57 are you sure those are not blanks? Your recoil control is flawless!
The gun weighs like ten pounds, it’s easy to control the recoil when you’re shooting 5.56 out of a gun that weighs as much as a FAL.
Here in New Zealand, we replaced our bullpup Steyr rifles with the AR type MARS-L rifle.
Apparently the NZ Army had issues using the Steyr in Afghanistan especially in regards to range and firepower. Also, the AR type MARS-L has an adjustable stock which some soldiers appreciated apparently.
it's hard to pick anything over an m4/ ar15 once you have used it....
Good to see a positive video about a rifle that is actually a very solid design. Just before my unit transitioned to the A2 we had refurbished A1s delivered to our armoury and to be honest there was nothing wrong with them, I found that if the rifle was well cared for you wouldn't get constant stoppages that was associated with the A1. What's worth mentioning was the quality of the magazines, originally the MOD were going to use magazines made by Colt or FN but because they were expensive we got this cheap tinny shit made in the UK, the springs were dire and they were responsible for 90% of all stoppages. While HK did a blinding job on the A2 upgrade, the real game changer was the high quality magazine they made for us (I know we have since moved on to polymer mags but in the early 2000s the HK mags were fucking gucci). My only real gripe with the weapon system was it its weight, being heavier than an AR rifle, but because it was so well balanced you hardly noticed it, plus in a pinch if you had to clobber someone with it you knew for a fact they were not getting back up. Cleaning was a bit of an arse too as you had to completely disassemble it. Since it's A2 and now A3 upgrades I'd argue its a superior rifle to an M4 in most respects now you can attach a wide variety of sights and other accessories. A replacement is not yet needed as frankly there isn't a rifle out there yet that offers that much of a quantum leap in capability. You only have to look at the trouble the US Army has had, its being trying to replace the AR platform for nearly 20 years now, and though it looks like they could transition to the 6.8mm round the rifles they are looking at are -still- based on the AR series.
Danish army here.
We often send people to the UK. And for admin reasons it is often easier to just borrow weapons from the host nation than bringing our own.
Meaning that we have quite a few people who are trained with the L85, at the same time we have trained quite a few British army with the C8 for the same reasons.
The result we tend to get is the Danish army guys come back saying they never missed their rifle so much, and the Brits tend to leave saying that they really liked the C8.
As for my own opinion having tried it in Afghanistan in 2009, i saw no advantage to it at all either. Because the only thing that gun has going for it is a long barrel. But the design is so ungainly that its hard to take advantage of that long barrel, and when you get into cqb that gun just gets really unwieldy has to be moved around alot to reload, and finally cant shift it to your other shoulder because that will jam the ejection port.
So to me any other rifle would be preferable. Even borrowed a variant of AK from some Hungarian soldiers once and liked that better than the L85.
If nothing else another indicator of a rifles usefulness is who uses it. And even though it has been around since the 80's only the UK and several poor countries use them. No other Major military is using it. I even get the creeping suspicion that the reason you see US marines with the gun in that footage is for the same admin reasons i mentioned earlier.
That's a lot of words.
Maxwell Silin and a lot of bullshit to go with it
It's one of my favorite bullpups for the fact that it doesn't look like a sci-fi prop gun.
I used the sa80 in Brunei when we where testing it out. The thing that I found the worst wa that the ejection cover would cut my thumb all the time. I went from using the slr to the sa80.
I always found it to be a good range weapon as it was accurate and the sling was a great bit of kit once you worked it out and it was nice and compact but you couldn't beat the ability to throw the slr into the back of a 4 tonner knowing it was almost unbreakable
It may be ok now but it will NEVER replace my trusty old SLR in my heart - 7.62mm rules ok . My problem with the SA80A2 is that you could never use the weapon butt in hand to hand combat like you could with the SLR .
Philip Kerry Bang on...ex Royal Fusiliers SLR...GPMG... SMG forever!
More than happy to carry the extra weight for the extra power. With the SLR, when the 7.62 hit, it hit. With a bit of practice and 3 round bursts, the full auto FN was fine.
Knock holes through houses with a GPMG
terry jackson Used the R1(FN FAL) in Rhodesia, very true on 3 round burst, in the bush we knew 6 depressions on the trig then a final 2 round burst, reload. Also used it semi-auto, great rifle, more accurate than the G3, less muzzle kick too.
terry jackson Correct!😂
I served with the 7.65 FN Rifle in the '70s . Wouldn't carry anything else.
Same here,amen Bro/
Oh AYE The Brullyint SLR.NI.RHF.
I served with it and never had a problem, mostly used the carbine version which I found to be a bit in balanced but never let me down
Fair assessment. I served in a TA unit with first the SLR and then the L85 A1 in early 90s. The SLR was great, but less accurate and I never had any stoppage problems with the L85. Also little things like a SUSAT as standard and the nicely designed sling were definite improvements, not to mention full auto and lighter ammo.. not perfect, maybe better available, but it now works fine and a replacement would cost a fair chunk.
a rubbish weapon, i carried it in West belfast and south armagh, somebody wrote on the inside of the gate at fort whiterock "remember your kit has been made by the cheapest contractor" we had to duct tape the bottom of the mags to stop the rounds going everywhere, attach a clip from the mag to the weapon as release was poorly designed, and the green plastic butt plate used to regularly drop off - m4 all day long....
What division did you serve in may i ask
What were you hoping to achieve by adding "bitch" to the end of your comment?
Johnny Dong Jesus, triggered much
The A2 and now the A3 are first class weapons.
If you were carrying in in NI and had issues with the mag falling off, you would have likely been using one of the early A1s in the late 80s/early90s. The mag release had a guard placed around it due to this problem which seemed to address this in the 90s. A non-issue for over 20 years now.
You never mentioned the excellent accuracy of this weapon.
when the rifle weighs so much with a light caliber, its bound to be.
Given that civilian ar15s are sub MOA thats not an achivement.
How accurate is it?
@@TheAlexagius and military issue M4s are 2-4MOA.
@@borkwoof696 Very accurate
I am a big bullpup fan. I currently own a couple Tavor SARs, X95, Steyr AUG and FS2000. I was also able to shoot a rare US imported L85 demo gun many years ago. While I thought the there were a lot of room for improvement, I was impressed by its accuracy.
Hi Matsimus, a very well balanced and fair review of the L85 series in my view. I can only recall on my time with the Air Cadets, for the experience I had when shooting the L98A1 GP Cadet Rifle (A modified manually cocked L85, minus the gas parts). I had a lot of enjoyment from using this weapon, whilst its Bullpup design suited my short stature. It was relatively straightforward to field strip, and quite accurate at achieving competent groupings, even with just Iron sights. This was albeit a little heavy relative to its compact design. The manual cocking modification, I felt, did increase the frequency of stoppages, albeit these were simple to clear before commencing firing.
I feel that, as the MoD are now in the process of procuring the Knights Armament KS-1 Rifle for the Ranger Regiment Battalions and the Royal Marines, they should look to procure the same weapon system across the entire military, when the L85A3 reaches it’s out of service date. This could save on separate procurement costs and allow all three armed services Individual Primary Weapon standardisation of parts and Training. If there is still the desire for a Bullpup design then why not look towards the fully ambidextrous IWI Tavor TAR Flattop Varient? Its just thought! Cheers.👍