Question is; If you were going on operations tomorrow and you could only choose either the 7.62 mm Self Loading Rifle (SLR) or the 5.56 mm SA80 A1/A2/A3. Which would you take?
@@Stanly-Stud I was a surveyor in the RA...in UKLF we had a land rover and SLR for personal weapons...when we were exchanged to BAOR we got a ferret as a survey vehicle, as driver I got SMG...my boss, the survey bombardier kept SLR and we got an LMG on top of the ferret to keep dry and clean ...much preferred a landrover and an SLR in a plastic bag...
@@Stanly-Stud Did my APWT a couple of times with SMG...felt like a gangsta...but from what I can remember the procedure was...a few rounds on single shot to hit the target at 30 metres.....checked for accuracy...then empty the magazine...9mm rounds cost money... 80s Thatcher defence cuts...
I'm an American, never been in the military, haven't shot a rifle in decades, but I live with chronic pain from an old injury in my neck and back, and there's something relaxing about watching a British man take a walk and talk about old military weapons, thank you sir for helping me relax, at least a little bit.
Hey there, very sorry to hear about the pain you currently suffer. My neck was broken in Iraq 2004, so I also suffer pain there and down the left shoulder blade area. Thank you for commenting and for your support it's very much appreciated 👍
During my service ( line infantry), I used both the SLR and the first version of the SA80. I would take the SLR hands down everytime. When I did the Battalion SA80 instructors course as a Junior NCO I managed to break it in under 30 minutes as the holding open device catch snapped off. A couple of the others on the course managed to break theirs as well but in different ways. The dust cover snapped off one and if memory serves me right the top cover hinge snapped on another. The irony of it was we were supposed to be training our platoons in using the bloody thing but not letting on how badly made it was! First time I took it on the range, fired my first round and the magazine disintegrated dropping all of my rounds into the bottom of the firebay and the mud. I wasn't impressed. On the other hand my SLR which was made in 1959, so was nearly 30 years old when I got it, worked like a dream. I never had any problems with it at all as it was solid and reliable. I wasn't a fan of 5.56 as when I joined up the Warsaw Pact was our main enemy so I wanted a weapon that would kill the enemy. The 5.56 round was balistically different and was supposed to wound rather than kill as it tumbled rather than travel on a straight axis. The theory being it would tie people up dealing with wounded Flawed thinking really as the WP were never bothered about casualties as there were literally millions of them as we're seeing in Ukraine now. A 7.62 round would leave a small entrance wound and an exit wound the size of a tea plate so even if you winged someone it would probably take their arm off. An excellent weapon which we should have kept!
To suggest the SA80 round was designed to tumble is nonsense. Were this the case it would be incredibly inaccurate. I agree the SLR was a great weapon, easy to strip, clean and get to places the SA80 couldn’t.
@@andyniblock43 The 5.56 round "thumbles" inside the body rather than goes straight through. The logic behind the 5.56 round is from a report that said the more rounds a soldier puts in the direction of the enemy the more likely it is to wound the enemy. If a soldier is killed then he is dead but if he is wounder it takes the effort of three soldiers to recover and extract him from the battlefield.
The SA80 program was a bad deal for everyone. The project got so bad it is rumoured they paid Eugene Stoner £1m for a days work as a consultant. Eugene chambered a round and cycled it through without firing it. He then pointed out every scratch on the casing and how to fix it in 20 minutes. On reflection an M16 variant made in Enfield under lisence would have been a better choice.
@@andyniblock43 I believe it was designed to "tumble" after entering the body, not before that. In flight its trajectory was quite flat. And I also think the idea was that it would cause massive internal bleeding and organ injury, after entering the body and tumbling around - and therefore kill easier, rather than just wound the enemy - as opposed to an entry-exit wound that (if the victim was lucky) would go through flesh without harming internal organs.
Having used the SLR, the SA80, and the SA80A2 in anger, I would say the SLR would be my choice on an open battle field, but the A2 for CQB and restrictive environments like the jungle. When the SLR was about to be phased out my lads were all a bit gutted and didn't welcome the new rifles at all well. I was actually asked by the brass at one point what my solution would be to all the problems we were having with the 80, and my response was to upgrade the SLR with folding stocks like the FN para, a short barrel version for afv crews, re introduce the full auto on all platforms, and include a heavy barrel version with bipod for section support. All of which already existed in other nations arsenals. My observations were met with shuffling feet and a change of subject. Most of us that could do so had acquired the 30 round LMG mag and with a few winks and nudges, had the armourers add an extra section of spring to the magazine follower which prevented stoppages because the LMG mag was designed to feed down with gravity assistance but when fitted to the SLR had to push the rounds up against gravity, not down with it. This mod worked well and gave a full 30 round capacity without feed issues. The same armourer could also supply a rivet pin with the rivet head removed and the pin filed to the correct length which was then inserted before ops and gave full auto to the SLR. We also had spare gas plugs in our cleaning kits as the loss of your gas plug was the most likely problem you might face in the field with the SLR. All of this was of course considered illegal modifications, the RSM would charge you in a split second for any whiff of them in camp, on exercise, or on the ranges, but on deployment he always seemed to have bouts of visual impairment, and on one occasion threatened to put everyone on duties when no one offered a new lad that had lost his gas plug a spare that he knew we had several of. In my opinion there was nothing wrong with the SLR that a modernisation refit couldn't fix. It would have saved a fortune upgrading what we had instead of buying into a completely new platform that was unfit for use and required several evolution to bring up to speed, not to mention we already had the training, the support infrastructure, the skills and tooling, and the stock of spares and reserve stock with the SLR in place, which all had to be replaced. The SA80 was horrible in the field. On ranges in a semi controlled environment it could be fun, but take it out of its comfort zone and it fell apart literally. Insect repellent melted the plastic furniture, it dumped mags non stop, it had constant miss feeds no matter how clean you kept the rifle and mags, the optics lost zero after a few hundred rounds, the firing pin retaining pis was too easy to loose, the field strip was complex and slow, stoppage drills were constant and it was prone to hard extractions. I was once seen to be trying to kick the cocking handle with my boot while under fire to clear a hard extraction it was stuck so tight. My opinion was that the best thing with the rifle was the sling. and even that was a pain. We did of course get all the tweaks and mods done over time but it left us with trust issues that us old hats never quite ever shook off. The new intakes didn't get why we disliked it so much because they had no experience with the SLR as a comparative. The A" saw most of the problems disappear completely and was a much better rifle, but that old gal we once had was always lurking fondly in our memories. Mine was called Daphney and kept me warm and safe in my basha more night than I can count. Apparently ours ended up in India in the end. I hope Daphney is being loved and cared for the way she always was by me.
That's correct, India do manufacture the inch pattern FN FAL or "SLR" Apparently they also took a big batch of SLR's from uk stocks during disposal too.@@carlgustav2982
I've shot the Australian & British versions of the SLR 1000's of times, if it is more accurate than the SA80 the SA80 must be the worst assault rifle ever! IMHO & experience the 5.56 M16A1's which we also carried in our sections were far quicker at getting rounds on target (all that matter's really) and far more accurate than the SLR's. (Carry far more rounds too) As for stopping power, if you get hit anywhere by a 7.62 or the 5.56 you're out of the fight most of the time anyway.
@@rorynicholson3295 just for interest Australians in Vietnam one per squad with m16 and rest with FAL - m16 had underslung grenade so was sort of SAW MG crew and fire support Mortar Crew- was this a good squad load out - or should all have m16 /or FAL
When we transitioned from the SLR to the first version of the SA 80, we loved it in the BN, it was light, had a sight and automatic capability, that lasted about a week, the SA80 was a twat to clean in the field, was prone to stoppages, and was not squaddie proof, easy to break. I would take the SLR all day long, but that was because I had used it for a good few years before the SA80 turned up. The SLR, once you mastered it was a very accurate weapon {ammo allowing} hit really hard, and was easy to keep functioning in any conditions, ok it was a bit heavier, a little awkward in CQB but when you butt stroked someone they were down and out. I've heard the HK SA is a world apart from the first incarnation, so lots of the younger vets will no doubt tell us some good things, us old buggers sometimes don't like change, (unless its after buying a pint). Great vid, thanks.
The SLR is not an assault rifle. It is a Battle rifle. The difference is that a battle rifle fires a full power rifle cartridge and an assault fires an intermediate cartridge (lower power).
Yeh same here ( Ex RAF) ....got my marksman badge with the 303..it had some kick in your shoulder At lot guys used put their Berry on their shoulder under their combat jack..and wind up with nice brused impressions of RAF badge on their shoulder. 😅
@@louisdisbury9759The definition of 'assault rifle' means it has to be selective fire, which the L1A1 never was. I've shot several FAL variants which do have selective fire, including the Israeli heavy barrel & Australian L2A1. Selective fire FAL is too hard to keep on target & the HB variants were poor compared to the Bren.
I agree assault rifle round in between smg and full power battle rifle. First introduced by 2ww german sturmgevehr 44. Most combat is below 400 metres so 7.62 a bit out. But 5.56 m16 tended to go of course in Vietnam dut to small trees.
@@jonbritland8389The original cartridge developed by the UK in conjunction with FN for use in the FAL was a .280/30 cartridge, using a steel cored, 130gr bullet. I've fired a wildcat round based on it but only from a bolt action. IMO it would have been far more controllable (& thus effective) in a selective fire FAL than 7.62x51.
Was lucky enough to know a gentleman that had used both, they were the unit tasked with first using it and evaluating it. He hated the SA80, even showed the MoD guys how useless it was by bending one over his knee. Something he couldn't do with the SLR. I've never served, but I do think the SLR looked so much better on parade.
Served in British Army 1969-1976 (Royal Corps of Transport) for 6 years and 42 days!!. Never fired an SA80, only ever used an SLR, which in my opinion is an amazing weapon. I even won a 'Pull Bull' at Aldershot. Good old days!
on the final run up to bisley we were firing anything from 500 to 1000 a day and a clean plug, spring and gas tube plus ports were essential, you could then make the plug adjustment as the day wore on if needed, back in the day i think we used jenolite to help clean the carbon off. far better products available now thankfully. i didn't like the plasitc furniture, the dust kicked up in the prone position would settle between your cheek and the plastic, this was like sandpaper especially on a hot dusty day !
Change SLR to FN FAL & there are more than a few variants. I have both L1A1 & a FAL Para with folding stock & 16" barrel over in the US & prefer the latter for 3 gun competition.
@@simonsignolet5632The UK played a major part in its testing & development. Had the US not refused to move to an intermediate cartridge for rifles, it would have been even better.
When I was an armourer in REME, I found the time to mod the safety catch to rotate to the FN auto position. Shorten the trigger plunger and no one could tell at a glance. Never got to live fire auto, but it worked by hand pumping the cocking handle. SLR tough as old boots. In Aden, soon after we arrived with little in way of spares and bits, lad fell out of his vehicle, foresight protectors were left pointing east and west and wood handguards were matchwood. In the shop, 'straighten' the foresight guards to normal. Sort out the bits of handguard, add loads of araldite epoxy glue, refitting to said rifle and wrap in flannelette (4x2). Leave overnight to set, unwrap, clean down wood with a file, good as new. Hand back and out on ops. New handguards on order...
You know Simo out of Catterick? 102 trainer? Decided to demonstrate the catch release on the GMPG by one-arm swinging it forward to a recruits face and slamming the bolt forward Never heard someone audibly evacuate their bowels so quick in my life! At our time doing DECOM over there with REME we got our hands on a lot of supposedly "captured" FALs that were all actually SLRs, meanwhile the guys that turned them in were rocking some suspiciously fresh looking "SLRs" No one said a word, think they are on display at the Leeds Royal Armouries now! (Alongside an MP40 I got to work on personally, probably the proudest moment of my time there)
We had the full auto version on the FN FAL and we never used it on full auto (apart from trying it now and then). Semi Auto was far superior in every way. The Brits were correct to remove it from their SLR.
Please dont doubt yourself, this channel is great! Sometimes the simplest concepts are the best. And believe me, allot of people love to see an old soldier talk.
25 yrs ago I funded a guy who had designed a muzzle stabiliser that replaced the flash hider and acted as both a recoil brake and prevented muzzle climb on full auto. Worked well also on an M16 and .50cal. Fitted to an SA80, and tested at Warminster, it cured a full auto jamming issue, by being more efficient at extracting gas from the end of the barrel, and not allowing gas to blow back destabilising the next round entering the chamber. Solution was rejected by manufacturer due to high cost of re writing the training manual. Fitted to an M16 you could fire on full auto holding the pistol grip one handed at arms length with the muzzle holding completely still.
Looking back,a slightly smaller and lighter version of slr in say a 6.5mm cal would have been a good idea.loved the simplicity of the FAL design.long list of pros and cons for both weapons,had great fun with both.
It may well have solved a full auto jamming issue, but definitely not by the alleged mechanism you give. Muzzle brakes and the like don't pull gas out of the barrel any faster, nothing out on the muzzle can do that. Integral suppression plus flow through could do that, or a bore evacuator like on a tank gun or the Gemtech GVAC. Blow back destabilizing the next round entering the chamber... that's just not real in a locked breech firearm like an SA80. If any significant amount of pressure was still present at time of unlocking, the rate of fire of SA80 would be much higher, and SA80 really doesn't have a particularly high rate of fire. The feed mechanism just isn't very good. It's not gas blowback. This is also a problem that has literally never been encountered in blowback firearms.
@@StevieGtube I've heard a lot of total baloney from military instructors, this does not surprise me in the least. It was probably as mysterious to them as it was to you, or more.
I was out in the Falklands, we didn't change our SLRs but we did pick up Argentine GPMGs - we had the Bren L7A1 so a couple of the boys carried the Gimpy. The other advantage of common weapons was 7.62mm. We all started off carrying 150rds - 4 mags of 20 plus the balance in bandoliers. We shot off a fair amount at San Carlos and topped up when we got to Mt Challenger.
I am not saying it didnt happen but once you exchanged your british SLR for the Argentine variant, what did the officers and SNCOs say? Then how did you explain it handing back your regular SLR to the Quarter Master?
@@anthonyhassett I was thinking the same thing. You'd have to hump both gats because you couldn't hand it in to the QM while on ops and everyone was on foot AFAIK
@@fatmanfaffing4116 Remember the lost Wessex helicopters on the Atlantic convayer? They were gone, then there was the Great Yop to Port Stanley. Carrying a pair of SLRs? I am guessing Officers, SNCOs and autonomous Special forces groups could get away with stuff like that.
@@fatmanfaffing4116 My old BQMS (Irish FCA) would have cleaning the tarmac on square with tooth brushes if we ever tried carrying around AK variants. There are stories that the SAS took the collapseable stock variants to Northern Ireland for shooting out of cars while waiting for H&K G3s with collapseable stock (Both do the same job compact 7.65 rifle for aerating soft skinned vehicles). I would imagine under Thatcher anything her SAS boys wanted they got immediately.
Still serving but my history goes back some way. In 1989 as a 16 year old I signed up and ended up in the Royal Signals as an apprentice Tele Op TG (some will know that trade). The SLR was my issued rifle and I was really happy with it (I'd been a cadet since 84 so had fired the .303 Lee Enfield Mk4 and Bren Gun) and used to the recoil unlike many of my non cadet service comrades who had never fired a rifle in their life. As I joined HM Forces the SA80A1 was entering service with the Infantry but would not filter down to the other Corps until the early 90's. In training and on the range the SLR was a simple weapon to learn and (having experienced the .303 round) I knew the stopping power of the cartridge and the recoil so was not surprised by it. A few years down the line and I'm a reservist in a volunteer (TA) Infantry Battalion and suddenly learning the new battle rifle, the SA80A1. First thoughts, very plastic, heavy and not as ergonomic as the SLR. On the range I'm aware of the lower recoil pressure and the lack of range but this would change as the years progressed. In training, other than the different components, once you know how to strip, clean and assemble a rifle is a rifle. Albeit the SA80 was a bit more fiddly. I've since served as a reservist in the Balkans with the SA80A1, and a regular in Afghanistan with the SA80A2. The A1 was a nightmare, stoppages from sand, grit or the case bouncing back into the chamber off the cocking handle. A2 much improved and 100% more reliable (didn't have a single stoppage in the Ghan), and had some very good competition shooting (Bisley) with it (could hit a huns head at 500m). Snap shooting with the SA80 is far easier than the SLR. FIBUA is easier with the SA80. Working out of an AFV is easier with the SA80 but what the SA80 lacks is the stopping power and range of a 7.62mm cartridge! I've seen people wounded by a 5.56mm round and still able to function (not fully, but still dangerous) whereas I've seen 7.62 utterly obliterate an enemy with one hit. Hence why the L129A1 sharpshooter rifle entered service in 2009. Still doesn't answer the question though, SLR or SA80? Well, both have there place and I'm still undecided.
Joined REME in 1966 as a 'B' Vehicle Mechanic and my standard personal weapon was the SLR. It was a delight to use and I got a 'Marksman' badge with it. In 1970, I did an 'A' Vehicle Mechanic conversion course and my personal weapon became a SMG although at times I was also issued with the 9mm Browning right up until I became a civvy in 1980.
SLR, No Doubt, at least I knew when I was down range, it was going to put down the enemy, I trained on SLR, SMG & Browning 9mm hi power, those were our standard issue, but I did also train on the Lee Enfield .303 as an Army Cadet in the early 1980's now that a cracking weapon.
Lee Enfield, first full calibre weapon I fired as an Army Cadet in 1968, we all weighed about 3/5s of Sweet Fanny Adams so grouping and zeroing was fun - the white patch had to be about knee level on a figure 11 to guarantee that we'd get some rounds on the target.
Irish Army had the same FN as the Argies, fired it on full auto once, apart from the Lee Enfield MK 4 the best rifle you could ever be lucky enough to use.
David, brilliant to hear from someone who served with the Irish Army, thank you for your support mate 👍. I didn't know that you guys had the FN, awesome. All the best brother, take care mate 👍
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Irish Army got the the FN late as defense was not a primary concern for the new state. This was for dealing with Mercenaries in the Congo. Please see Siege of Jadotville
No Irish did not get the same FN-FAL as the Argentinians. The Irish one was made in Belgium by FN but the Argentinian one was made under licence in Argentina.
@@anthonyhassett They look very similar almost identical, Irish FN was made in Belgium thought the Argi FN was also made in Belgium. I remember ours was referred to as the FN SLR, I am going back 50 yrs now with my memory re, the FN.
@@daviddoyle5291 No the Agentine FN FAL was made under liscence by a state company. Its a common thing, a country wanting to control its own defence manufacturing, even if it is under lisence. I am not sure that the Argentine copy was as good as the British imperial or FN Original patterns.
I worked with the SLR and SA80 mark 1 for approximately 60/30 of my 13-year career. I received the SA80 with an overwhelming sense of disappointment, until I fired it. I became an immediate convert and forgave it all its faults after feeling the balance of rifle, how easily the recoil was absorbed and how quick it is to reset to fire the next round. The SA80 gave more confidence a static target would be hit with a higher consistency than with an SLR. When you looked over the sites you were more than likely going to hit the target. The most dangerous thing on a battlefield is not an officer with a map but the keen to please accountants, who went to work on the furniture attached to the SA80 with predictable results. Fortunately, the engineers retained control on the rifles firing characteristics and made the business end of the rifle far superior to that of the SLR. If the amount of ammunition expended to hit the target was discussed the SA80 would show why it is the best rifle in service with an army.
Almost certainly down to the smaller cartridge. It's much easier to stay on a target with an SA80. The SLR could be a bit of a handful, especially for soldiers of a smaller stature.
Thanks for the reply. The magazine being moved to behind the trigger brings the weapons centre of gravity closer to the shoulder, thus providing a more stable firing position. @@DrFod
Agree. For all its simplicity and hitting power, the SLR just didn’t have the accuracy that the (complicated) F88 delivers. If you don’t hit the target, the terminal effect is irrelevant.
Infantry 71 to 77 so I used the SLR extensively. I was a boy soldier for two years and then joined 1RGJ for four and a half years. I was a marksman on it and liked the weapon enormously. Used LMG magazines on a South Armagh tour a few times but you did have to re zero because of the weight of the extra rounds so largely stopped doing that. There simply in my view weren’t any problems with the SLR whatsoever. Used the SUIT in the later years of my service. A very good sight. We set the SUIT sight at 100 and 300 metres. We shot at up to 600 metres on iron sights and you learned to aim slightly high with the SUIT sight. Practice makes for perfection. Carrying 7.62 ammunition wasn’t ever a problem. The alternative was to not carry enough and that was never going to happen. Your life could have depended on it. Never used the SA80 but I was shown one as a reservist later on. I’d heard about some of the problems like the magazine release etc. I was surprised at the weight of the weapon. I read that it wasn’t as accurate as it was supposed to be initially and they added extra weight to it to improve its accuracy. 5.56 simply doesn’t have the range or stopping power that 7.62 has. In the Afghanistan campaign, they introduced the 7.62 sharpshooter weapon to overcome that problem. That tells me a lot about 5.56. So it’s the SLR or its modern equivalent for me!
I was a QMSI in ITDU during the A2 reliability trials so my opinion is slightly biased. Remember the context of why we replaced SLR back in the early 80s - politically we wanted to make our own weapon (I dont think we would do it again but as the H&K guys said the problem with A1 wasn't so much the design but the manufacturing/tolerance problems in its production in Enfield/Nottingham especially the poor magazines), doctrinally we needed to move to standard NATO ammunition anyways and at the time we were mainly in BAOR (temperate environment) and we wanted a smaller (bullpup) weapon to use in trenches and the back of 432s in that environment - the SLR was long, heavy and cumbersome. Good point that we had to change the APWT as the SUSAT improved marksmanship to such a degree everyone was getting Marksman - we had to make it harder. There was lots of negative press and misinformation during that time and I honestly never read an accurate article on SA80 - I believe H&K sorted it out and hence its still in service as the A3 - if it was so bad it wouldn't be!. I won't mention the LSW! That said I actually preferred the German G36 over both systems.
I had a copy of the Trial report of the A2 and it made very interesting reading as it revealed a number of facts that Never SA-80 mates couldnt handle. Part of the A1's issue was the Trials condirtions were not representaive of a battle field day - they estimated that only 90 rds would be fired in a day. The Trial of the A2 expanded that several times over. Trials simulated an advance to contact, attack, counter attack and consolodation. Memory serves up to 500 rds would be fired in a day without cleaning. The Trial also introduced a number of torture tests - mud and sand were involved and the A2 outperformed the A1, M16 AND AK-47. Who knew!
@@jamescoleman8287 We had a busy time doing the trials (in Alaska, Kuwait and Brunei) and the Battlefield Missions (as we called them) pushed the weapons to the limits. I cant remember the actual figures but we rarely had a Trapped Fired Case (which happened regularly on the A1 with the round not fully ejecting). Despite this the press just hated it (H&K/Bae weren't happy as it reflected on their reputation) with some journalists who had been in cadets suddenly became the SME. At the same time we also were bringing in the new grenade, Armour piercing ammunition for the AI L115 and a fair few UORs as Op Jacanna was kicking off- I remember not being in Warminster much that year.
What a cracking video! I used the SA80 Rifle and LSW but as a Regimental shooting team member (3 UK Div) I was fortunate to get to use several other platforms. Both rifle and LSW would often jam with a full colt magazine so I dropped my mags to 25 rounds each and took an extra mag. Never had need or cause to the bayonet as I wasn't in an infantry regiment. While I only got to use it on two occasions, he SLR was a dream to use and maintain. The object was to learn to use other 5.56, 7.62 and Russian ammunition platforms should primary weapons fail (I had 2 firing pins break on the SA80 in competition practice). If I had the choice between the two I would have picked the SLR every time and the only thing I didn't like was that a mounted sight was placed on the upper receiver cover which could move a little and cause accuracy issues at longer distances. I also never wanted to fire anything automatic aside from the GPMG. I wish I could have tried the Bren out. Instant subscribe, really looking forward to hearing your banter and topics, mate!
My initial training, way back in the 60s, was with the SLR. Liked it a lot, but then again I was just a kid - big boys toys! When I joined my regiment (RTR) my personal weapon, not counting the 120mm Chieftain gun, was an SMG. Dead easy to use and maintain - lousy accuracy beyond spitting distance but good enough for our needs. Annual weapon test was boringly easy to pass. Eventually I moved on to the Medical Services, but my personal weapon as hospital staff remained the SMG or Browning pistol. I had my one and only experience with the SA80 in 1992 I think. It felt very odd to handle, for me. Didn't like it at all, unfortunately. Since retiring in '93 I've had a lot more experience with various weapons (I live in Texas!) so I would probably appreciate the SA80's good points much more now than that one 'fun shoot' experience that I had. Enjoyed you video mate.
I left the services in 1976 so never fired the SA80 but I loved the SLR and fired thousands of rounds through it and at the very least it looked like a proper weapon.
South Armagth, knocked on farmhouse door to scrounge some matches and an old lady invited me in for a warm, oppos waited in yard. Sat in front of their coal range smoking my snout with bren on bipod on floor next to me and old lady said "that looks like a terrible weapon you have there". Just then her adult son came downstairs, he looked very suprised to see me! I think he'd been hiding and his mom told me that they'd had a problem with the last unit posted locally "because of the smuggling".
"No rounds in the chamber - no magazine on the rifle!" I laughed out loud. The L85A1 - the reason why British servicemen needed eyes in the back of their heads - not to look for enemy, just to track where you were leaving your magazines.
After the cold war ended, Mikhail Kalashnikov visited Britain. He was taken to the Royal Ordnance factory in Nottingham, and shown the SA80. He looked at it for a while, and finally said: "You must have some very clever soldiers."
Joined in 1977. Issued with the SLR. As an Army Cadet, i had fired the SLR both Full Bore & .22 conversion. Loved it!🥰🥰🥰 First came across the SA80 in the mid 80's when attached to the Royal Scots. So many problems with the A1. Too fragile. To fiddly. Not able to be fired left handed. When Op Granby 'kicked off' in 1991, The Royals found that whilst training in the desert, the magazine catch was being activated when carrying out Fire & Manouvere. As Keith said, the guys would get down into a fire position and begin to open fire. 1 round & click! Magazine had dropped off!😱😱 Not what an Infanteer needs!🤬🤬 I didnt use the A2 or A3. But i believe once Heckler Koch got hold of the weapon, they carried out many modifications. Since yhe Bullpup design has been though of in 1942 with the EM2 you would have thought that 40+ years of R&D would have 'ironed out' the problems before mass production. Personally, my choice would still be the SLR over the SA80. If you are hit by 7.62mm chances are 'you aint getting up'!👍👍👍👍👍
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Thanks Buddy. I'm going to concentrate on the Wellbeing aspect of Tabbing, whilst you corner your market. I really enjoy your posts!🥰 Bri gs back so msny happy memories. Yes, there are times i remember those i lostduring and after my Military career. But they keep those people 'alive'. 👍👍 Keep going with your posts. Your channel is growing lovely.👍👍👍🤜🤜🤜🤜
They knew about the mag catch before it entered service the initial batch sent out for field tests also suffered from the plastic furniture reacting to the issue inpel melting the plastic, suit sights weren't properly purged and fogged up on hot days and if you got a bit rough with the charging handle it broke off it was beyond a joke.
"Since the Bullpup design has been thought of in 1942 with the EM2" Believe it or not, I think the bullpup concept in military rifles actually goes back to 1901 with the Thorneycroft bolt action rifle. Far out, isn't it..?!
SLR with the 7.62 NATO every time. If you ran out of ammo, in eyeball to eyeball parties a decent strike with the wooden stock could down an elephant (like the L.E. 303) . Plastic stock made it feel like a toy. Would make a great jungle weapon if the barrel was sawn off/shortened like a Mob shotgun and 'tricked' into full auto. A month or two training & tabbing with the SLR onboard and the weight was no issue - even with two mags taped together and loaded. Loved the GIMPY and if you could operate with that, the SLR was lightweight. Early 1970s: One naughty incident I had: running back to the helo I must have inadvertently caught the mag release catch on my belt-gear and, unknown at the time, the mag dropped off. As we took off I discovered the loss. Pilot immediately did a quick circuit (brilliant reaction) and returned to precisely the same spot. I jumped out, ran back to where I guesstimated the mag fell off, found it immediately (luck or skill?) and remounted the helo. Just as well there were no bandits nearby. Missed a charge by a hairs breadth. Serious but y'gottalaff.
Ex REME Armourer here. On exercise we would occasionally convert our SLRs to fire auto as well as single shot. it was easy with only two components requiring alteration. The volume of fire that came from A&G was outstanding and the cone of flame coming from the flash eliminator was a sight to see!! We made sure we changed them back before they were handed in. SA80 or SLR? Horses for course really. Loved the SLR but also the weight, kick and auto capability of the SA80. Great video Keith, I miss the old days.
The SLR! Came back from Ripon down the A1 in the back of a 4 Tonner. Decided to save time and clean it along with everybody else. All done and dusted went through the drill and watched in horror as my gas plug rod and spring sailed over the tailgate,,,,,,,,,,Cost me £50.00 back at base. Loved the rifle when fitted with the mag from an LMG. Late in 88 I gave a presentation of the SA80 To the general staff at Sorbrane barracks in Lincoln. We had problems with the dust covers. magazine release and the gas port under the top cover. Lots of problems to start with. Keep up the good work Keith.
SLR all day, though I can't fault the M16, M203 the grunts in my day loved the SLR and swore by it,as a killing machine I never heard a grunt complain about them. I loved mine and thought it was sexy as fuck, I felt like a real soldier with it,,
Hi Tim, as an army cadet on a summer camp, one of the regulars who were DSing asked if I could lose an LMG mag for him, as he was off to Northern Ireland next. Being a reasonably bold and decent sort, I duly did so and as a cadet, there were no real consequences for the loss. The regular was naturally dead chuffed. Years later, as a regular myself, I wondered about stoppages. The LMG mag was feeding downwards, so the spring was not designed to be strong enough to push the very last rounds up into an SLR…But if you upgraded the spring, then, yes an epic extended mag?
😁 I know the feeling! I spent half an hour crawling around Sennybridge in the rain at night looking for my spring and rod. Stupid gun could not be stripped if it was jammed. Happy Days! Give me the 303 any day.
I was issued an SLR in 1971 with a wooden stock and but that we used linseed oil on, then the armourer came and took the stock off and put a plastic one on. We used to store the oil, cleaning wadding brush and drawstring in the butt. Our official gun was the SMG but we kept SLR 's in the armoury above the guardroom and regually went to the ranges.
I remember using a plimsol sole to whack the linseed oil into the furniture. I kept my triangular wooden stock when it was replaced by the oval grip of the plastic and fitted it for a tour of Andy town. I only ever used A1 version of SA80, not impressed but know by A3 it is a good weapon.
@@peterbrown1012 SA80 only appeared in 78. I was on the TAPC course at Warminster that summer, we got to play with the first one, bull-pup is a great idea but loses the range image. What I mean by that is similar to landing a Heavy jet - you fly it into the flare, focused on the touchdown zone, and switch to the end of the runway as it touches, because the way it's pointed against crosswind is not the direction you need it pointed when slowing, rolling on the runway. Similarly, feeling the bullet trajectory through crosswinds is greatly helped with a long barrel in front of you. OK, this isn't FIBUA, but then again, I'm not adverse to cold steel.
I served in Aden with the RAF. The army and RAF regiment at that time used the FN; us poor airmen were issued with old WW2 kit. I once rode shotgun around Crater in an enclosed car carrying a .303. A brilliant rifle in my opinion, highly accurate, but not designed to be fired from a small car, muzzle out of the window, the back plate in the driver's lap. I told the driver that if we came under fire, he was not to drive through it, but to stop and let me out so that I could take up a comfortable firing position on the pavement; the terrs would wait for me of course.
When I initially seen the title pop up mentioning the SLR,,it was a must watch... The talk/walk through was a great old memory lane wander, so thanks for that. As for rifle choice, never had the SA80, so my choice would be old school reliability. I was a Blowpipe/Javelin operator (air defence unit R.A. in the 80's) So carrying FHC's and your SLR was always a careful scenario lol....Its very clear to see your time spent in the past was imbedded in, even in a wide open field, not a soul to be seen for miles, you constantly looked over your shoulder, checking the shrubbery, gotta love the training we had eh. 👍 Keep up the great work and all the best in your channel growth.
Get that lamp swinging. I was 1977 to 1986. only fired the early SA80 on a 30 meter range. For target shooting as a bit of fun, I thought the low recoil was great, a bit like an air rifle. Going against an enemy I would definitely take the SLR. When I was in, on exercise everyone wanted an SMG, light, short, didn’t get caught on branches, didn’t bash your head when over your shoulder. When we went to the Falklands nobody wanted an SMG ! Everyone wanted the most stopping power possible. Automatic puts a lot of rounds down, but there’s a confidence in knowing one hit from a 7.62 will drop anyone, even if they’re behind cover. My SLR could be dragged through mud, and dropped on rocks, and I could rely on it.
@@andrewcornford2306 Shitty Indian ammo was usually the culprit, not enough blow back to recock the working parts. Or not cocking it fully in the first place.
I joined the TA at 16 in the early 90’s and used a SLR for the first couple of months before changing to SA80. Joined the regs at 18 and served for 24 years and in those almost 26 years with the SA80 I never really experienced any of the problems that are widely reported in the press. Yes if you didn’t look after it you would get dramas but that is the same with any firearm. As to your question I would 100% pick the SA80 to go into battle with, so many plus points over the SLR. More ammo, optics, more compact for vehicles, easier to use for FIBUA, being able to ‘acquire’ ammo from the yanks easier ( who want to break down link for 7.62?)
I joined the RAF as a boy in 1963, and learned to shoot with the 303 Lee Enfield rifle and the Bren gun. I believe the SLR came into service in 1954, but I never saw one before 1971! New firearms were issued to the RAF several years after the army (except for the RAF Regiment, who got them when the army did). In 1968 I joined a parachute team consisting of only nine men, and our personal weapons were SMGs: I don’t know why - the rifle was the personal weapon of junior ranks as a rule - but I appreciated not having to tote the greater weight! In later years I represented RAF units at Bisley, firing the SLR, SLP, and SMG. During one of my NI tours I had the opportunity to fire an AK47: it impressed me greatly! By the time I was demobbed in 1987 the SA80 was still unavailable to most RAF personnel, and I never fired one. Nor saw one. I couldn't watch your video after you started to talk of the SA80 because I was suffering from motion sickness! But I suspect that I would opt for the SLR because I know it so well. Unless, of course, the AK47 was on offer!
For me it's the L85 A2, just because of the amount of ammunition that you could carry. I had a chance to fire both the SLR and the FN FAL, both great strong rifles, but what a kick you got from them. This is your best video yet, mate. A very interesting topic.
A friend of mine (who has sadly past) was a Vietnam veteran, he told me if they were in camp at Nui dat they would carry around the M16 because it was light but if they were going on patrol (outside the wire) they would take the SLR L1A1, when you hit something with that it stayed down and our SAS would cut the barrel down to make it easier to handle for their work, good video mate all the best.
Just found you ( like & subscribed) really interesting talk about the SLR and SA80. Reminded me of my Army Cadet Force days when we had to do SLR drill with Lee Enfield rifle, not easy 🙂
From using both, I always remember my sergeant saying “if you’re facing someone hiding behind a wall, the SLR will go straight through the wall and take them out, the SA80, will put 2-3 rounds in exactly the same place and drill a hole through”. From a usability POV SA80 was great due to bullpup, short aspect but from a one shot, one kill, SLR every time. There was an article that I can’t find now but which came out in the 90’s about how there was a change in calibre across western countries to smaller calibres as wounding a casualty was a great draw on resource than an outright kill. Not a complete answer but AK-74 (5.56), AR-15/M-16 (5.56), SA80 (5.56) and others.
All the wee changes to the SLR during my time in regular service, plastic furniture replacing the wood, SUIT sight and IWS. Also the iron sights got the large aperture and luminous foresight if I remember correctly. I only handled the A1 during TA service and it was a very fragile piece of kit at that point. Keep this up Keith, pure nostalgia!
I used the FN and our replacement 5.56 rifle over my military career. I have never shot the UK SA80, however. During my first 5 years in the regular army, I lugged around the Canadian-made FN C1 A1. In 3 decades of military service and 5 deployments, I've never fired a weapon in combat so I'm certainly no authority. Minor technicality. Canada was the first nation to adopt the FN as its official small arm. The 'tweaks' you refer to were done by Canada initially. Aside from being made semi auto only, the big one was to convert the rifle from the Belgian metric measurements to Imperial. Once that work was done, Australia and the UK jumped on board and adopted the rifle as well. Of course Canada also built and used the C2 LAR version with bipod, heavier barrel and 30 rd mags. The Australians used them as well but also kept 7.62 Brens... As for Argy rifles being swapped for Brit rifles... I'm not sure. IIRC, the Argy rifles were metric pattern (I could be wrong on this). If so, the mags would not be interchangeable. Full auto FALs are impossible to control. And with 20 rd mags, a bit of a waste of time. I can't see a soldier surrendering his tried and true, zeroed rifle for a strange one... except in an emergency as a battlefield pick up. Many of the Argy rifles had folding para stocks which may have been attractive in that way. You say that .308 is significantly bigger than .303 which is not true. They are variations of the venerable .30 cal rd. Is it possible you meant to say that .308 was significantly bigger than .223? SOF units preferring M 16. I had a conversation with an NCO in 22 SAS in 1984. Being young, I was blathering on about how cool the new SA80 was going to be. He simply said that he'd fired both the SA80 and the new US M16A2 and preferred the M16. He also said he was aware of the new rifle we were going to build in Canada based on the M16 and said we were getting the better small arm. Fast forward a few years and the SAS ran trials for a dedicated small arm. The winner was Diemaco Canada and its rifle was selected. Which would I choose for battle? I think the UK was ahead of the game in wanting to go to a smaller, faster bullet way back prior to WW1. Then again prior to WW2 (wars kept getting in the way). Then Germany proved the effectiveness of the smaller bullet and, a few years later, so did the Soviets. NATO was bullied into .308 by the US. Ironically, after they made us all standardize on the heavier, bigger bullet, they turned around and adopted the 5.56! The obsession with the .30 cal bullet took a while to die. Good for LARs, GPMGS and DM rifles, but not needed for the average soldier. 5.56 recoils less, you can carry more (on both my Afghanistan tours, I was issued 300 rds in 10 mags. Imagine that in 7.62 loaded in steel FN mags!). I've always believed that one of the main purposes of an infantry platoon is to provide protection for and to get into position its most effective weapon - the GPMG. Sure, theirs winkling badguys out of caves, trench clearing, building clearing, low-level maneouvre etc... but individual riflemen just don't have the same effect. As such, the fantasy of making 1,000 yd shots etc are silly. A 5.56 rifle is just an all round more useful tool. Much as I love the FN (I own 2).
Cannuks still make or " tweak" firearms. I shot canuck 303 that went through world war two. It was my competition rifle and looked like a dog and chewed it from butt to fore end. It had three colour furniture. It looked like a piece of scrap wood wise but shot like a dream. Mechanically perfect once I got a new W spring. Trying asking an armourer with literally a thousand 303s behind him for a new W spring. My first five answers were. " Have you tried cleaning it?" Or my personal favourite was " Just bend it at the bottom and it will work better" This is a forty year old battle rifle with the original W spring.
The L1A2 heavy barrel SLR was used (in Australia in the 70s and 80s) by rear echelon troops mostly. Infantry used the Bren in 7.62mm up until Vietnam when they converted to the US M60 (a derivative of the German MG42), partly for commonality and partly for change in doctrine. Belts versus mags with more ammo carried in link than heavy mags and the M60 being more an area weapon than the sniper rifle the Bren had a reputation for. Also experience in Malaya and Borneo found it easier to toss a belt across a jungle path when ambushed than mags, according to one veteran I spoke to. Brens were issued to us for UNTAG Namibia as they were considered defensive weapons compared to the M60. To be fair, the L1A2 was never taken very seriously as it was the 'gun' used to defend the HQ, the cook house, the portable shower truck etc.
@@michaeldoolan7595 Conversely, I inherited a Canadian-built No 4 Enfield (dated 1950) from my Dad and it is so pristine, I haven't dared to shoot it yet.
@@fatmanfaffing4116 Yes, I was aware of that. We (Canada) were one of the few countries to extensively use the LAR version of the FAL. We had 2 per infantry section right up until 1988 when it was replaced by the belt-fed FN Minimi (C9). I always wondered why the Aussies eschewed their L2A2s in favour of the heavier 7.62 Brens.... However, they were actually fighting a war at the time while we weren't so I'll defer to them. I suppose the removable barrel featured prominently in the decision... along with the proven reliability etc...
I was in the Falklands in 82. We did get hold of captured FN’s. They were an absolute pig to fire on automatic. Really hard to hold the barrel down. Made me realise why SLR wasn’t automatic.
The FAL similar to the M-14 has poor accuracy on Automatic setting. The Rifle works best fired semi automatic with steady hands. Too much climb on automatic.
The Irish issued FN-FAL had an automatic setting. We never fired it on Automatic on the range. There would have been consequences and repercussions if it was fired on the range in that manner.
Aussie veteran here, joined in '87 and like you I started on the SLR then transitioned to our (ADF's) bullpup, the F88 Steyr. Personally I'd have the SLR any day but then I'm a dinosaur. The reliability and ruggedness of the weapon and the 7.62 mm hitting power is always reassuring. The F88 is a decent weapon that's for sure but I just never did get to love the plastic stuff, still deployed with this and it was fine for what I needed.
I trained with the SLaR, L4, Sterling and eventually the L42, I've also used the Armalite and I'd take the L85A2 over any of them. The problem was never the concept or design it was the bloody awful build quality. The standard sight unit on the SA80 made a huge difference to the average tom, the 20" barrel gives the 5.56 reach and accuracy in a compact package. The changeover to the SA80 caused major resentment because of lefties and the rifles falling apart. I had 19" biceps and had to rethink as i regularly dumped the mag until i learnt. The most comprehensive discussion I've seen Keith, well done and kudos on the old ambidextrous joke lol.
😆 🤣 I had to put that old joke in there, just couldn't resist it. Thank you for your support my friend hope you're well and enjoying the beautiful area where you live. Take care
I remember one lad in basic training cleaning the barrel of his SLR put too much wadding on the pull through , the string snapped and the wadding getting stuck fast down the barrel . To try and free it up he then stuffed a Bic Biro and a coat hanger wire down the barrel and they got stuck too!! It took the half the Troop about an hour to free it all up! 🙂. I only ever fired the SLR and GPMG on a firing range and all I know is that I would never want to be on the receiving end of those two legends! Keep up the good work Sir.
That was why there was the loop on the far end of the pullthrough (Three loops - A.G.F. (All Guns Firing)- Armourer, Gauze, Flanelette). The REME armourer has a hook for that very purpose. A pint would guarantee anonymity.
Favourite trick the last time I did the matchstick conversion was when I served in The TA Then I got further promotion and I was issued with an SMG anyway we were on the range one weekend doing Range Control and all of a sudden shortly after I had said Watch and Shoot, Watch and Shoot there was a burst of automatic fire well I nearly fell off the chair needless to say the range was shut down till further notice till the Armorer checked out the rifle.
I used the SLR in 1 RAR in the 70's and early 80's, it WAS classed as an assault rifle here in Oz but we never had any left handed versions or modifications
I along with a friend created experimental armour test samples 200x200x25mm in dimension and weighing 200 grams per plate. It's composition was an exfoliated graphite reinforced Polyurethane wrapped in a sheet of aramid for anti spalling purposes. The bigger 7.62x51 FMJ penetrated 20mm's into the plate while the smaller 5.56x45 55 grain FMJ only managed 4.5mm. I would point out at this stage that the latter was discharged from a Remington 700 with a full length barrel and a sound suppressor on the end of it. The speed at impact was probably around 3200~3400fps as it was only discharged from 8 yards away. As the tests were conducted in the USA we had the opportunity to test other weapons and ammo types to include 7.62x39 FMJ, 5.45x39 FMJ and 5.56x45 M855 Green Tip, none of which offered full penetration and none of the plates showed any sign of back face deformation. So as a non-military man considering the question, I'd probably want the SLR but I imagine the ammunition is heavier, that I would be unable to carry as much of it compared to 5.56x45 and that there may be compatibility problems with allies serving with me. Also, if two paddies from Belfast can make that armour in our kitchens for fun I'd hate to be in a war in which high quality armour was prolific as putting people down for good might be easier said than done even if you're using the SLR.
SLR every time I was serving in 1987 and had both. I preferred the ease of cleaning and reliability of SLR and the stopping power but the compactness and lightweight of the SA80 (but only the A3 variant).
I remember the insect repellent melting the sa80 A1 chin guard.and I'm a lefty had to learn to shoot right handed. Did my basic at Pirbright guards depot back in the day during the transition. I loved the slr. So slr for me
Used the SLR in the Falklands, Northern Ireland etc. Great rifle. If they’d shortened the barrel by four inches it would have been perfect for today’s use.
Reference SLR "Single Shot" /Automatic Fire. When I joined the TA in 1971 the SLR training pamphlet we had (blue book) still had a chapter about the section commander having a SLR capable of firing a 3 round burst ! Never saw one ! The photograph in the manual showed a change lever with a "burst" option after the obvious "S" and "F".
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Since I posted my earlier comment I have seen photographs of Argentinian FNs captured in the Falklands War, these had the 3-shot burst capability, some had a "paratrooper" version with a skeleton folding stock. NAAFI rumours have told me that the proper, fully auto version of the FN was rejected by the War Office as it "wasted too much ammo". This fully auto version was more robustly built (heavier) , with a much heavier barrel and a bipod. To my mind it would have been akin to the converted to 7•62 Bren guns we knew as the LMG. All the best, enjoy your posts for all the memories that they stir up.
Ex Scots Guards ('75 to '90) here, great vids, keep it up. They had to rewrite the drill manual when they brought out the SA80 so the Guardsmen could still do public duties, Trooping the colour etc.. I only used the SLR so I would stick with it. Cheers
The Australian Army replaced their SLR's with the AUG Steyrs in the late 80's/early 90's. Like this, there were similar issues going from the larger and sturdier SLR to a 5.56 "plastic fantastic" type of rifle. Drill was a big issue, Drill with the SLR looked great , with the new bullpup rifle it was a dogs breakfast. The shorter rifles simply weren't great to drill with. In fact to this day the ceremonial unit of the Australian Army still uses the SLR for Drill, over 30 years since SLR's were removed from active service use.
SLR was lovely for me,easy to take apart even in the dark 😀.Yes we had to do that in cabin on St Edmund hdg south,,happy days.Good vid mate,all the best.
I served during the crossover between the two rifles, I trained on the SLR in basic which was more of a familiarization incase we ever got posted to a unit still using them and fired 40 rounds down the range and that was it. So I cant give an accurate account as I didn't have it as a personal weapon. I had the SA80 a1 with SUSAT sight, trained with it in basic and could strip it down and reassemble it blindfolded. I knew it inside out you could say. Encountered many of the problems you spoke about. I only got gas stoppages on the LSW though which was a quick fix changing the gas settings. I didn't like the LSW but it was my section weapon for the first 6 months in battalion until another sprog came along then it got pushed onto him. With the SA80 I passed the APWT no problem scored marksman every year with it. I never fired it in anger but used it in BATUS for 6 weeks in the field and didn't have a single issue with it once the magazine dumping problem was sorted out. Fired a Hell of a lot of live rounds through it in Canada as well. Also used it on several exercises in Germany some real cold ones and again never had any issues with the A1. I was given the SA80 A2 when I rejoined as a combat medic in the TA about 10 years after I left the the Army, that was a good weapon by then HK had sorted out everything and introduced the forward assist when you cock the weapon. I hated the iron sights though and longed for my old SUSAT sight back. As much as I like the SLR if I was going into a battlefield situation where my life depended on it I would have to go with what I know and I know the SA80, so as long as I was given the A2 or A3 with a SUSAT sight I would be happy. Thanks for the great video
I believe you will find that the .303 projectile was .311-.312 inch diameter and the 7.26mm was .308 inch so the older British bore was larger by a few thou. But saying that the 7.62 was more ballistically efficient and because of the rimless cartridge allowed straight high capacity mags as opposed to the curved design on the old favorite LMG the Bren or even older design Lewis gun. Also I remember seeing some 30 round mags in use with SLR's I believe they were Belgium manufacture designed for the FAL select fire version. PS I was engineers so our go to was the 9mm Sterling and HP35 Browning pistol with it's double stacked mag. PPS. 9mm was .310 inch dia.
9mm Parabellum has a bullet diameter of 0.355" (or 35 calibre as they say over the pond). Sorry my OCD kicked in and I had to mention this. 😁 All the best.
Will, An American here. I have used the SLR in civilian use. Grand weapon and easy to use. I was trained with the M14, M1, and M16A1 as a Marine, carrying the latter in Vietnam (with 20 rd. mages). So the issues are similar...SLR/SA80 vs M14/M16...weight/7.62 vs 5.56/range, etc. I have no experience with the SA80 but I have fired bullpup 5.56 rifles. First, I concede the FN SLR did not get a proper test when compared to the M14 by the US Military in selection or we might have carried the SLR like so many other nations (as indeed, the Italians did a better job making a better version of the M14 with their BM59 from old M1s [as I learned post service time])). Since the M14s sights were basically the same as the M1 and maybe the best issue rifle sights, both the M1 and M14 sights are, in my humble opinion, better than the SLR for accurate fire down range (I have more than one M1 and still reach out to distance range targets with issue sights). I did find the SLR easy to carry and quick to shoulder. I ran into some Royal Marines and Engineers in Puerto Rico in 1967 and compared some techniques. I appreciated some of their weapon use techniques and later I observed the SLR carry use in Ireland when using the long rifle in building searches. I have long owned a civilian M16 type and practiced that technique as a deputy sheriff SWAT operator. Interesting conversation. Thanks
I was involved in inspection of manufactured parts to the sa80, in early 1980s. I remember some of the cast bayonets being bent over the centreline of the handle. Then the magazine release surround was solid at the round end and filled with weld. They later changed it to an open design.
Simple choice - SA80 Mk2+ for close quarter/vehicle carry - SLR for everything else - the 7.62 round could stop a vehicle if the round is place correctly. Less stoppages with the SLR and I could strip it blindfolded - as was often practiced!
It was a sad day when we gave up our SLR, especially as the early SA80's were so poor. Melting plastic on the face with the jungle formula insect repellent, magazine release when strapped to the chest, cocking handles flying down range........... never tried the later versions, but I'd go SLR
Bloody hell! It’s like talking to my old man! He used to go on about the sten gun, and how if you found a good one you would try to keep hold of it. Nice one mate.
We had an interest training package where we had the chance to fire a variety of nato and soviet block weapons during my service (2002-2018).. SLR was rugged and took some getting used to as the reload buggered me up 😄 . No doubt if you hit a target with an SLR the guy wasnt getting up in a hurry. SA80a1 was a pain if you didnt look after it. Young crowbags that didnt clean their weapons would have stoppages. That said our ability to fire accurate bursts or rapid semi auto shots onto target was good especially in CQB....i remember getting clotheslined on exercise when the GMPG barrel and butt hit a doorway (demonstrating length in CQB can be an issue 😂) Good vid have subbed keep em coming
Currently Serving, SA80 is Shite, was fortunate enough to get the opportunity to fire the SLR and it just feels better to shoot, easier to clean, looks better. It would be better logistics wise aswell since the Gimpy uses the same cartridge Would have loved to used the SLR but unfortunately been lumped with a SA80
Like you I did the transition, I was also a weapons instructor so when we transitioned I did an additional module to learn the weapon from a teaching viewpoint. From a pure marksmanship perspective everyone went up, even those guys using weapons fitted with iron sights. During competition I was on a shoot next to a guy from the Black Watch who had been issued SA80, whilst I still had SLR. I can't recall the name of the shoot but we were at 400m. I was just concentrating on getting rounds on a figure 11. He was deciding which part of the target he was putting the rounds on. A big difference came during the falling plate competition. SA80 teams put the plates down in seconds, wiping the floor with SLR teams to an embarrassing degree. Another point for the SA80 was the sling system. You never ended up putting your weapon down as it was always strapped to you. And it was designed to shoot whilst wearing the sling Wandering away from your rifle (SLR) whilst carrying out tasks was a common problem. A few times firing full auto the SA80 tried to load two rounds at once. They jammed in tight. I found the best way to clear it was to hook the working parts to the rear and use the tin opener of the army clasp knife on the rim of the cartridge and lever the jammed rounds out through the magazine housing. Had a guy next to me in a practice ambush have it happen and was stuck. I kept my knife on a lanyard in the top pocket of my smock. Told him to take the mag off, and just reached over and yanked the rounds out for him with the knife. Only took a few moments. That's not in any manual. Glad you said SA80A3, though I left prior and only used up to A2. Target acquisition time, accuracy, increased ammunition load (especially with a bandolier and speed loader), increased reliability over its predecessors, greater magazine capacity. I'd take the A3. Auto was only ever useful in FIBUA or CQB. If it was the A1 then I'd plump for the SLR, At least I knew it would work and wouldn't break it I had to use the blunt end. I did try the LMG mag, but the spring was a lot weaker then the standard 20 round SLR mag and the feed wasn't reliable. Also used the M16. Kind of a halfway house. Had the reliability of a tried and tested system. Was light and accurate. Same round as the SA80, but the mags were very flimsy. Fun fact, the civil servants who were responsible for the initial introduction of the SA80 into service couldn't get it through the quality control gates, so they re-categorized what a stoppage was so that they could say it only had so many "critical" stoppages after so many rounds. Box ticked. Clearly by tossers who would never carry one in anger. Civil servants and the A1, neither worked and they couldn't be fired.
I'd go with the SLR. I never had feed problems with the LMG mags, but firing in the prone was a pain because they're so long. I gave my two LMG mags to one of the COP guys, who had bipods.
It depends on the job in hand, but as a battle rifle definitely the SLR. That said when my unit changed over to SA80 in the mid 80s. As a recce officer, to me the SA80 was a marked improvement over the SMG. Mind you a lot of that was the utility of the sling (provided one could fit it 😂). Never got to the A2 because my personal weapon became a browning for the last 10 years until I finished in 2003. I am considering buying a FAL actually, got my eyes open for a reasonably priced and conditioned one.
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd I have had a scan about for a FAL and they don't seem too bad price wise. Not sure how worn they are of course. I'll let you know if I get one. I was thinking of a Mini 14 as an alternative. They are reasonable, because the Gendarmerie and Police Nationale use them. Not quite the same I know. I also fancied a British service Browning but apparently they were all destroyed. Shame.
I remember the SLR as difficult to lug around, and heavy. But even the battered Vietnam era weapons used by Australian Army recruits were reliable and accurate. We were also taught not to waste ammunition. Deliberate fire only - no spray and pray.
That is exactly right, as you say we may have only been able to carry smaller amounts of ammo for SLR but we were frugal when expending rounds. Great comment thank you
Mate I used the SLR, Same size as you, thing was taller than me. Great weapon though, but for me, I struggled to fire it stood up. Pokey drill, another nightmare. I was mainly Recce Plt, so the SA80 was ideal, plus when I first went into Recce we had the SMG, which was perfect for in the Scimitar. Remember the days of SLR, and 84mm, humping them about plus kit, now that was fun.
@@stuartb4525 Dear Stuart, as I went up the ranks, stirling & then browning. I can only assume having a low centre of gravity helped me (LoL) Charlie G was a pain in the arse!
Why did they make the smallest guy carry the heaviest weapon? same with me I always got the bren every time and was only 5.4 in boots and the bloody thing weighed nearly as much as me. I think it was a way to see if you could hack it and I did 12 years I just got on with it and never gave up. Firing it was a different matter as it would pull you forward unless you dug your toecaps in.
I was issued three versions of C7 on deployed operations - C7, C7A1 and C7A2. Of the three the last one was so much better than either predecessor. The A2 has ambidextrous controls, a better cocking handle; the C79 optic sight, adjustable butt and a full length barrel. The other improvement was to ditch plastic Thermold magazines and go for USGI metal mags. The A1 had a diagonal chest patrol sling that didn't work with the adjustable butt. No great loss.
UA-cam recommended your channel you took me back a few years I used the SA80A2 thanks for this video I've subd ps its be the SA80A2 I stripped it down in 20 seconds flat as a bet once
Used both SLR and SA80 A1 give me my elephant gun any day 7.62 when you shoot them they stayed shot and Keith you forgot to mention the university degree needed to put the sling on the SA80 great stuff mate
What is unbelievable in 2024 - the return to the larger cartridge; the EM-2 in 1951 was going to use the .280 (7mm) as a trade off between light weight of the 5.56mm and stopping power of the .303. Sadly wasnt chosen as the USA wanted 5.56. Well here we are, and 70 years later, stopping power is needed and the EM-2 would have been the right choice all along
My second comment. A video popped up on my Utube feed. In 1954 the War Office experimented with TWO varients of the automatic FN . The X8E1 and X8E2. Basic difference between the two was in sighting. 5,000 of these were purchased in total. Both had the auto/burst capability. Thought you'd find this informative.
SLR...greater range, more stopping power, easier to clean, more reliable, nuff said...
Yeah but tge Sa80 was for everyone more accurate.
I was at best an average shot with the SLR but Sa80 a feckin marksman 😂
@@Stanly-Stud I was a surveyor in the RA...in UKLF we had a land rover and SLR for personal weapons...when we were exchanged to BAOR we got a ferret as a survey vehicle, as driver I got SMG...my boss, the survey bombardier kept SLR and we got an LMG on top of the ferret to keep dry and clean ...much preferred a landrover and an SLR in a plastic bag...
@@georgeatkinson759
as a Gun Bunny i had an SMG but we had a Gimpy on the Gun, the command post the LMG & Charlie-G . not sure about the Op´s
@@Stanly-Stud Did my APWT a couple of times with SMG...felt like a gangsta...but from what I can remember the procedure was...a few rounds on single shot to hit the target at 30 metres.....checked for accuracy...then empty the magazine...9mm rounds cost money... 80s Thatcher defence cuts...
SLR BRILL
I'm an American, never been in the military, haven't shot a rifle in decades, but I live with chronic pain from an old injury in my neck and back, and there's something relaxing about watching a British man take a walk and talk about old military weapons, thank you sir for helping me relax, at least a little bit.
Hey there, very sorry to hear about the pain you currently suffer. My neck was broken in Iraq 2004, so I also suffer pain there and down the left shoulder blade area. Thank you for commenting and for your support it's very much appreciated 👍
Well looks like we're in the same boat then! As my good friend once said, keep on trucking, looking forward to more videos, thank you sir!
I'm sure the gentleman presenting this video would say you are welcome.
I hope you get to feeling better.
For me, SLR, or FNC1 as we called it here. In particular, I was very good with the C2, heavy, but I loved it!
Carried an SLR for 10 months in Vietnam in 1970. Reliable, heavy, accurate and tough. Haven't touched one in 54 years, and am happy with that....
I hear that!
Good on you,let's hope we don't have to pick up any weapon again....I'll drink to that!!
Howdyu get your mitts round an SLR, back then, thought M16`, and, happen, the odd Belgian FN were available ¿?
@@suzyqualcast6269 NZ and Australian troops were in Vietnam and most of them were armed with the SLR.
During my service ( line infantry), I used both the SLR and the first version of the SA80. I would take the SLR hands down everytime. When I did the Battalion SA80 instructors course as a Junior NCO I managed to break it in under 30 minutes as the holding open device catch snapped off. A couple of the others on the course managed to break theirs as well but in different ways. The dust cover snapped off one and if memory serves me right the top cover hinge snapped on another. The irony of it was we were supposed to be training our platoons in using the bloody thing but not letting on how badly made it was! First time I took it on the range, fired my first round and the magazine disintegrated dropping all of my rounds into the bottom of the firebay and the mud. I wasn't impressed. On the other hand my SLR which was made in 1959, so was nearly 30 years old when I got it, worked like a dream. I never had any problems with it at all as it was solid and reliable. I wasn't a fan of 5.56 as when I joined up the Warsaw Pact was our main enemy so I wanted a weapon that would kill the enemy. The 5.56 round was balistically different and was supposed to wound rather than kill as it tumbled rather than travel on a straight axis. The theory being it would tie people up dealing with wounded Flawed thinking really as the WP were never bothered about casualties as there were literally millions of them as we're seeing in Ukraine now. A 7.62 round would leave a small entrance wound and an exit wound the size of a tea plate so even if you winged someone it would probably take their arm off. An excellent weapon which we should have kept!
Karl you make a very important point there when you mentioned the WP would not worry about picking up their wounded. Thank you for commenting 👍
To suggest the SA80 round was designed to tumble is nonsense. Were this the case it would be incredibly inaccurate. I agree the SLR was a great weapon, easy to strip, clean and get to places the SA80 couldn’t.
@@andyniblock43 The 5.56 round "thumbles" inside the body rather than goes straight through. The logic behind the 5.56 round is from a report that said the more rounds a soldier puts in the direction of the enemy the more likely it is to wound the enemy. If a soldier is killed then he is dead but if he is wounder it takes the effort of three soldiers to recover and extract him from the battlefield.
The SA80 program was a bad deal for everyone. The project got so bad it is rumoured they paid Eugene Stoner £1m for a days work as a consultant. Eugene chambered a round and cycled it through without firing it. He then pointed out every scratch on the casing and how to fix it in 20 minutes. On reflection an M16 variant made in Enfield under lisence would have been a better choice.
@@andyniblock43 I believe it was designed to "tumble" after entering the body, not before that. In flight its trajectory was quite flat. And I also think the idea was that it would cause massive internal bleeding and organ injury, after entering the body and tumbling around - and therefore kill easier, rather than just wound the enemy - as opposed to an entry-exit wound that (if the victim was lucky) would go through flesh without harming internal organs.
Having used the SLR, the SA80, and the SA80A2 in anger, I would say the SLR would be my choice on an open battle field, but the A2 for CQB and restrictive environments like the jungle. When the SLR was about to be phased out my lads were all a bit gutted and didn't welcome the new rifles at all well. I was actually asked by the brass at one point what my solution would be to all the problems we were having with the 80, and my response was to upgrade the SLR with folding stocks like the FN para, a short barrel version for afv crews, re introduce the full auto on all platforms, and include a heavy barrel version with bipod for section support. All of which already existed in other nations arsenals. My observations were met with shuffling feet and a change of subject. Most of us that could do so had acquired the 30 round LMG mag and with a few winks and nudges, had the armourers add an extra section of spring to the magazine follower which prevented stoppages because the LMG mag was designed to feed down with gravity assistance but when fitted to the SLR had to push the rounds up against gravity, not down with it. This mod worked well and gave a full 30 round capacity without feed issues. The same armourer could also supply a rivet pin with the rivet head removed and the pin filed to the correct length which was then inserted before ops and gave full auto to the SLR. We also had spare gas plugs in our cleaning kits as the loss of your gas plug was the most likely problem you might face in the field with the SLR. All of this was of course considered illegal modifications, the RSM would charge you in a split second for any whiff of them in camp, on exercise, or on the ranges, but on deployment he always seemed to have bouts of visual impairment, and on one occasion threatened to put everyone on duties when no one offered a new lad that had lost his gas plug a spare that he knew we had several of. In my opinion there was nothing wrong with the SLR that a modernisation refit couldn't fix. It would have saved a fortune upgrading what we had instead of buying into a completely new platform that was unfit for use and required several evolution to bring up to speed, not to mention we already had the training, the support infrastructure, the skills and tooling, and the stock of spares and reserve stock with the SLR in place, which all had to be replaced. The SA80 was horrible in the field. On ranges in a semi controlled environment it could be fun, but take it out of its comfort zone and it fell apart literally. Insect repellent melted the plastic furniture, it dumped mags non stop, it had constant miss feeds no matter how clean you kept the rifle and mags, the optics lost zero after a few hundred rounds, the firing pin retaining pis was too easy to loose, the field strip was complex and slow, stoppage drills were constant and it was prone to hard extractions. I was once seen to be trying to kick the cocking handle with my boot while under fire to clear a hard extraction it was stuck so tight. My opinion was that the best thing with the rifle was the sling. and even that was a pain. We did of course get all the tweaks and mods done over time but it left us with trust issues that us old hats never quite ever shook off. The new intakes didn't get why we disliked it so much because they had no experience with the SLR as a comparative. The A" saw most of the problems disappear completely and was a much better rifle, but that old gal we once had was always lurking fondly in our memories. Mine was called Daphney and kept me warm and safe in my basha more night than I can count. Apparently ours ended up in India in the end. I hope Daphney is being loved and cared for the way she always was by me.
Great story and interesting point of view, many thanks
India had been building their own for decades; I know some SLRs wound up in Africa. Sierra Leone, maybe other countries.
Please do tell more how to modify to full auto :)
That's correct, India do manufacture the inch pattern FN FAL or "SLR" Apparently they also took a big batch of SLR's from uk stocks during disposal too.@@carlgustav2982
Yeah, I don't think im going to do that here. But its a simple mod done during a field strip if you know how.@@imjinriver641
Shot both. SLR hands down in terms of stopping power, accuracy and reliability.
Not accuracy.
@@sandemike The SLR in my hands was more than accurate enough
I've shot the Australian & British versions of the SLR 1000's of times, if it is more accurate than the SA80 the SA80 must be the worst assault rifle ever!
IMHO & experience the 5.56 M16A1's which we also carried in our sections were far quicker at getting rounds on target (all that matter's really) and far more accurate than the SLR's. (Carry far more rounds too)
As for stopping power, if you get hit anywhere by a 7.62 or the 5.56 you're out of the fight most of the time anyway.
Was that on X Box or Playstation?@@rorynicholson3295
@@rorynicholson3295 just for interest Australians in Vietnam one per squad with m16 and rest with FAL - m16 had underslung grenade so was sort of SAW MG crew and fire support Mortar Crew- was this a good squad load out - or should all have m16 /or FAL
The SLR hit what you pointed it at, and killed what it hit. Nuff said!
👍
When we transitioned from the SLR to the first version of the SA 80, we loved it in the BN, it was light, had a sight and automatic capability, that lasted about a week, the SA80 was a twat to clean in the field, was prone to stoppages, and was not squaddie proof, easy to break. I would take the SLR all day long, but that was because I had used it for a good few years before the SA80 turned up. The SLR, once you mastered it was a very accurate weapon {ammo allowing} hit really hard, and was easy to keep functioning in any conditions, ok it was a bit heavier, a little awkward in CQB but when you butt stroked someone they were down and out. I've heard the HK SA is a world apart from the first incarnation, so lots of the younger vets will no doubt tell us some good things, us old buggers sometimes don't like change, (unless its after buying a pint). Great vid, thanks.
Yes the A2 was so much better after HK got a grip of it for us. Thank you for commenting 👍
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd yeah and the slr would go through a brick wall
The SLR is not an assault rifle. It is a Battle rifle. The difference is that a battle rifle fires a full power rifle cartridge and an assault fires an intermediate cartridge (lower power).
SLR was used as an assault rifle at Goose Green worked extremely well there.
Yeh same here ( Ex RAF) ....got my marksman badge with the 303..it had some kick in your shoulder
At lot guys used put their Berry on their shoulder under their combat jack..and wind up with nice brused impressions of RAF badge on their shoulder. 😅
@@louisdisbury9759The definition of 'assault rifle' means it has to be selective fire, which the L1A1 never was.
I've shot several FAL variants which do have selective fire, including the Israeli heavy barrel & Australian L2A1. Selective fire FAL is too hard to keep on target & the HB variants were poor compared to the Bren.
I agree assault rifle round in between smg and full power battle rifle. First introduced by 2ww german sturmgevehr 44. Most combat is below 400 metres so 7.62 a bit out. But 5.56 m16 tended to go of course in Vietnam dut to small trees.
@@jonbritland8389The original cartridge developed by the UK in conjunction with FN for use in the FAL was a .280/30 cartridge, using a steel cored, 130gr bullet.
I've fired a wildcat round based on it but only from a bolt action.
IMO it would have been far more controllable (& thus effective) in a selective fire FAL than 7.62x51.
“I’d give my right arm to be ambidextrous”! 😂🤣💀
🤣🤣
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Classic - and totally straightfaced delivery too
I gave my right shoulder.
I'd give my brain to be able to remember this one at the right time...
Was lucky enough to know a gentleman that had used both, they were the unit tasked with first using it and evaluating it. He hated the SA80, even showed the MoD guys how useless it was by bending one over his knee. Something he couldn't do with the SLR.
I've never served, but I do think the SLR looked so much better on parade.
I agree John 💯 thank you for commenting 👍
Served in British Army 1969-1976 (Royal Corps of Transport) for 6 years and 42 days!!. Never fired an SA80, only ever used an SLR, which in my opinion is an amazing weapon. I even won a 'Pull Bull' at Aldershot. Good old days!
👍🍻
SLR L1A1 every time, easy to clean, reliable, accurate with excellent stopping power
@@firefly0073 lol, well don't put it in upside down, there's a reason the notch is on the top😁 or do you mean cleaning the carbon out of the plug?
Agreed 👍
@@firefly0073 lol I remember those days.
on the final run up to bisley we were firing anything from 500 to 1000 a day and a clean plug, spring and gas tube plus ports were essential, you could then make the plug adjustment as the day wore on if needed, back in the day i think we used jenolite to help clean the carbon off.
far better products available now thankfully.
i didn't like the plasitc furniture, the dust kicked up in the prone position would settle between your cheek and the plastic, this was like sandpaper especially on a hot dusty day !
Also leaves a serious exit wound,it will open you up like a water mellon
SLR - ONE version
SA80 - MANY versions
Need I say more...
Change SLR to FN FAL & there are more than a few variants. I have both L1A1 & a FAL Para with folding stock & 16" barrel over in the US & prefer the latter for 3 gun competition.
Yes, you could mention that the SLR is one of many variants of the FN FAL.
SLR - MANY versions. We adopted it after it's teething problems were sorted out.
@@simonsignolet5632The UK played a major part in its testing & development.
Had the US not refused to move to an intermediate cartridge for rifles, it would have been even better.
Well put my friend
When I was an armourer in REME, I found the time to mod the safety catch to rotate to the FN auto position. Shorten the trigger plunger and no one could tell at a glance. Never got to live fire auto, but it worked by hand pumping the cocking handle.
SLR tough as old boots. In Aden, soon after we arrived with little in way of spares and bits, lad fell out of his vehicle, foresight protectors were left pointing east and west and wood handguards were matchwood.
In the shop, 'straighten' the foresight guards to normal. Sort out the bits of handguard, add loads of araldite epoxy glue, refitting to said rifle and wrap in flannelette (4x2).
Leave overnight to set, unwrap, clean down wood with a file, good as new. Hand back and out on ops. New handguards on order...
You know Simo out of Catterick? 102 trainer?
Decided to demonstrate the catch release on the GMPG by one-arm swinging it forward to a recruits face and slamming the bolt forward
Never heard someone audibly evacuate their bowels so quick in my life!
At our time doing DECOM over there with REME we got our hands on a lot of supposedly "captured" FALs that were all actually SLRs, meanwhile the guys that turned them in were rocking some suspiciously fresh looking "SLRs"
No one said a word, think they are on display at the Leeds Royal Armouries now! (Alongside an MP40 I got to work on personally, probably the proudest moment of my time there)
We had the full auto version on the FN FAL and we never used it on full auto (apart from trying it now and then). Semi Auto was far superior in every way. The Brits were correct to remove it from their SLR.
Only ever fired the wonderful SLR so can’t compare, but what a piece of kit it was.
Steve I believe you're right mate what a Gat the SLR was, cheers all the best 👍
Not much of a contest. SLR hands down.
In the Australian army we called it the Elephant Gun and loved it
When they went from the SLR to the Steyr, it was like "what's this BS plastic toy".....like the SA80, lots more parts and not as durable.
@@RS-rj5sh I dunno about you but the Steyr AUG (F88) did a lot better than the SA80 practically in every way....
So you've never ever fired the A2, but can state the SLR is better...
Hmmm...
@@darealbukchoyboi A1 maybe. A2, unlikely.
@@darealbukchoyboi im not saying the Steyr wasn't (and isn't) a good weapon. It's just "different" in so many ways to the L1A1
Please dont doubt yourself, this channel is great! Sometimes the simplest concepts are the best. And believe me, allot of people love to see an old soldier talk.
That's really kind and I very much appreciate your comment and support
Absolutely agree a great channel 👏👏👍🇬🇧
25 yrs ago I funded a guy who had designed a muzzle stabiliser that replaced the flash hider and acted as both a recoil brake and prevented muzzle climb on full auto. Worked well also on an M16 and .50cal. Fitted to an SA80, and tested at Warminster, it cured a full auto jamming issue, by being more efficient at extracting gas from the end of the barrel, and not allowing gas to blow back destabilising the next round entering the chamber. Solution was rejected by manufacturer due to high cost of re writing the training manual. Fitted to an M16 you could fire on full auto holding the pistol grip one handed at arms length with the muzzle holding completely still.
Very interesting comment thank you for sharing
Looking back,a slightly smaller and lighter version of slr in say a 6.5mm cal would have been a good idea.loved the simplicity of the FAL design.long list of pros and cons for both weapons,had great fun with both.
It may well have solved a full auto jamming issue, but definitely not by the alleged mechanism you give. Muzzle brakes and the like don't pull gas out of the barrel any faster, nothing out on the muzzle can do that. Integral suppression plus flow through could do that, or a bore evacuator like on a tank gun or the Gemtech GVAC.
Blow back destabilizing the next round entering the chamber... that's just not real in a locked breech firearm like an SA80. If any significant amount of pressure was still present at time of unlocking, the rate of fire of SA80 would be much higher, and SA80 really doesn't have a particularly high rate of fire.
The feed mechanism just isn't very good. It's not gas blowback.
This is also a problem that has literally never been encountered in blowback firearms.
@@superfamilyallosauridae6505 I am not an expert and this was the army instructors' own diagnosis when they tested the device at Warminster
@@StevieGtube I've heard a lot of total baloney from military instructors, this does not surprise me in the least. It was probably as mysterious to them as it was to you, or more.
I used the SLR down south in ‘82 and I am still alive 40 years later..’nuff said.
Respect 🙏 🫡
SLR . Served me well in NI. Won me a marksman shield at Bisley. Enjoying the videos keep em coming. Regards Garry x2 CG
What year were you at bisley
@@steven9562 hi Steven, I was there in 76 Prince Charles now King was also there
I miss bisley and Ash ranges
At pirbright
Thank you Gary, all the best mate 👍
Hi Gary you were there when I was then
I was out in the Falklands, we didn't change our SLRs but we did pick up Argentine GPMGs - we had the Bren L7A1 so a couple of the boys carried the Gimpy. The other advantage of common weapons was 7.62mm. We all started off carrying 150rds - 4 mags of 20 plus the balance in bandoliers. We shot off a fair amount at San Carlos and topped up when we got to Mt Challenger.
Alan, big respect mate and thanks for commenting it's very much appreciated 👍
I am not saying it didnt happen but once you exchanged your british SLR for the Argentine variant, what did the officers and SNCOs say? Then how did you explain it handing back your regular SLR to the Quarter Master?
@@anthonyhassett I was thinking the same thing. You'd have to hump both gats because you couldn't hand it in to the QM while on ops and everyone was on foot AFAIK
@@fatmanfaffing4116 Remember the lost Wessex helicopters on the Atlantic convayer? They were gone, then there was the Great Yop to Port Stanley. Carrying a pair of SLRs? I am guessing Officers, SNCOs and autonomous Special forces groups could get away with stuff like that.
@@fatmanfaffing4116 My old BQMS (Irish FCA) would have cleaning the tarmac on square with tooth brushes if we ever tried carrying around AK variants. There are stories that the SAS took the collapseable stock variants to Northern Ireland for shooting out of cars while waiting for H&K G3s with collapseable stock (Both do the same job compact 7.65 rifle for aerating soft skinned vehicles). I would imagine under Thatcher anything her SAS boys wanted they got immediately.
Still serving but my history goes back some way. In 1989 as a 16 year old I signed up and ended up in the Royal Signals as an apprentice Tele Op TG (some will know that trade). The SLR was my issued rifle and I was really happy with it (I'd been a cadet since 84 so had fired the .303 Lee Enfield Mk4 and Bren Gun) and used to the recoil unlike many of my non cadet service comrades who had never fired a rifle in their life. As I joined HM Forces the SA80A1 was entering service with the Infantry but would not filter down to the other Corps until the early 90's. In training and on the range the SLR was a simple weapon to learn and (having experienced the .303 round) I knew the stopping power of the cartridge and the recoil so was not surprised by it. A few years down the line and I'm a reservist in a volunteer (TA) Infantry Battalion and suddenly learning the new battle rifle, the SA80A1. First thoughts, very plastic, heavy and not as ergonomic as the SLR. On the range I'm aware of the lower recoil pressure and the lack of range but this would change as the years progressed. In training, other than the different components, once you know how to strip, clean and assemble a rifle is a rifle. Albeit the SA80 was a bit more fiddly.
I've since served as a reservist in the Balkans with the SA80A1, and a regular in Afghanistan with the SA80A2. The A1 was a nightmare, stoppages from sand, grit or the case bouncing back into the chamber off the cocking handle. A2 much improved and 100% more reliable (didn't have a single stoppage in the Ghan), and had some very good competition shooting (Bisley) with it (could hit a huns head at 500m). Snap shooting with the SA80 is far easier than the SLR. FIBUA is easier with the SA80. Working out of an AFV is easier with the SA80 but what the SA80 lacks is the stopping power and range of a 7.62mm cartridge! I've seen people wounded by a 5.56mm round and still able to function (not fully, but still dangerous) whereas I've seen 7.62 utterly obliterate an enemy with one hit. Hence why the L129A1 sharpshooter rifle entered service in 2009. Still doesn't answer the question though, SLR or SA80? Well, both have there place and I'm still undecided.
VZCZC 4LF CR 😁
Very interesting comments thank you for taking the time, I like your thinking
Joined REME in 1966 as a 'B' Vehicle Mechanic and my standard personal weapon was the SLR. It was a delight to use and I got a 'Marksman' badge with it. In 1970, I did an 'A' Vehicle Mechanic conversion course and my personal weapon became a SMG although at times I was also issued with the 9mm Browning right up until I became a civvy in 1980.
💯👍
SLR, No Doubt, at least I knew when I was down range, it was going to put down the enemy, I trained on SLR, SMG & Browning 9mm hi power, those were our standard issue, but I did also train on the Lee Enfield .303 as an Army Cadet in the early 1980's now that a cracking weapon.
Lee Enfield, first full calibre weapon I fired as an Army Cadet in 1968, we all weighed about 3/5s of Sweet Fanny Adams so grouping and zeroing was fun - the white patch had to be about knee level on a figure 11 to guarantee that we'd get some rounds on the target.
Yes the .303 was a cracking weapon, it cracked many a collar bone. 😳😳
All good bits of kit
Irish Army had the same FN as the Argies, fired it on full auto once, apart from the Lee Enfield MK 4 the best rifle you could ever be lucky enough to use.
David, brilliant to hear from someone who served with the Irish Army, thank you for your support mate 👍. I didn't know that you guys had the FN, awesome. All the best brother, take care mate 👍
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Irish Army got the the FN late as defense was not a primary concern for the new state. This was for dealing with Mercenaries in the Congo. Please see Siege of Jadotville
No Irish did not get the same FN-FAL as the Argentinians. The Irish one was made in Belgium by FN but the Argentinian one was made under licence in Argentina.
@@anthonyhassett They look very similar almost identical, Irish FN was made in Belgium thought the Argi FN was also made in Belgium. I remember ours was referred to as the FN SLR, I am going back 50 yrs now with my memory re, the FN.
@@daviddoyle5291 No the Agentine FN FAL was made under liscence by a state company. Its a common thing, a country wanting to control its own defence manufacturing, even if it is under lisence. I am not sure that the Argentine copy was as good as the British imperial or FN Original patterns.
I worked with the SLR and SA80 mark 1 for approximately 60/30 of my 13-year career. I received the SA80 with an overwhelming sense of disappointment, until I fired it. I became an immediate convert and forgave it all its faults after feeling the balance of rifle, how easily the recoil was absorbed and how quick it is to reset to fire the next round. The SA80 gave more confidence a static target would be hit with a higher consistency than with an SLR. When you looked over the sites you were more than likely going to hit the target.
The most dangerous thing on a battlefield is not an officer with a map but the keen to please accountants, who went to work on the furniture attached to the SA80 with predictable results. Fortunately, the engineers retained control on the rifles firing characteristics and made the business end of the rifle far superior to that of the SLR. If the amount of ammunition expended to hit the target was discussed the SA80 would show why it is the best rifle in service with an army.
Almost certainly down to the smaller cartridge. It's much easier to stay on a target with an SA80. The SLR could be a bit of a handful, especially for soldiers of a smaller stature.
Thanks for the reply. The magazine being moved to behind the trigger brings the weapons centre of gravity closer to the shoulder, thus providing a more stable firing position. @@DrFod
Agree. For all its simplicity and hitting power, the SLR just didn’t have the accuracy that the (complicated) F88 delivers. If you don’t hit the target, the terminal effect is irrelevant.
Infantry 71 to 77 so I used the SLR extensively. I was a boy soldier for two years and then joined 1RGJ for four and a half years. I was a marksman on it and liked the weapon enormously. Used LMG magazines on a South Armagh tour a few times but you did have to re zero because of the weight of the extra rounds so largely stopped doing that. There simply in my view weren’t any problems with the SLR whatsoever. Used the SUIT in the later years of my service. A very good sight. We set the SUIT sight at 100 and 300 metres. We shot at up to 600 metres on iron sights and you learned to aim slightly high with the SUIT sight. Practice makes for perfection. Carrying 7.62 ammunition wasn’t ever a problem. The alternative was to not carry enough and that was never going to happen. Your life could have depended on it. Never used the SA80 but I was shown one as a reservist later on. I’d heard about some of the problems like the magazine release etc. I was surprised at the weight of the weapon. I read that it wasn’t as accurate as it was supposed to be initially and they added extra weight to it to improve its accuracy. 5.56 simply doesn’t have the range or stopping power that 7.62 has. In the Afghanistan campaign, they introduced the 7.62 sharpshooter weapon to overcome that problem. That tells me a lot about 5.56. So it’s the SLR or its modern equivalent for me!
I was a QMSI in ITDU during the A2 reliability trials so my opinion is slightly biased. Remember the context of why we replaced SLR back in the early 80s - politically we wanted to make our own weapon (I dont think we would do it again but as the H&K guys said the problem with A1 wasn't so much the design but the manufacturing/tolerance problems in its production in Enfield/Nottingham especially the poor magazines), doctrinally we needed to move to standard NATO ammunition anyways and at the time we were mainly in BAOR (temperate environment) and we wanted a smaller (bullpup) weapon to use in trenches and the back of 432s in that environment - the SLR was long, heavy and cumbersome. Good point that we had to change the APWT as the SUSAT improved marksmanship to such a degree everyone was getting Marksman - we had to make it harder. There was lots of negative press and misinformation during that time and I honestly never read an accurate article on SA80 - I believe H&K sorted it out and hence its still in service as the A3 - if it was so bad it wouldn't be!. I won't mention the LSW! That said I actually preferred the German G36 over both systems.
Agree G36 everytime….although I did love the M16, and I trained and did most of my service with the SLR….but the G36 great weapon
Gunner?
I had a copy of the Trial report of the A2 and it made very interesting reading as it revealed a number of facts that Never SA-80 mates couldnt handle. Part of the A1's issue was the Trials condirtions were not representaive of a battle field day - they estimated that only 90 rds would be fired in a day. The Trial of the A2 expanded that several times over. Trials simulated an advance to contact, attack, counter attack and consolodation. Memory serves up to 500 rds would be fired in a day without cleaning. The Trial also introduced a number of torture tests - mud and sand were involved and the A2 outperformed the A1, M16 AND AK-47. Who knew!
@@jamescoleman8287 We had a busy time doing the trials (in Alaska, Kuwait and Brunei) and the Battlefield Missions (as we called them) pushed the weapons to the limits. I cant remember the actual figures but we rarely had a Trapped Fired Case (which happened regularly on the A1 with the round not fully ejecting). Despite this the press just hated it (H&K/Bae weren't happy as it reflected on their reputation) with some journalists who had been in cadets suddenly became the SME. At the same time we also were bringing in the new grenade, Armour piercing ammunition for the AI L115 and a fair few UORs as Op Jacanna was kicking off- I remember not being in Warminster much that year.
@@paulbostock9448 yes mate - how's it going Paul?
What a cracking video! I used the SA80 Rifle and LSW but as a Regimental shooting team member (3 UK Div) I was fortunate to get to use several other platforms. Both rifle and LSW would often jam with a full colt magazine so I dropped my mags to 25 rounds each and took an extra mag. Never had need or cause to the bayonet as I wasn't in an infantry regiment.
While I only got to use it on two occasions, he SLR was a dream to use and maintain. The object was to learn to use other 5.56, 7.62 and Russian ammunition platforms should primary weapons fail (I had 2 firing pins break on the SA80 in competition practice). If I had the choice between the two I would have picked the SLR every time and the only thing I didn't like was that a mounted sight was placed on the upper receiver cover which could move a little and cause accuracy issues at longer distances. I also never wanted to fire anything automatic aside from the GPMG. I wish I could have tried the Bren out.
Instant subscribe, really looking forward to hearing your banter and topics, mate!
Hi Bret, many thanks for commenting it's very much appreciated mate 👍
My initial training, way back in the 60s, was with the SLR. Liked it a lot, but then again I was just a kid - big boys toys! When I joined my regiment (RTR) my personal weapon, not counting the 120mm Chieftain gun, was an SMG. Dead easy to use and maintain - lousy accuracy beyond spitting distance but good enough for our needs. Annual weapon test was boringly easy to pass. Eventually I moved on to the Medical Services, but my personal weapon as hospital staff remained the SMG or Browning pistol. I had my one and only experience with the SA80 in 1992 I think. It felt very odd to handle, for me. Didn't like it at all, unfortunately. Since retiring in '93 I've had a lot more experience with various weapons (I live in Texas!) so I would probably appreciate the SA80's good points much more now than that one 'fun shoot' experience that I had.
Enjoyed you video mate.
Thanks for commenting 👍 great to hear from Texas
I left the services in 1976 so never fired the SA80 but I loved the SLR and fired thousands of rounds through it and at the very least it looked like a proper weapon.
Cracking looking Rifle, and just fitted me so well
Me also@@LetsTab59-bd4fd
South Armagth, knocked on farmhouse door to scrounge some matches and an old lady invited me in for a warm, oppos waited in yard. Sat in front of their coal range smoking my snout with bren on bipod on floor next to me and old lady said "that looks like a terrible weapon you have there". Just then her adult son came downstairs, he looked very suprised to see me! I think he'd been hiding and his mom told me that they'd had a problem with the last unit posted locally "because of the smuggling".
👍
People don’t realise even until recently how much smuggling went on between the north and south!
"No rounds in the chamber - no magazine on the rifle!" I laughed out loud. The L85A1 - the reason why British servicemen needed eyes in the back of their heads - not to look for enemy, just to track where you were leaving your magazines.
After the cold war ended, Mikhail Kalashnikov visited Britain. He was taken to the Royal Ordnance factory in Nottingham, and shown the SA80. He looked at it for a while, and finally said: "You must have some very clever soldiers."
Brilliant Steve
Joined in 1977. Issued with the SLR. As an Army Cadet, i had fired the SLR both Full Bore & .22 conversion. Loved it!🥰🥰🥰
First came across the SA80 in the mid 80's when attached to the Royal Scots.
So many problems with the A1. Too fragile. To fiddly. Not able to be fired left handed.
When Op Granby 'kicked off' in 1991, The Royals found that whilst training in the desert, the magazine catch was being activated when carrying out Fire & Manouvere. As Keith said, the guys would get down into a fire position and begin to open fire. 1 round & click!
Magazine had dropped off!😱😱
Not what an Infanteer needs!🤬🤬
I didnt use the A2 or A3. But i believe once Heckler Koch got hold of the weapon, they carried out many modifications.
Since yhe Bullpup design has been though of in 1942 with the EM2 you would have thought that 40+ years of R&D would have 'ironed out' the problems before mass production.
Personally, my choice would still be the SLR over the SA80.
If you are hit by 7.62mm chances are 'you aint getting up'!👍👍👍👍👍
Cheers Nobby, I'm following your videos on your channel 👍 keep going mate 👍
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Thanks Buddy. I'm going to concentrate on the Wellbeing aspect of Tabbing, whilst you corner your market. I really enjoy your posts!🥰
Bri gs back so msny happy memories.
Yes, there are times i remember those i lostduring and after my Military career. But they keep those people 'alive'. 👍👍
Keep going with your posts. Your channel is growing lovely.👍👍👍🤜🤜🤜🤜
Yeah, the magazine catch was a defo problem on the A1. They put a guard around it and strengthened the spring on the A2 IIRC
They knew about the mag catch before it entered service the initial batch sent out for field tests also suffered from the plastic furniture reacting to the issue inpel melting the plastic, suit sights weren't properly purged and fogged up on hot days and if you got a bit rough with the charging handle it broke off it was beyond a joke.
"Since the Bullpup design has been thought of in 1942 with the EM2"
Believe it or not, I think the bullpup concept in military rifles actually goes back to 1901 with the Thorneycroft bolt action rifle. Far out, isn't it..?!
SLR with the 7.62 NATO every time. If you ran out of ammo, in eyeball to eyeball parties a decent strike with the wooden stock could down an elephant (like the L.E. 303) . Plastic stock made it feel like a toy. Would make a great jungle weapon if the barrel was sawn off/shortened like a Mob shotgun and 'tricked' into full auto. A month or two training & tabbing with the SLR onboard and the weight was no issue - even with two mags taped together and loaded. Loved the GIMPY and if you could operate with that, the SLR was lightweight. Early 1970s: One naughty incident I had: running back to the helo I must have inadvertently caught the mag release catch on my belt-gear and, unknown at the time, the mag dropped off. As we took off I discovered the loss. Pilot immediately did a quick circuit (brilliant reaction) and returned to precisely the same spot. I jumped out, ran back to where I guesstimated the mag fell off, found it immediately (luck or skill?) and remounted the helo. Just as well there were no bandits nearby. Missed a charge by a hairs breadth. Serious but y'gottalaff.
👍🙏
The #1 choice. Came as standard for Action Man.
🤣👍
Ex REME Armourer here. On exercise we would occasionally convert our SLRs to fire auto as well as single shot. it was easy with only two components requiring alteration. The volume of fire that came from A&G was outstanding and the cone of flame coming from the flash eliminator was a sight to see!! We made sure we changed them back before they were handed in. SA80 or SLR? Horses for course really. Loved the SLR but also the weight, kick and auto capability of the SA80. Great video Keith, I miss the old days.
Me too mucker me too
The SLR! Came back from Ripon down the A1 in the back of a 4 Tonner. Decided to save time and clean it along with everybody else. All done and dusted went through the drill and watched in horror as my gas plug rod and spring sailed over the tailgate,,,,,,,,,,Cost me £50.00 back at base. Loved the rifle when fitted with the mag from an LMG. Late in 88 I gave a presentation of the SA80 To the general staff at Sorbrane barracks in Lincoln. We had problems with the dust covers. magazine release and the gas port under the top cover. Lots of problems to start with. Keep up the good work Keith.
SLR all day, though I can't fault the M16, M203 the grunts in my day loved the SLR and swore by it,as a killing machine I never heard a grunt complain about them. I loved mine and thought it was sexy as fuck, I felt like a real soldier with it,,
Cheers Tim 🍻
Hi Tim, as an army cadet on a summer camp, one of the regulars who were DSing asked if I could lose an LMG mag for him, as he was off to Northern Ireland next. Being a reasonably bold and decent sort, I duly did so and as a cadet, there were no real consequences for the loss. The regular was naturally dead chuffed. Years later, as a regular myself, I wondered about stoppages. The LMG mag was feeding downwards, so the spring was not designed to be strong enough to push the very last rounds up into an SLR…But if you upgraded the spring, then, yes an epic extended mag?
😁 I know the feeling! I spent half an hour crawling around Sennybridge in the rain at night looking for my spring and rod. Stupid gun could not be stripped if it was jammed.
Happy Days! Give me the 303 any day.
I was issued an SLR in 1971 with a wooden stock and but that we used linseed oil on, then the armourer came and took the stock off and put a plastic one on. We used to store the oil, cleaning wadding brush and drawstring in the butt.
Our official gun was the SMG but we kept SLR 's in the armoury above the guardroom and regually went to the ranges.
When we deployed to Northern Ireland in 72 and 74, we took our SLR's
I remember using a plimsol sole to whack the linseed oil into the furniture. I kept my triangular wooden stock when it was replaced by the oval grip of the plastic and fitted it for a tour of Andy town. I only ever used A1 version of SA80, not impressed but know by A3 it is a good weapon.
@@peterbrown1012 SA80 only appeared in 78. I was on the TAPC course at Warminster that summer, we got to play with the first one, bull-pup is a great idea but loses the range image. What I mean by that is similar to landing a Heavy jet - you fly it into the flare, focused on the touchdown zone, and switch to the end of the runway as it touches, because the way it's pointed against crosswind is not the direction you need it pointed when slowing, rolling on the runway. Similarly, feeling the bullet trajectory through crosswinds is greatly helped with a long barrel in front of you. OK, this isn't FIBUA, but then again, I'm not adverse to cold steel.
Cheers Peter, thanks for commenting 👍
I served in Aden with the RAF. The army and RAF regiment at that time used the FN; us poor airmen were issued with old WW2 kit. I once rode shotgun around Crater in an enclosed car carrying a .303. A brilliant rifle in my opinion, highly accurate, but not designed to be fired from a small car, muzzle out of the window, the back plate in the driver's lap. I told the driver that if we came under fire, he was not to drive through it, but to stop and let me out so that I could take up a comfortable firing position on the pavement; the terrs would wait for me of course.
Nice story Bob thank you mate 👍
When I initially seen the title pop up mentioning the SLR,,it was a must watch... The talk/walk through was a great old memory lane wander, so thanks for that. As for rifle choice, never had the SA80, so my choice would be old school reliability. I was a Blowpipe/Javelin operator (air defence unit R.A. in the 80's) So carrying FHC's and your SLR was always a careful scenario lol....Its very clear to see your time spent in the past was imbedded in, even in a wide open field, not a soul to be seen for miles, you constantly looked over your shoulder, checking the shrubbery, gotta love the training we had eh. 👍 Keep up the great work and all the best in your channel growth.
Thank you so much for commenting. Until you mentioned I was looking over my shoulder I hadn't realised I was doing it . All the best mate 👍
Get that lamp swinging. I was 1977 to 1986. only fired the early SA80 on a 30 meter range. For target shooting as a bit of fun, I thought the low recoil was great, a bit like an air rifle. Going against an enemy I would definitely take the SLR.
When I was in, on exercise everyone wanted an SMG, light, short, didn’t get caught on branches, didn’t bash your head when over your shoulder. When we went to the Falklands nobody wanted an SMG ! Everyone wanted the most stopping power possible. Automatic puts a lot of rounds down, but there’s a confidence in knowing one hit from a 7.62 will drop anyone, even if they’re behind cover. My SLR could be dragged through mud, and dropped on rocks, and I could rely on it.
Welcome to the NAAFI Bar 😆
Seen a few ND's with the SMG.
@@andrewcornford2306 Shitty Indian ammo was usually the culprit, not enough blow back to recock the working parts. Or not cocking it fully in the first place.
The SMG. Venerable but awful.
@@georgejohnson7591Curry Puffs!
I joined the TA at 16 in the early 90’s and used a SLR for the first couple of months before changing to SA80. Joined the regs at 18 and served for 24 years and in those almost 26 years with the SA80 I never really experienced any of the problems that are widely reported in the press. Yes if you didn’t look after it you would get dramas but that is the same with any firearm. As to your question I would 100% pick the SA80 to go into battle with, so many plus points over the SLR. More ammo, optics, more compact for vehicles, easier to use for FIBUA, being able to ‘acquire’ ammo from the yanks easier ( who want to break down link for 7.62?)
Thanks for commenting
Thoroughly enjoying these videos mate.
And having used both, like you, the SA80 every time.
Thank you so much for your comment and support it's much appreciated
I joined the RAF as a boy in 1963, and learned to shoot with the 303 Lee Enfield rifle and the Bren gun.
I believe the SLR came into service in 1954, but I never saw one before 1971! New firearms were issued to the RAF several years after the army (except for the RAF Regiment, who got them when the army did).
In 1968 I joined a parachute team consisting of only nine men, and our personal weapons were SMGs: I don’t know why - the rifle was the personal weapon of junior ranks as a rule - but I appreciated not having to tote the greater weight!
In later years I represented RAF units at Bisley, firing the SLR, SLP, and SMG. During one of my NI tours I had the opportunity to fire an AK47: it impressed me greatly!
By the time I was demobbed in 1987 the SA80 was still unavailable to most RAF personnel, and I never fired one. Nor saw one.
I couldn't watch your video after you started to talk of the SA80 because I was suffering from motion sickness! But I suspect that I would opt for the SLR because I know it so well. Unless, of course, the AK47 was on offer!
I preferred the SLR, did not like the SA80 when it came out, no stopping power and a shorter range.
Agreed 👍
For me it's the L85 A2, just because of the amount of ammunition that you could carry. I had a chance to fire both the SLR and the FN FAL, both great strong rifles, but what a kick you got from them. This is your best video yet, mate. A very interesting topic.
God help you with a No4!
@@edjones7709 I own a smle and a no. 4 so I know what they kick like
Many thanks John I appreciate your comment and support 👍
Did you turn gas up or down? Just jokes with bang comes range.
A friend of mine (who has sadly past) was a Vietnam veteran, he told me if they were in camp at Nui dat they would carry around the M16 because it was light but if they were going on patrol (outside the wire) they would take the SLR L1A1, when you hit something with that it stayed down and our SAS would cut the barrel down to make it easier to handle for their work, good video mate all the best.
Cheers Ken, I've heard similar comments from over your way mate. Thank you for your support mucker
Just found you ( like & subscribed) really interesting talk about the SLR and SA80. Reminded me of my Army Cadet Force days when we had to do SLR drill with Lee Enfield rifle, not easy 🙂
The SLR is in my opinion, the best rifle ever made.
👍
No 2 ways about it! The SLR was a hard hitting weapon, it was the absolute "Take down" option...........
Exactly 💯
Like most viewers I could still strip the SLR blindfolded even after all these years. Served us well during Gulf 1990/1.
Cracking Rifle
From using both, I always remember my sergeant saying “if you’re facing someone hiding behind a wall, the SLR will go straight through the wall and take them out, the SA80, will put 2-3 rounds in exactly the same place and drill a hole through”. From a usability POV SA80 was great due to bullpup, short aspect but from a one shot, one kill, SLR every time. There was an article that I can’t find now but which came out in the 90’s about how there was a change in calibre across western countries to smaller calibres as wounding a casualty was a great draw on resource than an outright kill. Not a complete answer but AK-74 (5.56), AR-15/M-16 (5.56), SA80 (5.56) and others.
All the wee changes to the SLR during my time in regular service, plastic furniture replacing the wood, SUIT sight and IWS. Also the iron sights got the large aperture and luminous foresight if I remember correctly. I only handled the A1 during TA service and it was a very fragile piece of kit at that point. Keep this up Keith, pure nostalgia!
Alex cheers mate 👍
I used the FN and our replacement 5.56 rifle over my military career. I have never shot the UK SA80, however. During my first 5 years in the regular army, I lugged around the Canadian-made FN C1 A1. In 3 decades of military service and 5 deployments, I've never fired a weapon in combat so I'm certainly no authority.
Minor technicality. Canada was the first nation to adopt the FN as its official small arm. The 'tweaks' you refer to were done by Canada initially. Aside from being made semi auto only, the big one was to convert the rifle from the Belgian metric measurements to Imperial. Once that work was done, Australia and the UK jumped on board and adopted the rifle as well. Of course Canada also built and used the C2 LAR version with bipod, heavier barrel and 30 rd mags. The Australians used them as well but also kept 7.62 Brens...
As for Argy rifles being swapped for Brit rifles... I'm not sure. IIRC, the Argy rifles were metric pattern (I could be wrong on this). If so, the mags would not be interchangeable. Full auto FALs are impossible to control. And with 20 rd mags, a bit of a waste of time. I can't see a soldier surrendering his tried and true, zeroed rifle for a strange one... except in an emergency as a battlefield pick up. Many of the Argy rifles had folding para stocks which may have been attractive in that way.
You say that .308 is significantly bigger than .303 which is not true. They are variations of the venerable .30 cal rd. Is it possible you meant to say that .308 was significantly bigger than .223?
SOF units preferring M 16. I had a conversation with an NCO in 22 SAS in 1984. Being young, I was blathering on about how cool the new SA80 was going to be. He simply said that he'd fired both the SA80 and the new US M16A2 and preferred the M16. He also said he was aware of the new rifle we were going to build in Canada based on the M16 and said we were getting the better small arm. Fast forward a few years and the SAS ran trials for a dedicated small arm. The winner was Diemaco Canada and its rifle was selected.
Which would I choose for battle? I think the UK was ahead of the game in wanting to go to a smaller, faster bullet way back prior to WW1. Then again prior to WW2 (wars kept getting in the way). Then Germany proved the effectiveness of the smaller bullet and, a few years later, so did the Soviets. NATO was bullied into .308 by the US. Ironically, after they made us all standardize on the heavier, bigger bullet, they turned around and adopted the 5.56! The obsession with the .30 cal bullet took a while to die. Good for LARs, GPMGS and DM rifles, but not needed for the average soldier. 5.56 recoils less, you can carry more (on both my Afghanistan tours, I was issued 300 rds in 10 mags. Imagine that in 7.62 loaded in steel FN mags!). I've always believed that one of the main purposes of an infantry platoon is to provide protection for and to get into position its most effective weapon - the GPMG. Sure, theirs winkling badguys out of caves, trench clearing, building clearing, low-level maneouvre etc... but individual riflemen just don't have the same effect. As such, the fantasy of making 1,000 yd shots etc are silly. A 5.56 rifle is just an all round more useful tool. Much as I love the FN (I own 2).
Thank you I always appreciate proper insight, I stand corrected 👍 many thanks for your support and input 👍
Cannuks still make or " tweak" firearms.
I shot canuck 303 that went through world war two.
It was my competition rifle and looked like a dog and chewed it from butt to fore end.
It had three colour furniture.
It looked like a piece of scrap wood wise but shot like a dream.
Mechanically perfect once I got a new W spring.
Trying asking an armourer with literally a thousand 303s behind him for a new W spring.
My first five answers were.
" Have you tried cleaning it?"
Or my personal favourite was " Just bend it at the bottom and it will work better"
This is a forty year old battle rifle with the original W spring.
The L1A2 heavy barrel SLR was used (in Australia in the 70s and 80s) by rear echelon troops mostly. Infantry used the Bren in 7.62mm up until Vietnam when they converted to the US M60 (a derivative of the German MG42), partly for commonality and partly for change in doctrine. Belts versus mags with more ammo carried in link than heavy mags and the M60 being more an area weapon than the sniper rifle the Bren had a reputation for. Also experience in Malaya and Borneo found it easier to toss a belt across a jungle path when ambushed than mags, according to one veteran I spoke to. Brens were issued to us for UNTAG Namibia as they were considered defensive weapons compared to the M60. To be fair, the L1A2 was never taken very seriously as it was the 'gun' used to defend the HQ, the cook house, the portable shower truck etc.
@@michaeldoolan7595 Conversely, I inherited a Canadian-built No 4 Enfield (dated 1950) from my Dad and it is so pristine, I haven't dared to shoot it yet.
@@fatmanfaffing4116 Yes, I was aware of that. We (Canada) were one of the few countries to extensively use the LAR version of the FAL. We had 2 per infantry section right up until 1988 when it was replaced by the belt-fed FN Minimi (C9).
I always wondered why the Aussies eschewed their L2A2s in favour of the heavier 7.62 Brens.... However, they were actually fighting a war at the time while we weren't so I'll defer to them. I suppose the removable barrel featured prominently in the decision... along with the proven reliability etc...
I was in the Falklands in 82. We did get hold of captured FN’s. They were an absolute pig to fire on automatic. Really hard to hold the barrel down. Made me realise why SLR wasn’t automatic.
I can only imagine the kick and trying to hold it on full auto
The FAL similar to the M-14 has poor accuracy on Automatic setting. The Rifle works best fired semi automatic with steady hands. Too much climb on automatic.
The Irish issued FN-FAL had an automatic setting. We never fired it on Automatic on the range. There would have been consequences and repercussions if it was fired on the range in that manner.
I believe during the initial FN/FAL trials, the inability to fire accurately on auto was why our SLRs were single shot only.
Aussie veteran here, joined in '87 and like you I started on the SLR then transitioned to our (ADF's) bullpup, the F88 Steyr. Personally I'd have the SLR any day but then I'm a dinosaur. The reliability and ruggedness of the weapon and the 7.62 mm hitting power is always reassuring. The F88 is a decent weapon that's for sure but I just never did get to love the plastic stuff, still deployed with this and it was fine for what I needed.
I trained with the SLaR, L4, Sterling and eventually the L42, I've also used the Armalite and I'd take the L85A2 over any of them. The problem was never the concept or design it was the bloody awful build quality. The standard sight unit on the SA80 made a huge difference to the average tom, the 20" barrel gives the 5.56 reach and accuracy in a compact package. The changeover to the SA80 caused major resentment because of lefties and the rifles falling apart. I had 19" biceps and had to rethink as i regularly dumped the mag until i learnt.
The most comprehensive discussion I've seen Keith, well done and kudos on the old ambidextrous joke lol.
😆 🤣 I had to put that old joke in there, just couldn't resist it. Thank you for your support my friend hope you're well and enjoying the beautiful area where you live. Take care
I remember one lad in basic training cleaning the barrel of his SLR put too much wadding on the pull through , the string snapped and the wadding getting stuck fast down the barrel . To try and free it up he then stuffed a Bic Biro and a coat hanger wire down the barrel and they got stuck too!! It took the half the Troop about an hour to free it all up! 🙂.
I only ever fired the SLR and GPMG on a firing range and all I know is that I would never want to be on the receiving end of those two legends!
Keep up the good work Sir.
Thanks for commenting and your support mate 👍
I suppose who carries a brass ram rod in their pack - the only thing for removing an obstruction without damaging the bore
We were always getting wadding jammed and snapped pull throughs in the barrels of the L98s in the LI ACF. Always had to send them back to the armoury.
That was why there was the loop on the far end of the pullthrough (Three loops - A.G.F. (All Guns Firing)- Armourer, Gauze, Flanelette). The REME armourer has a hook for that very purpose. A pint would guarantee anonymity.
Really enjoyed your video you explain so clearly keep up the good work
Thanks that's very kind
Was interesting hearing your take on this as you were there during the transition period. Here in Canada the SLR was designated the FN C1.
Thanks for commenting it's appreciated mate 👍 hope all good over in Canada 🇨🇦 👍
I had many a tough night figuring out the complexities of the SA80 sling....
Me too
The sling was the best bit of the rifle.
😁It was ridiculous! I put myself in a straight jacket once by clipping the wrong clips onto my webbing and sa80
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Spot on It was far too fiddley!
1988.... transition period, used both, preferred SLR for sure.
Me too 👍
Your presentation was an excellent account of the pros and cons of both weapons and I reckon the SLR was a great ‘bangstick’!!
Thank you Tony and thanks for your support 🙏
Anyone remembers the matchstick placed in the SLR to make it full auto until it broke the matchstick.
Yes made it auto with the BFA fitted but if you left it in the GAT double tapped😂😂😂😂😂.
Yep lol
Always used to did that mod with a BFA on, great fun.
Bet you couldn't hit shit lol
Favourite trick the last time I did the matchstick conversion was when I served in The TA Then I got further promotion and I was issued with an SMG anyway we were on the range one weekend doing Range Control and all of a sudden shortly after I had said Watch and Shoot, Watch and Shoot there was a burst of automatic fire well I nearly fell off the chair needless to say the range was shut down till further notice till the Armorer checked out the rifle.
I used the SLR in 1 RAR in the 70's and early 80's, it WAS classed as an assault rifle here in Oz but we never had any left handed versions or modifications
I along with a friend created experimental armour test samples 200x200x25mm in dimension and weighing 200 grams per plate. It's composition was an exfoliated graphite reinforced Polyurethane wrapped in a sheet of aramid for anti spalling purposes. The bigger 7.62x51 FMJ penetrated 20mm's into the plate while the smaller 5.56x45 55 grain FMJ only managed 4.5mm. I would point out at this stage that the latter was discharged from a Remington 700 with a full length barrel and a sound suppressor on the end of it. The speed at impact was probably around 3200~3400fps as it was only discharged from 8 yards away. As the tests were conducted in the USA we had the opportunity to test other weapons and ammo types to include 7.62x39 FMJ, 5.45x39 FMJ and 5.56x45 M855 Green Tip, none of which offered full penetration and none of the plates showed any sign of back face deformation. So as a non-military man considering the question, I'd probably want the SLR but I imagine the ammunition is heavier, that I would be unable to carry as much of it compared to 5.56x45 and that there may be compatibility problems with allies serving with me. Also, if two paddies from Belfast can make that armour in our kitchens for fun I'd hate to be in a war in which high quality armour was prolific as putting people down for good might be easier said than done even if you're using the SLR.
Fantastic information in your comment very interesting experiment 👍
SLR every time I was serving in 1987 and had both. I preferred the ease of cleaning and reliability of SLR and the stopping power but the compactness and lightweight of the SA80 (but only the A3 variant).
💯👍
I remember the insect repellent melting the sa80
A1 chin guard.and I'm a lefty had to learn to shoot right handed.
Did my basic at Pirbright guards depot back in the day during the transition. I loved the slr.
So slr for me
👍
Used the SLR in the Falklands, Northern Ireland etc. Great rifle. If they’d shortened the barrel by four inches it would have been perfect for today’s use.
👍💯
Reference SLR "Single Shot" /Automatic Fire.
When I joined the TA in 1971 the SLR training pamphlet we had (blue book) still had a chapter about the section commander having a SLR capable of firing a 3 round burst !
Never saw one !
The photograph in the manual showed a change lever with a "burst" option after the obvious "S" and "F".
Very interesting, so maybe they were considering a fully automatic version 🤔
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Since I posted my earlier comment I have seen photographs of Argentinian FNs captured in the Falklands War, these had the 3-shot burst capability, some had a "paratrooper" version with a skeleton folding stock.
NAAFI rumours have told me that the proper, fully auto version of the FN was rejected by the War Office as it "wasted too much ammo". This fully auto version was more robustly built (heavier) , with a much heavier barrel and a bipod. To my mind it would have been akin to the converted to 7•62 Bren guns we knew as the LMG.
All the best, enjoy your posts for all the memories that they stir up.
Ex Scots Guards ('75 to '90) here, great vids, keep it up. They had to rewrite the drill manual when they brought out the SA80 so the Guardsmen could still do public duties, Trooping the colour etc.. I only used the SLR so I would stick with it. Cheers
Thank you for your support 🙏
The Australian Army replaced their SLR's with the AUG Steyrs in the late 80's/early 90's. Like this, there were similar issues going from the larger and sturdier SLR to a 5.56 "plastic fantastic" type of rifle. Drill was a big issue, Drill with the SLR looked great , with the new bullpup rifle it was a dogs breakfast. The shorter rifles simply weren't great to drill with. In fact to this day the ceremonial unit of the Australian Army still uses the SLR for Drill, over 30 years since SLR's were removed from active service use.
Which battalion? I was with 2SG LAD 76-77.
@@edjones7709 1SG Chelsea bks then
SLR was lovely for me,easy to take apart even in the dark 😀.Yes we had to do that in cabin on St Edmund hdg south,,happy days.Good vid mate,all the best.
Cheers Jerry much appreciated mate 👍
I served during the crossover between the two rifles, I trained on the SLR in basic which was more of a familiarization incase we ever got posted to a unit still using them and fired 40 rounds down the range and that was it. So I cant give an accurate account as I didn't have it as a personal weapon. I had the SA80 a1 with SUSAT sight, trained with it in basic and could strip it down and reassemble it blindfolded. I knew it inside out you could say. Encountered many of the problems you spoke about. I only got gas stoppages on the LSW though which was a quick fix changing the gas settings. I didn't like the LSW but it was my section weapon for the first 6 months in battalion until another sprog came along then it got pushed onto him. With the SA80 I passed the APWT no problem scored marksman every year with it. I never fired it in anger but used it in BATUS for 6 weeks in the field and didn't have a single issue with it once the magazine dumping problem was sorted out. Fired a Hell of a lot of live rounds through it in Canada as well. Also used it on several exercises in Germany some real cold ones and again never had any issues with the A1. I was given the SA80 A2 when I rejoined as a combat medic in the TA about 10 years after I left the the Army, that was a good weapon by then HK had sorted out everything and introduced the forward assist when you cock the weapon. I hated the iron sights though and longed for my old SUSAT sight back. As much as I like the SLR if I was going into a battlefield situation where my life depended on it I would have to go with what I know and I know the SA80, so as long as I was given the A2 or A3 with a SUSAT sight I would be happy.
Thanks for the great video
Urm......SMG for me being tank crew 😂😂😂
what was you issued?
Good bit of kit and on exercise never fired it because never had blank 9mm
I believe you will find that the .303 projectile was .311-.312 inch diameter and the 7.26mm was .308 inch so the older British bore was larger by a few thou. But saying that the 7.62 was more ballistically efficient and because of the rimless cartridge allowed straight high capacity mags as opposed to the curved design on the old favorite LMG the Bren or even older design Lewis gun.
Also I remember seeing some 30 round mags in use with SLR's I believe they were Belgium manufacture designed for the FAL select fire version.
PS I was engineers so our go to was the 9mm Sterling and HP35 Browning pistol with it's double stacked mag.
PPS. 9mm was .310 inch dia.
👍👍🍻
9mm Parabellum has a bullet diameter of 0.355" (or 35 calibre as they say over the pond).
Sorry my OCD kicked in and I had to mention this. 😁
All the best.
Will, An American here. I have used the SLR in civilian use. Grand weapon and easy to use. I was trained with the M14, M1, and M16A1 as a Marine, carrying the latter in Vietnam (with 20 rd. mages). So the issues are similar...SLR/SA80 vs M14/M16...weight/7.62 vs 5.56/range, etc. I have no experience with the SA80 but I have fired bullpup 5.56 rifles. First, I concede the FN SLR did not get a proper test when compared to the M14 by the US Military in selection or we might have carried the SLR like so many other nations (as indeed, the Italians did a better job making a better version of the M14 with their BM59 from old M1s [as I learned post service time])). Since the M14s sights were basically the same as the M1 and maybe the best issue rifle sights, both the M1 and M14 sights are, in my humble opinion, better than the SLR for accurate fire down range (I have more than one M1 and still reach out to distance range targets with issue sights). I did find the SLR easy to carry and quick to shoulder. I ran into some Royal Marines and Engineers in Puerto Rico in 1967 and compared some techniques. I appreciated some of their weapon use techniques and later I observed the SLR carry use in Ireland when using the long rifle in building searches. I have long owned a civilian M16 type and practiced that technique as a deputy sheriff SWAT operator. Interesting conversation. Thanks
I was involved in inspection of manufactured parts to the sa80, in early 1980s. I remember some of the cast bayonets being bent over the centreline of the handle. Then the magazine release surround was solid at the round end and filled with weld. They later changed it to an open design.
Interesting comment thank you
Simple choice - SA80 Mk2+ for close quarter/vehicle carry - SLR for everything else - the 7.62 round could stop a vehicle if the round is place correctly. Less stoppages with the SLR and I could strip it blindfolded - as was often practiced!
Big old bang stick
It was a sad day when we gave up our SLR, especially as the early SA80's were so poor.
Melting plastic on the face with the jungle formula insect repellent, magazine release when strapped to the chest, cocking handles flying down range........... never tried the later versions, but I'd go SLR
SLR for me, maybe with a modern day optic
Bloody hell! It’s like talking to my old man! He used to go on about the sten gun, and how if you found a good one you would try to keep hold of it. Nice one mate.
Cheers Geoff 🍻
We had an interest training package where we had the chance to fire a variety of nato and soviet block weapons during my service (2002-2018)..
SLR was rugged and took some getting used to as the reload buggered me up 😄 . No doubt if you hit a target with an SLR the guy wasnt getting up in a hurry.
SA80a1 was a pain if you didnt look after it. Young crowbags that didnt clean their weapons would have stoppages. That said our ability to fire accurate bursts or rapid semi auto shots onto target was good especially in CQB....i remember getting clotheslined on exercise when the GMPG barrel and butt hit a doorway (demonstrating length in CQB can be an issue 😂)
Good vid have subbed keep em coming
I trained with the SLR. Happy memories
👍
Currently Serving, SA80 is Shite, was fortunate enough to get the opportunity to fire the SLR and it just feels better to shoot, easier to clean, looks better. It would be better logistics wise aswell since the Gimpy uses the same cartridge
Would have loved to used the SLR but unfortunately been lumped with a SA80
I think the next weapon system you get will be awesome 👌
Loved the F.N here in Ireland ☘️. Thank you.
☘️ cheers 🍻 Robert
Like you I did the transition, I was also a weapons instructor so when we transitioned I did an additional module to learn the weapon from a teaching viewpoint. From a pure marksmanship perspective everyone went up, even those guys using weapons fitted with iron sights. During competition I was on a shoot next to a guy from the Black Watch who had been issued SA80, whilst I still had SLR. I can't recall the name of the shoot but we were at 400m. I was just concentrating on getting rounds on a figure 11. He was deciding which part of the target he was putting the rounds on. A big difference came during the falling plate competition. SA80 teams put the plates down in seconds, wiping the floor with SLR teams to an embarrassing degree.
Another point for the SA80 was the sling system. You never ended up putting your weapon down as it was always strapped to you. And it was designed to shoot whilst wearing the sling Wandering away from your rifle (SLR) whilst carrying out tasks was a common problem. A few times firing full auto the SA80 tried to load two rounds at once. They jammed in tight. I found the best way to clear it was to hook the working parts to the rear and use the tin opener of the army clasp knife on the rim of the cartridge and lever the jammed rounds out through the magazine housing. Had a guy next to me in a practice ambush have it happen and was stuck. I kept my knife on a lanyard in the top pocket of my smock. Told him to take the mag off, and just reached over and yanked the rounds out for him with the knife. Only took a few moments. That's not in any manual.
Glad you said SA80A3, though I left prior and only used up to A2. Target acquisition time, accuracy, increased ammunition load (especially with a bandolier and speed loader), increased reliability over its predecessors, greater magazine capacity. I'd take the A3. Auto was only ever useful in FIBUA or CQB. If it was the A1 then I'd plump for the SLR, At least I knew it would work and wouldn't break it I had to use the blunt end.
I did try the LMG mag, but the spring was a lot weaker then the standard 20 round SLR mag and the feed wasn't reliable. Also used the M16. Kind of a halfway house. Had the reliability of a tried and tested system. Was light and accurate. Same round as the SA80, but the mags were very flimsy. Fun fact, the civil servants who were responsible for the initial introduction of the SA80 into service couldn't get it through the quality control gates, so they re-categorized what a stoppage was so that they could say it only had so many "critical" stoppages after so many rounds. Box ticked. Clearly by tossers who would never carry one in anger. Civil servants and the A1, neither worked and they couldn't be fired.
Grateful for your detailed comment 🙏 very interesting and much appreciated
I'd go with the SLR. I never had feed problems with the LMG mags, but firing in the prone was a pain because they're so long.
I gave my two LMG mags to one of the COP guys, who had bipods.
Bipods would have helped
It depends on the job in hand, but as a battle rifle definitely the SLR. That said when my unit changed over to SA80 in the mid 80s. As a recce officer, to me the SA80 was a marked improvement over the SMG. Mind you a lot of that was the utility of the sling (provided one could fit it 😂). Never got to the A2 because my personal weapon became a browning for the last 10 years until I finished in 2003. I am considering buying a FAL actually, got my eyes open for a reasonably priced and conditioned one.
I would love to get an SLR, so expensive, even a deactivated SLR is not cheap.
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd I have had a scan about for a FAL and they don't seem too bad price wise. Not sure how worn they are of course. I'll let you know if I get one. I was thinking of a Mini 14 as an alternative. They are reasonable, because the Gendarmerie and Police Nationale use them. Not quite the same I know. I also fancied a British service Browning but apparently they were all destroyed. Shame.
I remember the SLR as difficult to lug around, and heavy. But even the battered Vietnam era weapons used by Australian Army recruits were reliable and accurate. We were also taught not to waste ammunition. Deliberate fire only - no spray and pray.
That is exactly right, as you say we may have only been able to carry smaller amounts of ammo for SLR but we were frugal when expending rounds. Great comment thank you
In the 1970s to 1980 I had the SLR. brilliant rifle and never once had a stoppage. Today I would still choose the SLR.
Me too
Dear Keith, SLR without hesitation! During basic being only 5' 6'' had to carry the GPMG as well. Best Wishes Johnny
Mate I used the SLR, Same size as you, thing was taller than me. Great weapon though, but for me, I struggled to fire it stood up. Pokey drill, another nightmare. I was mainly Recce Plt, so the SA80 was ideal, plus when I first went into Recce we had the SMG, which was perfect for in the Scimitar. Remember the days of SLR, and 84mm, humping them about plus kit, now that was fun.
@@stuartb4525 Dear Stuart, as I went up the ranks, stirling & then browning. I can only assume having a low centre of gravity helped me (LoL) Charlie G was a pain in the arse!
Why did they make the smallest guy carry the heaviest weapon? same with me I always got the bren every time and was only 5.4 in boots and the bloody thing weighed nearly as much as me. I think it was a way to see if you could hack it and I did 12 years I just got on with it and never gave up. Firing it was a different matter as it would pull you forward unless you dug your toecaps in.
@@williamcoulter5462 I think it was part of the welcome to Battalion life, until the next batch of sprogs arrived.
Hey Johnny, thank you for commenting 👍. GPMG was great, but hard work humping it around. Thank you for your support mate all the best
Fired both. Would take the SLR any day of the week!
👍
I was issued three versions of C7 on deployed operations - C7, C7A1 and C7A2. Of the three the last one was so much better than either predecessor. The A2 has ambidextrous controls, a better cocking handle; the C79 optic sight, adjustable butt and a full length barrel. The other improvement was to ditch plastic Thermold magazines and go for USGI metal mags. The A1 had a diagonal chest patrol sling that didn't work with the adjustable butt. No great loss.
UA-cam recommended your channel you took me back a few years I used the SA80A2 thanks for this video I've subd ps its be the SA80A2 I stripped it down in 20 seconds flat as a bet once
Thank you so much for your support 🙏
Used both SLR and SA80 A1 give me my elephant gun any day 7.62 when you shoot them they stayed shot and Keith you forgot to mention the university degree needed to put the sling on the SA80 great stuff mate
It was a double lesson to put the string on if I remember correctly. 😊
Good point, that bloody sling 😆
What is unbelievable in 2024 - the return to the larger cartridge; the EM-2 in 1951 was going to use the .280 (7mm) as a trade off between light weight of the 5.56mm and stopping power of the .303. Sadly wasnt chosen as the USA wanted 5.56. Well here we are, and 70 years later, stopping power is needed and the EM-2 would have been the right choice all along
How do the powers that be work these issues out and seemingly get it wrong time and time again.
@@LetsTab59-bd4fd Uncle Sam.
Never fired either so I can’t comment. But what I do know is how hard it is to present like you just did. Good job 👍
Thank you for your support and kind words it's really appreciated 👍
My second comment. A video popped up on my Utube feed. In 1954 the War Office experimented with TWO varients of the automatic FN . The X8E1 and X8E2. Basic difference between the two was in sighting. 5,000 of these were purchased in total. Both had the auto/burst capability. Thought you'd find this informative.