Japan’s new rifle.

Anonymous Yank

On ROPS
On ROPs
...with a piston, rather than direct impingement. Why is that, do you think? AR-15 design not... reliable enough, perhaps? See also M27...
I prefer a piston myself. Much easier clean up. But, also shows a piston AR-15 derivative can be preferable to an AR-18 bullpup derivative that weighs too much.
 

gafkiwi

War Hero
The Kiwis use the LMT direct impingement rifle in select-fire 5.56mm NATO form. Your argument is?
There is no argument really just marketing, opinions or people with a barrow to push. We found no real difference in the two systems when they are in quality made rifles. The Norwegians had issues with their H&K 416's when they first adopted them predominately based a round the gas system but like other rifles with teething issues it was sorted. Strangely enough though the Norwegian SOF tend to use DI Colt Canada C8 IUR's over the issue H&K which is also used by UK elements. The H&K in its reasonably short life has also had so many upgrades or developments it is already at its A7 model.
When you get down to it, If you were to take any quality contemporary rifles like the LMT, Colt IUR, H&K 416, SIG 516 and even the L85 A2/3 for that matter and evaluated them without any international pride, justifications and Govt or Commercial interference the results in accuracy and reliability would be that close that there would be nothing really in it. They have all had enough development.testing and refinement to there designs to ensure this. Any ratings from there would be based on external issues like ergonomics, maintenance/support and cost to establish a preference.
 
Yes... I didn't want to get long winded, so didn't mention UK Pathfinders, etc. using M16/203 set ups, or lots of UKSF replacing those boxhead sub guns (that also aren't "home grown") with the new M6A2 UCIW which is also a short barreled M16/M4.
Like I said - different SOR. Oh, and there’s no such thing as ‘lots’ of UKSF!
 
Like I said - different SOR. Oh, and there’s no such thing as ‘lots’ of UKSF!
Well not since those 34000 Blades that were on the balcony retired...
 

Anonymous Yank

On ROPS
On ROPs
Like I said - different SOR. Oh, and there’s no such thing as ‘lots’ of UKSF!
Comparatively, Old Boy... There is no such thing as "lots" of anything UK mil anymore.
 
Because the UKSF/SOF door kickers that actually might be running through buildings and down hallways definitely don't need a shorter configuration than a L119A2/C7/M16/M4?

How about snipers/dedicated marksmen that need something with a little more accuracy and reach than a fatarsed bullpup AR18 derivative? What do they use then? L129A1? Whot's that then? Oh... another M16/M4 variant made in Iowa?
A lot of the argument around NOT using the L86A2 in a DMR role was its lack of a "proper" bullet like the 7.62 NATO - because of the type of warfare we encountered in Afghanistan and probably will encounter in Mali. The LSW can't be re-chambered for anything like the 7.62 NATO, has very little in the way of aftermarket add ons , and there are numerous good commercial OTS 7.62 combinations that will work - L129A1 is one of them. But is far from a "run of the mill" M16 variant being thoroughly fettled and finished for its purpose - and its compatible with after market add ons galore.
Switch to a European setting and the combat ranges are down to 300m or less due to urbanisation and at that range targets would be well within the capabilities of the LSW. Give it decent optics and you could easily double that. Even I could shoot well with it.
There is very little to choose from in semi-auto/auto actions for rifles now , other than G3 roller lock, AR15 type multi lug or AK type. Any DMR would have to have one of these actions. Unlikely we would contemplate a 7.62 that wasnt AR18 based.
 

napier

LE
Moderator
Kit Reviewer
A lot of the argument around NOT using the L86A2 in a DMR role was its lack of a "proper" bullet like the 7.62 NATO - because of the type of warfare we encountered in Afghanistan and probably will encounter in Mali. The LSW can't be re-chambered for anything like the 7.62 NATO, has very little in the way of aftermarket add ons , and there are numerous good commercial OTS 7.62 combinations that will work - L129A1 is one of them. But is far from a "run of the mill" M16 variant being thoroughly fettled and finished for its purpose - and its compatible with after market add ons galore.
Switch to a European setting and the combat ranges are down to 300m or less due to urbanisation and at that range targets would be well within the capabilities of the LSW. Give it decent optics and you could easily double that. Even I could shoot well with it.
There is very little to choose from in semi-auto/auto actions for rifles now , other than G3 roller lock, AR15 type multi lug or AK type. Any DMR would have to have one of these actions. Unlikely we would contemplate a 7.62 that wasnt AR18 based.
After TELIC and Staff College I served my black bag penance at DE&S. Funnily enough a request came in from UKSF for a job lot of LSWs for HERRICK as their diddy black guns were being outranged by goat herders with AK variants. Admittedly it was a UOR to cover a capability gap until something more gucci could be purchased.
 

Anonymous Yank

On ROPS
On ROPs
A lot of the argument around NOT using the L86A2 in a DMR role was its lack of a "proper" bullet like the 7.62 NATO - because of the type of warfare we encountered in Afghanistan and probably will encounter in Mali. The LSW can't be re-chambered for anything like the 7.62 NATO, has very little in the way of aftermarket add ons , and there are numerous good commercial OTS 7.62 combinations that will work - L129A1 is one of them. But is far from a "run of the mill" M16 variant being thoroughly fettled and finished for its purpose - and its compatible with after market add ons galore.
Switch to a European setting and the combat ranges are down to 300m or less due to urbanisation and at that range targets would be well within the capabilities of the LSW. Give it decent optics and you could easily double that. Even I could shoot well with it.
There is very little to choose from in semi-auto/auto actions for rifles now , other than G3 roller lock, AR15 type multi lug or AK type. Any DMR would have to have one of these actions. Unlikely we would contemplate a 7.62 that wasnt AR18 based.
The point missed would be it's production in a little specialty shop in Iowa, not very unlike the thousands of little specialty shops we have all over the US turning out bespoke AR-10, AR-15, and AR-18 variants.

Of course, we even have tens of thousands of individuals who quietly build their own from the enormous variety of high grade parts and kits available on the US market. You can build an AR variant over here for a cost of anywhere from $500 to $5000 or whatever you wish to spend.
 
Comparatively, Old Boy... There is no such thing as "lots" of anything UK mil anymore.
Of course - the USA is a marvellous country but a waning imperial power - as we are (And much further down the road).

‘As I am, so you shall be’.
 
I prefer a piston myself. Much easier clean up. But, also shows a piston AR-15 derivative can be preferable to an AR-18 bullpup derivative that weighs too much.
"Too much"?

L85A2, unloaded, without optical sight: 3.8kg
L85A3, unloaded, without optical sight: 3.7kg
M16A3, unloaded, without optical sight: 3.4kg
Weight of a single magazine of 30 rds: about 0.5kg

So... for the weight of just over half a magazine, or half a grenade, or a quarter of a water bottle; you can move from "47% chance of firing 150rds without a stoppage" to "95% chance of firing 150rds without a stoppage". Seems fair. Feel free to choose differently.
 

Anonymous Yank

On ROPS
On ROPs
"Too much"?

L85A2, unloaded, without optical sight: 3.8kg
L85A3, unloaded, without optical sight: 3.7kg
M16A3, unloaded, without optical sight: 3.4kg
Weight of a single magazine of 30 rds: about 0.5kg

So... for the weight of just over half a magazine, or half a grenade, or a quarter of a water bottle; you can move from "47% chance of firing 150rds without a stoppage" to "95% chance of firing 150rds without a stoppage". Seems fair. Feel free to choose differently.
M16 unloaded: 2.95 kg
M16A2 unloaded: 3.26 kg
M16A4 unloaded: 2.89 kg
M4 unloaded: 3.01 kg

AR-18 unloaded: 3.0 kg

So, a couple extra pounds to stuff a borrowed septic design into a fat arse bullpup to call your own and claim it's better.

Shoot whatever you choose, my usual is in a larger caliber (and usually with a higher cyclic rate).
 

Anonymous Yank

On ROPS
On ROPs
How sure are you of those figures? Because if they say that an M4 is heavier than an M16A4, something's obviously incorrect...
Yet they are all about 2 pounds lighter than yours... And, if you are going to nitpick small fractions of a kg over where your misleading list was continued to continue to deflect attention from the fact that the "UK made" L8X series is a fat piece of shit compared to the "septic" original, you might be a bit biased.
 
And, if you are going to nitpick small fractions of a kg over where your misleading list was continued to continue to deflect attention from the fact that the "UK made" L8X series is a fat piece of shit compared to the "septic" original, you might be a bit biased.
Interesting. I point out some actual weights, and you disagree by grabbing a bunch of figures that obviously aren't entirely correct. Instead of saying "oops, typo, here's the real figures" you double down and go for the insults.

I'll help. Here's the USMC publication, quoting weights with a 30-rd magazine, for the M16A4 (8.79 lbs / 4.0 kg) and M4 Carbine (6.9 lbs / 3.1 kg). Assuming that a 30-rd magazine weighs 0.5kg, there's only 200g (about half a pound) between an M16A4 and an L85A3.

When I find out I'm wrong, I change my mind. What do you do?
 

Anonymous Yank

On ROPS
On ROPs
Interesting. I point out some actual weights, and you disagree by grabbing a bunch of figures that obviously aren't entirely correct. Instead of saying "oops, typo, here's the real figures" you double down and go for the insults.

I'll help. Here's the USMC publication, quoting weights with a 30-rd magazine, for the M16A4 (8.79 lbs / 4.0 kg) and M4 Carbine (6.9 lbs / 3.1 kg). Assuming that a 30-rd magazine weighs 0.5kg, there's only 200g (about half a pound) between an M16A4 and an L85A3.

When I find out I'm wrong, I change my mind. What do you do?
The M16A2 (at a fat 3.26 kg) was what was in use when the UK "developed" the even fatter arsed AR-18 derivative L8X series.

And magazine weight is fairly variable. Just like M16A4s made new from FN vs Colt vs those upgraded from A2s and A3s of several different manufacturers.
 
How about snipers/dedicated marksmen that need something with a little more accuracy and reach than a fatarsed bullpup AR18 derivative? What do they use then? L129A1? Whot's that then? Oh... another M16/M4 variant made in Iowa?
There's little out there in non-match config that's more accurate in 5.56 than an L85.

The L129 is 7.62... one can only conjecture what an equivalent AR-16 bullpup would have looked like but it'd have had 8 inches more barrel than the L129 anyhow.
 

Anonymous Yank

On ROPS
On ROPs
There's little out there in non-match config that's more accurate in 5.56 than an L85.
But you have paid over price 4 times now for a short sight radius, fat arsed piece of derivative tech that took over 30 years to get up to snuff. A lot higher cost than most match config service rifles.

The L129 is 7.62... one can only conjecture what an equivalent AR-16 bullpup would have looked like but it'd have had 8 inches more barrel than the L129 anyhow.
Yeah... but it goes to the question of accuracy and utility required for designated marksmen & snipers, pointing out that L85 doesn't exactly cut it. I also tossed that in there so that I could remind people that the L8X weighed half a kilo MORE than the 7.62 L1A1 it replaced (which could do the job of the now required bespoke L129), once someone noted its inclusion.

K17S bullpup based on 7.62 AR10
K17S.jpg


And just because it popped up while I was browsing, how about a .308 AR10 based "pistol" for a bit of fun?

I'd bet that fat assed fun pistol is a bit more everything good than that fat arsed L8X rifle.
 
Last edited:
But you have paid over price 4 times now for a short sight radius, fat arsed piece of derivative tech that took over 30 years to get up to snuff. A lot higher cost than most match config service rifles.



Yeah... but it goes to the question of accuracy and utility required for designated marksmen & snipers, pointing out that L85 doesn't exactly cut it. I also tossed that in there so that I could remind people that the L8X weighed half a kilo MORE than the 7.62 L1A1 it replaced (which could do the job of the now required bespoke L129), once someone noted its inclusion.

K17S bullpup based on 7.62 AR10
View attachment 479015
Now you're pushing it a bit to compare L129 with the L1A1 - I carried the latter for a fair chunk of my service life and it was my SASC blokes that brought the former into service in Afghanistan. One's good to 300m in the hands of an average shot the other much, much further - I'll leave you to guess which one!
 

Anonymous Yank

On ROPS
On ROPs
Now you're pushing it a bit to compare L129 with the L1A1 - I carried the latter for a fair chunk of my service life and it was my SASC blokes that brought the former into service in Afghanistan. One's good to 300m in the hands of an average shot the other much, much further - I'll leave you to guess which one!
300m is designated marksman territory, but the L1A1 and the L129 have exactly the SAME effective firing range of 800m. That was one area where the UK touch was an improvement over the original FAL (600m). I don't notice much difference my self... all of my Inch and Metric SLRs seem to reach out wherever I need them to.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top