SA80 made anymore???

#1
i heard someware that the SA80 is not produced anymore?? i find that hard to believe as if it wasnt, wouldnt the army eventually run out rifles with new recuits joining and rifles need to be serviced etc


Why wasnt the SA80 produced in civilian format (streight pull single shot) for the civilians to buy?? The M16 was produced in civilian formate for them to use...is it the case of the government ******* hard its own people and not wanting its people to own firearms ??
 
#5
Gremlin said:
LancePrivateJones said:
Have a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SA80

The article states that SA80 production ended in 1994.
I presume spares kits were manufactured too so making up deficiencies would not be difficult.
That is referring to the L85A1, not the current rifle, the L85A2!
It is my understanding that the L85A2 is a refurbished and modified L85A1.
If you know of the L85A2 being manufactured as a stand alone weapon maybe you could enlighten us.
 
#6
HK now own the rights so if you rocked up with a million quid I'm sure they'd make you some :twisted:

but the UK failed to persuade anyone else to buy the original as it was'nt very well made and any way the Uk goverment hates civillian shooters YOUR ALL EVIL EVIL EVIL unless you win an olympic medal then we might try to say something nice through clenched teeth :roll:

actually it probably doesn't even care about civillain shooters enough to hate them if it did it would probably ban it :evil:
 
#7
brighton hippy said:
HK now own the rights so if you rocked up with a million quid I'm sure they'd make you some :twisted:




interesing...funny if HK started producing streight pull single shot versions of the SA80 i wounder how many civillans would buy it over here?
 
#9
I don't see any market for a civilian straight pull (Essentially a cadet GP).

What I would have liked is a 22 rim-fire version, essentially a L85 body with a 22 rim-fire barrel and the working parts and magazine from the 22 conversion kit.

An interesting idea I heard someone suggest is take all the new bits H&K have made for the A2 and put them in a light-weight polymer body. This would give a weapon with all the advantages of the A2 and lighter weight. Since the body is the bit that has not been produced for years this would permit new production.
 
#10
Mobat said:
An interesting idea I heard someone suggest is take all the new bits H&K have made for the A2 and put them in a light-weight polymer body. This would give a weapon with all the advantages of the A2 and lighter weight. Since the body is the bit that has not been produced for years this would permit new production.
I would be deeply dissappointed if the tooling and fixtures for the SA80 had been destroyed. OK, this government does not take national defense seriouslly, but it would be very easy to store the tooling for minimal cost, on the assumption that if it really does hit the fan, more weapons can be made.

Ski.
 
#11
Why on earth would anyone want a rimfire SA80? There are plenty of terrific rifles out there without having something like this. I also wonder about the sort of person that buys the straight pull AR15s
I should imagine that it would be absurdly expensive but I suppose each to their own
 
#13
joeblocky said:
also wonder about the sort of person that buys the straight pull AR15s why? said:
30 rounds? Good grief, I never bother to take out more than 6 for the .243.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#14
joeblocky said:
i heard someware that the SA80 is not produced anymore?? i find that hard to believe as if it wasnt, wouldnt the army eventually run out rifles with new recuits joining and rifles need to be serviced etc


Why wasnt the SA80 produced in civilian format (streight pull single shot) for the civilians to buy?? The M16 was produced in civilian formate for them to use...is it the case of the government * hard its own people and not wanting its people to own firearms ??
It was and it was pants despite it being available as an LSW so the sight and barrel were harmonised but hat was removed and the sight bracket changed to allow more traditional scopeds to be used. What killed it was the Canadian market closing to bullpup rifles!
That was also a mistake as it was a misreading of the regs on that!
as for Practical rifle well an SMLE is more effective than a straight pull AR/AUG/mini 14 better round and range.
PR is slightly tarnished by the shooters wearing plod black overalls or DPM. Just a little too walty. Why not join the TA?
 
#15
happybonzo said:
Why on earth would anyone want a rimfire SA80? There are plenty of terrific rifles out there without having something like this.
Any civilian derivative of the SA80 would be for people who want to shoot the current military rifle but are not able to. I suggested a rim-fire version because rim-fire ranges are more common and more likely to be local that full-bore, and because being semi-auto the drills would be the same.

Granted, a lot of the customers would be walts, but that is still a market for the manufacturer.

Servicemen who want to get more practice with the issue weapon could use it, by the time I left the TA I was only getting to shoot 5.56 about twice a year. Also servicemen or ex-servicemen who want to shoot rim-fire for some reason could be attracted to a rifle they are familiar with.

I also see it as a potentially good cadet weapon.

Even for the forces, I have never been convinced that the conversion kit was a good idea. You have to re-zero the weapon when you fit or remove the kit, so why not have a dedicated rim-fire rifle?
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#16
Mobat said:
happybonzo said:
Why on earth would anyone want a rimfire SA80? There are plenty of terrific rifles out there without having something like this.
Any civilian derivative of the SA80 would be for people who want to shoot the current military rifle but are not able to. I suggested a rim-fire version because rim-fire ranges are more common and more likely to be local that full-bore, and because being semi-auto the drills would be the same.

Granted, a lot of the customers would be walts, but that is still a market for the manufacturer.

Servicemen who want to get more practice with the issue weapon could use it, by the time I left the TA I was only getting to shoot 5.56 about twice a year. Also servicemen or ex-servicemen who want to shoot rim-fire for some reason could be attracted to a rifle they are familiar with.

I also see it as a potentially good cadet weapon.

Even for the forces, I have never been convinced that the conversion kit was a good idea. You have to re-zero the weapon when you fit or remove the kit, so why not have a dedicated rim-fire rifle?[/quote]

Thats because the rounds are years apart ballistically, even dedicated rf weapons would need rezeroing between firers and to be honest nowadays unless you teach marksmanship principles for bolt action rifles you are probably better off starting the recruit on an Iron sighted L85A2 at 30 metres. It has the same effect and will highlight the errors allowing for correction, if however everyone will be issued optics then everyone needs to move rapidly onto optic sights.
 
#17
In the late 1980's I use to work at the Royal Small Arms factory at Enfield machining parts for the A1, (probably why it was so shite)! The A1 was designed and manufactured for UK forces only, there was never the idea for export etc, the contract was for enough weapons for the Navy, Army RAF. Even the Falkland Island Defence Force use the Styer 80. The reason for this is quite straight forward unlike our Yank friends we do not sell our arms that could be used to shoot back at us.

HK own the rights to the SA80 (the trade name), I do not know what happened to all the tooling, as when Royal Ordinance was privitised by the then goverment and BAe brought RO, and moved production from Enfield to Nottingham. Then flogged to HK.

Also there is not a market in the UK for a single shot version as the Hungerford massicare, did not help as all auto/semi auto weapons are banned.

Stilts

STILTS
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#18
STILTS said:
In the late 1980's I use to work at the Royal Small Arms factory at Enfield machining parts for the A1, (probably why it was so shite)! The A1 was designed and manufactured for UK forces only, there was never the idea for export etc, the contract was for enough weapons for the Navy, Army RAF. Even the Falkland Island Defence Force use the Styer 80. The reason for this is quite straight forward unlike our Yank friends we do not sell our arms that could be used to shoot back at us.

HK own the rights to the SA80 (the trade name), I do not know what happened to all the tooling, as when Royal Ordinance was privitised by the then goverment and BAe brought RO, and moved production from Enfield to Nottingham. Then flogged to HK.

Also there is not a market in the UK for a single shot version as the Hungerford massicare, did not help as all auto/semi auto weapons are banned.

Stilts

STILTS
My bold Stilts, BAE never did anything without an eye on export, I believe and have seen the manual in Arabic for the SA80 series produced before it was accepted into UK service, the funny and ironic part being the poor dust performance of the A1.
 
#19
Ugly,

BAe did not own RO then it was still as goverment company,it was privisted and brough out by BAe. The contact was for the supply for UK forces only and there was never he intention to export it.

Stilts
 
#20
joeblocky said:
i heard someware that the SA80 is not produced anymore?? i find that hard to believe as if it wasnt, wouldnt the army eventually run out rifles with new recuits joining and rifles need to be serviced etc


Why wasnt the SA80 produced in civilian format (streight pull single shot) for the civilians to buy?? The M16 was produced in civilian formate for them to use...is it the case of the government * hard its own people and not wanting its people to own firearms ??
Apparently some did make their way on to the civvy market. I even saw an ad in a Swiss magazine for an L85, not sure if there were any takers.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads