Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

SA80 Replacement on the distant horizon ?

Struggling to see the argument to change unless it’s the US forcing the issue with a new calibre. We’ve spend a shit load on mods for the SA-80. I’m with the previous poster that suggested it will be around for another 20 years. May not be that long but I can’t see it being binned in the short to medium term. Feels like the justification is too weak

disagree.

the A3 has reached the limits of absurdity trying to fix the SA80’s endemic issues.
What was already an ergonomic nightmare had now morphed into a very expensive Johnny Seven OMA knock off that now weighs far more, and is much bulkier than the ‘large’ and ‘heavy’ 7.62 rifle it replaced.

Anyone brought up on the SA80 and exposed to the alternatives is invariably surprised at how big and heavy the L1A1 isnt, and how instinctively it comes to eye - and how compact, light, and instinctive to operate the AR platforms are.

the SA80 remains what it is, a perfect example of a rifle designed by committee without any regard to the end users needs, with the basic design layout preordained by RO’s decades long institutional fixation on introducing a bullpup.

While the Army may have sensibly wanted a 5.56 rifle, it flew completely in the face of its experience for MOD to adopt an entirely novel and new rifle.
Its rather forgotten that not only were the British using the M16 before the US Army, (and had none of the problems the American had, funny how basic rifle maintenance makes a rifle, well, work!), it had also had it in service in large numbers, used across every environmental theatre with great success, including Jungles and Deserts, and large numbers had gone south in 1982 to the Falklands, where it had performed perfectly in the very arduous conditions.

Well, here we are, 40 years on, and it’s back to the future with the large scale introduction of the C8.
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
disagree.

the A3 has reached the limits of absurdity trying to fix the SA80’s endemic issues.
What was already an ergonomic nightmare had now morphed into a very expensive Johnny Seven OMA knock off that now weighs far more, and is much bulkier than the ‘large’ and ‘heavy’ 7.62 rifle it replaced.

Anyone brought up on the SA80 and exposed to the alternatives is invariably surprised at how big and heavy the L1A1 isnt, and how instinctively it comes to eye - and how compact, light, and instinctive to operate the AR platforms are.

the SA80 remains what it is, a perfect example of a rifle designed by committee without any regard to the end users needs, with the basic design layout preordained by RO’s decades long institutional fixation on introducing a bullpup.

While the Army may have sensibly wanted a 5.56 rifle, it flew completely in the face of its experience for MOD to adopt an entirely novel and new rifle.
Its rather forgotten that not only were the British using the M16 before the US Army, (and had none of the problems the American had, funny how basic rifle maintenance makes a rifle, well, work!), it had also had it in service in large numbers, used across every environmental theatre with great success, including Jungles and Deserts, and large numbers had gone south in 1982 to the Falklands, where it had performed perfectly in the very arduous conditions.

Well, here we are, 40 years on, and it’s back to the future with the large scale introduction of the C8.

A friend made this meme, which oi like :)

1611307454467.png
 
Its rather forgotten that not only were the British using the M16 before the US Army, (and had none of the problems the American had, funny how basic rifle maintenance makes a rifle, well, work!)
The British forces were using the M16 before 1961? The US Army sorted the problem with the M16 quite quickly by introducing proper cleaning procedures, Colt had sold the weapon as a "self cleaning rifle", it wasn't. Furthermore chroming the bores and use of a ball propellant as was actually required sorted the other problems. The M16 was introduced into US service before proper evaluation had been carried out, otherwise all the problems in Vietnam would have been sorted beforehand.
 
By being half a kilo lighter and 300mm shorter?
Half a kilo lighter? Presumably to arrive at that figure it's without sights or magazine? L85A1 bare was 3.7kg, SUSAT 0.7kg, giving 4.4kg without a magazine. 4.81kg with SUSAT and loaded (lightweight A1) mag. Figures I'm seeing for the A3 is 4.0kg, which I presume is without sights, and I'd be surprised if that rail weighs less than the early plastic handguard.

L1A1 all-up was 4.3kg for the rifle, 737g for the loaded mag, giving 5.0kg loaded weight.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
The British forces were using the M16 before 1961? The US Army sorted the problem with the M16 quite quickly by introducing proper cleaning procedures, Colt had sold the weapon as a "self cleaning rifle", it wasn't. Furthermore chroming the bores and use of a ball propellant as was actually required sorted the other problems. The M16 was introduced into US service before proper evaluation had been carried out, otherwise all the problems in Vietnam would have been sorted beforehand.
We have a whole thread.

The AR-15 was being used in Borneo by regular battalions and not just Them - my father's unit, the DLI, for one. In fact, the first picture in that thread of a guy holding one is of someone from the DLI.
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/m16-ar-15-in-uk-service-early-1960s-to-late-1980s.286750/

But 1961? M-16 entered US service in 1964.
 
The British forces were using the M16 before 1961? The US Army sorted the problem with the M16 quite quickly by introducing proper cleaning procedures, Colt had sold the weapon as a "self cleaning rifle", it wasn't. Furthermore chroming the bores and use of a ball propellant as was actually required sorted the other problems. The M16 was introduced into US service before proper evaluation had been carried out, otherwise all the problems in Vietnam would have been sorted beforehand.

Date's squiffy there... ;)
 
Having been a cadet and done dry drills on the .303, and then finally shot with it years later, I was surprised when I first picked up a Mauser (this one a Turkish one owned by a neighbour) at how stiff and slow the bolt action was by comparison.

You wouldn't manage some of the snap-shooting that you do in some of your videos with one.

For reference for others, here's what I'm on about - from about nine minutes in (incidentally, @stoatman, I'm not convinced that the use of an Apple Mac is historically accurate :-D ):
Oh, indeed - you can do it to a degree with a P14 / M17, but beyond that, not really. Maybe a slick 1903 or 98k, but the bolt handle's a bit far forward for it.
 
disagree.

the A3 has reached the limits of absurdity trying to fix the SA80’s endemic issues.
What was already an ergonomic nightmare had now morphed into a very expensive Johnny Seven OMA knock off that now weighs far more, and is much bulkier than the ‘large’ and ‘heavy’ 7.62 rifle it replaced.

Anyone brought up on the SA80 and exposed to the alternatives is invariably surprised at how big and heavy the L1A1 isnt, and how instinctively it comes to eye - and how compact, light, and instinctive to operate the AR platforms are.

the SA80 remains what it is, a perfect example of a rifle designed by committee without any regard to the end users needs, with the basic design layout preordained by RO’s decades long institutional fixation on introducing a bullpup.

While the Army may have sensibly wanted a 5.56 rifle, it flew completely in the face of its experience for MOD to adopt an entirely novel and new rifle.
Its rather forgotten that not only were the British using the M16 before the US Army, (and had none of the problems the American had, funny how basic rifle maintenance makes a rifle, well, work!), it had also had it in service in large numbers, used across every environmental theatre with great success, including Jungles and Deserts, and large numbers had gone south in 1982 to the Falklands, where it had performed perfectly in the very arduous conditions.

Well, here we are, 40 years on, and it’s back to the future with the large scale introduction of the C8.

I cant disagree with the sentiment of your post and many of the observations. I was commenting on the fact that after the various mods and effectively a complete bloody rebuild, which is where it is now, its has to be working effectively for goodness sake, surely?????

I shot my SLR on the 300m range at Bisley before the lockdown and there was a platoon strength bunch of lads out a dozen lanes down from me blatting away with their SA-80s are I didnt see any hands go up all afternoon with stoppages or misfires. Granted it was a range and not battlefield conditions, but after all the money that's been thrown at the bloody thing, it surely must work by now......?

Weight wise, I couldnt really comment. I've got a Suit on my gat and its balanced and it lifts to the eye like a thing of beauty. ACOG now is it not. Not sure if they still have the Daniel Defence Rail still fitted and various attachments, but it would be interesting to compare the weight of a fully tooled up SA-80 to an SLR with Suit fitted.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
an SA80 is lighter than an L1A1? really? It’s much heavier now.

and this much touted ‘shorter’?
Did it never occur to MOD to introduce the ParaFAL stock?
funny how bods with LSW’s and GPNGs managed with long weapons out the back of APCs
What would the weight of an SLR be with all of the SA80's current bells and whistles attached?

This is a tired argument.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I cant disagree with the sentiment of your post and many of the observations. I was commenting on the fact that after the various mods and effectively a complete bloody rebuild, which is where it is now, its has to be working effectively for goodness sake, surely?????

I shot my SLR on the 300m range at Bisley before the lockdown and there was a platoon strength bunch of lads out a dozen lanes down from me blatting away with their SA-80s are I didnt see any hands go up all afternoon with stoppages or misfires. Granted it was a range and not battlefield conditions, but after all the money that's been thrown at the bloody thing, it surely must work by now......?

Weight wise, I couldnt really comment. I've got a Suit on my gat and its balanced and it lifts to the eye like a thing of beauty. ACOG now is it not. Not sure if they still have the Daniel Defence Rail still fitted and various attachments, but it would be interesting to compare the weight of a fully tooled up SA-80 to an SLR with Suit fitted.
Whatever went on before, the A3 works.

Some people here don't want to accept that, though.
 
disagree.

the A3 has reached the limits of absurdity trying to fix the SA80’s endemic issues.
What was already an ergonomic nightmare had now morphed into a very expensive Johnny Seven OMA knock off that now weighs far more, and is much bulkier than the ‘large’ and ‘heavy’ 7.62 rifle it replaced.

Anyone brought up on the SA80 and exposed to the alternatives is invariably surprised at how big and heavy the L1A1 isnt, and how instinctively it comes to eye - and how compact, light, and instinctive to operate the AR platforms are.

the SA80 remains what it is, a perfect example of a rifle designed by committee without any regard to the end users needs, with the basic design layout preordained by RO’s decades long institutional fixation on introducing a bullpup.

While the Army may have sensibly wanted a 5.56 rifle, it flew completely in the face of its experience for MOD to adopt an entirely novel and new rifle.
Its rather forgotten that not only were the British using the M16 before the US Army, (and had none of the problems the American had, funny how basic rifle maintenance makes a rifle, well, work!), it had also had it in service in large numbers, used across every environmental theatre with great success, including Jungles and Deserts, and large numbers had gone south in 1982 to the Falklands, where it had performed perfectly in the very arduous conditions.

Well, here we are, 40 years on, and it’s back to the future with the large scale introduction of the C8.

You’ve really no idea have you? The L85 is over half a KG lighter the the SLR. It id ergonomically fine, as been demonstrated in the last 30 years. It also has many great advantages over the SLR, which you simply wouldn’t comprehend as you’ve never had to use it as a daily work tool.

The C8 will not replace the L85 to become the British Army’s GS rifle.
 
I cant disagree with the sentiment of your post and many of the observations. I was commenting on the fact that after the various mods and effectively a complete bloody rebuild, which is where it is now, its has to be working effectively for goodness sake, surely?????

I shot my SLR on the 300m range at Bisley before the lockdown and there was a platoon strength bunch of lads out a dozen lanes down from me blatting away with their SA-80s are I didnt see any hands go up all afternoon with stoppages or misfires. Granted it was a range and not battlefield conditions, but after all the money that's been thrown at the bloody thing, it surely must work by now......?

Weight wise, I couldnt really comment. I've got a Suit on my gat and its balanced and it lifts to the eye like a thing of beauty. ACOG now is it not. Not sure if they still have the Daniel Defence Rail still fitted and various attachments, but it would be interesting to compare the weight of a fully tooled up SA-80 to an SLR with Suit fitted.

‘effectively?

the mag change/cocking drill is still batshit crazy.

You can operate the safety, mag release and bolt from either side of my ARs. None of that reach over under your armpit sillyness.
 

Sttrory

Old-Salt
Silly question but why don't we just copy mother Russia with the same calibre they use? There be plenty of rounds knocking around.
 
‘effectively?

the mag change/cocking drill is still batshit crazy.

You can operate the safety, mag release and bolt from either side of my ARs. None of that reach over under your armpit sillyness.

It’s quite easy and straightforward to a professional trained soldier.
 
Top