View Poll Results: Which weapon would you choose?

Voters
111. You may not vote on this poll
  • Enfield L85 (SA80)

    34 30.63%
  • L1A1 SLR (FN FAL)

    77 69.37%
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 98

Thread: FN FAL L1A1 SLR -vs- Enfield L85 (SA80) assault rifle

  1. #1

    Default FN FAL L1A1 SLR -vs- Enfield L85 (SA80) assault rifle

    I do not understand why the British armed forces would drop a fine weapon like the L1A1 SLR for a POS like the Enfield L85.

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Probably because their L1A1 fleet was worn out to the point they could not teach marksmanship with weapons that would not group, for NATO standardisation to 5.56 and a whole lot of other reasons

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bottom of the food chain, again.
    Posts
    2,392

    Default

    The fact that all of NATO converted to 5.56 was definitely a major factor.

  4. #4
    Senior Member ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    If your box is green, you might have a yeast infection. -MrSkorotsnoy
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,576

    Default

    SLR is the way to go

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7

    Default

    While a great weapon, it is still too heavy and long, esspecially for mech or MOUT operations

  6. #6
    Member Aussie E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Sin City, NV
    Posts
    804

    Default

    The Australian SASR used the SLR with devastating results in Vietnam, many were modified with short barrels and converted to full-auto. In one friendly fire incident between an ARVN platoon and a SASR patrol, after the firing stopped the ARVN wanted to see the .50 cal HMG that the Aussie's had with them, they had mistaken the slowy heavy sound of the SLR's for a .50 cal. If anyones interested the book "Behind Enemy Lines" by O'Farrel has this and many other great stories about his experience with the SASR in Vietnam.
    Last edited by digrar; 11-06-2009 at 07:40 PM.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,185

    Default

    The SLR is a damn fine weapon, heavy but I found it acurate and easy to use. Had one hell of a kick for a young Cadet to fire (many years ago ) But I thoroughly enjoyed handling it.

    I guess the biggest reason for the swap was standardisation, lighter, and a replacement for aging kit.

  8. #8
    Banned user Uninen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,125

    Default

    The weapons are of different classes.. you cant compare em..

    Be as it may that SA 80 replaced L1A1, the SA 80 still is assault rifle and L1A1 was semi automatic battle rifle...

    Its like comparing SVD Dragunov (WHICH IS NOT SNIPER RIFLE!!!) to AK-74.. makes no sense.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    defending rockall for the evil empire
    Posts
    4,538

    Default

    simple 120 rounds basic load slr
    600 rounds 5.56
    soldiers in the falklands were clearing trenches at bayonet pint as they'd run out of ammo.
    I loved the SLR but the ability to carry more rounds makes the SA80 better for war fighting personally I'd take the SLR but we are not allowoed to own semi auto rifles
    rumour had it they brough in the ban because too many squaddies were looking at buying civi 5.56 rifles

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uninen
    The weapons are of different classes.. you cant compare em..
    Well, you can't avoid comparing them as one replaced the other as the British Army's standard battle rifle.

    There are three different issues here: the calibre, the configuration and the quality/reliability.

    The calibre change was a result of the adoption of the 5.56mm as the NATO standard. There are pros and cons - lighter ammo weight for the 5.56mm plus lighter recoil enabling controlled automatic fire, but less effectiveness and range. Personally I think that something in between would have been better - and still would - and maybe we'll eventually get that with the new 6.8x43 Rem SPC.

    The bullpup configuration had been favoured by the British Army since the late 1940s; in the early 1950s they actually adopted the EM-2 bullpup in 7mm calibre, before the Americans forced them to drop it in favour of a 7.62mm calibre weapon. However, the SA80 is not a very good bullpup design, being right-hand only and rather heavy with a marked rearward weight bias.

    The quality/reliability issues with the SA80 are very well known. However, they now seem to have been corrected. See: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/SA80.htm for the full story.

    Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

  11. #11
    Senior Member Gringo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dalby Inquiry Bureau, Charlotte Street, Soho, London
    Posts
    3,556

    Default

    When will these polls ever end!!!!!????? :P

  12. #12
    Hot Biker Dude of Death Royal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    'round and about...
    Posts
    7,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Williams
    The calibre change was a result of the adoption of the 5.56mm as the NATO standard. There are pros and cons - lighter ammo weight for the 5.56mm plus lighter recoil enabling controlled automatic fire,
    Without a bipod or better still a tripod there is no such thing. Automatic fire is necessary for room/trench clearing, but controlled it ain't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Williams
    The bullpup configuration had been favoured by the British Army since the late 1940s; in the early 1950s they actually adopted the EM-2 bullpup in 7mm calibre, before the Americans forced them to drop it in favour of a 7.62mm calibre weapon.
    Not true. EM-2 was triled, but never adopted - largely for the reason you've given.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Williams
    However, the SA80 is not a very good bullpup design, being right-hand only and rather heavy with a marked rearward weight bias.
    The right/left handed issue is true, although I've never met a left handed soldier who couldn't be trained to shoot (a rifle) right handed. The weight issue is actually an advantage as it keeps a short weapon well seated in the shoulder and thus aids the accuracy of what is already a very accurate weapon.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Stavka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Keeping the homoerotica in MP.net
    Age
    31
    Posts
    2,215

    Default

    FAL all the way baby, all the way!

  14. #14
    Senior Member Falco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Chicoutimi, Canada
    Posts
    2,758

    Default

    Never fired either of them so I can't say for sure. Could we say that the L1A1 is like the M14 while the SA80 is like the M4/16?

  15. #15
    Senior Member Gringo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dalby Inquiry Bureau, Charlotte Street, Soho, London
    Posts
    3,556

    Default

    the SLR I suppose. Not a fan of bullpup at all.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •