Hey,

I've always thought the SA-80 (L85A1& A2) was a great weapon, but some net reviews
I've read were far from complementry about it, e.g calling it "an overweight paperweight."
While on the other hand a book I have, called "Guns in Combat" reviewed it as a great
weapon. What I am unsure of is if some of these reviewers have every indeed used the gun
in the field, etc. One thing that all the authors agree on is that the SUSAT sight and the
bayonet (esp. scabbard) are brilliant. I agree for a practically shortened AR-18 its weight
of around 5kg is a bit much.

So I thought this would be the place to ask -seeing that it will still be a few years till I can
have my own soldier stories- if anyone here has had any experience, memories, opinions,
stories to tell about the L85A1 or A2?.
Is there a reason why I normally see the SAS with M-16's?

thanks,

Erik

im not in the forces, but was a cadet so extensively used them on ranges, and on exercise with blanks, both the SA80(L85) and L98(a training version)

in my experience it is very accurate, well balanced, light and handy. the reliability issues i cant really comment on though.

most of the time we never had SUSATs as they are too expensive for cadets to use/break.
we used the carrying handle with iron sights on top.

we sometimes had access to SLRs, if at beckingham training camp. and whilst its far moore powerful, and seems to be better built, its also heavier, and very long.

maybe some of the real soldiers can tell you better! #:-)

cheers

joe

not very good the flash eminator rusts very quickly in the groves, the cleaning kit is pants to get right into the weapon and grit does stick in the rear sights ect my sa80's butt plate fell out the other week on the ranges its a weapon that you've got to keep on top of the maintance all the time now we have got new mags for it from the states we cant use them
on the older version which hasnt had the upgrades carried out due to the weight of the mags. it was in the press last week that the newer version has had to under go another upgrade due to yet another fault. if the working parts dont get enoght oil on them before firing this can cause stoppages and some nasty jams in the chamber and trying to clean the chamber with the cleaning kit supplied is a right pain its like a xmas tree but more often known as a bog brush these are thin brass/copper brushes which wear out but seldom get replaced. The army had to bring back the GPMG as the LSW didnt cut the mustard . I think the weapon should be replaced there are some good choices out there and needs to be addressed soon before the weapon causes some one to die.
BTW if the susat sight gets broken and gasses leak it got to be treated very soon due to the fact that the sights contain lithum? gass which is radioactive

Thanks for your opinions, any one else got some stories to tell?

The SA80 seems to be going through the same ‘teething’ problems that the R4 (and R5) went through in the SADF. At first the soldiers on the ground hated the weapon with a passion. The R4s had many problems, some real problems and others just attitude, namely:

Real
The folding butt was prone to breaking off.
There were problems with the magazines and mag retaining clips. Some literally fell off the weapon for no reason.
Some of the first R4s tested jammed for no reason at all.
There were phantom rounds fired. (Rounds were going off in the magazine)
The carry grip was prone to breaking off
On some weapons the (romp deksel?) breach cover came off while firing

Attitude
The hand grip / guard was too broad (because of the bipod)
The pistol grip too thin, the trigger and trigger guard too big etc.
It was 5.56mm.
The wire cutters were too weak

I have spoken to quite a few serving members of the British Armed Forces and the only printable reference I heard was “thankfully we don’t use that toy much!”

I personally think that when a report blames some of the highest / best trained soldiers in the British Forces for not keeping their weapons clean as a cause for jamming, then the ‘Assault Rifle’ concept has been inaccurately attached to the weapon!

The first thing about an Assault Rifle is that is must be robust! When you have to modally coddle a combat or assault weapon it has no business being in the military at all!

Thanks,

You seem to know quite a bit about the good old SADF Savage, not a former South African by any chance?

Yeah, I'm a "when we" , served for a day or two in the SADF / SANDF!

I asked a bloke at work who came out of the Army a few years ago if all the stories about how bad the SA-80 was were true.

He launched into a 45 minute diatribe using lots of *&%#@* and (@:":!* to describe just how bad it was. Basically he felt that it was OK as long as you kept it at room temperature and never fired it..........

Salute

nothing like colourful language!

ive got one story for you,

one time i was staying at RAF leuchars for a week, and we were given the oportunity to do some work experience with different sections. i chose the armoury.

after being taught how to operate, strip service etc all the weapons they had. SA80,LSW, GPMG, Browning and walther pistols, M60 etc we were given some to service, and i dropped the top half of the reciever. anyone familiar with the weapon will im sure know this is made of stamped steel. the rear part that engages with the butt plate was bent inwards and even though it was carefully bent back. the bolt would not operate smoothly. so the weapon had to be rebuilt

i doubt an enfield of even SLR would be so easily damaged!

cheers

joe

Would'nt mind spending a weekend in a British Army armoury......

just remembered we were told that it was impossable to put the gas parts in the wrong way a lad in our troop in basic trg proved the manual wrong never got done for it either

it was actually RAF. but they had almost all the weapons you would find in an army one.

they also had some US air force weapons, M60s etc, as some US special forces chinooks were there for an exercise.

one of the coolest things they had was an M79 grenade launcher. they were keeping it for the local constabulary, as it had been found several months earlier in a bin in dundee town centre!

cheers

joe

Amazing what pops up in bins!

What weapons do you think should replace the SA80 ? personally after reading about the G36, I would have to go with that

the FAL in 5.56 with folding stock should have picked it the 1st time round

Such a pity to see a fine-looking weapon plagued with defects. But (I dunno about you guys) if Enfield (the manufacturer) is aware of it and is oing something to correct these problems. It would be quite a blow to its reputation if they do not fix these problems.

IIRC, the M-16 also had problems when it was first introduced during the Vietnam war. The M-16A2 is the result of these corrections.

one problem........the factory where they were made has been closed,

they were made at the royal ordanance factory in nottingham, which is not far from where i live. and it wasnt their fault at all.

a relative of mine was a sergeant in the grenadier guards, and he was seconded to the unit based in warminster that tests weapons. he was there at the time they were developing the SA80. according to what he has told me, the original prototype was incredible. this was the design royal ordanance had made. he said that all throughout testing it was faultless.

but, it was too expensive. it was made of high quality machined parts, and the MOD ordered the design to be changed to cut costs. the result was the production model. the royal ordance factory produced the weapons according to the specification the government provided.

my relative left the army just as the SA80 was coming into service so only used it in training a few times, but he says the prototype was nothing like the production model in terms f quality or reliability.

cheers

joe

pity about having limited military budgets, imagine if they were limitless....... ....