Retired AF Guy
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 866
- Points
- 1,160
Reference the SA-80. I have never fired it and therefore no expert on its capabilities, but I have talked to lots of Brits army types and I cannot remember any of them saying good things about the rifle. One of the big complaints (among many) they had was that the magazine release was on the left side of the rifle and when the soldier was running the mag release would bang against the webbing and the mag would pop-out. The problems got so bad that back in 2002 (if I remember correctly) the Brit papers were reporting that the Ministry of Defence was actually looking at the Canadian C7 as a possible replacement. Instead, they signed a deal with HK; haven't heard whether the improved SA-80 is any better.
Just a little historical background, the prototype of the SA-80 was called the EM-2 and was originally chambered in 4.8 mm. A friend of mine who was on the NATO weapon trials said that while accurate the EM-2, but the 4.8 mm rounds because of its size was unable to knock the targets down!
While there were many reasons for adopting the SA-80, one reported reason is the UK experience with the L1A1 in Northern Ireland. One problem was that the L1A1 was to long and would get entangled with legs, equipment, etc when jumping in/out of APC's, kicking in doors, running through houses, etc. Adopting firing positions may also had an impact; with the L1A1 (and C1A1) who had about two feet of barrel and forestock sticking around a corner before you had actually engage a target. With the shorter SA-80 you wouldn't have these problems. (Sorry cannot remember where I heard this and could be nothing more than rumour).
Just a little historical background, the prototype of the SA-80 was called the EM-2 and was originally chambered in 4.8 mm. A friend of mine who was on the NATO weapon trials said that while accurate the EM-2, but the 4.8 mm rounds because of its size was unable to knock the targets down!
While there were many reasons for adopting the SA-80, one reported reason is the UK experience with the L1A1 in Northern Ireland. One problem was that the L1A1 was to long and would get entangled with legs, equipment, etc when jumping in/out of APC's, kicking in doors, running through houses, etc. Adopting firing positions may also had an impact; with the L1A1 (and C1A1) who had about two feet of barrel and forestock sticking around a corner before you had actually engage a target. With the shorter SA-80 you wouldn't have these problems. (Sorry cannot remember where I heard this and could be nothing more than rumour).
How much was your EOtech?
