[ARCHIVED THREAD] - The L85... (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 9/7/2012 5:05:53 PM EDT
|
is it legal here in the US? I have never seen one in person, at a gun show or at any range I have been to.
Also is it crap compared to the M4 ? |
|
Quoted: is it legal here in the US? I have never seen one in person, at a gun show or at any range I have been to. Also is it crap compared to the M4 ? No one ever made a semi-auto civilian version that I am aware of, I am not sure if any FA version ever made it to the USA. There was a guy a few years back talking about making a semi-auto receiver that looked like the L85 but used different internals. |
|
Dont know if they were imported, BUT the Brits over here carry them and say they have fixed all the earlier issues with them and they are reliable now. Right hand only though.
The Australian manufactured AUG though appears to be the cats ass. Left or right handed and reliable as can be according to some AusCommando types I work with from time to time. |
|
A few were imported as semis and the guy that brought them in had the rights to make them in the USA. I met him once. Saw one of the rifles as well. He was trying to get investors interested in the project at the time. I was not an investor, just met him in relation to guns. I remember later he was trying to sell the whole thing off. Guns, and rights to produce as a package. Timing was bad as it was the AWB days.
Don't know what happened to the rights or guns. |
|
Quoted:
Also is it crap compared to the M4 ? Yes. http://rationalgun.blogspot.com/2011/11/actual-friggin-data-on-sa80.html The source for the information on that blog spent considerable time training Brits while on loan from the USMC. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I held one once in Kuwait. It was heavy as hell and didn't balance well at all. That is a bizarre complaint against a bullpup it is far better balanced than an M16 or M4 felt like there was to much weight at the rear instead of towards the center of the weapon. It might have been better if the grip had been farther back on the weapon. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I held one once in Kuwait. It was heavy as hell and didn't balance well at all. That is a bizarre complaint against a bullpup it is far better balanced than an M16 or M4 felt like there was to much weight at the rear instead of towards the center of the weapon. It might have been better if the grip had been farther back on the weapon. I see what you are saying (especially with a full magazine) - but I'd still argue that at worst, it's still BETTER than a traditional rifle/carbine setup in terms of balance, because you can essentially aim and fire (with some reasonable accuracy) with ONE hand, which is essentially impossible with a traditional design. |
|
Quoted:
Not realy true I carried one on and off from 1988-2007. the L85 is designed so the you never need to move you hand from the pistol grip much like a FAL 
Try that with an AR  What are you talking about? Do you really think having the charging handle on the right side of the rifle (as on the L85) is better? Do you actually think it is good to have to reach your support hand over the top of your optic to charge the weapon? The FAL charging handle is in a much better position, and the FAL and L85 have nothing in common ergonomically. Don't make silly comparisons! 
Sorry Ross - I was trying to quote the guy posting just above you! 
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: A few were imported as semis and the guy that brought them in had the rights to make them in the USA. I met him once. Saw one of the rifles as well. He was trying to get investors interested in the project at the time. I was not an investor, just met him in relation to guns. I remember later he was trying to sell the whole thing off. Guns, and rights to produce as a package. Timing was bad as it was the AWB days. Don't know what happened to the rights or guns. What are you talking about? Do you really think having the charging handle on the right side of the rifle (as on the L85) is better? Do you actually think it is good to have to reach your support hand over the top of your optic to charge the weapon? The FAL charging handle is in a much better position, and the FAL and L85 have nothing in common ergonomically. Don't make silly comparisons! wut |
| Others may disagree but we aren't missing anything. Haven't met too many Brits that liked it more than the AR series or over anything else for that matter. The ones that did as far as I can tell haven't shot anything else other than the L85. I like the IDEA of a bullpup, but I haven't shot/ used one I like better than a standard pattern rifle |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Looks about as ergonomic as a transmission bellhousing. Not realy true I carried one on and off from 1988-2007. the L85 is designed so the you never need to move you hand from the pistol grip much like a FAL
Try that with an AR Considering I have a BAD lever on my AR, I try it all the time. |
| The L85 and the FAMAS are both really rare in the U.S. There were semi-auto versions of both imported, but in very low numbers, and they are scarce (and pricey) collector's items now. I don't know how many, if any, Pre-86 transferable MG's of either type exist. (I wouldn't be surprised if the answer was "less than 5" or even "zero" though). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Looks about as ergonomic as a transmission bellhousing. Not realy true I carried one on and off from 1988-2007. the L85 is designed so the you never need to move you hand from the pistol grip much like a FAL
Try that with an AR I do it all the time. Of course, I shoot the rifle left handed, although I am right handed. Having one good eye sometimes has its advantages. I'm just glad they came up with the shell deflector.
|
|
I was stationed in the BIOT with a bunch of Bootnecks when they made thier transition from thier Armalites and L1A1's to the SA85.
Got to do the whole framilliarization and kit change bit with them. I hated the POS, and the Brits were even more disgusted with the things. The optical sight is the best part of the package, and the rest is a sorry assed joke to be playing on a Grunt. For giggles, hand one to a southpaw and force them to qualify right handed with the thing. They are NOT intuitive like most battle arms. The 86 was the answer to the problems of the 85 bieng a POS, and still fell short. The fact the things aren't sold here, is similar to not bieng able to find a cargo Hippo to rent in Iowa... |
|
I was deployed with a Royal Air Force Police and RAF Regiment section on two different deployments and I had the opportunity to handle and use the L85 before and after the modification program by HK. I found the weapon to be well made after the HK rework. The ergonomics were way different than the M16 series rifles I was used to but with more time I would have adjusted to it. I liked how the weapon balanced, magazine placement took some getting used to. The SUSAT sight was a bit clunky but serviceable. Accuracy wasn't bad and the sight helped some.
The majority of British troops I spoke with from RAF troops to Paras, to Royal Marines all said they liked the weapon and some said it was even better once the weapons got reworked. The SAS guys I met only replied with a sly grin while they patted their Diemaco AR's when I asked about the L85. The only detractor I found was a crusty old Corporal who started his career with an L1A1. He told me they snapped an L85 in half when they used one as a cricket bat. Overall, the weapon didn't seem too bad. I'd use it if needed. For a soldier like an englishman with little previous firearms experience and with the proper training it would be a good rifle for them. If any of them made it to our shores for civilian use, I would buy one in a heartbeat. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
is it legal here in the US? I have never seen one in person, at a gun show or at any range I have been to. Also is it crap compared to the M4 ? No one ever made a semi-auto civilian version that I am aware of, I am not sure if any FA version ever made it to the USA. There was a guy a few years back talking about making a semi-auto receiver that looked like the L85 but used different internals. Read some threads indicating that there are some in the US (less than 200). All semi-auto. Story was that part of the problem was the exchange rate between $ and pounds sterling at the time jacked it up about 5x and it was stupid expensive. It's on the first page of "The armory" section, other weapons or something like that. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
There are the SA80's on the mg registry in the US. Magpul owns one, not sure of the others. transferables or post samples? Not sure, I was under the impression they were transferable, but they could be post samples. Also my first post should read "three SA80's" instead of "the SA80's". iPhone posting... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
non-adjustable stock designed for the pre-body armor era. I love bullpups, but I agree that's a problem. Not realy true the rifle came into service and was used operationaly with CBA from the start. The weapon fits just about everyone and I have never come across a soldier That the adjustment of the sight on the rail didn't produce the correct eye relief. What I do wish it had was a 1913 rail instead if the terrible piece of crap welded to it 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
non-adjustable stock designed for the pre-body armor era. I love bullpups, but I agree that's a problem. Not realy true the rifle came into service and was used operationaly with CBA from the start. The weapon fits just about everyone and I have never come across a soldier That the adjustment of the sight on the rail didn't produce the correct eye relief. What I do wish it had was a 1913 rail instead if the terrible piece of crap welded to it Possible, I was borrowing my british friend's gun and not like I was going to tweak his scope (which also sucks badly). you never hear the SAS complain about their SA 80s.
|
|
Quoted:
Shit looks as ergonomic as an AK. Only one country in the world uses it....... If that tells ya anything... 
actualy used by about 5 countries I forget which . As I pointed out ealier the ergonomics are good as its designed so that you never have to move your hand from the pistol grip or take the weapon from the shoulder to to operate the weapon. The British drills for the FAL are the same way. As for the SUSAT yes its showing its age and is realy modified SUIT sight, but it was one of the first optics issued to all Infantry. A UOR was issued for ACOGS in the sand box and now the SUSAT is being relaced by the ELCAN which is great news. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Shit looks as ergonomic as an AK. Only one country in the world uses it....... If that tells ya anything...
actualy used by about 5 countries I forget which . As I pointed out ealier the ergonomics are good as its designed so that you never have to move your hand from the pistol grip or take the weapon from the shoulder to to operate the weapon. The British drills for the FAL are the same way. As for the SUSAT yes its showing its age and is realy modified SUIT sight, but it was one of the first optics issued to all Infantry. A UOR was issued for ACOGS in the sand box and now the SUSAT is being relaced by the ELCAN which is great news. Trading ACOGs for ELCANs is a step down. Jamaica and Sierre Leone. quite the heavy hitters. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Shit looks as ergonomic as an AK. Only one country in the world uses it....... If that tells ya anything...
As I pointed out ealier the ergonomics are good as its designed so that you never have to move your hand from the pistol grip or take the weapon from the shoulder to to operate the weapon. The British drills for the FAL are the same way. When are you moving your hand from the pistol grip on an M4 in a legitimate use situation? After you charge the first round you're not touching the charging handle until you're completely done and you're clearing the rifle. You don't have to operate the bolt hold open manually, it opens when the magazine is empty. Closing it is with your support hand. Reloading is with your support hand other than dropping the magazine, and that accomplished without moving your hand off. Selector is flipped without moving your hand. With most malfunctions you can fix them without moving your hand from the pistol grip as well. I am really having trouble thinking of something that requires you to move your hand that you'd find on an M4 but not on an L-85/SA-80. Maybe when you're on the range and you have to open the bolt manually to clear the rifle and make it safe a few times in between iterations or whatever I can see it being a pain in the ass on an M4, but that only matters on the range. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Shit looks as ergonomic as an AK. Only one country in the world uses it....... If that tells ya anything... As I pointed out ealier the ergonomics are good as its designed so that you never have to move your hand from the pistol grip or take the weapon from the shoulder to to operate the weapon. The British drills for the FAL are the same way. When are you moving your hand from the pistol grip on an M4 in a legitimate use situation? After you charge the first round you're not touching the charging handle until you're completely done and you're clearing the rifle. You don't have to operate the bolt hold open manually, it opens when the magazine is empty. Closing it is with your support hand. Reloading is with your support hand other than dropping the magazine, and that accomplished without moving your hand off. Selector is flipped without moving your hand. With most malfunctions you can fix them without moving your hand from the pistol grip as well. I am really having trouble thinking of something that requires you to move your hand that you'd find on an M4 but not on an L-85/SA-80. Maybe when you're on the range and you have to open the bolt manually to clear the rifle and make it safe a few times in between iterations or whatever I can see it being a pain in the ass on an M4, but that only matters on the range. I rack the charging handle with my left hand also, while the rifle is shouldered. It's really not hard to do. |