The SA-80 in pictures.

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - The SA-80 in pictures.

Posted: 9/16/2012 5:31:25 AM EST

Posted: 9/16/2012 5:32:31 AM EST

[#1]

I peed a little bit

Posted: 9/16/2012 5:36:48 AM EST

[#2]

Shockingly similar boltface.

Posted: 9/16/2012 5:41:08 AM EST

[#3]

Should we start calling this place SA80.COM?

Posted: 9/16/2012 5:41:56 AM EST

[#4]

Quoted:
Shockingly similar boltface.

It's a modified AR-18 action, so it makes sense that the boltface is pretty much an AR-15 boltface.

ETA: The bolt assembly and piston assembly is pretty much identical to what my AR-180B's looks like. I do remember that some guy from Sterling saw it and thought that Enfield did a shitty job modifying it and that Sterling could've done a much better job but Enfield never asked for help.

ETA2: Ah, found the quote on wikipedia.

Many of the key parts of the SA80 were poorly copied by Royal Ordnance engineers from the Armalite AR18, then made in Britain under licence by the Sterling Armaments factory in Dagenham, using the pressed-steel technique. The former owner of the factory, James Edmiston, says that his chief designer had seen an early prototype SA80 at an arms fair, stripped it down and discovered that the bolt, bolt carrier, magazine, springs and firing pin had been taken from an AR18. "Not once did Enfield ever ask Sterling for information on the AR18," he says. "I know of at least one component that they 'copied' incorrectly which could well have made a difference to reliability." '

Posted: 9/16/2012 6:17:42 AM EST

[#5]

Quoted:
Should we start calling this place SA80.COM?

Have there been a bunch of threads on it? I guess I didn't even search

Posted: 9/16/2012 6:36:00 AM EST

[#6]

So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

Posted: 9/16/2012 6:40:00 AM EST

[#7]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Shockingly similar boltface.

It's a modified AR-18 action, so it makes sense that the boltface is pretty much an AR-15 boltface.

ETA: The bolt assembly and piston assembly is pretty much identical to what my AR-180B's looks like. I do remember that some guy from Sterling saw it and thought that Enfield did a shitty job modifying it and that Sterling could've done a much better job but Enfield never asked for help.

ETA2: Ah, found the quote on wikipedia.

Many of the key parts of the SA80 were poorly copied by Royal Ordnance engineers from the Armalite AR18, then made in Britain under licence by the Sterling Armaments factory in Dagenham, using the pressed-steel technique. The former owner of the factory, James Edmiston, says that his chief designer had seen an early prototype SA80 at an arms fair, stripped it down and discovered that the bolt, bolt carrier, magazine, springs and firing pin had been taken from an AR18. "Not once did Enfield ever ask Sterling for information on the AR18," he says. "I know of at least one component that they 'copied' incorrectly which could well have made a difference to reliability." '

Dang, they even copied the magazine?

Posted: 9/16/2012 6:41:16 AM EST

[#8]

So damn ugly its pretty.

Posted: 9/16/2012 6:43:40 AM EST

[#9]

Quoted:
So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

This.

Bill

Posted: 9/16/2012 6:44:34 AM EST

[#10]

I could never wrap my head around to it being a rifle, it's just so damn ugly.

Posted: 9/16/2012 6:45:34 AM EST

[#11]

I hate shooting that fucking thing...

And the lefties have a big suprise......

Posted: 9/16/2012 6:50:34 AM EST

[#12]

Quoted:
So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

The alleged lack of reliability of the SA-80 has been pretty overblown (especially on arfcom) in my opinion.

Much like many early complaints about the M16 when it first was adopted in the U.S., a lot of the complaints about the L85A1 when it was first introduced seemed to mostly be just teething problems and soldiers that didn't like change (and getting used to a bullpup), and not necessarily any serious issues with the rifle. I know that I got to train with British troops that has the L85A1 in the late 80s, and I was VERY impressed with it.

Admittedly, there were some marginal issues (especially in sandy and extremely cold conditions, IIRC) that were then fixed by the BAE/HK upgrades to the A2 version in the early 90s. But it's not like it was some horribly unreliable and crappy rifle before the upgrades.

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:01:44 AM EST

[#13]

Agree its an ar18 or 180B with a bulpup stock. I think the whole bulpup fad was just a phase we went thru in the 80's like wundernines and now everyone makes a polymer pistol or AR15. And while some good designs came out of it like the FAMAS and AUG, I don't see whereas the SA 80 really solved anything for the British military –– there were better 5.56 platforms already available when the SA 80 was designed ––just none were native Brit designs –– kinda like the M14/M16 follies and the ordinance dept. Then you take it and try to make it do things it was never intended to do such as squad automatic weapon and sniper roles. Ah! politics and procurement –– talk about lawyers,guns and money! holy crap. I am glad the Brits ended up with a decent system but it sure took a long road to get there––as did we with the M16. I personally don't see the point of a bulpup outside of troops operating within and getting in and out of vehicles very often but if Her Majesty's Royal Marines are happy with it so be it.

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:11:19 AM EST

[#14]

They're pretty easy to field strip.

Apart from messing with the gas parts

(which I've only done once or twice in the L86A1 LSW as a Cadet), we sometimes did it blindfolded for giggles.

Mind you, I was 18 the last time that I did it. Hopefully I would still manage.

EDIT - Fucked if I can remember how to put that sling on though.

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:21:26 AM EST

[#15]

I'm left eye dominant, therefore I can not shoot it. FUCK THAT THING

Weird being right handed but shooting left handed. I also bat left handed and use a lacrosse stick left handed. I so confused

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:24:16 AM EST

[#16]

I want one

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:28:32 AM EST

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

The alleged lack of reliability of the SA-80 has been pretty overblown (especially on arfcom) in my opinion.

Much like many early complaints about the M16 when it first was adopted in the U.S., a lot of the complaints about the L85A1 when it was first introduced seemed to mostly be just teething problems and soldiers that didn't like change (and getting used to a bullpup), and not necessarily any serious issues with the rifle. I know that I got to train with British troops that has the L85A1 in the late 80s, and I was VERY impressed with it.

Admittedly, there were some marginal issues (especially in sandy and extremely cold conditions, IIRC) that were then fixed by the BAE/HK upgrades to the A2 version in the early 90s. But it's not like it was some horribly unreliable and crappy rifle before the upgrades.

If you squeezed the back of the receiver it wouldn't fire.

That's not a teething problem.

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:29:00 AM EST

[#18]

Thanks for the pics, Despite the known design flaws, its one of those rifles that I have always just wanted. I have hoped for a while that someone would do a run of affordable semi-auto ones, but I also know the market is extremely small for such a rifle.

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:29:06 AM EST

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

The alleged lack of reliability of the SA-80 has been pretty overblown (especially on arfcom) in my opinion.

Much like many early complaints about the M16 when it first was adopted in the U.S., a lot of the complaints about the L85A1 when it was first introduced seemed to mostly be just teething problems and soldiers that didn't like change (and getting used to a bullpup), and not necessarily any serious issues with the rifle. I know that I got to train with British troops that has the L85A1 in the late 80s, and I was VERY impressed with it.

Admittedly, there were some marginal issues (especially in sandy and extremely cold conditions, IIRC) that were then fixed by the BAE/HK upgrades to the A2 version in the early 90s. But it's not like it was some horribly unreliable and crappy rifle before the upgrades.

If you squeezed the back of the receiver it wouldn't fire.

That's not a teething problem.

WTF? Seriously?

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:30:20 AM EST

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

The alleged lack of reliability of the SA-80 has been pretty overblown (especially on arfcom) in my opinion.

Much like many early complaints about the M16 when it first was adopted in the U.S., a lot of the complaints about the L85A1 when it was first introduced seemed to mostly be just teething problems and soldiers that didn't like change (and getting used to a bullpup), and not necessarily any serious issues with the rifle. I know that I got to train with British troops that has the L85A1 in the late 80s, and I was VERY impressed with it.

Admittedly, there were some marginal issues (especially in sandy and extremely cold conditions, IIRC) that were then fixed by the BAE/HK upgrades to the A2 version in the early 90s. But it's not like it was some horribly unreliable and crappy rifle before the upgrades.

If you squeezed the back of the receiver it wouldn't fire.

That's not a teething problem.

I never heard that from any of the British soldiers I talked to (including those who kicked our asses in field shooting competitions

) nor did I hear that from my buddy who was issued one in Bosnia.

Source?

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:33:10 AM EST

[#21]

I'd love to try one out, but I doubt there are but a few ranges here in the US that have one.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:36:24 AM EST

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:

If you squeezed the back of the receiver it wouldn't fire.

That's not a teething problem.

WTF? Seriously?

The L85A1/A2 are chunky-ass metal and plastic.

Just how fucking hard were they squeezing? They must have had arms like Popeye to be able to do that.

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:39:55 AM EST

[#23]

Looks like the guts were taken right out of my AR-180 (AR-18)

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:41:36 AM EST

[#24]

I liked the one I was issued. Did a mag dump in about 3 seconds. No problems that I could tell during the month I had it.

Posted: 9/16/2012 7:44:05 AM EST

[#25]

Has anyone reported the illegal use of the BFL to the mods?

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:03:36 AM EST

[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:

So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

The alleged lack of reliability of the SA-80 has been pretty overblown (especially on arfcom) in my opinion.

Much like many early complaints about the M16 when it first was adopted in the U.S., a lot of the complaints about the L85A1 when it was first introduced seemed to mostly be just teething problems and soldiers that didn't like change (and getting used to a bullpup), and not necessarily any serious issues with the rifle. I know that I got to train with British troops that has the L85A1 in the late 80s, and I was VERY impressed with it.

Admittedly, there were some marginal issues (especially in sandy and extremely cold conditions, IIRC) that were then fixed by the BAE/HK upgrades to the A2 version in the early 90s. But it's not like it was some horribly unreliable and crappy rifle before the upgrades.

It's still ugly as sin.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:04:15 AM EST

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

The alleged lack of reliability of the SA-80 has been pretty overblown (especially on arfcom) in my opinion.

Much like many early complaints about the M16 when it first was adopted in the U.S., a lot of the complaints about the L85A1 when it was first introduced seemed to mostly be just teething problems and soldiers that didn't like change (and getting used to a bullpup), and not necessarily any serious issues with the rifle. I know that I got to train with British troops that has the L85A1 in the late 80s, and I was VERY impressed with it.

Admittedly, there were some marginal issues (especially in sandy and extremely cold conditions, IIRC) that were then fixed by the BAE/HK upgrades to the A2 version in the early 90s. But it's not like it was some horribly unreliable and crappy rifle before the upgrades.

It's still ugly as sin.

I think it (and the FAMAS) are sexy.

Then again, I also own a Bushmaster M17S

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:06:52 AM EST

[#28]

I have both the L85 and the L86.

Both airsoft.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:09:45 AM EST

[#29]

Opinions on the Susat vs the Acog ?

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:16:52 AM EST

[#30]

Quoted:
I have both the L85 and the L86.

Both airsoft.

Baaaaaa Haaaaaaaaa –––––––– DORK...!!!

Oh wait...

I have an airsoft Stg44.

Never mind...

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:23:36 AM EST

[#31]

That is one butt ugly gun!

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:35:16 AM EST

[#32]

Quoted:

They're pretty easy to field strip.

Apart from messing with the gas parts

(which I've only done once or twice in the L86A1 LSW as a Cadet), we sometimes did it blindfolded for giggles.

Mind you, I was 18 the last time that I did it. Hopefully I would still manage.

EDIT - Fucked if I can remember how to put that sling on though.

Fuck that sling, I had a hell of time with it as well

Reliability wise I thought it was a damn fine weapon. We popped off a few rounds for familiarization, shot a few more for qualifications, then shot off a shit load of blanks. Mine did fine and I didn't hear about anybody having any problems. I found it fit right into the pocket of the shoulder and was nicely balanced. What I didn't like was the sights and conducting mag changes. I had my face right up in there to get a proper sight picture and thank goodness my Oakleys are tough because they were getting smashed into with every shot. Mag changes were more on me for not having any bullpup experience but even the really quick Brits would still be behind an M4 mag change.

Zeroing and qualifying is a bit of an eye opener.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:36:31 AM EST

[#33]

Quoted:
I have both the L85 and the L86.

Both airsoft.

You wouldn't have a mp5a2 to go with that avatar would you? Neil Marshall did a damn fine job on that movie...it's way underrated. I heard there is supposed to be a sequel in development for sometime in 2014

Anyways, I've always wanted to get some trigger time on a SA80. Uhm...thats all I have to add to the discussion, carry on folks.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:37:15 AM EST

[#34]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

The alleged lack of reliability of the SA-80 has been pretty overblown (especially on arfcom) in my opinion.

Much like many early complaints about the M16 when it first was adopted in the U.S., a lot of the complaints about the L85A1 when it was first introduced seemed to mostly be just teething problems and soldiers that didn't like change (and getting used to a bullpup), and not necessarily any serious issues with the rifle. I know that I got to train with British troops that has the L85A1 in the late 80s, and I was VERY impressed with it.

Admittedly, there were some marginal issues (especially in sandy and extremely cold conditions, IIRC) that were then fixed by the BAE/HK upgrades to the A2 version in the early 90s. But it's not like it was some horribly unreliable and crappy rifle before the upgrades.

If you squeezed the back of the receiver it wouldn't fire.

That's not a teething problem.

I never heard that from any of the British soldiers I talked to (including those who kicked our asses in field shooting competitions

) nor did I hear that from my buddy who was issued one in Bosnia.

Source?

I can verify that from personal experience. I shot both versions, the LSW and the L85, and when I used my off hand to support the weapon (somewhat akin to how you might grip a machine gun buttstock), any pressure on the flimsy sheet metal of the receiver would either slow down the bolt enough to cause a stoppage, or actually stop the bolt. The receiver is actually flimsy enough to bend with finger pressure alone.

The -A2 version I don't know about, as they stopped Trumpet Dance before they applied that, and I never got to fire one.

L85 or L86––Cool looking POS. I did not like them, and after most of the Brits we cross-trained with fired our stuff, they preferred it.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:42:24 AM EST

[#35]

Quoted: I can verify that from personal experience. I shot both versions, the LSW and the L85, and when I used my off hand to support the weapon (somewhat akin to how you might grip a machine gun buttstock), any pressure on the flimsy sheet metal of the receiver would either slow down the bolt enough to cause a stoppage, or actually stop the bolt. The receiver is actually flimsy enough to bend with finger pressure alone.

Why did you do that with the L86A1 LSW? It already has a rear pistol grip that you are supposed to use.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:48:19 AM EST

[#36]

Quoted:

So damn ugly it's pretty still ugly as shit.

FIFY.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:51:02 AM EST

[#37]

Quoted:

Quoted:
So, how reliable of a platform is it? Also, it seems a lot more simple than I thought it would be.

The alleged lack of reliability of the SA-80 has been pretty overblown (especially on arfcom) in my opinion.

Much like many early complaints about the M16 when it first was adopted in the U.S., a lot of the complaints about the L85A1 when it was first introduced seemed to mostly be just teething problems and soldiers that didn't like change (and getting used to a bullpup), and not necessarily any serious issues with the rifle. I know that I got to train with British troops that has the L85A1 in the late 80s, and I was VERY impressed with it.

Admittedly, there were some marginal issues (especially in sandy and extremely cold conditions, IIRC) that were then fixed by the BAE/HK upgrades to the A2 version in the early 90s. But it's not like it was some horribly unreliable and crappy rifle before the upgrades.

If you squeezed the back of the receiver it wouldn't fire.

That's not a teething problem.

I never heard that from any of the British soldiers I talked to (including those who kicked our asses in field shooting competitions

) nor did I hear that from my buddy who was issued one in Bosnia.

Source?

I can verify that from personal experience. I shot both versions, the LSW and the L85, and when I used my off hand to support the weapon (somewhat akin to how you might grip a machine gun buttstock), any pressure on the flimsy sheet metal of the receiver would either slow down the bolt enough to cause a stoppage, or actually stop the bolt. The receiver is actually flimsy enough to bend with finger pressure alone.

The -A2 version I don't know about, as they stopped Trumpet Dance before they applied that, and I never got to fire one.

L85 or L86––Cool looking POS. I did not like them, and after most of the Brits we cross-trained with fired our stuff, they preferred it.

Did not know that.

Thanks for the info.

ETA: Technically, I GUESS it could be argued it's not really a "reliability" issue, since it works fine as long as you use it as intended - but I'd still be very worried about that, since it would obviously be pretty susceptible to damage that could cause it to not work.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:51:12 AM EST

[#38]

Quoted:

Quoted: I can verify that from personal experience. I shot both versions, the LSW and the L85, and when I used my off hand to support the weapon (somewhat akin to how you might grip a machine gun buttstock), any pressure on the flimsy sheet metal of the receiver would either slow down the bolt enough to cause a stoppage, or actually stop the bolt. The receiver is actually flimsy enough to bend with finger pressure alone.

Why did you do that with the L86A1 LSW? It already has a rear pistol grip that you are supposed to use.

Something that was pointed out to me by the guys I was shooting with... It was an informal deal, and nobody did anything at all in the way of really formal cross-training on the weapons. The Royal Engineers had the ammo, we had the contacts with Range Control, and a group of us went out on the weekend to shoot each other's stuff on an unused range. I found the rear grip on the LSW to be in an awkward position (we had to wear body armor, when on the range––The Royal Engineer guys were wearing their "berries"), so I gripped it the way I was used to handling the M60. After about the third stoppage, the guy on my left flank yelled out something like "Oi, mate... Don't hold it like that...". I did something similar when it came to the L85, not realizing I was doing it.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:55:40 AM EST

[#39]

SA80 and the FAMAS make my pants tight.

Posted: 9/16/2012 8:58:26 AM EST

[#40]

Quoted:

Something that was pointed out to me by the guys I was shooting with... It was an informal deal, and nobody did anything at all in the way of really formal cross-training on the weapons. The Royal Engineers had the ammo, we had the contacts with Range Control, and a group of us went out on the weekend to shoot each other's stuff on an unused range. I found the rear grip on the LSW to be in an awkward position (we had to wear body armor, when on the range––The Royal Engineer guys were wearing their "berries"), so I gripped it the way I was used to handling the M60. After about the third stoppage, the guy on my left flank yelled out something like "Oi, mate... Don't hold it like that...". I did something similar when it came to the L85, not realizing I was doing it.

Fair enough. I was only ever a snot-nosed teenager in the ACF when I used it, and the heaviest duty gear I had to wear was PLCE webbing, which was basically belt gear with braces.

Posted: 9/16/2012 9:36:39 AM EST

[#41]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I have both the L85 and the L86.

Both airsoft.

You wouldn't have a mp5a2 to go with that avatar would you? Neil Marshall did a damn fine job on that movie...it's way underrated. I heard there is supposed to be a sequel in development for sometime in 2014

Anyways, I've always wanted to get some trigger time on a SA80. Uhm...thats all I have to add to the discussion, carry on folks.

Not anymore.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - The SA-80 in pictures.

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us