Anyone have any experience with these? Been seeing them on TV doing alot of the dirty work of urban combat. I wonder if they really work or if they just "look cool".

They dont work. Search the internet, you will find endless articles about the SA80's functioning problems.

Kristofer

I've spoken with many British, Irish, and Scottish soldiers in my military duties. They said "It sucks." Their words, not mine.

I can't imagine using a bayonet on one of those stubby bullpup rigs.

They just spent something like $1000 dollars a rifle to have H&K try to fix the things so they will work. They could have spent a lot less and bought new M-16's, or better yet break out some of the L1A1s they must have in reserve.

Didn't the French have a similar weapon? Who developed it and what sort of results? Hope it wasn't as "LeftHanded" as most of their other weapons!
Regards,

When I was in Thailand I met up with some Ghurkas who let us shoot theirs. They work if you keep them very clean and don't try to do anything vigorous. If you run around, the mag release hits your gear and drops your mag, so you have a single shot rifle. Also, the triggers on the ones we used got so hot that you couldn't touch them. The SA 80 is a total POS in my opinion. Okie John.

It's too bad, because they do indeed look cool...

How about the Steyr AUG? Wasn't that a sucessful bullpup design?

Trapper,the French's bull pup actualy works real well, its made by Famas, and has a reverseable bolt group,to work for left handed shooters and it uses the M-16 mag.I am still in touch with several friends in the "Legion" and they love them
they refer to it as the "Le Trumphet".

In my 14 years as a regular British infanteer I used L1A1, M16/AR15 and SA80 as my personal weapon at various times. My favourite rifle was a AR15 fitted with a SUIT sight.

On the SA80 the magazine did indeed fall off, as the push button release was on the left side where it would brush against the body, especially when wearing body armour. They soon fixed this by spot welding a shroud around the magazine release catch.

The empty cases are ejected from the LH side so forget about using it from the left shoulder. This is a disadvantage when trying to shoot around cover especially in built up areas.

Infantry and other front line troops get to use the excellent SUSAT scope and the CWS Gen3 night sight. Support troops get the iron sights. There is a bayonet, but I have not heard of it being used in anger yet.

The ergonomics are awful with regard to change levers, cocking handles etc. Build quality is flimsy, lots of spot welded steel pressings. The balance is all behind the pistol grip.

I saw some rifles go down due to heat and dust on live field firing ranges in Africa. A few cook-offs too.

The rifle was puchased in a political move in the early 80s. The design requirement was for a short rifle to fit in with the armoured warfare that was expected against the USSR. I agree that it would have made more sense to get the M16 at the time, but British jobs depended on the contract going "in-house".

Now I would prefer to see British troops with one of the new HK rifles. Their quality has always impressed me and they are now UK owned.

Regards

[ 03-31-2003, 15:01: Message edited by: Deerdogs ]

I've no direct experience with one but have read that since the A2 came out (with the HK mods) it has done very well in tests, consistently beating other rifles for reliability.

So far, no complaints from the Gulf that I've heard of.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion
forum

Incidentally, the SA80 isn't the only one to have had problems. Read this about the current US rifle, the M4: http://www.geocities.com/usarmyafghangearproblems/tsld017.htm

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum