vrbtny said:
Treblaine said:
MrJKapowey said:
Well, IRL it'd have to be the L85
vrbtny said:
Ah, good to see a fan of possibly the most underrated gun in the world. Especially on the Internet.
The L85 gets my vote too. Though only the L85A2. The A1 was a bit of a joke...
But... huh?
I get personal appeal, but technically what is so great about that gun (not jamming as much as L85A1 isn't much of a unique feature, almost every gun jams less than L85A1).
Well aside from the fact that it looks really cool, and that it seems to fit on a soldier more than any other gun. When a soldier points it at something, the only thing you see is the barrel. And it's about the only bullpup that is accurate at long range.
And I personally see it as a clever gun, with a barrel length which is the same as a M4, but the overall length of the weapon is much shorter.
Now putting personal opinion aside, I shall bring out the stats. The L85A2 does consistently outperform fellow 5.56mm Assault Rifles in Reliability and Accuracy.
The effective firing range of the L86 is 650ms, compared to the M4's 500ms. It has a higher muzzle velocity than the M4.
In recent Nato tests of a all standard Issue 5.56mm service rifles, the L85 scored highest on Reliability and Accuracy, with 100% of the test firers saying they were "very confident" with the gun.
So, yeah. There's my answer.
Yes, it's the same length as M4 but a long barrel, but for what?
M4 Carbine velocity: 900 meters/sec [http://www.armystudyguide.com/flashcards/flashcards.php?cat=23&qnum=27]
L85A2 velocity: 940 meters/sec [http://www.armedforces-int.com/projects/sa80_rifle_l85a2iw.html]
40 m/s does not make a significant amount of difference in visual combat range. A 4% difference in velocity.
What DOES make a significant amount of difference is weight, the L85 near as damn TWICE the weight of the M4 Carbine That weight IS going to tire you out and affect your aim by muscle fatigue just on the arms and upper body. Just focusing on the weight the legs have to support the weight savings that could be for almost 150 rounds in magazine loaded ammunition.
And you have the disadvantage of bullpup in how the weapon must be raised and twisted to even begin the reloading process. The magazine must be released and removed by the left hand while the M4 the magazine can be released with just the trigger finger while keeping the weapon on target and the left hand is fetching another mag. Then you have to reach over the top to cycle the bolt handle to charge the next round with L85A2, much easier on M4 Carbine one's hand is naturally in position to release the bolt. There is no adjustment for length of pull with people of different build or different bulk of body armour while there is on M4.
No way the L85A2 can reload this quickly:
This is not unquely american, the Canadians have diverged with Britain on the L85. After following suit with Lee-Enfield and FN FAL they went for the C7 rifle and C8 Carbine when they realise what the SA80 series was going to be.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C8_Carbine
Other bullpup rifle designs (like the Steyr AUG as used by the Australian, New Zealand, Falkland, Irish, Austrians, Dutch and Argentinian armed forces to great success) have the centre of gravity over the main pistol grip, while the SA80 it is far in the unsupported rear where it must be jammed into the shoulder to keep it from slipping. The fire-mode select is a single plunger on Steyr AUG from safe, semi and then full auto (even with full auto you have the 2-stage trigger).
With L85A2 the best you can do is disengage the safety from "home position" but must move your hand to re-engage it and that's saying nothing about selecting fire mode. The selector switch between Semi-auto and full-auto is way back in the rear on the weapon and is SO HARD TO MOVE!! I think the logic was that it was to discourage soldiers from switching to full auto too quickly only the problem was every soldier would just leave it on full auto, even on the range they would leave it on full-auto and try to flutter off single shots.
M4 carbine's safety is thumb operated to seamlessly move between all the fire modes. M4 Carbine can also use magazines like the 100-round C-mag.
I have heard anecdotal evidence to believe L85A2 was "trained to test" for the trials which are hardly the most thorough (remember, NATO is not the highest standard, it's the lowest common denominator between several countries and their respective political pride at stake). Particularly the
"100% of the test firers saying they were "very confident" with the gun" sounds like the result of a weighted poll.
Most damningly for the entire SA80 series (including the L85A2) there has not been a single overseas order. That is the ultimate test they have failed.
Not even a single Commonwealth country has adopted it, they all went for the Steyr AUG or an AR15 variant. A few crates have been shipped off to the likes of Sierra Leone and Jamaica but they were ditched from some cheap Chinese AK47 rip off instead.
The likes of the M4 Carbine, C8 Carbine (Canadian equivalent), and Steyr AUG are ordered in massive numbers all over the world as the quality, reliability and performance are objectively recognised universally.
No other countries think this rifle is worth it.
I know to you it may be your personal weapon, but what do you have to compare it to? It may seem natural to you but is that just because it's the main weapon you trained on? It's the baddess ass thing the average Brit can ever legally get their hands on but that's relative to the extreme gun restrictions of the UK, many american soldiers have a semi-auto AK-47 or AUG at home for private ownership. In fact the US military go to extra effort of letting soldiers try novel weapons on their gun ranges in familiarisation programs. As far as I know British Soldiers are forbidden from firing any weapon other than their issued rifle (even on range) unless they are under specific orders.