When will the British Army just get rid of this piece of shit lads?
Only after we make another 8 million threads about replacing it and the m4/. So get to work.
I don't know.
I'll never get used to holding the bloody thing. Gravity wants everything to go balls up, and it's fucking annoying and vaguely uncomfortable.
It'd be acceptable if it wasn't for the dodgy weight distribution.
I believe it is due to be replaced in 2025. At which point we will have to bus in some completely foreign designed and manufactured rifle like the M16/M4/HK416/FN SCAR-L/etc because the british gun industry has been completely destroyed
Equivalent to pointing at the M16 in Vietnam and saying its still shit. Literally nothing wrong with it anymore, no one whose actually uses them dislikes them that much. The hate comes from people who have read about them being bad and will never see let alone touch one.
I think the AUG is a superior bullpup design. Thank god Australia adopted it instead of this shite.
Both England and France should adopt the VHS-1.
France is actually seriously considering it.
VHS-2 I mean.
Yeah but this is the VHS-2. Second generation, gonna revolutionize everything.
Yes. The return spring on the A1 was too weak so the bolt would often stop a fraction too far away and not fire. I've used the A2 for 2 years now and never had it jam on me once. The only time i've seen it jam is in the hands of an idiot that wouldn't let go of the cocking handle when making ready.
He hates it!
It's only a matter of time before it cocks up, really.
mfw the real UK shooters use C8s
It's not as big as a looks in the pictures. It's also got an adjustable stock.
Opinions on the ARX 160? It's another contender to replace the FAMAS.
I meant the ARX 100
And there's already a superior bullpup they can switch to!
No, you meant the ARX 160 which is the .mil designation for the rifle. The ARX 100 is the .civ designation for the U.S. version. The ARX 160 is also the .civ designation for the U.S. 22lr version.
What you posted was a pic of the .22lr version, however.
X95 is sex.
Never saw an AUG irl, but after going through boot with an m16, getting to shoot the micro tavor was just orgasmic.
It's just so comfy.
Feels like everyone is kind of waiting for the next big thing but there's nothing really in the pipeline.
Ive shot one before, it was nice but mfw shooting
Iirc, he tested the ability to switch shoulders on the fly in Tavors and AUGs. Conclusion was that you're gonna eat brass, unless you use expensive ammo- which the Tavor menages to eject away from the face (intentional design, but works only with certain types of ammo for some reason).
Needs some tweaking but I think this could be a real winner
France would never adopt an Israeli small arm, they have a hard enough time adopting Belgian small arms ffs, and there are real serious pushes against the HK416 which seemed like a shoe in
is it because you're below a -5'8 manlet and weigh only 65kg you fucking gobshite? Or you're just some yank pretending to be a Brit to shitstir?
The rifle is literally fine. This coming from an /actual/ serving lance jack in the army. 1RA Vikings C Coy
The only people who I've seen have an issue with it is short, stubby, weak dickheads. After phase 2 and you're finally at garrison you'd never notice the weight difference on ops and theatre. Accuracy is on point and the new kit is mint.
ITT people pretending to have actually used it and never have just to shitpost\ weekend warriors or fat fucks glued to their chairs going off of an old meme or following that degenerate cartoon anime bullshit.
No new rifle today is enough of an improvement over any in-service rifle today to justify spending the money to replace the gun and it's supply chain.
The US is waiting on LSAT cased telescoping to mature and adopt that along with a bigger round than 5.56 to replace M16/M4.
How you you even know if it is a good rifle compared to the M4 or AUG shit brit? Oh that's right you wouldn't because you live in a shithole country where your only chance of handling real weapons is in the military. You might think it is a fine rifle but that's because you have nothing to compare it to. Keep sucking that tea and denying how shit the rifle is.
>aside the fact that I've used both the latest M16 variant and M4 in poland nov last year
fair enough cant compare to the AUG as I've never used it but compared to the French Famas the SA80's felt much better and handled better. French bullpup literally felt like it was going to fall apart when I was running with it.
Only thing I can positively say about the M4's\M16 is that it's significantly lighter. m16 literally felt like I was holding a plastic toy and I was worried I'd break it and the M4 felt like a lighter A2 but the cocking bolt was a bit finnicky since I wasnt trained with it as the yanks where
I own one. It's actually a lot slimmer feeling than it looks. Slimmer feeling and less bulky than my SCAR even though it doesn't look like it.
It is about AK accurate. So not the best, but good enough for the kind of work it will be doing anyway. The one thing I really like about it is reliability. The thing eats every ammo I've run through it without a problem. It just goes and goes and goes.
I've put probably 4,000 rounds through one over the last month alone during my battalion's shooting comp team training. I've used it since 2011.
I've typed out some lengthy multi post evaluations of it before and I can't be bothered to do it again as I'm about to dive home for the weekend. Those posts were all probably tl;dr anyway.
So I'll tl;dr it in three sentences.
1. It's a shitty design, badly made, but it somehow does the intended job to a satisfactory level with decent accuracy.
2. Only stoppages I've ever had were from bad old steel STANAG mags, EMAGS solved this, and I've never had a stoppage due to fouling from extended firing (hundreds of rounds without any cleaning or lube. thousands of rounds without meaningful cleaning) or dirt (never really got it THAT dirty without cleaning it before firing).
3. I hate it and the trigger is tied for worst trigger I've ever pulled alongside a century old BSA war office pattern .22lr that was completely scap, it's that awful.
Do people really believe that the L85 is one of the best rifles in the world? It's heavy and not particularly ergonomic. There's nothing that it does that really justifies using it over the C7/C8.
Only people that believe the shit they get told during training in the British armed forces.
You get some Corporal who knows jack shit about guns, who only ever fired one in the military and who was half asleep during his skill at arms training on juniors and he recites a lesson from a pam to some fearful and brainwashed recruits, likely including time honoured phrases like "shoot the nads off a gnat" and "best in the world". Unsurprisingly these people, also ignorant of guns beyond state media and COD, believe what their literal god (section commander) tells them.
But equally retarded are the people who believe, and are willing to opine, it's a complete POS jam-o-matic when they've never even seen a real one.
I don't doubt that the A2 is reliable, I'm just surprised that Enfield and HK have collectively made one of the heaviest AR18 derivatives in existence while simultaneously doing nothing better than an AR15 or AR18.
>is it because you're below a -5'8 manlet and weigh only 65kg you fucking gobshite?
Close, I'm 6"3, 90KG, a captain, and in the greatest shape of my life. The rifle is not ergonomically designed, and the weight distribution is unnatural.
>an /actual/ serving lance jack in the army. 1RA Vikings C Coy
This is just stupid. If I were in a bad mood, I'd write an email to your OC, saying that there's someone who browses a notorious pedo porn cartoon site in the company, and he should get them beasted at least.
I'm also not about to identify myself to some walt on the internet for that same reason. It would be by far greater a problem for me, than it would be for you.
As far as I know the changes made by HK didn't really effect weight as it was involved with smaller parts and problems. It's been heavy since it was designed, as an already outdated rifle, in the 70s.
It was a mismanaged project, a bad design and there's always been a lot of speculation (and not without evidence) that its acceptance was a deal sweetener during a period of privatisation and general political fuckery. i.e. fatcats might have had as much to do with it being adopted as its own suitability, and probably more.
>absolute bollocks - the post
and I suppose you've also got the vc and you're pay is on par of that of coy co, you're ripped to shit and you've fucked every bird you've met at garrison
enough bluestone 42 mate time to actually go do some with your weekend warriors
>and I suppose you've also got the vc
I've been awarded hundreds. I keep them in a tray on my desk, next to my collection of Blue Peter badges and model HMS Victory.
On a more serious note, you could try to talk about the rifle, but instead you'd rather use this as an opportunity to hurl insults at one of your superiors without consequence. I think I've heard enough from you.
I'll talk shit to supposed "Captains" who're probably not even in a combat role let alone been to theatre
You haven't even stated what you don't like about the rifle just saying that you hate it. tie a noose around my fucking neck and I'll still say you're talking out of your arse
Depends on specific unit. Often these are contained in the 'manuvere support company ' which will have recce, sniper, AT and support weapon platoons to be assigned as needed. Iv seen reservr orbats where they are part of the rifle platoons though
I love seeing bongs defend this POS. It can't even be fired left handed unlike the AUG, Tavor, and FAMAS, has shitty weight distribution and the bongs have no domestic small arms industry thanks to Thacher to replace or upgrade it.
The only people who complain about the SA80 are faggots stuck in 1998 or cadets who listen to everything their crusty ex-RLC instructor who left the regular Army 20 years ago says.
>I'm in the army and I'm telling you
Confirmed for REMF