StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I've heard a wide range of answers for this question, ranging from the M-16 to the G-36 to the FA MAS...and I want to know what the good people of SDN think.

Ideas?

My air rifle.

I think the G-36 is a good substitute.

There are several good candidates, among them the G-36, M-16, and maybe the M-8.

Hasn't Heckler and Koch actually taken over the company that builds the SA-80? So the G-36 would be most logical choice.

Diemaco C7



Surprisingly enough, the Canadian version of the M16 is superior to the US issue M16A2

WHAT?! How so?! I was going to say that nothing could beat the good ol' reliable M16A2 (That's right, Not M-4 A2.) Based on my own personal experience.

Posbi wrote:Hasn't Heckler and Koch actually taken over the company that builds the SA-80? So the G-36 would be most logical choice.

BAE Systems owns Royal Ordnance which in turn owns Enfield, maker of the L85 and L86. Royal Ordnance also bought a controlling interest in HK in 1991, but that was sold back to a German company a couple years ago.


The UK should just buy a bunch of M16A4's, because there cheep as hell and the British Army has already spent a huge amount of money on its small arms, the cost of the L85A2 upgrade alone would have bought over 430,000 brand new M16's, only about 200,000 L85's have ever been produced.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Posbi wrote:Hasn't Heckler and Koch actually taken over the company that builds the SA-80? So the G-36 would be most logical choice.

BAE Systems owns Royal Ordnance which in turn owns Enfield, maker of the L85 and L86. Royal Ordnance also bought a controlling interest in HK in 1991, but that was sold back to a German company a couple years ago.


The UK should just buy a bunch of M16A4's, because there cheep as hell and the British Army has already spent a huge amount of money on its small arms, the cost of the L85A2 upgrade alone would have bought over 430,000 brand new M16's, only about 200,000 L85's have ever been produced.

That's what happens when you let pride come before effectiveness.

They ought to go with a militarized version of the AR-18/AR-180.

British military already has plenty of experience with M16 rifles since SAS and other British special units have been using them since late 80's. As far as I know G36 on the other hand has not been tested in combat conditions, though it's possible that KSK used them in Afganistan.

While Diemaco rifles may be superior to M16s, it's possible that they are also more expensive as well.

The Diemaco comes standard with safe-semi-full auto instead of the M16A2's safe-semi-3 shot burst.

That's what makes it superior to the US issue A2

Other than that, they're identical to the M16.

The Diemaco would have the political advantage for the Brits of coming from a Commonwealth country rather than the United States.

Glocksman wrote:The Diemaco comes standard with safe-semi-full auto instead of the M16A2's safe-semi-3 shot burst.

That's what makes it superior to the US issue A2

Other than that, they're identical to the M16.

No it's not actually, it's built somewhat differently and jams less, which is why it's considered to be slightly superior. Having full automatic fire isn't even relevant to this, since the M16A3 is in production. Changing the A4 over to full automatic would also be exceedingly easy, the capability just wasn't wanted.

Any rifle that doesn't disassemble when a gust of wind hits it would be an improvment. The Canadian M16 seems decent enough, whats the retail on one?

No it's not actually, it's built somewhat differently and jams less, which is why it's considered to be slightly superior.

My understanding is that the Diemaco has a heavier barrel for improved heat dissipation. It also has the A2 style integrated brass deflector.


As for other improvements, if you could post a list I'd appreciate it.

As an aside, Canada's had problems with their plastic magazines and replaced them with standard M16 aluminum 30 rounders.

The Canadian M16 seems decent enough, whats the retail on one?

Given the weakness in the Canadian dollar, probably cheaper than the US manufactured rifles.

IIRC, the SAS has some Diemaco (as well as Colt M4) rifles.


Edit: After doing a little digging, I found that Diemaco also sold $6 million worth of 'components for small arms' to Colt according to their 2001 report.

M14

In reality, I'd say the M16.

Never used the SA80 myself, but that should soon change. This weekend my UOTC unit is gonna be in the field and we might get to use blank rounds. So it looks like I will be able to confirm just how useless the SA80 is for myself.

What are the major problems inherent in the SA 80.

Does Britain suffer from the "It wasnt made here" syndrome we sometimes see in Congress when it comes to weapons procurement?

Chardok wrote:What are the major problems inherent in the SA 80.

First off, the SA-80 refers to both the L85 and L86, the rifle and its light machine gun variant respectively. The L85 has major jamming problems, and has a habit of completely disintegrating thanks to its awful construction. The L86 which is even worse thanks to firing heavily on full auto in action.

The SA-80 family should be replaced with either the M16 family (the M16A4 and the M4A1 respectively) or the G36 family (G36 and G36K respectively). Either rifle would provide the UK military with a fine general purpose assault rifle as well as having a carbine for medium to close range combat comming from the same rifle series. If the UK really wanted to keep a Bullpup design they would be better off with either the FAMAS-G2 (much improved and STANAG compatible meaning 30 rounds rather then 25) or the Styer Aug.

If bullpup definitely FAMAS-G2 over Steyr AUG.

CmdrWilkens wrote:They ought to go with a militarized version of the AR-18/AR-180.

As the proud owner of an orginal Costa Mesa made Armalite AR-180 (as well as a Sterling made one which I am shortly to sell), I congratulate you sir on your obviously superior judgement.

Perinquus wrote:

CmdrWilkens wrote:They ought to go with a militarized version of the AR-18/AR-180.

As the proud owner of an orginal Costa Mesa made Armalite AR-180 (as well as a Sterling made one which I am shortly to sell), I congratulate you sir on your obviously superior judgement.

The things have all the precision and sleekness to purpose of the rest of the Stoner made. All that plus reliability that makes the -16 look like a piece of crap. Obviously a few things would need to be changed to militarize it but thje basic design is reliable, precise, and very accurate, that's what I want in a rifle.

IIRC, the G36 and the Japanese Type 89 borrow a bit from the AR18 design.

They aren't copies, but there are some concepts borrowed from the AR18 design present in those rifles.

The only real problem with the G36 is that it doesn't use the STANAG magazines. If the UK adopted it, they'd have to replace all of the STANAG magazines in the inventory as well as all of the rifles. Whereas if the Diemaco or FN FNC was adopted, all of the magazines in inventory are compatible.

IMO the M16 family or the FAMAS G2 would be the best bet for the UK. Both are proven true weapon systems and are highly capable. Furthermore they continue to use STANAG clips.

Of course there is a problem with the M16 series because its schedueled to be replaced. Maybe the UK can buy some for temporary replacement (get the M16A4) and then eventualy switch to the M8. If they want an imediate new weapon system, the FAMAS G2 is a nice weapon system.