SLR or SA80 - You Choose? 

During my service ( line infantry), I used both the SLR and the first version of the SA80. I would take the SLR hands down everytime. When I did the Battalion SA80 instructors course as a Junior NCO I managed to break it in under 30 minutes as the holding open device catch snapped off. A couple of the others on the course managed to break theirs as well but in different ways. The dust cover snapped off one and if memory serves me right the top cover hinge snapped on another. The irony of it was we were supposed to be training our platoons in using the bloody thing but not letting on how badly made it was! First time I took it on the range, fired my first round and the magazine disintegrated dropping all of my rounds into the bottom of the firebay and the mud. I wasn't impressed. On the other hand my SLR which was made in 1959, so was nearly 30 years old when I got it, worked like a dream. I never had any problems with it at all as it was solid and reliable. I wasn't a fan of 5.56 as when I joined up the Warsaw Pact was our main enemy so I wanted a weapon that would kill the enemy. The 5.56 round was balistically different and was supposed to wound rather than kill as it tumbled rather than travel on a straight axis. The theory being it would tie people up dealing with wounded Flawed thinking really as the WP were never bothered about casualties as there were literally millions of them as we're seeing in Ukraine now. A 7.62 round would leave a small entrance wound and an exit wound the size of a tea plate so even if you winged someone it would probably take their arm off. An excellent weapon which we should have kept!

Having used the SLR, the SA80, and the SA80A2 in anger, I would say the SLR would be my choice on an open battle field, but the A2 for CQB and restrictive environments like the jungle. When the SLR was about to be phased out my lads were all a bit gutted and didn't welcome the new rifles at all well. I was actually asked by the brass at one point what my solution would be to all the problems we were having with the 80, and my response was to upgrade the SLR with folding stocks like the FN para, a short barrel version for afv crews, re introduce the full auto on all platforms, and include a heavy barrel version with bipod for section support. All of which already existed in other nations arsenals. My observations were met with shuffling feet and a change of subject. Most of us that could do so had acquired the 30 round LMG mag and with a few winks and nudges, had the armourers add an extra section of spring to the magazine follower which prevented stoppages because the LMG mag was designed to feed down with gravity assistance but when fitted to the SLR had to push the rounds up against gravity, not down with it. This mod worked well and gave a full 30 round capacity without feed issues. The same armourer could also supply a rivet pin with the rivet head removed and the pin filed to the correct length which was then inserted before ops and gave full auto to the SLR. We also had spare gas plugs in our cleaning kits as the loss of your gas plug was the most likely problem you might face in the field with the SLR. All of this was of course considered illegal modifications, the RSM would charge you in a split second for any whiff of them in camp, on exercise, or on the ranges, but on deployment he always seemed to have bouts of visual impairment, and on one occasion threatened to put everyone on duties when no one offered a new lad that had lost his gas plug a spare that he knew we had several of. In my opinion there was nothing wrong with the SLR that a modernisation refit couldn't fix. It would have saved a fortune upgrading what we had instead of buying into a completely new platform that was unfit for use and required several evolution to bring up to speed, not to mention we already had the training, the support infrastructure, the skills and tooling, and the stock of spares and reserve stock with the SLR in place, which all had to be replaced. The SA80 was horrible in the field. On ranges in a semi controlled environment it could be fun, but take it out of its comfort zone and it fell apart literally. Insect repellent melted the plastic furniture, it dumped mags non stop, it had constant miss feeds no matter how clean you kept the rifle and mags, the optics lost zero after a few hundred rounds, the firing pin retaining pis was too easy to loose, the field strip was complex and slow, stoppage drills were constant and it was prone to hard extractions. I was once seen to be trying to kick the cocking handle with my boot while under fire to clear a hard extraction it was stuck so tight. My opinion was that the best thing with the rifle was the sling. and even that was a pain. We did of course get all the tweaks and mods done over time but it left us with trust issues that us old hats never quite ever shook off. The new intakes didn't get why we disliked it so much because they had no experience with the SLR as a comparative. The A" saw most of the problems disappear completely and was a much better rifle, but that old gal we once had was always lurking fondly in our memories. Mine was called Daphney and kept me warm and safe in my basha more night than I can count. Apparently ours ended up in India in the end. I hope Daphney is being loved and cared for the way she always was by me.

Carried an SLR for 10 months in Vietnam in 1970. Reliable, heavy, accurate and tough. Haven't touched one in 54 years, and am happy with that....

Please dont doubt yourself, this channel is great! Sometimes the simplest concepts are the best. And believe me, allot of people love to see an old soldier talk.

The SLR is not an assault rifle. It is a Battle rifle. The difference is that a battle rifle fires a full power rifle cartridge and an assault fires an intermediate cartridge (lower power).

When I was an armourer in REME, I found the time to mod the safety catch to rotate to the FN auto position. Shorten the trigger plunger and no one could tell at a glance. Never got to live fire auto, but it worked by hand pumping the cocking handle. SLR tough as old boots. In Aden, soon after we arrived with little in way of spares and bits, lad fell out of his vehicle, foresight protectors were left pointing east and west and wood handguards were matchwood. In the shop, 'straighten' the foresight guards to normal. Sort out the bits of handguard, add loads of araldite epoxy glue, refitting to said rifle and wrap in flannelette (4x2). Leave overnight to set, unwrap, clean down wood with a file, good as new. Hand back and out on ops. New handguards on order...

I was out in the Falklands, we didn't change our SLRs but we did pick up Argentine GPMGs - we had the Bren L7A1 so a couple of the boys carried the Gimpy. The other advantage of common weapons was 7.62mm. We all started off carrying 150rds - 4 mags of 20 plus the balance in bandoliers. We shot off a fair amount at San Carlos and topped up when we got to Mt Challenger.

SLR . Served me well in NI. Won me a marksman shield at Bisley. Enjoying the videos keep em coming. Regards Garry x2 CG

Served in British Army 1969-1976 (Royal Corps of Transport) for 6 years and 42 days!!. Never fired an SA80, only ever used an SLR, which in my opinion is an amazing weapon. I even won a 'Pull Bull' at Aldershot. Good old days!

The SLR hit what you pointed it at, and killed what it hit. Nuff said!

Irish Army had the same FN as the Argies, fired it on full auto once, apart from the Lee Enfield MK 4 the best rifle you could ever be lucky enough to use.

Joined REME in 1966 as a 'B' Vehicle Mechanic and my standard personal weapon was the SLR. It was a delight to use and I got a 'Marksman' badge with it. In 1970, I did an 'A' Vehicle Mechanic conversion course and my personal weapon became a SMG although at times I was also issued with the 9mm Browning right up until I became a civvy in 1980.

SLR - ONE version SA80 - MANY versions Need I say more...

Not much of a contest. SLR hands down. In the Australian army we called it the Elephant Gun and loved it

When we transitioned from the SLR to the first version of the SA 80, we loved it in the BN, it was light, had a sight and automatic capability, that lasted about a week, the SA80 was a twat to clean in the field, was prone to stoppages, and was not squaddie proof, easy to break. I would take the SLR all day long, but that was because I had used it for a good few years before the SA80 turned up. The SLR, once you mastered it was a very accurate weapon {ammo allowing} hit really hard, and was easy to keep functioning in any conditions, ok it was a bit heavier, a little awkward in CQB but when you butt stroked someone they were down and out. I've heard the HK SA is a world apart from the first incarnation, so lots of the younger vets will no doubt tell us some good things, us old buggers sometimes don't like change, (unless its after buying a pint). Great vid, thanks.

SLR...greater range, more stopping power, easier to clean, more reliable, nuff said...

Joined in 1977. Issued with the SLR. As an Army Cadet, i had fired the SLR both Full Bore & .22 conversion. Loved it!🥰🥰🥰 First came across the SA80 in the mid 80's when attached to the Royal Scots. So many problems with the A1. Too fragile. To fiddly. Not able to be fired left handed. When Op Granby 'kicked off' in 1991, The Royals found that whilst training in the desert, the magazine catch was being activated when carrying out Fire & Manouvere. As Keith said, the guys would get down into a fire position and begin to open fire. 1 round & click! Magazine had dropped off!😱😱 Not what an Infanteer needs!🤬🤬 I didnt use the A2 or A3. But i believe once Heckler Koch got hold of the weapon, they carried out many modifications. Since yhe Bullpup design has been though of in 1942 with the EM2 you would have thought that 40+ years of R&D would have 'ironed out' the problems before mass production. Personally, my choice would still be the SLR over the SA80. If you are hit by 7.62mm chances are 'you aint getting up'!👍👍👍👍👍

A friend of mine (who has sadly past) was a Vietnam veteran, he told me if they were in camp at Nui dat they would carry around the M16 because it was light but if they were going on patrol (outside the wire) they would take the SLR L1A1, when you hit something with that it stayed down and our SAS would cut the barrel down to make it easier to handle for their work, good video mate all the best.

I was issued an SLR in 1971 with a wooden stock and but that we used linseed oil on, then the armourer came and took the stock off and put a plastic one on. We used to store the oil, cleaning wadding brush and drawstring in the butt. Our official gun was the SMG but we kept SLR 's in the armoury above the guardroom and regually went to the ranges.

For me it's the L85 A2, just because of the amount of ammunition that you could carry. I had a chance to fire both the SLR and the FN FAL, both great strong rifles, but what a kick you got from them. This is your best video yet, mate. A very interesting topic.

My initial training, way back in the 60s, was with the SLR. Liked it a lot, but then again I was just a kid - big boys toys! When I joined my regiment (RTR) my personal weapon, not counting the 120mm Chieftain gun, was an SMG. Dead easy to use and maintain - lousy accuracy beyond spitting distance but good enough for our needs. Annual weapon test was boringly easy to pass. Eventually I moved on to the Medical Services, but my personal weapon as hospital staff remained the SMG or Browning pistol. I had my one and only experience with the SA80 in 1992 I think. It felt very odd to handle, for me. Didn't like it at all, unfortunately. Since retiring in '93 I've had a lot more experience with various weapons (I live in Texas!) so I would probably appreciate the SA80's good points much more now than that one 'fun shoot' experience that I had. Enjoyed you video mate.

Get that lamp swinging. I was 1977 to 1986. only fired the early SA80 on a 30 meter range. For target shooting as a bit of fun, I thought the low recoil was great, a bit like an air rifle. Going against an enemy I would definitely take the SLR. When I was in, on exercise everyone wanted an SMG, light, short, didn’t get caught on branches, didn’t bash your head when over your shoulder. When we went to the Falklands nobody wanted an SMG ! Everyone wanted the most stopping power possible. Automatic puts a lot of rounds down, but there’s a confidence in knowing one hit from a 7.62 will drop anyone, even if they’re behind cover. My SLR could be dragged through mud, and dropped on rocks, and I could rely on it.

I joined the TA at 16 in the early 90’s and used a SLR for the first couple of months before changing to SA80. Joined the regs at 18 and served for 24 years and in those almost 26 years with the SA80 I never really experienced any of the problems that are widely reported in the press. Yes if you didn’t look after it you would get dramas but that is the same with any firearm. As to your question I would 100% pick the SA80 to go into battle with, so many plus points over the SLR. More ammo, optics, more compact for vehicles, easier to use for FIBUA, being able to ‘acquire’ ammo from the yanks easier ( who want to break down link for 7.62?)

Saw a documentary on the bush war in Rhodesia. That SLR (South African version), sure put holes in people, even through dense foliage. One scene showed a rebel gorilla take some rounds.... one left a baseball hole size wound in the chest. Better than the rounds from later rifles.

I preferred the SLR, did not like the SA80 when it came out, no stopping power and a shorter range.

I used the FN and our replacement 5.56 rifle over my military career. I have never shot the UK SA80, however. During my first 5 years in the regular army, I lugged around the Canadian-made FN C1 A1. In 3 decades of military service and 5 deployments, I've never fired a weapon in combat so I'm certainly no authority. Minor technicality. Canada was the first nation to adopt the FN as its official small arm. The 'tweaks' you refer to were done by Canada initially. Aside from being made semi auto only, the big one was to convert the rifle from the Belgian metric measurements to Imperial. Once that work was done, Australia and the UK jumped on board and adopted the rifle as well. Of course Canada also built and used the C2 LAR version with bipod, heavier barrel and 30 rd mags. The Australians used them as well but also kept 7.62 Brens... As for Argy rifles being swapped for Brit rifles... I'm not sure. IIRC, the Argy rifles were metric pattern (I could be wrong on this). If so, the mags would not be interchangeable. Full auto FALs are impossible to control. And with 20 rd mags, a bit of a waste of time. I can't see a soldier surrendering his tried and true, zeroed rifle for a strange one... except in an emergency as a battlefield pick up. Many of the Argy rifles had folding para stocks which may have been attractive in that way. You say that .308 is significantly bigger than .303 which is not true. They are variations of the venerable .30 cal rd. Is it possible you meant to say that .308 was significantly bigger than .223? SOF units preferring M 16. I had a conversation with an NCO in 22 SAS in 1984. Being young, I was blathering on about how cool the new SA80 was going to be. He simply said that he'd fired both the SA80 and the new US M16A2 and preferred the M16. He also said he was aware of the new rifle we were going to build in Canada based on the M16 and said we were getting the better small arm. Fast forward a few years and the SAS ran trials for a dedicated small arm. The winner was Diemaco Canada and its rifle was selected. Which would I choose for battle? I think the UK was ahead of the game in wanting to go to a smaller, faster bullet way back prior to WW1. Then again prior to WW2 (wars kept getting in the way). Then Germany proved the effectiveness of the smaller bullet and, a few years later, so did the Soviets. NATO was bullied into .308 by the US. Ironically, after they made us all standardize on the heavier, bigger bullet, they turned around and adopted the 5.56! The obsession with the .30 cal bullet took a while to die. Good for LARs, GPMGS and DM rifles, but not needed for the average soldier. 5.56 recoils less, you can carry more (on both my Afghanistan tours, I was issued 300 rds in 10 mags. Imagine that in 7.62 loaded in steel FN mags!). I've always believed that one of the main purposes of an infantry platoon is to provide protection for and to get into position its most effective weapon - the GPMG. Sure, theirs winkling badguys out of caves, trench clearing, building clearing, low-level maneouvre etc... but individual riflemen just don't have the same effect. As such, the fantasy of making 1,000 yd shots etc are silly. A 5.56 rifle is just an all round more useful tool. Much as I love the FN (I own 2).

I went through Cranwell in 1987. Prior to this I’d done work experience in the TA armoury and guns were a passion as a natural engineer. Even though we were firing blanks and had a BFA fitted, I ga examine a full annual in the sleeping bag each night. No jams! I could empty two mags fully withou a single jam! Blat blat blat. Also old 10p groups at 300yds was good enough on iron sights.

The SLR is in my opinion, the best rifle ever made.

Used both. Got presented the first SA 80 for the Army. Soldiers do not get choices. Marksmanship matters, but that depends on high training standards. Firepower matters. That requires discipline. Range & stopping power kills the enemy. If you had a choice for Fibua or rural you may switch choices. I want it all. Just like most soldiers.

All the wee changes to the SLR during my time in regular service, plastic furniture replacing the wood, SUIT sight and IWS. Also the iron sights got the large aperture and luminous foresight if I remember correctly. I only handled the A1 during TA service and it was a very fragile piece of kit at that point. Keep this up Keith, pure nostalgia!

Will, An American here. I have used the SLR in civilian use. Grand weapon and easy to use. I was trained with the M14, M1, and M16A1 as a Marine, carrying the latter in Vietnam (with 20 rd. mages). So the issues are similar...SLR/SA80 vs M14/M16...weight/7.62 vs 5.56/range, etc. I have no experience with the SA80 but I have fired bullpup 5.56 rifles. First, I concede the FN SLR did not get a proper test when compared to the M14 by the US Military in selection or we might have carried the SLR like so many other nations (as indeed, the Italians did a better job making a better version of the M14 with their BM59 from old M1s [as I learned post service time])). Since the M14s sights were basically the same as the M1 and maybe the best issue rifle sights, both the M1 and M14 sights are, in my humble opinion, better than the SLR for accurate fire down range (I have more than one M1 and still reach out to distance range targets with issue sights). I did find the SLR easy to carry and quick to shoulder. I ran into some Royal Marines and Engineers in Puerto Rico in 1967 and compared some techniques. I appreciated some of their weapon use techniques and later I observed the SLR carry use in Ireland when using the long rifle in building searches. I have long owned a civilian M16 type and practiced that technique as a deputy sheriff SWAT operator. Interesting conversation. Thanks

I along with a friend created experimental armour test samples 200x200x25mm in dimension and weighing 200 grams per plate. It's composition was an exfoliated graphite reinforced Polyurethane wrapped in a sheet of aramid for anti spalling purposes. The bigger 7.62x51 FMJ penetrated 20mm's into the plate while the smaller 5.56x45 55 grain FMJ only managed 4.5mm. I would point out at this stage that the latter was discharged from a Remington 700 with a full length barrel and a sound suppressor on the end of it. The speed at impact was probably around 3200~3400fps as it was only discharged from 8 yards away. As the tests were conducted in the USA we had the opportunity to test other weapons and ammo types to include 7.62x39 FMJ, 5.45x39 FMJ and 5.56x45 M855 Green Tip, none of which offered full penetration and none of the plates showed any sign of back face deformation. So as a non-military man considering the question, I'd probably want the SLR but I imagine the ammunition is heavier, that I would be unable to carry as much of it compared to 5.56x45 and that there may be compatibility problems with allies serving with me. Also, if two paddies from Belfast can make that armour in our kitchens for fun I'd hate to be in a war in which high quality armour was prolific as putting people down for good might be easier said than done even if you're using the SLR.

SLR every time I was serving in 1987 and had both. I preferred the ease of cleaning and reliability of SLR and the stopping power but the compactness and lightweight of the SA80 (but only the A3 variant).

I remember the insect repellent melting the sa80 A1 chin guard.and I'm a lefty had to learn to shoot right handed. Did my basic at Pirbright guards depot back in the day during the transition. I loved the slr. So slr for me

Simple choice - SA80 Mk2+ for close quarter/vehicle carry - SLR for everything else - the 7.62 round could stop a vehicle if the round is place correctly. Less stoppages with the SLR and I could strip it blindfolded - as was often practiced!

I mainly trained with the SLR ut the SA80A1 was introduced at the end of my service. A bloke I knew fell out of a 4 tonner and landed on his SA80, it snapped in half. The other thing you may have not mentioned is because you can only fire the SA80 from the right shoulder , you can only really use left cover meaning you're exposed half the time. So it's the SLR for me but given the choice of todays weaponry I'd pick a modern DMR probably by HK or FN in 7.62 Nato, 4x magnification optics and some secondary sight system, bipod , suppressor etc. "One round, one kill"

No 2 ways about it! The SLR was a hard hitting weapon, it was the absolute "Take down" option...........

Used the SLR in the Falklands, Northern Ireland etc. Great rifle. If they’d shortened the barrel by four inches it would have been perfect for today’s use.

Currently Serving, SA80 is Shite, was fortunate enough to get the opportunity to fire the SLR and it just feels better to shoot, easier to clean, looks better. It would be better logistics wise aswell since the Gimpy uses the same cartridge Would have loved to used the SLR but unfortunately been lumped with a SA80

It was a sad day when we gave up our SLR, especially as the early SA80's were so poor. Melting plastic on the face with the jungle formula insect repellent, magazine release when strapped to the chest, cocking handles flying down range........... never tried the later versions, but I'd go SLR

I had the pleasure of firing both the SLR and the sa80 A2 while serving in the TA in my younger years and I enjoyed the SLR but it was definitely a cumbersome rifle to use but accurate as mentioned, personally I preferred the sa80 because of it's accuracy and lighter weight and of course the fancy 3 point sling was revolutionary compared to the SLR for mobility. Great video thank you sir 👍👍👍

I think the respective designations of both rifles tell their own story. L1A1 against (now) L85A3. In all its time in service, the SLR only ever had one iteration and it was a marvellous bit of kit! And as a left-hander, I had no problems with it. Although I was RAMC, we had to learn to shoot with all the weapons available and the SLR stands out for me as the hands-down winner, even though my personal weapon was mostly an L9 or Smudge. I recall that I was seconded as a Medic to the Black Watch for a scheme in Germany and the armourer issued me with a Smudge because they'd run out of L9s. However, he'd replaced the cocking handle, that always dug into your ribs or caught on the cam nets, with a rounded knurled knob that was just as easy to use but without all the obvious disadvantages of the normal cocking handle. That was one Smudge that was a real joy to carry over your shoulder. The one downside to the SLR, at least in my opinion, was that the front sight and rear sight were attached to different parts of the rifle, so that, strictly speaking, re-zeroeing was in order after every cleaning. MsG

I believe you will find that the .303 projectile was .311-.312 inch diameter and the 7.26mm was .308 inch so the older British bore was larger by a few thou. But saying that the 7.62 was more ballistically efficient and because of the rimless cartridge allowed straight high capacity mags as opposed to the curved design on the old favorite LMG the Bren or even older design Lewis gun. Also I remember seeing some 30 round mags in use with SLR's I believe they were Belgium manufacture designed for the FAL select fire version. PS I was engineers so our go to was the 9mm Sterling and HP35 Browning pistol with it's double stacked mag. PPS. 9mm was .310 inch dia.

Dear Keith, SLR without hesitation! During basic being only 5' 6'' had to carry the GPMG as well. Best Wishes Johnny

Love it!! "I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous" Brilliant!

It depends on the job in hand, but as a battle rifle definitely the SLR. That said when my unit changed over to SA80 in the mid 80s. As a recce officer, to me the SA80 was a marked improvement over the SMG. Mind you a lot of that was the utility of the sling (provided one could fit it 😂). Never got to the A2 because my personal weapon became a browning for the last 10 years until I finished in 2003. I am considering buying a FAL actually, got my eyes open for a reasonably priced and conditioned one.

"No rounds in the chamber - no magazine on the rifle!" I laughed out loud. The L85A1 - the reason why British servicemen needed eyes in the back of their heads - not to look for enemy, just to track where you were leaving your magazines.

Urm......SMG for me being tank crew 😂😂😂

We had an interest training package where we had the chance to fire a variety of nato and soviet block weapons during my service (2002-2018).. SLR was rugged and took some getting used to as the reload buggered me up 😄 . No doubt if you hit a target with an SLR the guy wasnt getting up in a hurry. SA80a1 was a pain if you didnt look after it. Young crowbags that didnt clean their weapons would have stoppages. That said our ability to fire accurate bursts or rapid semi auto shots onto target was good especially in CQB....i remember getting clotheslined on exercise when the GMPG barrel and butt hit a doorway (demonstrating length in CQB can be an issue 😂) Good vid have subbed keep em coming

I remember the SLR as difficult to lug around, and heavy. But even the battered Vietnam era weapons used by Australian Army recruits were reliable and accurate. We were also taught not to waste ammunition. Deliberate fire only - no spray and pray.

I was in the Falklands, and yes people did get hold of Captured Argie FN's, But there were not that many lying around so maybe after a Battle a few were picked up and used or taken off POW's in the early days. But people still had to carry their SLRs as there was nowhere to store them, The Magazines were not interchangeable due to the shape of the lip when you placed them in the rifles. You can google a picture of the Lip.. The only good thing about both Rifles was they used the same ammunition and at one stage there was a shortage in resupplying so again people picked up Argie magazines for the ammunition. The normal Battle load was 4x20 Round Magazines plus a Bandolier of 50 for the GPMG, which could be used to replenish the SLR. The LMG (Bren) was still in service for some units so any spare 30 Rnd magazines would be used with the SLR, but again due to the Lip was not interchangeable with the FN, some magazines could work but it caused Feed issues, I think FN Mags Could be swapped but not SLR mags on FN. Again look at a picture. I preferred the SLR for the stopping power but the weight and ammunition Quantity which although you could carry more increased the weight. SA80 was More versatile with sighting systems (SUSAT) and the option of Full auto was better after H&K sorted out the problems. The Support Wpm the light support Weapon (LSW) was just a Beefed up SA80 with a longer Heavier duty barrel was Total crap due to its size.

I enlisted in 87 when the SA80 came in. My SLR was dependable Reliable and packed a punch! The SA80 A1 felt cheap and plasticky and now we know all about it that was correct. Now with the upgrades who knows. I loved my SLR!!! Always liked the fact a 7.62 round would stop better than the 5.56

FN with a folding stock handled captured one in Kuwait at the new military school in 95 very nice rifle!

SLR all day long, I used the SLR from 1981 to 1986 (1 Queens) , and as part of COP platoon Armagh 87 we had the SA80 although I used the M16A2 (M203 grenade launcher). Overall I'd have the M16A2, but failing that the SLR can't really say I liked the SA80, it wasn't squaddie proof and the SUSAT didn't like bad weather the same as the SUIT sight for the SLR in Omagh towards the end of my first NI tour (I was LMG gunner for the first half) but my SUIT spent most of the time in my spare pouch due to bad weather. Optics on rifles are great if you have good weather, but crap in the cold wind and rain. Had the SA80 then from 87 to 95 (2 PWRR 91 to 95). Given a choice between SA8O or SLR it would have to be SLR.

Anyone remembers the matchstick placed in the SLR to make it full auto until it broke the matchstick.

When I initially seen the title pop up mentioning the SLR,,it was a must watch... The talk/walk through was a great old memory lane wander, so thanks for that. As for rifle choice, never had the SA80, so my choice would be old school reliability. I was a Blowpipe/Javelin operator (air defence unit R.A. in the 80's) So carrying FHC's and your SLR was always a careful scenario lol....Its very clear to see your time spent in the past was imbedded in, even in a wide open field, not a soul to be seen for miles, you constantly looked over your shoulder, checking the shrubbery, gotta love the training we had eh. 👍 Keep up the great work and all the best in your channel growth.

I never had a problem with the slr back in the 80's and used to easily hit the target at a few hundred yards but never got to use an sa80 as they weren't available to the TA so just got to have a look at them when we went on exercise with the regs

Ex RAF from the 70s/80s so only had the opportunity of using the SLR. Loved the weapon & I was pretty handy with it as I was with the 303 in the Air Cadets before that. I was awarded my RAF Marksman for 5 in the left of the bull in an old penny size with one keyhole at 300 yards. I also had the good fortune to have a go with the Belgian FN on a shooting day at RAF Leuchars while in the cadets. Awesome weapon on fully automatic. I also had a Range Officer Certification back then when I was still a teenager. While in the RAF I qualified & retained my Marksman status. I also used to fire Martini action.22 at my local rifle club

hi mate, I joined the navy in march 90. we saw both riles in training. all can i remember is we couldn't use the SA80 because of the rounds. some balls up.

In my service life the SLR was best friend and when in NI it could get real at anytime you need a weapon that will work every time no question.

i never got through basic training for the guards, in 4 months and bought myself out, not ashamed to admit it, but i did get the pleasure of live firing an SLR, Loved the rifle, SLR anytime

I used the SLR in 1 RAR in the 70's and early 80's, it WAS classed as an assault rifle here in Oz but we never had any left handed versions or modifications

Used the A2. Great no problems and accurate. Loved it. Only used the SLR as a cadet. Just remembered thinking that was so much better than the Lee Enfield No 4. But that's another totally different comparison.

I was involved in inspection of manufactured parts to the sa80, in early 1980s. I remember some of the cast bayonets being bent over the centreline of the handle. Then the magazine release surround was solid at the round end and filled with weld. They later changed it to an open design.

Nice and relaxing video. TY Not sure how true the tale was, but my armourer claimed that he was able to convert the SLR into fully automatic by using a matchstick. I transitioned from SLR to SA80 in 87-8. The weight was about the same but the balance of the SA80 was immediately noticeable. It was not my first choice at the time, though it did have its advantages. The SUSAT, and being able to sling it over both shoulders on the assault course was a bonus. Based on the SA80 of the era, today I would chose the SLR, and only because it is 7.62.

I was in the Us Marines (1983 to 1989) and trained with the Royal Marines in Norway (Teamwork 88) and the RM's were carrying SLR's or FN FAL and I was carrying an M16A2. The RM's let me hold and check out their SLR's/FN FAL. I showed them my M16A2 as they were curious also. Great collaboration between allies !!!!

RU-vid recommended your channel you took me back a few years I used the SA80A2 thanks for this video I've subd ps its be the SA80A2 I stripped it down in 20 seconds flat as a bet once

Placing a broken matchstick under the safety sear and you have a fully auto SLR. Loved using it in the Australian Army back in the day - except it was really heavy would rust. lol

I'd take the SA80A3, but it would be quite interesting to see a short barrel version of the SLR with a top Picatinny rail...with an optic like the ACOG. Great topic! Cheers from Texas

I joined the army in 1978 used the slr. It was used and abused by us used on the assault course as a steep up to get over the 6ft and 12ft wall. One held the barrel the other the stock guy came put his foot on the middle and you pushed him up. When the sa80 came in we had to leave the sa80 at the end of the assault course we were not allowed to take it across the assault course. As it was too fragile. We were in n.i. when it came out we hated it lost too many magazines as the magazines release catch was pressing up against the body and it would cause the mag to fall off. We had no faith in the sa80. On the firing the slr we we trained in my bn to shoot with iron sites to 400 yrds and suites to pass our grade 1inf pay at 300 yrds. Sa80 was light to carry compared to the slr was a pain to keep clean. I would take the slr to combat with me longer reach when you put the bayonet on and you could swing the butt as well.

Modern SLR with retractable/adjustable stock with picatinny rail top cover for modern ergonomics and scope mounting would be the ultimate battle rifle for the regular squaddie, especially considering that Russians and Chinese are once again the potential opfors of future conflict. US DSArms SA58 have evolved to shorter configurations for CQB. Never shot a FAL, but shot G3s and was issues an AKM. 7.62 NATO is the ultimate cartridge. Great channel, Tab, much respect.

Your presentation was an excellent account of the pros and cons of both weapons and I reckon the SLR was a great ‘bangstick’!!

"Gangster grip" has to be a reminiscence dating way back to W. Churchill...

In the Marines I use the SLR However I It was one of those lucky people Who had hands on The No4 No8 L98 L81A1 L81A2 L85A1 L85A2 L86 As a range officer coach and weapon instructor

Aussie veteran here, joined in '87 and like you I started on the SLR then transitioned to our (ADF's) bullpup, the F88 Steyr. Personally I'd have the SLR any day but then I'm a dinosaur. The reliability and ruggedness of the weapon and the 7.62 mm hitting power is always reassuring. The F88 is a decent weapon that's for sure but I just never did get to love the plastic stuff, still deployed with this and it was fine for what I needed.

Brown Bess any day! There’s a lot of sandbags being pulled up here 😂

I’m just a hillbilly from Alberta Canada , love this channel. 303 British is technically larger than 7.62x51 nato…… (308 Winchester) But the rimmed casing made it susceptible to Rim lock. Have a No. 1 mark 3 smle produced in 1917. Knowing what it’ll do to a 1200 pound moose it’s outrageous to think about the first and second world wars. Cheers.

I ended up carrying three SLR's on a Commando "Speed March" as two oppo's were struggling. A six miler with full kit and an SLR strapped to your back is no joke as the length and weight make it very cumbersome. But the first time I used one I was shocked on how robust, accurate and powerful the thing was and that it was a good replacement for the Bolt action Lee Enfield 303. The guys in the Falklands were poorly equipped to do the task required from them due to 5 Brigades involvement after the loss of the Atlantic Conveyor. There just wasn't enough to go around. The clearing of trenches and defended positions with a Bayoneted SLR was also virtually impossible. The Australian SAS used the SLR to it's best in Vietnam. They shortened them fitted a pistol grip or grenade launcher, a 30 round FN or Bren mag, made it automatic and called it the Bitch. The point man carried the Bitch and used it to spray and pray if they were compromised and needed to break contact. I've not used the SA80 but it's a toy compared to the Bitch and with todays modern body armor there's more of a need for an Infantry weapon with the stopping power of a 7.62.

Bloody hell! It’s like talking to my old man! He used to go on about the sten gun, and how if you found a good one you would try to keep hold of it. Nice one mate.

Started on the SLR and felt it was up for the job (distance, stopping power etc) then I moved to the FAMAS and I felt they had really screwed up on the magazine, it was easily damaged and flimsy. The worst was the sights, your eye was positioned to close to the rear sight, which then made the front sight less easier to center. I went from 300m naturally great groupings on the SLR, to having to concentrate a whole lot harder to nearly achieving good groupings on the FAMAS. While on exercise in sardinia we got the chance of firing the SA80 A2 with the Royal Marines and except for the fiddly buttons it was great to shoot as the OPTICAL SIGHT allowed you to pick what leg you wished to shoot on a dragonfly in flight at 100m. A section issued with the SA80 meant you had 20/30 soldiers/ Marines observing there surroundings, essentially when they took a knee they just soaked up the surroundings and informed higher if anything was going on, whereas every other army/marine unit had to rely on Rupert/ jean pierre's observational skills (and map reading skills)

SLR in my day, loved it apart from a few mag spring issues. SA80 was after my time. but did get an opportunity to fire the H+K G3 down on the ranges which was impressive.

I loved the SLR, I fell over and blocked my muzzle with mud and I had to strip it down, clean it and have it ready to fire in minutes, in the pitch black by feel so I was soooo glad it was so simple to strip. I preferred it over the SA80, felt more robust.

I'm from Belfast.SLR in a concrete jungle it was a flag pole but the sound of it let you know to get the fxxk home out of it.Sa80 the fxxkers were on top of you before you knew it & I'm only rioting..brilliant channel sir keep it up.

SLR . Without question. It looks elegant, it’s stopping power, Ammo control, ease of stripping and it’s very tough. Once more. SLR , Without question. Ex CSM . Infantry . I used both weapons. Thank you.

From my RN day’s original the navy were issued with 303 rifles re barrelled with nato round barrels. And they were very accurate used for snipers with sites . When I joined in 1968 we only had SLR rifles

The SLR. I did a short course with it when I was in the New Zealand Army Cadet Corps about 40 years ago. It was easy for 15 year old guys to learn and master with a few lessons. The recoil was strong, but even on my first magazine I was landing shots on a torso-sized target at 100 metres.

I was in the RAF 92-97 , I was taught on the SLR where I found it very easy to use, being the first time I had ever used a riffle and being left handed. couple years later went on the converstion course to SA80 and found it a lot difficult to use and not so accurate, I found. So I prevered SLR.

SLR. I have the privilege and honor of owning an SLR made by Birmingham Arms factory. Being in the US, the rifle is amazing and has performed well for my rifle clubs monthly practical rifle competition. The steel targets stay down with the SLRs .308 ammo. I don't have any experience with the SA80 but I would take my private owned SLR to battle if needed. Great video by the way.

If battle took place outdoors and long range precision was on: SLR. If battle took place indoors and lots of spray&pray was on: SA80. Fun fact: The HK51 was a .308 version of the HK MP5 specifically requested by the SAS for car-to-car contacts in Northern Ireland. But they found that a HK51 on full auto, fired from inside a car, was more harmful to your own side than to the enemy.

I once spoke to someone who used both, horses for courses and kickbacks he said. He also said the SLR made you a better marksman, you didn't waste your shots, unlike the seppos spray and pray ethos, he also said if you ran out of ammo it made an excellent club and would easily batter any one to death, then later when you picked up more rounds you could use it again, his only gripe was in cqb, ie in buildings, it was to long, though you could shoot through most walls.

Just subscribed to channel, & you couldn't have put it any better! I converted out in the desert in gulf war 1 & the SA80 was not great, thank god i was in the ROYAL ARTILLERY so our INFANTRYMAN have to cope with it's pros & cons, good channel i'm going to have a look

Fantastic .So good to listen to someone who really knows his stuff.I was SLR in the RAF and later SA80 in the TA . Laughed at the comment about the "gangster grip" .During oh so many hours of basic training ( Odd career , Did basic 4 times and snco course once , laugh a Minuit) I described an additional way of holding the sa80 ,as the Elliot Ness hold ,lol. I would go in with the SA80 mk 3 and steal something better if possible. Dont quite agree about the slr not being as accurate ,you just have to have better skills. Did a shoot at Bisley once with a "Regiment" buddy with Lee enfields at a long range .His comment ,"now were f.....g talking accuracy.PS It always amuses me that folk say the Browning 9mm was not accurate .The truth was that they just couldnt shoot pistol . On one shoot we did the usual 10 metre point blank range shoot and I muttered to the range officer that that was like shooting fish in a barrel. He took the bait and cleared the rnge back to 20 metres .OK Studd go for it! Same grouping . OK Sarge lets go 50 M .Not on your life ,do you want to get me into trouble. By the way I think you can do it. By the way ,I only ever shot pistol ine handed, If you need a pistol ,it is up close and personal so dont expose too much body.

SLR every day of the week, it served me well both in Northern Ireland and the Falklands. Never saw any of the lads i was with take an Argy FN over the SLR.

Loved my SRL - would have been quite happy to go anywhere with it. Had the wooden and plastic versions. Fully automatic only ever made me think about how much ammo we would have to carry. Simply, robust and plenty of reach with a sticky thing on the end. Never experienced the joys of the SA80, but never liked anything I heard about it.

I did My Basic Training on the SLR then went to my Regiment and after 6 months changed over to SA80 L85A1 but continued to use SLR for Guard Duty for a few months after. We took the SA80 to Belize and the plastics melted in contact with the Mozzie Repellent and I remember a LSW getting bent out of shape after getting run over by a forward control 101...

I served during the crossover between the two rifles, I trained on the SLR in basic which was more of a familiarization incase we ever got posted to a unit still using them and fired 40 rounds down the range and that was it. So I cant give an accurate account as I didn't have it as a personal weapon. I had the SA80 a1 with SUSAT sight, trained with it in basic and could strip it down and reassemble it blindfolded. I knew it inside out you could say. Encountered many of the problems you spoke about. I only got gas stoppages on the LSW though which was a quick fix changing the gas settings. I didn't like the LSW but it was my section weapon for the first 6 months in battalion until another sprog came along then it got pushed onto him. With the SA80 I passed the APWT no problem scored marksman every year with it. I never fired it in anger but used it in BATUS for 6 weeks in the field and didn't have a single issue with it once the magazine dumping problem was sorted out. Fired a Hell of a lot of live rounds through it in Canada as well. Also used it on several exercises in Germany some real cold ones and again never had any issues with the A1. I was given the SA80 A2 when I rejoined as a combat medic in the TA about 10 years after I left the the Army, that was a good weapon by then HK had sorted out everything and introduced the forward assist when you cock the weapon. I hated the iron sights though and longed for my old SUSAT sight back. As much as I like the SLR if I was going into a battlefield situation where my life depended on it I would have to go with what I know and I know the SA80, so as long as I was given the A2 or A3 with a SUSAT sight I would be happy. Thanks for the great video

Never had a SA80 but used both SLR and AR-15 and what the 5.56 lacked in beefy punch it sure made up for in it's lightweight portability and full auto can occasionally have it's day.

I'm a leftie due to s stuffed right eye. So I'd take the SLR anytime. I only ever used the SLR but you could also convert the SLR to fully automatic. All you needed to do was when the rifle was stripped down and before you put the working parts in you put a small strip of (I used two matchsticks) to secure the retaining bolt down so that the working parts just carried on going forward. But you DID lose the single-shot feature. I only ever used it on exercise firing blanks as the CO would have gone nuts.

Quality videos. As someone who is interested in the cold war I find this fascinating.

I used both. The only thing the SA80 had going for it was SUSAT sight and the ability to fire bursts. As for the length and weight of the SLR and weight of 7.62 ammo, All I can say is that on the few times I fired it in anger I didn't notice the weight. I did notice that it went through most things, walls, cars, medium sized trees jungle ext. And would still do horrendous damage to whoever got in its way. So for most thing's SLR 7.62.