D F ditto

+ReconOhioTeam I owned an M-14 for nearly 20 yrs. & liked it. Then I bought a DSA Fn-fal in '97 & LOVE the thing. I wouldn't trade it for 2 M-14's or 3 of those abominable HK-91's. I only wish I COULD fire the Fn at full auto. I put a hooded rear sight on the Fn for a much better sight picture & Belgian handguards w/no bipod cuts. Much better looking. The muzzle break works great, & the recoil is about half that of the other two rifles.

Wolfwolveswolf yes

Really? I converted to the (Nottingham made) L85 in 1989 and much preferred it. Did a tour of NI with both (1986 & 1990) and would've taken the L85 every day of the week. Yes, I'm serious

@@arthurjarrett1604 each to his own I suppose. Never liked the SA80 or any bullpup for that matter I suppose I am old fashioned. My brother liked the L85 but he generally carried the sterling before it came in to service. Funny, we eventually adopted the 5.56 round years after others and now the yanks are going up on calibre's now with the 6.8 rounds. I would still take an SLR to war.

@@reubendobbs8011 I'll give you stopping power but everything else that was measurable (weight (controversial), accuracy (much better) ease of cleaning (especially!) etc,etc) goes to the L85. In my book of course - boring world and all that

@@arthurjarrett1604 no sorry can't agree, SLR is easy to maintain and accurate enough. The weight well most didn't have a problem you just got used to it. I know it's all an subjective point of view but why do you think the bullpup period is coming to an end and so called conventional platform back in vogue. The problem with the Sa80 it was a child of two failed systems. 1 it was a bastard child of the AR18. 2 it was built by engineers and accountants not gun smiths. That's why it has had major redesign work. The L85 A1 was a heap of crap and fell to bits. Mine kept dropping the Mag out just for fun, plastic replaced 4 time's and the sight fell off. Improved tons on the A2 model but that was virtually a new rifle.

@@reubendobbs8011 Fair do's mate. I was careful to mention that the one I used was manufactured in Nottingham which is important. Your points are valid and echo Ian McCullom's excellent video on the shortcomings of the A1. However, I (pre-tour, I never fired a shot in anger) spent a lot of time on the ranges with both rifles and felt more confident of a hit with the L85. I disagree the A2 was "virtually a new rifle" - McCullom even said it was a matter of better materials and finish. There was no improvement in accuracy.

Richard Harper slr any time every time

Put the scope from the Steyr on the L1A1 SLR and the Australian Army would have been on a real winner. The improved accuracy of the scope combined with the hitting power of the NATO 7.62 mm ammunition would have paid dividends in Iraq and Afghanistan.

U can add india to that list too, we replaced our beloved with the infamous INSAS 5.56 and it's absolute garbage

More reliable than the AK but at least as effective as the M16. I would certainly say this is one of the best assault rifles of all time. Except when it comes to weight. Lighter than the AK, yes. The M16, no.

Raspian Kiado you can’t really compare weapons with different calibres, the Soviet equivalents would be the AKM as it’s also 7.62 one of the main reasons the original M16 was not popular was the light rifle 5.56 round lacked penetration and stopping power at range, good video ruined by idiotic pictures of dead animals presumably “hunted” using assault rifles ☹️I wonder what country they are from🤔

@@raspiankiado4658 The FN FAL is a battle rifle, not an assault rifle.

36 years for me and like you, could still field strip today (and remove the match stick from under the sear lol).

@@november50 not certain who you trainec with, when I was doing my reserve training with the New Zealand Army, we were taught to take the gas plug out first, because you could aleays manually cock it, if you needed to. Last time I handled one was about 10-12 year ago.

@@lesthiele4921 RF not TF (NZ and Singapore based) Was trained make weapon safe, then gas plug out, exactly for the reason you state. So I'm trying to understand your comment in relation to me?

@@lesthiele4921 The match stick under the sear. Would enable your SLR to fire automatic, not recommended for obvious reasons but doable if required for short bursts and not a prolonged period if you didn't have a heavy barrel fitted. Before you ask, There was a battalion exercise in Tekapo, in the early eighties. The enemy party for that exercise were rather surprised, when they attacked the mobile echelon and found themselves under countless GPMG return fire. It was common knowledge at that time, that nearly all of the unit's GPMG's had been 456'd and then BLR or BER'd hence the enemy party's surprise. Two things I learned serving with the NZ Army. You make do with what you have got and get the job done and learn to live off the land, even if it's bolted into solid concrete. I'm sure the American military can attest to this.

@@november50 I did hear rumours about the match stick idea, but as Territorial Volunteer in 1974, for some reasom we were not shown this, but I still have fond memories of Burnham Camp, and now at 66yo I am living the dream in Melbourne, keep safe and well my Kiwi mate.

trupnk My uncle was a Rhodie that fought in the Bush War and he hold adamantly to the opinion that his South African R1 (South African SLR) is the greatest rifle he ever fired.

trupnk Having been in the British Army in the early to mid 1970s I remember the SLR well, wonderful weapon both reliable and with good stopping power, the SA80 was coming in as I left and my short recollection of it was it was junk in comparison constantly jamming. However I understand they improved it later but it never had the range nor stopping power of the SLR.

+trupnk Idiots in glass towers make decisions based on their ignorance. The people on the ground pay the price. I loved my SLR in the Army Reserve. It was long, it was heavy but it was no toy.

+kevin vincent When properly zeroed on the ranges and sights glued in place the good old SLR was extremely accurate , I could easily get a 5" group at 300 yards with my trusty " Sally " weapon number 33 :)

trupnk True and it was heavier then the L1A1.SLR. Makes you wonder who got their back pockets filled on the deal huh .

+michael mcbride How often do the psychopaths who run our military or gov't, make a good decision? Never in my lifetime & I'm 60. I went through Marine boot camp with the M-14. The Fn, which I now own, is a MUCH better choice.

If only, my Friend. If only.

+michael mcbride yes ..."if only"....but we see more and more rifles popping up in 7.62x51...old ones G3, M14, modified or totally new ones like the HK417, FN SCAR, M110, All those so called benefits from the 5.56 are nice but what it lacks are the most important parts of all:1st stop power...2nd range...so even an .22 LR would come good out of that story when it was introduced as the 5.56x45. All that compact shit and reduced barrel length is nice...but in combat you need an hammer which reach out far and hits hard...penetrate bullet protective gear...rips through tree's...car doors...brick wall's...you name it...try that with 5.56... Many lifes could been saved by keep up the 7.62 as an battle rifle. In Iraq in Afghanistan in Africa the US did had their problems with the 5.56, that they keep hanging in this caliber for so long is unbelieveble. Check CNN, check KZfaq...today the infantry is supported by snipers in the open...and the snipers walk next to the infantry men...that say's enough about the situation itself.

True, thanks. If only..........

Political

Belgium

Way better than trash g3a3 design

Absolute fucking bollocks. Do you even have the slightest idea of how firearms operate? Fucking cretin.

No it wouldn't !! AK 7.62 X 39 SLR 7.62 X 51 !!!

A guy using the name of an SS officer some suspect of war crimes especially at Malmedy against US troops, using the American insult (even though we don't give a fuck) towards Brits of 'Limey!' lol

Rifle fires one or two shots and stops; work charging handle and continue firing. Rifle fires one or two shots and stops again; turn gas regulator up one or two notches, continue firing.

+Manas Surya The UK switched to 5.56 with the infamous SA80. 5.56 rounds were consistently shown to be underpowered in places like the Afghan and and iraq. however 5.56 its still effective in more dense environments such as jungles and urban settings.

NATO switched to 5.56 Although...if you're going to fight across the open fields of Europe...200-300m into a barn or something Ya....well....that's a head scratcher...

NATO as a whole would have been better served by adopting 5.56x45 as its assault rifle cartridge,while keeping 7.62x51 as its GPMG and service (battle) rifle cartridge. In effect, that is what has happened anyway.

7.62 All the way baby!!! The Ultimate Beast of Round in the old Faithful L1 A1!

gary perry par for coarse

Rhodesia.

David, the American M-14 has no need of an external gas regulator, since its internal short-stroke gas piston system with gas expansion cutoff valve is self-adjusting, self-calibrating and - to a degree - self-cleaning. Back when it was first drawn up, it received a number of patents. This is one of the chief differences between it and its "parent," the M-1 Garand. The Garand, being a 1st-generation SLR, has no external or internal gas regulator or valve; whatever gas pressure the operating rod "sees," is what cycles it. This is why Garands tend to function best - to "like" - certain propellants (gas pressure profiles) and loads than others. Powders in the burn-rate range of IMR-4064 or IMR-4895, bullets in the 147-175-grain range, etc. If you want to shoot modern "high-pressure" hunting loads in your M-1, it is recommended that you replace the OEM gas plug under the muzzle with an aftermarket version by Schuster or one of their competitors. The after-market plug will allow the safe use of higher-pressure loads, without the danger of bending or even breaking an op-rod. The M-14/M1A-pattern rifle is an excellent design, albeit one somewhat more-traditional in appearance than the FAL. The FN FAL, of course, is well-deserving of its status as the "right arm of the free world." It was very hard for many soldiers and Marines in Vietnam to turn in their M-14s for M-16s; but perhaps even harder for British troopers to hand in their SLRs for the SA80.

The CETME/G3 design is quite idiosyncratic. Being of roller-locked delayed blowback operation, it has no gas system whatsoever to adjust, to get fouled or damaged or dirty. The design is legendary for its toughness, durability, and ability to tolerate - to shrug off - abuse that would break most other rifles. For this reason, it became popular with rebels, mercenaries and other irregulars fighting in Africa's "bush wars" of the 1960s and 1970s. An ill-trained man could neglect to clean, lubricate or otherwise maintain his G3/CETME for months, and it would keep on working anyway. Good thing, too, because the weapon has its drawbacks. It is a disaster ergonomically. The charging handle, magazine release, and safety are all located poorly, and the rifle has no last-shot hold-open (as you already noted), a real detriment in a combat weapon. The factory/OEM trigger is typically set to ~ 12 lbs. and is needlessly poor, as are the factory iron sights, which are only graduated out to 400 meters. The zeroing procedure is needlessly complex and requires a screwdriver or a special tool. The barrel is of high-quality, so G3/CETME rifles can be made into an accurate platform, but they need a trigger job or improved trigger. Mounting a scope or an optic is possible, but not easy on older versions of the rifle,which lack a P-rail/M1913 rail. It requires a special claw-mount. The rifle, due to its large reciprocating mass of the bolt-BCG, is noted for beating up on optics pretty hard, knocking them out of zero or damaging them. Firing the NATO-standard 7.62x51, the rifle hits hard out to 800-1000m. Given these defects, the rifle has enjoyed a surprisingly long service life in more than fifty nations at one time, and even today, many nations still use it - including Spain, Portugal, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Greece, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, and some others.

Forward assist is a bad thing, you shouldn't be forcing a round in under any circumstances. Just ask an armourer they will confirm that fact.

The forward assist was found useful only a few versions of the M16, I hear. That other rifles do not need it is not a problem. If the rifle is so dirty that it fails to feed, that's the firer's own fault.

It was designed to be fired with M80 Ball,i.e. NATO-stanag ammo. 145-150-grain FMJ-BT at aboyut 2750-2800 fps. Most users simply set their gas system to work well with that, and then crank the system 1-2 clicks open in case a bit of excess is needed (when the rifle is cold, dirty, etc.). The well-prepared trooper would also mark -maybe on a piece of tape inside the buttstock - his valve setting.

Rifle fires one or two shots and stops; work charging handle and continue firing. Rifle fires one or two shots and stops again; turn gas regulator up one or two notches.