Any SLR (Self Loading Rifle) enthusiasts?

madgaz

Forager
Sep 21, 2011
221
0
Bradford, West Yorkshire
Just after any info, if possible, on this bit of kit I recently picked up.
Who/what was the primary user?
Even though it has SAS in the description, I doubt it was for them. As a friend pointed out, they wouldn't advertise the fact would they?
Kind of interested in the history if it (although it is unissued) as I have never seen one in the 15 years I've being interested in army surplus.
y6enunaq.jpg
equ3a2a9.jpg


Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2
 

widu13

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Feb 9, 2008
2,334
19
Ubique Quo Fas Et Gloria Ducunt
As I was a user of the SLR and later became part of the AGC, the time frames don't match. By the time the AGC was formed through amalgamations the SLR had already left us.
 

Silverclaws

Forager
Jul 23, 2009
249
1
Plymouth, Devon
The L1A1 SLR, I trained on and if I was in a different country to this I might be still interested in the rifle, as I liked it and was most disappointed when I did the conversion training to the SA80. But I have done, it, watched Americans using our old SLR on Youtube where I notice some admiration for the weapon and some dislike due to the amount of stoppages the old worn rifle had but on such videos,it is amusing to read the comments from those trained on the weapon.

What was the real reason the SA80 replaced the old SLR ?
 

Itzal

Nomad
Mar 3, 2010
280
1
N Yorks
The L1A1 SLR, I trained on and if I was in a different country to this I might be still interested in the rifle, as I liked it and was most disappointed when I did the conversion training to the SA80. But I have done, it, watched Americans using our old SLR on Youtube where I notice some admiration for the weapon and some dislike due to the amount of stoppages the old worn rifle had but on such videos,it is amusing to read the comments from those trained on the weapon.

What was the real reason the SA80 replaced the old SLR ?

Because the SLR had reliability issues, it was too heavy as was the ammo and the belief was that combat would be urban and a long rife with a heavy round wouldnt be needed. The SA80 project was a joke from the start, they should have gone to the Germans and picked up a HK variant for a fraction of the price with twice the reliability.
 

widu13

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Feb 9, 2008
2,334
19
Ubique Quo Fas Et Gloria Ducunt
Quite simply the move to the standardised 5.56mm NATO round that the USA reneged on the 7.62mm commitment they made. The benefits of the 5.56mm were that a LOT more rounds can be carried. As an old school LMG (7.62mm) gunner I'm here to tell you that an LMG and a box of ready loaded mags are damned heavy.
 
Sep 21, 2008
729
0
56
Dartmoor
Quite simply the move to the standardised 5.56mm NATO round that the USA reneged on the 7.62mm commitment they made. The benefits of the 5.56mm were that a LOT more rounds can be carried. As an old school LMG (7.62mm) gunner I'm here to tell you that an LMG and a box of ready loaded mags are damned heavy.

Oooo me too.. Did you ever pick it up by the handle to move and find that you had nothing but a barrel in your hand :eek:.

The 5.56 and 7.62 FN were trial looooooooooooooooooong long ago. My dear old day was on the small arms trials team for them. We went with 7.62 (in his view) to satisfy a political aim for manufacturing and supply at the time.
 

Retired Member southey

M.A.B (Mad About Bushcraft)
Jun 4, 2006
11,098
13
your house!
As I understand it, the thinking behind weapon use change in that the effect of a well aimed centre of mass 7.62 hit was death, where as a hit from a 5.56 was likely to be an injury where you tie people up carin for the injured party, where a dead chap is less of a drain of effectiveness, of course this relies on people fighting within certain held concepts Luke a soldiers life life is worth the medic or that they would have a medic in the first place, but now stppin power is wanted as well as accuracy over longer distances so the ebr came about :D of course this is only a possible reason. :)
 
Sep 21, 2008
729
0
56
Dartmoor
Of course! It was a right of passage. I also had the good fortune to burn out a barrel on a SAAD course. We did multiple 1000s of rounds on that course.

Lucky bu99er. I cant rememebr how many rounds were in a magazine... it didn't take many - was it 30??? I remember a hard extraction involving stamping like hell on the cocking handle :D
 

Itzal

Nomad
Mar 3, 2010
280
1
N Yorks
Oooo me too.. Did you ever pick it up by the handle to move and find that you had nothing but a barrel in your hand :eek:.

The 5.56 and 7.62 FN were trial looooooooooooooooooong long ago. My dear old day was on the small arms trials team for them. We went with 7.62 (in his view) to satisfy a political aim for manufacturing and supply at the time.

The GPMP was a bugger for that with the barrel.
 

Graywolf

Nomad
May 21, 2005
443
2
68
Whereever I lay my Hat
Having served my time in the 70s I remember the SLR well,having used .303 enfields while hunting,prior to joining I found the SLR to be heavy and badly balanced to carry.Didnt like it at all.
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE