View Full Version : 43 Commando (Royal Marines) gets Colt C8's
Think maybe that the L85A2 is slowly losing ground?:
"A high-profile UK Royal Marine unit has been re-equipped with the Colt Canada C8 carbine to enhance its ability to protect the Royal Navy's nuclear deterrent submarine base and nuclear weapon convoys.
The move makes the unit the first British non-special forces unit to completely drop the bullpup L85A2 (SA80) rifle used by the rest of the regular forces. Various UK special forces units already use the C8, which is designated the L119 in British service."
http://www.janes.com/article/58501/uk-royal-marine-unit-ditches-the-sa80-for-colt-c8
"Reduced ricochet and collateral damage"....
Brilliant!
Makes sense.
Honestly don't see why they still use the SA80.
Makes sense.
Honestly don't see why they still use the SA80.
Brits are notoriously cheap and will give their military equipment that you wouldn't expect a Boy Scout troop to depend upon, especially true when the Labour Party is in power which is most of the time in that quasi socialist country.
They knew the SA80/L85 series was screwed when HK couldn't even really fix them 100%. About the only good thing to come of that was the maritime magazine. HK did a band aid fix and they were designated the L85A2 and they are pretty much just running the life expectancy out of their inventory.
That is really the only reason they waited to adopt a Colt M4 type carbine. And even having done that, they will still stick some guard / reserve or police unit with those old L85s until they can't cobble together mix and match guns anymore.
I'd sooner they tote FALs than that SA80.
Crow Hunter
04-07-16, 09:15
Think maybe that the L85A2 is slowly losing ground?:
"A high-profile UK Royal Marine unit has been re-equipped with the Colt Canada C8 carbine to enhance its ability to protect the Royal Navy's nuclear deterrent submarine base and nuclear weapon convoys.
The move makes the unit the first British non-special forces unit to completely drop the bullpup L85A2 (SA80) rifle used by the rest of the regular forces. Various UK special forces units already use the C8, which is designated the L119 in British service."
http://www.janes.com/article/58501/uk-royal-marine-unit-ditches-the-sa80-for-colt-c8
Wonder why they didn't equip with some other type of bullpup?
There are several other designs on the market. Why choose an "old" design like the C8?
Why not the Tavor or AUG or F2000 or some such?
This is a somewhat rhetorical question as I have owned and shot several bullpups and hated them and would vastly prefer a C8 but I also wasn't raised/trained on bullpups rifles like I assume the Brits were.
Plus, why didn't they go with some of the newer AR pattern designs?
Is it just because they could easily get the L119?
crusader377
04-07-16, 09:24
My thoughts are in bold.
Wonder why they didn't equip with some other type of bullpup?
I think bullpups are on their way out in general. Their are simply too many tradeoffs in terms of weapon handling to get the slightly shorter rifle in a bullpup.
There are several other designs on the market. Why choose an "old" design like the C8?
The C8 is already in service with British Special Forces. Also the C8 is still a very solid design despite being a little dated. It has proven very reliable in service.
Why not the Tavor or AUG or F2000 or some such?
Answered in question 1.
This is a somewhat rhetorical question as I have owned and shot several bullpups and hated them and would vastly prefer a C8 but I also wasn't raised/trained on bullpups rifles like I assume the Brits were.
I think the training issue is overrated. The AR is a very easy platform to learn and highly capable soldiers like Royal Marines will have no problem transitioning quickly.
Plus, why didn't they go with some of the newer AR pattern designs?
Is it just because they could easily get the L119?
Again the C8 is a very proven and available rifle. On top of that I have a hard time thinking of a AR pattern rifle that is overwhelmingly better than a C8 for actual combat use.
A long time ago, 2001ish, we were cross-training with Royal Marines. Outstanding guys, could drink like fish. Anyway they loved shooting our M4s, said how much they would like to have them instead of what they had. I have no clue what they had but they didn't care for them.
"Reduced ricochet and collateral damage"....
Brilliant!
Having been a service' policy lead and knowing the weapons used to guard the American Tridents (Brits rent their's from the US and follow US surety policy) this not an actual requirement for the security forces
I'd sooner they tote FALs than that SA80.
Wrong caliber, big and heavy. I'd hate to have to run into some of those community complexes with a rifle that big. Also their L1A1 has no select fire capability.
Wonder why they didn't equip with some other type of bullpup?
There are several other designs on the market. Why choose an "old" design like the C8?
Why not the Tavor or AUG or F2000 or some such?
This is a somewhat rhetorical question as I have owned and shot several bullpups and hated them and would vastly prefer a C8 but I also wasn't raised/trained on bullpups rifles like I assume the Brits were.
Plus, why didn't they go with some of the newer AR pattern designs?
Is it just because they could easily get the L119?
All cost twice as much as a Canadian Colt, additionally I think the Colt is the better carbine as a general issue weapon.
All that being true, I'd still rather they had FALs. Don't see were full auto would benefit.
A while back I made acquaintances with a C3 guy who had an L85 in his display I guess. Like he couldn't sell but only demo. I got to hold it but not shoot it. It felt awkward and kinda heavy. It was def right hand only.
The SUSAT was like a post ,simple, but it magnifed. Couldn't imagine actually using one. It felt way heavier than an AUG. And the charging handle looked like it would break your face if fired left handed.
It LOOKED cool but felt gross. It felt more awkward than the FS2000.
I have a personal AUG A3 and really...thats probably the only bullpup that got it right.
The coolest thing he had was a SPAS 15. But didn't get to shoot it.
Bleh
Wrong caliber, big and heavy. I'd hate to have to run into some of those community complexes with a rifle that big. Also their L1A1 has no select fire capability.
In the Falklands war, the Tommies were ditching the L1A1 as fast as they could pick up a select fire Argentine model off the ground.
All that being true, I'd still rather they had FALs. Don't see were full auto would benefit.
See above post. As this was well documented, the Tommies that traded in their L1A1 for the Argentine select fire models obviously saw a benefit having been on both ends of one.
I can testify that trying to control that beast on select fire takes some doing.
In the Falklands war, the Tommies were ditching the L1A1 as fast as they could pick up a select fire Argentine model off the ground.
But whyyyyy?
Didn't they have MAG58s. I don't see where a f/a FAL would really make anything easier.
Plus wouldn't some Sergeant Major notice and get pissed at them shit canning the Queens rifles?
But whyyyyy?
Didn't they have MAG58s. I don't see where a f/a FAL would really make anything easier.
Plus wouldn't some Sergeant Major notice and get pissed at them shit canning the Queens rifles?
I can't reliably answer any of those questions without simply speculating. But it is a fact this did occur...
But whyyyyy?
Didn't they have MAG58s. I don't see where a f/a FAL would really make anything easier.
Plus wouldn't some Sergeant Major notice and get pissed at them shit canning the Queens rifles?
Because when some asshole goes "BRRRRRP" at you...you want to be able to "BRRRRP" back at them. It sucks when somebody goes "BRRRRRP" at you and you can only reply with "POW, POW."
^^^ Good point. And after a few good "BRRRRRP's" in his direction, I'd be willing to bet said Sergeant Major would be first in line to pick up a "BRRRRRP" gun too.
MountainRaven
04-07-16, 16:57
All that being true, I'd still rather they had FALs. Don't see were full auto would benefit.
A while back I made acquaintances with a C3 guy who had an L85 in his display I guess. Like he couldn't sell but only demo. I got to hold it but not shoot it. It felt awkward and kinda heavy. It was def right hand only.
The SUSAT was like a post ,simple, but it magnifed. Couldn't imagine actually using one. It felt way heavier than an AUG. And the charging handle looked like it would break your face if fired left handed.
It LOOKED cool but felt gross. It felt more awkward than the FS2000.
I have a personal AUG A3 and really...thats probably the only bullpup that got it right.
The coolest thing he had was a SPAS 15. But didn't get to shoot it.
Bleh
From talking to Brits who served: It will break your face if you try to shoot it left-handed. Some had seen it happen with fresh recruits in the British equivalent of Basic. Everyone in the BAF is right-handed. Even if they're a lefty.
Because when some asshole goes "BRRRRRP" at you...you want to be able to "BRRRRP" back at them. It sucks when somebody goes "BRRRRRP" at you and you can only reply with "POW, POW."
They can BRRRP all they like and hit a Harrier. I'd sooner Pow Pow and do some 7.62 heart surgery.
They can BRRRP all they like and hit a Harrier. I'd sooner Pow Pow and do some 7.62 heart surgery.
Actually the FAL isn't that terrible on full auto if you know how to run a 7.62 on full auto.
In my experience the easiest to manage is the G3, then the FAL and then the M-14. But bad as the M-14 is, if you know what you are doing, you can even keep that one on target. Short bursts really aren't any worse than rapid doubles.
I've never fired a full auto FAL. Only subguns. Even then it really only seems practical in a very limited role And an M16 during patrol rifle. Try to control as I might, the auto(not burst this was an A1) didn't help much even at 25. That was more of a "this is why we only use semi" spiel
I have an HK91 and had an STG58 in college. With the stock trigger it felt easy enough to do quick follow up shots on a pizza box at 100 yards or so.
But it happened and I was a tot and nowhere near the Falklands at such time so whatever they did seemed to work.
I dunno I just do what I'm told
The British forces didn't seem terribly bothered by the lack of full auto during most of the L1A1's service. I would imagine that other supporting weapons took up the slack.
I've never fired a full auto FAL. Only subguns. Even then it really only seems practical in a very limited role And an M16 during patrol rifle. Try to control as I might, the auto(not burst this was an A1) didn't help much even at 25. That was more of a "this is why we only use semi" spiel
I have an HK91 and had an STG58 in college. With the stock trigger it felt easy enough to do quick follow up shots on a pizza box at 100 yards or so.
But it happened and I was a tot and nowhere near the Falklands at such time so whatever they did seemed to work.
I dunno I just do what I'm told
Here is a friend of mine running my 21 off the shoulder. It's not hard if you know what you are doing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae5GBsTBUVM
dwhitehorne
04-07-16, 18:46
The issue is the knowing what you are doing part. I spent two weeks in Argentina in 1989 training with their Naval Infantry. Lots of rounds on full auto went over the berm.
Back on topic. Whether some want to admit it or not the M4 platform is still one of the best choices out there for ease of use, modularity and parts support. David
Back on topic. Whether some want to admit it or not the M4 platform is still one of the best choices out there for ease of use, modularity and parts support. David
I agree. I like the ergonomics better than a lot of newer 5.56 rifles now out. It handles well, and is relatively light, even with a small scope or red dot. I love mine.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.