SAR-21 vs G-36
-
If i recall correctly from the articles I read, the british should be using the SA-80. Lots of complaints over that weapon.Originally posted by RAIDER:If i'm not wrong the standard rifle for the British armed forces is the SAR-80 or izzit the SA-80??? Its definately not the one pictured above though... -
They have already improved the weapon and it seems to work alright now.Originally posted by wombat:If i recall correctly from the articles I read, the british should be using the SA-80. Lots of complaints over that weapon.
RAIDER:
SA-80 is a british bullpup design rifle - a little like SAR-21 in appearance although I think SAR21 is a lot more sleek and mean.
SAR-80 is a Chartered Industry (CIS) - now currently grouped under ST Engg designed weapon taken from the design of AR-18 (son of AR-15), with some help from the British. They are two totally different weapon. The designation of the weapons may confuse quite a number of people. CIS also produced another weapon designated SR-88(A). -
Opps...typo, My mistake :p. the unit I meant was 6SIR, not 7SIR...heheh. I heard they were issued bcoz they were involved in the NDP2000 parade and had to display the weapon.Originally posted by RAIDER:Its charging handel can be switched to accomodate both left n right hander.
Since when is there a 7SIR in the SAF???
6SIR is the first infantry unit tt used them n the batch have ORDed last yr.ADF 1st coy is also using them.Both of them had pretty good feedback.
During NDP I overheard kids asking their parents "Are they holding real guns? Those guns looked like toys...". I agree with the kid that the SAR21 looks a bit like a toy until you fire it. Maybe it's bcoz of the plastic body....hehe
The SA80's had bad reputation during the gulf war as the rifle's known to cause alot of stoppages. Partly due to the high tempreture. I heard it's some in the barrel that either expands or contract too much it the heat of the battle that cause all the jams and stoppages.
Is the problem solved? I thought I read saying that the British Army are now developing a new weapon to replace the pioneer bullpup rifle. Maybe I'm wrong again..... :/ -
I thought i've seen the Taiwanese also using that? Someone to confirm this? I think i saw it on the special forces video...on Taiwan forces.Originally posted by wombat:If i recall correctly from the articles I read, the british should be using the SA-80. Lots of complaints over that weapon. -
Viper52:
Yup, I just checked a picture the right side of an SAR-21 and it does appear to have a casing deflector. I can't remember where I got it from though, so I can't post it here.
Well, actually when I mentioned the charging handle was flimsy, I meant whether the mechanism that allows the knob to flip to either the left or right side would hold up under the repeated handling of NSmen. But I guess they probably took that into account. I'm just wondering why they didn't use a more straightforward design to make the charging handle ambidextrous, such as the FA-MAS type charging handle
About the ease spring feature, was this feature intentionally excluded from the SAR-21, or was it because implementing it into a rifle with a bullpup design would be difficult for whatever reason? Because personally I think the ease spring feature is a very useful feature which no decent assault rifle should go without. If it was indeed excluded intentionally, what were the reasons behind it?
Nevermind about the magazine thing then
So long as it accepts M16 magazines without any modification, its perfectly fine with me.
The three-round burst option might not exactly be very good though. Apparently during the Gulf War some soldiers were court martialed for modifying their M16A2s to fire in full-auto. I haven't had any personal experience with this so I can't say for sure whether its good or bad though.
About the ability of an SAR-21 shooter to fire with both eyes open, I too agree its one of the SAR-21's strong points, and would be very useful in a CQB situation, due to both this feature and the SAR-21's overall short length.
About the books that cover the SAR80 and U100, do you know where they can be purchased? I am rather interested in finding out more about these locally made weapons.
About the SAR80 vs the SR88, which design came about first, and about which year did both designs come out?
Actually, any rifle that is chambered for the M193 round would be able to fire the M855/SS109 round. This is because the external dimensions of both rounds are identical, since the longer bullet of the M855 round sits deeper in the casing. However, rifles which use the M855 round have to have a tighter rifling twist, in order to stabilize the heaver bullet. (M193 is 55 grains, and M855 is 62 grains if I recall correctly. What are "grains" btw?) Again, if I remember correctly, the M16A1 or M16S1 barrel has a 1 in 12" rifling, and the M16A2 or other rifles using the newer round have a 1 in 7" rifling.
The optimal rifling twist for the M855 round is actually 1 in 9" but the 1 in 7" rifling was used, so as to stablize heavier tracer rounds that may be used occasionally. The rather tight rifling twist is what I believe causes the ineffectiveness of the bullet that you mentioned.
What happens with the M193 round is that the 1 in 12" rifling is just within the critical limits required to stablize a bullet of that weight, so when it hits any obstruction such as armour or a person's body, the round destabilizes very quickly, and tends to keyhole (turn on its side). If it hits hard armour, it tends to go splat and generally not pierce the armour but if it hits a soft obstruction such as a human body, the bullet would destabilize and turn on its side, causing the bullet to split apart at its cannelure (the ring thing that the casing is crimped around) and fragment. This causes the horrible wounds that were documented in the Vietnam War, when the M193 round was being used. The bullet would normally blow out huge chunks of flesh and create large wounds that would result in massive bleeding and a quick death, especially if fired at ranges closer than 25m. Also, if the bullet fragmented, the lead fragments from the bullet's core could cause lead poisoning if not removed quickly, and this was generally very hard to do since bullet itself was already rather small, more so for the fragments.
As for the M855/SS109 round, the tight rifling twist makes the round very hard to destabilize even when it hits obstacles, so it normally just "drills" and punches through the target. This would make it more effective against armour, but rather ineffective against personnel, because it would normally create a very small and neat wound, and normally with very little loss of flesh. And since the bullet doesn't even remain in the body, the wound is both minor and usually heals rather quickly, provided the wound is sterilized and bandaged properly and that the bullet doesn't hit any vital organs. Against personnel with body armour however, I think the train of thought was that the armour would sufficiently destabilize the bullet to the point that it would have the same effect on the body as the M193 after it passed through the armour.
So actually, I'm just wondering what the rifling twist of the SAR-21 is. Is it a 1 in 9" twist that would cater to most types of bullet weights, or would the barrel have to be swapped if different bullet weights to be used? I also recall reading that older M193 bullets used in rifles with a 1 in 7" rifling twist would sometimes explode after leaving the barrel due to the increased centrifugal force. I'm wondering if this is true, because it doesn't make much sense to me since the bullet diameter remains the same. I think the quality of the bullet might be the case here, or maybe the M855/SS109 round is specified with a thicker jacket. Does anyone know more about this?
What was the difference in the way you had to hold the SAR80? Just curious cos I've never touched an SAR80 before As for the added weight, I would gladly use a lighter and (allegedly) less accurate weapon, and carry more rounds, instead of a heavier weapon, whose accuracy may or may not (arguably) make a difference and not allow me to carry more rounds. So yea, I would prefer an M16 over a SAR80 anytime as well
Ahh yes... the country I was trying to recall was Croatia Thanks for refreshing my memory. I read somewhere that the U.S. Navy Seals use the U100 too. Is that true or just bullshit? I personally feel the pistol foregrip of the U100 is a little on the small side though. (I got to handle it once before)
Raider:
The SA80/L85A1 is a totally different rifle from the SAR80, just that the lack of an "R" confuses people sometimes. The SA80 name is actually the name of the rifle when it was still a prototype design. The correct designation is "L85". The L85 is a bullpup rifle, and apparently its extremely problemetic. The SUSAT 4x sight is supposedly very fussy with temperature variations and the earlier-issued ones fogged up internally after a while and there're no backup iron sights, if I'm not wrong. (correct me if I am) They did try to fix it up, but its reliability still leaves a lot to be desired. Its wierd, since the L85A1 was essentially, supposedly a redesigned AR18/AR180 in a bullpup configuration, and the AR18/AR180 was a reliable weapon. Also, though the L85A1 is manufactured using plastic furniture and sheet steel stampings, it still manages to be rather heavy. (3.8kg without a loaded magazine and the optical sight, and 4.98kg with both the sight and loaded magazine) Its supposedly heavier than an L1A1/SLR/FN-FAL. I don't have the info on hand at the moment so correct me if I'm wrong.
Silenthunter:
They have supposedly asked H&K to troubleshoot and improve the rifle, and when re-issued it will be designated the L85A2. If I'm not wrong, this hasn't happened yet, unfortunately
Eyezer:
I think the Taiwanese use the M16A1...maybe they were using the L85 for training exercises to simulate a "worst-case" scenario. hehehe If all I've read about the L85 is true, then its probably one of the most poorly recently designed rifles.
Anyway, this is a picture of an L85 I managed to find:
-
If you could get your hands on the Video "World Special Forces - Taiwan Recon Forces" or something like that, it's a long series on all the special forces in the world, you can see that they are using the SA-80 look alike. Didn't realise that until I saw the pix from the forum and recalled from the video. Pls verify.........Originally posted by chamenos:Eyezer:
I think the Taiwanese use the M16A1...maybe they were using the L85 for training exercises to simulate a "worst-case" scenario. hehehe If all I've read about the L85 is true, then its probably one of the most poorly recently designed rifles.
Knew that the taiwanese now have their own M-16A1 look alike, cos they did some modification on it. Saw it once and besides the bolt group the same as the M16A1, and the engravings in Chinese.. didn't notice any significant differences, maybe they did something to the rifling..which would be really hard to see it physically. -
Agreed, the HK fire select switch is still the best.
About the SAR-21 laser, what is that used for? I can only imagine it being slightly more helpful in CQB. Anywhere else, wouldn't the laser give away the shooter's position instead?
Is there any word about some combat armor/suit we're developing? I remember hearing something about that before, can't remember exactly where. I think it was Straits Times. -
Yup. Though the M16 one is quite good ergonomically overall, the switching from semi to auto or vice versa is a bit awkward, whereas the HK type is very easy to operate.Originally posted by Shotgun:Agreed, the HK fire select switch is still the best.
About the SAR-21 laser, what is that used for? I can only imagine it being slightly more helpful in CQB. Anywhere else, wouldn't the laser give away the shooter's position instead?
Is there any word about some combat armor/suit we're developing? I remember hearing something about that before, can't remember exactly where. I think it was Straits Times.
Regarding the SAR21 laser, I was thinking about the same thing too. I just can't think of that many situations where the benefits of using the laser would outweigh the disadvantages, especially in a jungle. It could be that the SAF realized that should the fighting spill into Singapore, most of the combat would be done in an urban area, since Singapore is so built-up, rather than in the jungles. Other than that, I don't see how using the laser would be very beneficial.
I don't know about the combar armour though
[This message has been edited by chamenos (edited 01 June 2002).] -
Just a question. Does SAF include night-vision/ low light vision equipment as a standard equipment? Or only elite formations recieve it?
-
not unless you count the L-shaped flashlight with the red lensOriginally posted by Shotgun:Just a question. Does SAF include night-vision/ low light vision equipment as a standard equipment? Or only elite formations recieve it? it would be too costly i think, both in the initial purchase and the subsequent maintenance. -
kaoz.... in the night jungle, SAF troops are basically marching blind? Some jungle terrain are already quite dangerous, with holes in the ground and all sorts of funny drops here and there... Not to mention spotting enemies.
-
Haven't you guys surf NS? Only BMT greenies and some Conversion Course Trainees use the L-torch at night cos it'll boost their weaker minds by seeing things clearer. Cos once you're in unit, you'll be more or less accustom to the night in the jungle. You'll know... (unless you become a clerk or non combat vocation)
NVGs are so common in the SAF and soon, it'll be every soldier's standard issue. I won't be suprise if one cost only $50.
No one will turn on laser 24/7, it's a trigger. if you see the red dot appear, most probably you're dead even before you can react and the red dot is gone again. Also, there's such thing as "invisible" laser....not new tech too........nuff said....
Go read the "Singapore War" archives in this forum for more info..
[This message has been edited by Silenthunter (edited 03 June 2002).] -
I thought I saw the G36 carried by the police STAR team during the National Day celebrations mobile displays. Can anybody confirm this?
-
well, I saw it too. I always think that their standard issue is the HK MP5 series.
-
i didn't know the NVGs were so cheap...are the ones that the SAF use locally produced or purchased from other countries? btw does anyone know what's the price of a new M16, as compared to a new SAR21?
No one will turn on laser 24/7, it's a trigger. if you see the red dot appear, most probably you're dead even before you can react and the red dot is gone again. Also, there's such thing as "invisible" laser....not new tech too........nuff said....
yes, but the guy whom you just shot may have buddies around him that may have seen the laser, which would give away your position. also the laser won't be used if you've already identified a target....its used more for CQB scenarios where you don't use the scope and use the laser instead to engage your targets. the invisible lasers would only be invisible if the enemy soldiers don't also have the infra red goggles to see it...if they do then it would stand out even more than a normal laser.I thought I saw the G36 carried by the police STAR team during the National Day celebrations mobile displays. Can anybody confirm this?
how come they can't use use the SAR21? its not as if the G36 is so advanced right? its also quite long...though it doesn't look that way. its actually longer than an H&K G3.
btw, in reply to an earlier post, one of the companies i know off that are marketing the SAR21 in the USA is www.classthreesupply.com they're also selling the Ultimax100.
chao ang mor using an SAR21:
[This message has been edited by chamenos (edited 04 June 2002).] -
aiyoh...better update guys...now SAF already issuing out the FN P90 to Commando units... it was shown during NDP 2002 ...when the commandos rappelled down from the ropes... Straits Time picture show that the P90 comes with a three-pt sling and gemtech suppressor....wah kaoz... p90...likely to be use for CQB ...and urban combat... with the impressive 5.7mm caliber...kelvar vests also won't offer much protection then..so what's the next weapon..?
anyway, i'm not too comfortable using sar-21 for cqb...when u got to change mag, time taken is longer than usual..compare it with a m4 carbine..i think u change faster on a carbine...
one Shot..one kill..
-
the suit is still very much in the future. You probably saw it in pioneer if you have it, cos thats where i saw it in. should also go look at the US version, look like some space cadet rather than infantry...Originally posted by Shotgun:Agreed, the HK fire select switch is still the best.
About the SAR-21 laser, what is that used for? I can only imagine it being slightly more helpful in CQB. Anywhere else, wouldn't the laser give away the shooter's position instead?
Is there any word about some combat armor/suit we're developing? I remember hearing something about that before, can't remember exactly where. I think it was Straits Times. -
if i'm not wrong...the IR aiming system comes in two modes..one which is pure IR which u can see with your eyes the other one can be seen using NVG. not much use either.. like the army 21 advertisement...u see one section of soldiers in the river/swamp..with the laser on...during smoky conditions...its really misguiding...giving your self away for enemy to spot your positions...
some US Swat teams used a diff version of the sar-21...it comes with a Picantinny rail, so u can remove the built in scope and add on a 20 mm rail red dot sight..(e.g aimpoint or trigicon aCOG reflex) ... i think that one better for CQB and FIBUA. -
the SA80 is too sucky...look stylish..but can't last long... chamber jammed v. often...can't use in harsh conditions...which was reported during the Royal Marines were issued with the new improved version LA85 A2... still got problem...
butt stock melts when comes into contact with insect repellent...
magazine gets jammed up easily also...falls out of the magazine chamber without notice...
the british army is going to replace it soon with the G36...i find it strange then..perhaps Heckler & Koch wants them to buy the G36..that's why give them lousy quality and design when manufacturing the SA80 for the british army...who knows...no offence here.. -
Came across your discussions. Couldn't resist replying. Let's compare the SAR21, G36 and M16 in terms of length, safety, optics and versatility.
Length: SAR21 is the shortest, but remember, the G36 has a folding stock, that takes about 20cm out of the length. So, the length is almost the same. No difference. Score: 1-1-0
Safety: The SAR21 uses a push button safety fitted to the top of the front guard. The G36 and M16 both employs a thumb safet/selector switch. The G36's switch is ambidextrous.
I've tried the SAR21 before. I cocked the weapon, and had to use my left hand to push the safety on. When I tried to push the safety button off with my right hand index finger with the weapon shouldered, I had some difficulty getting enough leverage. I had to tilt the gun to one side to gain more leverage to push the button in. I prefer the old M16 in this respect. Easier to switch the safety off with a simple swipe of the thumb. The same should go for the G36.
Pushing the safety in, then moving the index finger to the trigger is two distinct motion. Much easier with a thumb switch.
Also, to switch the SAR21 to auto, you had to move your left hand from the front guard to behind the magazine to push in the selector button. Again, switching the M16 and G36 to auto is much easier. Another swipe of the thumb.
Furthermore, it is impossible to switch the SAR21 to safe with just the firing hand. You had to use your left hand. What if your left hand is occupied?
Score: 0-1-1
Optics: Much had been made about the SAR21's optics. I've tried the optics before. It is a black circle. When the gun is cocked, a tiny black dot appears in the centre of the circle.
I actually prefer the M16's iron sights. The contrast between the front sight is better than the black circle. It was also easier to acquire the M16 front sight for snap sighting. Perhaps it is because when I tried the SAR21, I was in a shed, and the target was covered by the shadow of a camo net. Perhaps it is because of my eyesight, but this goes to show the SAR21 optics is not ALWAYS better.
The G36 uses a red dot reflex sight. I tried an Aimpoint, a Tasco version, an ACOG reflex sight and a Bushnell Holosight before. They are great. It was easy to pick out the red electronic dot against any background, and very easy to acquire for snap sighting. I tried a Bushnell Holosight equipped SAR21-P. It's definitely better.
Furthermore, the German Army version had a 3.5x shooting scope fitted to ALL their G36, under the red dot reflex sight.
Score: 0-2-1
Versatility: One thing I definitely like about the M16 is it's versatility. You can fit a 4x scope by simply putting it on the carrying handle. You can fit an M203 by removing the front guard. Not so simple with the vanilla SAR21.
With the G36, there is also a hole in the carrying handle to which you can fit other systems. And let's not forget, with the German version, this is a moot point as the 3.5x scope is standard. It also has its own version of a 40mm grenade launcher.
Much has been said about the laser point incorporated into the front guard. But you can clamp it to the barrels of the M16 and G36 too. So, no real advantage.
When it comes to true versatility, nothing beats the M4A1 carbine fitted with a KAC Modular Weapon System. This carbine is fitted with P-rails on the top, bottom and both sides of the hand guard. You can fit laser sights, flashlights, grenade launcher, shot-gun, fore-grip, fore-grip/flash-light/laser-pointer combination, together with a whole variety of sights on the p-rail over the receiver of the carbine. Now, how's that for versatility?
Score: 0-1-2
So, what is the final score:
SAR21:1 G36:5 M16:6
Let's keep our M16's but fit it with the KAC Modular Weapon System. : ) -
Well, I don't know if this is fair to the SAR 21, because I doubt anyone have handled and shot a G36 before.
I have shot the SAR 21 before on 2 occasions, and I find it very comfortable for me, except for the selector switch, which require a bit of work. As for the scope, I don't know if its just me... but I feel its very "minimal", especially since it is actually a scope and not a reflex sight. I have shot a CDO MP5 with reflex sight (forgot the type), a simple red dot, but it is much easier to do snap shots accurately with it, but then again to be fair, the requirements of those 2 weapons are entirely different.
I also understand that the magazine for the SAR 21 cannot be used on the M16 and vice versa, that is definitely a minus point if the SAF intends to maintain both weapons. -
Versatility: One thing I definitely like about the M16 is it's versatility. You can fit a 4x scope by simply putting it on the carrying handle. You can fit an M203 by removing the front guard. Not so simple with the vanilla SAR21.
i don't really agree with this point u brought up...
true... the m-16 can accommodate a scope, a grenade launcher and LADs, but under the SAF ORBAT, only one man out of 7 gets the 4x scope and 2 others get the M203... its not as if we make it such that everybody gets everything... its not the point at all.
with the SAR 21, everybody gets their scope, not just the sharp-shooter and it can be fitted with an M203 as well (though not everyone gets it nor wants it ).
i like the build in LAD of the SAR21... it beats having an add-on module fitted to the barrel of your weapon! that is the most absurd piece of equipment i've ever seen! it shifts the C.G of the weapon slightly forward while the cable linking it to the trigger button is ALWAYS getting in the way! the SAR21 has been built with all these features in mind and even though it weighs more, it has a more balanced feel. -
I saw in a Discovery Channel Program that a british officer who take part in the falkland war said that the fighting was so fierce that he uses his fist and helmet to beat the enemy soldier. And in Vietnam war a US officer said when he run out of bullet. He jump on top of the North Vietnamese soldier uses his fist and punched his face.Originally posted by wombat:Hmm...but guess got to make every bullet count. Cause I don't think we can go bayonet fighting with the SAR21. -
Fair enough. I guess no one will actually be slapping an M203 to his M16 on a whim. I can also see your point about the orbat. I guess for new recruits, it would be easier to train them to use the SAR21. So for the ordinary GI Joe, it wouldn't make much of a difference. But wouldn't it be great if everyone got a 3.5x scope to go with his rifle? And wouldn't it be nice to know that you can fit an M203, and the other accessories, to a standard rifle in the field if necessary without having any specialist help or waiting for that M203 eqiupped SAR21 to arrive?
Personally, I'm not sure how useful the LAD really is. Have anyone noticed that the Israelis really don't seem to be issuing that stuff to very soldier, and they certainly has more operationally experience than anyone else. What they DO do, is issue as many reflex sights as they could to their troops, especially those involved in occupational duties.
Another thing: has anyone noticed that almost every Israeli soldier carries an M16 or its derivative nowadays? This is despite the fact that IMI produces the Galil.
Yet another point: Brit SF troopers really can't seem to be bothered with the SA80, but uses the M16 instead, despite all the other alternatives, like the Steyr AUG.
Yet, yet another point: the American SF troops (even their airborne troops) in Afghanistan still uses the M4 or the M16. And if you look at the photos, they are fitted with all the cool accessories like ACOG sights, LAD designators (they don't seem to be bothered about the CG being off balance), etc.
A lesson here perhaps? : ) -
The Israelis use the M16 series because they receive American aid and funding to be buy these. Its cheaper for them.Originally posted by philip72:...............
Another thing: has anyone noticed that almost every Israeli soldier carries an M16 or its derivative nowadays? This is despite the fact that IMI produces the Galil.
That might change however, if the Tavor 21 is succesfully introduced.
Israeli defense forums -
http://www.waronline.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0