Why did SAF switch from SAR21 from M16
-
Ok, so perhaps SAF wanted to have a local capability to built rifles. But why switch over to the bullpup design when the current M16 design has been so successful?
Wouldn't it have been a better idea to improve the M16, kinda like what HK did?
And does anyone else think the HK416 look suspiciously like a heavily modified M16? -
Many reasons..Originally posted by insouciant:Ok, so perhaps SAF wanted to have a local capability to built rifles. But why switch over to the bullpup design when the current M16 design has been so successful?
Wouldn't it have been a better idea to improve the M16, kinda like what HK did?
And does anyone else think the HK416 look suspiciously like a heavily modified M16?
1) M16 was made under license. Meaning singapore can only make the m16 according to original specs and further modifications are not allowed as part of the license agreement despite if the modfication is actually an improvement.
This severely limits singpaore's flexibility.
2) Changing nature of warfare. SAR 21 is designed so that our fingers are not lmited by trigger guard. This makes it easier to handle if we are wearing MOPP 4, etc.
3) M16 are running near (with some beyond) their useful life.
4) SAR 21 designed with the typical Asian user in mind. So butt stock's shorter, etc.
5) Shorter weapon, easier to wield.
6) Singapore can finally make a rifle where they have full rights on, meaning can modify as they please. I personally konw there are 2 improvements on SAR 21 though I believe there are many that i dunno about. -
what improvement?
-
1) The emergency sights are changed for the later models.Originally posted by relackjack:what improvement?
2) The Polymer plastic was changed from Durathane to Zytel. Because earlier ones tend to be slippery after some use.
This are the 2 that i know of. Anybody else know anything more? -
another reason is that spore is trying to develop its defence industry. it is trying to build up its capabilities in weapon design and manufacturing so that besides using them for its own defence, it could also sell to other countries. so far, it is not very successful but i guess it takes time........
-
oh when did they change the emergency sight? what is it like now?
-
Rubber seals improved on the 1.5x scope, and better optical quality.Originally posted by Ponders:1) The emergency sights are changed for the later models.
2) The Polymer plastic was changed from Durathane to Zytel. Because earlier ones then to be slippery after some use.
This are the 2 that i know of. Anybody else know anything more?
Not sure but I believe there are users abroad who have adapted a M16 magazine to the SAR21. -
Emergency sights are a post now rather than a fin looking thing.
Laserlords... if i am not wrong, when STL advertised SAR21 back in 1999, they say M16 and SAR21 mags are interchangeable. Something i have not seen.
Also there were plans for M203 attached to SAR21. This i haven't seen for Unit's use yet.
Dunno what's taking them so long. -
i have seen some unit used the SAR21 w/M203 attached. if i not wrong one of them is CDOsOriginally posted by Ponders:Emergency sights are a post now rather than a fin looking thing.
Laserlords... if i am not wrong, when STL advertised SAR21 back in 1999, they say M16 and SAR21 mags are interchangeable. Something i have not seen.
Also there were plans for M203 attached to SAR21. This i haven't seen for Unit's use yet.
Dunno what's taking them so long. -
Thought that there are only 2 SAR21 w/M203 combos so far?Heard from an ST Engineer during the last Army Open House.
-
I really think they need to re-look into the weight issue of the SAR-21/M203.
Perhaps a lighter weight solution. Cos already the Sar-21 weigh like bricks, cant imagine a loaded Sar-21M203 FULLY loaded. -
carry a standalone M203.Originally posted by Shotgun:I really think they need to re-look into the weight issue of the SAR-21/M203.
Perhaps a lighter weight solution. Cos already the Sar-21 weigh like bricks, cant imagine a loaded Sar-21M203 FULLY loaded. -
The ACMS SAR 21 weighed an insane weight when it was first trialed.Originally posted by Shotgun:I really think they need to re-look into the weight issue of the SAR-21/M203.
Perhaps a lighter weight solution. Cos already the Sar-21 weigh like bricks, cant imagine a loaded Sar-21M203 FULLY loaded. -
Yes, yes, we all know about the license limitations and Singapore building up its defense industry.
The question is design. Why build a rifle that is heavier, is harder to swop mags, etc, etc. Especially as you pointed out this rifle is supposed to be better for Asians. I would think weight would be major issue here. -
To really know the answer, you gotta ask STK.Originally posted by insouciant:Yes, yes, we all know about the license limitations and Singapore building up its defense industry.
The question is design. Why build a rifle that is heavier, is harder to swop mags, etc, etc. Especially as you pointed out this rifle is supposed to be better for Asians. I would think weight would be major issue here.
BUt to me, even thought SAR 21 is heavier, it is easier to carry and more balanced than M16. You can comfortably hold SAR21 with one hand on the grip but you can't do that with M16.
Swopping mag, i just think the lever is too far back to change mag easily.
I think they choose bullpup so as to come up with a shorter rifle for fibua usage. -
Maybe the design team (or rather the guy in charge of the project) fell victim to fashion. Bull pups were all the rage years ago.
Of course, now, bull pups seem to be passe.
The SAR 21 is certainly more comfortable to fire, but I do not think it is more comfortable to carry around. -
Singapore has always emphasized the importance of logistics, that's why we try to standardize a lot of things, now even all our howitzer calibres are standardized to 155 ...
but what about our small arms ? .... with the old SAW/M16/M203 mix, magazines were all interchangeable ... with this switch to SAR21, this advantage is negated,
so now we have a rifle that uses proprietary magazines, with no bayonet mounts, weights a brick and with ejector port fixed only to the right side (how are the lefties dealing with the SAR21 ? )
the SAF say they are not captive customers of ST ... but in this case it's a bit hard to see that .....
-
I still think the AR variants are better rifles in certain areas, but it didnt hurt to produce our own too.Originally posted by Fatum:Singapore has always emphasized the importance of logistics, that's why we try to standardize a lot of things, now even all our howitzer calibres are standardized to 155 ...
but what about our small arms ? .... with the old SAW/M16/M203 mix, magazines were all interchangeable ... with this switch to SAR21, this advantage is negated,
so now we have a rifle that uses proprietary magazines, with no bayonet mounts, weights a brick and with ejector port fixed only to the right side (how are the lefties dealing with the SAR21 ? )
the SAF say they are not captive customers of ST ... but in this case it's a bit hard to see that ..... -
Correct me if i am wrong.
in 1999, STK had a advertisement blitz to market their SAR21.
At the time, their "GRAND" plan in the ads was.... (which till now i haven't seen it realised)...
1) SAR21/M203 variants to replace M16/M203 for operational use.
2) 1.5x & 3x magnification variants. 3x supposed to replace M16 SS but have yet to see it happen.
3) interchangeable magazines.
4) left and right eject pods.
let me see if i still can find the PDF and video ad in my computer... will link it here if i find it. -
Thank you! Now we are on topic!
Yes, I guess the answer will ultimately lie with STK.
But yeah, I have to if the design was not influence by the "fashion" of that day. Yeah I like the SAR21 in a FIBUA fight too for it's short length, but the weight...
The Carbine is ideal I think. Perhaps they had look for scope with M4 like design, it would have worked out better.
Don't they ask lefties to shoot right handed too? But I guess between the scope at the LAD, it would be easier to aim. -
I can see the logic of having bullpups over traditional battle rifle designs. But the weight is just ... not viable.
One thing I appreciate is that the SAR-21 is a safe rifle. But that additiona kevlar plate is really contributing to most of the weight isn't it?
The picatinny version of the Sar-21 is much lighter, why dont we adopt those instead? U can attach according to requirements, eg, if u are just a rifleman, a 1.5 scope or reflex sight etc. Then after that u can have a slightly lighter version of the picatinny sar-21 and M203. -
SAF should also replace the SAW....
so long, magazine always jam, bi-pod always spoil, barrel easily rusty, butt loose
-
to what? bullpup SAW?Originally posted by ToffeeClub1929:SAF should also replace the SAW....
so long, magazine always jam, bi-pod always spoil, barrel easily rusty, butt loose
but yah, i think SAW is a big successful failure for them.
It succeded by making world's lightest and negligible recoil SAW. So much so US forces were considering it but adopted M249 instead.
Failure was its reliability. It's a good weapon, just that it just needs alot of attention.
But phasing out the 100 round magazine was really negating the need for a SAW . -
I thought ST are toying with the idea of having a SAR version of SAW?
anyway, the response from some US Marines on our SAW MK2 was that it resembled a Tommy gun
-
if thats the case, i rather SAF first try out the Chinese version... qbz95 version of saw.