Ian McCollum looks at the L2A1.

[bladeracer]

https://youtu.be/y8cm_SmNE08

[Tiger650]

Cheers BR
I well recall the gun I burned through much taxpayer supplied ammo with one, do not recall any feed issues with the 30rd mag and we did not use 20rd mags.
Also the one time burned thumb, when new to the gun and familiar with the SLR I got it hot and wrapped my hand around the non existent hand guard, ouch.
A little heavy to carry but shot well off hand and awesome off the bipod.
Adjust the gas regulator up as the gun got hot/fouled and no stoppages with sustained high rates of fire, I would call it a light machine gun.

[bigrich]

Good old “gun Jesus “ . I love his work

[wanneroo]

Pretty cool gun, will probably sell for $20K plus at Morphy's.

I've shot a 1972 Lithgow L1A1 that had been converted to a machine gun here in the USA. I think the FAL was probably one of the best battle rifles of it's generation.

I'd like to own a Lithgow FAL but they command high prices here in the USA and don't come up for sale much.

[bigrich]

Pretty cool gun, will probably sell for $20K plus at Morphy's.

I've shot a 1972 Lithgow L1A1 that had been converted to a machine gun here in the USA. I think the FAL was probably one of the best battle rifles of it's generation.

I'd like to own a Lithgow FAL but they command high prices here in the USA and don't come up for sale much.

I read a article that the FAL was a finalist for the US military, but dodgy generals and politicians did some behind closed door deals
Woulda been a better thing than a AR in my opinion
A mates stepdad is a vet, and he reckons he had a SLR cut down by mates in the engineers, apparently the gas adjuster compensated for the shortened barrel. So he said anyway

[Blr243]

Many decades ago I saw an slr advertised in the paper version of the trading post real cheap. It might have been 2 or 300 bucks. It’s not likely I drove at the speed limit to pick it up. I was very excited and thought they were worth more like 2500 bucks. Unfortunately When I arrived at the correct address the house was full of derilict bikies and it was just a semi auto Fn 8 mm Mauser But I bought it anyway ..... Probably a good thing that it was not a real slr. A couple of years later if I hand to hand in a slr in the 96 buy back I would have cried for a month ...... does any one remember, we’re the any slrs circulating in the civilian market ?

[bigrich]

Many decades ago I saw an slr advertised in the paper version of the trading post real cheap. It might have been 2 or 300 bucks. It’s not likely I drove at the speed limit to pick it up. I was very excited and thought they were worth more like 2500 bucks. Unfortunately When I arrived at the correct address the house was full of derilict bikies and it was just a semi auto Fn 8 mm Mauser But I bought it anyway ..... Probably a good thing that it was not a real slr. A couple of years later if I hand to hand in a slr in the 96 buy back I would have cried for a month ...... does any one remember, we’re the any slrs circulating in the civilian market ?

oh yes, there were civillian owned SLR's around . talking to some fellas they made money selling back some rifles . i'd like a civillian spec BAR browning . they were made up to 270 and 30-06 . i wouldn't think it'd be a issue converting one to 35 whelen . now that'd be a sambar rifle hey a semi auto 35 whelen

[disco stu]

Interesting. Never heard of this version myself. Played with the L1A1 plenty when I was young in cadets.

Terry O'Farrell mentions in his book using one of these with cut down barrel. Apparently was commonly mistaken for .50. Also read another book recently of an Australian officer who was with some crazy US unconventional group. Was very glad he carried SLR rather than the M16 when looking around at bunches of guys trying to clean their rifle in the middle of a firefight.

Book I read on sniping actually said the 7.62 projectile would punch straight through a body (FMJ being military rounds), where the 5.56 would tumble creating more damage. Not sue of the accuracy of this, but it was surprising

[Blr243]

My father said that when he shot the enemy With 556 in Vietnam , sometimes they would continue to shoot back at you until they died , but when he shot them with 762 u knew they were dead and did not have to worry about that particular soldier any more

[on_one_wheel]

Looks neat, might get one at tax time ... oh I forgot I live in Australia.

I don't know why, but I like watching this fella review firearms, he's a pretty cool old cat.
https://youtu.be/lXh4Qhmt3xA

[Bills Shed]

Cheers BR
I well recall the gun I burned through much taxpayer supplied ammo with one, do not recall any feed issues with the 30rd mag and we did not use 20rd mags.
Also the one time burned thumb, when new to the gun and familiar with the SLR I got it hot and wrapped my hand around the non existent hand guard, ouch.
A little heavy to carry but shot well off hand and awesome off the bipod.
Adjust the gas regulator up as the gun got hot/fouled and no stoppages with sustained high rates of fire, I would call it a light machine gun.

Yep I used these, way back when. We did not have stripper clips and loading those 30rd mags made for some sore thumbs. Never had any feed issues with the 30 red mags. Looking at the background of the video and the gear against the wall reminded me of my gun plumber days walking into an mechanised infantry armoury. 50 cal, M60, I think there was a MG3 in there etc. We would spend a week going through a company armoury inspecting every one of the weapons. The smell of gun oil and the wood of the SLR, L1A1 was glorious.

Bill

[bladeracer]

oh yes, there were civillian owned SLR's around . talking to some fellas they made money selling back some rifles . i'd like a civillian spec BAR browning . they were made up to 270 and 30-06 . i wouldn't think it'd be a issue converting one to 35 whelen . now that'd be a sambar rifle hey a semi auto 35 whelen

Wow! I don't fancy lugging a BAR around in sambar country

[bigrich]

oh yes, there were civillian owned SLR's around . talking to some fellas they made money selling back some rifles . i'd like a civillian spec BAR browning . they were made up to 270 and 30-06 . i wouldn't think it'd be a issue converting one to 35 whelen . now that'd be a sambar rifle hey a semi auto 35 whelen

Wow! I don't fancy lugging a BAR around in sambar country

the mark two civillian sporter weighs 8 pounds . i'm not talking about the military version with 20 round mag . a little bit of weight would help with a semi auto 35 whelen
besides that , my name isn't "bigrich" for nuthin' . id take a bren gun pig hunting if i was allowed

[in2anity]

It’s a bit before my time, but the boys reminisce about the SLR pre-Howard. I’ve heard a few say the SLR would tend to let you down a bit on the 300m prone mound, when it came to brute accuracy. A solid choice for the other positions, however. Ticks a lot of boxes.

[Tiger650]

It’s a bit before my time, but the boys reminisce about the SLR pre-Howard. I’ve heard a few say the SLR would tend to let you down a bit on the 300m prone mound, when it came to brute accuracy. A solid choice for the other positions, however. Ticks a lot of boxes.

As I recall the SLR was rated sufficiently accurate to 300 yds but the AR [L1A2] to 500, the latter had a different rear sight with increased elevation available.
I suspect the heavier barrel had little to do with that but rather the AR would shoot a 12" group at 500 yds off the bipod.
Not an impressive group until you consider all the bullets arrive pretty much at once LOL.

Both the rifle and the gun had a relatively large rear sight aperture and short sight radius, very quick to aim and also recover sight picture following recoil.
I have a Rossi .357" lever rifle and thinking of a ghost ring in place of the useless safety and front sight blade in place of the std rear sight.
Shorter sight radius than the SLR but also not a 300 yd rifle.

[wanneroo]

I read a article that the FAL was a finalist for the US military, but dodgy generals and politicians did some behind closed door deals
Woulda been a better thing than a AR in my opinion
A mates stepdad is a vet, and he reckons he had a SLR cut down by mates in the engineers, apparently the gas adjuster compensated for the shortened barrel. So he said anyway

Yes the FAL would have been better than the M-14, no question and as I recall actually beat it out in trials. There were even FALs made here domestically by Harrington and Richardson in the 1950s. The US Marine Corps at Quantico still has hundreds of FALs used in the trials from various manufacturers in their vaults.

I've shot a shorter barrel FAL full auto and it's fun.

I don't have an FAL yet but recently obtained a bunch of Rhodesian FAL magazines that need some love and will clean those up for my Youtube channel. Eventually hope to obtain a few FALs in time.

We have a domestic manufacturer here in the USA, DSA and they still make new ones as well as supply parts and guns overseas to countries like Brazil and South Africa that still use the platform. The gamekeepers in southern Africa still use the FAL as they outperform the AK in the bush against the poachers.

[wanneroo]

It’s a bit before my time, but the boys reminisce about the SLR pre-Howard. I’ve heard a few say the SLR would tend to let you down a bit on the 300m prone mound, when it came to brute accuracy. A solid choice for the other positions, however. Ticks a lot of boxes.

The FAL is not the most accurate of the 7.62 battle rifles. It's why it never really got serious adoption of a designated marksman rifle or built into a sniper rifle as did the M-14, G3 and AR-10 platform rifles. I know there is an explanation for why that is the case but I can't remember it.

[in2anity]

It'd sure be cool to shoot a match with the HB L2A1 though. I bet it would generally hold a better group. I wonder if that handguard had much flex in it (when folded flat)?

[wanneroo]

It'd sure be cool to shoot a match with the HB L2A1 though. I bet it would generally hold a better group. I wonder if that handguard had much flex in it (when folded flat)?

Probably would be better with that barrel as the regular barrel has quite a bit of barrel whip to it.

[in2anity]

Probably would be better with that barrel as the regular barrel has quite a bit of barrel whip to it.

As do most as-issued, run-of-the-mill service rifles

[Download]

Pretty cool gun, will probably sell for $20K plus at Morphy's.

I've shot a 1972 Lithgow L1A1 that had been converted to a machine gun here in the USA. I think the FAL was probably one of the best battle rifles of it's generation.

I'd like to own a Lithgow FAL but they command high prices here in the USA and don't come up for sale much.

I read a article that the FAL was a finalist for the US military, but dodgy generals and politicians did some behind closed door deals
Woulda been a better thing than a AR in my opinion
A mates stepdad is a vet, and he reckons he had a SLR cut down by mates in the engineers, apparently the gas adjuster compensated for the shortened barrel. So he said anyway

It wasn't the politicians, it was Springfield Armory and the US Ordnance Board that sabotaged the trials.

The M14 was their pet project, and then the FAL came along and swept aside their rifle in trials. So as a final "test" they demanded that both contenders prove they could function in arctic conditions. They specially modified their M14 for the trial, and put it up against a stock FAL, and naturally the FAL lost.

So they declared the M14 the winner, even though the specially modified arctic M14 was in no representative of the adopted rifle.

By the way, these are the same ****** that sabotaged the M16 when McNamara forced them to adopt it. They should have been put in front of the firing squad for that one given their actions killed something like 500 to 1000 US servicemen. McNamara got the last laugh though: he closed Springfield Armory.

[in2anity]

By the way, these are the same ****** that sabotaged the M16 when McNamara forced them to adopt it. They should have been put in front of the firing squad for that one given their actions killed something like 500 to 1000 US servicemen. McNamara got the last laugh though: he closed Springfield Armory.

I read a chilling autobiographical recount from a Vietnam vet a while back. He described his first firefight after his platoon switched to the original m16 (from the venerable m14). His fire team were out on the extremities of a flank with a support weapon, but the VC made a number of hits forcing the entire platoon to withdraw and regroup. This guy ultimately had to dash to form up again. As he ran past the line, he described seeing numerous friendly KIAs, all with cleaning rods sticking out of their muzzles, all attempting to clear stoppages after failure to extract. An absolute cluster f**k, that rollout was. Shameful.

[SCJ429]

It’s a bit before my time, but the boys reminisce about the SLR pre-Howard. I’ve heard a few say the SLR would tend to let you down a bit on the 300m prone mound, when it came to brute accuracy. A solid choice for the other positions, however. Ticks a lot of boxes.

You are not wrong about the poor accuracy, the front sight is on the barrel and the rear sight on the action. These rifle broke open and a well used one had plenty of slop at the pivot. I remember my Warrent Officer going on about how well he shot with his brand spanking SLR while diggers like me had one with about a million rounds though them. Complete pieces of rubbish, would much rather carry a Mauser 98.

The L2A1 was a heavy piece of junk and even the Pig was a better thing to shoot.

[bladeracer]

I've never fired the "SLR", but have a real soft spot for it. As an Army Cadet ('80-'83) in high school we drilled with deactivated vietnam-era L1A1 rifles every week. The chamber and the bolt face were welded up, and the "rat's tail" on the bolt was replaced with a piece of 10mm rod welded to the bolt so the bolt couldn't move. Otherwise they were fully functional rifles. We did get to shoot the M16 at the Army base at Northam though, they were like toys in comparison to the weight and size of the SLR..

[Tiger650]

It’s a bit before my time, but the boys reminisce about the SLR pre-Howard. I’ve heard a few say the SLR would tend to let you down a bit on the 300m prone mound, when it came to brute accuracy. A solid choice for the other positions, however. Ticks a lot of boxes.

You are not wrong about the poor accuracy, the front sight is on the barrel and the rear sight on the action. These rifle broke open and a well used one had plenty of slop at the pivot. I remember my Warrent Officer going on about how well he shot with his brand spanking SLR while diggers like me had one with about a million rounds though them. Complete pieces of rubbish, would much rather carry a Mauser 98.

The L2A1 was a heavy piece of junk and even the Pig was a better thing to shoot.

Good luck with the Mauser 98, that worked out well for the Wehrmacht.
The fore sight on the SLR is mounted just aft of the gas block not on the barrel.
Maybe your WO was more skilled, you having been been a cadet and all.
The F4 7.62 round used a 144gn projectile, a little light for the 7.62 but relatively fast at 2600 fps, good for Communist way out past 300 yds as indicated by the increased stated effective range of the AR [the "gun"]
I shot some very high mileage SLRs and they were good, RAEME armourers would check them with feeler gauges at rear of receiver and tag some out of tolerance, the tags got thrown away and the rifles still shot well.
Do not look at the rifle or the gun in isolation but consider the system, the SLR was designed by FN for European battle, 300 yds was too damn close given that Air and Arty [including mortars] should have thinned out the opposition prior.

[wanneroo]

I read a chilling autobiographical recount from a Vietnam vet a while back. He described his first firefight after his platoon switched to the original m16 (from the venerable m14). His fire team were out on the extremities of a flank with a support weapon, but the VC made a number of hits forcing the entire platoon to withdraw and regroup. This guy ultimately had to dash to form up again. As he ran past the line, he described seeing numerous friendly KIAs, all with cleaning rods sticking out of their muzzles, all attempting to clear stoppages after failure to extract. An absolute cluster f**k, that rollout was. Shameful.

That was all due to switching to a ball powder and also not issuing cleaning kits. The rifle ran fine with the original IMR powder. The Army later modified the rifles to the M16A1 configuration with a different buffer and a bolt close device but using the same crappy powder. Also they issued cleaning kits and instructions for cleaning the rifles.

No doubt troops lost their lives from these stupid decisions.

[SCJ429]

Good luck with the Mauser 98, that worked out well for the Wehrmacht.
The fore sight on the SLR is mounted just aft of the gas block not on the barrel.
Maybe your WO was more skilled, you having been been a cadet and all.
The F4 7.62 round used a 144gn projectile, a little light for the 7.62 but relatively fast at 2600 fps, good for Communist way out past 300 yds as indicated by the increased stated effective range of the AR [the "gun"]
I shot some very high mileage SLRs and they were good, RAEME armourers would check them with feeler gauges at rear of receiver and tag some out of tolerance, the tags got thrown away and the rifles still shot well.
Do not look at the rifle or the gun in isolation but consider the system, the SLR was designed by FN for European battle, 300 yds was too damn close given that Air and Arty [including mortars] should have thinned out the opposition prior.

There was considerable play in the SLR which you could see the change in the sight picture when you twisted the pistol grip away from the fore end. This is not conducive to accuracy. The WO2 may have had some skills but I was shooting 3P at the time and was graded AAA so I was no mug. If I had been given the pick of every rifle in the Armoury, I think I would have done better.

[SCJ429]

I read a chilling autobiographical recount from a Vietnam vet a while back. He described his first firefight after his platoon switched to the original m16 (from the venerable m14). His fire team were out on the extremities of a flank with a support weapon, but the VC made a number of hits forcing the entire platoon to withdraw and regroup. This guy ultimately had to dash to form up again. As he ran past the line, he described seeing numerous friendly KIAs, all with cleaning rods sticking out of their muzzles, all attempting to clear stoppages after failure to extract. An absolute cluster f**k, that rollout was. Shameful.

That was all due to switching to a ball powder and also not issuing cleaning kits. The rifle ran fine with the original IMR powder. The Army later modified the rifles to the M16A1 configuration with a different buffer and a bolt close device but using the same crappy powder. Also they issued cleaning kits and instructions for cleaning the rifles.

No doubt troops lost their lives from these stupid decisions.[/quote)

The Australian Amy told the troops that the M16 was a self cleaning rifle because of the chrome lined barrel but then of course told you to use the bolt assist if the round did not chamber properly.

The US Army had tons of ball powder left over from WW2 and they wanted to use it instead of the stick powder used in the original ammo. That contributed to the extraction issues which they tried to fix by slowing the rate of fire. Complete debarkle caused by bean counters trying to save money.

[Bills Shed]

Good luck with the Mauser 98, that worked out well for the Wehrmacht.
The fore sight on the SLR is mounted just aft of the gas block not on the barrel.
Maybe your WO was more skilled, you having been been a cadet and all.
The F4 7.62 round used a 144gn projectile, a little light for the 7.62 but relatively fast at 2600 fps, good for Communist way out past 300 yds as indicated by the increased stated effective range of the AR [the "gun"]
I shot some very high mileage SLRs and they were good, RAEME armourers would check them with feeler gauges at rear of receiver and tag some out of tolerance, the tags got thrown away and the rifles still shot well.
Do not look at the rifle or the gun in isolation but consider the system, the SLR was designed by FN for European battle, 300 yds was too damn close given that Air and Arty [including mortars] should have thinned out the opposition prior.

There was considerable play in the SLR which you could see the change in the sight picture when you twisted the pistol grip away from the fore end. This is not conducive to accuracy. The WO2 may have had some skills but I was shooting 3P at the time and was graded AAA so I was no mug. If I had been given the pick of every rifle in the Armoury, I think I would have done better.

You must have had the worst SLR in the nation for that to happen. I was a armourer and I would suggest that you may be exaggerating a little. They locked up pretty good and even when they failed the clearance test using a feeler gauge they would still shoot fine at 300. I spent a lot of time on the mound at 300. They were no MOA rifle but you could hit FIG11 targets ( man size) and put them all in the 5 ring with practice. I have a very big soft spot for those big bangers. As a young bloke they were a man cannon. It was a rifle well respected.

[in2anity]

All conditions considered, you need an honest 2 minute shooter (or better) to score a 50.+ for an application. Was the SLR an honest 2 minute rifle? I do agree you could clear the fig 11 perhaps even the fig 12 for a snap or rapid, but that’s a bit different to cleaning the 5 ring with some Vs during a slow fire... was the SLR up to that?