The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Gaz wrote:I still wonder what the MoD did with all the L98A1s when they were withdrawn from the cadets. I know most of them would have needed rebarrelling before you even considered doing anything else, twenty years of neglect at the hands of inept teenagers armed with pullthroughs would have destroyed the crowns and throats.

i heard once that they ship the ones the CBA to sort out to our friends in Africa


its all about what other people dont have with me .... thats why my car is an mg6

Blackknight1974 wrote:so you are really paying the rarity/privilege, rather than the quality of the rifle.

Paying for memories for me. It was the first full bore rifle that I ever fired. The older cadets lamented the loss of the SLR but to me it was great. I know we used to break them regularly but I really enjoyed firing it when I was 14 or so.

Btw, re cleaning, my hazy recollection was that we just used oil, I can't remember solvents being used so there must be a fair bit of muck in the barrels. We never took the bolts down either. I'm assuming that the armourers did all of that but you know what assuming does!

Charlotte the flyer wrote:Btw, re cleaning, my hazy recollection was that we just used oil, I can't remember solvents being used so there must be a fair bit of muck in the barrels. We never took the bolts down either. I'm assuming that the armourers did all of that but you know what assuming does!

Cadets were prohibited from stripping the bolt carrier assembly because it's possible to reassemble it without the cam stud, meaning there would be nothing to ensure the bolt was locked closed upon firing. Apparently the little darlings couldn't be trusted to reinsert that, but could be trusted to drop items into the bore and leave a potential obstruction in there.

Gaz wrote:Apparently the little darlings couldn't be trusted to reinsert that, but could be trusted to drop items into the bore and leave a potential obstruction in there.

Every upper is inspected by the cadet supervisor before reassembly, so unless someone is doing their job wrongly that'll never happen.

Same with any shooter, doing it wrong can have consequences, we all rely on everyone, even you, taking care with their jobs - the cadets I have had the privileged to shoot with have had impeccable drills and can show some sports shooters the meaning of diligence with all aspects of shooting.

Mattnall wrote:

Gaz wrote:Apparently the little darlings couldn't be trusted to reinsert that, but could be trusted to drop items into the bore and leave a potential obstruction in there.

Every upper is inspected by the cadet supervisor before reassembly, so unless someone is doing their job wrongly that'll never happen.

Same with any shooter, doing it wrong can have consequences, we all rely on everyone, even you, taking care with their jobs - the cadets I have had the privileged to shoot with have had impeccable drills and can show some sports shooters the meaning of diligence with all aspects of shooting.

We never had any issues with our ATC cadets stripping and cleaning SLRs when I was an instructor.

The definitive answer to this is on page 213 of Steve Raw's book, in a picture of the Enfield Competition Rifle, basically an LSW with the gas block blanked off, single shot, fitted with a modified Cadet cocking assembly. You can see clearly from the photo that this rifle is also modified exactly the same as mine and the other two mentioned above.......and Peter confirms this rifle was obtained new, directly from the ROF Enfield factory modified in this way, which concretes the provenance of these modifications. [David TS]

Vince Bottomley (aka 'The Gun Pimp' here) was loaned one of these and reviewed it in the old 'Target Sports' magazine getting on for 20 years ago now. (Our man Vinnie was a Practical Rifle competitor back in these days before becoming a Bench Rest and F-Class guru.) I suspect that would be post-ROF Enfield and by then BAe Nottingham, but Vince can no doubt say which if he reads this. The guideline price quoted was really attractive compared to SGC Speedmasters, and I remember thinking, I'll have one of them when they appear - but, of course they never did! Whether that was due to truly commercial reasons, or whether a result of political pressure is debatable, although I know whcih side my money would be on.

PS I also have Steve Raw's book. Fascinating reading, and really depressing too! When I mention it to people, nobody I speak to has even heard of this book never mind read it. As our former colonial cousins across the Atlantic say, an elephant is a mouse designed by a government committee.

Surely as with all the AR/ AK builds, I assume someone could build a civilian version commercially if they so wished?

I'm thinking H&K hold the copyright for the design. Having said that, they haven't stopped all the airsoft copies popping up. I'd jump at an SA80 straight-pull for a reasonable price.

Gaz wrote:I'm thinking H&K hold the copyright for the design. Having said that, they haven't stopped all the airsoft copies popping up. I'd jump at an SA80 straight-pull for a reasonable price.

I know H&K started suing some airsoft companies but it was about markings on the guns rather than the actual shape of the gun.
a lot of airsoft companies don't seek any permission from the companies that make the real guns. My airsoft SA80 does have "HK A2" on it or something simallar. also didn't H&K do a straightpull g36 a few years ago? I suspect they would probably give permission if they got profit of it.

JS569 wrote:Surely as with all the AR/ AK builds, I assume someone could build a civilian version commercially if they so wished?

Absolutely......but, setting up the tooling for the sheet metal stampings would be eye wateringly expensive, and wouldn't warrant the limited numbers that would sell. It would be a complicated rifle to build from scratch, and I would say it would be impossible to ever make a profit on one in the low volumes that would result.