Would you consider the SA80 an HK product?

Barn Owl Lover

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 4, 2021
Posts
672
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Well, would you after HK rebuilt them to the standard that Enfield and Nottingham should've built them to in the first place? Or was it just a project that HK took over because the British Government offered them a ton of money to save the SA80 instead of buying something else?
 
HK (BAE Systems) only made improvements to the rifle--- never designed or manufactured. :)
And I will fondly remember the rifle as the L85A1. ;)

Tony
 
Well, HK have their logo all over parts of the rifle (to keep the A2 and A3 parts from getting mixed with the Enfield/Nottingham A1 parts), and the British MOD essentially consider HK to be the manufacturer of record now (HK even took over the RSAF Nottingham site to do the conversions and for maintenance of the L7A1 FN MAGs). Though as I attempted to point out, HK didn't build the rifles from scratch. Rather, they rebuilt them. According to Forgotten Weapons, HK replaced almost everything aside from the barrel, rear trunnion and the outer receiver body (which got replaced on the A3 upgraded rifles). And though this did bring a lot of prestige to HK for basically polishing a turd and making the SA80 into an effective rifle, it should be pointed out that HK didn't exactly work magic. In short, they just tuned up the SA80s to the production standard they should've originally been built to. And it was usually small details that trained gunsmiths and weapons designers would know that the original designers at Enfield (who often had little actual firearms experience) usually missed.

So HK is as far as the British are concerned are now the manufacturer or record. Though "re-manufacturer" or "refurbish-er" is probably a better title.
 
We trained on these at RM Poole when I went to the Royal Naval College as a student. The A1s were hideous, shot for shit, and were terribly unreliable, as well as a bitch to field strip and clean well.

When I asked my Royal Marine LT Col instructor how they could fight with these hideous weapons, he told me that when it mattered, they checked out either L1A1s (FAL) or Colt Commandos (they had bought a bunch for special ops missions.

HK upgrades were well received.
 
We trained on these at RM Poole when I went to the Royal Naval College as a student. The A1s were hideous, shot for shit, and were terribly unreliable, as well as a bitch to field strip and clean well.

When I asked my Royal Marine LT Col instructor how they could fight with these hideous weapons, he told me that when it mattered, they checked out either L1A1s (FAL) or Colt Commandos (they had bought a bunch for special ops missions.

HK upgrades were well received.

Interesting story--- I would take the L1A1 (albeit inch pattern) for certain. ;)

Tony
 
About the only thing that gets me as worked up as HKs is Colt's commando line up!! Have several retro builds done and two more in the works. 🤷🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🥴😂
 
As a Defense Logistician, I know there’s an easy way to resolve who is the current official manufacturer of record. Look up the NSN (NATO Stock Number) or UK Codification for the weapon and see what CAGE (Commercial and Government Entity) code is the last listed.

The NSN for the latest L85A3 is 1005-99-155-2342 and the CAGE is KE016. So the official manufacturer is:
NSAF Limited
Nottingham ng7 2td

The NSN for the L85A2 is 1005-99-250-9030. There are multiple CAGEs including DE&S SCM Support Services, H&K, and BAE Systems. BAE SYSTEMS is officially listed as the Design/Source Control Reference, so I’m thinking the L85A2 is still considered a BAE rifle, but BAE and H&K share the same CAGE.

So the L85A2 is considered either an H&K or a BAE weapon. BAE owning the engineering control, but H&K was part of BAE, so same same.

The recent L85A3 is probably being directed by the UK MoD.

Confused yet? Don’t be. I literally have meeting after meeting for F/A-18 and Chinook aircraft over the same engineering authority questions. It’s a good career.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top