I always considered these two rifles, well not look alikes, but in the same category, and in the same genre of the same category. But, just wondering, since some of you on this very forum, have or are serving with one of these two rifles. I was wondering, if you had the choice, if each was set out on a table in front of you, which would you pick?

Also, I mean the entire Series,

Example: M 16 A1, A2,(not the AR 15, or M 4 Carbine Series, service rifles only) so on and so on. Same with the LA 85.

I do take attention that a rifle is as effective as the shooters ability's, so lets say we picture them on a firing tripod in a lab for the ballistics performance. But the reliability and field testing is up for any one who has done there homework on it, or just have been issued one.

But for those of you are serving or have served with one or the other,feel completely free to leave your comment, no matter how long on the weapons. And please, don't stray from these two fire arms to some other firearm, only if you are referring to a predecessor or a replacement, or rival design. Also, if you have been issued one in the military, feel free to speak your mind about what model you were issued.

(last note, if you HAVE served with either design, then vote twice, one for what rifle you have served with, or your choice)

M-16 because thats what I'm used to.

I've fired both rifles many times. I carried the M16A2, M4, M4A1, and the M16A4. As of right now I carry the Colt AR-15A3 (Law Enforcement/Civilian Rifle). I find the British SA80 (L-85) to be a okay rifle but I will list the pros and cons of it.

The SA80 is a bullpup rifle. Some bullpup rifles can be fired from either side but the SA80 cannot due to it's design. it does not allow the shooter to switch the ejection port like the Steyr AUG. It does have a shorter overall length then the AR family of rifles. The design in of itself has some issues. When it was first fielded and issued the stock had some chemical issues with the then standard bug spray that was given to all of the troops. the Bug Spray would melt the plastic stock parts. That issue has been resolved back in the 1980s. Also when it was first field it was such a piece of crap that Heckler and Koch of Germany had to step in and redesign many of the part and production tooling for the British Government.

As of now, it's an okay rifle but it's not the best in the world. The AR series of rifles is a very modular platform and also very ergonomic. Both left and right handed shooters can fire the AR series without a problem expect for the first batch of M16's and Colt SP1's (First Production of rifles without a forward assist and a shell deflector). More optics, calibers, sights, barrel lengths, suppressors, rail systems, stocks, weapon lights, magazines, slings, etc... are made for the AR series of rifle. For the SA80, what you see is what you get.

In the end, I believe that the British should adpot a new rifle design. Whether it is as simple as going with a AR-15 type rifle or with a completely new design like the Magpul Masada or a FN SCAR or some other rifle. As of right now to my knowledge, the British SAS use the standard Colt Canada AR-15 Series of rifles [Diemaco C7/C8]. Which is nothing more then an American AR-15 made in Canada and given a different nomenclature number and company brand.

My choice for my service rifle is the Ar-15 series of rifles.

SAS uses the AR-15 family of rifles instead of the SA80. I think that just about sums up everything.

I'd go with the L85A2, with the M16A3 a close second choice. M16A2/4 would be my third choice. The rest I wouldn't want unless I couldn't get anything else. Especially not the original L85. I'd sooner trust my life to a surplus Makarov than that thing.

Definitely M-16 series. I do not like bullpup scheme.

although it pains me to say this (lol), im going to have to go with the m-16 family.


im a firm believer in the bullpup layout (from my own experience with the AUG), but it think in this comparison, the m-16's battle record and modularity win out.

i think the brits will be looking at something similar to the g-36 before long


i will add this though, the l-85 SUSAT sight is excellent, and both families had MAJOR teething problems in the early days.

Well you have a point, the SA 80, has some accessories, like a L9 A1 optical sight, and maybe a laser pointer.

Both rifles did indeed have some teething problems.

But just for a better idea for accessories, here is a M 16 A2 I believe.



with all that on there it should weigh like a recoilless rifle.

Originally Posted by Sukio

Well you have a point, the SA 80, has some accessories, like a L9 A1 optical sight, and maybe a laser pointer.

Both rifles did indeed have some teething problems.

But just for a better idea for accessories, here is a M 16 A2 I believe.



with all that on there it should weigh like a recoilless rifle.

That's the M16A3/A4 package. The A3 is fully automayic and the A4 is Three-Shot Burst.

It's actually pretty light for a full size service rifle.

I have never seen a large package for the L 85, only a simple optical device. Nothing major like a thermal scope.