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

It’s been reported that the SLR is going to be reintroduced in to British service!!!

https://veteranweb.asn.au/news/the-slr- ... tish-army/

That's clearly nonsense.

I am sure a lot of soldiers and veterans would like to see the return of a weapon in a more powerful and longer range calibre than 5.56mm NATO. I truly doubt whether many will want the SLR back though.

The SLR was a design of the 1940s, a first generation self-loading rifle. I carried one myself for years, and frankly, I was not all that fond of it. I was so glad to be promoted to Section Commander and trade my SLR in for an SMG! Thanks to the design of the action, the SLR recoiled far more unpleasantly than was necessary. I don't know about the UK, but when Canada transitioned to the C7/C8 family in the late 1980s, they put all the serviceable SLRs and SMGs in long-term preservation. I understand that since then all of these have been destroyed. I would be very surprised to see if the UK really had sufficient stocks of them remaining to provide a sustainable supply of SLRs.

If a 7.62mm NATO calibre rifle is required, the AR10-based systems are far superior. They are more accurate, and felt recoil far less than the SLR. Parts are widely available for them, too, which is more than I can say for the SLR, which has been pretty much out of production for decades.

The rifle in the article is a DSA Arms SA58. Looks like the rumour did start from the Australian veterans site…. Bunch of bloody criminals!

As far as the old L1A1 inventory is concerned, some went into reserve storage but most were sold to 3rd World former colonies. FN stopped production years ago And we couldn’t make them again as the government sold Enfield off!

I too carried the SLR. And I too have no more to say about it, than that. But, as far as the age of the design, I was having a conversation a couple of months ago about how we may have reached the pinnacle of firearms design. The only place left to go, is ammunition, where advances seem to be being made.

The AR style is close to 60 years old. A piston driven AR is really close to 50 years old and even the striker fired polymer pistol in essence is nearly 40 years old! As is even the specialised kit, like the AI rifle!

Wooden stocked bolt guns the eventual 360 degree evolution?!

I first saw this on the Facebook group "Veterans News UK" which is a military humour page. The article is clearly poking fun at the old and bold who do tend to waffle on about the wonders of the obsolescent SLR.

A RAF regiment chap (no insults please) told me when I was an Air Cadet, the UK military changed from the 7.62 to the 5.56 as it was less lethal. The idea being, in a sustained fire fight, hitting someone with a 5.56 and not killing them took them out of the battle and also took someone else out of the battle who dragged them to safety, administered first aid etc... A 7.62 round would kill more readily only removing one person from the battle.
If that is true (and I'm sure it wouldn't be the only reason if it is) then I can't see any reason why they would go back.

That was part of the rational given, which may be true of opposing armies with similar morals.

But, the enemy faced today is fanatical and determined. Wounded and down is not necessarily out.

Pippin89 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:48 pm A RAF regiment chap (no insults please) told me when I was an Air Cadet, the UK military changed from the 7.62 to the 5.56 as it was less lethal.

We changed because we just followed Uncle Sam.
Uncle Sam had been trying to get rid of their 7.62's for years, as it was the NATO round, they had to keep their M14's in service for their European based troops, when all those serving in Vietnam and SE Asia were already using the 5.56 with the M16.
The septics love of full auto meant they could carry more 5.56 than 7.62......but they used more of it.......and then surprise, surprise, once in Afgan and Iraq, they started pulling M14's out of store for marksmans rifle with optics as the 5.56 was found wanting.
Talk about full circle......

However, I thought the US Army were already very advanced with its replacement for the M4, and with it a new calibre of 6.8mm?

I had a 6.8SPC chambered Remington. The cartridge was appalling! Didn't shoot people with it, but gave it a run out on foxes, vermin and targets. .223 performed better in all aspects!

There is a new "6.8" in the offing, a 6.8x51, or .277 Fury. It's a hybrid case that had a steel case head and is loaded to 80000 PSI!
There's going to be difficulty usurping the 5.56x45 as the NATO cartridge. But, there is some work, particularly in bullets that has made it slightly more effective.