Worst currently-fielded military rifle in the world?

[MatthewVanitas]

Of all the standard-issue primary rifles currently issued in the military of any nation, which is the worst?

(Not up for discussion: LMGs, rifles that used to be issued but no longer are, etc. If you say "M16" or "AK-47", be prepared to justify your statement.)

I realize that most of us haven't handled many of the world's rifles, due to unjust importation laws, so a lot of this thread will probably be second-hand info. But hopefully an interesting topic all the same.

-MV (who has held a real-live FAMAS, but never got to shoot it, wasn't in a hurry to hold an SA-80)

 

[KaceCoyote]

Probably AK and FAL knockoffs. They may be simple to produce, but that doesnt mean you cant totally screw one up.

 

[MechAg94]

I thought there was an article posted a while back about rifles used by Tibet or one of those mid-Asian countries that were made in India. They didn't work too well.

 

[mustanger98]

Of the currently issued mainline military rifles, internationally, I don't like any of 'em that I know of. They're either ugly, wierd, or crap.

You can read that as saying if it's not a Garand action- M1, M14- or either of three or four types of bolt action '03/'03A3, Lee Enfield, K98k, US M40 sniper rifle, I don't much care for it. I am, of course, only speaking of 20th and 21st Century military rifles.

 

[beerslurpy]

L85/SA80 that the brits use. Unreliable POS. They have spend the past 30 years polishing that turd and it still doesnt work that great.

Havent seen the thing the french use. I imagine it is quite drop resistant.

 

[chopinbloc]

beerslurpy, that was absolutely golden!

 

[beerslurpy]

Is your sig from Red Dawn?

 

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

I've got to agree on the L85. I haven't heard a positive report on the long-term useability of them.

From my personal experience in a non-military role, I've never been wild about the AUG. Between my opinion (from 20 years ago) of the standard optical package and the trigger, I'd take something else if I had a choice of issue.

Regards,
Rabbit.

 

[Phyphor]

+1 to the L85

ANY weapon that all but REQUIRES the user to friggin' DUCT TAPE the mag into it is a clear POS and a dead soldier waiting to happen.
:banghead:

 

[Preacherman]

The SA80, as reworked by H&K, has proven to be very reliable, and is no longer the POS it was in its original form.

I'd nominate the Indian INSAS service rifle - all reports I've heard state that it's extremely unreliable and prone to breakages. This surprises me somewhat, since it's based on the AK-47 action, but I guess if you monkey about enough with even an ultra-reliable action, it can develop glitches.

 

[MatthewVanitas]

The INSAS is that bad? 'S a shame, from the world.guns.ru writeup, it seems to have quite a few advantages over the Kalashnikov, while still keeping many of the AK's virtues:

a) AK-style long-piston, presumably with max-power gas system and large clearances

b) Hooded front sight, diopter rear

c) Safety on left side (above your shooting thumb), _major_ plus.

d) Charging handle on front left side (ala G3)

Just goes to show that you can have a great design but poor execution. The original L85 had all the great aspects of the AR-18 in bullpup form, right?

I've really heard some argument as to whether the revamped SA-80 is good or not. Reactions seem mixed. -MV

 

[Dave Markowitz]

Probably AK and FAL knockoffs. They may be simple to produce, but that doesnt mean you cant totally screw one up.

Say what?

 

[Oldtimer]

I have to agree with those who said the British L85, for it has been an almost total failure. The British SAS complained so much that they were eventually able to get US-made M-16's/M-4's, which has the "average" Brit trooper doing even MORE complaining.

The Israeli Galil ARM and ARMS rifles are still issued, at least to a certain extent. There were certain design flaws that caused them to be re-called and placed into storage. There's a new Israeli combat rifle that showed some promise, but it's still in the "proving" stages. The USA supplied Israel with M-16's, and they seem to like them!

 

[BaiscInfantry]

I know the answer

The French FA-MAS....nuff said

 

[MatthewVanitas]

What's wrong with the FAMAS? From what I've heard, it's one of the better bullpups out there. Or is this just knee-jerk France-bashing?

 

[Essex County]

I think I' with Beerslurpy........Essex

 

[MechAg94]

That INSAS must be what I was thinking of earlier. Some small country had all sorts of problems in exercises.

 

[White Horseradish]

I would say the INSAS is it. The reason is not the design, that is plenty sound, it's the workmanship.

I have an Indian Ordnance Hi-Power. It's an Inglis built on Inglis tooling the Canadians sold them. From 10 feet it's ok. Lookng at it closely reveals all the workmanship of a gang of rabid mini-beavers gnawing parts out of metal. The slide does not match the frame. The barrel wobbles in the bushing. I am glad I don't have to rely on this thing in a life or death situation. I use it to plink and practice gunsmithing.

Since the INSAS is made by the same people in the same place, I expect it has the same atrocious fit and finish issues. It takes real talent to bugger up an AK variant, but they did it. The problems experienced during that engagement in the mountains were reported to be due to overheating. Just how hot do you have to get an AK for it to stop working?

 

[ghost squire]

They probably used them for firewood!

 

[Fletchette]

What's wrong with the FAMAS? From what I've heard, it's one of the better bullpups out there. Or is this just knee-jerk France-bashing?

As much as I disdain the French, they have produced some decent weapons. I have heard good things about the FAMAS. I also have shot the MAS 49/56 (in 7.5 French); it is a decent, reliable and accurate battle rifle.

 

[madmike]

Depends on your criteria.

PER DESIGN SPECS, the M14 was absolutely the biggest, most bloated piece of crap that actually went to the field. It is a fine rifle. It did not, however, meet 90% of the criteria it was supposed to.

Assuming the Garand is still out there, it was a critically flawed design from the get go. Very accurate, better than the bolts it was competing with (apples/oranges) but arguably the most inferior semiauto ever.

The Steyr AUG is a brilliant design that fails to function properly in the field. I'd love to have one I could trust. It's gorgeous. But it hates mud.

The L85 was very flimsy originally, and while H&K and the Brit Govt claim it's now fixed, the troops using it argue the point.

I've never been personally impressed with either the FAL or the G3.

If I were equipping a large army of troops who had little experience, AK47. Cheap, sturdy, feed it rocks. If I were equipping professionals, some variant of AR depending on mission. There're reasons the AK action is now 60 years old and the AR has been in US use for 46 years.

I haven't handled a G36, but it's supposed to be excellent.

 

[madmike]

I have to agree with those who said the British L85, for it has been an almost total failure. The British SAS complained so much that they were eventually able to get US-made M-16's/M-4's, which has the "average" Brit trooper doing even MORE complaining.

The information I have is that the SAS used the M16 from 1965ish until 1996, when they switched to the G36. The Royal Marines (certainly not average) wanted the G36, but were forced to use the L85. It was argued that they were "normal" troops and the expense wasn't justified.

The main problem seems to be the sheet metal of the receiver is too thin, dents easily, and interferes with the action.

 

[Father Knows Best]

Assuming the Garand is still out there, it was a critically flawed design from the get go. Very accurate, better than the bolts it was competing with (apples/oranges) but arguably the most inferior semiauto ever.

Explain, please.

I've never been personally impressed with either the FAL or the G3.

What you're "personally impressed" with may be interesting, but doesn't seem to be particularly relevant to this discussion. What is it about the FAL and G3 that fail to impress you?

I haven't handled a G36, but it's supposed to be excellent.

I have. My brother has one courtesy of his SWAT team responsibilities. It's interesting and fun to shoot, but it never has to see a battlefield. I have no idea how it would hold up under continuous use in a harsh environment.

 

[Slimjim]

As much as I disdain the French, they have produced some decent weapons. I have heard good things about the FAMAS. I also have shot the MAS 49/56 (in 7.5 French); it is a decent, reliable and accurate battle rifle.

The MAS has a very good bolt system in it, simplist design to take apart. ID really like one chambered for .308 that actually worked though.

 

[Kurush]

INSAS not performing to optimum level: Army

new delhi: the army has complained that the country's indigenous state-of-the-art 5.56 mm indian small arms system (insas) is not performing to the optimum level, with major defects like cold arrest, breakage and cracking of components reported in active areas like siachen glacier, kargil heights and other high-altitude zones. ``major defects in assault rifles as well as light machine guns like change lever system, breakage of carrying handle, screw locking butt, crack of retainer and breakage of barrel bulge have come to the fore from forward areas," top army officials said. they said that these defects, which had come to the fore even during the kargil conflict, had been brought to the notice of rifle specialists at ishapore factory as well drdo scientists, but the defects were yet to be rectified. these defects plus ordinance factories not keeping to delivery schedules had forced the army, with government clearance, to import one lakh ak-47 assault rifles from romania at a cost of rs 85 crore. the officials said that a special task force comprising officials of master general of ordinance, directorate general of quality assurance, rifle specialists and drdo scientists had been constituted to rectify the defects. the comptroller and auditor general has also taken the defence ministry to task for a three-year delay in fulfilling the army's plan to re-equip all its formations with the indigenously developed 5.56 mm small arms system. ``the army's plan was to equip all its forces with these light arms by 1998 and ordinance factories supplied only 2.75 lakh rifles and light machine guns as on march 2000," cag said in its latest report tabled in parliament. the report stated that despite the army having asked the ordinance board in july 1989 to speed up the process of development so as to introduce the weapon in 1990, ``development and establishment of the weapon had lagged behind by eight years."

http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1759706828.cms