Talk:L1A1 Self-Loading Rifle
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the L1A1 Self-Loading Rifle article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Match stick trick.
editMilitary L1s usually had a modified selector so that thy could not be set to full auto. This restriction was easily defeated with a match stick. This was the reason, as I recall, why the L1 wasn't legal in Australia during the 60s and 70s, and presumably in other countries. An importer tried to get L1s imported from South Africa, which had a selector mechanism which was trick proof. This was the type that became legal, and could even be seen on sale at Kmart and Big-W. Ex-army guns were never sold to the public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.118.239 (talk) 23:35, 21 February 2018 (UTC) This is incorrect. Yes, the selector was modified, but also the trigger return spring plunger had increased length, preventing the trigger from being pulled back to the automatic position. At the automatic position, the semi/safety sear did not engage the hammer - the match stick trick disables this sear, but has the unfortunate effect of losing drop safety, even with the selector to safe. If the trigger return spring plunger is trimmed to allow full trigger movement, removal of the selector allows for selective firing in repetition or automatic depending on how far back the trigger is pulled. The weapon remains drop safe. The L1A1 was available for sale to the public in Australia, but could not be imported into the USA as it was (quite properly) determined to be easily modified to automatic.Pavel Saccani (talk) 08:14, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
Why a separate article from FAL?
editSo I've looked through the talk page archive, and I haven't seen anyone else ask this obvious question: Why is this article separate from the FN FAL article?
This is the same rifle, simply produced to slightly different standards, resulting in some components being non-interchangeable, and some being interchangeable. Is this significant enough to warrant this being a separate article? I'd argue it isn't.
Folding stock variants of the FAL (which are all metric pattern) necessarily have the recoil spring relocated from within the stock to beneath the dust cover. This results in some components not being interchangeable with those of the standard fixed stock, metric pattern FAL. Should the folding stock rifles therefore have their own article as well? Obviously not.
Hopefully this article is on someone's watch list so I receive a quick response. Thanks!
- Politics. Politically they're seriously different - as far as AR-15s and M-16s. Then the technical aspect of the metric/inch difference too. I've never known if that was British stupidity, or a British attempt to appease American stupidity. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- The FAL prototypes were originally chambered for .280 SAA. The FAL came second to the EM-2 in trials but when NATO adopted 7.62 as the cartridge it was easier to convert the FAL design to this cartridge than it was to convert the EM-2. The other FALs are select fire, while the L1A1 is semi-automatic only. The British FALs are made to Imperial measurements because that's what the design drawings supplied by FN were drawn in, and the UK at the time was still using Imperial measurements, and would continue doing so until around 1970. The L1A1 barrel rifling is cold-formed by hammering over a mandrel.
- BTW, FN never charged Britain a penny for the UK rights to build the FAL, in thanks for what Britain did 1939-45. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.115.110 (talk) 08:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
- Two 1954 Pathe News items, "The Army's New Rifle", here: [1] and "Demonstration Of The New F. N. Rifle" here: [2]— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.50.147 (talk) 09:21, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
- .280 SAA prototype FAL here: [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.50.147 (talk) 08:49, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Port Arthur massacre
editBryant did not use an L1A1. He used an FN manufactured FAL, serial number G3434. Interestingly, this particular rifle was a prohibited import to the USA, under the 1968 Gun Control Act. Both FN and SAF Lithgow developed modified versions for the US market, which deleted the safety sear and the machining to accomodate it from the lower receiver, and changing the trigger sear-hammer geometry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavel Saccani (talk • contribs) 08:19, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
Civilian semiauto variants
editThere was at least one inch FAL variant built by Lithgow for the American commercial market - it looks like only a few hundred were imported but still maybe worth mentioning. https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/79/520/australian-production-l1a1-semiautomatic-rifle-with-accessories 192.5.215.212 (talk) 23:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- You wouldn't happen to have a more reliable source than just an old auction listing? Do you know where they got their information from? - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:18, 3 October 2024 (UTC)