Jump to content

L85A2


pikuinhas08

Recommended Posts

Hey...

 

I'm looking to get myself an L85A2... I'm trying to build the loadout of the Royal Marines!

 

but I'm facing an issue... witch L85 should I get...

 

Star? Army Armament? ICS? or G&G?

 

I read somewhere that Army is a clone of G&G, but Army is not very reliable and G&G is the most expensive...

 

how about the Star model? and the ICS...

 

send your feedback...

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think Army version is the most reliable of all those versions, but any of them is not 100% reliable as they have same design flaws which some of them was fixed in the army version i believe if i remember right reading far easts review :) and Armys version is actually L85A1, they are making the L85A2 later this year

Link to post
Share on other sites
thats pretty convincing mate, just saying something is *suitcase* and not putting any groundwork why it would be or why other models would be better...

 

Well if you'll pardon a sweeping generalization, what he says is true even though he didn't back it up. I've fielded each version except the gun if you include Ares with STAR. I own the ICS version.

 

I used to have a 20-something page .pdf file covering the "mods necessary to make the G&G L85 not self-destruct." Needless to say, it exaggerated its own importance, but without those mods, the G&G is prone to failure. If you google that phrase, you'll find that I didn't get it quite right, but you'll find forum posts on it self destructing. In any case, the Army one is a clone of that, complete with design flaws, and it also introduces QC issues. I should note now that the one that I fielded this past summer is now non-functional for whatever reason (I didn't ask).

 

I have had the least experience with the STAR/ARES, but from what the people on the internet say, it's pretty nice, and doesn't usually self destruct, though it's not unheard of.

 

It's obvious that I'm going to be biased towards the ICS one, since I own one, but I really enjoy it, and it hasn't broken on me. I'd write more about it, but honestly this exact question has been asked not too long ago and was answered in great detail. In that light I'm just going to add my experience and direct you towards it.

 

If you're interested in these guns I suggest you do some research and make the decision yourself. There's a 100 thousand page discussion on on the Army one that's mostly people solving problems (and sometimes more than once because nobody wants to read the whole damn thing).

 

If you were to ask me I would promote either the STAR or the ICS, with great emphases on the latter.

 

Also: BAM!

I've handled the real L85, STAR, Army and own an ICS L85 replica. The best one for materials in respect to closeness to the real thing would be STAR, ICS then Army. Having not handled the G&G I can't comment. The ICS 'inaccuracies' are very minor and unless you are a pedant for trades and 100% dimensional accuracy they do not detract at all from the appearance and feel of the gun.

 

Its funny in a way that despite being a niche rifle the L85 is slowly beginning to turn into M4, I remember years ago it would often be duked out on here about whether to get a CA, G&P or ICS Armalite and each time a number of things would be touted, mainly build quality, performance out of the box, reliability, upgradeability/ease of working on, extra features and trades and depending on what the user wanted they'd make their choice.

 

I got my ICS for free winning it at a national skirmish, but I could write near endlessly about why I would reccomend it over other makes, instead I'll do a brand by brand write up on the makes mentioned thus far

 

Star L85A2 (has A1 bolt conversion available)

 

Build quality - Feels very much like the real thing in materials and heft, the latter being a downside as it is a weighty AEG, has correct trades but a minor dimensional inaccuracy around the barrel (think this is to stop people fitting the easily available bayonet) and safety

 

OOTB Performance - Variable due to less than stellar quality control that has plagued STAR when they first brought the gun out, the one I used (which had been downgraded to 1J by the shop it was bought from) had a slight left hook near the end of the flight path, it was however predictable irrespective of wind so could have been a bedding in issue. Either way I could confidently hit a target about 25m away which I would say is a benchmark for a stock gun in the UK.

 

Reliability - See OOTB performance, later models may have be under stricter QC but

 

Upgradeability/Ease of working On: This is where the STAR falls down majorly. Not so much that it cannot be upgraded, its just a pain in the jacksie to get into the gearbox. Has a degree of proprietary parts (hop and nozzle off the top of my head) but the gears/motor are at least standard, as is barrel, rubber, piston. Gearbox is polycarbonate which limits uber high FPS upgrade potential but they originally came shooting at 400fps with the motor being the thing most likely to go. Think the spring FPS has gone down while motor reliability has gone up.

 

Extra features/Trades/Anything else - Features a spring release, only make with attendant UGL upgrade. All trades present and correct. Requires a custom form factor battery

 

Army L85 (Note lack of 'A1', the Army lacks the mag release guard of the A1 and A2)

 

Build quality - Cheap and cheerful would probably best describe the build in my opinion, it'll stand up to typical skirmish handling but I have seen people lose bits (cocking handle, issue now fixed I believe. Other thing was a front end falling off) from rougher handling. It sort of tells you its been built down to cost.

 

OOTB Performance - Like most clones this replica actually punches above its weight when it comes to skirmishing performance but like most clones the lemon rate is a bit higher.

 

Reliability - Clone/Lemon rate aside, the gearbox has a mechanical linkage to the cocking handle increasing the chance of a significant mechanical failure. Due to the use of an 18 tooth piston (Standard is 16) and semi precocking gear set up, the chance of piston stripping is inherently higher at UK FPS levels using typical battery voltages than a standard design unless you fit a 16 tooth conversion kit. As you are in the US I think the design would be fine at its stock FPS and used with an 8.4v battery.

 

Upgradeability/ease of working on - Take down is significantly easier than the STAR and the gearbox is a split design (like the PSG meets ICS V2) makes upgrades easy. As has been said the piston is an 18 tooth type but with a conversion kit you can install standard compression parts. The gearset spur gear is unique as far as I can tell but standard bevel and sector gears can be used.

 

Extra features and trades - Magwell spring release, requires a different custom form factor battery to the STAR. Has bolt hold open functionality

 

What I've said above pretty much goes for the G&G bar the OOTB performance and build quality where the G&G I'd say would rate higher. G&G provides A2 flavour as well.

 

ICS L85A2 (Only available in A2 variant)

 

Build quality - As said before, its second to the STAR because its built from a lighter metal than the real thing/STAR but the plastics feel similar. Some minor dimensions are off but most are done in such a way they look like they are meant to be there and generally make things easier for the owner. Only downside for me is the way the cocking handle/fake bolt can flex so your cocking handle can bend off axis, simply enough to just bend it back. Only noticed when it was in a gun bag at the bottom of a roof box with tonnes of other camping gear ontop of it.

 

OOTB Performance - Relatively standard at UK performance but can very easily be improved

 

Reliability - I've only seen one report on here of one getting sent back to the retailer for repair and this was as far as I could tell to do with the way the wiring can put a bit of a strain on the motor spades but as the guns haven't been out as long its hard to guage reliability at different FPS etc. Having taken mine to bits there really isn't anything that makes me think 'yep, theres an obvious point of potential failure' other than anything you'd find in any AEG (premature engagement)

 

Upgradeability/ease of working on - Take down is a piece of cake on this, however it is a mix of standard and proprietary parts. It take standard gears, short motor, piston and springs. Piston head is a custom vented type that can be replaced with a standard type but I can't see any reason why you'd want to. Spring guide is a variable position one allowing you to increase precompression (FPS) of the spring, its metal and bearing type so again, its not lacking in any way Cylinder head is V2 type. Tappet and nozzle are proprietary but nothing really wrong with them. Hop unit is unique and is a pressure relay type so is very good for holding setting/trajectory consistency. Wiring is set out in such a way that you can easily mosfet it up. Downside of the hop unit is that it cannot take a H bucking without minor filing of the hop arm to re profile it.

 

Extras - Only features receiver trades, handguard trades are absent, as are fire selector markings (Even though they are in the manual). Also features a hold open functionality. Can comfortably take up to 9.6v large standard packs and up to 12v 4/5 sub C packs. Comes with two hicaps rather than the typical one highcap/standard cap mag

 

 

Hopefully that will be of some help in identifying which replica best suits what you want. Hopefully it won't kick off a massive argument either biggrin.gif

 

EDIT: Forgot to say credit where credit is due- RSM

Link to post
Share on other sites
Star in my book. A winner on looks alone. :) Solid, accurate, *painful* and reliable out of the box too.

 

Oh that's not fair, you have a gorgeous setup.

 

But on a serious note, I agree with you. The STAR is solid both externally and internally, and shoots well.

 

I also think the ICS is just as nice though.

 

Externally, they both have full steel bodies, polymer handgrips, and a rubber cheek and butt. Both feel great. I don't know what the real is like, but the finish on the bodies is different. The ISC is matte, while the STAR is glossy. Don't quote me on this because I might be wrong, but I think the finish on the STAR is more realistic. Either way, they're both very nice, and I wouldn't say a bad thing about the finish on either.

 

Internally has already been discussed, and I don't know how much I can add. The quick change and adjustable spring guide on the ICS is a handy feature. I think they're both great mechboxes as long as you don't install a blowback unit on the STAR.

 

EDIT: Actually, as I recall, the finish on the handgrips are different too. The STAR are smoother while the ICS are textured. I think they might both be realistic because the ICS is replicating a different handgrip. Realism aside, personally, I love the feel of the furniture on my ICS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I own the ICS version but I have used the Army version. Of the two the ICS is by far the superior gun but then again it's over twice the price.

 

The Army version is a clone of the G&G so both have the blowback function which I think most people will agree is a great gimmick but it drains your battery quicker and affects your rate of fire. It also tends to break and deposit bits of metal in your gearbox. For these reasons most people disable it. The gearbox uses many proprietary parts including the piston and sector gear. The fit and finish is okay and what you'd expect for the price. Battery wise it only seems to take the one it's supplied with or custom. It's an okay gun for the price but their is better out there.

 

The ICS version is not a 100% accurate copy but you'd have to have actually used the real one to tell the difference. It has a very stable hop unit giving good range and is an excellent skirmishing tool. ROF is good and the slightly larger handguard will take any large battery type I've currently got a 4700 mAh 9.6v in mine. Again some proprietary parts Hop unit, gearbox shell which I feel you'd expect from a totally different design but the gearbox does use standard gears and piston/piston head. It also has a quick change system, the spring guide is completly removable from the back of the gearbox without having to take it apart. This makes changing the spring a doddle and allows you to change the FPS by moving it between it's three settings. The only real drawback is the fact it uses a proprietary barrel which is a tightbore as standard which isn't really a problem but if something does go wrong with it you'll have to get the original part.

 

The Star version is the most accurate copy but I've never used one only had a look, so all I can say about it is the it is the most expensive. Uses proprietary gearbox parts and has a plastic gearbox (I think the newer Ares version has a metal one but not too sure). I had to replace the plastic gearbox in my Star M249 3 times so I would never go near another one but most people have no problems. Also it takes custom batteries.

 

Just my opinion though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have bought and still in my arsenal:

1x G&G in L85A2

2x Army

2x Star in L85A2

1x ARES in AVF

 

Haven't tried any ICS

 

The G&G is has a good chamber and barrel. the grouping at 30ft is the tightest of all my SA80s. Good body finish. Good chassis alignment, great for field stripping. Upper and lower receiver comes part and fit back together without any need for shuffling to get the alignment to fit. (Much like the real steel.) This is essential as you'll find ourself continuously having to replace fuses and pistons!!! While the materials used are very good and the stamping evidently precise, the workmanship on the assembly is appalling. Mine example turned into an "electric drill" after about two to three magazines. The reason was the depth of the motor not being set properly. The electric drill incident would no doubt have damaged the pinion and bevel gears to some extend. The 3 teeth of rack gear was also found to be worn down when I stripped the gun to investigate the problem. It is evident that the angle of attack of the sector and rack gears were not fit for purpose. I'm now on my 4th piston. The current one is an Army one with one tooth removed. So far so good. The blowback is latch comes lose repeatedly. Both WGC and G&G have been passive in dealing with the poor workmanship issue. WGC seems to have discontinued the A2 as well. the G&G SA80s are really not worth the money. I also have the G&G SUSAT that is really lousy in respect of acquiring sight picture.

 

The Army are good value for money. The upper and lower receivers fitment is not so precise and require a bit of force to open and shuffling to close. The chamber is okay but the hopup difficult to adjust. Stock inner barrel is adequate. Stock spring needs downgrading. I can't really tell the difference whether one tooth is removed or not removed from the rack gear. The shoulder stock rubber goes orange for some reasons. The Army magazines are very good. They are built of heavier gauge material and slighter bigger than regular M4 high cap mags. Two complete windings will allow you to clear a full mag.

 

BOTH G&G AND ARMY ARE NO GOOD FOR SCENARIOS WHEN ONLY SEMI-AUTO IS ALLOWED. (Note, I only use 7.4V LiPos and 8.4V NiMH batteries) The pre-cocking is counter-productive. I'm not sure whether it's due to overspining or whatever, the piston never stops at the same place on neither auto nor semi. On semi, you can only do solid single trigger pulls. Any quick successive double tap would result in the gun locking. I've fitted one of mine with a Red-wolf space and regular M4 piston. This mod does nothing to solve this problem. However, it's convenient to be able to use regular pistons.

 

The Stars are built of heavier material. The finish is arguably better than the G&G. However, very very cumbersome to take apart (except for the spring change). Soldered electrical contacts makes the situation worse. Don't be put off by the plastic gearbox, it turned out to be very durable. I can't believe the oldest one (2 years old) still hasn't cracked. While the chamber is coupled into the gearbox, it doesn't seem to be very good at all. The hopup adjustment on all three of mine, 2x Star 1x ARES are practically useless. Despite the long barrel on the A2, the grouping at 30ft is way below expectation. The Star SA80s has no problem with jamming when the trigger is pulled in quick succession on semi-auto. The prices of Star and ARES have gone down substantially in recent months. The price of the AFV is even more incredible, it even comes with a SUSAT (the ARES SUSAT is a bit brighter that the G&G). If accuracy is not a concern, they are well worth considering.

 

I can't comment on the ICS. I would rule out the G&G. If you want blowback, and a bit more accuracy, go for the Army. If you want something general purpose, go for Star/ARES.

 

Erik.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Photos removed to save space.

 

Only the G&G has a notch on the flash hider to latch the bayonet.

 

Best regards,

 

Erik.

 

 

If its a D shaped notch then the ICS has it too. Would get pics if my camera wasn't dead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

after reading and hearing about all the problems of the army and G&G i bought a star 2 months ago

 

It is 1 hefty gun at approx 6kg and with the star susat it is even heaver, but i like it as it is SOLID there is no body movement at all except for a tiny bit in the front handgrip which was fixed in 1 min with a washer

 

The quick spring change system is very good as i have already used it extensively :D

i have left it stock as it came at just under 400 and change the spring for CQB to a PDI 120% with no problems

it cycled very quickly on a 1100mAh 9.6V Chinese NiMH and has never jammed on semi, which if it does the spring decompress fixes it :P

i am currently using a 1800mAh 7.4V lipo with no problems

 

 

admittedly it is a pain to take down to the mec (not to change the spring) as the whole thing has to come apart and the after market support isnt all that

and like most star guns the hop bucking comes covered in a nice thick grease which is the cause of most peoples accuracy problems ;)

but once that was fixed it was getting the same groupings and range as a 400FPS TMM14, this is stock and just had stuff tidied up a bit

 

i havent owned the ICS but i have seen one and they are very nice as well and i have only herd great things about them to be honest

 

so i would go for a star or ICS

(pics of my gun and quick change spring guide HERE)

Link to post
Share on other sites
but once that was fixed it was getting the same groupings and range as a 400FPS TMM14, this is stock and just had stuff tidied up a bit

 

What exactly did you do to your Star? I fitted a Systema (for SG550) inner barrel to my oldest Star (also fitted with the extension outer barrel for the UGL). Grouping still lousy.

 

I stripped the ARES AFV couple nights ago to investigate the hopup. It has a red bucking and the bucking turned out to be not lined up with the groove of the inner barrel. That is plain poor workmanship and QC. (Will load pictures later). The red bucking is made of very soft material. I've yet to try it on a range.

 

While the quick change spring feature is convenient, I find I could flick the spring guide up and down. I fear it might catch the spring on compression.

 

What make and what stiffness of bucking would you recommend for the stock spring.

 

Best regards,

 

Andrew.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

well all the star guns i have worked on have had a very thick grease on the bucking

so i took it off and gave it a very good wash in soapy water

i then put a VERY light coat of silicone oil on the outside of the bucking to keep it moist and help seal it to the hop housing

The L85 had a soft red bucking and it is working lovely now it has been cleaned of that horrid grease

 

but the SLR i worked on needed the bucking cleaned and the mec taken apart and to be re-greased which to be honest isnt really that much work (i like any excuse to open stuff up :P)

 

The spring guide moves slightly but catching has never been a problem, and i haven't herd of it being a problem though i could be wrong

 

well the stock spring is around 380-400 so i dont know if you would be allowed to use it but i have used the stock and a soft systema with no problems, the systema preformed slightly better but no to much

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor man crono @ redwolf

 

 

All figures are approximated based on tests with an 0.2g BB. Varying weight of BB may alter results as the above FPS values only apply for 0.2g BBs. Using 0.25g BBs will sometimes allow you to penetrate a surface even at the lower FPS rate. All FPS measurements chrono'd with a Combro cb-625. The range of FPS above accounts for minor structural differences between cans which can require a little more FPS to make the mark.

 

ONE SIDE

(BB remains in can after penetrating one side) 290 to 310 fps

BOTH SIDES

(BB makes it straight through and exits on the other side) 350 to 370fps

BOTTOM (CENTRAL) 420 to 450fps

BOTTOM (EDGE) 450 to 480fps

TOP (EDGE) 480 to 510fps

TOP (CENTRAL) 520 to 540fps

 

seems to be not to bad but ye there is a leek somewhere

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.