Re the SLR, wasn't it also converted to imperial measurements from metric, and although some parts were interchangeable, quite a lot wern't?
As was the L2A1 AR (Automatic Rifle) which also had the auto safety and heavy barrel. Always thought an AR with a conventional fore stock would have been a good thing. It was a mean looking weapon but my experience of a triple feed and jam on the range did temper my view of them. I often carried one as No.2 on the gun in my Uni Regiment days, the idea being that in the event of a major stoppage on the M-60 the No.1 and Section 2IC would fix the gun and I would provide suppressive fire with the AR.
Is this getting to the point that its worth splitting off into a separate topic on FN FALs and derivatives?
Yes.
The L2a1 was a copy of the Canadian C2a1, without the C2's dust cover which allowed loading of the magazine with stripper clips, without having to remove it first.
L2a1:
C2a1:
L2s were pretty much exclusively an ARes weapon, although they were originally intended for use by Armoured troopers but the Regulars after they realised how bad the weapon was, pretty well abandoned it. Its major problem was that it was prone to stoppages and misfeeds from fouling of the gas system unless it was kept scrupulously clean. I used to fire the L2a1 on various ARes exercises. I much preferred the L4a4 Bren personally as an LMG. Much more reliable. Both suffered from the lack of a proper foregrip though and I've burnt my hand on both of them at various times. It was always bloody inconvenient having a bare barrel just where you were likely to grab the weapon when getting up off the ground.
For diggers who liked to look "warry" the 30 round magazine was a favourite as it would fit the standard L1a1, although it made it rather front heavy. Both pictures show the earlier straight 30 round magazine. It was later replaced with a slightly curved one because they found it fed better. The 30 round magazine was also used on the L4a4 Bren.