Tactical Merits Of The Carbine

Glenfilthie

Glenfilthie

CGN Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
I am going to preface this by saying that I know enough about these guns to be dangerous and that's it. I am asking these questions in ignorance and not trying to be a dink or slag anybody's guns.

So - having said that - what tactical merit do these guns have? I am referring to the pistol calibre carbines with that question. A year or so back I handled that little Beretta with a red dot sight at an indoor range and was able to put a couple rounds through it. The accuracy wasn't great and I could match it with my pistol. I can see a bit of a velocity gain with the carbine...but in close quarters combat, wouldn't you be better off with a pistol?

Second...why would you AR guys buy a pistol calibre carbine instead of a chopped .223?

These little guns are very interesting and look like alot of fun...
 
The performance of sub guns/pistol calibre carbines is on par with their bigger brothers at short ranges. The advantage is the fact its shoulder controlled and many sub guns sport more than 5 rounds in a free country. Other two benefits are low ammo costs(comparatively) and low recoil. As well as being able to run your sub gun on a pistol range.

TDC
 
Having had several 9mm ARs it is a training issue, having the ability to run cheaper 9mm ammo while still maintaining a similar manual of arms...the indoor range issue is nice too. The down side now is the cost of 9mm ARs, it is hard to justify having a 3K gun sitting around for once in a while shooting, makes the CX series quite attractive as are the .22LR conversions.
 
I can put together a 9mm AR for about $1500 with new parts.....actually I am right now. 9mm is cheaper than .223, and I like being able to use an indoor range in the winter.



.
 
MrSmitty: I heard from a gentleman at a range today that you cannot use the 10 capacit magazines on the non-restricted CX4 out in the bush, only at a range. Is that correct?
 
Absolutely wrong. Use the 10 rounders anywhere you can legally fire the CX4.

Voxx Boxx said:
MrSmitty: I heard from a gentleman at a range today that you cannot use the 10 capacit magazines on the non-restricted CX4 out in the bush, only at a range. Is that correct?
Click to expand...
 
IMO, its probably the ammo savings and low recoil that make a pistol caliber carbine a popular alternative.

Personally, I don't think I would ever own one.
 
For a pistol cal carbine (like my USC) there are a few pro's compared to a rifle caliber short barreled rifle.

Velocity loss for one:

Most 9mm, .40 cal and .45 cal carbines have longer barrels than the pistols the rounds are designed to come out of. So the velocity is not degraded in any way with a short barrel.

With 5.56x45mm short barreled rifles (11" and 8" for example) the velocity of the round is reduced quite a bit, at close quarters its still pretty potent, but at 50 yards or even 100 yards (where pistol cal carbines are still effective due to the heavy bullets) the 5.56 rounds lose quite a bit of punch, as well as their fragmentation.... you essentially have a hot .22 caliber rifle at that point.

Muzzle flash & noise:

with shorty 5.56 carbines, a great deal of the powder is unburnt, spewing out big balls of fire. Now this looks cool as heck :D but in a "real world" scenario, they can mess with your eyes (especially if its a dark room) and can give away your position. Noise is a big one. 5.56 out of a 10" barrel (in a room) is loud enough to cause ruptured ear drums. not cool. Even though .45 out of a 6" barrel is still like 165 Db (according to my HK Mark23's owner manual) that's still a lot quieter. Out of an 8" barrel it would probably be quite a bit less noisy.

Suppression:

Pistol caliber rounds are perfect for suppression, since many are naturally subsonic, or at least have effective subsonic loads available for them.

.45 is naturally subsonic, and 9mm has 147 Grain bullets. Even being subsonic, they still have a lot of WEIGHT in the bullet, so they will retain their kinetic energy with velocity loss. You are thus able to have subsonic (and therefore decent suppression) with normal weight bullets.

With 5.56, all a suppressor does is eliminate most of the muzzle flash and the pop of the shot, but the sonic crack still remains.


So for SBR type rifles, pistol caliber carbines are on a pretty level playing field as rifle caliber carbines. With longer barrel (14.5") rifle caliber carbines, the advantage starts to drift to the rifle caliber, since you have an effective fragmentation and less muzzle blast, as well as far superior effective ranges.
 
Glenfilthie said:
I am going to preface this by saying that I know enough about these guns to be dangerous and that's it. I am asking these questions in ignorance and not trying to be a dink or slag anybody's guns.

So - having said that - what tactical merit do these guns have? I am referring to the pistol calibre carbines with that question. A year or so back I handled that little Beretta with a red dot sight at an indoor range and was able to put a couple rounds through it. The accuracy wasn't great and I could match it with my pistol. I can see a bit of a velocity gain with the carbine...but in close quarters combat, wouldn't you be better off with a pistol?

Second...why would you AR guys buy a pistol calibre carbine instead of a chopped .223?

These little guns are very interesting and look like alot of fun...
Click to expand...

Because we can that's why!!!
 
cheaper ammo for training and having the same geometry and ergonomics as the full size service rifle goes long way to help your muscle memory.
 
While I have no tactical experience to speak of in comparing the .223/5.56 to a pistol calibre, I find that having pistol calibre carbine a nice change of pace and something fun to play with. ;)

On the more practical side, I can double up on my ammo purchase by getting .40 for my pistols and CX4.

Of course now I'll have to look into getting .45 pistols whenever (crosses fingers) my USC comes in. :D
 
In single fire, they are pretty useless. Subguns are supposed to be bullet hoses for very quick, violent and short distance engagements.

Short barrel .223s have pretty much replaced them in that role.
 
the line has become blurred with the advent of the 223 bullpup lioke the tavor, sa80, etc- it used to be the sub gun was the king of cqb, but not any more- as far as accuracy goes, my uzi was good enough to chew off an entire ear at 25 yards,with the 25 round mag - when we could use such things- i had one of those armalite arm pistols away back when, and once you could get it to feed properky without jamming, that was a really nice cqb- just point and spray
 
I like the fact I come to the range and Im running the same ammo through both guns.

Also the same ammo I use in my handgun ~ 1100fps runs at just under ~1500fps through my carbine and I can shoot in really accurately out to 100 yrds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom