You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
RRA AR15 Carbine vs Mid-length
- Thread starter yegor
- Start date
I personally like the looks of a midlength better. I think the extra few inches of barrel sticking out of carbine handguards looks silly, and the bayonet (if you like them) doesn't look right on a 16 inch carbine.
I am also given to understand that the midlength is a bit more reliable because of the extra dwell time of the gas system. Some carbines are apparently pretty hard on components because they operate with higher pressure. I am no expert on this, but no doubt someone who knows better will chime in.
For normal range use, I doubt that carbine vs. midlength makes any real difference as far as reliability goes. Another thing to think about is that carbine length is more common so aftermarket rails are slightly more difficult to get for a midlength since not everybody makes one.
My personal preference is for a midlength, and if I had the option of carbine or midlength with the same brand of rifle I would go for the midlength. But this is just my opinion and preference.
I am also given to understand that the midlength is a bit more reliable because of the extra dwell time of the gas system. Some carbines are apparently pretty hard on components because they operate with higher pressure. I am no expert on this, but no doubt someone who knows better will chime in.
For normal range use, I doubt that carbine vs. midlength makes any real difference as far as reliability goes. Another thing to think about is that carbine length is more common so aftermarket rails are slightly more difficult to get for a midlength since not everybody makes one.
My personal preference is for a midlength, and if I had the option of carbine or midlength with the same brand of rifle I would go for the midlength. But this is just my opinion and preference.
I personally like the looks of a midlength better. I think the extra few inches of barrel sticking out of carbine handguards looks silly, and the bayonet (if you like them) doesn't look right on a 16 inch carbine.
I am also given to understand that the midlength is a bit more reliable because of the extra dwell time of the gas system. Some carbines are apparently pretty hard on components because they operate with higher pressure. I am no expert on this, but no doubt someone who knows better will chime in.
For normal range use, I doubt that carbine vs. midlength makes any real difference as far as reliability goes. Another thing to think about is that carbine length is more common so aftermarket rails are slightly more difficult to get for a midlength since not everybody makes one.
My personal preference is for a midlength, and if I had the option of carbine or midlength with the same brand of rifle I would go for the midlength. But this is just my opinion and preference.
Paulz has nailed it. The benefit to the mid-length is the lower pressure during operation. The reduction in pressure more closely replicates the pressure found in traditional rifle length gas systems which the AR was originally designed to use. The 16" barrel provides nearly same the same velocity as a 20" thus offering nearly identical ballistic performance(give or take). Mid-length is growing in popularity which helps with parts availability but can be difficult to shop for.
TDC
