LOL...
Does MagPul still sell those goatees? I can't find them on their catalog.
It would be a perfect addition to my kit.
Why the plethora of AR Shorties?
- Thread starter Teapot
- Start date
LOL...
Does MagPul still sell those goatees? I can't find them on their catalog.
It would be a perfect addition to my kit.
shatthatkilledelvis
Regular
- Location
- in the bby
shorties store better under my pillow...
I used a C8A3 (16 inch HB) I was OMLT though. 16 inch barrel is a great compromise and you dont lose much velocity, with it still being quite handy in a vehicle and closer ranges (flagging issues indoors with the 20 inch barrel), easier to move around in complex terrain like jumping walls in grape fields lol(hate those things). IMO the Combat Arms should standardize on a C8 with a 16 inch barrel, and leave the A2's for the support trades (i seen this while working with a US Mil unit, many of the support trades had old M16A2's with fixed stocks and Iron Sites, while the troops that leave the wire were all issued M4's, with a collapsing stock M14 thown in here and there).
To a version made of kevlar that apparently it comes from Costa's beard.
Guaranteed no "Barrel envy" there.
- Location
- Edmonton Alberta
best thing about the Heat shoot out is seeing that beautiful FN FNC in action..
And this is why you won't be put in charge of those types of decisions...you make sense.
Make it into a long convoluted two hour long powerpoint, with a bunch of buzzwords in there, and you might get somewhere.
There are multiple ways of thinking about this and the US is not in agreement either. US Army has gone M4 for Cbt Arms but USMC maintains M16A4 for theirs. Going with the 16" barrel, sure whatever. I'd rather spend the money on optics.
However, I'm more concerned with fire support, eg the plan to get rid of things like the M2 .50BMG.
(I realise I've gone completely away from the topic, my apologies)
I dont mean to sound disrespectfull but many of the guys in the USMC are complaining about the fit of the M16A4 with soft armor and plates. It was a decision made by people who are more concerned with target range performance of a weapon then fighting performance. A fixed stock M16A4 with an ACOG might be the best for shooting slick on a flat one way range for silhoute targets. But add in body armour and you get issues with smaller people shooting from different positions (ie I run a C8 with the stock all the way IN shooting with armour, I remember the old days shooting a fixed stock C7A1 with a M203 on it...good luck getting a half decent sight picture), longer barrel length is a pain in the ass in a vehicle or inside a building. Over all when you are carrying a minimum of 70 pounds of gear its nice to have something that is shorter, lighter and handier to shoot.
Valid point and I'm in complete agreement WRT requirement of an adjustable stock for C7/8 regardless of barrel length.
Additionally, your point of short barrel for mounted and FIBUA is a consideration. Afterall, historically, that was the point of having short carbines(mounted role) (vs a front and top heavy rifle)
I'm not disagreeing with you, but the vision is not unified in long barrel vs short barrel and in truth there are valid points/uses for both. With all the other projects/concerns going on, swapping all the barrels for 16" is pretty low on the scale.
I'm glad that this thread was created. I don't check this forum very often, just when I have a question or am bored at work.
I'm getting an AR built for me right now with a 16" barrel and a 1/7 twist. I chose 16" because it was the shortest I wanted to go without losing too much punch behind my bullet. I was glad to see it to get some extra info to confirm if I actually got what I wanted.
I had the luck of carrying a full length C7 overseas, which was fine on patrols both mounted and dismounted(I just kept it in my bussel rack). What really sucked was all of the shuras and meetings that I had to attend. Since we never went anywhere unarmed, and I never had a pistol, carrying that into small rooms or even having to use it would have been very difficult. Just carry a meter stick around with you for a day and you'll get my point.
I know people with the 10" barrels, and my one friend just straight up admits that he has it for LCF and nothing more. It's his money, not mine.
I'm getting an AR built for me right now with a 16" barrel and a 1/7 twist. I chose 16" because it was the shortest I wanted to go without losing too much punch behind my bullet. I was glad to see it to get some extra info to confirm if I actually got what I wanted.
I had the luck of carrying a full length C7 overseas, which was fine on patrols both mounted and dismounted(I just kept it in my bussel rack). What really sucked was all of the shuras and meetings that I had to attend. Since we never went anywhere unarmed, and I never had a pistol, carrying that into small rooms or even having to use it would have been very difficult. Just carry a meter stick around with you for a day and you'll get my point.
I know people with the 10" barrels, and my one friend just straight up admits that he has it for LCF and nothing more. It's his money, not mine.
sillymike
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Why?
I could think of a few valid answer...
1. Because we can (Yanks need to pay an extra $200 for them)
2. To piss-off a Liberal (The gun looks scarier, according to them)
3. We enjoy the extra noize (Loud pipe save lives, no?)
4. They take less room in the safe (Good for urban dweller with limited space)
I could think of a few valid answer...
1. Because we can (Yanks need to pay an extra $200 for them)
2. To piss-off a Liberal (The gun looks scarier, according to them)
3. We enjoy the extra noize (Loud pipe save lives, no?)
4. They take less room in the safe (Good for urban dweller with limited space)
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Most of the people who own them never shoot them at targets beyond 100m. Thus we have people talking about a 10.5" being able to hit a target at X distance without considering the effect of accuracy in judging range and ability to read wind, both of which are far more important with shorter barrels. At range the difference between a 14.5" and a 20" is huge.
Why?
I could think of a few valid answer...
1. Because we can (Yanks need to pay an extra $200 for them)
2. To piss-off a Liberal (The gun looks scarier, according to them)
3. We enjoy the extra noize (Loud pipe save lives, no?)
4. They take less room in the safe (Good for urban dweller with limited space)
All very good points, i'll keep this in mind as I build an 11.5"
In military applications, I suppose that the extra barrel length is needed in order to make ball ammo attain the velocity it needs to yaw/ fragment/ whatever. In civilian use this would be nullified to a large extent by the use of HP/SP ammo would it not?
As far as accuracy goes, I'd say that it has more to do with using a quality barrel with quality ammunition and having a well trained person using it. Aren't shorter barrels supposed it be stiffer anyway?
As far as accuracy goes, I'd say that it has more to do with using a quality barrel with quality ammunition and having a well trained person using it. Aren't shorter barrels supposed it be stiffer anyway?
Last edited:
