Carbine length on 14.5" and 16" barrels - why?

samuelshoun

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
89
Location
Tulsa, OK
Been meaning to ask this a while now... Why do these exist? Why not just make them midlength? Is the higher gas pressure advantageous under adverse conditions? Better for full-auto, maybe?

For a civilian AR, carbine gas seems to me obsolete in 14.5" & 16" barrel lengths. But I see a ton of them being sold. What am I missing?
 

Spiff

Semi-Pro
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
1,388
Location
Greenville, TX
The operating pressure is disadvantageous, and that's what spawned all the different heavy buffers and extractor enhancer thingies.
 

drmitchgibson

The white Morgan Freeman
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
3,938
Location
OKC
You're missing the "Mil-spec" factor. That factor sells countless millions of guns to people who will never shoot more than 1000 rounds in their entire lifetime.
 

samuelshoun

Well-Known Fanatic
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
89
Location
Tulsa, OK
Hmm... I guess "carbine" does sounds more badasser than lame-o "midlength" anyway. Plus I like my guns with MORE recoil!!

Anyway, thanks for confirming my suspicion. My guess is these are still "milspec" because military beaurocracy yada yada, and eventually the military will go to midlength? Or maybe they're using shorter barrels...
 

foghorn918

Consistently Inconsistent
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
2,762
Location
USA
Weren't the original AR's issued to MIL in Vietnam 20" barrels? DId they have rifle length gas systems?
 

Wormydog1724

ATAS Ninja
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
2,839
Location
Texas
Just a rumor man. I only take pictures of them and apparently piss OSA guys off when I post them. :/
 

Latest posts

Top