PDA

View Full Version : AR: 14.5" vs. 16" barrel


Subotai
07-15-2011, 9:08 AM
I'm looking at uppers and notice that there are A LOT of 16" uppers. Why does the M4 use a 14.5"? Why don't they use a 16"? I'm old school and used a 20" A2, so I don't know why you would want a 14.5 over a 16. Seems the 16 would be good enough for urban combat and be better for longer ranges. Why the 14.5? Is the 16 considered a good compromise between the 20 and the 14.5? Can someone talk about the thought processes that went into these two barrel lengths?

chicoredneck
07-15-2011, 9:17 AM
I can't tell you why the military chose 14.5", but I think it had something to do with the gas system length.

I can tell you that as a civilian the only reason I can see someone wanting a 14.5" barrel over a 16" barrel is if they know that they must have a flash hider/muzzel brake and they want it to be as short as possible and they have no plans of ever having to change their flash hider/muzzel brake.

Bhobbs
07-15-2011, 9:23 AM
The barrel has to be 16 inches per the law. If you want a 14.5 inch barrel you have to permanently fix something on the muzzle to make it 16+ inches. There probably are a lot of 16 inch uppers so people can swap muzzle devices without unknowingly commtting a crime.

Uxi
07-15-2011, 9:33 AM
Yeah, 16 is a product of the NFA. Like most of the weapons laws, it's completely arbitrary

Subotai
07-15-2011, 9:34 AM
Thanks guys!

d4v0s
07-15-2011, 10:06 AM
I built a 20" a4 flat top, with a2 stock and all those goodies.. I love it, but at 11 pounds it can be beastly and unwieldy for close quarters or as a ranch/truck gun.

The reason i will be building a 14.5 bcm is the length, I can be right at 16 inches with a flash hider and Also the weight. I will be getting the bcm lightweight upper so with my current math i should be right around 5 pounds 10oz. plus any optic weight i choose, which will probably be the trijicon RMR so a little over 6 pounds total. It will make a great hiking rifle and general duty carbine.

The whole goal for my 14.5 is weight and honestly the .223 round is plenty powerful with the proper bullet, 14.5 wont send the fmj fast enough to yaw past 100 yards, however with a 72grain bthp i wont really need to count on yawing.

762.DEFENSE
07-15-2011, 10:40 AM
Plus if you get a 14.5" upper, you'll have to have it pinned due to CA Regulations and NFA issues (limiting your muzzle/flash hider options in the future). Thus why most people go with the standard NFA 16" barrel.

jayzx10r
07-15-2011, 10:52 AM
A bayonet fits correctly on the 14.5" barrel (on the flash hider) while it'll rattle around on the barrel directly on a 16".

T-800
07-15-2011, 12:15 PM
14.5 is better balance better for fighting inside and carries enough velocity to be effective

ilkhan
07-15-2011, 12:22 PM
M4 used 14.5 because thats what they picked. Shorter is more maneuverable.
Civilians use 14.5 because with a pinned 1.5" FH it reaches 16" and avoid NFA.
Civilians use 16" to have a not-pinned FH and still avoid NFA.

Subotai
07-15-2011, 12:49 PM
We shot at 500 meters with a 20" barrel A2. Do you think the 16" will perform close to this? Or does it lack at 500 meters?

Uxi
07-15-2011, 1:11 PM
Officially, the M4 still has point target at 500m max range, but at 500m is alot like the M16 at 600-700m. It's area target is 600m instead of the 800m on the M16. IIRC from marksmanship trials, the Marines saw a significant increase in unqs with the M4 (remember, USMC has 500m on marksmanship).

Subotai
07-15-2011, 4:04 PM
Leaning toward a 20" barrel.

Pryde
07-15-2011, 4:12 PM
As stated before the only reason why the military uses a 14.5" barrel is to properly mount a bayonet. It has nothing to do with being shorter or more maneuverable. The bayonet secures on the rearmost ring of the flashhider. With a 16" barrel the hilt ring on the bayo will not lock onto the barrel.

motorwerks
07-15-2011, 5:59 PM
If you were local (Sacramento area) I'd let you shoot one of each. I have 2 @ 20, 1 @ 16 and one @ 14.5. I like my 14.5 but honestly it does exactly the same thing as my 16, I just had to have one since I had everything else covered.

Scutler
07-15-2011, 6:03 PM
The difference is minimal. I have a 14.5 inch barrel on my rife and it is dead on. The benefits to having a 14.5 inch barrel are that they are lighter weight than 16 inchers and are slightly more compact. The only issue with a 14.5 barrel is having a pinned flash hider. This can be limiting but for me its not an issue.

motorwerks
07-15-2011, 6:06 PM
The difference is minimal. I have a 14.5 inch barrel on my rife and it is dead on. The benefits to having a 14.5 inch barrel are that they are lighter weight than a 16 inchers and are slightly more compact. The only issue with a 14.5 barrel is having a pinned flash hider. This can be limiting but for me its not an issue.

Yeah me too. I use it for 3 gun, our local events are a short enough distance that it does good.

Army GI
07-15-2011, 6:08 PM
Leaning toward a 20" barrel.

If you are going to be doing a lot of shooting at 600 yards, definitely go for the 20" barrel.

As someone else mentioned, the M4 can make it out there. But lets put it this way, you won't see any Army or Marine marksmanship units competing at a Service Rifle match with an M4.

Maddog5150
07-15-2011, 6:09 PM
If you are going to be doing a lot of shooting at 600 yards, definitely go for the 20" barrel.

As someone else mentioned, the M4 can make it out there. But lets put it this way, you won't see any Army or Marine marksmanship units competing at a Service Rifle match with an M4.

nope. Cause its against service rifle rules :p

Army GI
07-15-2011, 6:24 PM
nope. Cause its against service rifle rules :p

Smartass:p I knew you were going to say that.

Point being, even if it was, you won't be competitive against someone shooting a 20" rifle.

Again: I'm not saying it can't be done. It can. But you won't be competitive.

SanPedroShooter
07-15-2011, 6:33 PM
I got into a bit of a "discussion" about this topic a few weeks ago. I was asked why the military went with the 14.5. The other poster implied he knew, but if he did he didnt tell me. I believe the OG CAR15's were 15'' chopped down 20's and the Commando's were/are 11.5 ... That must have been fun...

I know that Colt did make a 16'' for the military at ont point, but they settled on 14.5 eventually. I wonder why?

I went with a stock LMT carbine upper with a few upgrades to ease the cycle issues you hear about, heavier buffer, stiffer spring, M16 carrier. We'll see how she shoots. I think next time, I will look into a midlength 14.5. That seems to be the way to go with a carbines these days. Of course, I am got a 14.5 to use at short distance, I suppose if you wanted an all around gun, you could get a 18''.

My 14.5 feels perfectly balanced in my hand, and it swings and points like no other rifle I have ever handled. I can live with a pinned hider and a DD Omega rail.

Brown Rock
07-15-2011, 7:17 PM
A bayonet fits correctly on the 14.5" barrel (on the flash hider) while it'll rattle around on the barrel directly on a 16".

Funny I was just reading about this. http://bravocompanymfg.com/carbines/m4.php

FNH5-7
07-15-2011, 7:25 PM
16" barrels are only popular because of NFA. If NFA wouldn't of considered barrels under 16 inches to be "SBR's" 16" inch barrel's wouldn't be so popular.

akjunkie
07-15-2011, 7:31 PM
Three major factors to consider.

Velocity, Fragmentation, & Bullet construction.

Fragmentation:
http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_velocity.html

http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_m855yaw.html

Velocity:
http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/perf_ballmil.html

Bullet Construction:
http://ammo.ar15.com/ammo/project/term_2700.html

STAGE 2
07-15-2011, 9:19 PM
This platform is ideally a 100-200 meter gun. At those distances, the difference in muzzle velocity and accuracy between a 14.5" and 16" barrel are negligible.

The greatest potential velocity loss in the 223/5.56 is in barrels less than 16" because of incomplete powder burn. Longer than 16" barrels can still gain velocity due to residual pressure to about 26". Longer than that and the velocity gain is very minimal.

50-100ft/sec per inch of barrel loss under 26" is accecpted as the standard until you get to 16". Shorter than 16" barrels and the velocity loss is faster.

This has a larger impact on bullet performance than many people care to admit. With m193 the fragementation range out of a 16" barrel is 150 meters. Out of a 14.5" it drops to 100. With m855 and 16" you get 95 meters. With 14.5 it drops to 50.

So while this doesn't affect accuracy, it had a great deal of impact on performance even at these close combat distances. It doesn't make sense to me to give up 50 yards of effectiveness to lose less than an inch of length (with thread overlap the difference is about .8 inches) and an unnoticable amount of weight (1 oz on a 7.5 lb rifle).

Subotai
07-15-2011, 9:24 PM
Definitely NOT going with 14.5. I might consider a 16, but am seriously leaning toward 20 as that is what I carried in the Marines back in the late 70's. I'm thinking it maximizes the round's potential. I don't expect any serious urban combat any time soon. LOL

Mr. Meeseeks
07-15-2011, 9:34 PM
I've got a 16" M4 profile and a Dissy. As time goes by the 16" M4's barrel is starting to look longer and longer, specially after I added a vortex to the end of it. LOL

I really do like the balance of it though.

I've been contemplating a 20" set up lately too.

Subotai
07-15-2011, 9:37 PM
I'm not feeling much reason to get a 16. So, without some great benefit, I probably won't.

DannyInSoCal
07-15-2011, 10:32 PM
This thread is another reason why I'm considering a 6.8SPC 80% AR pistol build with a 12.5" barrel.

Seems the more powerful round would compensate for the reduced burn time - Giving good accuracy and stopping power in a much lighter package...

Army GI
07-15-2011, 10:35 PM
I'm not feeling much reason to get a 16. So, without some great benefit, I probably won't.


I've been contemplating a 20" set up lately too.

You know you want to:reddevil:

http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm315/FA_45ACP/SANY1042.jpg

Cokebottle
07-15-2011, 10:45 PM
A bayonet fits correctly on the 14.5" barrel (on the flash hider) while it'll rattle around on the barrel directly on a 16".
It'll work just fine on a 16" mid-length.

And you want a mid-length gas system on a 16" barrel anyways. Carbine length is overgassed on a 16".

I'm running mid-length on my 14.5 and it works great.

andytothemax
07-16-2011, 12:22 AM
I'm looking at uppers and notice that there are A LOT of 16" uppers. Why does the M4 use a 14.5"? Why don't they use a 16"? I'm old school and used a 20" A2, so I don't know why you would want a 14.5 over a 16. Seems the 16 would be good enough for urban combat and be better for longer ranges. Why the 14.5? Is the 16 considered a good compromise between the 20 and the 14.5? Can someone talk about the thought processes that went into these two barrel lengths?

I can't speak for thought processes, but in CA a semiautomatic centerfire rifle under 30 inches in length is an AW regardless of magazine capacity. My Colt M4 .22LR with a 16" barrel is exactly 31 inches long even with the flash suppressor. If you use a CAR stock on a 14.5" barrel with fixed flash suppressor, you might be under the 30 inch limit.

motorwerks
07-16-2011, 12:50 AM
I can't speak for thought processes, but in CA a semiautomatic centerfire rifle under 30 inches in length is an AW regardless of magazine capacity. My Colt M4 .22LR with a 16" barrel is exactly 31 inches long even with the flash suppressor. If you use a CAR stock on a 14.5" barrel with fixed flash suppressor, you might be under the 30 inch limit.

Thats weird, I just measured my 14.5. Its actually 14.75 so you can run an A2 pinned hider but with my pinned Smith vortex its like 16.5-ish (I cant remember exactly) it was about 31. Maybe my MOE stock is longer then a CAR stock????

Cokebottle
07-16-2011, 1:25 PM
I can't speak for thought processes, but in CA a semiautomatic centerfire rifle under 30 inches in length is an AW regardless of magazine capacity. My Colt M4 .22LR with a 16" barrel is exactly 31 inches long even with the flash suppressor. If you use a CAR stock on a 14.5" barrel with fixed flash suppressor, you might be under the 30 inch limit.
Nope.

This one is just a touch over 30"
14.5" barrel with a pinned Smith Vortex FH. Completely collapsed, the end of the buffer tube is flush with the end of the buttstock

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=106636&stc=1&d=1310851505

Cokebottle
07-16-2011, 1:28 PM
Remember, the 30" limit applies to any configuration that allows the gun to be fired. Don't measure it with the buttstock installed (unless it's pinned). The gun can be fired with only the buffer tube installed, so measure with the buffer tube only.

Not sure what Colt did with the Umarex .22lr... since the .22lr doesn't need the buffer tube, they may have used a shorter receiver extension, and the 30" limit does not apply to rimfire, so it's good down to 26".

Uxi
07-16-2011, 1:33 PM
Nice paint job, especially on the ACOG

Cokebottle
07-16-2011, 1:43 PM
Nice paint job, especially on the ACOG
FAKEOG ;)

Redchevyman
07-16-2011, 1:45 PM
Frank, I have a brand new 20" government profile flat upper with M4 feed ramps, 1 in 9 twist, chambered for 5.56 complete with bolt carrier group and charging handle for $395.
http://www.gunco.net/gallery/data/500/medium/IMG_0088.JPGhttp://www.gunco.net/gallery/data/500/medium/IMG_0091.JPG

blazeaglory
07-16-2011, 2:21 PM
Check it out. This is what the M4 was designed for. If you want to target shoot passed a certain yard, get a 20inch. The only reason we have a 16" barrel is because its law.

http://youtu.be/PDQ0McPWXJA

How do you view this without linking it? You know so its visible to everyone?

OutlawDon
07-16-2011, 3:12 PM
PDQ0McPWXJA

motorwerks
07-16-2011, 8:16 PM
Remember, the 30" limit applies to any configuration that allows the gun to be fired. Don't measure it with the buttstock installed (unless it's pinned). The gun can be fired with only the buffer tube installed, so measure with the buffer tube only.


Crap..... forgot about that. I'll pull the stock and report back. :D

andytothemax
07-16-2011, 8:38 PM
PDQ0McPWXJA

Check out some of this guy's other videos! :eek:

UcN7w_gh7uY

Code7inOaktown
07-16-2011, 9:28 PM
Remember, the 30" limit applies to any configuration that allows the gun to be fired. Don't measure it with the buttstock installed (unless it's pinned). The gun can be fired with only the buffer tube installed, so measure with the buffer tube only.

Not sure what Colt did with the Umarex .22lr... since the .22lr doesn't need the buffer tube, they may have used a shorter receiver extension, and the 30" limit does not apply to rimfire, so it's good down to 26".

Is this correct? Any configuration would include removing the stock? Can't that be done with any weapon?

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

Uxi
07-16-2011, 9:45 PM
Never heard of people removing the stock, just that if it's folding it has to be in the shortest configuration

Cokebottle
07-16-2011, 10:29 PM
Slight difference with the AR pattern in that the buttstock can (generally) be removed without the use of tools.
You're going to need some kind of tool to remove the buttstock from the AK or a typical sporting rifle... AR is somewhat unique.

But as I said... unless you've got a pistol buffer or something, a 14.5 pinned to 16" plus the upper plus the buffer tube is going to be over 30".

dieselpower
07-17-2011, 8:27 AM
I too have never heard of having to remove the stock and make sure its 30". Thats complete BS...but this is California.

The Stock is part of the firearm, so unless a DA can prove you are trying to trick the system and are actually removing the stock, I do not think that arrest would see the inside of a court room.

There is no requirement to use tools to remove the stock for it to be part of the rifle. Stop mixing laws people. The permanently attached muzzle device is an exemption for NFA law as ruled by the ATF. So all the tools and welds and pins and set screws BS is for that ONLY....ONLY...ONLY.

It doesn't matter if I need to use a blow-torch to make my rifle under 30" or a twist of a finger... as long as it is 30" long in the shortest NORMAL configuration while firing..its NOT an AW. Removing the stock, even if all it takes is lifting a lever and pulling it off ISNT normal.

Cokebottle
07-17-2011, 10:19 AM
There is no requirement to use tools to remove the stock for it to be part of the rifle. Stop mixing laws people. The permanently attached muzzle device is an exemption for NFA law as ruled by the ATF. So all the tools and welds and pins and set screws BS is for that ONLY....ONLY...ONLY.
Then explain how a simple cap that is not in any way secured with at least Loctite does not avoid AW status on a handgun with a threaded barrel.

OTOH, an AR without a buttstock is no longer a "rifle" because it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder, thus, the 30" OAL would no longer apply.
But we still have "once a rifle, always a rifle"

Point being, with a standard CAR buffer tube and a barrel that meets minimum legal length for NFA, the OAL of an AR pattern rifle will indeed meet the minimum 30" even with the buttstock removed.

That's all I was saying. With my Vltor Modstock completely collapsed, the end of the mil-spec buffer is flush with the end.
I've got a DD 14.5" barrel with a Smith Vortex FH. It's over 30".

shadow65
07-17-2011, 1:09 PM
The one and only reason for the existance of the 16" is the civilian market.
14.5 is better balanced and the carbine gas system is correct for the 14.5"

There is nothing a 16" will do better than a 14.5".
Problem is, 16" is needed for a civilian barrel length without ATF paper work.
A 16" M4 profile barrel looks like poo to me.
Dave N

Code7inOaktown
07-17-2011, 1:12 PM
Then explain how a simple cap that is not in any way secured with at least Loctite does not avoid AW status on a handgun with a threaded barrel.

OTOH, an AR without a buttstock is no longer a "rifle" because it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder, thus, the 30" OAL would no longer apply.
But we still have "once a rifle, always a rifle"

Point being, with a standard CAR buffer tube and a barrel that meets minimum legal length for NFA, the OAL of an AR pattern rifle will indeed meet the minimum 30" even with the buttstock removed.

That's all I was saying. With my Vltor Modstock completely collapsed, the end of the mil-spec buffer is flush with the end.
I've got a DD 14.5" barrel with a Smith Vortex FH. It's over 30".

Cokebottle, do you have any guidance from the lawyer's here on this as I have not ever heard of removing the stock as a condition. I suppose if you took it to the range, removed the stock and began firing it you might be in trouble but it seems to me that OAL is with the stock collapsed. Maybe someone should post this over in the legal section.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

dieselpower
07-17-2011, 1:21 PM
Then explain how a simple cap that is not in any way secured with at least Loctite does not avoid AW status on a handgun with a threaded barrel.

OTOH, an AR without a buttstock is no longer a "rifle" because it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder, thus, the 30" OAL would no longer apply.
But we still have "once a rifle, always a rifle"

Point being, with a standard CAR buffer tube and a barrel that meets minimum legal length for NFA, the OAL of an AR pattern rifle will indeed meet the minimum 30" even with the buttstock removed.

That's all I was saying. With my Vltor Modstock completely collapsed, the end of the mil-spec buffer is flush with the end.
I've got a DD 14.5" barrel with a Smith Vortex FH. It's over 30".

I am not going back and fixing what I said, nor do I even think I said something wrong. I think you are mis-reading what I wrote, or just can't follow my Sunday morning logic...

once again, there is no freaking law saying a stock must need tools, time and extreme effort to remove in order for it to be counted in the 30" min length requirement...

show me the law if you say I am wrong... PM it to me and post it here since I see no F-ing reason to deal with you on this issue Coke. On a personal note if you spent more time reading what I am saying than just disagreeing with me I think you and I would have less conflict.

The Fed law has ZERO to do with CA AW law....

Cokebottle
07-17-2011, 1:33 PM
The Fed law has ZERO to do with CA AW law....
Agreed.... and the only law that references a "tool" is the case law (or was it a DOJ opinion letter?) to the fixed magazine issue stating that a bullet tip qualifies as a tool.

But "common practice" on a featureless rifle is that a telescoping buttstock is GTG if the stock is pinned via a screw.
Again, not permanent, as "permanence" is only required for NFA and not to avoid California AW issues... so following this logic, a "tool" being used to adjust the buttstock is legal (of course, like the original P50, the upper should not be installed when the screw is removed).

I'm applying the same logic to removing the buttstock to meet the 30" minimum OAL, since it falls under the same AW laws as the telescoping buttstock, and the threaded barrel on pistols.
S&W was told by the DOJ that Loctite was sufficient to mount a sleeve on their threaded barrels to bypass SB23. It's not "permanent"... but does require some kind of tool to remove.
If some level of "solid attachment" were not required, then a threaded barrel with a sleeve threaded on would also be legal... but it is apparently not.

But as I said... it's a moot point. A 14.5" barrel pinned to 16" will be legal on an AR pattern rifle with a CAR buffer tube, whether the buttstock is installed or not.

30" OAL, telescoping buttstock, and threaded barrels on pistols are all covered under the same AW laws, so the level of "permanence" or lack thereof for one statute should apply equally to all.

dieselpower
07-17-2011, 2:29 PM
7" upper + 16" barrel = 23". That leaves a minimum of 7" left for the stock. If the 7" stock "rode" on a 3" tube that would still be 100% legal since the law doesn't adjust for non-standard use of the rifle.

So you can [in 1 second] "twist" the 7" stock off of the 3" tube, and manufacture a 26" rifle doesn't make the rifle an AW until it is DONE. The MICRO-SECOND a person removed the stock, the rifle would be classified as an AW... the same way a 11+ magazine is snapped into a fixed magazine rifle or a magazine lock is unsecured to allow readily detachable magazines.

Time, Tools and effort play no part in AW law when Time, Tools and Effort were not written into the law. In the normal operation of the rifle when the stock is in the shortest position while firing...that must = 30". Time tools and disassembly of the rifle play no part unless a DA can prove that is how the rifle is normally used.

Cokebottle
07-17-2011, 2:48 PM
And a mil-spec buffer tube is 7.25 to the end of the threads. Commercial is a bit longer by maybe 1/4-1/2"
The threads eat up about 1/2", but in your 16+7 are you taking into account the upper part of the lower receiver?

Mine (pictured above) is 30.5" OAL with the buttstock removed.

Sometimes I think you like to argue just for the sake of argument and it's getting old.

On one hand, you come up with :TFH: ideas about making 10/20 and 10/30 magazines being illegal unless you use terms like "long body" when it is clearly not illegal... then you come up with things that are questionably legal and treat it like it's a non-issue.

Whether the gun is normally operated in a particular configuration or not makes little difference (maybe if you have a good attorney)... You can "normally" operate a functional folder with the stock opened all day long and have dozens of witnesses claim that you never fold the stock with the upper attached.
That doesn't make it a legal configuration.
A telescoping buttstock with the molded part pulled off does not cease to be a telescoping buttstock.


OAL of an AR-pattern rifle is a 100% non-issue. With a legal barrel and CAR buffer tube, you will meet the 30" minimum.

dieselpower
07-17-2011, 3:10 PM
And a mil-spec buffer tube is 7.25 to the end of the threads. Commercial is a bit longer by maybe 1/4-1/2"
The threads eat up about 1/2", but in your 16+7 are you taking into account the upper part of the lower receiver?

Mine (pictured above) is 30.5" OAL with the buttstock removed.

Sometimes I think you like to argue just for the sake of argument and it's getting old.

On one hand, you come up with :TFH: ideas about making 10/20 and 10/30 magazines being illegal unless you use terms like "long body" when it is clearly not illegal... then you come up with things that are questionably legal and treat it like it's a non-issue.

Whether the gun is normally operated in a particular configuration or not makes little difference (maybe if you have a good attorney)... You can "normally" operate a functional folder with the stock opened all day long and have dozens of witnesses claim that you never fold the stock with the upper attached.
That doesn't make it a legal configuration.
A telescoping buttstock with the molded part pulled off does not cease to be a telescoping buttstock.


OAL of an AR-pattern rifle is a 100% non-issue. With a legal barrel and CAR buffer tube, you will meet the 30" minimum.

Once again Coke you are showing that you don't read post...you skim them.

My issue in this thread was people were implying if a rifle's stock could be removed without tools and that removal made the rifle less than 30" it was an AW even with the stock. That is NOT the case...unless someone can show me a law stating tools, time and effort are required to disassemble a rifle for the 30" AW rule.

on the 10/20 and 10/30 I am again correct... . you don't read..you SKIM post. My Glock 17 didn't come with a 10/15 from the factory did it Mr Coke. It came with a 10 round magazine. The fact the body can be MODIFIED and hold 15 rounds shouldn't be an issue. Guess freaking what Coke...its NOT an issue unless I turn it into one. How do I do that?...by first referring to a 10rd magazines as a 10/15.. 10/20...10/30. My post on this issue was merely to advise a safer behavior of referring to magazines as what they are and NOT adding drama to your life. A magazine that holds 10rds should be called a 10 rd magazine...nothing more. Others live for drama. That thread then turned into a complete crap-fest since people love freaking drama.

Fiiyablade
07-17-2011, 3:14 PM
Id go 14.5 for a light weight build

Cokebottle
07-17-2011, 3:15 PM
My issue in this thread was people were implying if a rifle's stock could be removed without tools and that removal made the rifle less than 30" it was an AW even with the stock. That is NOT the case...unless someone can show me a law stating tools, time and effort are required to disassemble a rifle for the 30" AW rule.
I was the one that brought that up, and merely because I am concerned that it COULD be an issue.

It's another one of those things that is going to be up to one of the 58 DAs in the state.

And Kamala.

dieselpower
07-17-2011, 3:34 PM
I was the one that brought that up, and merely because I am concerned that it COULD be an issue.

It's another one of those things that is going to be up to one of the 58 DAs in the state.

And Kamala.
No Coke it isn't. It would NOT see the inside of a courtroom and you know it.

You have enough training on the legal system to know I am right. Its only in your mind and the minds of people who use fear and unreasonable logic where a DA would seek an AW charge in this manner.

The process a person would have to go through and what the LEA/LEO/Tech would have to do to even come to those charges are outside of any logic foundation in reality. People have a greater chance of being charged with DUI after taking a Tylenol then being charged with AW possession for a rifle that can be disassembled and then fired while disassembled meeting the 30" rule.

There would be no law to file charges on since the rifle met the 30" rule in its normal firing configuration.

Come on man, stop the fear mongering and treat the new members here with some respect. Give them the proper info and don't advise things that are not within the reality of our situation in CA. We have it bad enough without the guys who know the law twisting it to things unrealistic.

m98
07-18-2011, 1:11 AM
Imo, 16" barrel is a much better choice for real world urban combat. Like the poster above stated velocity is a key factor in maximizing the 556 fragmentation potential. Thats why i have the 16" barrel m4.

Code7inOaktown
07-18-2011, 9:19 PM
Imo, 16" barrel is a much better choice for real world urban combat. Like the poster above stated velocity is a key factor in maximizing the 556 fragmentation potential. Thats why i have the 16" barrel m4.

What is "real world urban combat?" Somewhere where you would need fragmentation at 150 meters instead of 100 meters?

RRichie09
07-19-2011, 1:03 PM
What is "real world urban combat?" Somewhere where you would need fragmentation at 150 meters instead of 100 meters?

Real world urban combat involves malls and terroist treats that may or may not be real. Honestly, if you are shooting at someone 100 yards away in self-defence have fun in court.

I have a 16" middy and will be building a 14.5" middy or carbine next.

Delphin25
07-20-2011, 2:41 PM
On the original topic:
I'm building a 14.5" lightweight with Rock River extended A2 Flash Suppressor pinned and welded for the 16.1" length.
Plan to order extended front post sight from Bushmaster.
Because I am using a upper with fixed handle adjustable elevation rear site and stock M4 front sight config is lower ie non F stamp.
I may try and zero in first to see if it actually is off.

Brown Rock
07-20-2011, 7:49 PM
Remember, the 30" limit applies to any configuration that allows the gun to be fired. Don't measure it with the buttstock installed (unless it's pinned). The gun can be fired with only the buffer tube installed, so measure with the buffer tube only.

Oh ****, I forgot about this. Just checked mine without the stock and it's 30.5" :cool:

Code7inOaktown
07-21-2011, 1:07 AM
Real world urban combat involves malls and terroist treats that may or may not be real. Honestly, if you are shooting at someone 100 yards away in self-defence have fun in court.

I have a 16" middy and will be building a 14.5" middy or carbine next.

That was kinda my point. Althoug I think the 16-inch middy makes a lot more sense for the longer handguard and non-pinned FH.

Code7inOaktown
07-21-2011, 1:07 AM
Oh ****, I forgot about this. Just checked mine without the stock and it's 30.5" :cool:

There is contention as to whether this is true or not.

RMTactical
07-21-2011, 10:33 AM
When the M4 was first made, Colt had figured out that at that time the 14.5" barrel was the shortest they could go and still maintain a decent degree of reliability.

The 16" is a very good length IMO though, especially in a mid length.

Personally though, I like the 14.5" with a permanently attached flash hider...