Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 10/19/2004 12:20:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2004 6:48:19 PM EST by gvidon212]
Having a full length sight radius without the excess barrel length of the 20" yet not the velocity loss of the short 14.5" barrel? I guess considering this is the only reason that someone would by a 16 inch patrolman carbine for looks?


*****www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=2&f=28&t=144698&page=1


Tell Bushmaster to make a Dissipator with mid-length gas system. Link above.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 12:25:54 PM EST
I have been thinking of getting a dissipator upper. I think i am going to order one now.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 12:27:48 PM EST
I have a project started to build a 16 HBAR with a rifle gas system. A2, of course.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 2:07:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2004 2:18:42 PM EST by LJUnaTIC]
I had ADCO build me an 18 inch Govt. profile no ban A4 upper. Very similar to the dissy, and so far runs great with the stock rifle gas system. Weight is the same as an Hbar 16", very easy to handle, and IMHO just slightly better than the 16" Dissapator, though not by much
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 3:50:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2004 3:50:45 PM EST by gvidon212]

Originally Posted By LJUnaTIC:
I had ADCO build me an 18 inch Govt. profile no ban A4 upper. Very similar to the dissy, and so far runs great with the stock rifle gas system. Weight is the same as an Hbar 16", very easy to handle, and IMHO just slightly better than the 16" Dissapator, though not by much




Can you post a pic? Also, is it a standard 20' gas system.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 3:54:58 PM EST
The concept of the Dissipator sounds logical - carbine like mobility with rifle length accuracy potential.

I've got one in the works based on a cut down 20" gov't profile barrel, but it is on the burner behind the back burner. I've got the barrel, receiver and front sight. I'm going to KG coat it like U-dog's Dissergy.

When I get time...................................
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 4:38:42 PM EST
I've always drooled over Hawkeye's dissipator.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 4:47:54 PM EST
I've got a Bushy M4 profile dissy with a vortex and love it. I'm trying to trade stuff or raise cash right now for a second one.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 4:54:52 PM EST
I happen to have the "real thing"; a Bushmaster Dissipator. Unfortunately as they build them they are rather heavy. I'd like to see a medium profile 1:7 barrel with a mid-length gas system.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 5:03:40 PM EST
The mid-length gas system on a 16" barrel is hard to beat, especially with the weight savings of turning down the barrel under the handguards, nice balance, too.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 5:07:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:
I've always drooled over Hawkeye's dissipator.



I have an virtual carbon copy of his (differences: fluted barrel, A2 stock), and find it too heavy. I'm thinking of putting on a bipod and a 4x ACOG, and making it a "designated marksman" type rifle.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 5:28:22 PM EST
I just got a new BM Dissipator carbine. I really liked the Dissipator for the same reasons that gvidon212 gives, the handy 16'' barrel with the full length sight radius. I thought that the post ban dissipators looked kind of ugly with the plain muzzle but the flash hiders on the new ones really dress the rifle up and now they look very business like. I'm looking forward to trying mine out for the first time on Thurs. or Fri.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 5:33:11 PM EST
Here's mine!



teamroper
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 6:28:52 PM EST
I dont like the dual gasblock idea, but I know its the only surefire reliable 16 incher. I sure wich someone would make the dissipator with the midlength gas system

to me the rifle system cut down would be best. Many have had very successful rifle gas systemed 16's by enlargening the gasport to .XXX. Some have said this set up is unreliable. Im gonna say the verdict is still out cause not all of the people who had trouble didnt open the gas port up either enough or did it too much.

To me I think someone should just forfeit the inch and take a rifle and cut it down to 17. 18 inch barrel function without modifying the gasport. If someone would figure what size to make the gasport for a 17 inch barrel, you have minmal extra length but increase the bullets lag distance after the gas port by about 1/3. I dont know the exact amount it increases, but a 16" barrel only has like 3 in of distance from the gas port to the muzzle. Someone please post the exact distances and gas port dimensions for all these set ups.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 6:38:41 PM EST
Full size 20" barrels over carbines any day of the week, Better velocity, better range, better fragmentation and better penetration. Iraq is TSHTF everyday and the Marines knew to pass on the M4 for their standard rifle, and chose the M16A4

Always remember, Everyman is a rifleman, and it's hard to be a rifleman if your weapon's effeciency is restricted to 100 yards
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 6:45:04 PM EST

Originally Posted By jonathan1994:
I dont like the dual gasblock idea, but I know its the only surefire reliable 16 incher. I sure wich someone would make the dissipator with the midlength gas system

to me the rifle system cut down would be best. Many have had very successful rifle gas systemed 16's by enlargening the gasport to .XXX. Some have said this set up is unreliable. Im gonna say the verdict is still out cause not all of the people who had trouble didnt open the gas port up either enough or did it too much.

To me I think someone should just forfeit the inch and take a rifle and cut it down to 17. 18 inch barrel function without modifying the gasport. If someone would figure what size to make the gasport for a 17 inch barrel, you have minmal extra length but increase the bullets lag distance after the gas port by about 1/3. I dont know the exact amount it increases, but a 16" barrel only has like 3 in of distance from the gas port to the muzzle. Someone please post the exact distances and gas port dimensions for all these set ups.



Proper gas port size for a 16 inch barrel with a rifle gas sytem is .110". I'll be using a lightweight carrier and an OAI adjustable pneumatic buffer so I can tune cycle speed to match my needs. Worst cas scenario I have the hole plugged and a new gas block put in at the midlength position. I will report back when my project is done.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 6:49:36 PM EST
Hey I have a Bushmaster Dissipator upper on a DPMS lower. My impressions are that it is kinda barrel heavy. But when fired rapidly it has virtually no muzzle hop and the barrel tends not to heat up nearly as fast. Most of the barrel is covered by the handguards and is very user freindly when it does heat up. My impressions are that it is extremely accurate as well though. Muzzel flash and concussion are a bitch but I have no flash hider...want one though. In a way it looks odd but also kinda cool because everyone just dont have one. I like it

Wes
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 6:53:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2004 7:14:08 PM EST by DBAR]

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:
Full size 20" barrels over carbines any day of the week, Better velocity, better range, better fragmentation and better penetration. Iraq is TSHTF everyday and the Marines knew to pass on the M4 for their standard rifle, and chose the M16A4

Always remember, Everyman is a rifleman, and it's hard to be a rifleman if your weapon's effeciency is restricted to 100 yards



I have a dissy and I don't feel I'm limited to 100 meters. Then again I'm not a rifleman in Irag. However I do feel that the effeciency of a dissy is Not restricted to 100 meters. What makes you feel that the 16" bbl'd AR would be limited to such a short distance? I've ck'd out ammo specs. and the 5.56 performs (energy and bc through a 16" bbl) well past the limit of 100 meters.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:04:22 PM EST
If you're just talking about lethal and size then wouldn't the Bushmaster Bullpup be a better choice. It's got a 21.5" barrel in a 30" package and the velocity of both a M193 and the SS109 is higher than the velocity coming out of a 24" barrel (according to Bushmaster). So you have a longer fragmentation range. This is assuming you overlook - no real handguard for prolong shooting and slower mag changes.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:12:55 PM EST

Originally Posted By leadfoot:
If you're just talking about lethal and size then wouldn't the Bushmaster Bullpup be a better choice. It's got a 21.5" barrel in a 30" package and the velocity of both a M193 and the SS109 is higher than the velocity coming out of a 24" barrel (according to Bushmaster). So you have a longer fragmentation range. This is assuming you overlook - no real handguard for prolong shooting and slower mag changes.



The BFI bullpup is a heavy, uncomfortable, inaccurate pos. Its cheap, the trigger sucks and the receiver gets hot under rapid fire.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:14:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By DBAR:

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:
Full size 20" barrels over carbines any day of the week, Better velocity, better range, better fragmentation and better penetration. Iraq is TSHTF everyday and the Marines knew to pass on the M4 for their standard rifle, and chose the M16A4

Always remember, Everyman is a rifleman, and it's hard to be a rifleman if your weapon's effeciency is restricted to 100 yards



I have a dissy and I don't feel I'm limited to 100 meters. Then again I'm not a rifleman in Irag. However I do feel that the effeciency of a dissy is Not restricted to 100 meters. What makes you feel that the 16" bbl'd AR would be limited to such a short distance? I've ck'd out ammo specs. and the 5.56 performs (energy and bc) well past the limit of 100 meters.



The possibility of fragmentation out of a 16" barrel drops off dramatically around 75 yards, with no fragmentation at 100 yards. You can still engage targets at longer ranges, true, but without fragmentation lethality goes way done. The loss of velocity also reduces overall range and accuracy as well...

The M16A4 with M193 will fragment out to 150 yards, and still have enough energy to defeat body armor at 500 yards
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:14:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2004 7:16:24 PM EST by DBAR]
Combat_Jack Anything else?
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:21:15 PM EST
Combat_jack, looks aside is the Bullpup a more lethal rifle. I didn't care it looks like crap on a stick if it can put a man down easier than another rifle.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:28:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By leadfoot:
Combat_jack, looks aside is the Bullpup a more lethal rifle. I didn't care it looks like crap on a stick if it can put a man down easier than another rifle.



If I could stomach the idea of combustion next to my skull, and they sold the Famas in America, I'd jump on the bullpup bandwagon in a heartbeat. Full length barrel and lethality in a package not much bigger than an Mp5 is an alluring prospect...
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:30:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By leadfoot:
Combat_jack, looks aside is the Bullpup a more lethal rifle. I didn't care it looks like crap on a stick if it can put a man down easier than another rifle.





It has a longer barrel. Thats its only advantage. Perhaps if you were discussing the merits of the Tavor or AUG we might have more to agree about. I actually like the bullpup concept. I just dont like the BFI bullpup.

There is more to making a lethal weapon than hitting hard. If that were the case we could get by with a magnum remington 700.

Fact is, inside of 200m my M4 with 77gr will be just as deadly as you bullpup. More so, in fact, when other facotrs like user friendliness are brought in.

Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:35:03 PM EST
M193
20" 190-200m
16"140-150m
14.5" 95-100m
11.5" 40-45m


The difference is less than you think, and even this is fixed with 77gr ammo or, when it becomes more available, 6.8.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:38:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:

Originally Posted By DBAR:

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:
Full size 20" barrels over carbines any day of the week, Better velocity, better range, better fragmentation and better penetration. Iraq is TSHTF everyday and the Marines knew to pass on the M4 for their standard rifle, and chose the M16A4

Always remember, Everyman is a rifleman, and it's hard to be a rifleman if your weapon's effeciency is restricted to 100 yards



I have a dissy and I don't feel I'm limited to 100 meters. Then again I'm not a rifleman in Irag. However I do feel that the effeciency of a dissy is Not restricted to 100 meters. What makes you feel that the 16" bbl'd AR would be limited to such a short distance? I've ck'd out ammo specs. and the 5.56 performs (energy and bc) well past the limit of 100 meters.



The possibility of fragmentation out of a 16" barrel drops off dramatically around 75 yards, with no fragmentation at 100 yards. You can still engage targets at longer ranges, true, but without fragmentation lethality goes way done. The loss of velocity also reduces overall range and accuracy as well...

The M16A4 with M193 will fragment out to 150 yards, and still have enough energy to defeat body armor at 500 yards



Where did you get your information? I'm not trying to start anything but I thought M193 was more of a defensive rnd used for its fragmentation qualitys, and that the SS109 or M855 rnds where better for penetration. I also have read that m193 will fragment out to 100 yards with diminishing effectiveness out to 150 yards from a 16" bbl. I've also read that your right about the 20" bbl performance. That being the m193 rnd being effective out to 125 yard with diminishing effectiveness out to 175 yards.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:40:22 PM EST
I asked in the ammo forum about this, but I remember the Ammo Oracle data was put into question by some people here as being based on erroneous data or testing procedures? It's being reexplained to me over there (it might just be heresay), but the dissenters said that a carbine length barrel fragments M193 out to around 95 to 100 yards. 150 is a big difference.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:43:21 PM EST
Sight radius shmight radius.

If you want accuracy, go with an optic of some kind. Thus, sight radius is immaterial.

If you want a short rifle, go with the carbine setup.

All the Dissiptor has is extra weight and parts. TWO gas blocks? Eh?
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:46:44 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2004 7:52:10 PM EST by DBAR]

Originally Posted By gvidon212:
I asked in the ammo forum about this, but I remember the Ammo Oracle data was put into question by some people here as being based on erroneous data or testing procedures? It's being reexplained to me over there (it might just be heresay), but the dissenters said that a carbine length barrel fragments M193 out to around 95 to 100 yards. 150 is a big difference.



Well M193 is out of fragmentation energy below 2400 fps (based on various different charts), and I've never chronographed anything. Based on what I've read, out of a 16" bbl M193 is at 2700 fps at 100 yds so I'm guessing that it would carry 2400 fps out to 125 or 150 yards.

IMHO the dissy is a decent compramise. In the future I'll have 3 AR's.
M4
Dissy
Full size 20" A2
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:50:30 PM EST
Your 77gr leaves a 16" the barrel at 2750 muzzle velocity making fragmentation highly unlikely past 25 yards, let alone 200 yards. My M193 will fragment at 150 yards out of a 20" barrel. Even SS109 fragments at 125 yards, and still cut through armor and barriers a few hundred hards past that...

Mind you, I have nothing against carbines, they are just very mission specific firearms. Once you try and take them out of their specific role they become poor combat choices compared to a full size rifle. For the entry teams, and room clearing, the M4 is the way to go. For outright warfare the M16 is the better gun...
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:51:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By gvidon212:
I asked in the ammo forum about this, but I remember the Ammo Oracle data was put into question by some people here as being based on erroneous data or testing procedures? It's being reexplained to me over there (it might just be heresay), but the dissenters said that a carbine length barrel fragments M193 out to around 95 to 100 yards. 150 is a big difference.



The ammo-oracle is the best resource available. I have NO reason to doubt it.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:53:28 PM EST

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:
Your 77gr leaves a 16" the barrel at 2750 muzzle velocity making fragmentation highly unlikely past 25 yards, let alone 200 yards. My M193 will fragment at 150 yards out of a 20" barrel. Even SS109 fragments at 125 yards, and still cut through armor and barriers a few hundred hards past that...

Mind you, I have nothing against carbines, they are just very mission specific firearms. Once you try and take them out of their specific role they become poor combat choices compared to a full size rifle. For the entry teams, and room clearing, the M4 is the way to go. For outright warfare the M16 is the better gun...



77gr fragments to 250+ meters from a 16 inch barrel. It fragments at a lower velocity than lighter bullets. Out of an 18 inch SPR barrel it does well on arabs to 600m, although its not fragmenting at that distance.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 7:55:07 PM EST

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:
Your 77gr leaves a 16" the barrel at 2750 muzzle velocity making fragmentation highly unlikely past 25 yards, let alone 200 yards. My M193 will fragment at 150 yards out of a 20" barrel. Even SS109 fragments at 125 yards, and still cut through armor and barriers a few hundred hards past that...

Mind you, I have nothing against carbines, they are just very mission specific firearms. Once you try and take them out of their specific role they become poor combat choices compared to a full size rifle. For the entry teams, and room clearing, the M4 is the way to go. For outright warfare the M16 is the better gun...



Well I think everyone has made very valid points. Mine where the least substanstiated
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 8:02:00 PM EST
Thanks for the reply, Combat_Jack. I don't own a BM Bullpup because I also think their ugly and not designed to be user friendly but I always thought it was more lethal than my 20" AR and definitely my 14.5" AR.

Just can't bring myself to buy one. All around I feel the 20" AR is a better choice in AR then the 16" dissipator from BM. I really like the way the standard 20" AR shoots over any other barrel length AR.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 8:05:19 PM EST

Originally Posted By DBAR:

Originally Posted By gvidon212:
I asked in the ammo forum about this, but I remember the Ammo Oracle data was put into question by some people here as being based on erroneous data or testing procedures? It's being reexplained to me over there (it might just be heresay), but the dissenters said that a carbine length barrel fragments M193 out to around 95 to 100 yards. 150 is a big difference.



Well M193 is out of fragmentation energy below 2400 fps (based on various different charts), and I've never chronographed anything. Based on what I've read, out of a 16" bbl M193 is at 2700 fps at 100 yds so I'm guessing that it would carry 2400 fps out to 125 or 150 yards.



I dont think anyone has written what the fragmentation threshold is for the new heavier 5.56 bullets, but I know they fragment below typical velocities, and I'm betting they were engineered that way. The 77gr TAP is said to be one of the most lethal anti personel rounds ever made. Those brands are just very expensive (too expensive for the average shooter) so SS109 and M193 are the default choices, and it's a fact that they perform better out of a 20" barrel. Also the 1:7 twist wears very fast compared to 1:9.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 8:05:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By leadfoot:
Thanks for the reply, Combat_Jack. I don't own a BM Bullpup because I also think their ugly and not designed to be user friendly but I always thought it was more lethal than my 20" AR and definitely my 14.5" AR.

Just can't bring myself to buy one. All around I feel the 20" AR is a better choice in AR then the 16" dissipator from BM. I really like the way the standard 20" AR shoots over any other barrel length AR.



I miss my old Colt A2.

I'm gonna build an M16A2 clone one of these days.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 8:16:01 PM EST
The Dissy is an attractive carbine. No one can deny that much.



Link Posted: 10/19/2004 8:21:24 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2004 8:22:04 PM EST by Onslaught]
I like the looks of the Dissy, but I think the ADCO mid-length is a better option for what this thread's original purpose was seeking.

It's got the gubment profile barrel, 16" barrel, 2" longer sight radius than a carbine, there's only one gas block, recoil impulse same as 20", and it just looks GOOD!

Heck, you can even attach a bayonet to spike zombies in the head as they rise from the grave without even spending a round!
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 8:36:33 PM EST
I have a dissy and I like it. My next build will be a 20" A2 design, of what caliber is the next question.

Link Posted: 10/19/2004 9:03:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:
Full size 20" barrels over carbines any day of the week, Better velocity, better range, better fragmentation and better penetration. Iraq is TSHTF everyday and the Marines knew to pass on the M4 for their standard rifle, and chose the M16A4

Always remember, Everyman is a rifleman, and it's hard to be a rifleman if your weapon's effeciency is restricted to 100 yards



+1
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 9:30:45 PM EST

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:

Originally Posted By DBAR:

Originally Posted By gvidon212:
I asked in the ammo forum about this, but I remember the Ammo Oracle data was put into question by some people here as being based on erroneous data or testing procedures? It's being reexplained to me over there (it might just be heresay), but the dissenters said that a carbine length barrel fragments M193 out to around 95 to 100 yards. 150 is a big difference.



Well M193 is out of fragmentation energy below 2400 fps (based on various different charts), and I've never chronographed anything. Based on what I've read, out of a 16" bbl M193 is at 2700 fps at 100 yds so I'm guessing that it would carry 2400 fps out to 125 or 150 yards.



I dont think anyone has written what the fragmentation threshold is for the new heavier 5.56 bullets, but I know they fragment below typical velocities, and I'm betting they were engineered that way. The 77gr TAP is said to be one of the most lethal anti personel rounds ever made. Those brands are just very expensive (too expensive for the average shooter) so SS109 and M193 are the default choices, and it's a fact that they perform better out of a 20" barrel. Also the 1:7 twist wears very fast compared to 1:9.



What are you talking about Variablebinary?

Link Posted: 10/19/2004 9:46:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By Variablebinary:
Full size 20" barrels over carbines any day of the week, Better velocity, better range, better fragmentation and better penetration. Iraq is TSHTF everyday and the Marines knew to pass on the M4 for their standard rifle, and chose the M16A4

Always remember, Everyman is a rifleman, and it's hard to be a rifleman if your weapon's effeciency is restricted to 100 yards



yeah and the marine's whine about how their a4's are too long getting in and out of their vechiles... our wars today are mechinized... we aren't going to see long rifles any longer (hince xm8)... most soldiers don't even fit a2 buttstocks and you start seeing the crapying bazooka stance with their A4's...

when you say Always remember, Everyman is a rifleman, and it's hard to be a rifleman if your weapon's effeciency is restricted to 100 yards... keep in mind that those marines w/ 20" barrel, shooting 62gr bullets, at 125m is at 2688fps (less that what is required for proper fragmentation)... so according to you the marines are almost currentlying carring around 100m restricted guns... shesh...

After action reviews of the marines and front line army reports engagements being almost always less than 100m in iraq... and most of those were within 40m... this is were a carbine is faster to point faster to kill... as Pat Rogers just wrote in SWAT mag... something like "for reason I will never understand the marines adopted the a4 instead of going with m4's"... people who know the game.... know that carbines are usally more useful on more days of the year than rifles... get over your "misterious 4" of barrel length and about 5" of stock"

EAT My GUN!!!



Link Posted: 10/19/2004 10:19:59 PM EST

Originally Posted By jar3ds:
yeah and the marine's whine about how their a4's are too long getting in and out of their vechiles... our wars today are mechinized... we aren't going to see long rifles any longer (hince xm8)... most soldiers don't even fit a2 buttstocks and you start seeing the crapying bazooka stance with their A4's...



Funny, the vast majority of 'my rifle's too big' complaints I've read have been from soldiers, not Marines... And they're predominantly armed with M4 carbines at this point, as I understand it. I just spoke with a colonel this past summer who had recently returned to the States from Iraq, and he stated that the M16A4 was doing a great job (although the M1014 had been his personal favorite weapon over there).

Having not been to Iraq or any such thing, I cannot comment from firsthand experience. Annecdotally, I've heard that the M4 is doing a fine job in Iraq as well. However, in Afghanistan, the M4 seems to have developed something of an undesirable reputation because of the longer ranges firefights can occur at over there. As I recall, there was an acrticle in The Marine Corps Gazette a while back that bespoke Afghanistan as being 'rifle country' or somesuch thing.

Somehow, I don't think that an extra 4.5" of barrel is likely to be high on a list of things that can get you deep-sixed in Iraq.
Link Posted: 10/19/2004 11:22:43 PM EST
When I first received my HBAR DISSY upper and slapped it on my lower, I was like, damn, this is kinda heavy. Solution? I sent it to KKF and had him give the barrel a GOVERNMENT PROFILE job under the handguards (except where the legs of the shaved gas block wrap around). Result? GREAT. The rifle handles SIGNIFICANTLY better for ME. I really like the setup. Now the only think I need a FF rail!
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 12:50:08 AM EST
Hopefully this week I'll be ordering parts for an interesting M4 Dissy build.....
If all goes well it will become my only carbine.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 6:46:25 AM EST

Originally Posted By Brett_Bass:

Originally Posted By jar3ds:
yeah and the marine's whine about how their a4's are too long getting in and out of their vechiles... our wars today are mechinized... we aren't going to see long rifles any longer (hince xm8)... most soldiers don't even fit a2 buttstocks and you start seeing the crapying bazooka stance with their A4's...



Funny, the vast majority of 'my rifle's too big' complaints I've read have been from soldiers, not Marines... And they're predominantly armed with M4 carbines at this point, as I understand it. I just spoke with a colonel this past summer who had recently returned to the States from Iraq, and he stated that the M16A4 was doing a great job (although the M1014 had been his personal favorite weapon over there).

Having not been to Iraq or any such thing, I cannot comment from firsthand experience. Annecdotally, I've heard that the M4 is doing a fine job in Iraq as well. However, in Afghanistan, the M4 seems to have developed something of an undesirable reputation because of the longer ranges firefights can occur at over there. As I recall, there was an acrticle in The Marine Corps Gazette a while back that bespoke Afghanistan as being 'rifle country' or somesuch thing.

Somehow, I don't think that an extra 4.5" of barrel is likely to be high on a list of things that can get you deep-sixed in Iraq.



The M16A4 is just as modular as the M4 and will fight well in both urban and battefield conditions, while the M4 is more focused and is literally regulated to only CQB. Thankfully we have been fighting restless natives who cant shoot worth anything the past 40 years and not a serious army. God forbid we ever go against a well put together army with real rifleman. The M4 would be seriously challenged then...
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 6:47:15 AM EST
It always kills me when a thread goes this way but the guy was just asking about the dissi and the full sight radius...not bullet performance. When it comes down to it none of us should worry really about bullet frag out past 100 yds. We are using a semi-auto...we can always take another shot or we can put that first round where it belongs either in the heart or between the eys either of which has always been quite effective on humans in the past. I know we are all good marksmen and can do this For legal reasons if you just start whacking folks with your AR at extreme distances you are gonna fry in the electric chair cause they are gonna say 'the threat was to far away therefore it wasn't a threat.' I have a bolt action hunting rifle to supplement my SHTF resources. It is a remington 700 chambered in 270. I use federal premium bullets and its kinda like that old phone commercial that says reach out and touch someone. Once the bad guys get into tactical range then I'll drop it and swing the AR into position. To me that is a more sound way of doing things however silly it may sound to everyone else but the main fact is I probably will never need a weopon that has to be effective out past 100 yds meters or whatever. There just isnt that much open space where my life plays out. I really wouldnt want to be out in the open in a SHTF situation anyhow as that gives the bad guy the same tactical situation I have which is not advantageous to me at all. I have a Dissy and I like the thing. Do I think it is the perfect rifle? Probably not but then that is why I have more than one rifle. If I was in a situation where I needed HEAVY firepower at under 50 yds I might even opt out and use my AK. Up close they hit hard and are easy to manage. At really long ranges I might use my 270. But to be honest with you I feel the most comfortable with an AR of some type in my hand. I dont know why but I do. Maybe being ex-mil makes me like that but that is just the way I feel about it.

Anyway each person has his own dislikes and his own likes. Does anyone here really think the guy will go wrong if he buys a Dissi? I personally dont think so. He could definately do a lot worse and you guys know it. Hell he could go buy a mini 14 or something crappy like that. Not a terrible rifle but not good for the price either. If he doesn't like his dissi after he gets it he can always put on a new barrel or have the barrel worked on by someone like Kurt.

Hey DBAR. Just wanted you to know I think your Dissi rocks man. How does it shoot anyway? I havent had my barrel threaded yet how well does a flash hider help it out? Mine blows fire like a mad dragon or maybe a naval deck gun. I like your dissi too, teamroper2004.

Have a nice day guys,
Wes
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 7:36:05 AM EST
A2 stock length is so long for a reason. The Marine Corps rifle team wanted it that way, and unfortunately, they have a large amount of sway when it comes to how the rest of the Corps is equipped and trained.

What's good for shooting Camp Perry isn't necessarily good for fighting.

As for myself, I don't find the A2 stock too long. However, I am not your average rifle user. I am tall, with long arms.

Highpower oriented thinking is giving way to real world experience, primarily at the deckplate level. People like Pat Rogers are having an effect, as more troops rotate through places like Gunsite, and go over to the sandbox. Magpul stocks are hard to find for a reason....

As for barrel length, I am a believer in getting hits before all else. I do not worship at the altar of one shot stops. Recent experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan are proving that the amount of fight in a man has a large bearing in how many hits it takes to put him down. So, give me enough barrel to provide accurate shots at typical combat distances, without hindering my movement too much. Full length 20" is too long, and as a "civilian" I can't go under 16" without paperwork (Yes, I know 14.5" with permanent flash hider is legal, but after doing that, what do you have? A 16" barrell.) , so 16" it is.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 8:02:39 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/20/2004 8:03:55 AM EST by wulf50guy]
Well for me I don't think the hand guards are too long either.
I'm tall and have long arms too, that's why I mounted my vert grip farther out than most do.
It's more comfortable for me a little farther out. Its a DPMS upper and the heavy barrel does tend to make it a little nose heavy but also helps keep the muzzle down for a follow up shots. Here's a pic of it, just got the Eotech mounted but hopefully will get to get it sighted in shortly.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 8:16:14 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/20/2004 8:42:44 AM EST by LJUnaTIC]

Originally Posted By gvidon212:

Originally Posted By LJUnaTIC:
I had ADCO build me an 18 inch Govt. profile no ban A4 upper. Very similar to the dissy, and so far runs great with the stock rifle gas system. Weight is the same as an Hbar 16", very easy to handle, and IMHO just slightly better than the 16" Dissapator, though not by muchhr



Can you post a pic? Also, is it a standard 20' gas system.


I found a pic in a previuos post but its not very good.
Yes it has an unaltered rifle gas system, unless Steve @ Adco did something I don't know about. Ran great on 200 rounds of M193 FED during sight in


http://home.earthlink.net/~ljunatic/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/mvc-126f.jpg
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top