User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 12:55:39 PM EDT
[#1]
Get the RRA carbine with the mid-length gas system. It has a longer gas tube and the front sight is moved forward about 2 inches. Regular bayonets fits them or any other mid-length brands.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 12:58:43 PM EDT
[#2]
or you can try this
prebanarms.com/detail.asp?product_id=a03 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 12:58:47 PM EDT
[#3]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 1:06:21 PM EDT
[#4]
You can also buy one of these from DPMS
 Mount the lug where you want it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 1:09:34 PM EDT
[#5]
I read a thread, I believe was on this board but a few industrializing people actually cut the handle and welded and extension to it and repaired the handles.
Unfortunately, I cant find the post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 1:20:49 PM EDT
[#6]
See Knight_Shadow post above. I remember that thread, too. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 1:22:02 PM EDT
[#7]
Yes that would work, permanently install a Phantom flash hider or a longer A2 style which Talon Arms (TX) sells. The regular A2 flash hider will not make it up to 16", you have to use longer flash hider which I noted. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 1:38:11 PM EDT
[#8]
Hmm ok well which one has found to function better? The a2 or phantom?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 1:43:26 PM EDT
[#9]
The Phantom is better than the standard A2. Here's a thread about it with pictures. New Flash Suppressor Tests thread link |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 1:46:21 PM EDT
[#10]
Thanks! Now the only problem is finding someone afforadable like RRA that makes such an upper... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 2:04:17 PM EDT
[#11]
I have this one It is roll-marked "Colt" and is a bit more slender a blade than traditional AR bayo's, but overall, I d rate it a solid choice/ ETA: Just noticed they have gone up to $110. Mine was $79 from the same source 6 months ago.. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 2:14:12 PM EDT
[#12]
Look around in the Equipment Exchange in this same site. Just click the tab at the top of this webpage. Then click on the Upper section. If you can't find any you could also have it cut down to 14.5" and have the Phantom permanently installed. ADCO is highly recommended at this site and they also sell RRA. ADCO website link |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2005 9:43:28 PM EDT
[#13]
Thanks guys for all your help! I'll try Adco, and maybe even RBPrecision can do the same thing...I'll call them tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 7:24:27 AM EDT
[#14]
I have the 14.5 M4 barrel with prem. attached Phantom, nice and compact, bayonet fits fine.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 10:35:03 AM EDT
[#15]
Not to harp but let me get this straight - you have decided on a 14.5" bbl with permanently attached muzzle device so a standard bayonet can fit rather than go with the velocity of a full 16" with removable muzzle device of choice?
I chose the latter 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 11:18:14 AM EDT
[#16]
You need to go back to the midlength 16" barrel idea. You can get a $20 USGI M7 bayonet and then later upgrade to the M9 without f*cking around.
Midlength gas systems are better than carbine lengths for more than one reason, even if not huge reasons by themselves. One of the small reasons being that you can use an A2 and bayonet and not have anything "oogly" or goofy on your rifle. Look on the EE for midlength barreled uppers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 2:21:22 PM EDT
[#17]
Hrmm wow didnt realize it mattered that much ie muzzle velocity and better gas systems. Could someone enlighten me on how much less the muzzle velocity is on a 14.5 compared to a 16 as well as why a mid length gas system is better than a CAR?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 3:21:29 PM EDT
[#18]
14.5 loses 50-100 fps, and the mid length is better because it reduces the peak gas pressure on the operating parts and the pressure curve is broader and lower. I like 14.5s for their handiness. I like mid lengths because they don't have any disadvantages over carbine length gas systems, except maybe for weight. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 3:45:21 PM EDT
[#19]
M855/C77 (I dont have my temp and air density figures handy - but we chrono'd these the same day so the relationship is 100%)
MV's FPS 14.5" 2930 16" 3010 20" 3150 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 4:13:10 PM EDT
[#20]
I asked the same question of Tatjana a few years ago. Here's her response This should answer your question: If we look at typical explosive acceleration we see that the only real difference in measurement will be in the first 2 radii, after that the pressure fall off is significant enough to become not interesting. (The last 4 inches, for example, only make about 80-100fps difference in an AR barrel. Example: Some IMI muzzle velocity numbers I have for different uppers, same ammo: Inches: FPS 14.5: 2890 16.0: 2970 20.0: 3055 Differences: Base (14.5) to 16.0: +80FPS (53.00FPS/Inch) 16.0 to 20.0: +85FPS (21.25FPS/Inch) The problem is that the muzzle velocity from 14.5" is only 2890 or so with really hot ammo. Because 2700 is the magic number, basic ballistics show us that the projectile slows down to 2700 (only 190 fps after all or 6.5% of total velocity) fast. In the rifle the projectile gains 94.5% of its speed in the first 14.5 inches of a 20" barrel. The projectile gains 97.2% of its speed in the first 16 inches of a 20" barrel. The difference between 14.5" and 16" isn't significant FPS wise, but 14.5" is close enough to 2700 that it really doesn't take much resistance to slow the bullet down. Remember also that resistance is the frontal area time the SQUARE of velocity. That means 80FPS at 3000 does not do as much for you as 80FPS at 2900. So you have two forces at work here. First, 4" more at 16" gives you the same amount of push that 1.5" at 14.5" does. Second, that same amount of velocity (80-100FPS) is shed faster at 3000 than at 2900. Result: The discrepency you see in the barrel lenghts v. range. PS: What the hell happened to Tatjana? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 6:23:00 PM EDT
[#21]
The things people will do to have something that they will never use.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 6:40:20 PM EDT
[#22]
I guess the easiest answer to the Post is, "Shoot them before they get too close" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 8:20:01 PM EDT
[#23]
So basically if Im understanding this right in my tired after work state tonight, is that the difference in barrel thing wont mean a darn thing to me ever right? Heres the deal, I won't be shooting rounds any further than 300yrds, and 300 yrd shots will be at a range and a RARE thing. I will mostly be popping rounds out to 100-200yrds 99% of the time or closer than 100yrds. So the real question is, will these rounds hit a 300yrd paper just fine with a 14.5+phantom? Also, Im more interested in the gas system differences...is the feel or pressure to the internal parts that different? Anybody who has a m4 config got any complaints? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 8:37:35 PM EDT
[#24]
Accuracy out to 300 yards isn't so much the issue with barrel length, especially if we're talking about 14.5 vs 16 inch.
The difference is in the effective range until the bullet loses it's ability to FRAGMENT, which is around 2700fps. This fragmentation is what makes the .223 round lethal, or more lethal. Now, that's for the typical 55 or 62 grain round. ONce you start adding in Hollow Points, soft points and heavier bullets (ie. 75 or 77 grain), the fragmentation becomes less of an issue. So, go ahead and shoot the crap out of targets at 300 yards. The 16 and 14.5 inch barrel aren't optimal for MOA shooting out to these ranges but the accuracy between the two hasn't been an issue in my own experience. Hopefully, others can chime in to refute/clarify what I've said, but I believe it's a reasonable explanation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 8:39:50 PM EDT
[#25]
Appreciate it, glad theres some one not trying to rip me for my gun and my preference......annnnnyywaaaaayyy...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 8:46:35 PM EDT
[#26]
Right...and all those lasers, and mounted lights, and night scopes, and $600 red dot combat sights are used for their created purposes....last i checked the saying went something like "boys and their toys"? Mine cost a total of $60 in parts and labor, theirs $300-1000. The meaningless 80fps of muzzle velocity that I'm sacrificing would never have been used to the fullest...seeing as i dont shoot outside of 150yrds 99% of the time. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 9:36:33 PM EDT
[#27]
Assuming I'm talking to me (not one of your other namesakes),
Keep this in mind: 1. There's target shooting. Assuming it's just you out shooting for the fun of it, you're 14.5, 15, 20, etc. will work just fine. Bullet drop (due to velocity differences) and accuracy may be different, but you can learn to shoot your gun well with practice, regardless of muzzle length. 2. There's the optimal lethality range for the 5.56/.223 round. That DOES change with barrel length. For the average Joe Shmo shootier, lethality is, or at least shouldn't be a major issue for self-defense purposes. In other words, it would be atypical and probably indefensible to shoot somebody "attacking" you at 50, 100 or 150 yards away. 3. Shoot the shit out of your gun, have fun with it, learn how to use it and don't worry what everybody else may think. There's always another opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/6/2005 9:39:09 PM EDT
[#28]
Don't be so defensive. The bayo is a look cool item. I have one just because I like the way it looks. That said, given that it's on my GUN, I will most certainly be shooting somebody multiple times before they get close enought to ram a bayo through their gut. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 5:59:10 AM EDT
[#29]
LOL 
Im not, it just amazes me sometimes how people think...*shrugs* no biggy. Im going to have fun no matter what ...but no one has answered my question yet about any significant difference in the shorter gas tube of the car/m4 compared to mid length |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 6:10:30 AM EDT
[#30]
Well, I brought up the fact that midlengths have minor advantages over carbine length gas systems and no disadvantages AND I stated that they aren't big advantages.
If you want to pretend that I'm trying to twist your arm and force you to buy a midlength from me or trying to force you to throw away a carbine in favor of a midlength, I'll just give up now. That's not what I'm trying to do. What's with people holding a grudge against guys with 16" midlengths who point out that when given a choice, you might as well go midlength as opposed to a 16" M4 profile?? Why do people jump out of the woodwork and jump down the midlength-advocate's throat? Go ahead and throw the fact that you asked about using a bayonet and anymore arguing against a midlength is ridiculous. regardless of whether or not people need aimpoints, eotechs, lasers, etc., you want a bayonet which won't fit on a 16" M4 barrel? That's a bad place to start an argument. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 6:27:01 AM EDT
[#31]
I know your not twisting my arm about anything, and dont worry about anything on this thread I've said. I understand what your saying but heres a disclaimer: Im a real bad smartmouth. No offense to you or anybody else, Im just giving ya'll a hard time. Its both humorous and annoying how people on web forums are so passionate and yet so easily offended by trains of thought etc. I see what your saying completely, but personally the loss of velocity etc doesnt really concern me as a shooter. Im looking to make my first rifle a cheap brush gun kinda sorta, I guess you could call it that. I honestly do appreciate your info and point  By the way, what does your quote mean? I was with the following of "All your base" but whats the reel thing?And Im stealing your 5.56 inside logo....too cool. Just need an Intel bunny with a hole in his visor. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 6:30:41 AM EDT
[#32]
Have your fun, please don't let me get in your way, but the idea that people are making rifle component decisions based on whether or not a bayonet will fit on it completely blows me away.
The chances of using an Aimpoint, flashlight or even a night vision scope are exponentially higher than the chances of using a bayonet. Call me the Devil's advocate, the other side of the fence or whatever. My $0.02. TIFWIW. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 6:37:07 AM EDT
[#33]
Well you've also got to understand that this will be my first rifle build, a cheapy, a learning experience, and then I'll build a 2nd with what I want and spend more $$ on high quality parts etc. *Shrugs* If i ever use the bayonet to stab somebody I'll let you know the potential for defensive posibilities. lol  Its all about preference! Hey can you explain to me though the difference in gas system performance? Nobody still is saying anything about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 6:42:38 AM EDT
[#34]
The midlength is smoother, much like a rifle's system. It is a better design than the carbine gas system, IMO and many other's opinion. And, yes, it accepts a standard bayonet. For me, if I'm close enough for knife attacks, I've got other skills to fall back on which are more effective. Honestly, a bayonet is really only good enough to finish off a wounded person or battling an unarmed person. It is far from an offensive weapon. YMMV. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 6:45:30 AM EDT
[#35]
Ok, smoother...so then would the carbine/m4 system be considered rough or harsh? And ya hahah bro the bayo is for dress up LOL I was joking about the stabbing, thats why I would definately let you know if it was ever used haha. Im not even talking about self defense Im just trying to build a rifle first lol. I have a shotgun for home defense and dos dogs. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 7:20:57 AM EDT
[#36]
OK, since we are all on the same page (I usually fall on the same page as mongo anyhow...) I'd like to restate what mongo said and I never got around to due to my ADD and Autocad. This statement is general and NOT about you unless you choose to go the 'wrong' route to building- You will be as 'gay' as your rifle if you build it based on how cool you perceive aspects of the AR to be instead of listening to the advice you are given.
Midlength rifles have a nicer impulse than a carbine. Carbine's have a sharper 'kick' and there is definitely more SPROING from the buffer spring. I have not noticed my midlength's buffer spring since my carbine upper was sold and I bougth this middy upper. I haven't even gone the heavy buffer or 9mm buffer route... PKFirearms' Ad JTAC $205 barrels and complete uppers |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 7:34:33 AM EDT
[#37]
Oh sssssstop Thanks for the links! Rob from TA is going to be showing me some midlengths this week when they get off the brown truck...i'll make my final decision then. I guess I need to see them in rl. Anybody have any pics of midlength rifles with a collapsible stock? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 7:53:44 AM EDT
[#38]
+1...the choice of mid-length vs carbine gas system had merit based on what's been noted by Joseph and Mongo, not on whether or not a bayo will mount on it. The only time I've mounted my bayo on any of my ARs or AKs has been for a picture or two. Now they're someplace in a box up in the attic. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 7:57:06 AM EDT
[#39]
Another Disclaimer: I am a noob to the AR system to a point, but does the spring system in the stock have any connection with the gas system up front? Or is the spring just for recoil alone? And if it IS related, can you get a strong spring to change up the jolt a little bit?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 8:02:13 AM EDT
[#40]
Wolff makes extra power spring, and I have tried out the Enidine buffer in my 18 inch SPR clone build. I will tell you that the Enidine buffer does smooth out the felt recoil. I know some folks use heavy and H2 buffers in their carbines. I've not done this so I can't speak to the impact it may have on "spring jolt". |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 8:03:02 AM EDT
[#41]
there is less pressure in the barrel when the bullet passes the gas block and therefore less pressure (albeit just a small amount less) in the gas system. The bolt carrier and group is forced back into the buffer spring and buffer a little "softer." |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 8:18:37 AM EDT
[#42]
I think for bayonetting the 20" is the way to go. You want that extra reach to keep your bad guy away from you while bayonetting, not to mention, you can buttstroke to the head/groin with a regular stock and not with a telestock.
I suppose it really just depends on the application. If I'm worried about the need to bayonet, well, I learned on an M16A1. I always kind of thought bayonets on M1 carbines were kind of odd, too, but that M4 combat knife was pretty slick. But it's all up to personal preference, I guess. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 8:36:06 AM EDT
[#43]
You are telling me that 5-6" of blade is only helpful if you have the extra 4" of rifle? Come on, get real. It helps to have all of the length you can, but it's silly to say a bayonet on a 16" is almost useless because it's missing 4" of barrel and reach.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 8:41:50 AM EDT
[#44]
The 4 extra inches help minimize the blood splatter on your clothing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 8:42:54 AM EDT
[#45]
Tell that to OJ Simpson hhahaha |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 10:36:43 AM EDT
[#46]
I like both the M4 and midlength carbines. I have a 16" M4 now but I'm building a midlength and I'm just short of the barrel.
Here's some porn links of the M4gery and middy. M4GERY PIC THREAD link MID-LENGTH AR PICTURE THREAD link |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 10:41:30 AM EDT
[#47]
I didn't say it was "almost useless." You said that. It's preferable to have your rifle and bayonet combination longer than your opponent's, in case you have to stab him while he's trying to stab you. I was generally worried about guys with AK's when I was busy learning about bayonetting. It also makes slashing him a hell of a lot easier. In addition to that, you get a lot more forearm, which gives you better leverage, and like I said, buttstroking or smashing someone in the face with a telestock doesn't really work all that well. Now, you can use a bayonet on a shorter rifle, but longer is generally considered to be better. I never got the opportunity to run a bayonet assault course with an M4, but my experience tells me it wouldn't work as well. Your experience might be different. Maybe we should put bayonets on M9's, too? That said, if you want bayonets on your M4s, more power to you. My train of thought is the whole point of the M4 is to be able to swing around and shoot your opponent faster instead of stabbing him to death with it. Or is there some reliability issue you're worrying about? My well-maintained gear seemed and still seems to be pretty reliable. Well, except for that M16A1 I had at Ft. Lewis, but I traded it in for an M60. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 12:33:16 PM EDT
[#48]
I see what you are saying, just wanted to push to see if you were knocking the 16" midlengths at all. I don't like the bayo on a 16" M4 barrel because I do not like that barrel at all to begin with.
Before I buy another M4 profile barrel, it will be because I find a good deal on a 14.5" with the specs I want and then I'll be SBR'ing a lower. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 8:04:23 PM EDT
[#49]
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
