AR Sponsor
Posted: 2/3/2011 8:09:04 PM EDT
| I am new to this site and have been looking around as well as searching for the difference between a 16" CAR vs Mid-length. If someone could point me in the right direction I would greatly appreciate it. I know it's probably a dumb question but I was finally able to afford my first AR so now I am trying to soak up as much info as possible. Thanks!! |
|
The difference is the length of the gas system... how far away from the receiver the gas port is located. In a standard configuration AR15 type, that will also determine the length of the handguards and the position of the front sight, since the front sight base is also the gas block.
With the direct gas system of the AR15, the gas system length to barrel length relationship is an integral part of the operation of the mechanism, since the gas system length sets the timing of the operating cycle. There are several adverse effects when the gas system to barrel length configuration gets too short, and some for too long also. I strongly discourage the purchase of 16" barrel CAR (aka "carbine gas") rifle configurations, midlength IMO is a far superior choice. CAR handguard length is roughly 7", midlength is roughly 9", and rifle is roughly 12". There are other less common lengths as well, like Knight's Armament ("KAC") which has their own "KAC midlength" which is longer than the industry standard midlength which can be a little confusing. |
|
Quoted:
The difference is the length of the gas system... how far away from the receiver the gas port is located. In a standard configuration AR15 type, that will also determine the length of the handguards and the position of the front sight, since the front sight base is also the gas block. With the direct gas system of the AR15, the gas system length to barrel length relationship is an integral part of the operation of the mechanism, since the gas system length sets the timing of the operating cycle. There are several adverse effects when the gas system to barrel length configuration gets too short, and some for too long also. I strongly discourage the purchase of 16" barrel CAR (aka "carbine gas") rifle configurations, midlength IMO is a far superior choice. CAR handguard length is roughly 7", midlength is roughly 9", and rifle is roughly 12". There are other less common lengths as well, like Knight's Armament ("KAC") which has their own "KAC midlength" which is longer than the industry standard midlength which can be a little confusing. Thanks for the help!! Makes me feel better that I have a RRA 16" Mid instead of a CAR. My handguard is 9" so with your info that cleared it up for me since I wasn't sure. Thanks again! |
|
I guess I'll be the contrarian and say that while I own 2 middies and 1 carbine gas gun, I don't discern enough difference to discourage the purchase and use of a carbine gas system. To me, the differences is recoil imulse are negligible (all other things being equal); the CAR not having noteworthy recoil to begin with. The benefits of the mid-length system are lagrely theoretical, with no hard data to back up the claims that a carbine gas system is harder on the internals, or makes the bolt or FCG more prone to breaking/failure. There are some folks that feel that the increased pressure of a carbine gas system will make it more reliable under adverse conditions. Just one more theory to add on to the pile. Now, that said, if you are looking at a brand that offers both carbine and mid-length systems, then a mid-length would be a good choice from the standpoint of forearm real estate and the resultant handling characteristics alone. There are lots of GREAT choices in carbine gas guns (Colt, BCM, Spikes, DD, Noveske) and I don't think any of them would be a bad choice. Carbine gas has proven its worth over several decades. By comparison, middies only have one decade under their belt. My go-to gun for social events and zombie gatherings is a Colt carbine, 7" gas haters be damned. |
|
Quoted:
I guess I'll be the contrarian and say that while I own 2 middies and 1 carbine gas gun, I don't discern enough difference to discourage the purchase and use of a carbine gas system. To me, the differences is recoil imulse are negligible (all other things being equal); the CAR not having noteworthy recoil to begin with. The benefits of the mid-length system are lagrely theoretical, with no hard data to back up the claims that a carbine gas system is harder on the internals, or makes the bolt or FCG more prone to breaking/failure. There are some folks that feel that the increased pressure of a carbine gas system will make it more reliable under adverse conditions. Just one more theory to add on to the pile. Now, that said, if you are looking at a brand that offers both carbine and mid-length systems, then a mid-length would be a good choice from the standpoint of forearm real estate and the resultant handling characteristics alone. There are lots of GREAT choices in carbine gas guns (Colt, BCM, Spikes, DD, Noveske) and I don't think any of them would be a bad choice. Carbine gas has proven its worth over several decades. By comparison, middies only have one decade under their belt. My go-to gun for social events and zombie gatherings is a Colt carbine, 7" gas haters be damned. +1. Have both, the recoil sensation seems a bit softer w/midlength than on the M4, but that said, I shoot a Colt 6940 carbine primarily. If I were getting another AR I probably would get the middy since I have not seen any downside. |
|
Don't worry about recoil. 90lb women have no problem shooting an M4 carbine and do not need the recoil mitigated.
Gun internals: How many 10's of thousands rounds will the rifle be used for? Do you shoot in competition? No? Don't worry about it. Buy based on getting a good deal on a quality rifle. Carbine vs. Mid is a minor tweak. If they cost the same, get the mid-length. I think they look nicer. |
|
Thanks a lot for the info guys. I like the 9" handguard personally so that was a selling point. As far as getting a good deal I think I did. It's a RRA 16" Mid heavy barrel which came with a Miculek muzzle brake, YHM floating quad rail, some cheapy foregrip which I replaced with a Mil-spec grippod that I got from my USMC buddy who got upgraded to an M203 (his gain my gain..lol), YHM flip up rear sight, and an EoTech 512. I got it for $1350 and it had about 300 rds through it. Not a scratch on it and my same USMC buddy stripped that thing down and told me it was immaculate and that I got a good deal. He also gave me a Surefire light. Considering you guys on here have a vast amount of knowledge also I thought I would throw the price I got it for out there and see what you thought. I have put about 700 rds through it already without a hiccup. This gun has made me completely fall in love with AR's and now my gf is jealous...j/k..she helped me buy it (I think she's a keeper!!). Here's a couple pics.
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a378/dragtillidie/IMAG0085.jpg http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a378/dragtillidie/IMAG0086.jpg |
|
As for the felt recoil aspect, it is a .223 it really does not matter. Besides the data and math I really can't feel a difference between the 2. As for wear on the carrier and buffer, etc. yeah a little less.
The big thing is that if you have a front site base then the mid-length gives you a longer site radius. Basically better targeting. To give you an example of longer site radius and better target acquisition I will tell you that this is why many high power guys use a "bloop tube" to give more site radius to their barrels. Another reason why they use the bloop tube is that their eyes are failing them. Sucks getting old but whatever it takes to shoot at 1000 yards. 
|
|
Everyone likes the idea of a longer sight radius, but in my experience, most people I run into are in no way able to take advantage of even a magnified optic, much less the extra sight radius.
Get what you want/can and shoot it to it's limitation (it's usually the user,anyway.) |
|
Quoted:
Everyone likes the idea of a longer sight radius, but in my experience, most people I run into are in no way able to take advantage of even a magnified optic, much less the extra sight radius. Get what you want/can and shoot it to it's limitation (it's usually the user,anyway.) Sounds like you should get out more or try a different area. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Everyone likes the idea of a longer sight radius, but in my experience, most people I run into are in no way able to take advantage of even a magnified optic, much less the extra sight radius. Get what you want/can and shoot it to it's limitation (it's usually the user,anyway.) Sounds like you should get out more or try a different area.
You'd think, but that's not the case. I'm not hanging out with high power shooters, but all the gear queers I see should do just that - get out more. Just last Saturday, I met a guy with a SCAR w/ acog whose eyes were "too bad" to shoot at 100 yards. His kid was shooting 4"+ groups at 100 with an AR and a 12x scope. Pretty typical around here - The Impact Zone, Hotwells, Carter's, and the few times I went out to PSC. Hell, the 300 yard range at the Zone is/was used so infrequently, I guess the owner closed it down. I met only one guy in several years who walked right out to 300 yards, besides myself and a buddy of mine. Add to that many Appleseeds. Confirms to me that at 200+ yards, one is safe form the average American "marksman". I sat on a line at 25m with over 20 shooters, 4 of us using irons. Me and one other guy shot "rifleman" that day. 16 shooters w/ scopes and no one could hit an inch+ targets @ 25m 30 out of 40 times. MANY of them shooting .22's. Seeing all this leads me to think, that the extra ~3" or extra sight radius probably matters not to 90 some odd percent of American shooters. |
|
Quoted:
Seeing all this leads me to think, that the extra ~3" or extra sight radius probably matters not to 90 some odd percent of American shooters. True..and with the popularity and common usage of FF rail systems lately, the GL is pretty much irrelevent as far as that goes. Use a LPGB and get a rail that supports your "preferences" for sight radius and weak hand grip style. That being said..once you shoot a well made/sorted MGL they are hard not to like, but as others have said, most will be happy with either GL and i would never kick a CGL "out of the bed" :-). |
| I've sold off my 3 midlengths. They were ok but with rails like the DD RIS II (not mention irons are for back up mostly due to modern optics) the sight radius thing is a non issue. I've never had an issue with a carbine gas system in fact I've only had gas problems with one middy and some 20" rifles. I never liked any of the 9" rails either. My current favorites are my 2 16" carbine M4s with DD RAS II FSP rails and my 3 16" carbine M4's with DD RAS IIs. I still love my LMT 14.5 M4 with KAC M4 RAS. Then there's a dozen or so 14.5 to 16" KISS carbine builds laying around. At this point in time I'm done with midlenghts, I just don't see the need. I like carbines, a lot like the middy and some like the rifle- it's really personal preference. |
AR Sponsor