Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/27/2003 8:51:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/27/2003 8:54:18 AM EDT by LightSpeed2]
As my research winds down for my first AR I keep coming back to RRA.Which brings me down to barrels. The AR is going to be an M4. The RRA barrels are not crome. How important is this
vs stainless vs their stock barrel. The next question is on length and type. I can choose from a 14' with a muzzel brake to get my 16 " barrel, a 16 or 20 inch barrel with no flash supressor ect. What am I giving up with each selection. The guy at the local FFL recoments the 20" because the 16" RRA is on the heavy side so the extra 4" isn't noticable on weight.
Also any opinions on RRA apreciated.
All opinions welcome.
Thanks,
Joel
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 2:43:50 PM EDT
Why would you "keep coming back to Rock River" if they doesn't meet any of your needs. Needlessly heavy HBAR barrels or no chrome lined bore. If you want a "M4" just buy a new Bushmaster or Colt's M4 type and be done with it. You'll be extremly happy with either. M4 bbl is 14.5" long so it requires a permanetly affixed muzzle device. Avoid HBARs like the plague. They're not more accurate, merely heavier. -- Chuck
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 3:01:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/27/2003 3:03:34 PM EDT by LightSpeed2]
See, there you go Chuck,good answer. It does sound like RRA doesn't fit what I need. I have read alot of positive coments about their match trigger and lower end. Lifetime warranty, but maybe that is not really a necessary item??Maybe a heavy barrel in a .223 has several benefits I am not aware of?? The Bushmaster is the other choice by the way. I still have the question about differant barrels on the market.Are chrome lined barrels better for accuracy or hold up better in unfavorable weather concitions?? Thanks, Joel
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 4:15:11 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 4:52:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/27/2003 4:56:15 PM EDT by LightSpeed2]
Thank you Troy. That answered some of my questions and I agree with the " make it cheaper, sell it as better" marketing ploy. I'm sure it has worked well for "business". Please define a few things for me A1 "pencil" profile, "LW under the handgards" "fluted", "HBAR" and MOA ( I know, a referance of accuracy). I like everything explained to me as if I knew nothing, which happens to be the case. This is much more technical than picking out a new shotgun, and I want to do it right.I also am on a budget(as decent budget) so I can't have the kitchen sink all at once.I am enjoying the research part this project as much as I will when I open the box. Thanks, Joel
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 5:38:12 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 6:17:47 PM EDT
I'd highly reccommend the 16" M4 barrel. It is light and accurate. 20" HBARs are unweildy and unbalanced. If you can not find the rifle you want, get a complete upper from Legal Transfers in the EE or Bushmaster. Then have a complete lower shipped to your FFL.
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 6:59:34 PM EDT
Wow!!!!!!!! Great stuff. A picture is worth a 1000 words. Things are coming together much faster. By the way, does anyone have a favorite lower?? Thanks, Joel
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 7:46:29 PM EDT
How are heavy barrels cheaper? More material = less money? I dun geddit. What about the bending of light A1 barrels? Wasn't that why the A2 barrel was heavier? (excuse the newbie questions, please)
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 7:54:30 PM EDT
Removing more metal means more machine time, which means more labor cost and more tool wear.
Link Posted: 9/27/2003 9:18:49 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/28/2003 5:39:43 AM EDT
Chrome lining is very important. A chrome lined chamber aids in lubricity and therefore better extraction., A chrome bore lasts far longer than a non-chrome one, which may not be an issue for you. DPMS is offering some very nice chrome lined 1/7 M4 barrels in both 14.5 and 16". Bushmaster also sells chrome lined, mostly in 1/9 twist.
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 7:02:06 PM EDT
bushmaster sells superb complete uppers. 4150 steel barrels(which is a more dense steel than the common 4140 which adds life to the barrel) with chrome lining. That's about all there is to it.
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 7:36:07 PM EDT
Thanks for al of the input, barrel selection 101. After reading this thread I can see how many manufacturers put HBARs on most of their products.[^]
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 8:17:54 PM EDT
You have mentioned flash hiders so I am assuming you want a preban right? The best and cheapest is Bushmaster M4 14.5" 1/7 twist 4150 steel forged front sight. I got mine for $175 you can get it from Bushmaster for $195. These are military spec barrels and are contract over runs. They are not always available so if you can get one jump on it. My favorite lower is Bushmaster simply becasue they are known quality and are the closest to milspec of any lower. This only matters if you want to do a RDIAS later or put in a different trigger.
Link Posted: 10/22/2003 6:29:51 PM EDT
Of course, due to M203 mounting, they HAD to make the LW portion under the handguards instead of out front, but that works out better anyway. Heat collects in the heavy muzzle end, which is fully exposed to air and cools better, and the heavy forward portion of the barrel reduces barrel whip at the critical time. It also adds a slight "choke" effect, like a shotgun, which increases accuracy a tiny bit. -Troy[/quote] While I usually find out alot on the board,especially from Troy, I have to get on my soapbox for a few of these points: 1. a lighter profile barrel will ALWAYS whip more than an HBAR, not just at its heat limit. Although agree that heat increases whip for all. Also, even shooting with a tight sling (a lost art)causes point of impact shifts in a pencil barrel, unless you free float handguard it. 2. Heavy barrels will also take longer to heat up than light barrels (and subsequently longer to cool from the same temp). 3. Barrels with different profiles heat unevenly and cause more "funk" /uneven expansion due to temperature differences. 4. I am not aware of the heavy end of an M4 acting as a heat sink for the rest of the barrel. 5. "Choke effect"?? helping accuracy???- I would hope that the internal measurements of the bore are not reduced like a choke when the external dimensions of an m4 change. That would probably cause one hell of a pressure spike and probably degrade accuracy, rather than aid it. With all that said these are all theoretical differences. They will make very little difference at tactical (dare I say under 50 yds)distances. In the real world, internal barrel smoothness and consistent tolerances make the rifle more or less accurate that anything else. If you are going to use the iron sights, and have your heart set on a shorter barrel, get a Dissipator to take advantage of the longer sight radius. This will make a significant difference. I have a 20" pre-ban HBAR, and do not find it sluggish, too heavy or misweighted/unbalanced. I may in the future put a 16" barrel on it, but I am not a "gear-junkie". Also take into accout that any muzzlebrake/flash hider on a 14.5 will have to be permanently attached, so I hope you love it out of the box and don't break anything. With all that said, I am only aesthetically opposed to m4 barrels. Try out some and see how they swing at a gunstore. Pick the one that feels the best. Whatever you get, the man behind the gun has more to do with performance than the all the gear in Brownells you can hang from that rifle, or barrel length/profile. (ask Clint Smith) Most guys who get a m4 hang 2 pounds of light weight tactical gear (lazers, phasers, lights and tasers)on it anyway, just to negate the weight advantage.
Link Posted: 10/22/2003 9:49:21 PM EDT
I own all three profiles in 16", all Colt. The HBAR is alot easier to hold on target, and reacquire the target in rapid semiauto fire. The LW seems a bit quicker to acquire the target in the first place. Although. . . . . At the Casa Grande 'AR15.com Shoot' last spring, I participated in one of the little contests where shooters were timed at running 10 yards, picking up rifle, inserting mag, loading chamber, and firing a single round at an 8 inch target at around 75 yards. I ran the course with my HBAR and then with my LW. I made hits with both, but was nearly a full second quicker with the HBAR (8 point something secs with the HBAR, 9 point something secs with LW). Also, I seemed to notice that after a mag or so of rapid fire, the LW shot noticeably larger slow fire groups than the HBAR. Cold, my LW in my hands is capable of 1 or 2 MOA. Hot, no way. Unfortunately, I have no way of proving that the difference isn't due to the fact that my hands are shakier after firing a quick 30 rounds, but the HBAR is steadier after rapid fire as well. It would make sense that the M4 profile would respond even worse than the LW to rapid fire, since it has so many cuts and variations in thickness, but I've never proven it. Has anyone else?
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 12:01:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/25/2003 12:03:16 AM EDT by JTinIN]
[b]I like the 20" HBAR's for full auto fire as make a "poor man's LMG upper"[/b] Works great off a bipod and off hand is a lot easier to keep the rounds on target (almost too easy as just lays in your hand), nearly as nice as some of the AUG heavy barrel systems. Now my second favorite is still M4, but makes the M16 a totally different gun. [blue]If everyone hates the 20" HBARs ...where are they all kept as I need another one?[/blue] Regards John
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 7:18:26 PM EDT
To the why light under the handguards and heavy in front on govt 20" question, I offer the following hearsay: Since GIs were using their M16's as pry-bars, esp. on issue cot end bars (if you've put on together you know what I mean). That could bend a pencil barrel, so Uncle Sam decided on a heavy in front profile. Makes a better pry bar that way. Sounded good to me at the time. My $.02 TJ
Link Posted: 10/30/2003 11:27:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LightSpeed2: As my research winds down for my first AR I keep coming back to RRA.Which brings me down to barrels. The AR is going to be an M4. The RRA barrels are not crome. How important is this vs stainless vs their stock barrel. The next question is on length and type. I can choose from a 14' with a muzzel brake to get my 16 " barrel, a 16 or 20 inch barrel with no flash supressor ect. What am I giving up with each selection. The guy at the local FFL recoments the 20" because the 16" RRA is on the heavy side so the extra 4" isn't noticable on weight. Also any opinions on RRA apreciated. All opinions welcome. Thanks, Joel
View Quote
You've said this is an "ALL PURPOSE" AR. In that case, I would NOT go with the 14" barrel. The shorter the barrel the more velocity you loose. The only reason I would buy a 14" is if the ONLY thing you use it for is close quarters. The shortest I would go is 16" if you envision a lot of CQB and a 20" (or 18" if anyone makes one) if you think you'll be shooting more at slightly farther distances. Otherwise, listen to what TROY said. A lighter barrel is better in most cases.
Link Posted: 10/30/2003 11:31:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/30/2003 11:34:40 AM EDT by giffmann]
Just so you know, RRA recently added the chrome lining to their M4 barrels. It is a $35 upcharge. You can also get an M4 profile barrel in Stainless Steel. I believe this is a $55 upgrade. I've emailed RRA to find out if the SS barrel is a 1:9 or a 1:8 twist.
Link Posted: 10/30/2003 11:47:55 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DaPhotoGuy:
Originally Posted By LightSpeed2: As my research winds down for my first AR I keep coming back to RRA.Which brings me down to barrels. The AR is going to be an M4. The RRA barrels are not crome. How important is this vs stainless vs their stock barrel. The next question is on length and type. I can choose from a 14' with a muzzel brake to get my 16 " barrel, a 16 or 20 inch barrel with no flash supressor ect. What am I giving up with each selection. The guy at the local FFL recoments the 20" because the 16" RRA is on the heavy side so the extra 4" isn't noticable on weight. Also any opinions on RRA apreciated. All opinions welcome. Thanks, Joel
View Quote
You've said this is an "ALL PURPOSE" AR. In that case, I would NOT go with the 14" barrel. The shorter the barrel the more velocity you loose. The only reason I would buy a 14" is if the ONLY thing you use it for is close quarters. The shortest I would go is 16" if you envision a lot of CQB and a 20" (or 18" if anyone makes one) if you think you'll be shooting more at slightly farther distances. Otherwise, listen to what TROY said. A lighter barrel is better in most cases.
View Quote
I could not disagree more. A 14.5" is an all purpose barrel. It allows fragmenting of MK 262 ammo out to 150 yards. That is HARDLY CQB only. 10.5 and 11" barrels are CQB only. The difference in an 18" barrel and 14.5" barrel is that the 18" barrel still has the velocity to cause fragmentation of the bullet when it hits a target from 150-200m. I would hardly call that a large difference and certainly not enough of a difference to merit the added weight and length of the 18" in an all purpose role. 10.5-11.5 = CQB 14.5-16.0 = All around compromise 18.0-20.0 = Long range
Link Posted: 10/30/2003 12:13:56 PM EDT
I vote for the RRA M-4 barrel. It's chrome lined, 5.56 chamber, full 16" in length (not 16" plus a muzzle brake), light under the hanguards, and also has the fake flash suppressor that not only looks good (for a post ban), but also protects the muzzle/crown area. I own one and find it to be very accurate also. In my opinion it's the best post ban M-4 "no hassle" barrel made. This is a pic of one. Courtesy of "Legal Transfers"[img]http://image1ex.villagephotos.com/pubimage.asp?id_=193258[/img]
Link Posted: 10/30/2003 1:37:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/30/2003 1:39:12 PM EDT by DaPhotoGuy]
Originally Posted By DevL:
Originally Posted By DaPhotoGuy:
Originally Posted By LightSpeed2: As my research winds down for my first AR I keep coming back to RRA.Which brings me down to barrels. The AR is going to be an M4. The RRA barrels are not crome. How important is this vs stainless vs their stock barrel. The next question is on length and type. I can choose from a 14' with a muzzel brake to get my 16 " barrel, a 16 or 20 inch barrel with no flash supressor ect. What am I giving up with each selection. The guy at the local FFL recoments the 20" because the 16" RRA is on the heavy side so the extra 4" isn't noticable on weight. Also any opinions on RRA apreciated. All opinions welcome. Thanks, Joel
View Quote
You've said this is an "ALL PURPOSE" AR. In that case, I would NOT go with the 14" barrel. The shorter the barrel the more velocity you loose. The only reason I would buy a 14" is if the ONLY thing you use it for is close quarters. The shortest I would go is 16" if you envision a lot of CQB and a 20" (or 18" if anyone makes one) if you think you'll be shooting more at slightly farther distances. Otherwise, listen to what TROY said. A lighter barrel is better in most cases.
View Quote
I could not disagree more. A 14.5" is an all purpose barrel. It allows fragmenting of MK 262 ammo out to 150 yards. That is HARDLY CQB only. 10.5 and 11" barrels are CQB only. The difference in an 18" barrel and 14.5" barrel is that the 18" barrel still has the velocity to cause fragmentation of the bullet when it hits a target from 150-200m. I would hardly call that a large difference and certainly not enough of a difference to merit the added weight and length of the 18" in an all purpose role. 10.5-11.5 = CQB 14.5-16.0 = All around compromise 18.0-20.0 = Long range
View Quote
The MK 262 is a 77 grain bullet, right? What is the fragmentation range difference between 14.5" and 18" using M193? Truth be told, most guys I know shoot 55 gr or 62 gr. The 77 is too damn expensive to shoot in any great quantity and I believe in training with what you use.
Link Posted: 10/30/2003 3:41:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/30/2003 3:55:29 PM EDT by DevL]
100 vs 200 with M193 approximately... but this is a non issue for someone willing to use MK 262. Still there is no reason to train with MK 262 ammo. The only advantage is in long distance shooting since the MK 262 is more accurate and has different ballistics than M193. Out to 100m you will see no difference. You can shoot Q3131A at a carbine class and the skills you have learned will transfer 100%. It would be counter productive to use MK262 as practice ammo. As long as both are NATO pressure thats all that is needed for close in. Long range practice could be done with any similar weight match ammo. I dont think an SPR is even capable of reaching nears its potential as a precision arm at long range with innacurate M193. Edited to add. An SPR shootiong M193 will not even be more accurate than an M4 14.5" barrel using MK 262. Using your advice, an SPR using M193 now has an added fragmentation range of still only 50 yards over an M4 with MK 262. It is also not any more accurate than an M4 barrel now, possibly less accurate. They are equally cheap to train with (since the M4 trains with M193)but the 14.5" barrel is much lighter and shorter and possibly even more accurate. The 18" barrel is a poor choice for CQB. Even the 14.5" is a bit long for use in tight spaces. With appropriate ammo (77 grain) the SPR is a better long range precision weapon and offers great fragmentation beyond the M4 but at the cost of weight. Using M193 neuters the weapons accuracy potential. At that point youd be better off using a mid length 16" barrel and lose only 20 yards of fragmentation range. If the author of this post does not want to spend the cash for MK 262 I second the reccomendation for the chrome lined 16" M4 RRA barrel for a postban. You get 150 yards fragmenting range with M193 and 16" over all length. The only things you give up are a real flash hider, the accuracy of match ammo and the larger wounds of the heavier ammo. Also remember the VAST majority of police sniper shootings and the VAST majority of all small arms fire in Iraq is under 100m. To me performace beyond 100m is not a big issue for a civilian or LEO.
Link Posted: 10/30/2003 5:48:59 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DevL: 100 vs 200 with M193 approximately... but this is a non issue for someone willing to use MK 262. Still there is no reason to train with MK 262 ammo. The only advantage is in long distance shooting since the MK 262 is more accurate and has different ballistics than M193. Out to 100m you will see no difference. You can shoot Q3131A at a carbine class and the skills you have learned will transfer 100%. It would be counter productive to use MK262 as practice ammo. As long as both are NATO pressure thats all that is needed for close in. Long range practice could be done with any similar weight match ammo. I dont think an SPR is even capable of reaching nears its potential as a precision arm at long range with innacurate M193. Edited to add. An SPR shootiong M193 will not even be more accurate than an M4 14.5" barrel using MK 262. Using your advice, an SPR using M193 now has an added fragmentation range of still only 50 yards over an M4 with MK 262. It is also not any more accurate than an M4 barrel now, possibly less accurate. They are equally cheap to train with (since the M4 trains with M193)but the 14.5" barrel is much lighter and shorter and possibly even more accurate. The 18" barrel is a poor choice for CQB. Even the 14.5" is a bit long for use in tight spaces. With appropriate ammo (77 grain) the SPR is a better long range precision weapon and offers great fragmentation beyond the M4 but at the cost of weight. Using M193 neuters the weapons accuracy potential. At that point youd be better off using a mid length 16" barrel and lose only 20 yards of fragmentation range. If the author of this post does not want to spend the cash for MK 262 I second the reccomendation for the chrome lined 16" M4 RRA barrel for a postban. You get 150 yards fragmenting range with M193 and 16" over all length. The only things you give up are a real flash hider, the accuracy of match ammo and the larger wounds of the heavier ammo. Also remember the VAST majority of police sniper shootings and the VAST majority of all small arms fire in Iraq is under 100m. To me performace beyond 100m is not a big issue for a civilian or LEO.
View Quote
Well said. Depending on how the rifle will be used and with what ammo, it could double the fragmentation range. Not knowing how much $$ the author has to spend on ammo, I also recommend the chrome lined 16" M4 RRA barrel for a postban. The chrome lining is worth an extra $50 but still (IMHO) doesn't make or break a rifle.
Link Posted: 10/30/2003 7:56:26 PM EDT
The Author is eating this up. Believe it or not as everyone works out their opinions on a thread certain consistancy's appear. Project budget is 950.00, M4 #40 iron sights before an eotech or Aimpoint.
Link Posted: 10/31/2003 4:18:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LightSpeed2: The Author is eating this up. Believe it or not as everyone works out their opinions on a thread certain consistancy's appear. Project budget is 950.00, M4 #40 iron sights before an eotech or Aimpoint.
View Quote
Oh man, you have GOT to go ask your opinion as to which sight you should get (EoTech or Aimpoint) on the optics forum. That will really get the troops whipped into a frenzy. I believe you will get slightly more people saying Aimpoint strictly because most people on this forum believe "if the US Military does it, it's the best". They are both great sights, but the EoTech is better. [}:D]
Link Posted: 10/31/2003 4:25:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/31/2003 4:29:55 AM EDT by JTinIN]
Originally Posted By DaPhotoGuy: Oh man, you have GOT to go ask your opinion as to which sight you should get (EoTech or Aimpoint) on the optics forum. That will really get the troops whipped into a frenzy. I believe you will get slightly more people saying Aimpoint strictly because most people on this forum believe "if the US Military does it, it's the best". They are both great sights, but the EoTech is better. [}:D]
View Quote
During the Aimpoint vs. EoTech thread from hell ... I got the felling that the count was hundreds for the Eotech to less than a half of dozen who used the best sight made ... the Aimpoint M2 [;)] ... which would make going make long odds for the great Aimpoint vs Eotech shoot out, then again one of my Aimpoints is for the Browning 1919A4 ... have to start linking belts now .... Regards John P.S. Almost purchased an Eotech two gun shows ago, but decided to just friends and get the ACOG Donut ....
Top Top