14.5" or 16"? - AR15.COM

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:06:34 PM EDT

14.5" or 16"?
So besides the velocity whats the MOA comparison? I'm sure the 16" at 100 yards should be inherently more accurate. Question is how much more? Who makes nice short uppers with quad rail mounts etc in .223? I want to buy a stock upper without needing to buy accessories for it etc. I want a full setup.hreads
I want to spend no more then $700 on an upper and I want front and rear flip up B.U.I.S .

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:09:59 PM EDT

[#1]

IMO not that much difference in preformance between the two - Again IMO you have to have at least a 16" barrel ( sans the 'stamp' ) so i just opt for a 16" barrel to start with

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:11:03 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
14.5" or 16"?
So besides the velocity whats the MOA comparison?

If you meant the accuracy potential, there is no difference.

Given the same manufacturere, same ammo, and same shooter their groups should be the same (within normal statistical variations).

At extended ranges the 14.5 will show more drop and wind deflection, but not alot more.

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:14:17 PM EDT

[#3]

How much drop would you reckon the 14.5" would drop at 100 yards vs the 16"?

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:22:23 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
How much drop would you reckon the 14.5" would drop at 100 yards vs the 16"?

None that you would notice (seriously we're talking less than 0.05" with M193)).

Heck at 400y it's only 1.9" (less than 0.5 MOA).

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:34:12 PM EDT

[#5]

I'm personally going with a 14.5" cause i'm in NJ and any muzzle device has to be permanently attached anyway

If it's gotta be permanent might as well make it shorter

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:39:43 PM EDT

[#6]

whatever pisses off the anti's the most so if you can mount a bayonet and look scary why not

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:40:17 PM EDT

[#7]

Ohh I'm now thinking I want a shorty...I do want a silencer for later on and don't want a super long gun for getting in and out of vehicles. Predator calling...you setup, you call, you kill, (hopefully) then you move on to another stand and having a long gun is soo annoying! Sadly I have yet to kill a yote...someone else always gets the kill cuz I'm facing the wrong way

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:46:03 PM EDT

[#8]

^ Then you'll need a $200 tax stamp. Anything less than 16" overall requires one.

Posted: 4/15/2008 3:49:17 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
^ Then you'll need a $200 tax stamp. Anything less than 16" overall requires one.

Not if you pernanently attach a muzzle device that brings the barrel length up to 16"

So a 14.5" with a YHM Phantom (the version that allows attachment of the YHM supressor)

Or a 14.5" with the Gemtech Bilock (if you want to use the Gemtech supressor).

Or a 14.5" with the KAC flash supressor which will allow you to use the KAC supressor or the Gemtech Halo

or ...(well I think you get the idea).

Posted: 4/15/2008 4:27:04 PM EDT

[#10]

Oh snap so you need stamps for anything less then 16"?! I did not know this...maybe I will end up with a 16" then cuz I'm sorta on a budget.hock.gif

Posted: 4/15/2008 4:48:59 PM EDT

[#11]

You can still get a 14.5 and avoid getting the stamp if you have the brake or flash supressor permently attached.

That is what I am doing with my LMT 14.5 upper.

Posted: 4/15/2008 4:50:19 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Oh snap so you need stamps for anything less then 16"?! I did not know this...maybe I will end up with a 16" then cuz I'm sorta on a budget.

Oh hell yes

Posted: 4/15/2008 4:51:22 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Oh snap so you need stamps for anything less then 16"?! I did not know this...maybe I will end up with a 16" then cuz I'm sorta on a budget.

yes

ALL non-NFA rifles need bbls w/ OAL of 16" or greater or it must have the tax stamp/SBR documents

for AR bbls, full 16" carbine bbls are the cheapest, most available, and easiest to get

great news about the 16" vs a 14.5+perm muzzle device: you can change the muzzle device w/ a lot less hassel; more velocity; etc

Posted: 4/15/2008 7:33:52 PM EDT

[#14]

Well that settles that thank you guys so much! I don't know what I would do if these forums didn't exist.

Posted: 4/15/2008 8:24:12 PM EDT

[#15]

I'd go with the 16" more velocity and more versatility. If you cant clear a house with a 16" barrel then you are probably doing it wrong.

Posted: 4/16/2008 7:19:20 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
^ Then you'll need a $200 tax stamp. Anything less than 16" overall requires one.

Not if you pernanently attach a muzzle device that brings the barrel length up to 16"

So a 14.5" with a YHM Phantom (the version that allows attachment of the YHM supressor)

Or a 14.5" with the Gemtech Bilock (if you want to use the Gemtech supressor).

Or a 14.5" with the KAC flash supressor which will allow you to use the KAC supressor or the Gemtech Halo

or ...(well I think you get the idea).

Posted: 4/16/2008 8:09:28 AM EDT

[#17]

height=8

Quoted:
^ Then you'll need a $200 tax stamp. Anything less than 16" overall requires one.

Yep, requires you to SBR your lower.

But if you happen to have a RR or DIAS laying around you're good to go.

Posted: 4/16/2008 8:13:08 AM EDT

[#18]

A non-NFA barrel must be OVER 16".

You lose a very negligible amount of velocity with a 14.5" barrel.

14.5" on an M4 clone looks right. Get a surefire FH from Brownell's and pin it.

Posted: 4/16/2008 8:18:54 AM EDT

[#19]

You do NOT need a tax stamp if your 14.5" has a permanent attachment that makes it 16" overall.

The cost difference between a 14.5" barrel plus permanent flash hider and regular 16" barrel is about $50, based on CMMG's pricing. I'm thinking 16", because I'm a miser and I want a mid-length. But if having a slightly (1"?) shorter rifle is worth $50 to you, then go for it.

Ben

Posted: 4/16/2008 9:23:11 AM EDT

[#20]

It doesn't cost more for a shorter barrel if you look for a decent barrel. I'm not a fan of CMMG and their gimmicky barrels and pricing.

Don't argue the semantics of barrel length with me please.

If you have a FH welded to a 14.5" barrel to bring it over 16" then you have a barrel that is over 16". Plain and simple. When it's permanently attached it's considered part of the barrel. It doesn't matter what it used to be if it's now part of the barrel.

There's no law stating "you can legally own a 14.5" barrel if you permanently attach a 1.5" long FH" The law states the barrel must be greater than 16". If you perm. attach a 1.5" long FH to a 14.5" barrel you have a 16" barrel, nothing more, nothing less.

Posted: 4/16/2008 10:07:01 AM EDT

[#21]

Check out 16" midlength barrels.

Posted: 4/16/2008 11:00:18 AM EDT

[#22]

Also remember that you will most likely attach FH, etc. to your 16" barrel -- making it a minimum of 1.3" longer than, let's say, my 14.7" with an A2 (16" total). I have 16", 17.3" and 21.3" ARs (measured with FHs attached). At 100m I would take any one of them. At 200m, it still isn't much noticable difference with 193 ammo.

Posted: 4/16/2008 2:00:20 PM EDT

[#23]

I've owned a bunch of AR's over the years, in various configurations....

All my AR's are 14.5" now. I'll likely get a couple 20" AR's just to have them, but I'll wait till the Dems hit the White House before I jump on that.

Posted: 4/16/2008 2:08:45 PM EDT

[#24]

Doc Roberts had some interesting data supported that there is no worse combination than a 14.5 bbl and the carbine gas tube when it came to port erosion..

Posted: 4/16/2008 2:09:22 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Doc Roberts had some interesting data supported that there is no worse combination than a 14.5 bbl and the carbine gas tube when it came to port erosion..

Enter the 14.5" midlength!

I read that too. Doc's the man. It's a violent cycle...no doubt! But it works - and it works well. Still, with all that apocalyptic port erosion, the barrel will wear out before it's effects function. Also, just for trivial knowledge & nothing more ... the MGI rate-reducing buffer thrives amongst eroded gas ports. I have one in my trusty 14.5" CAR - love it. I've only got a couple thousand rounds down the pipe, but holy hell doesn't it soften the recoil. Using M193 my carbine behaves like a Ruger 10/22.

Anyway, sorry to go off on a tangent there

Posted: 4/16/2008 2:14:01 PM EDT

[#26]

height=8

Quoted:
It doesn't cost more for a shorter barrel if you look for a decent barrel.

Fair enough, but from shopping around, AFAIK, 16" barrels are far more common and cheaper than 14.5" or 14.7" barrels.
We all have our own ideas of what's "decent," but the OP said that he's on a tight budget. If you have to permanently attach an extra-long hider to a 14.5" barrel to get it to 16"OAL, then that costs more than screwing on a ubiquitous A2 hider, too.

Ben

Posted: 4/16/2008 2:46:58 PM EDT

[#27]

Not if you buy the CMMG barrel, it runs around the same price as other's 16" barrels. It also is 1/7 -CMV -chrome lined -MP marked -and the machine work is super clean.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 14.5" or 16"?

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us