16" vs 18" vs 20"

[Guest adamoxtwo]

Don't go trying to headshot any deer. A 62gr Corbon DPX to the vitals will drop a whitetail just fine.

Been pretty sucessful with it so far, and their are advantages. 1. they don't run 2. They are more tender because they don't fill with adreniline. If I can't dial it in to have a 1/2' MOA at 150 I won't even try. I mostly hunt with a bow anyhow.

[Guest Burgan]

I understand that you technically only gain velocity. Though since you are shooting a tiny round to begin with. The wind likes to play games with your accuracy. And velocity helps slightly conteract that

[BryanP]

If the muzzle device is permanently attached and the total length is 16", it is not an SBR.

True, but if you're going to make it effectively 16", why would you go with a muzzle device? Get a real 16" barrel with threading all the way out to the end.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Good to know. Most "commercial" AR15's generally don't.

Actually there are several that do. Bravo does on every single bolt. Feature for feature Bravo will beat out Colt. They do go the extra mile to ensure you get a quality product. And before anyone says I am a Bravo fan boy I do not own a single product of theirs. Daniel Defense is another well known builder that also tests all their parts. Bel;ive it or not but S&W supposedly also HPT and MPI.

When I build personal guns it is a hodge podge of quality parts. I try to get the best I can for the money. I will not spend twice as much as the next step down. And by doing so I have never had a failure of any kind with any of my guns and they tend to be reasonable. My current gun that has the most rounds through it cost me less than $1000 to build. It is 1/2" accurate at 100 and digests anything I have put through it.

Dolomite

[RWF]

Velocity is only thing you gain by going with anything over a 16". Barrel length has nothing to do with accuracy unless you are using irons. With irons you have a longer sight radius. With a shorter barrel harmonics are less making the barrel more accurate over a wider range of ammunition. With that being said I would still go with the longest barrel that can comfortably use. And as always every barrel is different so it is possible to have a thin barrel that shoots better than a heavy and vice versa.

Dolomite

Dolomite

first let me say i love my 16" AR's and do care for anything over a 20" barrel on a bolt gun. my 16" has always done what i have asked of it. and i guess for the most part and most shooters ( who really do not shoot distance) all that has been said is true. but velocity does equal accuracy if you shooting something like a hi power match. the longer the bullet stays supersonic the less it is effected by the elements. yes a shooter using a 16" gun can shoot at 600 but it harder to do than the guy using the 20 or 24 gun. i promise i will never have a 24" AR.

just my 2 cents

thanks.

[JoeBobOutfitters]

Actually there are several that do. Bravo does on every single bolt. Feature for feature Bravo will beat out Colt. They do go the extra mile to ensure you get a quality product. And before anyone says I am a Bravo fan boy I do not own a single product of theirs. Daniel Defense is another well known builder that also tests all their parts. Bel;ive it or not but S&W supposedly also HPT and MPI.

When I build personal guns it is a hodge podge of quality parts. I try to get the best I can for the money. I will not spend twice as much as the next step down. And by doing so I have never had a failure of any kind with any of my guns and they tend to be reasonable. My current gun that has the most rounds through it cost me less than $1000 to build. It is 1/2" accurate at 100 and digests anything I have put through it.

Dolomite

I would not lump Daniel Defense, BCM, Spike's, etc into the "commercial" category. These are all higher end, tactically geared AR-15's not the "mainstream" DPMS, Bushmaster, Olympic Arms, etc. I meant the "standard" AR-15 that you would normally pickup in Dick's Sporting Goods or that most people actually buy will most likely not be individually HPT/MPI tested and possibly not even batch tested. Internet buyers are a different story, as they are more knowledgeable and research the topics to squeeze more out of their money.

While I agree you will gain better terminal ballistics, buck wind better, etc with a faster bullet out of a longer barrel I don't believe it is nearly as important in a caliber such as 223. 204, and other similar calibers are much more sensitive to barrel length and velocity loss. I don't think for the average hunter, it will matter. Long range shooters wouldn't even consider a 16" barrel, nor 1:9 twist most likely, so they are lumped into their own category, IMO. A carry gun is entirely different in nature, expectations, and size than a bench gun, long range shooter, or varmint gun.

[Guest adamoxtwo]

Ok so I talked to the JSE Folks and the barrel that came with it was not lined. However, they will upgrade the barrel to SS for an additional $50. I thought that was a pretty reasonable. So this is the final product I will be purchasing from them:

16" BD 1x9 5.56 Chrome Moly GB Carbine Upper

Base Price is $375

with the following Options:

Handgaurd: UTG 4 Rail Free Float - $55

Gas Block: YHM 1 Rail - $15

BCG: DPMS Chrome - $35

Barrel: M4 SS 1x9 Barrel $50

Total Price is $530. Total for everything is going to be a little over $800 and that includes Lower, 6 Point Stock, Front and Rear sights, pistol and Fore Grips. That I can live with. I know it's not the best possible Upper out there, but should be a decent. Thanks for all of the input folks. One Day I hope money won't be a restricter and I can take more of the advise and buy some of the higher quality parts that were recommended.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Glad to hear it. I personally like SS over chrome lined.

Something you need to realize is that most uppers are forged and made by the same people then sold to different makers. I suspect yours will have the keyhole forge mark which is what in on S&W's and Spikes as well as a few other high end guns.

As far as barrels go there are a bit more makers of barrels out there but most who sell barrels to the public also have government contracts for the same barrels. And with that a certain level of quality is inherently there. You would be surprized at who makes the barrels for some of the high end guns, I know I was.

Glad you changed your mind on the Ti BCG. Chrome is the better option.

I will try to get the trigger kit out to you this week. I have a lot of other stuff going on with my health but I plan to get out tomorrow. The biggest obstacle is writing instructions but I will probably just have you call me when you get ready to install it.

Dolomite

[Guest adamoxtwo]

Glad to hear it. I personally like SS over chrome lined.

Something you need to realize is that most uppers are forged and made by the same people then sold to different makers. I suspect yours will have the keyhole forge mark which is what in on S&W's and Spikes as well as a few other high end guns.

As far as barrels go there are a bit more makers of barrels out there but most who sell barrels to the public also have government contracts for the same barrels. And with that a certain level of quality is inherently there. You would be surprized at who makes the barrels for some of the high end guns, I know I was.

Glad you changed your mind on the Ti BCG. Chrome is the better option.

I will try to get the trigger kit out to you this week. I have a lot of other stuff going on with my health but I plan to get out tomorrow. The biggest obstacle is writing instructions but I will probably just have you call me when you get ready to install it.

Dolomite

I really appreciate it. If you need anything please let me know! I owe you one for sure!

[JoeBobOutfitters]

I wouldn't say the forged upper receiver has much bearing on accuracy. The barrel/extension should play a much bigger part. If the JSE uppers have the "keyhole" then it is the same base forged upper as used by Spike's, Rock River, etc. The stripped upper isn't where you make or break your build, but in the barrel and BCG. You should have a decent setup out of the gate!

Edited June 1, 2011 by JoeBobOutfitters

[Guest adamoxtwo]

I wouldn't say the forged upper receiver has much bearing on accuracy. The barrel/extension should have a much bigger part. If the JSE uppers have the "keyhole" then it is the same base forged upper as used by Spike's, Rock River, etc. The stripped upper isn't where you make or break your build, but in the barrel and BCG. You should have a decent setup out of the gate!

Thanks! Pics will be posted!

[Guest BenderBendingRodriguez]

Since this thread seems to be full of people who would probably know, I figured I could try asking this here before starting a new thread about it...

What length barrel would you say is the minimum needed to get enough velocity to deal with, say, coyotes or, um, two legged predators, out to around 200 yards without using some sort of crazy ammo? This includes any available SBR lengths. Assume some sort of sighting system, so barrel length for iron sights can be ignored for purposes of this discussion.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Since this thread seems to be full of people who would probably know, I figured I could try asking this here before starting a new thread about it...

What length barrel would you say is the minimum needed to get enough velocity to deal with, say, coyotes or, um, two legged predators, out to around 200 yards without using some sort of crazy ammo? This includes any available SBR lengths. Assume some sort of sighting system, so barrel length for iron sights can be ignored for purposes of this discussion.

I would say 14.5" would be the minimum for anything out to 200 yards. I know for a fact that 10.5" guns aren't really effective beyond 100 yards using standard FMJ type ammunition. You can extend the effective range a bit with quality ammo like TAP rounds which are polymer tipped rounds. Forget about 7.5" guns as they aren't much more than a 25 yard guns when using FMJ ammunition. The reason is there isn't enough velocity from the shorter barrels for the bullet to fragment upon impact and unless the bulelt tumbles it will just pass right through making a nice, neat 1/4" hole.

Personally I would consider a 16" gun the minimum length. And if you don't plan on carrying it much or clearing building I would even go longer. Velocity is your friend and whatever you can do to increase velocity is a good thing.

If I had to have a short gun like a 7.5" or even a 10.5" I would consider a different caliber that uses the shorter barrels more effectively. 6.8, 7.62x39 or even some pistol calibers are more effective than the 5.56 in 7.5" or 10.5" barrels.

Dolomite

[Guest BenderBendingRodriguez]

I would say 14.5" would be the minimum for anything out to 200 yards. I know for a fact that 10.5" guns aren't really effective beyond 100 yards using standard FMJ type ammunition. You can extend the effective range a bit with quality ammo like TAP rounds which are polymer tipped rounds. Forget about 7.5" guns as they aren't much more than a 25 yard guns when using FMJ ammunition. The reason is there isn't enough velocity from the shorter barrels for the bullet to fragment upon impact and unless the bulelt tumbles it will just pass right through making a nice, neat 1/4" hole.

Personally I would consider a 16" gun the minimum length. And if you don't plan on carrying it much or clearing building I would even go longer. Velocity is your friend and whatever you can do to increase velocity is a good thing.

If I had to have a short gun like a 7.5" or even a 10.5" I would consider a different caliber that uses the shorter barrels more effectively. 6.8, 7.62x39 or even some pistol calibers are more effective than the 5.56 in 7.5" or 10.5" barrels.

Dolomite

That is exactly what I wanted to know, and you're exactly the person I expected to get the information from.

If 14.5" is the suggested minimum, I suspect I will end up going to 16" when the time comes. No sense in hassling with all the SBR requirements and extra $ for 1.5" difference unless I were going to end up with some sort of bullpup design.

This would mostly be a light carried piece, mostly for interior use (I won't claim that I plan on doing much building clearing, but interior defense would be an anticipated use), so smaller is better. At the same time, I don't want to have something that would be useless outside of the house. 200 yards is pretty much the absolute outside distance I would need in my current outside environment, so I figured that would be a good cutoff point.

[Capbyrd]

And go midlength. Its just looks SO much better.

[Dolomite_supafly]

And go midlength. Its just looks SO much better.

And it is easier on the gun as well. It also, at least for me, seems to soften the recoil impulse. The ones I have had were just as reliable as carbine length systems.

Dolomite

[Magiccarpetrides]

I wouldn't say the forged upper receiver has much bearing on accuracy. The barrel/extension should play a much bigger part. If the JSE uppers have the "keyhole" then it is the same base forged upper as used by Spike's, Rock River, etc. The stripped upper isn't where you make or break your build, but in the barrel and BCG. You should have a decent setup out of the gate!

Wow...good to know. My Surplus Arms and Ammo $60 lower is the same forging as the $79 spikes I ordered lol. Unfortunately the SAA lower also has a more even finish...now hopefully spikes won't let me down on my "zombie" lower thats been on order for over 2 months.

[Magiccarpetrides]

I appreciate the feedback. The only reason I was going with the Titanium is this. Since JSE is not a "top teir" Upper I wanted to make sure that the BCG was quality. I have read a lot of reviews and I have not read anything bad about them and have heard very positive feedback in reference to them. And yes there is a little Bling factor involved. I have the first Rifle of a limited Production and I did want to dress it up a little bit. My wife is getting the chrome option for $35 more and I could follow suit, but I like the look. I'm guilty.....However, I will check on that barrel.

It costs an arm and a leg(well $225) but the Spikes Nickel Boron(failzero) coated BCG is pretty awesome. I have it on mine and its super slick and easy to clean. It requires very little/no lube....down the road might not be a bad upgrade.

[Guest BenderBendingRodriguez]

It costs an arm and a leg(well $225) but the Spikes Nickel Boron(failzero) coated BCG is pretty awesome. I have it on mine and its super slick and easy to clean. It requires very little/no lube....down the road might not be a bad upgrade.

That same coating is on the slide and barrel of my G19 EXO. I will attest to the fact that it it stupid easy to clean.

[Guest kickstand]

I would say 14.5" would be the minimum for anything out to 200 yards. I know for a fact that 10.5" guns aren't really effective beyond 100 yards using standard FMJ type ammunition. You can extend the effective range a bit with quality ammo like TAP rounds which are polymer tipped rounds. Forget about 7.5" guns as they aren't much more than a 25 yard guns when using FMJ ammunition. The reason is there isn't enough velocity from the shorter barrels for the bullet to fragment upon impact and unless the bulelt tumbles it will just pass right through making a nice, neat 1/4" hole.

Personally I would consider a 16" gun the minimum length. And if you don't plan on carrying it much or clearing building I would even go longer. Velocity is your friend and whatever you can do to increase velocity is a good thing.

If I had to have a short gun like a 7.5" or even a 10.5" I would consider a different caliber that uses the shorter barrels more effectively. 6.8, 7.62x39 or even some pistol calibers are more effective than the 5.56 in 7.5" or 10.5" barrels.

Dolomite

What about 11.5 or 12.5? A lot of folks claim the extra inch or two gets you over the hurdle so to speak.

[Dolomite_supafly]

What about 11.5 or 12.5? A lot of folks claim the extra inch or two gets you over the hurdle so to speak.

Any increase in velocity from a longer barrel is a step in the right direction. The reason? A double in velocity increases kinetic energy by a factor of four yet doubling the weight only doubles the kinetic energy. So increasing the velocity increases any gains in kinetic energy by a factor of 4 compared to increasing bullet weight alone. The kinetic energy is what is used to do the work.

I would go with a lighter bullet rather than heavier one and increase velocity. I would take the lightweight bullet, add a hardened penetrator and push it as hard and as fast as the weapon would allow.

Couple this with a slower twist rate and you would have a more effective round than what we are using now. The additional velocity coupled with the slower twist would make for an unstable round in soft tissure. The extra velocity would also help the bullet disrupt and thus increasing the wound channel. It would also help with over penetration in soft tissue.

As far as the question I do not believe an extra inch or two is going to overcome most of the limitations we are seeing. Not because of the barrel length but because of the twist rates and the heavy bullet weights that are so common these days. If I had to use a 10.5 inch barrel I would either use a different caliber or load some lightweight bullets to the max.

The problem is the powers that be are trying to take a 200-300 yard cartridge and turn it into a 500+ yard cartridge. Now to get the extra distance they are sacrificing a lot in both long an short range perfromance. They need to stick to its original design specifications for a short range gun. If they want a long range gun then use a long range caliber. If they are worried about the extra weight then use a 6mm or 6.5mm bullet. They can be had with a long for caliber profile that helps ballistics. And a decent 6mm bullet is hardly heavier than the heavy 77 grain bullets the 223 uses for long range performance.

Dolomtie

[RWF]

sorry, but i just ain't to smart i guess. i am a little confused about your last post.

yes in the begining the 5.56 was made to be unstable so bullet would not just drill thru but start tumble and break apart.

now they are wanting a round more stable and that will go through body armor etc.

i do believe a super fast weight round even with a penetrater would still break apart and with this it let the penetrater part be knock off course per say.

i do know that the 193 5.56 hit at very close range just blows apart.

i guess i have never it much thought but i never thought of the 5.56 as a short range round only. and i know the 223 first came to life as a little critter getter.

not to worry even after 15 years i can say i did not ever have big love for the round or weapon system.

[Guest GunTroll]

I think Dolomite's opinion is about as good as it gets here. Lots of great info and ballistic facts.

As far as the second post on this page....it made my head hurt trying to read it. But I understand what you are saying oddly.

I like 16". Its short enough. Especially if you have a collapsible stock. "We" can still do CQB with it and yet it doesn't loose too much if you go to the woods to bring home dinner. With that being said, don't hate on me for my opinion, 223 isn't a large game cartridge. Of course thats not a fact.

[RWF]

sorry about the hrad ache, as i said i just ain't that smart. and confused easy. i am just glad some one could kinda understand it. i also agree the 223 is not a great big game (deer size) round. a good shot on the deer a must.

no hate at all! like i said i had 15 years with it, started with A1. in basic mine was in semi retirement from the undeclared war in the 65-73. rattled wobbled hated it. and never found true love with it or for it. now the M21 now that's a whole different thing....