[Stinkyshoe]

This is currently what I have. It is a heavy gun to begin with, but then I added an ATN scope and mount which adds atleast another 2 lbs(this is off topic, but I am very dissapointed with the ATN...it has a dot in the screen that the shooter places on the target...@ 100 yards the dot is 3 inches in diameter...to have a rifle capable of dime groups and scope that doesn't allow "dime"shot placement further adds to the problem). I am simply frustrated with my decision to purchase the 20 instead of a 16 or 24. I invision the 223 as a good caliber to have for HD, plinking and general target practice. But now that I have shot the 20" bbl more, I am wish I would have bought a 16".

I try to be very discriminate and picky when it comes to gun purchases. In my mind there are to catagories of guns. Self defense and sporting guns(sporting could mean target shooting, hunting, plinking). I don't know about you guys but to me and AR type gun is not something I would carry hunting. I know it is a capable and accurate round as well as an accurate gun, but it isn't big enough to responsibly take a deer. About all it would be good for is varmints. For me this leaves an AR to self defense and self defense type target practice.

I have no sort of military training or an extensive knowledge of guns, but it seems to me that because an AR can except hi cap mags that it would be best for SD or HD. A 20 inch bbl is hardly maneuverable(atleast to me) for that purpose. The 20 inch bbl probably would be a good choice for long range shooting, but I am unsure of the abilities of the 223 to stay stable at a long range(although I am not decieved to think that I have the ability to "out shoot" the 223). I could hand load for it and load heavier bullets, but it is a semi auto and I don't have time to load that much ammo each by hand(instead for a long range gun for hunting and targets, I would be better off with maybe a 30-06 bolt gun...I think I can justify the benefit of hand loading for that and having one gun to use for variments, deer and targets in a bolt gun) I am thinking that I should sell the 20 inch upper to someone who could better utilize it for it's purpose, and then in turn buy a 16 inch M4 upper.

Any comments, criticisms and thoughts will be much appreciated,
Thanks
Ss

[Quintin Likely]

Longer sight radius. Another 4" of barrel for more muzzle velocity. If you're shooting service rifle, it's gotta be 20". The M4orgery profile uppers on the market today all have brakes on them to make them legal, this makes them very loud, with a fair amount of muzzleflash if you're using something like surplus ammo.

I know it is a capable and accurate round as well as an accurate gun, but it isn't big enough to responsibly take a deer. About all it would be good for is varmints.

Shot placement, shot placement, shot placement...although granted, some states it's illegal to hunt deer with anything less than a .24 caliber centerfire. Shot placement will make up for a lot of caliber defiencies. I dunno about using a .223 for home defense, I figure a 18.5" or 20" barrelled scattergun would be a better bet for that, dollar for dollar.

-Quintin

[Onslaught]

This is only a matter of preference, and just my opinion based on the AR's I have owned and/or fired.

There are very few times when the 20" barrel is a better choice than the 16" for those who aren't attached to the look, nostalgia, etc... Aside from certain shooting competitions and maintaining reliable fragmentation of milspec FMJ ammo beyond 150 yards, the 20" is just not neccessary. There isn't much I can't do with my lowly 14.5" Bushmaster out to 500 yards that a 20" barrel can. (as a civilian, at the range, just for fun...)

I just really do like the multifunctional use of a 16" barrel. I can scope it, I can (informal) target shoot with it, I can varmint hunt with it, and I can do it all with a package that's over 4" shorter... Now, if you use irons, then the longer sight radius is a good thing. But then there's also the Dissipator.

I also think that the heavy barrel on most ARs is overkill for regular folk. But that is easily remedied by one of the AR custom shops, or a barrel swap.

If you're that dissatisfied, then I'd suggest either replacing the barrel (@$200) or selling your entire upper and buying a new one. Or you could try trading either here or at AR15.com (which seems to be down right now). Another option would be to have your existing barrel turned and/or fluted ($50 - $85 at
Kurt's Kustom (http://www.kurtskustomfirearms.citymax.com/page/page/8932.htm). Maybe have the barrel shortened to 18" as well... But then that's the great thing about the AR... modularity.

Of course, having said all that, I am in the market for a 20", but only because I already have the 14.5". If I could only have 1, it would be a 16". I also plan to have the barrel shortened to 18.5", put an A1 length buttstock on it and use it for armadillos. It will only be 2" longer than my current carbine...

[444]

Or instead of doing something rash, you could take off your present upper, put it in the closet and buy whatever upper currently suits your fancy.

Then in a couple years when you decide you wish you had a 20" barrel, you open the closet and switch back.

Selling guns or in this case an upper is almost always a rash move with little thought of the long term. If you don't have the money, save. They will still be selling them when you get the money. Then your collection will be gowing instead of marking time.

[Dave R]

I'll take a "shot" at this.

The .223 is a "small caliber/high velocity" round. If the barrel gets too short, it just becomes a "small caliber" round.

The "high velocity" component affects lethality, range and trajectory.

[Dave Markowitz]

Advantages of 20" barrel:

-- Better ballistics. The longer barrel gives you higher velocity which translates to flatter trajectory and longer effective range.

-- Less muzzle blast. .223 in a shorter barrel is LOUD. Heck, in a 20" it's loud, but the shorties magnify this.

-- Longer sight radius when using irons (unless you have a Bushmaster Dissipator, like I used to).

Cons of a 20" barrel:

-- Not as handy in close quarters, but an AR so fitted is still fairly short.

-- If it's an HBAR, makes the rifle rather heavy for a .223.

Pick the weapon based on your intended use. the nice thing about an AR is that you can have one receiver with different uppers. So, you can fit it with a 16" barrel for home defense, then take it varmint shooting with a 20" or 24" barrel, just by swapping the upper receiver assembly.

[swingset]

Isn't the best part of having an AR the ability to quickly and easily pop on any upper to a lower assy.!?!?!?!?

Quit yer bitchin and get a 16" upper. Then, you have both and you need not confuse yourself any longer.

[lmccrock]

S.shoe,

I do not hunt; I will leave that pontification to others.

Unless you are shooting some game which requires or benefits from 20", then I believe it is a compromise. You do not have the added muzzle velocity of the 24" nor the handiness of the 16". The shorter sight radius of the 16" is not an issue if you use optics, although there is some velocity loss. For "long range" it depends on what you mean for long range. 300 yards? 600? 1000?

It looks like you acquired one platform for many applications, and that means compromise. And, maybe you are dissatisfied with the outcome of that compromise. I am currently investigating a new upper for 3-gun, so I facing the issue of "compromise". Open sights or optics? Barrel length (probably 18 or 20)? Trigger? Magwell? How much $$$ ? That last question determines alot ;)

As for a 3 MOA dot sight, it is tough to pick a speck on a target and hit it. But if the bullseye is enough larger than 3 MOA that you can center the dot on the bull, then dime size groups are doable. Using open sights (front sight width works out to be about 6" at 100 yards), I can do quarter-size groups (not 0.25", but a US $0.25 coin) at 100 yards, onto a 6" black bull on a larger white background. My myopic eyes make open sights dicey anyway, which is why I am leaning toward a scope for my 3-gun upper. Dots are for speed, and some limited amount of precision, but are tough if you are shooting at paper targets typically used to zero a scope.

Too much typing, too many compromises, time to go.

Lee

[444]

One thing you might want to try.
With iron sights you sight in the weapon so that the bullet strikes the target at the very tip of the front sight. The same thing can be done with a dot. Zero the sight so the bullet impacts at the very top of the dot. For quick shooting, it is close enough to simply cover the target with the dot and fire (such as in self defense, you would place the dot in the center of the chest), but if you need to make a more precise shot, you hold the dot so the exact point of impact is right at the tip top of the dot.
I personally don't do this. If you think about it, just because the dot is 10 MOA, doesn't mean the group has to be 10 MOA. If you hold the dot in exactly the same place, the rifle will shoot a group the same size as with any other sighting system. In fact, if it were possible to hold the rifle in exactly the same position for each shot (such as if the rifle were in a vise), the sighting system doesn't matter at all.
I find that if I am shooting at a bullseye target, I can hold my Aimpoint ML2 dot in the center of the target so that the dot is concentric with the scoring rings on the target. With a silhouette target at longer range I might place the top curvature of the dot even with the shoulders. Etc. It is really a matter of using the sight enough to know where to hold on the target. At 400 yards I cover the silhouette's head with the dot. At 300 I hold the top of the dot even with the shoulders.......................

[Badger Arms]

For a civilian, I can't justify the 16" barrel. The only reason the Army and Special forces switched to the M-4 is because they feel more comfortable with urban and vehicle-borne operations which make up the majority of their fighting situation. Unless you plan on entering an APC or jumping from a helicopter with your rifle, use the full 20" for the folowing reasons:

More velocity
Less muzzle blast
Longer sight radius
Better handling

To me, it's absurd you would complain about the weight and maneuverability of a 20" barrel! Frankly, I find the perfect rifle ballance and pointability peaked with the M-14 which is heavier and longer. Please justify how 4 inches of overall length, half-pound weight savings and maneuverability can justify the 120fps velocity drop, 50% increase in muzzle flash, blast, and noise, and correspondinging shrinkage of sight radius?

[Gewehr98]

Since it's only been an issue item for 30+ years to our troops DoD wide... :scrutiny:

[Onslaught]

Why do we have to justify a 20" barrel AR?
Since it's only been an issue item for 30+ years to our troops DoD wide...

Because apparently after 30+ years, at least part of the DoD is asking themselves the same thing... :D
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&e=4&u=/ap/20031122/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_goodbye_m_16

To me, it's absurd you would complain about the weight and maneuverability of a 20" barrel! Frankly, I find the perfect rifle ballance and pointability peaked with the M-14 which is heavier and longer. Please justify how 4 inches of overall length, half-pound weight savings and maneuverability can justify the 120fps velocity drop, 50% increase in muzzle flash, blast, and noise, and correspondinging shrinkage of sight radius?

First, you gotta remember that everyone is different. Your "perfect" is somebody else's "aweful".
The M1A I owned was a good balancing weapon, but the 20" HBAR's I've held were more front heavy and not as evenly balanced.
120fps is NOTHING when you're talking about 3000+ fps. The only place that makes a difference is again in terminal ballistics using FMJ ammo or in scenarios I don't personally find myself in like trying to get the most out of the .223 at 800 - 1000 yards.
I have a pre-ban rifle with a Phantom flash supressor, so I get zero muzzle flash. My buddy's 16" post-ban has a little ball of flame, but certainly not anything to write home about.
There's most definitely NOT a lot more noise coming from a 16" than a 20", and certainly less than any hunting rifle. It may be "louder", but it's not "loud". Mine's a LOT less noisy than my buddy's 20" postban with the stupid Blast Enhancer on the end of it. Of course, "loud" is relative, as my first upper had an 11.5" barrel with 5.5" flash supressor. When I swapped for the 14.5" barrel, I was so happy with the noise reduction you'd have thought I'd put a silencer on it. :cool:
Sight radius is certainly an advantage on the 20", but again, if you use an optic, or you go for the Dissipator, then it's again not a problem.
I'm sure as heck not going to call anyone "absurd" if they like the 20" better as there's nothing wrong with them either... We're talking preferences here, and everybody's got a different one. If you think 20" is the cat's meow, then 20" it is! Personally, I just happen to prefer the lighter, shorter 16" with mid-length handguards....

[Gewehr98]

About that fantastic plastic Raymond Loewe-inspired HK XM8 thingie. They make the barrels any shorter, they may as well chamber them for .22 Hornet. (Ok, I'm being facetious, it should be .22 K-Hornet) :scrutiny:

[Skunkabilly]

Finally got to play with both side by side...The 16" with something on it (brake) only seems nominally shorter (18"-ish bbl) than a plain nosed 20"....at the risk of being called a ninja, if I decided to go short, I'd probably get a 14.5" with a brake :o but I think I'm back on the 20" boat.

[Onslaught]

They make the barrels any shorter, they may as well chamber them for .22 Hornet.
I know this is really a different thread, but I did notice that, for the same length rifle, you LOSE 2" with the new XZR8-2000 thingie.

The 16" with something on it (brake) only seems nominally shorter (18"-ish bbl) than a plain nosed 20"....at the risk of being called a ninja, if I decided to go short, I'd probably get a 14.5" with a brake
NINJA!

:D

That's true... but then playing fair, bare muzzles alike, there's still 4" difference... Mine is currently a 14.5" with the Phantom Flash supressor attached, so it's overall length is 16.1". I have a 16" midlength at KKF getting a weight loss job, so I'm actually opting for a 1" longer (with an A2 FS) OAL to get the longer handguards and (in my opinion) better looking rifle. If I put another Phantom on it, then it's up to 1.5" longer.

But then, as has been mentioned, that's the great thing about AR's. You can have a 16" lightweight upper for when you're feeling the need, and a 20" HBAR for when you want that extra 120fps, or better balance, or whatever... There's definitely a place for both. Just listening to Stinkyshoe's requirements/disappointments, it sounded to me like 16" was the way to go in his case.

After all... (not again :rolleyes: ) if we all thought just alike, who would we have to yell at in traffic?

[Skunkabilly]

NINJA! :D

You called?
http://www.skunkabilly.com/images/tactical/insertion.jpg

After all... (not again ) if we all thought just alike, who would we have to yell at in traffic?

Or tell to get a Glock? :D

What is the length of the barrel, not including the flash hider, on pre-ban A2 barrels? 19.25"?

[Stinkyshoe]

First off, I want to thank you all for the insightful comments(and to Skunk for adding a bit humor to the thread :) )

Gewehr and Badger:
Not to sound wishy-washy, but I am glad that you have found what works for you. I am not attacking the issue weapon of our military at all. I am one who thinks that the AR is one of the most accurate semi-auto guns. I guess my frustration with the weight and lack of accurate precision initially bothered me. It still does, but I think this can be remedied with a better scope choice(got any suggestions?). A 20" with a bull barrel is kind of a heavy gun if you ask me. Maybe it isn't to you, but I can only imagine myself wishing I had the light 20" or 16" if I had to carry it all day for varminting.

I will keep the 20" for the time being, as I would like to participate in the state games in the Military rifle competition(I will no doubt loose but it will be fun)

I know it will be painful, but the only solution to my "problem" is to get a Ar M4 upper :D

A question....Do the modern and "legal" muzzlebrakes actually reduce flash or increase it(Since it isn't a "flash supressor"anymore)? Does a rifle with a flash suppressor make the gun louder?

Thanks again,
Ss

[444]

A muzzle brake does reduce flash. Not to nearly the degree that a flash suppressor does, but there is FAR less flash than a bare muzzle.

If a flash suppressor makes a gun louder, I couldn't tell. Some muzzle brakes (not all) make the gun considerably louder and cause much worse muzzle blast.

I am happy you are going to keep your 20" upper. There are many things I sold that I now regret. Get yourself an additional M4 upper by hook or by crook and enjoy both of them. It sounds like you are putting together sort of a varmint rig with your 20" upper. Then you can have the M4 upper for defense, and fast action games. I think you will be happy with that decision. Even if you decide six months or a year down the road that you are totally put off by the 20" upper, you have an upper reciever that you can use with another barrel of your choice.

[bogie]

1. Find someone who desperately wants to carry a large and fragile piece of glass around, and sell 'em the ATN.

2. A 26" barrel would be about right, but 24 might be a better compromise.

3. Stick a good Weaver scope on it, and you're done.

[BDM]

I think barrel legnth comes down to intended use.I have 3 ARs all bushie 2 pre and 1 post the prebans are carbines 1 14.5 with phantom and 1 11.5 with the big ole suppresor those to are my self defense ARs,when the statistic for the last 60 years is 95% of infantry engagements take place at 100 yds and under wich is the situation in Iraq then the smaller barrels are perfect and the decreased velocity is not a factor at those ranges.My 3rd is a full size 20" I use for CMP matches that take place at longer ranges.I use HBARS on all because the extra pound is negligible no barrel whip double the life of a standard weight and more reliable should you need to use the rifle in a sustained fire situation.The new M4 barrells now in use are heavier than the older profile ones to combat the heat and make them more reliable thats why the new M4 RAS will fit a HBAR.So I think intended purpose dictates barrel legnth.

[Joe Demko]

I have two AR's. One with a 16" fluted barrel and one with a 24" HBAR. They have their own strengths and weaknesses. The shorty is very light and handy. The longer barrel gives a boost to muzzle velocity and is so steady that one can observe bullet impact through the scope because muzzle jump is basically nonexistant. Get yourself another upper. Better yet, get yourself a whole other gun with the shorter barrel.

[ARperson]

Geez, this is hardly an issue here. Just get yourself a 16" upper and viola! Problem solved. Get a dissipator model and you can solve the short sight radius issue with the typical M4 configuration.

Each configuration has it's own purpose. Perhaps not the purpose you wanted when you bought it, but that should have been part of the buying process. Of course, needs and desires changes which is why our collections grow. :D Since you already feel the 20" configuration is pretty much useless for your own purposes, it won't do me any good to go into a discussion of its advantages over other configurations. Suffice it to say that each config has benefits and advantages over the others for different purposes. Don't condemn it completely because it isn't the best choice for your purposes. That's not the gun's fault.

Keep in mind you're not a true AR gunowner unless you have at least 3 different complete rifles in completely different configurations at any point in time. :D