How short of a barrel is acceptable for assault rifles?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Evil Monkey

member
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
1,486
How short can you go until it becomes ridiculous? They could've never done this with a battle rifle but it seems alright for assault rifle calibers (5.56, 7.62x39, 5.45) to have such short barrels for.

The Israeli Micro Galil has the shortest barrel I've ever seen at 7.67 inches. Wow. The muzzle flash and noise must be very problematic. The Russians used to make 8.?? inch barreled AKSU-74 but have since stopped making them in favor of new AK-105's with 12.5 inch barrels.

Makes you wonder....
 
My SOCOM-16 has a 16" barrel of course and has been a proven hitter out to 400-yards, (as far as I've used it)....
 
the minimum that will give decent velocity and not blind/deafen the user...

now, when does an assault rifle end and a submachine gun begin?
 
now, when does an assault rifle end and a submachine gun begin?

Hard to say. US Navy issues a 10.5" barreled M16 variant to NAVSPECWAR types. Mk. 18 I think it's called? .223 ain't doing much with 10" of barrel, but it still packs more punch than pistol-round firing submachine guns.

Sig 552 and G36 both have 8-9" barrels. Shortest production .308s that I'm aware of have 11-12" barrels, and with that much barrel, .308's advantage over 7.62x39 is greatly reduced. (Unless, of course, you shorten the 7.62 barrel to the same length, then .308 shines again.)

Just depends on what you do with it, I suppose.
 
I thought the definition of a submachine gun was an automatic weapon of a pistol caliber (9mm), and a machine gun was an automatic weapon of a rifle caliber(5.56, 7.62x39, 5.45).

Besides which, "assault rifle" is still a bad word.
 
Besides which, "assault rifle" is still a bad word.

No it's not. The term assault rifle is a legitimate term describing a legitimate weapon(5.56mm, 7.62x39mm, 5.45mm). "Assault weapon" is the culprit.
 
No it's not. The term assault rifle is a legitimate term describing a legitimate weapon(5.56mm, 7.62x39mm, 5.45mm). "Assault weapon" is the culprit.
"assault weapon" is a political invention meant to demonize firearms with certain cosmetic features, divide and destroy the shooting community with the illusion that these "assault weapons" are somehow different. Assault Rifle is a translation of the german "Sturmgewehr" originally a propaganda word invented by hitler. I don't agree with either of the words, "rifle" seems short and simple enough.
 
"assault weapon" is a political invention meant to demonize firearms with certain cosmetic features, divide and destroy the shooting community with the illusion that these "assault weapons" are somehow different. Assault Rifle is a translation of the german "Sturmgewehr" originally a propaganda word invented by hitler. I don't agree with either of the words, "rifle" seems short and simple enough.

In all honesty, we loved using that word until 1994.
 
Assault Rifle was first coined by Hitler as a political propaganda tool when promoting the STG44.

I don't like any rifle to have a barrel smaller than 16". To me, it seems pointless after that.
 
I'd say that for .223, 14" or so seems to be working out okay. For a .308 I'd go sixteen.

Others seem to disagree. The SCAR rifle from FN's "standard" barrel in both .223 and .308 is around 14", and both have 11" "CQB" barrels, if I recall correctly.
 
well it would have to be pretty handy to justify the 200 dollars and extra paperwork.

10.5" Mk. 18 is the same size as an MP5, plus or minus an inch or so. Overall bulk is about the same. I was impressed with how handy it was, actually. Krinkov too.

Thought about getting a short-barreled rifle one of these days....then I read about that Kel-Tec bullpup, which has the same overall length than any of the SBRs I was looking at without the paperwork. Well... :D
 
Thought about getting a short-barreled rifle one of these days....then I read about that Kel-Tec bullpup, which has the same overall length than any of the SBRs I was looking at without the paperwork. Well...

A bullpup is of course the obvious answer to the problem of making very compact rifles for CQB and jumping in and out of vehicles, while keeping a long enough barrel to have a decent long-range performance. It also provides a much better weight distribution when it's kitted out with a UGL or the kind of fancy sights etc proposed for the Future Combat System (see pic of current version below).

But that message hasn't quite dawned on the US Army yet. It's a very conservative beast :rolleyes:

82971_1F.jpg
Source
 
On the "assault rifle" question...

The Merriam-Webster definition was incorrect, so I turned to the tried and true Wikipedia definition:

An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle or carbine firing ammunition with muzzle energies intermediate between those typical of pistol and battle rifle ammunition. Assault rifles are categorized between light machine guns, intended more for sustained automatic fire in a support role, and submachine guns, which fire a handgun cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge. Assault rifles are the standard small arms in most modern armies, having largely replaced or supplemented larger, more powerful battle rifles, such as the World War II-era M1 Garand and Tokarev SVT. Examples of assault rifles include the M16 rifle and the AK-47. Semi-automatic rifles, including commercial versions of the AR-15, and "automatic" rifles limited to firing single shots are not assault rifles as they are not selective fire. Belt-fed weapons or rifles with very limited capacity fixed magazines are also generally not considered assault rifles.

The first sentence has always been my definition of a true assault rifle. Namely, selective fire, chambered in a rifle caliber. That is the technical definition for an "assault rifle."

An "assault weapon" is a nebulous category defined by antigunners as any magazine fed, scary looking weapon, regardless of caliber or select fire capability.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top