I never see full length AR-15s

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a .221 fire ball with a 22 in. barrel and a dpms sportical with the tiny barrel, but at least it does not have the grenade launcher cutout. The ar-15 rifle i still lust after is an old colt from the 60's. It had the long barrel, carry handle and the triangle handguard with no forward assist. I borrowed it from a friend for a couple of years. still my favorite ar that i have ever shot. I would like to buy a reproduction if possible.
 
I have an upper/lower that I have earmarked for a M16A2 clone build. Kind of a nostalgia thing, you know. Really, it's because I can't stand having a fixed carry handle upper laying around without a barrel, bolt, etc.

Gotta finish my carbine, though...
 
Yeah, I know what you mean, for quite a while now I've yearned for the triangular handguard, grey phosphate lower receiver, fixed irons and "waffle" groove 20 round mags. You can still find the waffle variety 60's era mags, they just don't usually have the springs and followers, but if you're going for the true M16 look it would be worth it to assemble some.
 
For an all-around gun as opposed to a dedicated target or varmint gun, a 16" barrel IMO makes more sense than a 20", as the 16" is handier, and the velocity loss and muzzle blast aren't as bad as with a 14.5" NFA-length M4 barrel.

I personally like a 16" barrel with a midlength gas system; I don't like the stubby carbine-length handguards.
 
The ar-15 rifle i still lust after is an old colt from the 60's. It had the long barrel, carry handle and the triangle handguard with no forward assist.

theres a guy here that has one. i believe its an a1. he hasnt junked it up with crud hanging off everywhere, and it is just really sleek looking. all business.

i drool over it everytime i see it.

i really like 451's up there too. i havent seen that one before.
 
at this stage in my rifle collection, i have no desire what so ever for what is practical or what is very useful, maybe for the same reason that i would like an early e-type jag for a daily driver. the triangular handguard feels right.
 
I love shooting mine:

img_2112.jpg


img_2115.jpg
 
451_Detonics my 20" AR-15 also sports a cav arms lower. With a government profile barrel it makes for a surprisingly lightweight rifle.
 
The M4gery is the past decade's fad. Nowadays everyone wants a lightweight barrel profile, 14.5" + a pinned muzzle device, midlength gas system, 60" of free float rails, flip-up sights and the most futuristic looking & expensive stock that can hold a fruit roll-up and a spare battery or two. Seriously.

Now, that said, there's a small congregation of people coming to realize that carbine length gas is actually THE tried and true system and the alleged differences in recoil impulse aren't all that noticeable. Hatewrs will always hate...

I have rifles in both styles, but to be honest the M4 is the one I'm most comfortable with from all the years of using it. I have no need for a 20" 5.56mm rifle, but I won't begrudge anyone their choices. I just always figured if I needed more gun than a 5.56mm carbine then a battle rifle was the best path to take.
 
Many guys just feel that have to have the latest fad which is M4 right now. Some of us still prefer old school rifles. I have an early Colt SP-1 rifle, another one built on a DSA lower with a mil surp A1 upper which came from a military unit after they converted to A2 configuration, another early one which sports a Colt .22 conversion kit, and one which has a Lakeside .22 belt fed upper. I'm in the process of building another one right now which will take an XM177 upper. This is the first shorty I've ever had a desire to own or shoot. This one is really for my son actually. I still prefer the triangular handguards and long barrel myself.
 
i always thought that the rifle length gas system was better for the fact that the bolt stays locked up a little longer thus lowering chamber pressure making the ejection sequence a little softer. Not for recoil reasons but for the fact it is a little easier on the rifle.
 
The rifle gas system is easier on the gun but Joe Average isn't likely to ever wear out a good carbine.
 
I believe that the only real advantage of the longer barrel is the longer sight radius. Now, with red dots, the added sight radius is no longer an advantage and the added length makes the rifle difficult to deal with in some instances.

I don't think that the 20" is hated, it just doesn't offer any real advantage for most.
 
Twenty-inch barrels comprise over half of my collection...

including two SP-1 uppers, Citadel 20inch upper, and two 20-inch Colt HBARS

And currently building an X39 upper with 20inch barrel.

Sooo, yeah they are still around.:cool:

M
 
I'm kind of partial to a 18" barrel with midlength gas system. It gives a tad more velocity with only 2" more inches in OAL. Para Ordinance had a a really nice one with 18" barrel but also a folding stock due to the recoil spring being located on the piston above the barrel. They never really caught on though.

The original M16 was designed to fire a lighter bullet with a very slow twist rate out of a 20" barrel. Now it's moved towards heavier but slower.
 
I love shooting mine:

img_2112.jpg


img_2115.jpg
If you make that carry handle integral then that's EXACTLY the configuration I like in an AR-15. I especially love the look of the straight magazines. Ammo capacity be damned.

I don't have a use for an AR-15 for anything other than target shooting really. I just like them. I don't hunt varmints and I'd rather use a shotgun or big bore handgun for home defense.
 
I believe that the only real advantage of the longer barrel is the longer sight radius.

If you go with a dissipator upper, you still don't need a 20-inch barrel to get the longer sight radius. I really missed the sights on my 20-incher until I picked up a Spike's dissy. Now I get the longer sight radius and the handier 16-inch barrel length in one package.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top