Mid-length vs carbine length DGI AR question

[Prion]

Curious to hear opinions between mid and carbine length DGI systems on ARs.

I've read reliability is an issue only in full-fun, middies are gentler thus last longer, smooths out the recoil impulse (I didn't really notice) etc, etc.

I own a middie but would like another AR and really like the look of the Daniel Defense DDM4v2 w/ a carbine length system. I know they have released a v3 middie but I like the look of v2.

Thoughts, experiences?

 

[batex]

I don't own a middie but my DDM4 carbine length as been nothing but rock solid reliable. I only have a few thousand rounds through it, so I'm hoping others will more experience will chime in.

 

[Gary G23]

Never buy a gun based on looks.

 

[Prion]

Never buy a gun based on looks./QUOTE]

Right, I want another AR, like DD and am curious if it makes a noticeable difference. Not like I want a bolt action 223 so I'm buying an AR 'cause it's cool.

 

[longdayjake]

I have had a little experience with both types. All of them functioned very well. The middies all shot more accurately but that was probably because they were bought for accuracy and not for just "military look alike."

 

[Tirod]

It's not a significant operational difference. The recoil impulse is slightly different.

If the looks of a firearm are the determining factor, go for it. Justifying the purchase based on a difference of an inch or so in where the gas block is tapped should be done because of what it offers, regardless of looks.

Mid lengths are reputedly less harsh on the action and supposedly have higher reliability over the long run as a result. Looks are looks, an emotional consideration that little to do with actual function, but a lot to do with factors like coolness, and an elevated self esteem.

The real choice is, is looks or function the major priority in this decision? Satisfying an emotional feeling goes away shortly, will the gun still do what you need it to do later? If everyone owned a Daniel Defense, would you?

 

[Nugilum]

ARlover, what makes the V2 more appealing than the V3? Is it the barrel profile?

 

[Quentin]

I built a middy and my buddy has an M4gery. Both function well and really I don't notice a huge difference in felt recoil nor do I see much difference in bolt carrier group wear. The M4 is easier to maneuver since it's at least 1/2 pound lighter but the middy gives tighter groups probably due to the HBAR and longer sight radius. Overall I went with the midlength for the reasons already mentioned and have not been disappointed.

Personally I like the look of a middy slightly better than an M4 but if you like the V2 better I don't think you'll be unhappy with the carbine gas system.

 

[Zerodefect]

Carbines have more dwell pressure which can fling the brass farther forward sometimes. Good if you do alot of ambi shooting in odd combat positions. Good in a dusty/dirty enviroment, more gas power to get that bolt carrier back.

The middy has longer handgards, smoother cycleing. Deosn't like wimpy ammo when used with 14.5" or 16" barrels.

Either is fine. Really splitting hairs to choose between the two.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I have all midlengths and I think they offer real, albeit small, advantages; but a well-built carbine will run right with any of them. For one thing, the base of knowledge on what makes a carbine tick and run is much bigger than it is for midlengths (thanks to the M4). So it is easier to "tune" a carbine than a midlength.

 

[RP88]

as said, the heavier barrels on the middies attribute to a small accuracy advantage. The action is also not as sharp as said.

Another main advantage is that the middie length is more natural for a 16" barrel; a more natural taper and look, which helps with grip positioning if you don't want some sort of forward grip. Also, you can actually mount a bayonet on the middie's lug if you felt like it.

The only downside is that middies do clock in at about 10 oz. more, and it's all in the front of the gun. Mine weighs noticeably more than the carbines I've played with (but then again mine also has an EOtech and a quad-rail on it)

 

[Prion]

As stated, I have a mid-length. I was more interested in reliability and wear of the mid vs carbine length. Just thought if it was really insignifigant I'd get something with a slightly different look.

If this was all about looks why would I be bothering to ask this simple question? Do people read the OP and subsequent posts or just blurt out knee-jerk responses? It's the internet, I guess I should expect this.

Thanks to those that offered useful advice.

 

[RP88]

if you'd like to shave off some weight and make the gun a bit more balanced and handier, then a carbine is definitely good, and DDs are good guns and do look 'really nice'.

You are unlikely to shoot enough rounds to notice a huge difference in wear. And even if you do, it's a 70 dollar fix that holds for 10,000+ rounds or so. If you can shoot your gun that much then replacing a bolt isn't much of an issue

 

[Prion]

Thanks RP88- question answered.

 

[taliv]

i used to like the middies. then i went back to rifle length gas on 17 or 18" barrels. then i finally settled on the 'intermediate length' that KAC uses on their SR15

 

[MachIVshooter]

IMO, if you're gonna do a carbine, 14.5 w/permanent flash hider is the way to go. Otherwise, you end up with a disproportionate amount of barrel hanging out the front, no OAL advantage over the middy, and with the more violent cycling of the carbine gas system.

I'd gladly have a 14.5" carbine in my collection, but when I bought my 16", I went mid length. I think the extra inch and a half of barrel hanging out on the end of a 16" + flashhider carbine just looks silly.

 

[RP88]

I'd have to agree with Mach.

If the DD carbine has a 16" barrel, then possibly look into the cheaper and equally high-quality route of getting a 14.5" + pinned flash hider carbine upper from BCM, grab a milspec bolt, a DD omega rail or similar option, smack it onto a lower built with a CTR, VLTOR, etc. stock, and the only noticeable difference between that and the DD rifle is the BCM logo on the upper and a saved $350-450 in your wallet.

 

[Tirod]

I own a middie but would like another AR and really like the look of the Daniel Defense DDM4v2 w/ a carbine length system.

Knee jerk response? Sorry, I guess some misinterpreted what was said.

Happens a lot on forums.

 

[Quentin]

Curious to hear opinions between mid and carbine length DGI systems on ARs.

I've read reliability is an issue only in full-fun, middies are gentler thus last longer, smooths out the recoil impulse (I didn't really notice) etc, etc.

I own a middie but would like another AR and really like the look of the Daniel Defense DDM4v2 w/ a carbine length system. I know they have released a v3 middie but I like the look of v2.

Thoughts, experiences?

ARLover, in your OP you opened the door for just about any opinion - and even asked for them. Not every reply is going to be to your liking but no need to slap us in the face for trying to help.

 

[RP88]

also, if you already have a midde (and hence a smaller, carbine-esque AR), why not look into getting a 20" AR instead?

You can do a lot to a 20" AR if you like longer-range shooting. A setup with a nice scope, tube, and bipod, as well as a more ergonomic stock (in some cases) is a very good complimentary second AR.

basically what I'm inquiring on: what role are you trying to fill that you middie does not fill already?

Also, why are looks a determining factor? Is there something you don't like about your current AR's aesthetics? Tell/show us what you have and we can always give some suggestions on how to change that for function AND beauty's sake (which could save more money than buying a whole new decked-out AR)

 

[Prion]

Just looking for another fun blaster. I apologize for my negative posts.