Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

practical advantages of the mid-lenth upper vrs. carbine upper?

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Fremmer, Nov 14, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Fremmer

    Fremmer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,284
    The mid-length uppers seem to command a higher retail price over the typical carbine upper/rifle. They appear to have 2" more barrel and a slightly longer gas system. I read that the benefits of the middy are slightly reduced recoil and lessened wear on the gas system and the bolt. I don't have actual experience with the difference, but am I correct about the advantages of the middy, and more importantly,

    What are the actual advantages of the mid length upper in practical terms for an owner? Can anyone comment on actual data or tests showing a significant advantage over the carbine length for the average owner? Or perhaps your actual experiences with the middy vrs the carbine length? Thanks for the input, I'm just trying to justify the added expense of a mid length gun over the less expensive carbine set up.
     
  2. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    I have never owned, nor even shot, a mid length. However, from everything I have read I don't think there is a quantifiable, noticeable advantage to the average owner.

    That said, whenever I can afford a second AR (might be awhile), it may very well be a mid length. But I do figure to get more rounds downrange than the average owner, so that "reduced wear" point appeals to me.

    You also (typically) get more rail space, a longer sight radius, and can put your support hand further forward.
     
  3. nodeal117

    nodeal117 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    They look cooler. What else matters?
     
  4. highorder

    highorder Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,349
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    My wife enjoys shooting my Spikes 14.5" midlength with a Dynacomp.

    My friends carbine gassed 16" with an A2 birdcage is too "sharp" to be pleasant to shoot.
     
  5. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    Your friend's is probably over gassed. Who made it?
     
  6. meanmrmustard

    meanmrmustard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,225
    Location:
    Missouri
    Less crap in the action, proper dwell time, smoother cycling, and reduced recoil. Better, better, and better.
     
  7. FMF Doc

    FMF Doc Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    582
    Location:
    NC
    I am not an armorer, but from what I have been told, bery little assuming the barrel length is 16-18". I was told that a carbing with 14-16", mid with 16-18" and rifle with 19-20" have the same "gas dwell time" in the tube. This means that shooting a round in the correct combination of gas tube length/barrel length will yeild about the same effect in regards to cycle operation, speed, and recoil force. At the end of the day, I don't think it really matters. The midlengths in my opion have less felt recoil, but that could be as much a factor of the overall weight increase as it is the gas tube. That's all I got. Hopefully someone who knows a little more will come along and fix anything I got wrong here.
     
  8. highorder

    highorder Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,349
    Location:
    Cincinnati
    It's a S&W m&p15 MOE.

    I agree it's over gassed. Strangely it went back to the factory once for under gassed issues. I wonder if they just reamed the gas port.
     
  9. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    It isn't fair to blame that on the carbine gas system. That is simply a mid-tier AR manufacturer at work.

    *flame suit on*
     
  10. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    The big practical advantages you notice right away are:

    1. Better sight radius
    2. More handguard real estate (easier to use a more forward grip, less hot barrel exposed, more room for rail mounted crap)

    Additional advantages that are more theoretical than practical are a different recoil impulse compared to a carbine and a dwell time that is closer to the original 20" design than a carbine gas on a 16" barrel.
     
  11. jim243

    jim243 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,992
    No flame suit needed.

    I prefer the carbine gas system, shorter recycle times. But it is nice to have the longer sight radius if you shoot open sights, but I don't, red dot or scope for me.

    Good luck on your choice.
    Jim
     
  12. Fremmer

    Fremmer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,284
    And that's the rub, mr. Roberts: what are the actual differences in terms of recoil or wear that justify the added expense of the middy for the average owner? Have we had reports of middys lasting significantly longer, or are the advantages pretty much theoretical?

    And I keep wondering why the military, police and others use the carbine instead of the middys. That might be the cost difference, I suppose. That and if you're gonna shoot a middy for dwell time, why not just get 2 more inches from the 20" platform and end the dwell concerns...
     
  13. meanmrmustard

    meanmrmustard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,225
    Location:
    Missouri
    Give it a rest. What would the excuse have been if it were made by Colt? User error?
     
  14. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    What's your excuse for this rifle?
     
  15. MistWolf

    MistWolf Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    Messages:
    2,266
    Middys do not have less recoil. Fire the same ammo out of a 16" carbine length AR and a 16" mid-length AR, both ARs of the same weight and both will have the same amount of recoil.

    There is very little practical difference between the two, assuming both are properly tuned.

    The time it takes the bullet to travel from the gas port to the muzzle makes not a lick of difference. The bullet has cleared the muzzle before the BCG even charges up enough to get moving. What the extra length does is increase the blow down time- that is, the longer the distance from gas port to muzzle increases the time it takes the weapon to drop to atmospheric pressure after the bullet uncorks the muzzle before the gases get to the BCG. Blow down time makes a difference because it's the residual pressure inside the rifle after the bullet leaves that operates the action
     
  16. meanmrmustard

    meanmrmustard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,225
    Location:
    Missouri
    I haven't needed one. Ever.
     
  17. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    You are the friend being referenced?

    I thought you had a Sport, but sold it?

    Interesting.
     
  18. meanmrmustard

    meanmrmustard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,225
    Location:
    Missouri
    Point?

    Nary you make one. I've owned several Smiths, none had issues. I'm no ones friend, so where is this query leading us exactly?
     
  19. fatcat4620

    fatcat4620 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    1,263
    Location:
    TN
    The carbine the military uses has a 14.5 inch barrel, not a 16 inch like most civilian carbines (which is the point of this debate).
     
  20. RSR

    RSR Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16
    Everyone's liking the midlength upper these days and rightfully so. There is going to be less wear versus the carbine length, but that comes many of rounds down the road. Truth is, shooters and collectors alike will probably never see this wear, so buy the one you want! If you're worried about chamber/bolt/receiver wear, go full length. The AR rifle was built on a 12" gas system and 20" barrel......and a full length shoots best IMHO!!! Best of luck to ya.....
     
  21. Captains1911

    Captains1911 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,276
    Location:
    Loudoun County, VA
    This.

    Also, it's the gas tube that's 2" longer, not necessarily the barrel.
     
  22. cfullgraf

    cfullgraf Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,186
    Location:
    East TN
    I can tell some small difference between my 16" carbine length gas system AR versus my 20" rifle length but it is not enough to quantify. The different weight of the rifles has an effect.

    The 16" might have a louder bark.

    I just finished an 18" mid length gas system AR but have only a few sighters on it to make a judgment.

    Bottom line, one is not any more objectionable to shoot than the other. I really never thought about different recoil.

    As far as the mechanics of the different length systems, i will defer to others.

    With optical sights, length of the barrel is a moot point in terms of sight radius.
     
  23. Welding Rod

    Welding Rod Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,774
    Location:
    PacNW
    Yep. And that is enough for me.
     
  24. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    Well I think the difference in time to unlock between a carbine and a rifle is something like 120 microseconds (the exact numbers are in the archive somewhere) - which as small as that number is, it still has a measurable effect on function. As the weapon wears and parts get older and gas ports erode, a gas system that is closer to the original should give you a bigger window to work with.

    The flipside is while the M4 and M16 are some of the most exhaustively tested rifles in the world, there hasn't really been the same testing of the midlength, so it is hard to make pronouncements about whether what should happen actually does happen.

    To give an example, M4s have been shot to 80,000-120,000 rounds with parts replacement and can make 10,000-15,000 even without parts replacement. Doing a valid comparison to a midlength would be an expensive proposition, even for just a single rifle that would not tell us much. Either one will outlast 99% of the people who buy one.

    The military identified several new and improved M16 bolts that corrected identified problems with the bolt as early as 1999. However, changing the bolt meant changing the barrel extension - so the military continues to use the older bolt design. Logistics play a much bigger role the bigger your organization is.

    ? Not sure what you mean here. The whole point of the middy is to have the 14.5 or 16" barrel with a dwell time closer to a rifle. If you go 18", you have other options such as intermediate or rifle length gas and if you go 20", then rifle length gas is as close to the original design as you can get.
     
  25. MachIVshooter

    MachIVshooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,410
    Location:
    Elbert County, CO
    IME, with two rifles of roughly equal weight, the mid lengths have a noticeably softer recoil impulse.

    However, for me, the bigger reason to go middy is that you don't have that ridiculously long piece of barrel forward of the FSB. It just looks retarded, and you can't put a standard bayonet on it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page