purpose behind civilian "carbine"
- Thread starter CSestp
- Start date
- Status
black_powder_Rob
Member
I choose a carbine because it is cheaper to practice with than SG rounds. that is my reason, both are fully capable of taking down a BG in the house. I figure the more i practice with said carbine the better I will be able to use it.. that is it for me...
P.S. it is easier to handle.
P.S. it is easier to handle.
Last edited:
black_powder_Rob
Member
my mini 14 dosen't go sproing, It goes rack crack! 
I am seeing a lot of trash talked on carbine length ARs and their owners in this thread. Some of us don't feel that a couple hundred more FPS is worth making our rifle handle like s**t in tight spaces. What's so hard to figure out about that? It's a personal preferance.
Sometimes people just buy stuff/want stuff without having a "need." I didn't NEED my latest new car, but it was SOOO much cooler than cheap basic transportation. An although my shotgun is probably "better" for home defense, I do own both.
Quentin
Member
When I finally got my first AR I wanted it to be like the M16 I carried in Vietnam. But after handling many ARs I realized a carbine made more sense, at least for me. Went with a 16" middie, A4 carry handle and M4 stock. Having been a civilian for 40 years my combat days are probably over so I don't expect to need more rifle than that. No doubt the tactical stuff is great but I'm blessed with good eyesight so iron sights work fine.
I depend on an old 1911 for home defense but it's comforting to have the carbine near by just in case. Like the old Colt it's a familiar friend.
I depend on an old 1911 for home defense but it's comforting to have the carbine near by just in case. Like the old Colt it's a familiar friend.
SharpsDressedMan
member
The rack-rack, sproiiiing, and ka-chunk sounds don't make me faint. I just figure I'm up against someone who wasn't that ready for combat when they later decided to chamber their rounds. Kind of gives me a sense of confidence when going into combat when I hear the other guy not ready.
MountainBear
Member
I am not a believer in the AR-15 for home defense. I prefer a shotgun for this purpose. Therefore, one of my current AR-15 is a 20" H-Bar with an A2 stock. For the plinking I do with my AR, that works as well as anything. That being said, I also have a carbine on order. But it has a full 16" barrel, not a 14" with a permanently pinned flash hider, and fixed sights (A2 upper, not flat-top).
I was trying to research my notes and manuals to find what Colt considers the maximum useful ranges for the A2 vs. the A4, and couldn't find it. I do remember that when you drop the barrel length, you lower the range, and when you use a removable carry handle, you decrease the range further. That being said, most of the plinking I will be doing is probably well within the range of an M4 style civilian carbine, even with a 14.5" permanently pinned barrel and a removable carry handle sight. But I don't have the range facilities to stretch that out to 800 meters, or I probably would. It would be enjoyable.
So to answer the question, civilians probably don't NEED a carbine. But they look cool, which, be honest, is the reason a lot of guns are sold in this country. Unless people are competing or plinking at ranges beyond 600 meters, the carbine will be accurate enough. Or you can do what I do, and just own both.
I was trying to research my notes and manuals to find what Colt considers the maximum useful ranges for the A2 vs. the A4, and couldn't find it. I do remember that when you drop the barrel length, you lower the range, and when you use a removable carry handle, you decrease the range further. That being said, most of the plinking I will be doing is probably well within the range of an M4 style civilian carbine, even with a 14.5" permanently pinned barrel and a removable carry handle sight. But I don't have the range facilities to stretch that out to 800 meters, or I probably would. It would be enjoyable.
So to answer the question, civilians probably don't NEED a carbine. But they look cool, which, be honest, is the reason a lot of guns are sold in this country. Unless people are competing or plinking at ranges beyond 600 meters, the carbine will be accurate enough. Or you can do what I do, and just own both.
colt's not the place to look for that info. what matters is the ammo you're using and what's the minimum velocity it needs to fragment reliably. There are several forums with terminal ballistics info of various kinds of common ammo. ammo-oracle, tacticalforums and m4carbine.net are good places to go for that data
Creature
Member
I am familiar with this decision. Funny thing about that decision: when the Army surveyed their troops post-combat surveys indicate 90 percent satisfaction with M4. In another survey, the Center for Naval Analyses, who survey both Army and USMC troops, the surveys indicate 89 percent overall satisfaction with M4 and 75 percent overall satisfaction with M16.
The reasons the USMC brass went with the M16A4 is the doctrinal differences between USMC and Army Infantry tactics of foot patrols vs mounted patrols. However, the primary factor in deciding to continue with the M16A4 versus replacement with the M4 is that the USMC is and remains under severe fiscal constraints. It takes money to outfit the entire corps with M4s and even more money to train and requalify with M4's. Time and money is something that the USMC is in very short supply.
To imply that the USMC prefers the M16A4 over the M4 because the troops say so just isnt true. In fact, the surveys tell otherwise.
MountainBear
Member
My note from the Colt Armorer's course give their maximum recommended ranges with given ammunition types. That's the information I was looking for. I am not a soldier, I do not need to know at what range my ammunition will reliably fragment. Just my $.02...
MountainBear
Member
That's probably very true Taliv. Its not that the fragmentation data is useless, its just not as important to me as practical accuracy. But all information is useful...
Creature
Member
Hmmm
MountainBear
Member
That's Colt's position, not mine. They list the effective range of model's with detachable carry handles as lower than that of the fixed sight models.
I find it very odd that no one has mentioned the
Scariest sound of all..........
Ka-Chingggggg!!!!!!!!!!!
When you purchase yet another 'un.
This is usually followed by the other scariest sound,
That of your significant other's voice.
Just sayin'
isher
Scariest sound of all..........
Ka-Chingggggg!!!!!!!!!!!
When you purchase yet another 'un.
This is usually followed by the other scariest sound,
That of your significant other's voice.
Just sayin'
isher
Creature
Member
She has yet to find out!
SharpsDressedMan
member
I wonder what the average Marine would be carrying if he could purchase and use his own? (See new topic).
Al Thompson
Moderator Emeritus
My gripe with those surveys is "compared to what?"... Few military folks are shooters and I'd speculate that the vast majority have only fired their issue rifles. The M16/M4 may be great if you've never fired another rifle and have no basis of comparison.
FWIW, a Korea Marine wrote in his book that he despised the M1 Garand due to the malfunctions he experienced (he was a school trained unit armorer and served on the line). He liked the BAR better, IIRC.
Creature
Member
Since those surveys were asking whether the average trooper prefers the M16A4 or the M4, I think your point is moot. The surveys were comparing apples to apples...not apples to oranges.
- Status
