The Case for the AR-15 "Pistol"

[32_d3gr33s]

 

[32_d3gr33s]

I dont have much video of me shooting it yet, but this is the first time i took it out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLvJ0kY4FoA&feature=youtu.be

 

[PoserHoser]

I know about barrel whip, but I'm not sure I believe this. You'd have to test both guns from a mechanical rest, and even then, I'm going to say the longer barrel is going to be more accurate. If it was true what you are saying, then why don't the benchrest guys use shorter barrels? Sight radius isn't an issue since they are using scopes. Velocity isn't a major issue since the target is 100 yards away. So if the shorter barrel was *inherently* more accurate, I think you'd see them in competition. But instead you tend to see barrels around 20".

I belive it has more to do with the added velocity and flatter trajectory.

 

[CoalTrain49]

While you retain the mag capacity of an AR, you lose a great deal of a 5.56's effectiveness from a really short barrel:from around 3,082fps at 16" to about 2,172fps at 6". And of course, a bullet like a 5.56 NEEDS velocity to make it effective, as compared to, say, a .45ACP hollowpoint.

Combined with gunnutery's excellent point about noise and blast, (I'd be loathe to fire one without hearing protection ANYWHERE, much less in a closed room), and I think traditional handguns have an advantage that outweighs the mag capacity of a pistol AR.

Larry

I guess one can build and use any number configurations with short barrels and call them pistols. Personally I believe the advantage of any "rifle" is it's range and .223/5.56 has always been a rifle caliber. I think of home defense (inside the home) as trench warfare or CQB. The weapon that nailed that category down was designed 103 years ago in the form of a 1911.