Do-All Carbine - More Possible than ever?

[rob_s]

it strikes me that a variety of new(ish) tech in the AR world is coming together to make the idea of the "do-all carbine" more of a reality than ever.

That tech includes:
-long(er) life stainless barrels
-1.x-Y optics
-short/light 7.62 cans (no reason the can shouldn't be "do-all" too)
-Adjustable/two-position gas blocks
-better-performing 5.56 ammo
-ultra-light handguards (thanks to MLok and Keymod)
-QD weapon-light solutions, and smaller/lighter/brighter lights

It seems to me that with the right assemblage of the above parts, one could have an AR that would be more than sufficient for home defense, three-gun, precision shooting, hunting, plinking... without actually sacrificing much, if anything, in those pursuits. I was previously thinking I needed (or, wanted) three different rifles to meet my requirements, but I'm now thinking I could do it all with one.

The upper I'm thinking of would look something like:
-BCM KMR hanguard (or similar)
-12.5" stainless barrel (make/model TBD)
-Silencerco Omega can
-Leupold 1-6
-Surefire Scout on Larue offset throwlever mount
-Micro MOA Govnah gas block

thoughts?

[Peally]

Entirely possible; it won't be perfected for one specific role but for what to expect out of an AR it's not hard to cover most of those bases pretty damn well.

[Chuck Haggard]

For a GP gun I'm a big fan of the 16" barrels. Guys like Kyle DeFoor, Kyle Lamb and Frank Proctor have stuck with those for the ability to reach out while still being short enough to work indoors. I've been through probably well over a thousands doors with a 16" carbine, never had an issue taking guns that size indoors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GF4NTr4Ag

[LittleLebowski]

Great thread, tagged to learn.

[rob_s]

For a GP gun I'm a big fan of the 16" barrels. Guys like Kyle DeFoor, Kyle Lamb and Frank Proctor have stuck with those for the ability to reach out while still being short enough to work indoors. I've been through probably well over a thousands doors with a 16" carbine, never had an issue taking guns that size indoors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GF4NTr4Ag



I think there is a lot of wiggle room there, and I tend not to put too much stock in the "SME" take because of that. I was in a class with Defoor and he said there that te 12" (his term, not sure if he meant 12.5 or what) was the best general purpose barrel length. I prefer to think of their opinions as reference points rather than gospel.
https://www.facebook.com/303210778993/photos/pb.303210778993.-2207520000.1433350176./10152779069778994/?type=3&theater

Either way, absent the desire to suppress, I think the 16" would probably be a better bet, although I'm not sure what you really gain with that length. In 2015 shorter barrels can, and do, run reliably without issue, and the added MV gained with a 16" barrel doesn't really translate into any added benefit for most civilian users (including, most likely, most LE).

[shane45]

In that pursuit, my carbine is a KAC SR25EMC with a US Optics SR8C. I call it my "broad spectrum rifle". :)

[LittleLebowski]

In that pursuit, my carbine is a KAC SR25EMC with a US Optics SR8C. I call it my "broad spectrum rifle". :)

Nice.

[breakingtime91]

I am also watching this thread. I'm thinking of going with a bcm mid length upper with medium fluted barrel. Then I'm gonna throw either a nxs1-4 on it or a Tr 24 1-4.. will be my home defense/hunting/ training gun.

[rob_s]

In that pursuit, my carbine is a KAC SR25EMC with a US Optics SR8C. I call it my "broad spectrum rifle". :)

I think maybe that would work for some, but the caliber alone wouldn't be feasible for many simply due to ammo costs. So while that rifle might be *capable* of doing everything, I bet it rarely would for me (and probably quite a few others).

My sense of a "do all" would be a gun that you not only *could* use for a broad array of applications but that you also *would*. Applications such as:
-2/3-gun
-precision shooting
-home/homestead defense (suppressed)
-plinking
-hunting (suppressed and non)

So while the SR25 certainly could do all of those (although suppressing it might limit some of those applications, or at least push them over the limit of being optimal), I think a 12.5" stainless 5.56 would be something that would actually get used across that spectrum.

[Colt191145lover]

tagged to learn more myself.

[GJM]

Would you also want a pre zeroed Aimpoint in a QD mount to go in the carbine bag, along with some spare mags, etc.?

[breakingtime91]

Would you also want a pre zeroed Aimpoint in a QD mount to go in the carbine bag, along with some spare mags, etc.?

I don't know if my opinion matters but I am becoming more of the opinion that variables can be just as fast and reliable as a micro. I still would run a micro on a shot gun though.

[Chuck Haggard]

I think there is a lot of wiggle room there, and I tend not to put too much stock in the "SME" take because of that. I was in a class with Defoor and he said there that te 12" (his term, not sure if he meant 12.5 or what) was the best general purpose barrel length. I prefer to think of their opinions as reference points rather than gospel.
https://www.facebook.com/303210778993/photos/pb.303210778993.-2207520000.1433350176./10152779069778994/?type=3&theater

Either way, absent the desire to suppress, I think the 16" would probably be a better bet, although I'm not sure what you really gain with that length. In 2015 shorter barrels can, and do, run reliably without issue, and the added MV gained with a 16" barrel doesn't really translate into any added benefit for most civilian users (including, most likely, most LE).

Cans mean shorter gun is better, I concur, IF that fits your "general purpose" mission.

Around here my GP gun would need to handle prairie dogs, deer or antelope out to maybe 200, coyotes to 4-500 sometimes, so longer range civilian needs can be legit. Thus, IMHO, more velocity=more gooder. One can easily see how that would work for .mil guys shooting at bad guys way out yonder.

I could easily see a use for an M16a4 type gun with a free float tube and a collapsable stock in much of the work I would need a GP carbine for, for me, for my needs.

[John Hearne]

For a GP gun I'm a big fan of the 16" barrels. Guys like Kyle DeFoor, Kyle Lamb and Frank Proctor have stuck with those for the ability to reach out while still being short enough to work indoors. I've been through probably well over a thousands doors with a 16" carbine, never had an issue taking guns that size indoors.

I started out with a 20" fixed stock gun. It was a PITA inside of vehicles and was a bit much for structures. I subsequently went to a 16" gun and later a 14.5" gun both with adjustable stocks. All of the "win" was at the 16" length and the adjustable stock. I've never noticed any difference between 14.5" and 16".

Now, the 11.5" gun was really sweet but it seems to me it is a dedicated short range tool once you think about the ballistics. It is an absolute dream in an around vehicles.

[Chuck Haggard]

The 11.5s are nice as far as indoor handling, I just prefer to have the longer gun most of the time.

Even at some very intense stuff indoors in a tight team environment, say the DARC LECTC, I never had an issue with the 16" gun

[Surf]

We utilize 65 M4A1's. When the need arose for new barrels and bolts we went from 14.5 to 10.5 on 50 rifles with the plan of adding suppressors. Suppressors hasn't happened yet and may never. I run the a 10.5, 12.5, 14.5, 16 and 18 with great regularity. Work rifle is a 10.5 so that is what I use mostly at work which involves mostly doing entry into structures so the 10.5 is nice, but if I were on perimeters, in patrol I would opt for a 14.5 or 16. In all honesty I don't find a huge difference using a 14.5 or 16 indoors. We also do a lot of vehicle Dig Pro work and the 10.5 is tops no doubt. The biggest advantage to the 10.5 (remember not suppressed) quite honestly is the weight savings as we are often slung up for hours on end and it is quite noticeable as the time passes.

As for the 12" being the best "all around" length and yes this argument has been around a long time, I honestly cannot tell much difference in something like a 10 vs a 12. I feel that the 14.5 is all I would ever really need at longest distances that I will be shooting and will pretty much max out the 5.56. Anything more and I would generally opt for another caliber. So if I am going shorter than 14.5 compactness and weight would be my priorities, so I would personally opt for short. Yes I understand the arguments about ballistics, suppressors, reliability, etc which is often discussed in relation to this topic.

[HCM]

We recently began transitioning from 14.4" M4s to 11.5" heavy barrels. New guns will be 11.5" colts and our older Colts are getting refurbished - new springs/ barrels / Bolts etc. I just turned in my 14.5" M4A1 for an 11.5 rebuilt on an M16A1 lower. My only complaint is in came with a new Eotech instead of an H-1.

For our uses, inside vehicles, houses and outside to 100-200 yards the 11.5 does everything we need done and will alleviate some of the weeping and wailing over the MP5s going away.

[rob_s]

I think the other benefits (theoretical, probably) of the 12.5" over the 10.5" or 11.5" is the wear on the can, *slightly* better MV and all that comes with it, and a perceived improvement in reliability.

If I'm going to own more than one AR, I think maybe the potential benefit of the 12.5 goes away and, for non-professional use/purchase, having the 16" non-NFA gun and a 10.5" dedicated suppressed gun starts to look attractive. Then, add in an 11.5" for a dedicated non-suppressed gun for the benefits you mention (largely weight, as well as weight distribution). All of that thinking is what led me to think I *needed* three guns (well, that and the fact that I have three lowers that I probably can't/wouldn't sell, and that having a gun that runs suppressed/unsuppressed is kind of against my religion), but I'm not thinking I can truly get it all done with the 12.5".

However, and back to the OP, I wouldn't be considering it without the advancements I listed. 10, or even 5, years ago I would want at least two guns.

[HCM]

I would want two guns on GP - the whole 2 is 1 thing.

I would also want a dedicated 16" (or pinned 14.5) because Interstate travel with NFA is a hassle.

[rob_s]

Around here my GP gun would need to handle prairie dogs, deer or antelope out to maybe 200, coyotes to 4-500 sometimes, so longer range civilian needs can be legit. Thus, IMHO, more velocity=more gooder. One can easily see how that would work for .mil guys shooting at bad guys way out yonder.

I could easily see a use for an M16a4 type gun with a free float tube and a collapsable stock in much of the work I would need a GP carbine for, for me, for my needs.

That's all a good point. I should couch that I'm not really talking mil or other issue guns as those discussions are really only applicable to the people doing the buying, which is a pretty tiny number of people, and I ain't one of that tiny group.

Would a coyote not fall to a good projectile from a 12.5" gun? I'm asking because I don't know. I'm in SE Florida, and with just over an acre I wouldn't be shooting one that far. Nor am I likely to encounter a 200 yard shot on a deer, or a deer large enough to not notice a .223 from a 12.5" gun.

and, I should say, that there are probably some things that the AR wouldn't work for at all. For example, I'd be much more likely to shoot said coyote on said acre with a bolt-action suppressed .22 for a variety of reasons. Much more likely to shoot said deer with an unsuppressed .308, again reasons vary. So when I say "GP AR" I really mean "GP for any P where I might otherwise already want an AR, not Ps where I wouldn't use an AR to begin with".

[ASH556]

Man, I still get hung up on the optic. I keep wanting to like the low power variables but I haven't gotten behind one yet that I thought "wow, I could really make this work." The closest is the Leupold Mark 6, but I haven't shot one yet, just looked through. Even then, the FFP makes it pretty useless on 1X if the battery is gone. What's proven this to me, at least for now, is shooting 3gun. I'm WAAAAAY faster with an Aimpoint, even on a course of fire with 100yd targets than with a variable because the tradeoff of magnification is field of view. When you're shooting a multiple target array against the clock, you've got to see as much as possible so you don't get lost.

Maybe someone's found that magical unicorn or maybe my eyes just need to learn more.

[breakingtime91]

Man, I still get hung up on the optic. I keep wanting to like the low power variables but I haven't gotten behind one yet that I thought (wow, I could really make this work). The closest is the Leupold Mark 6, but I haven't shot one yet, just looked through. Even then, the FFP makes it pretty useless on 1X if the battery is gone. What's proven this to me, at least for now, is shooting 3gun. I'm WAAAAAY faster with an Aimpoint, even on a course of fire with 100yd targets than with a variable because the tradeoff of magnification is field of view. When you're shooting a multiple target array against the clock, you've got to see as much as possible so you don't get lost.

Maybe someone's found that magical unicorn or maybe my eyes just need to learn more.

I guess it is just priorities. I know people can shoot to pretty far distances with the dot +hold overs, my problem is range estimation on unknown targets with just a red dot.. that is where I am really considering going to a variable. It has been, at least for me, easier to adjust off of impacts + guess what the range is with a variable.

[secondstoryguy]

The major reason I like magnification is target ID when lighting is low and the target is obscured or lacking contrast with the background. Take that Aimpoint or those irons hog hunting and you will quickly realize it. I've taken many guys hunting who insist on using irons/red dots. It's a frequent thing to plainly see game at 50-100m thats 10m or so inside the cover of brush/trees but being in the shadows its very hard for even good eyes to get a good aiming point. With just a little magnification(3-4X) it breaks the target out of the gloom and allows a much more precise shot.

In LEO work I like the aimpoint but for a GP carbine magnification would be preferred.

[breakingtime91]

The major reason I like magnification is target ID when lighting is low and the target is obscured or lacking contrast with the background. Take that Aimpoint or those irons hog hunting and you will quickly realize it. I've taken many guys hunting who insist on using irons/red dots. It's a frequent thing to plainly see game at 50-100m thats 10m or so inside the cover of brush/trees but being in the shadows its very hard for even good eyes to get a good aiming point. With just a little magnification(3-4X) it breaks the target out of the gloom and allows a much more precise shot.

In LEO work I like the aimpoint but for a GP carbine magnification would be preferred.

I think I know why but why the red dot instead of magnification for police work?

[shane45]

I think maybe that would work for some, but the caliber alone wouldn't be feasible for many simply due to ammo costs. So while that rifle might be *capable* of doing everything, I bet it rarely would for me (and probably quite a few others).

My sense of a "do all" would be a gun that you not only *could* use for a broad array of applications but that you also *would*. Applications such as:
-2/3-gun
-precision shooting
-home/homestead defense (suppressed)
-plinking
-hunting (suppressed and non)

So while the SR25 certainly could do all of those (although suppressing it might limit some of those applications, or at least push them over the limit of being optimal), I think a 12.5" stainless 5.56 would be something that would actually get used across that spectrum.

Yes I am sure it might be cost prohibitive for sure. But in the pursuit of the most capable rifle across the board, the 7.62 brought the down range energy to the table that the 5.56 just couldn't compete with. Other considerations were bullet deflection in brushy environments. Im sure there were a few more things I came up with but down range energy was the main one. And again, this was a pursuit of a broad spectrum. Dial back that spectrum just a little and a 5.56, Im sure, falls into place. And in that role of dialing it back I have a KAC SR15E3 with a S&B short dot on it. My original concept was to have kit zeroed to each rifle. But in doing some testing I found I was really not giving much of anything up in terms of speed and accuracy running a daylight usable red dot in a scope vs an aimpoint for close in but was gaining a ton being able to dial in mag. SBR's and suppressors aren't an option in my area unfortunatly.

As a side note, I actually won a small 2 gun style match in my area running the .308. It was an interesting layout that had everything from 7 yd shots all the way to small plates at 100 in the same course of fire. Against a sea of 5.56 rifles, all running non magnified red dots (aimpoints and eotechs) I posted the single fastest time and won the match overall. It was NOT because I was a better shooter. I entirely give credit to the optics! Being able to run at zero mag for close up and dial for distance gave me a huge time and accuracy advantage. That observation is what drove me in the direction of the "broad spectrum rifle". That was about 5 years ago. I haven't moved off that concept much.

[rob_s]

Yes I am sure it might be cost prohibitive for sure. But in the pursuit of the most capable rifle across the board, the 7.62 brought the down range energy to the table that the 5.56 just couldn't compete with. Other considerations were bullet deflection in brushy environments. Im sure there were a few more things I came up with but down range energy was the main one. And again, this was a pursuit of a broad spectrum. Dial back that spectrum just a little and a 5.56, Im sure, falls into place. And in that role of dialing it back I have a KAC SR15E3 with a S&B short dot on it. My original concept was to have kit zeroed to each rifle. But in doing some testing I found I was really not giving much of anything up in terms of speed and accuracy running a daylight usable red dot in a scope vs an aimpoint for close in but was gaining a ton being able to dial in mag. SBR's and suppressors aren't an option in my area unfortunatly.

As a side note, I actually won a small 2 gun style match in my area running the .308. It was an interesting layout that had everything from 7 yd shots all the way to small plates at 100 in the same course of fire. Against a sea of 5.56 rifles, all running non magnified red dots (aimpoints and eotechs) I posted the single fastest time and won the match overall. It was NOT because I was a better shooter. I entirely give credit to the optics! Being able to run at zero mag for close up and dial for distance gave me a huge time and accuracy advantage. That observation is what drove me in the direction of the "broad spectrum rifle". That was about 5 years ago. I haven't moved off that concept much.

All of which would appear to indicate that neither are actually sufficient as tru single GP rifles, no?

Listen, if you can afford to shoot 7.62 ammo in a volume that meets your needs, I'm jealous to say the least. There was a time 15-20 years ago when 5.56 surplus was $100/k and 7.62 was $12/k and people thought I was extravagant for doing the same. I just can't justify the cost today. Not for a (for me) fantasy reason for "needing" down range apenergy vs the real world costs of ammo.

[Chuck Haggard]

That's all a good point. I should couch that I'm not really talking mil or other issue guns as those discussions are really only applicable to the people doing the buying, which is a pretty tiny number of people, and I ain't one of that tiny group.

Would a coyote not fall to a good projectile from a 12.5" gun? I'm asking because I don't know. I'm in SE Florida, and with just over an acre I wouldn't be shooting one that far. Nor am I likely to encounter a 200 yard shot on a deer, or a deer large enough to not notice a .223 from a 12.5" gun.

and, I should say, that there are probably some things that the AR wouldn't work for at all. For example, I'd be much more likely to shoot said coyote on said acre with a bolt-action suppressed .22 for a variety of reasons. Much more likely to shoot said deer with an unsuppressed .308, again reasons vary. So when I say "GP AR" I really mean "GP for any P where I might otherwise already want an AR, not Ps where I wouldn't use an AR to begin with".

If the bullet has lost enough velocity it might not work as one would hope, coyotes aren't very thick side-to-side. The deer here are very often 200lbs or bigger.

Not sayin anyone is wrong, just sayin that's MY situation and reasoning behind my choices.

[shane45]

Rob, I guess it should be clarified that I approach the "broad spectrum rifle" from an approach of literally covering the broadest spectrum of scenarios. That means Im not limiting it to my area. Living near a nuclear reactor, its possible I could need to grab one and go. With no idea where I might end up or what the situation is it is truly a theoretical exercise. This setup gives me the ability to go from 7 yds to 800 yds. In general I approach guns like golf clubs. Pick the right club for the situation. But if I could only grab one....the EMC would be it. Now as for 308 ammo, yeah I am at the end of my supply of 308 bought at $115 shipped per 1k :eek: But I have done pretty good picking up Privi for around 11 bucks a box. Im pretty entrenched in the 308.

[SecondsCount]

I have been running this setup for the last five years:
http://home.comcast.net/~d_kirk/gunstuff/ar/spikesvtac.jpg
Sabre Defense 16" fluted stainless midlength with YHM comp
VTAC tube
Magpul furniture
In that pic, the gun was new and on its first outing. At that time it had a 3-9 Burris TAC30 but I have since replaced it with a 1-4x Vortex Razor. The bipod was on it because I was sighting it in and it normally has a sling.

I have shot 3-gun, prairie dogs, 10" circles at 400 yards, taken a carbine class, and plinked with it. That barrel is a 1:8 twist and will stabilize everything from a 50 gr. V-max to a 77 SMK. My personal belief is that 68-69 grain bullets are the best all around weight the AR due to the limited mag length. 223 is all about velocity.

I'm with Chuck in that I would keep the barrel at 16". I own a 12" upper on a pistol lower and shooting steel at 180 yards, I could notice a difference in velocity between the 12 and 16 inch uppers. A suppressor is not yet in my stable but even so, I am not sure I would want to lose the speed. Then again, I live in a part of the country where stretching the legs on a rifle is not uncommon. In an urban setting, a 12" upper might be the ticket.

[secondstoryguy]

I think I know why but why the red dot instead of magnification for police work?

Aimpoints are small/light, I can leave them on for years, they are quick to deploy(always on), and most of the distances in my AOR are short(<100m) with the average deployment distance probably being 25-50m. I've been tempted to run an additional long gun with a 1-4 or 1-6 in the trunk for specific uses(active shooter at the nearby college, barricaded subject in building/car, etc) but I still believe that it's hard to beat an Aimpoint for general patrol use.

When they build a 1-4/1-6 with Aimpoint-like battery life my CC is going to take a hit.....

[JodyH]

I have every combination of everything mentioned. The carbine that lives outside the big safe and goes everywhere is my FN 16" M4 with a TA33 ACOG.

[shane45]

Aimpoints are small/light, I can leave them on for years, they are quick to deploy(always on), and most of the distances in my AOR are short(<100m) with the average deployment distance probably being 25-50m. I've been tempted to run an additional long gun with a 1-4 or 1-6 in the trunk for specific uses(active shooter at the nearby college, barricaded subject in building/car, etc) but I still believe that it's hard to beat an Aimpoint for general patrol use.

When they build a 1-4/1-6 with Aimpoint-like battery life my CC is going to take a hit.....

Your CC might be in danger then. The new USO SR4C has an 8k hour battery life I believe. Im actually going to sell off my S&B short dot for one. Better battery life and I found the unity sight picture to be much better on the USO.

[Robinson]

Curious about something: Is subsonic 5.56 typically used with a suppressor? Probably a stupid question, but how does subsonic 5.56 compare to .22LR ? When is something like 300 BLK discussed as an alternative?

If my questions are a bit derpy for this thread let me know and I won't be offended.

[Chuck Haggard]

Curious about something: Is subsonic 5.56 typically used with a suppressor? Probably a stupid question, but how does subsonic 5.56 compare to .22LR ? When is something like 300 BLK discussed as an alternative?

If my questions are a bit derpy for this thread let me know and I won't be offended.

Sub-sonic .223/5.56 is pretty much a .22lr round, bullet on the heavy side.

I don't know anyone who uses that type of ammo, the .300 on the other had I know lots of people who went that route

[rob_s]

While the idea of a subsonic 5.56 is theoretically appealing, the reality just never seems to pan out. I *think* I like the idea of a 77 grain 5.56 projectile that is whisper quiet, but what happens is that it doesn't cycle the action, getting it to cycle the action means modifying the gun such that it has to become a dedicated subsonic gun, etc. 300 WTF, for that that are so inclined, solves this by allowing the gun to cycle with subsonic ammo without major modifications.

[Unobtanium]

Man, I still get hung up on the optic. I keep wanting to like the low power variables but I haven't gotten behind one yet that I thought "wow, I could really make this work." The closest is the Leupold Mark 6, but I haven't shot one yet, just looked through. Even then, the FFP makes it pretty useless on 1X if the battery is gone. What's proven this to me, at least for now, is shooting 3gun. I'm WAAAAAY faster with an Aimpoint, even on a course of fire with 100yd targets than with a variable because the tradeoff of magnification is field of view. When you're shooting a multiple target array against the clock, you've got to see as much as possible so you don't get lost.

Maybe someone's found that magical unicorn or maybe my eyes just need to learn more.

My "unicorn" turned out to be a T2 and G33. I don't need BDC for the distances I care about (0-300m), but PID/Precision is what I WAS looking for, and it delivers. I can now shoot to the potential of my rifle (this was shot using a 16.1" Daniel Defense CHF .gov barrel/Surefire suppressor) and ammo, or close to. Here is a 100 yard 5-shot group with Hornady's 55gr 5.56 GMX. I couldn't have pulled that off without the G33.

https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/t31.0-8/11083975_745641058781_6518631934112380067_o.jpg

As to barrels, I used to get very excited about SBR's, until I actually owned one (I still own a 10.3" 300BLK). I simply just don't find it much use. There IS a lot more concussion and flash, though. With proper training, I found that I could use a 14.5-16" gun with or without a suppressor (I do prefer the "mini" cans) in vehicles just fine. The 10.3/10.5" just offered absolutely nothing over a pinned 14.5". The pinning gets me around 5320.20's, and the NFA wait.

[breakingcontact]

I consider the 300 Blackout my do it all gun. I do think the 556 has been vastly improved with the heavier rounds like 77gr thought.

*my version of doing it "all" doesnt include shot beyond 300 yards.

[breakingtime91]

I consider the 300 Blackout my do it all gun. I do think the 556 has been vastly improved with the heavier rounds like 77gr thought.

*my version of doing it "all" doesnt include shot beyond 300 yards.

How much drop does a 300 blk have at distances beyond 300

[rob_s]

I consider the 300 Blackout my do it all gun. I do think the 556 has been vastly improved with the heavier rounds like 77gr thought.

*my version of doing it "all" doesnt include shot beyond 300 yards.

Serious question...

Does it include training? Do you find the 300 to be cost-prohibitive in that regard?

[GJM]

What is a G33?

I certainly understand 5.56 for training and other purposes. For my use, which is personal defense from possible 2 and larger 4 legged threats, I really like my 9 inch AAC .300 BLK uppers. Having an AR pistol and SBR lower to mate with the .300 gives me a lot of flexibility.

To my ears, the 9 inch .300 with super sonic ammo and no suppressor, sounds comparable to a 16 inch, unsuppressed 5.56. The short .300 sure makes for a handy package.

[breakingcontact]

How much drop does a 300 blk have at distances beyond 300
It is measured in fathoms beyond that point.

Roughly speaking comparing 556 and 300...at 150 yards they are relatively close, the gap starts really opening up at 200 then by 300 yards depending upon the rounds.

Roughly with the same zero a 77gr 556 round will drop 25" at 300 yards and a 125 gr 300 Blackout round will drop 40" at 300 yards.

* At 400 yards it has dropped 80"

[breakingcontact]

Serious question...

Does it include training? Do you find the 300 to be cost-prohibitive in that regard?
Ammo is more expensive for sure.

I don't shoot rifles much. I mostly shoot pistols. Statistically if I ever have to use a gun for defense it will be my pistol which for me includes home defense.

So to be honest I dont train with a rifle much. I shot them for years in the military so I have the basic handling down although I know everyone can stand to improve from training. For me it is a gun ill zero and shoot a few times a year. If you are really into training a lot with a carbine I understand going 556.

300 blackout SBR or pistol suppressed (with super or subsonics) is a legit personal defense weapon but still a decent gun for hunting. Where I live in Texas you arent making 400 yard shots.

[Robinson]

So 300 BLK might make sense for a suppressed HD weapon if protecting the ears is a consideration?

Is the goal of using a suppressor with supersonic ammunition just to reduce the report somewhat? It must still be pretty loud, especially indoors.

[breakingcontact]

So 300 BLK might make sense for a suppressed HD weapon if protecting the ears is a consideration?

Is the goal of using a suppressor with supersonic ammunition just to reduce the report somewhat? It must still be pretty loud, especially indoors.
Suppressors don't silence the sound especially with supersonics but they take the edge off.

300 blackout does *not* have magical ballistics. Its around 30/30 or 762.x39 with supersonics and 45 ACP with subsonics.

[Robinson]

Thanks guys for the replies, good info to learn. I'm thinking someday I might want a suppressed AR-pattern carbine for a HD weapon but there is a lot I would need to research first.

[breakingcontact]

Thanks guys for the replies, good info to learn. I'm thinking someday I might want a suppressed AR-pattern carbine for a HD weapon but there is a lot I would need to research first.
Also some guys like 9mm or 45 suppressed carbines for HD.

[Chuck Haggard]

So 300 BLK might make sense for a suppressed HD weapon if protecting the ears is a consideration?

Is the goal of using a suppressor with supersonic ammunition just to reduce the report somewhat? It must still be pretty loud, especially indoors.

I'd rather keep the supersonic rounds fast and wear a set of Sordins.

[drummer]

If it weren't for the stupidity of the NFA, hardly anyone would own 16"ARs. Ive been of the mindset for a few years that ARs in the 12-14.5" range are the most practical and handy other than the travel notifications and stamp tax.

Ive been a fan of the GP rifle for civilian use for a while. For me, "general purpose" includes hunting large and medium game so 7.62 nato rifles are more versatile than 556 ever could be. The 762 rifles have gotten much better the last few years. For high round count classes, obviously 556 is cheaper. .308 ammo prices are cheap enough that you can train regularly without breaking the bank.

The variable power optics are really whats driving the train and have advanced rifle shooting more than weapon evolution.

[JodyH]

I'm about to pop for a Elcan 1.5-6 for my 16" H&K MR762, should make for a nice "do it all" heavy carbine.

[Unobtanium]

I believe he's referring to the 3x maginifier (http://www.amazon.com/EoTech-G33-STS-BLK-G33-Magnifier-Switch/dp/B008CXKX7M) from EOTech.

Thanks, just saw this, and yes, I was. The glass on it was similar to the Nightforce NXS I looked through. I know it's rugged. It's lightweight when paired with the Aimpoint T2 (my whole setup w/QD mounts is about the same as an un-mounted Nightforce NXS 1-4). It's daylight bright, it's got Aimpoint reliability and batter life (obviously). The only downside I could find was no BDC aspect to it, which for sub 300 yard use, isn't a big deal.

The POI shift that everyone complains about was a non-issue.

The G33 is a "prism" type magnifier. That is to say, you can move the prism to center the dot in the FOV. Thus, you are physically alignning or misaligning the prism. So I figured...hey...why not mis-align the prism as badly as I can to see if there will be any POI shift at all? So I did. I fired 3 rounds with the dot in the exact center of my FOV. Then I cranked on it until it was in the very far upper corner off to one side, and my FOV contained 90% shadow (basically it looked like horrific cheek-weld placement). I cranked off another 3 rounds. Then I adjusted the prism diagonally the OPPOSITE direction (bottom corner FOV) and repeated. Total of 9 rounds on target. They were fired through my .gov barrel CHF Daniel Defense using MK262 IMI ammunition through a SF suppressor using the magazine as a monopod off of a bench, at 50 yards. Here is the composite group.
https://scontent-atl1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/t31.0-8/11082340_741888483971_3523730073976045384_o.jpg--I'm sorry for the flier. Did I mention it was fired off a bench using the mag as a monopod? Still, the lack of POI shift point is proven, IMO
Also, this is a group with the magnifier removed, and then a group with it in place. 50 yards, again same weapon and technique, except Winchester RA556B was used.
https://scontent-atl1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/t31.0-8/885607_741888159621_1348462803880195512_o.jpg
As you can see, POI issues do not exist.

[GJM]

I had an Aimpoint magnifier, and to my eyes the dot was so distorted on a T1, it was almost unusable for precision shooting. Do you think the G33 is better by design, or is the difference your eyes vs mine?

[Unobtanium]

If it weren't for the stupidity of the NFA, hardly anyone would own 16"ARs. Ive been of the mindset for a few years that ARs in the 12-14.5" range are the most practical and handy other than the travel notifications and stamp tax.

Ive been a fan of the GP rifle for civilian use for a while. For me, "general purpose" includes hunting large and medium game so 7.62 nato rifles are more versatile than 556 ever could be. The 762 rifles have gotten much better the last few years. For high round count classes, obviously 556 is cheaper. .308 ammo prices are cheap enough that you can train regularly without breaking the bank.

The variable power optics are really whats driving the train and have advanced rifle shooting more than weapon evolution.

I agree 100%. However, NFA or not, 14.5" is my choice in barrel length for the 5.56x45 cartridge. For a 7.62x51, 16" would be the floor. Just my .02

As to 14.5", I choose to pin rather than stamp.

[Unobtanium]

I had an Aimpoint magnifier, and to my eyes the dot was so distorted on a T1, it was almost unusable for precision shooting. Do you think the G33 is better by design, or is the difference your eyes vs mine?

I have owned a T1 and own a T2. The T1 was a 3-5MOA diagonal blurr. It looked like when you take a laser-pointer and whip the dot across your FOV, except it was 3-5MOA long. The T2 dot is literally so crisp through my G33 that I can use the edges of the dot as hold-off aiming points if I am so inclined, although with a 2 MOA dot, I don't.

I like the G33 magnifier because it allows me to dial Diopter, and it comes with its own QD mount, it's optically similar to the Aimpoint mag,a nd it's what, $300 cheaper, once you take the QD mount into account? Oh, it's also literally THE best QD mag mount out there.

When I dialed diopter in, I took my time. Let my eyes focus on other things, etc. It literally took a whole range session to get it "perfect". That said, it made a huge difference for me making just 1/4 turn of the diopter adjustment. I have spoken to others who have the AP and G33 mags, and they, too, found that with the adjustable diopter things could be made just a TINY BIT crisper than with the fixed AP mag. In a very worst-case scenario, they would be the same, except for the integral QD mount on the Eotech mag. Also, I have let about half a dozen people look through the combo. Only 1 saw any distortion, and he said it was like 2 dots next to each other (but connected). Very useful he said, still. Also, he did NOT touch diopter adjustment, which may have well corrected this. With my T1, everyone who looked through it saw a mess.

[Mitch]

What do people think about lasers like this one? (http://www.crimsontrace.com/products/type/rail-master/01-9690)

Seems like a good option for people with astigmatisms that don't get along with red dots. I've though about getting one an pairing it with a 1.5-4x scope or an ACOG. I feel like if that were a good idea, more people would be doing it, though. Conventional wisdom seems to favor red dots.

[breakingcontact]

I agree 100%. However, NFA or not, 14.5" is my choice in barrel length for the 5.56x45 cartridge. For a 7.62x51, 16" would be the floor. Just my .02

As to 14.5", I choose to pin rather than stamp.
This is intetesting to me. 556 benefits from a longer barrel much more than 300 blackout. 18" seems to be a great 556 barrel length for 556 and 10" for 300 blackout.

[shane45]

I'm about to pop for a Elcan 1.5-6 for my 16" H&K MR762, should make for a nice "do it all" heavy carbine.

Jody, I had an Elcan 1-4. I did not like the way it balanced on my SR25. It was fine on my SCAR17 but just didn't feel right on the AR platform. As for the 1.5-6, I don't like loosing unity by not having a true 1x. I also don't like jumping all the way to 6. Id recommend taking a look at the 1-6 variables. Consider that you can leave a variable on 3x much like your TA33. That gives me fast engagement from about 30yds to 200 without needing to touch anything but leaves you the option to go up or down should the need arise. Just some things to consider.

[rob_s]

So 300 BLK might make sense for a suppressed HD weapon if protecting the ears is a consideration?

Is the goal of using a suppressor with supersonic ammunition just to reduce the report somewhat? It must still be pretty loud, especially indoors.

I may be wrong because I haven't been keeping up with things, but I do not believe there are any 300 BLK rounds that are both subsonic AND expand/fragment. So, then, to my mind if you want the quietest possible HD carbine I'd use a 9mm suppressed with 147 grain subsonic loads that are designed to perform well in sore ft targets at subsonic velocities.

Personally, I have still not been able to figure out the point of the 300 BLK (hence my referring to it as the 300 WTF), especially with the limiting factors of the subsonic loads and the advancements in 5.56 loads.

[rob_s]

Ammo is more expensive for sure.

I don't shoot rifles much. I mostly shoot pistols. Statistically if I ever have to use a gun for defense it will be my pistol which for me includes home defense.

So to be honest I dont train with a rifle much. I shot them for years in the military so I have the basic handling down although I know everyone can stand to improve from training. For me it is a gun ill zero and shoot a few times a year. If you are really into training a lot with a carbine I understand going 556.

300 blackout SBR or pistol suppressed (with super or subsonics) is a legit personal defense weapon but still a decent gun for hunting. Where I live in Texas you arent making 400 yard shots.

In reading this it occurs to me that it's not just training, but also just plain shooting. For me, part of the P of GP is training, matches, plinking, etc. and so the (to me) dubious benefits of the 300 do not outweigh the financial expense of shooting several thousand rounds per year.

[breakingcontact]

In reading this it occurs to me that it's not just training, but also just plain shooting. For me, part of the P of GP is training, matches, plinking, etc. and so the (to me) dubious benefits of the 300 do not outweigh the financial expense of shooting several thousand rounds per year.
I am a big advocate of 300 blackout but also first to say it may not be right for everyone. If a guy just wants to shoot to shoot and shoot a lot, 556 makes more sense.

[breakingcontact]

I may be wrong because I haven't been keeping up with things, but I do not believe there are any 300 BLK rounds that are both subsonic AND expand/fragment. So, then, to my mind if you want the quietest possible HD carbine I'd use a 9mm suppressed with 147 grain subsonic loads that are designed to perform well in sore ft targets at subsonic velocities.

Personally, I have still not been able to figure out the point of the 300 BLK (hence my referring to it as the 300 WTF), especially with the limiting factors of the subsonic loads and the advancements in 5.56 loads.
300 Blackout does things 556 cannot do and in a much smaller package.

There is resistance against the round from both traditionalists and from those heavily invested in 556 and/or 7.62x39. Ah I should also mention there is a subset against the round because they live in states where you cannot have short barreled rifles or suppressors and another group who doesnt want to deal with the ATF/NFA which I understand.

I "get it" but it helps that I know you don't need a 300 Win Mag to kill a Texas deer at 60 yards and im not heavily invested ($ and emotions into another round).

As much as I criticize others for...criticizing the 300 Blackout...the 300 Blackout fanboys need to chill out as well. 556 especially 77gr variety is still pretty good. As flexible as the 300 Blackout platform is the 556 has a wide range of bullets as well.

As far as hunting goes there are subsonic expanding rounds now. That being said if I were hunting I wouldn't choose subsonic rounds anyways even if using a suppressor.

[Hambo]

In reading this it occurs to me that it's not just training, but also just plain shooting. For me, part of the P of GP is training, matches, plinking, etc. and so the (to me) dubious benefits of the 300 do not outweigh the financial expense of shooting several thousand rounds per year.

Reading your posts it seems as though you're pretty set on what you want, but I'll throw in a couple of points. Having had the enjoyable experience of unsuppressed 11.5" Colts, I wouldn't own one without a can. As cool as 11.5" might be, I'd go 16". Not that 16" is that much better than 14.5", but I personally don't see NFA being worth it for an inch and a half. I have shot 14.5" barrels out to 450m, mas o menos, and with a fixed 4x it was not easy for me. Hence my GP rifle would be 16" with something in the 1-6x range. I know the deer are elfin sized here, but I still wouldn't hunt them with 5.56mm at 200m, especially an 11.5" with a can.

[JodyH]

Jody, I had an Elcan 1-4. I did not like the way it balanced on my SR25. It was fine on my SCAR17 but just didn't feel right on the AR platform. As for the 1.5-6, I don't like loosing unity by not having a true 1x. I also don't like jumping all the way to 6. Id recommend taking a look at the 1-6 variables. Consider that you can leave a variable on 3x much like your TA33. That gives me fast engagement from about 30yds to 200 without needing to touch anything but leaves you the option to go up or down should the need arise. Just some things to consider.
Good info.
The MR762 is already a chunk of a rifle, even the weight of a brick like Elcan won't change its balance much.
I don't mind the 1.5X on the low end since my house AR (suppressed 11.5" 5.56) has a ACOG TA44 1.5X and I'm used to it.
I've had several variables and always find myself at the extreme top or the extreme bottom of the magnification, at least with the Elcan it's a single throw lever instead of cranking the dial.
I've never owned a Elcan, just played around with one and have got to try it for myself.
At least they hold resell value really well!

[Chuck Haggard]

What do people think about lasers like this one? (http://www.crimsontrace.com/products/type/rail-master/01-9690)

Seems like a good option for people with astigmatisms that don't get along with red dots. I've though about getting one an pairing it with a 1.5-4x scope or an ACOG. I feel like if that were a good idea, more people would be doing it, though. Conventional wisdom seems to favor red dots.

I think lasers on carbines is a legit thing. Most of my time using them has either been IR laser with NODs, or indoors during active-shooter training, in both of those venues lasers worked REALLY well.

I'd look at one of the green lasers myself, to try and get the most range outdoors, if I was looking to go that route (which I kinda am, but have other projects taking precedence right now).

[HCM]

For myself, 300 black is a specialty round,which shines suppressed or as a short range hunting around out of it AR platform.

As much as we like to roll our eyes at terms like "platform" The truth is I can train with 22 Long rifle and 556 ARs and hunt with ARs or even just uppers in other calibers while benefitting from that common training time, just like with the Glocks.

NFA is definitely a limiting factor. Love them or hate them I believe the SIG brace pistols are what helped 300 black become mainstream.

[HCM]

I think lasers on carbines is a legit thing. Most of my time using them has either been IR laser with NODs, or indoors during active-shooter training, in both of those venues lasers worked REALLY well.

I'd look at one of the green lasers myself, to try and get the most range outdoors, if I was looking to go that route (which I kinda am, but have other projects taking precedence right now).

Chuck how about this green model?

http://www.crimsontrace.com/products/type/01-4620

If I'm reading right it takes the same batteries as the Aimpoint comp 2/3/pro.

[GJM]

I am thinking about a SF X400 G, mounted at 12 o'clock, in front of my forward BUIS on my nine inch .300 upper. I am not keen about the amount of offset of the laser on the X400 on a pistol, but on a carbine it puts the laser pretty close to the red dot. Besides normal laser benefits, I think it would help when firing off the shoulder with the pistol AR configuration. Since I wear contacts/glasses, the laser also could be an advantage in a middle of the night thing.

We have larger four legged creatures around here, and in a close defensive use, I would rather shoot a .30 caliber bullet at 2,150 fps leaving the muzzle, and try to stop a moose or bear, than any 5.56 load. The .300 essentially gives me 30/30 and 7.62x39 performance in a tiny little package, that I am most familiar running.

I know nothing about ballistics on people beyond what I read, but I feel like .300 with a 110 Barnes bullet in a across the room/car/house scenario ought to perform as well if not better than a 5.56 bullet?

[shane45]

Good info.
The MR762 is already a chunk of a rifle, even the weight of a brick like Elcan won't change its balance much.
I don't mind the 1.5X on the low end since my house AR (suppressed 11.5" 5.56) has a ACOG TA44 1.5X and I'm used to it.
I've had several variables and always find myself at the extreme top or the extreme bottom of the magnification, at least with the Elcan it's a single throw lever instead of cranking the dial.
I've never owned a Elcan, just played around with one and have got to try it for myself.
At least they hold resell value really well!

All good points and resale value is absolutely true. I didn't lose a penny on mine. On the up side, its great, clear glass! The FOV on the 1-4 was fantastic. Id imagine that transfers to the 1.5-6.

[rob_s]

I know nothing about ballistics on people beyond what I read, but I feel like .300 with a 110 Barnes bullet in a across the room/car/house scenario ought to perform as well if not better than a 5.56 bullet?

My question has been, and remains, how much better? how much deader? how much more stopped, or more quickly stopped?

[rob_s]

Reading your posts it seems as though you're pretty set on what you want, but I'll throw in a couple of points.

In terms of caliber? yes. I don't see any other round that matches 5.56 in terms of cost/performance/range/flexibility. Especially the 300 WTF. This is, I should point out, after several thousand rounds through a 300 WTF upper, mixed suppressed and non, supersonic and subsonic.

In my area, I can kill a boar or a deer with a .223, and if I wanted or needed to use something bigger I'd use a different platform/system entirely.

[rob_s]

As far as hunting goes there are subsonic expanding rounds now.

I sort of keep hearing that and then they keep sort of not panning out. Can you link to any?

[rob_s]

Interesting to note different people's take on the "general purpose" rifle. Especially given the thread title of "do-all carbine". what I am envisioning here is literally a single AR, not a stable or golf bag, with one gun selected as the favorite "general purpose". Not the "this is my SHTFantasy gun in 300 win mag because:knock-down-power" but literally, just one gun. maybe two identical guns if you're fixated on having a spare, but the idea is one, single, AR-pattern carbine. not spare upper, no swappable optic.

One

Complete

Gun

[HCM]

Interesting to note different people's take on the "general purpose" rifle. Especially given the thread title of "do-all carbine". what I am envisioning here is literally a single AR, not a stable or golf bag, with one gun selected as the favorite "general purpose". Not the "this is my SHTFantasy gun in 300 win mag because:knock-down-power" but literally, just one gun. maybe two identical guns if you're fixated on having a spare, but the idea is one, single, AR-pattern carbine. not spare upper, no swappable optic.

One

Complete

Gun

16" 556 carbine

Pinning a 14.5 limits your options as does NFA making 12.5" impractical. So a true "one gun " solution would need to be a 16 inch.

300 black is a specialty round. Some of the 6.5/6.8 rounds and are technically capable of "do it all" but cost and availabiliy of ammunition brings you back to 5.56.

[breakingtime91]

16" 556 carbine

Pinning a 14.5 limits your options as does NFA making 12.5" impractical. So a true "one gun " solution would need to be a 16 inch.

300 black is a specialty round. Some of the 6.5/6.8 rounds and are technically capable of "do it all" but cost and availabiliy of ammunition brings you back to 5.56.

put a good comp on it in the first place and your good to go..?

[GJM]

Not the "this is my SHTFantasy gun in 300 win mag because:knock-down-power"

Live in a place with bears, and your idea of SHTFantasy and the need for power might evolve. Last summer, I got chased by a bull moose in my driveway, and this is an iPhone photo taken about ten yards from my office window earlier this week.

If we are talking pure probability, based on where you live, I would say your need for anything beyond your Glock 19 is closer to fantasy.

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/black%20bear_zps5aflq9hy.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/black%20bear_zps5aflq9hy.jpg.html)

[breakingtime91]

Interesting to note different people's take on the "general purpose" rifle. Especially given the thread title of "do-all carbine". what I am envisioning here is literally a single AR, not a stable or golf bag, with one gun selected as the favorite "general purpose". Not the "this is my SHTFantasy gun in 300 win mag because:knock-down-power" but literally, just one gun. maybe two identical guns if you're fixated on having a spare, but the idea is one, single, AR-pattern carbine. not spare upper, no swappable optic.

One

Complete

Gun

here is mine that I am building right now.

BCM 14.5 pinned upper with a bcm gunfighter comp mod 1 (makes it legal length)
bcm kmr hand guard (light and free float)
either a tr 24 1-4 or a night force nxs 1-4
alg act trigger
bravo-company gunfighter grip
b5 sop mod stock.
surefire g2x in a thornntail offset mount (gets the light out of the way of the optic)

haven't decided if i'm gonna keep my fore grip on it or not. This set up gives me the ability to hit targets out to 500, I know some people don't think 5.56 will do much but I have seen stranger shit happen with this round. Realistically its a 0-300 meter gun for me that is light enough to be carried around or hiked through the Montana mountains when hunting coyotes and it is good enough to be used as a home defense weapon when the need arises.

[breakingcontact]

My question has been, and remains, how much better? how much deader? how much more stopped, or more quickly stopped?
Look at the difference in energy.

Bullets (including 30 cal bullets) don't always perform as they "should". 556 relies on bullet performance AND barrel length for performance. 300 blackout tolerates a short barrel better, has more energy AND if the bullet fails to perform you still used a 30 cal bullet.

That being said I dont use a rifle for indoor HD.

Don't count on most walls stopping bullets either.

[breakingtime91]

Look at the difference in energy.

Bullets (including 30 cal bullets) don't always perform as they "should". 556 relies on bullet performance AND barrel length for performance. 300 blackout tolerates a short barrel better, has more energy AND if the bullet fails to perform you still used a 30 cal bullet.

That being said I dont use a rifle for indoor HD.

Don't count on most walls stopping bullets either.

dude this argument has been going on forever. Until someone comes up with a carbine and round that weighs similarly, gains popularity, becomes as affordable, and can shoot without god awful drop offs, I will stick with a 5.56 carbine and make do.

[breakingcontact]

dude this argument has been going on forever. Until someone comes up with a carbine and round that weighs similarly, gains popularity, becomes as affordable, and can shoot without god awful drop offs, I will stick with a 5.56 carbine and make do.
Dude im totally fine with that.

Every round has its benefits. If 556 makes more sense to you and you can live with its limitations, enjoy.

I prefer 300 Blackout and will accept its limitations as I have no interest or reason to shoot past 300 yards.

Maybe 458 SOCOM or 6.8 SPC makes the most sense for someone reading this.

Imma do me.
You do you.

Dude!

[Wondering Beard]

What 5.56 GP round would go with the GP carbine?

[breakingtime91]

Dude im totally fine with that.

Every round has its benefits. If 556 makes more sense to you and you can live with its limitations, enjoy.

I prefer 300 Blackout and will accept its limitations as I have no interest or reason to shoot past 300 yards.

Maybe 458 SOCOM or 6.8 SPC makes the most sense for someone reading this.

Imma do me.
You do you.

Dude!

gotcha. and thats cool.

[breakingtime91]

What 5.56 GP round would go with the GP carbine?

well to each their own but I usually have a bunch of m193 loaded up and 5.56 hornady 55 grain gmx

[breakingcontact]

No 9mm or 45 ACP carbine fans around here?

[shane45]

Interesting to note different people's take on the "general purpose" rifle. Especially given the thread title of "do-all carbine". what I am envisioning here is literally a single AR, not a stable or golf bag, with one gun selected as the favorite "general purpose". Not the "this is my SHTFantasy gun in 300 win mag because:knock-down-power" but literally, just one gun. maybe two identical guns if you're fixated on having a spare, but the idea is one, single, AR-pattern carbine. not spare upper, no swappable optic.

One

Complete

Gun

Rob, I think you will need to find the guy with just one rifle then as it seems you are excluding those that don't have just one. I have many rifles. All with somewhat different focuses. The two I talked about fit your description as one complete gun, the only real difference being caliber. I laid them out as single optic do it all rifles. If you feel 5.56 is it then my SR15 fits that bill. Personally a 7.62 fits that bill for me and is why I name it as my go to.

[breakingtime91]

No 9mm or 45 ACP carbine fans around here?

I personally am not a fan of pistol carbines, I want either a shot gun or a rifle caliber. Pistol rounds are all about convenience because they can be carried in easily concealable platforms.

[breakingtime91]

Rob, I think you will need to find the guy with just one rifle then as it seems you are excluding those that don't have just one. I have many rifles. All with somewhat different focuses. The two I talked about fit your description as one complete gun, the only real difference being caliber. I laid them out as single optic do it all rifles. If you feel 5.56 is it then my SR15 fits that bill. Personally a 7.62 fits that bill for me and is why I name it as my go to.

I think this is a good point. I think 7.62 ARs are pretty cool but I have not seen one that catches my eye because of weight and the 7.62 adds little to my "mission" as a civilian rifle owner.

[breakingcontact]

Interesting to note different people's take on the "general purpose" rifle. Especially given the thread title of "do-all carbine". what I am envisioning here is literally a single AR, not a stable or golf bag, with one gun selected as the favorite "general purpose". Not the "this is my SHTFantasy gun in 300 win mag because:knock-down-power" but literally, just one gun. maybe two identical guns if you're fixated on having a spare, but the idea is one, single, AR-pattern carbine. not spare upper, no swappable optic.

One

Complete

Gun

The one rifle question often gets mocked by "gun guys" online but its a valid question. Not everyone wants to tie up $10,000 on a bunch of guns.

I formerly thought my "one gun to rule them all" had to be some sort of 308 and a bolt action at that for reliability.

My view on that changed when I got more realistic about MY realistic ranges.
Im not going to be shooting any animal or human at 800 yards. Im not a long range target shooter or competitor.

On top of that I belive in semi-automatics even for shotguns. I was formerly that 870 Police guy.

So what do I want in one gun?

Compact
Low recoil
Accurate within 200-300 yards
Easy to repair (sorry AK guys...they can and do break)
Intermediate power
Wide range of bullets
Easy to suppress
Easy to mount optics on

Things I dont care about that others do, like ammo cost or availability don't matter much to me. I don't shoot rifles that much. I dont need or want long range.

I think most here have stated such a gun for them is their 556 M4 type AR and that makes sense to me too...for them.

[Wondering Beard]

This looks like a good answer for a lot of people:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVbZEfQcmqY

[Surf]

I gotta agree in that the 5.56 for me stops with varmint hunting. Even though wild hogs are vermin around here and many hunt them with success with a 5.56 myself included, it is not my first choice for a boar and definitely not a choice for any larger game animal. So yes, when I look back at the OP with "hunting" involved, again outside of small varmints, I would not really have one "all around" rifle choice. Heck this is America and I can have several rifles if I want in a variety of shapes and sizes. Oh wait, I do. There is nothing in N. America that I am not prepared for when it comes to hunting. So yes, throw in the "hunting" aspect and I will not have a one and done rifle / carbine.

[BWT]

I own both a BCM 16" Midlength and BCM 12.5" SBR.

I'm with you on a 12.5" being optimal for the reasons cited (suppressor/maneuverability)

5.56mm has a ton of bullets that serve different purposes. The 5.56mm 70 gr TSX, IMHO, is the best for hogs because of expansion/penetration. For HD, I think the 77 gr Sierra TMK or Mk 262 Mod 1 work ideally for that purpose because of rapid fragmentation (read less penetration within a residence walls but better terminally on assailants) at lower velocities. XM193/M855 is a great general purpose projectile for training. I use XM193 currently as my stockpile 5.56.

I think perhaps a .308 Win or .30-06 would work best for hunting.

But I'm considering a hog hunt and I intend to get by with an AR.

.300 Blackout is cool but just too expensive. I'm just not a believer. I flirted with the idea of a 9" AAC upper but I realized to enjoy it I needed a silencer suited for it as well. All of that ended up being around $1,800-2,000 with tax stamps, etc. for a platform that needed optics, etc., and was .40-60$ a shot when you could find it.

Cool, but not cool enough for me.

God Bless,

Brandon

P.S. I think a lot of trainers use non-SBRs to avoid interstate legality issues, and also not having to notify the ATF, etc.

ETA: I don't hate .300 Black just for the performance improvements it offered; the cost of admission is too high.

[eyemahm]

There's a lot of AR love in this thread. Justifiably so, as I'm starting to more fully appreciate, but just to add perspective, one of my answers to this question was a PTR91 SC with a Pws fsc. I found the muzzle device really helped with recoil and follow up shots could be very fast if proper shooting form was utilized. For optics, I ran it with an aim point for short range and the hk diopters for distance (not a lot of 100+ yard in the city), but it'd be a good setup for magnifier or 1-6 scope. For ammo, Hornady 155 amax is a great, reasonably priced gp round. It shoots under 1.5 moa from this rifle and meets all 8 major criteria. There are alot of good, barrier blind rounds in 308, though.

If I could change anything about it, I'd reduce weight by cutting the barrel down to 14.5 or 12 and putting one of those long flash hiders on it. Even with the light optic, it's pretty hefty overall and the weight of the heavy barrel is noticeable.

[HCM]

put a good comp on it in the first place and your good to go..?

You need to be happy with your configuration because lose the ability to easily change the barrel, FSB, some handguards, and of course, the muzzle device.

Carbon and general gunk can build up between the muzzle device and the crown of the barrel, causing accuracy issues or key holing. This is more of an issue when shooting suppressed and can cause baffle strikes in suppressed guns if it's not kept under control. Some ammo and muzzle devices are worse than others for this but it’s difficult, if not impossible to clean if the muzzle device is permanently attached.

[Sigfan26]

There's a lot of AR love in this thread. Justifiably so, as I'm starting to more fully appreciate, but just to add perspective, one of my answers to this question was a PTR91 SC with a Pws fsc. I found the muzzle device really helped with recoil and follow up shots could be very fast if proper shooting form was utilized. For optics, I ran it with an aim point for short range and the hk diopters for distance (not a lot of 100+ yard in the city), but it'd be a good setup for magnifier or 1-6 scope. For ammo, Hornady 155 amax is a great, reasonably priced gp round. It shoots under 1.5 moa from this rifle and meets all 8 major criteria. There are alot of good, barrier blind rounds in 308, though.

If I could change anything about it, I'd reduce weight by cutting the barrel down to 14.5 or 12 and putting one of those long flash hiders on it. Even with the light optic, it's pretty hefty overall and the weight of the heavy barrel is noticeable.

Check out Investment Grade Firearms

[Hambo]

Interesting to note different people's take on the "general purpose" rifle. Especially given the thread title of "do-all carbine".

Why would that surprise you? Everybody's needs are different.

[Malamute]

Interesting to note different people's take on the "general purpose" rifle. Especially given the thread title of "do-all carbine". what I am envisioning here is literally a single AR, not a stable or golf bag, with one gun selected as the favorite "general purpose"...
One

Complete

Gun


Why would that surprise you? Everybody's needs are different.

I carry a rifle in my vehicle everywhere I go, and when out walking or hiking, which at times is daily. An AR or 5.56 arent part of my "general purpose" uses, they just arent as useful in a practical sense for my area and uses. A lever action Winchester in 30-30, 348 or 45-70 or a scoped bolt action sporter in 30-06 or 35 Whelen do all that I can realistically figure I'll need or want. If it had to be one, it would be a bolt action sporter.

Or maybe the 348.

[ranger]

I have been watching this thread with interest. Several years ago I bought a S&W M&P VTAC 16" 5.56 that came with VTAC sling and VTAC light mount and JP trigger as a package. I added MATECH rear sight, MAGPUL front sight, Primary Arms 1x6 scope, PEPR mount, and AAC 51T flash hider as my do it all rifle.

I am surprised that there are not more mentions of 6.8. I recently built a 14.5 6.8 ARP barrel upper with pinned AAC 51T flash hider to use for deer/hogs/HD. Ammo is not as cheap as 556 but PSA has steadily run sales on 6.8 ammo with S&B 110FMJ and various "hunting" or HD rounds.

[breakingtime91]

You need to be happy with your configuration because lose the ability to easily change the barrel, FSB, some handguards, and of course, the muzzle device.

Carbon and general gunk can build up between the muzzle device and the crown of the barrel, causing accuracy issues or key holing. This is more of an issue when shooting suppressed and can cause baffle strikes in suppressed guns if it's not kept under control. Some ammo and muzzle devices are worse than others for this but it’s difficult, if not impossible to clean if the muzzle device is permanently attached.

thanks for the info, never really thought about having to clean under the muzzle device..

[JM Campbell]

thanks for the info, never really thought about having to clean under the muzzle device..
Very true...

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/06/8834c2cfc130876260e652097055de85.jpghttp://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/06/72130b96468682d4b8ecb0da6ebd0e1c.jpg

Lead buildup.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[Chuck Haggard]

I carry a rifle in my vehicle everywhere I go, and when out walking or hiking, which at times is daily. An AR or 5.56 arent part of my "general purpose" uses, they just arent as useful in a practical sense for my area and uses. A lever action Winchester in 30-30, 348 or 45-70 or a scoped bolt action sporter in 30-06 or 35 Whelen do all that I can realistically figure I'll need or want. If it had to be one, it would be a bolt action sporter.

Or maybe the 348.

So, maybe Jeff Cooper's idea of what a GP carbine should be then?..................................

[Chuck Haggard]

well to each their own but I usually have a bunch of m193 loaded up and 5.56 hornady 55 grain gmx

That's a pretty good combo right there.

[SLG]

I've never cleaned under a flash hider. Just threw the barrels out every 20,000 rds. Never lost accuracy or anything else.

[joshs]

I've never cleaned under a flash hider. Just threw the barrels out every 20,000 rds. Never lost accuracy or anything else.

The buildup problem is worse with a brake that has high pressure ports before the first "baffle".

[SLG]

The buildup problem is worse with a brake that has high pressure ports before the first "baffle".

Makes sense. I rarely use brakes, so most of my experience is with SF Flashiders or the birdcage.

[Malamute]

So, maybe Jeff Cooper's idea of what a GP carbine should be then?..................................

Yes, pretty close. I just keep handy whats practical for my day to day environment and use, which is more likely to be critters than anything. If I needed a long gun for another purpose, I'm guessing I can make do.

[HCM]

Makes sense. I rarely use brakes, so most of my experience is with SF Flashiders or the birdcage.

I've never seen it with A2 flash hiders. I saw this twice with perm attached brakes back during the Clinton AWB and once with a YHM Phantom.

[HCM]

So, maybe Jeff Cooper's idea of what a GP carbine should be then?..................................

I think an AR in 6.8 or 6.5 with a 2 MOA Aimpoint, a magnifier and a light weight free float rail would make a great 21st century scout rifle.

[SLG]

I think an AR in 6.8 or 6.5 with a 2 MOA Aimpoint, a magnifier and a light weight free float rail would make a great 21st century scout rifle.

I use a 6.5 G for exactly that. NF 2.5-10 scope allows you to take advantage of the cartridge better than the aimpoint, since the 6.5 works great from 0-800 yards or more.

6.8 with an aimpoint would be a great 300 yard and in big game/GP rifle.

5.56 is still hard to beat for everything but big game hunting. I'd take it after deer or pronghorn, but nothing bigger. I also like that I can burn a 1000 rds through it in a weekend like nothing, and all that training translates to the 6.5 nicely.

[ranger]

I think an AR in 6.8 or 6.5 with a 2 MOA Aimpoint, a magnifier and a light weight free float rail would make a great 21st century scout rifle.

Agreed except I would substitute a 1x4, 1x6, or 1.5x5 variable optic in place of the Aimpoint and magnifier.

[MickAK]

If 6.5 G and 5.56 cost the same, I would have my one rifle I've been searching for all these years. Alas, the search continues.

[Unobtanium]

Agreed except I would substitute a 1x4, 1x6, or 1.5x5 variable optic in place of the Aimpoint and magnifier.

While I understand this, it boiled down to a few key facts for me.

1. My carbine is going to be most likely used to save my life within about 25 yards.
2. My carbine's most valuable potential use is to save my life or that of a loved one.

That said, I picked the best optic for me, for 0-25 yards. That turned out to be an Aimpoint (If you like Eotech, that's great, too, lets not go there...), as I just don't think a 1-X variable can compete with Aimpoint's brightness, durability, and 1X use up close, especially in awkward or less than ideal presentations.

Then I said...

What do I enjoy doing with my rifle?

Well, I enjoy shooting things with it. Near and far. I want to hunt with it. I like punching paper. I enjoy all sorts of things. So I added a magnifier which allows me to see my hits at 100 yards, which allows me to place bullets precisely on vermin, etc.

Basically I set my rifle up for what it is most likely to be used for. Not the 0.001% chance of what it might be used for.

YMMV

[HCM]

If 6.5 G and 5.56 cost the same, I would have my one rifle I've been searching for all these years. Alas, the search continues.

I agree but you can't beat the economics of 5.56 right now.

[breakingcontact]

I agree but you can't beat the economics of 5.56 right now.
People say that like 556 is cheap. Of course the other rounds are more expensive but 556 is still what? $0.35 per round or so

[breakingtime91]

People say that like 556 is cheap. Of course the other rounds are more expensive but 556 is still what? $0.35 per round or so

starting to think you really dislike 5.56 ;)

[breakingcontact]

starting to think you really dislike 5.56 ;)
Ha!

No way. I said early it is pretty good with 77gr bullets. I just think its funny when it is refered to as more economical. I mean yes...it is cheaper but it is not cheap.

Perhaps I don't get it as im not someone taking carbine classes 10x a year. I did that stuff in my military daze. Maybe im just over it?

I dont know but I do appreciate this being a very reasonable discussion for a gun forum.

Maybe im just too tactical. Probably not.

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/08/1aea74a83bafa0c342af6199585755a4.jpg

[Chuck Haggard]

No BUIS? That will get you killed on da streetz yo!

[Byron]

I just think its funny when it is refered to as more economical. I mean yes...it is cheaper but it is not cheap.
That is quite literally what "more economical" means ;)

[breakingcontact]

That is quite literally what "more economical" means ;)
Yes and I said as much...but it doesnt mean "cheap" which is how it is used.

Ive got etymology on lock!

[breakingcontact]

No BUIS? That will get you killed on da streetz yo!
Oh that isn't me but I am looking at that can.

Ive got flip up magpul steel sights...which operators do not approve of as the 1/2 second to flip them up with get me killed in them IDPA streets. Death while wearing a fishing vest.

[MickAK]

People say that like 556 is cheap. Of course the other rounds are more expensive but 556 is still what? $0.35 per round or so

True, and 6.5 G is getting cheaper all the time. Or more economical....

But the only real reason 5.56 won't do everything for me is the occasional elk or black bear, and I already have a rifle for that. Weighed against daily costs and ammo availability it just doesn't make sense. If I started reaching out more it would. I do like the idea of having one rifle.

[breakingcontact]

True, and 6.5 G is getting cheaper all the time. Or more economical....

But the only real reason 5.56 won't do everything for me is the occasional elk or black bear, and I already have a rifle for that. Weighed against daily costs and ammo availability it just doesn't make sense. If I started reaching out more it would. I do like the idea of having one rifle.

Similar conversation going on on a 300 Blackout FB page.

It is all about context. I cannot tell someone in the back country in Alaska that 300 Blackout is the best all around caliber. Of course it would not be for him.

I don't think the 300 Blackout is a fad but I don't think it is going to make any other rounds obsolete.

We live in a pretty awesome time when it comes to a wide range of guns and calibers being readily available and relatively affoedable.

[HCM]

Yes and I said as much...but it doesnt mean "cheap" which is how it is used.

Ive got etymology on lock!

I get reasonable amounts of 62 grain .223 at work for free. can't get cheaper than that.

[breakingcontact]

I get reasonable amounts of 62 grain .223 at work for free. can't get cheaper than that.
Free 99.

[breakingtime91]

Similar conversation going on on a 300 Blackout FB page.

It is all about context. I cannot tell someone in the back country in Alaska that 300 Blackout is the best all around caliber. Of course it would not be for him.

I don't think the 300 Blackout is a fad but I don't think it is going to make any other rounds obsolete.

We live in a pretty awesome time when it comes to a wide range of guns and calibers being readily available and relatively affoedable.

so one question, would you say you are similarly prepared or more prepared with your 300 blk that you sometimes train with compared to person who trains regularly with their 5.56 carbine?

[breakingcontact]

so one question, would you say you are similarly prepared or more prepared with your 300 blk that you sometimes train with compared to person who trains regularly with their 5.56 carbine?

TL; DR: Yes, shooting more is better.

Oh I am not running down anyone who trains a lot with 556 carbines. That just isnt my thing.

Statistically I am far more likely to need to use my pistol for defense than any long gun. That is especially true for me as my pistol is my HD gun and my long guns are for hunting or some complete break down of society.

I shot the M16A2 and M4 enough in the army that I have the basic handling and marksmanship down. Someone who trains more than me with a carbine will indeed most likely be better than me with a carbine. I may be better than them with a pistol.

In that same thought and to directly answer your question, IF you are training properly (not just busting primers and making noise), the more rounds you fire the better off you will be. Advantage 556 > 300 Blackout if cost is a factor.

If you train all around for proficiency with pistols, shotguns, carbines and long range guns...my hat is off to you.

That isnt my thing and i spent my time training for what I am most likely going to use for defense. Certainly it is good to develop and maintain a basic level of skill with all of the guns you have and may need to use.

[breakingtime91]

TL; DR: Yes, shooting more is better.

Oh I am not running down anyone who trains a lot with 556 carbines. That just isnt my thing.

Statistically I am far more likely to need to use my pistol for defense than any long gun. That is especially true for me as my pistol is my HD gun and my long guns are for hunting or some complete break down of society.

I shot the M16A2 and M4 enough in the army that I have the basic handling and marksmanship down. Someone who trains more than me with a carbine will indeed most likely be better than me with a carbine. I may be better than them with a pistol.

In that same thought and to directly answer your question, IF you are training properly (not just busting primers and making noise), the more rounds you fire the better off you will be. Advantage 556 > 300 Blackout if cost is a factor.

If you train all around for proficiency with pistols, shotguns, carbines and long range guns...my hat is off to you.

That isnt my thing and i spent my time training for what I am most likely going to use for defense. Certainly it is good to develop and maintain a basic level of skill with all of the guns you have and may need to use.

trackin. I do a lot more pistol then I do carbine now that I am done deploying but I still stay proficient on it since I own one. Looking back in the last year (these are rounded figures) I spent 83% of my time training on pistol and 17% on rifle (rounds fire that is).

This year I am trying for a 80/20 thing but not sure I'll be able to make it happen. With that said, I love shooting rifle and sometime shooting pistol just seems like a job

[breakingcontact]

trackin. I do a lot more pistol then I do carbine now that I am done deploying but I still stay proficient on it since I own one. Looking back in the last year (these are rounded figures) I spent 83% of my time training on pistol and 17% on rifle (rounds fire that is).

This year I am trying for a 80/20 thing but not sure I'll be able to make it happen. With that said, I love shooting rifle and sometime shooting pistol just seems like a job
I probably should take a carbine class or shoot mine more but im the opposite, I enjoy shooting pistols much more than rifles.

22LR pistol is about the most fun I have at the range, especially suppressed.

[JodyH]

I took my H&K MR762 with me to the Big Bend region of Texas for a few days of getting away from things.
It's pretty much the "do it all" carbine for my purposes.
My purpose being backcountry desert terrain, rides on the passenger seat of my Toyota PU, takes the occasional short hike to a scenic overlook, tent rifle and also backs up my Benelli M4 at the house.
The primary threats in the backcountry I travel in would be assorted borderland riffraff in vehicles.
I have been using my FN15 with a ACOG as my "do it all carbine" but prepping for this border trip reminded me that 5.56 just doesn't have the range or the vehicle penetration I want.

My current setup:
H&K MR762 16" .308
Geissele trigger
Hornady OTM 155gr.
Meopta 1-4x K-dot illuminated in a GG&G mount
Troy folding BUIS
Maxpedition shoulder bag with 5 extra magazines and a trauma kit

The only change I plan on making is swapping the Meopta out for a Elcan Spectre DR 1.5-6X for the extra magnification and the simple throw lever from min to max magnification.
The thing is a heavy pig to carry, but that's not what I do.
The accuracy, reliability and shootability more than make up for the weight and 20 round capacity.

[breakingcontact]

Hard to argue with 308

[BobM]

Hard to argue with 308

True. I was at the Texas Ranger Museum earlier today and saw one of the Larue 308s in a display. I thought of this thread and that for my purposes it would be close to ideal.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[rob_s]

Rob, I think you will need to find the guy with just one rifle then as it seems you are excluding those that don't have just one. I have many rifles. All with somewhat different focuses. The two I talked about fit your description as one complete gun, the only real difference being caliber. I laid them out as single optic do it all rifles. If you feel 5.56 is it then my SR15 fits that bill. Personally a 7.62 fits that bill for me and is why I name it as my go to.

I'm not excluding anyone, but if you have to have more than one ar to accomplish all of your ar needs then, by definition, you don't have a do-all carbine, do you?

There is a difference between having only one and needing only one.

[shane45]

I disagree with your logic. A general purpose focused rifle means it can cover a wide array of needs/wants, but likely isn't great at any one area, just good in a lot of areas. A focused rifle is specializing in a specific area. So just because I have specific need "focused" rifles, doesn't impeach the usefulness of the rifle that covers many needs. For example, the fact that I have a Custom GA Precision AR in .260 wearing a Hensoldt 4-16 focused specifically on long range shooting does not make my "GP carbine" somehow incomplete or inadequate. And the fact that I have a Tavor with a T1 Micro in the house doesn't either. Both those rifles are focused at opposite ends of the spectrum, well suited for their specific roles. BUT, if I had to cover either of those roles with my "GP Carbine" I could! The opposite is not true. So, again, if I had to grab the ONE rifle with the broadest spectrum of capabilities, its the SR25EMC 16" Carbine with a USO SR8C that goes from daylight usable, zero magnification red dot, to 8X scope.

[Chuck Haggard]

^This^ idea is why I think a 5.56 16" AR, set up with a variable 1x-whatever scope, is a "general purpose" carbine for most people, for most uses, in CONUS.

Can you do home defense, road trip/car gun, varmint hunting, deer hunting, 3 gun, OMG!ZATSHHTF gun, shoot from 0-600meters......, all with that one gun? Yup, sure can.

[breakingtime91]

^This^ idea is why I think a 5.56 16" AR, set up with a variable 1x-whatever scope, is a "general purpose" carbine for most people, for most uses, in CONUS.

Can you do home defense, road trip/car gun, varmint hunting, deer hunting, 3 gun, OMG!ZATSHHTF gun, shoot from 0-600meters......, all with that one gun? Yup, sure can.

Wisdom right there

[breakingcontact]

Wisdom right there
Nothing wrong with that logic, but...

I dont need to shoot 600m

300 Blackout is much easier to suppress and it has much better ballistics out of a short barrel.

Really if I were arguing for a "one rifle that can do it all" (not just all I need), it wouldnt be 556 or 300 Blk it would be 308 Win.

I am wildly appreciative of the civil conversation though. No insults being thrown around like usual on the gun boards.

There are a great many ways to solve this question depending upon your circumstances.

[shane45]

It would be interesting to me to take the conversation in a direction to fundamentally pick apart the desirable attributes of a GP carbine.

I think most agree on a variable optic of some sort.

I think the caliber at small frame rifle level category probably boils down to ammo availability which probably leads to a 5.56?

Does the energy, deflection, barrier penetration, etc etc strengths of a 308 merit consideration?

I think 16 and under are probably generally agreed on for length?

What weight does it need to come under with kit? For me personally I try and stay at or below 9lbs in 308 and 8lbs in 5.56.

If you have any thoughts in terms of civil unrest/emergency do you have to take a more abstract approach to the layout? You may not actually know where you will end up right?

Other considerations?

[breakingcontact]

Civil unrest? Im staying home. Running around with a gun is a great way to get dead.

[Chuck Haggard]

Nothing wrong with that logic, but...

I dont need to shoot 600m

300 Blackout is much easier to suppress and it has much better ballistics out of a short barrel.

Really if I were arguing for a "one rifle that can do it all" (not just all I need), it wouldnt be 556 or 300 Blk it would be 308 Win.

I am wildly appreciative of the civil conversation though. No insults being thrown around like usual on the gun boards.

There are a great many ways to solve this question depending upon your circumstances.

METT-T, it dictates!

I think the GP carbine idea has been driven by guys overseas who have found the utility of building such a gun that they can CQB with yet still reach out and whack bad guys at 600 meters, yet still stay lightweight enough that they can hump the gun and ammo up and down mountains, etc. The 5.56 makes a LOT of sense for this mission profile.

I'd lose zero sleep worrying about gun issues if I had to walk across CONUS with a 5.56 GP carbine, I could handle damn near any job I needed to handle. Alaska or Africa? Maybe not so much. .308 would be a better bet for sure.

Your GP isn't my GP, and may or may not meet the next guy's GP needs.

[shane45]

I dont want to spawn a derail, so maybe it suffices to say staying put may not be an option either by emergency or you've decided to go defend the borders in Mexico. Simply put, where you are may not be where you end up. If mobility concerns is not a worthy consideration, that would be interesting to discuss as well.

[breakingcontact]

Your GP isnt my GP pretty well nails it.

The quest for what is objectively is just a thought experiment.

Under gunned with 556? I agree that isn't likely. Something I do mention to the 556 fans when they say "well the military uses it" is they dont understand how the military deploys a wide variety of weapons to be used together. The military M4 should be understood within the context of it being used with M249/M240 and possibly M2 Mk19 and so on and that isnt even bringing up the DMRs.

[Chuck Haggard]

Your GP isnt my GP pretty well nails it.

The quest for what is objectively is just a thought experiment.

Under gunned with 556? I agree that isn't likely. Something I do mention to the 556 fans when they say "well the military uses it" is they dont understand how the military deploys a wide variety of weapons to be used together. The military M4 should be understood within the context of it being used with M249/M240 and possibly M2 Mk19 and so on and that isnt even bringing up the DMRs.

That said, the guys I know with time shooting bad guys with various calibers, and doing so in volume, have pretty much gone back to the 5.56 guns for their needs if given a choice. One guy I talk to with a lot of trigger time considers the 5.56 GP carbine to be a "death machine" and has his personal guns set up similar to what many here have talked about.

[breakingtime91]

That said, the guys I know with time shooting bad guys with various calibers, and doing so in volume, have pretty much gone back to the 5.56 guns for their needs if given a choice. One guy I talk to with a lot of trigger time considers the 5.56 GP carbine to be a "death machine" and has his personal guns set up similar to what many here have talked about.

Ya. I used to think that 5.56 sucked until I actually saw what it could do in country. Nothing like seeing something first hand to find out your opinion has no basis. I would also like to point out we had decent success against vehicles with 5.56 in country.. from the guys who engaged cars, often they all mentioned "shoot the same spot until you connect". I honestly believe people are way better off using a 5.56 and actual training. I would argue how effective anyone's general purpose carbine is if they don't train with it..

[breakingcontact]

Ya. I used to think that 5.56 sucked until I actually saw what it could do in country. Nothing like seeing something first hand to find out your opinion has no basis. I would also like to point out we had decent success against vehicles with 5.56 in country.. from the guys who engaged cars, often they all mentioned "shoot the same spot until you connect". I honestly believe people are way better off using a 5.56 and actual training. I would honestly argue how effective anyone's general purpose carbine is if they don't train with it..
Training is wildly undervalued by many in this world. And often training is held as more of a tourist experience, something to do, than something to learn from and improve upon.

That leads me to the severe lack of physical fitness amongst many in the 2A community but I wont say anymore on that in this thread.

300 Blk for the win! Just kidding.

Would one lower and multiple uppers satisfy the one GP gun requirement?

Also thanks to those of you have served. I did 8 years in USAR but all stateside.

[breakingtime91]

Training is wildly undervalued by many in this world. And often training is held as more of a tourist experience, something to do, than something to learn from and improve upon.

That leads me to the severe lack of physical fitness amongst many in the 2A community but I wont say anymore on that in this thread.

300 Blk for the win! Just kidding.

Would one lower and multiple uppers satisfy the one GP gun requirement?

Also thanks to those of you have served. I did 8 years in USAR but all stateside.

I second the physical fitness thing but I digress. I like the idea of having one gun, one scope, and a maintenance kit. SAves me money and every time I pick up the gun it is the exact same. I also like having the same optic constantly, same holds and reticle. I love simplicity and being minimalistic

[Beat Trash]

I think it's important to first give some thought and determine exactly what tasks you personally are expecting a "Do All" carbine to perform.

I agree with Chuck in that for my needs, a 14.5" - 16" AR in 5.56mm will handle about all I need it to do. I think most people in this country would be well served by a 5.56mm general purpose carbine.

But if I were JodyH's neighbor and was going to spend a couple of weeks out in the middle of no where Texas, a 16" AR in 308 might not be a bad idea. I live in the mid-west where the engagement distances are not nearly as open or as far. The only time I even begin to doubt my 5.56mm choice is the rare times we rent a cabin in the Smokey Mountains and I see black bears hanging about. All of a sudden a 308 AR with a 20 rd PMAG starts looking appealing.

The trips to the mountains or any future planned trips to rural parks in Texas have me considering the concept of an AR in 308 that is similar in size and setup as my 5.56mm guns. But if and when I set up a 308 gun, it would be a special purpose gun, intended for specific needs. My personal "Do-All" carbine is, and will be a 5.56mm.

[shane45]

"The quest for what is objectively is just a thought experiment."

I agree with this. And I like such experiments because they always help me re-evaluate what I think, what I have, and what I want to accomplish by considering the input from those that have experiences Im not likely ever to achieve.

[breakingcontact]

"The quest for what is objectively is just a thought experiment."

I agree with this. And I like such experiments because they always help me re-evaluate what I think, what I have, and what I want to accomplish by considering the input from those that have experiences Im not likely ever to achieve.
Indeed.

Ive warmed back up to the AR.

I went AR to Piston AR to Sig 556 to M1A to AK back to AR.

There is a lot to be said for being able to fix your own gun, share parts and mags, go with what you are most familiar and so on.

Also once I stopped worrying and got into NFA stuff that changed what makes sense to me as well.

To go full on Buddhist on this ive embraced the limitations of 300 Blk. I dont need to shoot 500M. If someone is 500M from me they probably dont see me and if they do they arent a threat. If someone is posted up with a 300 Win Mag at some great distance...300 Blk encourages me to break contact, beat feet and get to cover like I should do instead of doing my best Mark Walberg impersonation.

[blake_g]

I think it's important to first give some thought and determine exactly what tasks you personally are expecting a "Do All" carbine to perform.
e considering the concept of an AR in 308 that is similar in size and setup as my 5.56mm guns. But if and when I set up a 308 gun, it
I agree with Chuck in that for my needs, a 14.5" - 16" AR in 5.56mm will handle about all I need it to do. I think most people in this country would be well served by a 5.56mm general purpose carbine.

But if I were JodyH's neighbor and was going to spend a couple of weeks out in the middle of no where Texas, a 16" AR in 308 might not be a bad idea. I live in the mid-west where the engagement distances are not nearly as open or as far. The only time I even begin to doubt my 5.56mm choice is the rare times we rent a cabin in the Smokey Mountains and I see black bears hanging about. All of a sudden a 308 AR with a 20 rd PMAG starts looking appealing.

The trips to the mountains or any future planned trips to rural parks in Texas have m would be a special purpose gun, intended for specific needs. My personal "Do-All" carbine is, and will be a 5.56mm.

Not to piss in your Cheerios, but the last 3 bears I shot were with (respectively) a .223 Mini-14 (one shot under the ear), a carbon fiber arrow (double lung), and am H&R Handi-Rifle in .243 (shoulder/heart/lungs). Black bears are over-rated as far as being really dangerous, I've sent a big one scampering by hitting it in the face with the back of an ax (all I had at the time, and no, I'm not saying I didn't need a change of shorts later... we were both pretty surprised!). I've also kicked smaller ones (yearlings) off my deck with a steel-toed size 12 to the ass of the pants - story for another day...

I guess what I'm saying is that I have no problem shooting black bears with a 5.56 as long as the ammo is right.

[Chuck Haggard]

I can't see any bear running into an NSR of 70gr TSX, just sayin.

[Haraise]

I can't see any bear running into an NSR of 70gr TSX, just sayin.

An NSR?

3469

[Wondering Beard]

Non Standard Response

[Jay Cunningham]

2006 called and wants its recce back.


I keeed, I keeed!


:o

[JodyH]

Distances are different out here.
And everyone is in a vehicle because on foot... nature kills you.

3471
30 miles to the nearest paved road, 50 or so miles to the nearest house, 100 miles to the closest guaranteed law enforcement (USBP 24/7 inspection station)

[GJM]

I can't see any BLACK bear running into an NSR of 70gr TSX, just sayin.

FIFY

[Beat Trash]

Not to piss in your Cheerios, but the last 3 bears I shot were with (respectively) a .223 Mini-14 (one shot under the ear), a carbon fiber arrow (double lung), and am H&R Handi-Rifle in .243 (shoulder/heart/lungs). Black bears are over-rated as far as being really dangerous, I've sent a big one scampering by hitting it in the face with the back of an ax (all I had at the time, and no, I'm not saying I didn't need a change of shorts later... we were both pretty surprised!). I've also kicked smaller ones (yearlings) off my deck with a steel-toed size 12 to the ass of the pants - story for another day...

I guess what I'm saying is that I have no problem shooting black bears with a 5.56 as long as the ammo is right.

I've never hunted Black Bear. I do keep a carbine close at hand when we go to the mountains. But this is because my faith in my fellow man evaporated years ago. I'm glad to hear that what I've been taking along will work if needed for any four legged issues as well.

Seriously though, I appreciate the first hand comments about black bear. It'll make me feel better the next time we go.


I can't see any bear running into an NSR of 70gr TSX, just sayin.


Thoughts on the Winchester Ranger bonded 64 gr (RA556B) as a emergency black bear repellent? It's my issued duty round, so... the price is right...

[Chuck Haggard]

I think the Bonded would work fine, glad they give you good ammo.

[blake_g]

I've never hunted Black Bear. I do keep a carbine close at hand when we go to the mountains. But this is because my faith in my fellow man evaporated years ago. I'm glad to hear that what I've been taking along will work if needed for any four legged issues as well.

Seriously though, I appreciate the first hand comments about black bear. It'll make me feel better the next time we go.




Thoughts on the Winchester Ranger bonded 64 gr (RA556B) as a emergency black bear repellent? It's my issued duty round, so... the price is right...

The bear with the Mini-14 was W-W 64 gr SP regular cup and core, non-bonded. It did the job on a side-on head shot and the biggest piece I found was 28 gr - I'd use the bonded without hesitation...

[SLG]

Having carried an issued 308 Larue in really big country, with really big animals in it, I think the whole 308 thing is overrated. If it floats your boat, that's all that matters. Whether it actually gives you what you think you're getting...that's another story. The rds that tend to work ok on bigger animals, don't tend to be very accurate. The ones that are ok on bigger animals and are accurate, tend to be accurate at short ranges, not long. The rds with decent BC's don't tend to be great choices for other things. So if you want to carry multiple types of ammo, swap them around as you see fit, dial your zero back in each time, have at it. For GP use, I'll stick with a 14.5" 5.56. Shorter than that, is not equal.


I should add, if I'm carrying a 308, I want LR capability. If you're happy with mid range, then it may work for you.

[Beat Trash]

Gentlemen, my current work gun (Patrol Rifle for inter-city LEO) is a BCM factory upper with their 14.5" ELW-f barrel, BCM comp, and a 13" KMR rail, topped off with a Aimpoint T-1 and a surefire scout light. Duty/carry rounds are the Winchester 64 gr bonded 5.56mm loads. I have a twin of this gun set up, and the twin has become my travel gun when on vacations.

After reading the last few responses, I now have a warm and fuzzy feeling about my choice of travel gun. I'm no longer in as big of a rush to look into the 308 AR platform.

My wallet thanks you...

[SecondsCount]

Having carried an issued 308 Larue in really big country, with really big animals in it, I think the whole 308 thing is overrated. If it floats your boat, that's all that matters. Whether it actually gives you what you think you're getting...that's another story. The rds that tend to work ok on bigger animals, don't tend to be very accurate. The ones that are ok on bigger animals and are accurate, tend to be accurate at short ranges, not long. The rds with decent BC's don't tend to be great choices for other things. So if you want to carry multiple types of ammo, swap them around as you see fit, dial your zero back in each time, have at it. For GP use, I'll stick with a 14.5" 5.56. Shorter than that, is not equal.


I should add, if I'm carrying a 308, I want LR capability. If you're happy with mid range, then it may work for you.

I am mostly in agreement with this. 10 years ago I bought into the 308 AR craze about the time DPMS came on the scene. The gun was all around heavier, carried less ammo per square inch, and it really didn't do much for me inside 400 yards that I couldn't do with my 16" AR.

The 308 definitely has more energy but I see it being the argument of 9mm(223) vs 45 (308). Shot placement is always going to be the critical part of the equation.

Don't get me wrong, those that have chosen the 308 for their needs have not necessarily made a bad choice, just one that I tried and didn't feel the love.

[breakingtime91]

So here is a question to keep this thread going, would a carbine with just a red dot be considered an all purpose?

Things you lose out on with just a red dot:
1)ability to positive ID at distance
2)difficulty hitting targets past 300 (this is obviously based off the individual but hold overs are arguably easier with a 1-4 or 1-6)

positives:
1)better at night
2)probably better for 0-75 yard engagements
3)lighter

*this is obviously discounting a magnifier. There are enough light weight options in the variable market that I feel that a red dot + magnified is becoming less of an ideal option. While I know some will disagree, I am not a huge fan of the magnified hanging off the side because of the possibility that it snags on things since its hang out so far.

[breakingcontact]

Id say not just for my uses but objectively some magnification is needed for a GP carbine. That could be a fixed power or variable power scope.

I do like red dots and consider them practical even out to 200m or so.

[SecondsCount]

I think the red dot takes away from the "do-all" carbine, and I am not a fan of magnifiers for the reason you stated. The reality is that if you have a carbine setup for defensive purposes, and your local range is 100 yards, you will probably be doing most of your shooting inside that so for most a red dot will work fine. Those of us that shoot out beyond 100 on a regular basis like to have some magnification. You also have to consider that even an Aimpoint T-1 has a fine 2 MOA dot but that looks like a 4 inch red circle on a target 200 yards away.

I have seen 3-gun competitors use irons and red dot sights but most are using a 1-4 or 1-6x scope to engage targets at various distances. I have only seen one person using a magnifier and he was a novice shooter.

[breakingtime91]

so what 1-4 or 1-6 does every suggest? Trijicon just came out with a new accupower line that looks interesting to me.

[breakingcontact]

Burris was popular now Vortex seems to be.

Im sure Trijicon is good but I ain't got that long paper son!

[Colt191145lover]

so what 1-4 or 1-6 does every suggest? Trijicon just came out with a new accupower line that looks interesting to me.

Im also interested in 1-4 and 1-6 optics. I will start a new thread on this subject ,so we can keep this one on track.

[Dr. No]

3483

You pretty much described my purpose built work rifle.

12.5" Noveske, Surefire can, 1-4 S&B, etc..

[shane45]

Maybe its just my eyes, entirely possible. But the issue I ran into with aimpoints is the dependency on lighting conditions. Not really an issue with the aimpoint its self, just one with my eyes + non magnified optics and age I guess. In some lighting conditions that create shadowing of the target or other anomalies, I can cut right through that with magnification, not so much with the red dot. Some days Im good with the aimpoint but other days with different conditions it really eclipses my distance with a red dot.

[SLG]

So here is a question to keep this thread going, would a carbine with just a red dot be considered an all purpose?

I would say no. On a one way range, the shooting is more difficult with just a red dot at ranges beyond 100 yards. Young people do better, but its still not ideal. On a two way range, try finding the target at all, or seeing enough of it to hit it at those distances. Not only for PID, which is super important, but even just to get a sight picture, I find that magnification is needed more often than not, once you get past the close range stuff.

A good friend of mine was involved in the invasion of Panama. I mention this because though there are lots of current examples, he was the first person to clue me in on this, from way back when. He said that he "shot" some guys at around 250 yards. He's a good hand with a gun, so I had no reason to doubt. He then went on to say that at least one of the guys he "shot" jumped back up and ran off. When my friend's unit reached the point where the enemy were, no bodies were found, and neither was any blood. My buddy surmised that iron sights and partial targets don't always mix real well off the range. Just because you're "sure" you hit him, doesn't make it so. My friend went on to many more deployments, and has been in many many fights. For a long time now, he has been using optics of one kind or another, and now favors low to mid power scopes, like the NF 1-4. He said that when they go to check a position where the enemy was, they are way more likely to find bodies now. His experience in this matter is not exactly unique.

[breakingtime91]

Maybe its just my eyes, entirely possible. But the issue I ran into with aimpoints is the dependency on lighting conditions. Not really an issue with the aimpoint its self, just one with my eyes + non magnified optics and age I guess. In some lighting conditions that create shadowing of the target or other anomalies, I can cut right through that with magnification, not so much with the red dot. Some days Im good with the aimpoint but other days with different conditions it really eclipses my distance with a red dot.

same, I shoot way better with just iron sights at distances beyond 25 yards. I think this is because the way that my eyes see the dot at distance.

[breakingtime91]

I would say no. On a one way range, the shooting is more difficult with just a red dot at ranges beyond 100 yards. Young people do better, but its still not ideal. On a two way range, try finding the target at all, or seeing enough of it to hit it at those distances. Not only for PID, which is super important, but even just to get a sight picture, I find that magnification is needed more often than not, once you get past the close range stuff.

A good friend of mine was involved in the invasion of Panama. I mention this because though there are lots of current examples, he was the first person to clue me in on this, from way back when. He said that he "shot" some guys at around 250 yards. He's a good hand with a gun, so I had no reason to doubt. He then went on to say that at least one of the guys he "shot" jumped back up and ran off. When my friend's unit reached the point where the enemy were, no bodies were found, and neither was any blood. My buddy surmised that iron sights and partial targets don't always mix real well off the range. Just because you're "sure" you hit him, doesn't make it so. My friend went on to many more deployments, and has been in many many fights. For a long time now, he has been using optics of one kind or another, and now favors low to mid power scopes, like the NF 1-4. He said that when they go to check a position where the enemy was, they are way more likely to find bodies now. His experience in this matter is not exactly unique.

great insight, thanks slg

[Chuck Haggard]

To back up SLG's post, I know a couple of guys who were in the 82nd who used the old crappy Colt scopes on their M16s, the 3 or 4x (I forget which...) model that bolted on top of the carrying handle. Even with subpar optics and mounts compared to what we have nowadays they found in both Panama and Grenada that the glass gave them a significant advantage.

[Unobtanium]

I think the red dot takes away from the "do-all" carbine, and I am not a fan of magnifiers for the reason you stated. The reality is that if you have a carbine setup for defensive purposes, and your local range is 100 yards, you will probably be doing most of your shooting inside that so for most a red dot will work fine. Those of us that shoot out beyond 100 on a regular basis like to have some magnification. You also have to consider that even an Aimpoint T-1 has a fine 2 MOA dot but that looks like a 4 inch red circle on a target 200 yards away.

I have seen 3-gun competitors use irons and red dot sights but most are using a 1-4 or 1-6x scope to engage targets at various distances. I have only seen one person using a magnifier and he was a novice shooter.
I think preference plays plays a huge role. I know a SME who loved the eotech and g33. Until just recently he was active duty USSOCOM. Anything he wanted he could have.

[Unobtanium]

I've never hunted Black Bear. I do keep a carbine close at hand when we go to the mountains. But this is because my faith in my fellow man evaporated years ago. I'm glad to hear that what I've been taking along will work if needed for any four legged issues as well.

Seriously though, I appreciate the first hand comments about black bear. It'll make me feel better the next time we go.




Thoughts on the Winchester Ranger bonded 64 gr (RA556B) as a emergency black bear repellent? It's my issued duty round, so... the price is right...

Black bear, aside giants, just aren't as bulletproof as the Internet would have one believe.

[Unobtanium]

So here is a question to keep this thread going, would a carbine with just a red dot be considered an all purpose?

Things you lose out on with just a red dot:
1)ability to positive ID at distance
2)difficulty hitting targets past 300 (this is obviously based off the individual but hold overs are arguably easier with a 1-4 or 1-6)

positives:
1)better at night
2)probably better for 0-75 yard engagements
3)lighter

*this is obviously discounting a magnifier. There are enough light weight options in the variable market that I feel that a red dot + magnified is becoming less of an ideal option. While I know some will disagree, I am not a huge fan of the magnified hanging off the side because of the possibility that it snags on things since its hang out so far.

My issue is how poorly variables do up close. As a civilian, my living room is it by and large. Massive diopter shift. Poor illumination life. Etc. If I were in booger eater ville....in want at least 6x probably. The mission drives the gear train. Too many people like me will read boards like this and buy great gear for Afghanistan with intent to deploy it from behind their microsuede sectional

[breakingtime91]

My issue is how poorly variables do up close. As a civilian, my living room is it by and large. Massive diopter shift. Poor illumination life. Etc. If I were in booger eater ville....in want at least 6x probably. The mission drives the gear train. Too many people like me will read boards like this and buy great gear for Afghanistan with intent to deploy it from behind their microsuede sectional

Honestly I have to disagree. A true 1x is close to being as fast as a rds. I think of it like night sights vs fiber optic on a pistol. While one has a small edge, the difference most likely doesnt matter in reality.

[Unobtanium]

Honestly I have to disagree. A true 1x is close to being as fast as a rds. I think of it like night sights vs fiber optic on a pistol. While one has a small edge, the difference most likely doesnt matter in reality.

It's quick but I just hated the blurry image and being trapped in an eyebox. So I dumped the 1-6 I had and went t2/g33. No more blurry image and the glass is near night force quality.

[rob_s]

Reading back through the posts, I see another divergence. There are some that are thinking of what they *might* do with an AR-pattern rifle, and some who are thinking of what they *could* or *would* actually do with the carbine. In the former group I would put those that have opted for larger calibers or longer barrels to satisfy a perceived "need" for better ballistics or longer range (perhaps without having ever actually taken advantage of same), and in the latter group I would put those that favor training or competition in caliber or accessory choices.

My thinking, when I started this thread, was that it would be possible to do both. Caveat here that I *wouldn’t" hunt game (hogs aren't game here) with an AR to begin with, nor would I use a centerfire rifle bullet if I wanted true, movie quiet, suppression. The "do-all", therefore, fits a narrower spectrum. But, I think, that spectrum is expanding. The range of activities that the AR was originally good for, or even good for ten years ago, has grown due to the factors I originally listed.

[rob_s]

Honestly I have to disagree. A true 1x is close to being as fast as a rds. I think of it like night sights vs fiber optic on a pistol. While one has a small edge, the difference most likely doesnt matter in reality.

Maybe, but everyone has a bierarchy of needs that is going to differ from everyone else, at least slightly.

If someone's primary purpose for owning an AR is defense inside their home and on their suburban residential property, then the RDS is still king. Even "almost as fast", isn't. Further, the benefits of the 1.x-Y would only be worth the added weight, cost, and slower speed if there were longer-range engagements planned. Regardless of whether those engagements were humans, cardboard, steel, or animals. Conversely, people that are planning longer-range use of the carbine would find the trade-off wholly worthwhile for a perceived non-event inside the home.

The AR is interesting. You generally have people coming to it from two different directions. There are those that come to it from shooting "real" rifles (often from hunting or precision competition), who are then predisposed to that line of thinking, and others who come to it from shooting pistols (often defensively or competitively) who are then predisposed to think in those terms.

[shane45]

Unobtanium, the topic isn't whats best for your living room. It's is a "Do all" carbine possible. So the "mission driving the gear" is a carbine good in many scenarios not the one only good at the short end. Also, I agree with breakingtime91. The differences on my times between a red dot and an optic that can pull red dot duty were insignificant. In addition, in my opinion if the distance is that close and fast, I feel confident I could role off the sights altogether and shotgun it.

With that being said, I have run into a few oddities with my SR8C specifically worthy of consideration. First, light transmission is affected earlier in this optic than others I have owned.(Gets dark quicker in low light) As I understand it, its do to a coating designed to insure illumination from the beam splitter making the red dot does not project out the front. The other is the wandering zero magnification. Unity is dependent on the distance of the target. If unity is important, you may need to dial up to about 1.5 to get it depending on the target distance. I have found optics are always full of compromises. Im willing to accept these compromises to have 8X at the top (for now at least :) )

[shane45]

Rob, I think I agree with you. But I think that the discussion makes more sense if it is not individualized. If my area is my 150X150 yard, property lines never to be breached, Id agree with a red dot/AR. But I think that is a single individuals GP carbine, which from a more general perspective, isn't.

[breakingtime91]

I am really digging this thread. Look forward to even more posts!

[JodyH]

So far I've used my 16" MR762 for 3 gun and pig hunting. It's also my first choice for a backcountry and outside the house rifle (inside the house I'm still a shotgun fan). That's with the 1-4x or the ACOG 3x mounted. Pretty much a "do it all".
With a 1 minute optic swap out and bipod addition I'm good out to 1000 yards.

[GJM]

Not sure if covered already in this thread, but I have been told that a 5.56 mid-length gas system is optimal in a 16 inch barrel and a carbine gas system in 14.5 inches. This correct?

[Chuck Haggard]

GP ammo for a GP gun;

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?16298-223-gel-test-Federal-62-gr-Fusion

[Unobtanium]

Not sure if covered already in this thread, but I have been told that a 5.56 mid-length gas system is optimal in a 16 inch barrel and a carbine gas system in 14.5 inches. This correct?

I don't really think so. I think that midlength works better in either. Witness the SR-16, for one example of how it works just fine in the proven application of a 14.5" gun.

[Chuck Haggard]

Pat Rogers, who knows a thing or two about carbines, has his EAG BCM gun built with a 14.5 barrel and a mid-length gas system. Those are very nice guns to shoot, and they run. I will say that they seem to dislike lower impulse/pressure ammo and prefer 5.56 stuff.

[Unobtanium]

Pat Rogers, who knows a thing or two about carbines, has his EAG BCM gun built with a 14.5 barrel and a mid-length gas system. Those are very nice guns to shoot, and they run. I will say that they seem to dislike lower impulse/pressure ammo and prefer 5.56 stuff.

I would think throwing a carbine buffer in one might allow junk ammo to run robustly?

[Chuck Haggard]

I would think throwing a carbine buffer in one might allow junk ammo to run robustly?

Sometimes it do

[SLG]

I hate mid length systems on 14.5 or 16" guns. Carbine system is the single most proven one out there.

[Unobtanium]

I hate mid length systems on 14.5 or 16" guns. Carbine system is the single most proven one out there.
Why do you hate it? You justified the carbine system, but what's the validation for dislike of the middy?

[SecondsCount]

I think preference plays plays a huge role. I know a SME who loved the eotech and g33. Until just recently he was active duty USSOCOM. Anything he wanted he could have.

No doubt. A friend, who is former Marine Force Recon, has a 1-4x Vortex PST on his carbine. That is why Aimpoint, L3, Leupold, and Nightforce are still in business.

[SecondsCount]

I hate mid length systems on 14.5 or 16" guns. Carbine system is the single most proven one out there.

Go ahead and try prying my middy's from my hands ;)

[Colt191145lover]

I hate mid length systems on 14.5 or 16" guns. Carbine system is the single most proven one out there.

Id love to hear your thoughts on this.

[Jay Cunningham]

I would think throwing a carbine buffer in one might allow junk ammo to run robustly?

It's what I would do if forced to use a 14.5" mid-length. But it's a band-aid.

In my experience, the 14.5 middys run close to edge of reliability. Chuck mentioned that they dislike low pressure ammo... indeed. Of course there are plenty of examples which run great, but the common issue with these configurations tends to be short-stroking. A carbine buffer can help with that, but that gets into its own set of issues like increased chance of bolt bounce and quicker extraction.

[Byron]

I hate mid length systems on 14.5 or 16" guns. Carbine system is the single most proven one out there.
In terms of units tested in the field, the carbine system certainly has no rival, but it's not as if there's anything radical or alien about mid-length gas. Before it existed there was rifle, carbine, and pistol (if not more that I don't even know about). There was a mountain of data on the first two, certainly less on the last... but interpolating from there wasn't rocket science.

I feel like mid-length became very popular in an extremely short time period, then subsequently suffered backlash from people who felt it wasn't well enough proven. I can't argue against that in a military context, but the theory of mid-length was easy to work out on paper and from there plenty of people have found that they work out in real life just like the math said they would. If they haven't met someone's personal threshold for field trials that's one thing, but I've yet to see any evidence that they screwed the pooch in any way.

I just feel like if you have mountains of data on SizeA widget and SizeC widget, it's really not difficult to run the math on SizeB widget. Of course that doesn't mean that SizeB automatically gets a pass. If the real world implementation differs from theory, absolutely go back to the drawing board and figure out where things went wrong. But if SizeB works out as an "in-between" to SizeA and SizeC just like the math said it would, I personally don't feel like it needs as much real-world fielding to be deemed as a "proven" system.

Also, it's not as if carbine gas had been running great for everyone before middy came along. There's a reason the market was full of H, H2, H3, H-elenty buffers... extractor inserts... and various other doodads.

If middy doesn't float your boat that's one thing, but what is there to hate?

[Chuck Haggard]

I had a long conversation with Mike Pannone one time ref this, he certainly has the knowledge and the time with the system, is able to quote things like port pressure on the various systems when using different ammo types, etc. He noted that M4 reliability and M16 reliability were very different things, with the rifle gas systems being far more reliable than the carbines.
IMHO the 14.5 and 16" guns are likely too long in the barrel for a gun with a carbine gas system, just from observation. That said, mine have all been very reliable guns over the decades.

[breakingtime91]

I think mid-lengths are reaching the point, especially bcm, where enough people are running them that if there were wide spread issues, you would hear about it. Also, a lot of professional shooters are using midlengths to relatively high round counts and not many are complaining about it. With that said, I would be excited to hear a counter argument.

[ReverendMeat]

I hate mid length systems on 14.5 or 16" guns. Carbine system is the single most proven one out there.

I bet if I asked you your thoughts on rifle length systems on 14.5 guns (Salient) you'd probably have a few choice words

[drummer]

This has been an interesting thread with some excellent comments. It is interesting to see that most folks posting consider an AR of some sort as their GP rifle. In times past it probably would have been a .30-30, .270 or even .44-40 until the proliferation and popularity of the AR.

I have to ask, if ammo cost was no object, would people still choose .223/5.56mm? Taking the launching platform out of the equation, is .223 more versatile than .308, .30-06, 6.8, etc? I could argue pretty well that .30-30 is more versatile than .223, other than distance, obviously. Then you get into the .300 BO argument.

Modern AR .308s have gotten more reliable and lighter the last few years so ammo cost is the biggest deterrent. I feel that .308 is more versatile than .223 for a civilian for those of us who hunt. With the .223s lack of ability for large game, you have to add an additional rifle in a larger caliber. For those that include high round count training into the GP role, I can see why there's a slant to the AR. .223 is relatively cheap and can be shot all day. That doesn't mean it's more versatile.

[Sigfan26]

This has been an interesting thread with some excellent comments. It is interesting to see that most folks posting consider an AR of some sort as their GP rifle. In times past it probably would have been a .30-30, .270 or even .44-40 until the proliferation and popularity of the AR.

I have to ask, if ammo cost was no object, would people still choose .223/5.56mm? Taking the launching platform out of the equation, is .223 more versatile than .308, .30-06, 6.8, etc? I could argue pretty well that .30-30 is more versatile than .223, other than distance, obviously. Then you get into the .300 BO argument.

Modern AR .308s have gotten more reliable and lighter the last few years so ammo cost is the biggest deterrent. I feel that .308 is more versatile than .223 for a civilian for those of us who hunt. With the .223s lack of ability for large game, you have to add an additional rifle in a larger caliber. For those that include high round count training into the GP role, I can see why there's a slant to the AR. .223 is relatively cheap and can be shot all day. That doesn't mean it's more versatile.

If cost was no issue, id probably have a couple LWRC Six8 carbines, a Six8 UCIW, 60 PRI mags, and a pallet of ammo (ammo AVAILABILITY is a major factor)... But, I can't, and ammunition is still not common on retail shelves. Until it is, my general purpose is a Colt 6720 with Aimpoint Micro and Inforce WML (although, my MidLength S&W has run great, and I wouldn't hesitate to grab it. The colt is noticeably lighter, though)

[GJM]

For a well lubricated, high quality (Colt, BCM, Noveske or equivalent) AR, shot semi-auto, with 14.5 and 16 inch barrel lengths, is the difference between carbine and mid length gas systems significant or more a theoretical consideration?

[breakingtime91]

For a well lubricated, high quality (Colt, BCM, Noveske or equivalent) AR, shot semi-auto, with 14.5 and 16 inch barrel lengths, is the difference between carbine and mid length gas systems significant or more a theoretical consideration?

my friends bcm mid-length shot noticeably smoother than my 6720, nothing scientific but I noticed enough of a difference in my performance to switch. both had A2 flash hiders on them as well.. I don't think you could go wrong with either.

[SLG]

I know better, but I still write a if we're all in a room having a discussion. I need to try harder not to do that.

I don't actually hate mid length systems, I just think they are way over rated. I have a couple of them, fwiw. Given that my barrel of choice is a 14.5", the carbine length gas system is the most tested and proven option out there. Maybe its not ideal, theoretically. I don't care much for theory when reality proves otherwise. Some argue that the middies have less recoil. Ok, but we're talking about a .22. I can't tell the difference between them, as none of them have any recoil to speak of. If you like middies, have at it. I like proven systems, and more provener is more betterer for me. YMMV.

[breakingtime91]

I know better, but I still write a if we're all in a room having a discussion. I need to try harder not to do that.

I don't actually hate mid length systems, I just think they are way over rated. I have a couple of them, fwiw. Given that my barrel of choice is a 14.5", the carbine length gas system is the most tested and proven option out there. Maybe its not ideal, theoretically. I don't care much for theory when reality proves otherwise. Some argue that the middies have less recoil. Ok, but we're talking about a .22. I can't tell the difference between them, as none of them have any recoil to speak of. If you like middies, have at it. I like proven systems, and more provener is more betterer for me. YMMV.

the "limited" rail space doesn't effect your grip on a carbine?

[SLG]

the "limited" rail space doesn't effect your grip on a carbine?

Who said anything about limited rail space? More space is more better.

[breakingtime91]

Who said anything about limited rail space? More space is more better.

:eek: I'm guessing you found a work around. Sorry, that was a newb question lol

[SLG]

:eek: I'm guessing you found a work around. Sorry, that was a newb question lol

Now I'm lost. I thought we were talking about carbine length gas systems, not carbine length handguards. There are tons of longer than 7" handguards out there that are designed to go over 7" gas systems. Are you thinking that a carbine length gas system has to have an A frame and a 7" handguard?

[breakingtime91]

Now I'm lost. I thought we were talking about carbine length gas systems, not carbine length handguards. There are tons of longer than 7" handguards out there that are designed to go over 7" gas systems. Are you thinking that a carbine length gas system has to have an A frame and a 7" handguard?

yes, the second largest argument I hear for midlength systems are the fact that most come with longer hand guards than your standard carbine, which wears the 7 inch rail. Obviously this is a bad argument since you can put whatever rail you want on the gun if you ditch the A frame.

[Colt191145lover]

I know better, but I still write a if we're all in a room having a discussion. I need to try harder not to do that.

I don't actually hate mid length systems, I just think they are way over rated. I have a couple of them, fwiw. Given that my barrel of choice is a 14.5", the carbine length gas system is the most tested and proven option out there. Maybe its not ideal, theoretically. I don't care much for theory when reality proves otherwise. Some argue that the middies have less recoil. Ok, but we're talking about a .22. I can't tell the difference between them, as none of them have any recoil to speak of. If you like middies, have at it. I like proven systems, and more provener is more betterer for me. YMMV.

Thanks for taking the time to explain more on your preferences on middy vs carbine gas system.

[breakingcontact]

You 556 folks checked out 18" barrels?

For 300 Blk the gas length is pistol, 8"-16" barrel

[Unobtanium]

To me a 14.5 middy just feels smoother and they are closer to Stoner's original port and unlocking pressures. Arguably it is less stress on the bolt. Arguably.

[peterb]

This has been an interesting thread with some excellent comments. It is interesting to see that most folks posting consider an AR of some sort as their GP rifle. In times past it probably would have been a .30-30, .270 or even .44-40 until the proliferation and popularity of the AR.

I have to ask, if ammo cost was no object, would people still choose .223/5.56mm? Taking the launching platform out of the equation, is .223 more versatile than .308, .30-06, 6.8, etc? I could argue pretty well that .30-30 is more versatile than .223, other than distance, obviously. Then you get into the .300 BO argument.

Modern AR .308s have gotten more reliable and lighter the last few years so ammo cost is the biggest deterrent. I feel that .308 is more versatile than .223 for a civilian for those of us who hunt. With the .223s lack of ability for large game, you have to add an additional rifle in a larger caliber. For those that include high round count training into the GP role, I can see why there's a slant to the AR. .223 is relatively cheap and can be shot all day. That doesn't mean it's more versatile.

The "do it all rifle" question has been a staple of the hook & bullet magazines for decades. In that context "do it all" was understood to mean something suitable for hunting all North American game. It's interesting to see the different priorities in this discussion.

[Unobtanium]

The "do it all rifle" question has been a staple of the hook & bullet magazines for decades. In that context "do it all" was understood to mean something suitable for hunting all North American game. It's interesting to see the different priorities in this discussion.

Well, this isn't really an outdoors/hunting forum. Mission driving the gear train.

[rob_s]

I know better, but I still write a if we're all in a room having a discussion. I need to try harder not to do that.

I don't actually hate mid length systems, I just think they are way over rated. I have a couple of them, fwiw. Given that my barrel of choice is a 14.5", the carbine length gas system is the most tested and proven option out there. Maybe its not ideal, theoretically. I don't care much for theory when reality proves otherwise. Some argue that the middies have less recoil. Ok, but we're talking about a .22. I can't tell the difference between them, as none of them have any recoil to speak of. If you like middies, have at it. I like proven systems, and more provener is more betterer for me. YMMV.

I'm actually not fully sold on mid-length being the cure for cancer either.

But, the market clearly *thinks* that it is and will come up with all sorts of me-too reasons to support that choice.

[Unobtanium]

I'm actually not fully sold on mid-length being the cure for cancer either.

But, the market clearly *thinks* that it is and will come up with all sorts of me-too reasons to support that choice.

But...is there something WRONG with it? I personally like that the gas-port is in a lower pressure region of the barrel, and that the recoil impulse is a bit tamer. Is there a downside?

[LittleLebowski]

This has been an interesting thread with some excellent comments. It is interesting to see that most folks posting consider an AR of some sort as their GP rifle. In times past it probably would have been a .30-30, .270 or even .44-40 until the proliferation and popularity of the AR.

I have to ask, if ammo cost was no object, would people still choose .223/5.56mm? Taking the launching platform out of the equation, is .223 more versatile than .308, .30-06, 6.8, etc? I could argue pretty well that .30-30 is more versatile than .223, other than distance, obviously. Then you get into the .300 BO argument.

Modern AR .308s have gotten more reliable and lighter the last few years so ammo cost is the biggest deterrent. I feel that .308 is more versatile than .223 for a civilian for those of us who hunt. With the .223s lack of ability for large game, you have to add an additional rifle in a larger caliber. For those that include high round count training into the GP role, I can see why there's a slant to the AR. .223 is relatively cheap and can be shot all day. That doesn't mean it's more versatile.

The 6.5 Grendel (http://www.alexanderarms.com/products/65-grendel) fits into an AR15 lower and can do nearly anything a .308 can.

[texag]

You 556 folks checked out 18" barrels?

For 300 Blk the gas length is pistol, 8"-16" barrel

Yep, that's what I have now. BCM 18" barrel turned down to .675" behind the gas block, 15" trx alpha, 1-4 MTAC

I started with a 14.5" mid with a pinned battlecomp and an aimpoint. Great carbine, super light and handy and hitting an 8" steel plate from prone was automatic at 300 yds, even with the aimpoint. The issue was the POS battlecomp cause the muzzle to dip with every shot. I think this upper with a stronger handguard and a low power variable would be ideal for home defense, hog/coyote/deer hunting casually, and zombie fantasies.

http://i785.photobucket.com/albums/yy138/TexAg10/Firearms/IMAG0240.jpg

I briefly owned a 16" with a mid centurion LW CHF barrel that I freaking loved. It would shoot better than I could with match ammo and was still pretty light and handy. Pissed I sold this one. I really liked the 1.5-5 mk4. The previous owner had some custom turret caps made for 55gr and 77gr out of a 16" barrel that worked well.

http://i785.photobucket.com/albums/yy138/TexAg10/Firearms/IMAG0239.jpg

I don't think any of the three are bad for what I want, but the 16" strikes the best balance, IMO. The current 18" is so soft shooting and I like that it's done well for me on the one hunting trip I've actually been able to go on, so I'll deal with it being a bit unwieldy hunting from vehicles and indoors in order to save money and keep the wife happy. I got caught up in looking at what the cool kids used (3 gunners) and lost sight of the very minute difference between an 18" and a 16" barrel for 5.56. The most important thing I want to upgrade is the optic. The MTAC is more of a placeholder until I decide between a NF 1-4 and one of the bushnell 1-6.5 models.

[rob_s]

But...is there something WRONG with it? I personally like that the gas-port is in a lower pressure region of the barrel, and that the recoil impulse is a bit tamer. Is there a downside?

Ironically, as the hysteria around it grows, and the resultant upswing in popularity, the primary argument against it (parts availability) has decreased.

However, in the internut's quest to reduce the gas to the trickle most seem to think is required, there are certainly down sides like ammo sensitivity and increased malfunctions due to fouling.

[shane45]

So where does the SR15 E3 fit in? It is the smoothest shooting AR I have owned. It has a gas system longer than mid and shorter than rifle. It has proven a fantastic rifle!

[Kyle Reese]

So where does the SR15 E3 fit in? It is the smoothest shooting AR I have owned. It has a gas system longer than mid and shorter than rifle. It has proven a fantastic rifle!

It falls into the "pure awesome" category.
[emoji3]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[YVK]

Ironically, as the hysteria around it grows, and the resultant upswing in popularity, the primary argument against it (parts availability) has decreased.

However, in the internut's quest to reduce the gas to the trickle most seem to think is required, there are certainly down sides like ammo sensitivity and increased malfunctions due to fouling.

My current do it all setup has a Noveske intermediate gas length 16" barrel (1 inch longer than midlength) and an adjustable gas block. I can give as much or as little gas that I want to, setting it up for performance, or for reliability, for any buffer from JP to A5, low mass bolt carrier or normal bolt carrier, suppressed or not. Between that, Noveske keymod rail and 1-6 variable, that's my idea of do-it-all. I posted about that rifle about a year ago.

[Unobtanium]

Ironically, as the hysteria around it grows, and the resultant upswing in popularity, the primary argument against it (parts availability) has decreased.

However, in the internut's quest to reduce the gas to the trickle most seem to think is required, there are certainly down sides like ammo sensitivity and increased malfunctions due to fouling.

Parts availability? You mean spare gas tubes? Was that really the #1 complaint!?

Midlength is not about reducing gas flow. Its about decreasing unlocking pressures by increasing the unlocking delay. The end goal being less wear and tear. More like a rifle and less like a carbine.

[Chuck Whitlock]

I just feel like if you have mountains of data on SizeA widget and SizeC widget, it's really not difficult to run the math on SizeB widget. Of course that doesn't mean that SizeB automatically gets a pass. If the real world implementation differs from theory, absolutely go back to the drawing board and figure out where things went wrong. But if SizeB works out as an "in-between" to SizeA and SizeC just like the math said it would, I personally don't feel like it needs as much real-world fielding to be deemed as a "proven" system.




But...is there something WRONG with it? I personally like that the gas-port is in a lower pressure region of the barrel, and that the recoil impulse is a bit tamer. Is there a downside?

I recall Greg "Sully" Sullivan saying, and bear in mind this was some years ago, that the thing about midlength was not that the concept was flawed, but that there is no industry standard for it. So if you were to source parts from vendors B, C, and D for your midlength from manufcturer A, they might or might not fit. One can say to just go with a top tier manufacturer...ok, but the gold standard AR for years has been the 6920. What's going on with Colt right now? Carbine and rifle length gas systems are industry standard. That wouldn't stop me from buying a middy, but it's food for thought.

[Unobtanium]

I recall Greg "Sully" Sullivan saying, and bear in mind this was some years ago, that the thing about midlength was not that the concept was flawed, but that there is no industry standard for it. So if you were to source parts from vendors B, C, and D for your midlength from manufcturer A, they might or might not fit. One can say to just go with a top tier manufacturer...ok, but the gold standard AR for years has been the 6920. What's going on with Colt right now? Carbine and rifle length gas systems are industry standard. That wouldn't stop me from buying a middy, but it's food for thought.

I understand. This is why I buy complete rifles. Or at least, complete uppers. See, bore diameter, bore finish, gas-port shape, gas-port dimension, gas-system length, ALL of it plays into how things work. For example, if you have a polygonal rifled barrel, you are going to be using a smaller gas-port than if you had a cut-rifled/CHF barrel. Hence why people who get wrapped around JUST gas-port dimensions tend to miss the boat sometimes. Like it or not, a rifle IS a system.

[rob_s]

Parts availability? You mean spare gas tubes? Was that really the #1 complaint!?

Midlength is not about reducing gas flow. Its about decreasing unlocking pressures by increasing the unlocking delay. The end goal being less wear and tear. More like a rifle and less like a carbine.

It's not so much a compliant as it is a caution, or precaution.

Lemmings have been running off the longer/softer/smaller cliff for quite a few years now, parroting whatever after-the-fact justification they read online to make themselves feel better.
The fact is that, on the topic of do-all carbines, while certain things have improved, there is still little that a 6920, free-float handguard, and an Aimpoint can't accomplish.

Frankly, the fact that this thread has gone down so many rabbit holes of minutiae and SHTFantasy, tells me that my original postulation is true, which is that somewhere there can be a do-all AR for jus put about everyone. The factors I hadn't included in my original list appear to be variability in gas systems, and wider availability of calibers besides the .223/5.56 staple.

[rob_s]

I understand. This is why I buy complete rifles. Or at least, complete uppers. See, bore diameter, bore finish, gas-port shape, gas-port dimension, gas-system length, ALL of it plays into how things work. For example, if you have a polygonal rifled barrel, you are going to be using a smaller gas-port than if you had a cut-rifled/CHF barrel. Hence why people who get wrapped around JUST gas-port dimensions tend to miss the boat sometimes. Like it or not, a rifle IS a system.

Buying a complete anything is no guarantee that any of that is actually designed to work together. Who you buy it from is just as important,many is still no guarantee.

[breakingtime91]

Buying a complete anything is no guarantee that any of that is actually designed to work together. Who you buy it from is just as important,many is still no guarantee.

So your saying because a 6920 has been around longer a bcm mid length is a gamble in comparison?

[Unobtanium]

Buying a complete anything is no guarantee that any of that is actually designed to work together. Who you buy it from is just as important,many is still no guarantee.

This is why I stick with Jim Hodge, Daniel Defense, and recommend BCM to those who like BCM.

[breakingcontact]

People like to hate on Colt but the 6920 is a standard.

[Unobtanium]

People like to hate on Colt but the 6920 is a standard.

Who "hates on" Colt? Who are these "haters"? What they they "hate on" about Colt? The rap culture is damn annoying.

Colt is a great base-line/standard. It's like a Chevy 350. You know it's going to work if it's built/assembled correctly. However, there are other options which also work great, and bring other things to the table, too. Not hate,just facts.

[HCM]

This is why I stick with Jim Hodge, Daniel Defense, and recommend BCM to those who like BCM.

Do you have, or have you put rounds through a Hodge defense AR? I would love to see a good review of one being thoroughly run out

The GEN 1 Hodges I've seen and handled are nice, I see them as equivent to a Daniel Defense, unfortunately they are priced like a KAC and I just don't see the value to justify that price.

[breakingcontact]

Who "hates on" Colt? Who are these "haters"? What they they "hate on" about Colt? The rap culture is damn annoying.

Colt is a great base-line/standard. It's like a Chevy 350. You know it's going to work if it's built/assembled correctly. However, there are other options which also work great, and bring other things to the table, too. Not hate,just facts.

Ha! Stop throwing shade!

Should we speak old english? Language changes.

Ive owned a Colt 6920.

Some will say, somewhat accurately, that Colt stopped innovating due to having fat Mil/LE contracts.

Colt dissenters (haters) will tell you, you are overpaying for the brand.

I agree more with the former point than the latter.

[breakingtime91]

Ha! Stop throwing shade!

Should we speak old english? Language changes.

Ive owned a Colt 6920.

Some will say, somewhat accurately, that Colt stopped innovating due to having fat Mil/LE contracts.

Colt dissenters (haters) will tell you, you are overpaying for the brand.

I agree more with the former point than the latter.

Same. My colt s been stellar

[breakingcontact]

It's kind of the equivalent of some USPSA guy using a race gun that barely runs it has been so modified vs a stock Glock.

[breakingtime91]

It's kind of the equivalent of some USPSA guy using a race gun that barely runs it has been so modified vs a stock Glock.

I think a sixteen inch mid length is very good option for a general purpose rifle

[breakingcontact]

Mid length gas? I don't get that.

[Unobtanium]

Do you have, or have you put rounds through a Hodge defense AR? I would love to see a good review of one being thoroughly run out

The GEN 1 Hodges I've seen and handled are nice, I see them as equivent to a Daniel Defense, unfortunately they are priced like a KAC and I just don't see the value to justify that price.

I've handled them.

The MOD 1 is basically a Daniel Defense barrel with a Geissle hand-guard and a few tweaks proprietary to Jim Hodge, as the uppers and lowers are made specifically and exclusively for him. They are assembled with attention to detail that you will find in some DD guns, but not all (I own a few DD's that run the spectrum from "looks hand built by one person who's got passion" to "I wish they had just sent me the box of parts so I could do it.".) They are excellent guns with a street-price a few hundred more than Daniel Defense (when DD is not on sale, but just typical "street" price). I feel that they are worth it, given my experiences with DD's QA/QC and fit/finish. I'd pay the few hundred more for the HDSI attention to detail and the Geissele rail. Soon they will be phasing over to having Hodge Defense spec'ed Wedge Locks on them. That rail is amazing. I handled the prototype only so far, but WOW!

The MOD 2 is another animal all together, and is going to be very impressive when it does hit the open market. I am holding out for a MOD 2, and yes, when I get it, I will post a full review of it, of course. Most of the cool stuff about MOD 2 is already on the internet, but some things are yet to come. It's going to be good. It's going to be priced about like Noveske, but I feel, with far more technology and functional/usable return.

[breakingtime91]

Mid length gas? I don't get that.

I know better but what don't you get

[Unobtanium]

Ha! Stop throwing shade!

Should we speak old english? Language changes.

Ive owned a Colt 6920.

Some will say, somewhat accurately, that Colt stopped innovating due to having fat Mil/LE contracts.

Colt dissenters (haters) will tell you, you are overpaying for the brand.

I agree more with the former point than the latter.

Colt is stagnant and puts money into R&D when necessary, but some of their stuff is pure gold...like the gold extractor spring, no pun in tended.

That said, they are a "safe bet" as much as anything, and I strongly disagree with "overpaying" when you can grab a 6920 with MOE furniture and BUIS for what, $8-900?

[HCM]

I've handled them.

The MOD 1 is basically a Daniel Defense barrel with a Geissle hand-guard and a few tweaks proprietary to Jim Hodge, as the uppers and lowers are made specifically and exclusively for him. They are assembled with attention to detail that you will find in some DD guns, but not all (I own a few DD's that run the spectrum from "looks hand built by one person who's got passion" to "I wish they had just sent me the box of parts so I could do it.".) They are excellent guns with a street-price a few hundred more than Daniel Defense (when DD is not on sale, but just typical "street" price). I feel that they are worth it, given my experiences with DD's QA/QC and fit/finish. I'd pay the few hundred more for the HDSI attention to detail and the Geissele rail. Soon they will be phasing over to having Hodge Defense spec'ed Wedge Locks on them. That rail is amazing. I handled the prototype only so far, but WOW!

The MOD 2 is another animal all together, and is going to be very impressive when it does hit the open market. I am holding out for a MOD 2, and yes, when I get it, I will post a full review of it, of course. Most of the cool stuff about MOD 2 is already on the internet, but some things are yet to come. It's going to be good. It's going to be priced about like Noveske, but I feel, with far more technology and functional/usable return.

Thanks, Hodge is local to us but the only dealer who carries them is asking over $2K ($2300) for Gen 1 guns and about $1900 for a used one. DDs generally sell $1300-1600 around here. I'd be tempted at 1500 but not at 2300.

[breakingcontact]

Colt is stagnant and puts money into R&D when necessary, but some of their stuff is pure gold...like the gold extractor spring, no pun in tended.

That said, they are a "safe bet" as much as anything, and I strongly disagree with "overpaying" when you can grab a 6920 with MOE furniture and BUIS for what, $8-900?
The overpriced argument has lost legitimacy since the price has dropped.

[Unobtanium]

Thanks, Hodge is local to us but the only dealer who carries them is asking over $2K ($2300) for Gen 1 guns and about $1900 for a used one. DDs generally sell $1300-1600 around here. I'd be tempted at 1500 but not at 2300.

Here you go, brother, $1950 for a new one. I recall a comparably spec'ed DD being about $1600 "normal street price".
http://www.elementarms.com/Hodge-Defense-Systems-MOD-1-AR-15-5.56-16.html

*I am unaffiliated with Element Arms.

I also forgot to mention. All bar-stock controls on Hodge guns. No MIM/caste. Does this matter? I know people who have broken multiple bolt catches. Maybe it matters...maybe not. Your call, but it is a legitimate upgrade that does carry a cost to perform.

[drummer]

The 6.5 Grendel (http://www.alexanderarms.com/products/65-grendel) fits into an AR15 lower and can do nearly anything a .308 can.

Yeah, I like the Grendel but haven't made the jump because I refuse to buy or build a rifle when the only available magazines are from C Products.

I considered the 6.8 due to theoretically having a better cartridge design for use in autoloaders when the LWRC lower with the 6.8 Pmags came out but how long will 6.8 be available commercially?

For me, .308 makes the most sense.

[Unobtanium]

I just don't understand what all of these "intermediate" offerings give the user. I jumped on the 300BLK band-wagon pretty hard. But later asked...why? If you can't kill it with a 5.56, step up to the .308. KAC, LMT, FN, they all make robust .308 chambered rifles. My 5.56 will kill anything where I live (Arkansas), and is fine for me. If you live in brown bear or elk country, I understand that 5.56 may not be your thing. A .308 with 180gr TSX will drop anything in north America, though.

[breakingcontact]

I just don't understand what all of these "intermediate" offerings give the user. I jumped on the 300BLK band-wagon pretty hard. But later asked...why? If you can't kill it with a 5.56, step up to the .308. KAC, LMT, FN, they all make robust .308 chambered rifles. My 5.56 will kill anything where I live (Arkansas), and is fine for me. If you live in brown bear or elk country, I understand that 5.56 may not be your thing. A .308 with 180gr TSX will drop anything in north America, though.
I thought we went over this?

300 Blackout tolerates a short barrel and does very well suppressed.

[Unobtanium]

I thought we went over this?

300 Blackout tolerates a short barrel and does very well suppressed.

I have found short barrels to have no purpose, really? Anything I can do with a 10.3, I can do with a 14.5. The 300BLK cannot flatten its trajectory from ANY barrel really. I prefer 5.56 for its similar terminal ballistics, and its much longer point-blank envelope.

[breakingcontact]

I have found short barrels to have no purpose, really? Anything I can do with a 10.3, I can do with a 14.5. The 300BLK cannot flatten its trajectory from ANY barrel really. I prefer 5.56 for its similar terminal ballistics, and its much longer point-blank envelope.
How far do you want to take this argument? I mean we could probably all make due with an 30 30

Do you use suppressors?

[Unobtanium]

How far do you want to take this argument? I mean we could probably all make due with an 30 30

Do you use suppressors?
Yes, almost exclusively, except for some high volume classes.

Give me a .30-30 that I can buy ammo for at $200/1000 that has massive industry support that fits in an M4 that offers no more recoil than a 5.56 and allows me to "point and click" on a 5" target out to well past 200 yards, and I'll bite.

[breakingtime91]

ok, can you guys shift this to pm. Taking away from the general purpose thing.. (sorry staff).


Is a bi pod needed for a general purpose rifle or will a slick or foregrip get the job done?

[Failure2Stop]

I did a significant amount of work inside structures with 20 and 18 inch barrels. I vastly prefer a 14.5 for that kind of work. A 10.3-11.5 with a suppressor is very close to the 14.5 in maneuverability.
That barrel length, with intelligently selected ammunition is highly effective out to 200 meters (the optimal engagement envelope for 5.56), and with some knowledge and experience can reach out to 600.
1x optics are better than irons, and irons can be effective, but a 1-4 with a good reticle and footprint is preferable. The NF NXS probably best fits, and I am a Leupy guy generally.
That combination most efficiently meets my 5.56 needs.
Yup, it's NFA, and the glass is expensive, but it will take a dude with a lot of skill and a lot of gun to consistently out-perform me.

From Tapatalk:
Jack Leuba
Knight's Armament Company: Military/Govt Product Liaison
F2S Consulting: Director of Shooting Stuff

[breakingtime91]

I did a significant amount of work inside structures with 20 and 18 inch barrels. I vastly prefer a 14.5 for that kind of work. A 10.3-11.5 with a suppressor is very close to the 14.5 in maneuverability.
That barrel length, with intelligently selected ammunition is highly effective out to 200 meters (the optimal engagement envelope for 5.56), and with some knowledge and experience can reach out to 600.
1x optics are better than irons, and irons can be effective, but a 1-4 with a good reticle and footprint is preferable. The NF NXS probably best fits, and I am a Leupy guy generally.
That combination most efficiently meets my 5.56 needs.
Yup, it's NFA, but it will take a dude with a lot of skill and a lot of gun to consistently out-perform me.

From Tapatalk:
Jack Leuba
Knight's Armament Company: Military/Govt Product Liaison
F2S Consulting: Director of Shooting Stuff

don't doubt it! Whats your preference for optics Jack?