why so many carbine length on the market?

[Barms 98]

A while back i asked about what your preferred gas length system was. (majority said mid length).

 

So as i begin my trek into AR world i find that the overwhelming majority of complete rifles offered by manufacturers (or what's on websites of FFL's) are carbine systems.

 

If midlength is "better" why aren't more offered complete by manufacturer's? Is it a cost issue? (are carbines less expensive?). Or is it because on this board guys drive Cadillacs (mid length) but the rest of the world drives Camry's (carbines) ?

 

and i was apprehensive to write "midlength is better". Don't want to have thread drift to debate on lengths. I just wanted to say that i think most guys that are really into ARs have midlength. So please just give you thougths on why there is more Carbine selection vs midlength instead of discussing pros/cons.

 

thanks..

[Dan 177]

IMO, its all marketing. There is a high demand for "m4geries", AR's that look like the military M4 carbine, which is a carbine length gas system. People want what they see in the media, so when they see a middy, it doesn't look the same as the one they saw in COD, xyz movie, or the military channel. The carbine gas system also makes the rifle look smaller when it really isn't. An optical delusion.

[hiker88 22]

It could be that the US military uses the M4 carbine.

[MarkWVU02 47]

I think the advantages of midlength are longer sight radius, more handguard room, and supposedly softer shooting which some say equals less wear and tear on parts. That being said I own a midlength and my buddy owns a carbine and I don't really see much of a difference between the two. Many like midlength because it "looks" better as well. My one friend has a carbine with low profile gas block and a midlength handguard which covers the gas block and essentially gives you that same sight radius. I bought the midlength because I heard all the hype, read the article on BCM's midlength that had over 40,000 rounds through the pipe, and didn't mind waiting for BCM to get more in. That being said if I went to buy another AR I'd have no problem buying a carbine although I'd probably just wait around for a midlength.

[MarkWVU02 47]

Yeah, I gave you pros and cons sorry. Like the others have said its what the military uses and I think many want their gun to look as authentic as possible. The carbine also has that notch in the barrel for the grenade launcher which makes it look more like a military M4

[checko 180]

It could be that the US military uses the M4 carbine.

 

There you go.

[Vlad G 345]

Also mid-length is a lot newer, a lot of people don't even know its an option. I suppose it isn't THAT new, but it has become more popular in the last few years, where the the carbine system has been around for ever.

[Zerosignal 1]

I don't think all the shit mfgs. have mastered the mid length gas system yet. Thats one reason...

[Scrap 4]

It's because some cool dudes on internet forums that know how to (barely) read and parrot what they read from other cool dudes came up with the notion that carbine length ARs suck and make you a mall ninja, but high speed lo drag OPERATORS use Mid Length and therefore it makes you more specially forced and equipped to handle zombies, and then they started lathering, rinsing, and repeating what they were informed, but now they inform others with a similiar disparagingly difficult tone in their text, saying how Carbine Lengths suck and they hate you... Inspiring a mass exodus of carbine length ARs and now they all had to go by Delta Force Mid Lengths, which caused more people to lather, rinse and repeat.

[deni 16]

you seem bitter

[raz-0 1,259]

you seem bitter

 

Also poorly informed on the ar gas system. There is a difference. If it saved me a decent amount, or it was the difference between getting a rifle or not, I wouldn't say no to the carbine length. Mid length will shoot nicer and wear better.

[checko 180]

Does anyone have any actual data on how much less a mid length wears in a rifle. I've heard everyone say it but I don't have anyone showing it. I don't see many people"wearing out" their carbines either.

[Old School 611]

It's because some cool dudes on internet forums that know how to (barely) read and parrot what they read from other cool dudes came up with the notion that carbine length ARs suck and make you a mall ninja, but high speed lo drag OPERATORS use Mid Length and therefore it makes you more specially forced and equipped to handle zombies, and then they started lathering, rinsing, and repeating what they were informed, but now they inform others with a similiar disparagingly difficult tone in their text, saying how Carbine Lengths suck and they hate you... Inspiring a mass exodus of carbine length ARs and now they all had to go by Delta Force Mid Lengths, which caused more people to lather, rinse and repeat.

 

 

 

+1

[Old School 611]

Does anyone have any actual data on how much less a mid length wears in a rifle. I've heard everyone say it but I don't have anyone showing it. I don't see many people"wearing out" their carbines either.

 

 

 

 

+1

[Turbotezza 1]

Real M4's are tuned for full auto at a certain RPM, so maybe that's why?

[lunker 274]

My mid-length Spike's was a softer shooter than my Colt 6940. Of course the carbine had a 16" barrel. The Spike's mid-length had a 14.5" barrel. I think the difference in dwell between them explains the shooting characteristics more than the gas system. On the other hand, all things being equal, a midlength system is a nice compromise between carbine and rifle. I would choose one unless I needed an SBR (silly to speak of ion PRNJ) or wanted a precision AR. Tacti-coolness wouldn't factor into it.

[Scrap 4]

not bitter at all, I gave up on the AR a while back, it was a lot of fun to hold and dream about using it in anger and doing my ninja flips while getting my Green Beret on.

 

Once I got that out of my system, I realized I had set out what I wanted to accomplish. I bought myself an AR. I got a bunch of accessories. I did what I consider and a lot of other people considered to me an awesome awesome job making it look and feel great. Everywhere I took it people were extremely complimentary about it. I'd say, if 5 people said "it's not for me" or "I don't like it" , then at least 95 others said they loved it.

 

 

Again, then I realized I would really never use it all that much, and i am much more into survival , preparedness, and practicality. So I have changed what's important to me, went the AK Variant route, stockpiled thousands of 7.62x39mm rounds , am concentrating on getting my new Remington 700 .308 completely set up and ready just in case, furthering my shotgun collection and ammo stockpile... and if I want to have fun with the AR Platform I have a $1500 S&W M&P 15-22 setup to play with to my heart's content. Now I just leave the AR flame wars and arguments to those who really *ARE* in fact bitter about it, those who feel the need to insult the carbine guys because they have the cooler mid length carbines, and those with the carbines who are now forced to justify their very existence and relevance to the mid length delta force.

 

 

 

I just pop the popcorn and watch.

[Candide 0]

 

I just pop the popcorn and watch.

 

Your long posts in this thread say otherwise.

 

[bbk 188]

I think its really a matter of history/time. The classic carbine-length gas systems in an AR dates back quite some time, with the more nebulous "M4geries" becoming popular in the early 90s (I want to say 1994). The first commercial midlength was made by, supposedly, Armalite in 2002. But midlengths didn't really start catching on until a few years later. So, there may be other factors, but I think the overwhelming reason why carbine length gas systems are more popular than midlength is due to the hegemonic effects of the market translating unto the masses.

[raz-0 1,259]

Does anyone have any actual data on how much less a mid length wears in a rifle. I've heard everyone say it but I don't have anyone showing it. I don't see many people"wearing out" their carbines either.

 

You'll see a shorter service interval on the bolt with a carbine. The locking lugs are just exposed to significantly more force due to the much higher psi at the gas port and the shorter dwell time.

 

How much will it matter? That depends on the bolt. Carpenter 158 is heated up twice to remove impurities. It's good stuff, but not perfect. That and the machining will determine life span. If you don't shoot a lot, it probably doesn't matter. Some get 3-4k before cracks start showing, some get 4-5 times that. The worst I have seen reported for a middy is more than 4k and the highest round count is higher than the highest carbine. There is a lot of overlap though.

 

More practically, if you can't be picky about ammo, carbine gas systems can rip off case rims. I've had this happen.

 

There are a bunch of other pluses and minuses on both sides. It's not an absolute. For myself, I like mid length 16" barrels for overall performance.

[Vlad G 345]

Hmm I find it interesting that a lot of people say the AR platform is antiquated and flawed and then lots of people say that a change like this is unnecessary and doesn't do anything and the old one was fine. Sometimes it is even the same people.

 

From my personal experience I'm sold on the mid length, it most certainly feels softer. Bolt wear, I dunno, mechanically it makes sense but I have a bolt with a hell of a lot of rounds on it in a carbine that has yet to fail, maybe it's just on the higher end of the curve.

[checko 180]

Bolt wear, I dunno, mechanically it makes sense but I have a bolt with a hell of a lot of rounds on it in a carbine that has yet to fail, maybe it's just on the higher end of the curve.

 

This is what I mean. There is a lot of "I've seen" and "I've heard" but no real data. Raz-0 I see what you're saying and it makes sense to me but how much could be on the reliability of "budget" or inferior quality bolts.

 

From my personal experience I've had my stag upper for less than a year have between 2-3k rounds and have minimal if any wear. I can't see having to replace my bolt every year.

 

I think general maintenance of your firearm has just as much to do with wear as your gas system.

[Vlad G 345]

to be fair, 2-3k rounds on most quality bolts just scratch the finish a bit. My worn bolt is somewhere around 10k. I'm actually planning to shoot it to failure out of curiosity, it is actually on it second barrel now. I keep a spare bolt in my range bag just for that day.

[raz-0 1,259]

This is what I mean. There is a lot of "I've seen" and "I've heard" but no real data. Raz-0 I see what you're saying and it makes sense to me but how much could be on the reliability of "budget" or inferior quality bolts.

 

From my personal experience I've had my stag upper for less than a year have between 2-3k rounds and have minimal if any wear. I can't see having to replace my bolt every year.

 

I think general maintenance of your firearm has just as much to do with wear as your gas system.

 

The reality is that how worn the tooling was when they machined yours probably has more impact than carbine vs. mid-length. However, like I said, carbine length can rip the case rims off of soft brass (the cheap stuff when supplies are scarce), beat up brass (reloads, when supplies are scarce), brittle steel cases (a lot of russian steel cased stuff). It can leave you with a mess that needs tools to get running again. Mid-length can leave you high and dry in the cold if your port isn't sized correctly for your ammo that is really temp sensitive. Carbine gas ports are going to erode faster than mid-length gas ports due to the higher pressure and longer duration of high pressures. That means shorter barrel life before reliability issues.

 

There's all sorts of trade offs. I find you can get a mid-length 16" set up running reliably in all weather, that shoots softer, and in theory runs longer if you can afford to shoot so much that quantity comes into play with any meaningful frequency.

[checko 180]

 

 

The reality is that how worn the tooling was when they machined yours probably has more impact than carbine vs. mid-length. However, like I said, carbine length can rip the case rims off of soft brass (the cheap stuff when supplies are scarce), beat up brass (reloads, when supplies are scarce), brittle steel cases (a lot of russian steel cased stuff). It can leave you with a mess that needs tools to get running again. Mid-length can leave you high and dry in the cold if your port isn't sized correctly for your ammo that is really temp sensitive. Carbine gas ports are going to erode faster than mid-length gas ports due to the higher pressure and longer duration of high pressures. That means shorter barrel life before reliability issues.

 

There's all sorts of trade offs. I find you can get a mid-length 16" set up running reliably in all weather, that shoots softer, and in theory runs longer if you can afford to shoot so much that quantity comes into play with any meaningful frequency.

 

What would you consider cheap ammo? Not debating anything just never seen that before.

[NJKen 23]

It's because some cool dudes on internet forums that know how to (barely) read and parrot what they read from other cool dudes came up with the notion that carbine length ARs suck and make you a mall ninja, but high speed lo drag OPERATORS use Mid Length and therefore it makes you more specially forced and equipped to handle zombies, and then they started lathering, rinsing, and repeating what they were informed, but now they inform others with a similiar disparagingly difficult tone in their text, saying how Carbine Lengths suck and they hate you... Inspiring a mass exodus of carbine length ARs and now they all had to go by Delta Force Mid Lengths, which caused more people to lather, rinse and repeat.

You just made me spit beer on my computer!

I am under the belief that gas tube length is proportionate to barrel length. It makes sense to me that you would not want a carbine length gas system on a 24" barrel. It would try to extract the case before the bullet clears the barrel. Now, I do have a 18" with the mid length gas system and the one big difference between that and my carbine length is in the brass. On the gun with carbine length gas system on the 18" barrel there is absolutly no extractor mark on the brass even with hot loads. Otherwise, it feels the same to my untrained shoulder.

Ken

[blksheep 466]

It's because some cool dudes on internet forums that know how to (barely) read and parrot what they read from other cool dudes came up with the notion that carbine length ARs suck and make you a mall ninja, but high speed lo drag OPERATORS use Mid Length and therefore it makes you more specially forced and equipped to handle zombies, and then they started lathering, rinsing, and repeating what they were informed, but now they inform others with a similiar disparagingly difficult tone in their text, saying how Carbine Lengths suck and they hate you... Inspiring a mass exodus of carbine length ARs and now they all had to go by Delta Force Mid Lengths, which caused more people to lather, rinse and repeat.

 

Lol

[Dan 177]

Now I just leave the AR flame wars and arguments to those who really *ARE* in fact bitter about it, those who feel the need to insult the carbine guys because they have the cooler mid length carbines, and those with the carbines who are now forced to justify their very existence and relevance to the mid length delta force.

 

Who is insulting who here? I do not see that happening at all anywhere in any of the threads on this forum that gas length discussions have come up in. I've have never seen a post stating that someone thinks mid length gas systems are "green beret" cool or whatnot, besides your posts here. Also, who is bitter (besides you)?

 

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and folks here give their opinions with personal experiences when asked for them.

 

If you want to start a new thread on how you feel AR's and gas system length concepts are irrelevant in your world besides some apparently amazing one you had in the past, you are more then welcome to.

[raz-0 1,259]

What would you consider cheap ammo? Not debating anything just never seen that before.

Probably the most infamous for being soft was a very large supply of indian surplus ammo back around 2000 or so. 20" rifle length systems would chew up that brass. Some carbines would rip the whole case head off. There's been issues with batches of winchester white box when that was the affordable and available brass cased ammo. I've had mine chew up XM193 pretty badly. My carbine length leaves ejector tattoos on the brass and rounds the lip where the extractor grabbed pretty reliably. My mid length and rifle length systems do not. I've had lots of wolf where it cracks the rim, but doesn't go as far as ripping it off.

 

Most of what we buy in bulk is pretty cheap, and especially the cheaper bulk commercial ammo tends to have varying quality and/or composition of raw materials, especially during high demand periods where everyone is scrambling for components. Lets put it this way. Company A sells two boxes of ammo, one that is $0.35 a round, and one that is $1.00 a round. The projectiles are obviously different, but full MSRP for the projectile is $0.50 for the projectile vs. $0.09 for the cheaper round. That's $0.40 per round they still have to make up somewhere. Packaging accounts for some, Advertising doesn't unless it is the one model line they advertise for that fiscal quarter. You pay some for QC, and the expensive stuff makes more profit, but in the end, a lot of the cheaper price is covered by being less picky.

[Scrap 4]

Who is insulting who here? I do not see that happening at all anywhere in any of the threads on this forum that gas length discussions have come up in. I've have never seen a post stating that someone thinks mid length gas systems are "green beret" cool or whatnot, besides your posts here. Also, who is bitter (besides you)?

 

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and folks here give their opinions with personal experiences when asked for them.

 

If you want to start a new thread on how you feel AR's and gas system length concepts are irrelevant in your world besides some apparently amazing one you had in the past, you are more then welcome to.

 

 

I certainly did not mean to insult you , if you took it as me insulting you then I will apologize because that's not at all what I was trying to do.

 

I will say, you have been around long enough to know, that there are regularly extremely not nice and very long and repeated day in and day out threads on exactly what I described on the AR15 and M4Carbine and even bigger firearms forums not dedicated to just ARs , all the time, so I am not sure where your shock comes from, And I took it as the original poster might have come across some of those type of posts / "discussions" in his research and was either confused or concerned. Again, I was referencing a lot more of the internet firearms community / forum world than just the NJ firearbms forums / AR community discussion, I was pretty sure everyone would understand that.

 

 

It's pretty hard to defend myself when suddenly people aren't able to tell when a post is clearly facetious and joking versus, what is it I am, bitter about my old ar, I mean come on . The gas length wars on the internet forums have produced so much absolutely false, misleading information and have done it in some of the most vindictive and terrible-human-conduct posts I've seen some people treat other people in the AR forums, I was just trying to spare someone the thought they "screwed up" by going with one style of rifle or even getting the same trashy talk and terrible treatment other people get by posting the same stuff on the other forums, thats all. Believe it or not I was trying to help and maybe bring a little lightheartedness and fun to it, thats all.