View Full Version : Are 14.5" Middys all sorted out?
I read a comment in another thread here that has me thinking.
My next AR added to the stable was going to be a 14.5" LW Middy w/ a permed muzzle device to bring it up to 16". It's going to take over for my current training mule, so it'll see the majority of my round count.
Is there any reason to stick with a 16" middy for reliability reasons?
The small increase in velocity and inter-changeability of muzzle devices is not a concern for me with this build.
If you want to shoot bad ammo, don't get a 14.5 middy. Steel cased, under powered doo doo sometimes doesn't run in the guns.
Good 223 or 5.56 ammo and nothing heavier than an H buffer and you'll be pleased.
If you want to shoot bad ammo, don't get a 14.5 middy. Steel cased, under powered doo doo sometimes doesn't run in the guns.
Good 223 or 5.56 ammo and nothing heavier than an H buffer and you'll be pleased.
I reload 90%+ of what I shoot, so shooting underpowered ammo is not a concern. The other 10% is factory for brass donation or the odd training course. Thanks for the response.
I reload 90%+ of what I shoot, so shooting underpowered ammo is not a concern. The other 10% is factory for brass donation. Thanks for the response.
Then you'll be fine! Your only concern is dealing with a permed muzzle device. If that's not an issue for you, then I think you'll like the configuration.
If it was my comment in that other thread that has you worrying: I wouldn't worry too much with quality ammo from a quality upper. I was talking about the very limits of functionality, i.e. packed with sand/mud, no lube etc.
An Undocumented Worker
05-09-11, 20:43
Why does the 14.5" middy even exist? As far as I can tell, the carbine gas system was designed specifically for the 14.5" barrel.
The Mid Length gas system was designed for civilian 16" barrels, so why are people trying to use this gas system on 14.5" barrels.:confused:
Why does the 14.5" middy even exist? As far as I can tell, the carbine gas system was designed specifically for the 14.5" barrel.
The Mid Length gas system was designed for civilian 16" barrels, so why are people trying to use this gas system on 14.5" barrels.:confused:
Not trying to use, are using, with a high degree of sucess. I agree that the mid/16 duplicates the dwell of the carbine/14.5.
The 14.5/mid seems the result of someone trying something new. And it seems to be working.
There are also 16/intermediate gas systems, and the KAC SR15E3 also uses a longer than mid-length gas system with that rifle, which has a 16" barrel.
Why does the 14.5" middy even exist? As far as I can tell, the carbine gas system was designed specifically for the 14.5" barrel.
The Mid Length gas system was designed for civilian 16" barrels, so why are people trying to use this gas system on 14.5" barrels.:confused:
Same reason people use 12.5" carbines and 18" rifles.
They shoot softer!
ActiveShooter
05-09-11, 22:12
I've run the crap out of my 14.5" BCM middy with crappy ammo and minimal cleanings without any failures. I couldn't be more satisifed.
I've got 3 14.5 middies and they all run great. The first is a Bravo that was cut to 14.7, the second a factory Bravo 14.5 upper, and the third utilzing a 14.5 Centurion barrel. As stated all run great. I use F/A carriers in all. All three use "H" buffers. With the Centurion if I use .223 I switch to a carbine buffer for more solid lock back on empty mags. I was intrigued by them when they came out and was using them early in the game. I prefer the look when using a FSB and really like the extra length of the guards. The only carbine length gas system I have is on my 12.5 Noveske.
I have ~1100+ rounds of almost all Wolf & Brown Bear through two different BCM 14.5" midlengths and other than a couple of stuck cases from some suspect Wolf I haven't had a problem with either of them. Lube and clean chambers work wonders.
I was probably one of the biggest skeptics of the 14.5" midlength but now I'm pretty sold, even though I still wouldn't recommend one as an only/first AR.
I would not, however, say that they are "all" sorted out simply because I can't speak to all of them. I'd vouch for the BCM, Noveske (and derivatives built with Noveske barrels like the Next Generation Arms), Daniel Defense, and Centurion (basing the last one on reputation alone as I don't have any direct experience with their 14.5" mid-length barrels).
RAM Engineer
05-09-11, 22:39
Why does the 14.5" middy even exist? As far as I can tell, the carbine gas system was designed specifically for the 14.5" barrel.
The Mid Length gas system was designed for civilian 16" barrels, so why are people trying to use this gas system on 14.5" barrels.:confused:
Actually, the carbine length gas system was designed for the CAR-15 SMG/"Survival Rifle"/"Commando"/XM177/XM177E1/XM177E2 which all had 10"-11.5" barrels.
The earliest prototype "carbine" model ARs had 16" barrels with what appear to be approximate mid/intermediate length gas systems (fig. 166, "The Black Rifle", Stevens & Ezell).
The first OFFICIAL carbine, model 605 (fig. 168, ibid), had a 15" barrel with a rifle length gas system. However, "only a handful" were ever produced.
Actually, the carbine length gas system was designed for the CAR-15 SMG/"Survival Rifle"/"Commando"/XM177/XM177E1/XM177E2 which all had 10"-11.5" barrels.
The earliest prototype "carbine" model ARs had 16" barrels with what appear to be approximate mid/intermediate length gas systems (fig. 166, "The Black Rifle", Stevens & Ezell).
The first OFFICIAL carbine, model 605 (fig. 168, ibid), had a 15" barrel with a rifle length gas system. However, "only a handful" were ever produced.
There were tons of 605s if you include the submodels A and B. They had rifle length systems but the gas ports were drilled out to max size.
XM177s were 10-11.6 barrels with the carbine length system but they had a 3.5" or 4.5" moderator and the smaller gas port.
Colt was also working on the M16A1 Carbine (never adopted by anyone model 650) with the 14.5 barrel about the time the E2 went into production.
Im not arguing anything, just pointing out some of the smaller details. 200ms dwell time is well known as optimal for the AR-15 platform, 14.5" with carbine system gets that, as does 16" with midlength, and 20" with rifle.
RAM Engineer
05-09-11, 23:22
There were tons of 605s if you include the submodels A and B. They had rifle length systems but the gas ports were drilled out to max size.
XM177s were 10-11.6 barrels with the carbine length system but they had a 3.5" or 4.5" moderator and the smaller gas port.
Colt was also working on the M16A1 Carbine (never adopted by anyone model 650) with the 14.5 barrel about the time the E2 went into production.
Im not arguing anything, just pointing out some of the smaller details. 200ms dwell time is well known as optimal for the AR-15 platform, 14.5" with carbine system gets that, as does 16" with midlength, and 20" with rifle.
Absolutely. I've recently gone 100% SBR for my ARs, so it's all carbine gas system for me until I decide to build a SPR-type gun. And I stand corrected on the 605s.
DirtDiver06
05-10-11, 00:39
If you want to shoot bad ammo, don't get a 14.5 middy. Steel cased, under powered doo doo sometimes doesn't run in the guns.
Good 223 or 5.56 ammo and nothing heavier than an H buffer and you'll be pleased.
I run an H2 in mine and I'm pleased, but then again I almost exclusively use XM855 and .223 TAP.
I run an H2 in mine and I'm pleased, but then again I almost exclusively use XM855 and .223 TAP.
How does the H2 compare to the H in your 14.5 middy?
DirtDiver06
05-10-11, 00:56
How does the H2 compare to the H in your 14.5 middy?
I can't say. I haven’t tried an H buffer in it.
I've gone from a carbine, to a p.o.s. st-t2, to a colt H2. Comparing the carbine to H2... the difference was noticeable. The carbine was definitely a sharper impulse while the H2 feels like pillow.
Hell, just dry cycling the action you can tell the bolt slams home with less reverb when it hits the barrel extension.
How does the H2 compare to the H in your 14.5 middy?
Appreciably softer recoil, stays on target better. I've just shot an MNQ during EAG class with one shot dropped; I truly believe that gun being more controllable was a big part of if. Worth mentioning is that one of my 14.5s didn't lock the bolt on H2 buffer a couple of tines but another one has been 100%.
Re crappy ammo: I've had my 14.5 middy since only one vendor was offering those. Mine was a 16 inch BCM cut down to 14.5. To the best of my knowledge, gas ports on 16 and 14.5 BCMs are the same so mine is representative of their current setup. When I got mine done, I set out to test reliability; I even asked on this site what constitutes weak ammo. I then went and purchased a bunch of Wolf, UMC, PMC and other stuff and shot it without issues in 22 degrees weather. Prior to that, I shot almost two cases of Wolf over two days in Magpul class in 100 degree weather; all I had was one stuck empty case.
While this is individual sample size of two, based on cumulative reports and what I see around, I'd say they are pretty much sorted out, with anecdotal evidence of increased bolt longevity and subjective reports of softer feel.
No issues at all with two BCM 14.5 middies and about 4,000 rounds of silver and brown bear. Lube it and run an H buffer. H2 buffer shot very soft but I like the slightly more robust cycling of the H buffer.
vicious_cb
05-10-11, 05:00
I wonder how a 14.5" middy would run under filthy sandy conditions? Rifle designs over the years tells us that overgassed = good when sandy to overcome the increased friction of a dirty gun. But its also conundrum where overgassed carbines have harder extraction leading to decrease reliability.
I wonder how a 14.5" middy would run under filthy sandy conditions? Rifle designs over the years tells us that overgassed = good when sandy to overcome the increased friction of a dirty gun. But its also conundrum where overgassed carbines have harder extraction leading to decrease reliability.
Careful, I've suggested this before and nearly got myself lynched. :sarcastic:
BufordTJustice
05-10-11, 05:44
I wonder how a 14.5" middy would run under filthy sandy conditions? Rifle designs over the years tells us that overgassed = good when sandy to overcome the increased friction of a dirty gun. But its also conundrum where overgassed carbines have harder extraction leading to decrease reliability.
I wouldn't know since I run a FailZero BCG in my 14.5" BCM middy.
In all seriousness, I think that a quality coated BCG makes a lot of sense in 14.5" middies. I went from reliably locking back using an H buffer with my CMT FA BCG, to being able to run a buffer that is heavier than an H3 (7.0 oz, with the guts of an H2 and a SS buffer body) AND a Springco Blue buffer spring....and still lock back on empty using tula and wolf. The reduced friction by coatings such as FZ, IonBond, hard chrome, etc. is noticeable and welcome.
If you used a coated BCG and only used an H buffer, I think that any reliability ceded to the shorter dwell time would be regained and then some.
I don't know about sand, but I've had mine filthy from bear ammo and it still throws empty about 8 feet. I've never felt it get sluggish using an H buffer and mil spec spring. With an H2 buffer and an extra power spring, I could get consistent failures to lock on empty. I tossed those two items quickly. Can I get it to fail, probably, but enough crap to make it choke would most likely stop a 16" middy as well.
I wonder how a 14.5" middy would run under filthy sandy conditions? Rifle designs over the years tells us that overgassed = good when sandy to overcome the increased friction of a dirty gun. But its also conundrum where overgassed carbines have harder extraction leading to decrease reliability.
The extraction issues related to being overgassed have more to do with timing than dirt. If the bolt unlocks before the bore pressure decreases enough for the brass case to shrink back to its original size (usually when the bullet exits the muzzle) it doesn't really matter if the chamber is polished, the extractor won't be able to pull it out before it slides over the rim or tears it off.
I don't know about sand, but I've had mine filthy from bear ammo and it still throws empty about 8 feet. I've never felt it get sluggish using an H buffer and mil spec spring. With an H2 buffer and an extra power spring, I could get consistent failures to lock on empty. I tossed those two items quickly. Can I get it to fail, probably, but enough crap to make it choke would most likely stop a 16" middy as well.
I believe he was comparing gas system lengths, not barrel lengths. At least that was the context of my reply.
vicious_cb
05-10-11, 06:56
I believe he was comparing gas system lengths, not barrel lengths. At least that was the context of my reply.
Yes, I was comparing the benefits of a carbine gas system on a 14.5" vs the benefits of a 14.5" middy.
The extraction issues related to being overgassed have more to do with timing than dirt. If the bolt unlocks before the bore pressure decreases enough for the brass case to shrink back to its original size (usually when the bullet exits the muzzle) it doesn't really matter if the chamber is polished, the extractor won't be able to pull it out before it slides over the rim or tears it off.
Thats not what I was saying at all. Im saying a carbine gas system on 14.5" at higher pressure is going to have a higher BCG velocity thus it might be less susceptible to a stoppage when filthy and sandy but the downside is that the bolt unlocks sooner resulting in harsher extraction. Nothing to do with the chamber being dirty just pointing out a possible upside vs downside.
Compare this to a 14.5" middy with lower pressures where slower bolt velocity MIGHT make it more susceptible to stoppage when used in filthy/sandy conditions but has a very smooth delayed extraction.
After shooting a 14.5 for the first time Saturday I am sold and getting my bcm cut by Adco and a perm'd muzzle device. Has anybody experimented with a lighter bcg and heavier buffer H3? or is moving mass, moving mass? I would like the ability to reliably shoot brown bear, silver bear, wolf etc. and swap a heavier buffer in if needed for 5.56 loads. Or is an m16 carrier fine with a c or h buffer with brown and silver etc.? Is BCM gas ports the same for 16 and 14.5 ?
http://www.rainierarms.com/?page=shop/detail&product_id=1010
http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/JP-Low-Mass-Stainless-Carrier-Assembly-w-QPQ-Fini-p/jpbc-3.htm
After shooting a 14.5 for the first time Saturday I am sold and getting my bcm cut by Adco and a perm'd muzzle device. Has anybody experimented with a lighter bcg and heavier buffer H3? or is moving mass, moving mass? I would like the ability to reliably shoot brown bear, silver bear, wolf etc. and swap a heavier buffer in if needed for 5.56 loads. Or is an m16 carrier fine with a c or h buffer with brown and silver etc.? Is BCM gas ports the same for 16 and 14.5 ?
http://www.rainierarms.com/?page=shop/detail&product_id=1010
http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/JP-Low-Mass-Stainless-Carrier-Assembly-w-QPQ-Fini-p/jpbc-3.htm
Do you feel that you're reached the limitation of your gun as-is and have a specific goal in changing it? If so, is there something you hope to gain by using an un-tested combination of buffer and carrier?
This site is full of guys like me that are shooting 14.5" mid-length guns with Wolf & Brown Bear without issue when using an M16 carrier and an H buffer and GI spring. If you want to cycle that ammo my suggestion would be to stick with a known-good combination until you have a perceived advantage or gain in fiddling with it.
I have a Mid-length BCM 14.5. I currently run an H2 buffer, as I usual have access to quality ammo. However I always carry a carbine buffer in my rifle pack. When I switch to Tula, Wolf or BB I will have the occasional short stroke. If I'm going to shoot this ammo exclusively I'll put the Car. buffer in.
TC
I run an H2 in mine and I'm pleased, but then again I almost exclusively use XM855 and .223 TAP.
I had pretty good success with the H2 as well. We even ran an H3 in it when it was new. But if I wanted to ensure reliable function when dirty/dry, etc... I'd probably just run an H buffer.
DirtDiver06
05-10-11, 09:55
I had pretty good success with the H2 as well. We even ran an H3 in it when it was new. But if I wanted to ensure reliable function when dirty/dry, etc... I'd probably just run an H buffer.
I'll be sure to give an H buffer a try.
But would you say I'd be good with an H2 considering my 14.5 middy can run with a 4.3oz buffer, m16 carrier, and a red springco spring? Albeit, the brass ejects at like a foot and a half at 5 o'clock but it still runs.
DirtDiver06
05-10-11, 12:37
Another good question would be... is all this ejection
pattern stuff that's talked about on other forums nonsense?
Another good question would be... is all this ejection
pattern stuff that's talked about on other forums nonsense?
No. But it's only a piece of the puzzle. It can be a good indicator of what the gun is doing, but some folks with just enough info to be dangerous start messing with shit on their gun based on that fucking retarded MS paint clock chart thing that you see posted every so often. :rolleyes:
Cincinnatus
05-10-11, 12:44
Another good question would be... is all this ejection
pattern stuff that's talked about on other forums nonsense?
This has been discussed recently here:
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=76758&highlight=notebook+range
And is a perfect example of what MarkM is talking about--and yes, this link also has that MS Paint clock chart in it too. :)
I shoot match reloads through my lightweight 14.5 middy. It shoots great. I havent tried any cheap steel or lacquer coated stuff, and I doubt I ever will.
Thats not what I was saying at all. Im saying a carbine gas system on 14.5" at higher pressure is going to have a higher BCG velocity thus it might be less susceptible to a stoppage when filthy and sandy but the downside is that the bolt unlocks sooner resulting in harsher extraction. Nothing to do with the chamber being dirty just pointing out a possible upside vs downside.
Compare this to a 14.5" middy with lower pressures where slower bolt velocity MIGHT make it more susceptible to stoppage when used in filthy/sandy conditions but has a very smooth delayed extraction.
Yeah that's what i was saying too. :laugh: My point was that as long as the timing is ok the harsher extraction shouldn't actually result in a failed extraction.
Careful, I've suggested this before and nearly got myself lynched. :sarcastic:
I've made that case as well :o
Do you feel that you're reached the limitation of your gun as-is and have a specific goal in changing it? If so, is there something you hope to gain by using an un-tested combination of buffer and carrier?
This site is full of guys like me that are shooting 14.5" mid-length guns with Wolf & Brown Bear without issue when using an M16 carrier and an H buffer and GI spring. If you want to cycle that ammo my suggestion would be to stick with a known-good combination until you have a perceived advantage or gain in fiddling with it.
I certainly haven't met my limit with it as is. The persons I shot said his won't cycle any russian steel and haven't really researched what combos work. It was just an idea I had but the A5 RE looks proprietary.
I was probably one of the biggest skeptics of the 14.5" midlength but now I'm pretty sold, even though I still wouldn't recommend one as an only/first AR.
Why the caveat to recommending them as an only AR?
I would have to assume from this that you are still somewhat skeptical of their hard use reliability?
Why the caveat to recommending them as an only AR?
On paper, I thought the 14.5 middy was the perfect set up. I'm less sold on that notion now that I've got a thousand plus rounds on the platform.... due to the fact that it can barely handle a rifle buffer system. And that is the bottom line test for a good upper.
It's almost too much of a good thing with the smoothness. And with masturbators wanting to buy guns that run shit import steel cased ammo, it's hard to recommend the setup.
If you are willing to run good ammo, it's a nice configuration.
Why the caveat to recommending them as an only AR?
Not my quote... but...
On paper, I thought the 14.5 middy was the perfect set up. I'm less sold on that notion now that I've got a thousand plus rounds on the platform.... due to the fact that it can barely handle a rifle buffer system. And that is the bottom line test for a good upper.
It's almost too much of a good thing with the smoothness. And with masturbators wanting to buy guns that run shit import steel cased ammo, it's hard to recommend the setup.
If you are willing to run good ammo, it's a nice configuration.
On paper, I thought the 14.5 middy was the perfect set up. I'm less sold on that notion now that I've got a thousand plus rounds on the platform.... due to the fact that it can barely handle a rifle buffer system. And that is the bottom line test for a good upper.
On paper the dwell time is woeful. .13 seconds vs the optimal .20.
Sample size of one. My BCM 14.5 mid has gone 1340 rounds with all steel case ammo, a mix of brown/silver bear and tula. The rifle experienced 2 instances of short stroking with tula, but i realized that the carrier was bone dry and dirty so it was my fault. It also had one stuck case with the tula in the same range session. If kept properly lubed this rifle runs for me. Once again, sample size of one YMMV and all that.
My BCM 14.5" with BC1.5 with rifle buffer system- occasional issues with Wolf (mostly the last few rounds and bolt doesn't sometimes lock back. No issues with regular brass cased ammo.
On paper, I thought the 14.5 middy was the perfect set up. I'm less sold on that notion now that I've got a thousand plus rounds on the platform.... due to the fact that it can barely handle a rifle buffer system. And that is the bottom line test for a good upper.
I couldn't disagree more. The system was never designed to be run with a rifle buffer system. That is just as asinine as putting a carbine buffer system on a rifle gas gun and complaining when it doesn't work right.
As to dwell time, everyone knew the world was flat for a very long time. Not really the case. Until someone actually tries something new, how do you know it's going to work? My understanding of the development of the KAC SR15E3, was that Eugene Stoner was asked to update his original design. The SR15 is the result. And guess what? That dwell time was changed from the original design. Highly regarded as one of the best shooting rifles you can buy.
There is this weird trend whereas guys want to slap a Vltor A5 on everything and pimp it as the best shooting thing around because they drastically slowed the bolt carrier speed. The A5 was indented as a solution for the USMC to fit onto to 20" barreled rifle gassed guns. Not to serve as a solution to non-existent problems.
In my conversations with Wes Grant about the A5, he wrote something that got me thinking, that the A5 was a solution looking for a problem. I disagree to the extent that it served to fix a problem with a particular system. Outside of that, the results are highly subjective.
The 14.5" mid-length system runs great as it was designed, with a carbine buffer system.
Case and point, the EAG Tactical/Pat Rogers BCM carbines use the 14.5" mid gas...with a carbine RE, and have a metric shit ton of rounds down them. I don't for one minute believe this would be the chosen setup if it were an inferior product.
vicious_cb
05-11-11, 03:50
I couldn't disagree more. The system was never designed to be run with a rifle buffer system. That is just as asinine as putting a carbine buffer system on a rifle gas gun and complaining when it doesn't work right.
As to dwell time, everyone knew the world was flat for a very long time. Not really the case. Until someone actually tries something new, how do you know it's going to work? My understanding of the development of the KAC SR15E3, was that Eugene Stoner was asked to update his original design. The SR15 is the result. And guess what? That dwell time was changed from the original design. Highly regarded as one of the best shooting rifles you can buy.
There is this weird trend whereas guys want to slap a Vltor A5 on everything and pimp it as the best shooting thing around because they drastically slowed the bolt carrier speed. The A5 was indented as a solution for the USMC to fit onto to 20" barreled rifle gassed guns. Not to serve as a solution to non-existent problems.
In my conversations with Wes Grant about the A5, he wrote something that got me thinking, that the A5 was a solution looking for a problem. I disagree to the extent that it served to fix a problem with a particular system. Outside of that, the results are highly subjective.
The 14.5" mid-length system runs great as it was designed, with a carbine buffer system.
Case and point, the EAG Tactical/Pat Rogers BCM carbines use the 14.5" mid gas...with a carbine RE, and have a metric shit ton of rounds down them. I don't for one minute believe this would be the chosen setup if it were an inferior product.
I believe the KAC E3 can get away with it because they redesigned the inside of the carrier to be more efficient with the gas.
As for the A5 system, I think the data speaks for itself. Bash it all you want but there are many experienced members around here that will tell you this is going to be the new standard on alot of guns.
Why the caveat to recommending them as an only AR?
I would have to assume from this that you are still somewhat skeptical of their hard use reliability?
14.5" barrel caveats (http://docs.google.com/View?id=drnhb8z_258hp4knwf9)
On paper the dwell time is woeful. .13 seconds vs the optimal .20.
Yeah... I was looking at Quickload Pressure curve charts, and thinking it'd be perfect.
I still like the configuration and all. You just have to have it set up correctly and feed it good chow.
I believe the KAC E3 can get away with it because they redesigned the inside of the carrier to be more efficient with the gas.
As for the A5 system, I think the data speaks for itself. Bash it all you want but there are many experienced members around here that will tell you this is going to be the new standard on alot of guns.
Did you at least go to KAC's website before typing that? I find no mention what so ever about re-designing the inside of the carrier in anything i've ever read about that platform.
Internet posts are not "data". They are highly subjective. I'm not bashing the A5 system. I'm noting that adding the A5 to a system it was never designed for, and getting problems, is not a result of the of the barrel/gas combination, but a problem with adding incompatiable parts.
You will also see the same experienced members recommending lightening the stock A5 buffer by changing out one of the tungeston weights with a steel one, which is to modify it from its original design.
Its intresting because they are recognizing where the problem is.
I haven't seen any hard data to quantifiy exactly what the A5 does that a carbine RE with the propper buffer can't do.
I haven't seen any hard data to quantifiy exactly what the A5 does that a carbine RE with the propper buffer can't do.
It's all about the superior spring cycle of the rifle buffer system. The at rest spring tension and the % of spring compression all yield a more forgiving cycle.
It's exactly why a Carbine (for example) that runs optimally on an H buffer can run even better on the heavier rifle buffer. Even though throwing an H3 in that gun with a carbine spring would choke it.
We can't get hung up in the weight comparisons of Rifle Buffers and Carbine buffers. It doesn't work that way.
This thread makes my head hurt.
The OP's question was answered within first four posts, and now we have three pages of theoretical blah-blah.
14.5 midlength has proven itself highly reliable - whatever theoretical shortcomings might be. There are multiple samples of these rifles running well over last several years, dirty or clean, through very high round counts or volumes of fire, with buffer weights from carbine to H2. I believe there is one very reputable manufacturer that has discontinued their 14.5 carbine offering altogether in favor of 14.5 middy.
I am trying hard to give a damn about it not running with current A5 set-up, but I am failing here.
I am trying hard to give a damn about it not running with current A5 set-up, but I am failing here.
Failure is not an option.
I wonder why the port isn't enlarged on the 14.5 middy to offset the short dwell time. It's not like anyone could ever make the "over gassed" claim on any of the 14.5 middies I've seen.
People run 16" cut down rifle barrels with full rifle gas systems and enlarged ports. So why not with the middy I wonder....
I wonder why the port isn't enlarged on the 14.5 middy to offset the short dwell time. It's not like anyone could ever make the "over gassed" claim on any of the 14.5 middies I've seen.
My uneducated guess would be that manufacturers, who are best informed of any potential issues with their product through warranty claims, are not hearing anything about reliability issues with their 14.5 middies to get more gas going.
My uneducated guess would be that manufacturers, who are best informed of any potential issues with their product through warranty claims, are not hearing anything about reliability issues with their 14.5 middies to get more gas going.
Quite possible. I imagine the people running rifle buffers is pretty rare too.
It's all about the superior spring cycle of the rifle buffer system. The at rest spring tension and the % of spring compression all yield a more forgiving cycle.
Pure conjecture. You have the same or near the same mechanical resistance regardless of how you get there.
I wonder why the port isn't enlarged on the 14.5 middy to offset the short dwell time.
From what I've gathered in a few posts by Noveske people here, is that large(er) gas ports are less than ideal in cold conditions.
I think its time for me to bow out of this topic. I'm talking circles here.
Pure conjecture. You have the same or near the same mechanical resistance regardless of how you get there.
You have the same rearward energy at the bolt group. But if the same mechanical resistance is there, then why would a gun run one system differently than the other... Carbine vs. Rifle.
Common sense will tell you that the carbine system is "tighter". I mean... you're compressing a shorter spring the same amount that you're compressing the Longer spring of the rifle. You don't get that size reduction without giving something up.
If I had a good way to measure it, I would. I can't debate the notion that the carbine buffer system is tighter than the Rifle. I've just been around the AR long enough to see the problem caused when guys switched to the carbine system from the Rifle.
I've never heard anyone suggest that the two systems were on par. :confused:
I've just been around the AR long enough to see the problem caused when guys switched to the carbine system from the Rifle.
I've been around the AR long enough to see tons of parts drummed up to be the greatest thing to ever be manufactured for the platform, that everyone had to have. In the end, they probably hurt just as much as they helped.
You have the same rearward energy at the bolt group. But if the same mechanical resistance is there, then why would a gun run one system differently than the other... Carbine vs. Rifle.
Subjectively, I don't think they run differently. It slows the bolt carrier speed. You can do this with heavier carbine buffers, and you have lines of guys wanting to H3 their guns only because they don't make an H4. Of course it all depends on the exact selection of spring and buffer. In my system, the A5 didn't do anything that a carbine RE couldn't.
The gun is like the engine of a car. Everything works together. You can't change the specs on an assembly without having an effect. If the "engine" is designed around a carbine buffer system, and you change it to a A5 all while feeding it crap ammo...i'm sorry, that's a user problem. The biggest problem in the equation is the crap ammo.
For all the parts that people want to toy with, they could throw some extra coin on getting something (ammo) that doesn't suck...
The current stock A5 has uses. The 14.5" mid isn't one of them.
m1a_scoutguy
05-12-11, 00:06
Quite possible. I imagine the people running rifle buffers is pretty rare too.
Hey markm,,silly question I guess,,but I have 2 DD,14.5 Uppers/BBLs and I run a A1 Stock on both,,:confused: Are "A1s considered Rifle buffers"? Duh,,I guess I should know,,,LOL !! Anyways,,with that said,,I have run both my rifles alot with most kinds of Ammo & all is well !! :) Figured I would throw my hat into the mix !! Thanks for any info.
Hey markm,,silly question I guess,,but I have 2 DD,14.5 Uppers/BBLs and I run a A1 Stock on both,,:confused: Are "A1s considered Rifle buffers"? Duh,,I guess I should know,,,LOL !! Anyways,,with that said,,I have run both my rifles alot with most kinds of Ammo & all is well !! :) Figured I would throw my hat into the mix !! Thanks for any info.
Yes. Same buffer and spring.
The current stock A5 has uses. The 14.5" mid isn't one of them.
The current a5 stock is no different than the old standard rifle stock in function. Are you even familiar with what it is? They essentially removed the wasted length of the head on the rifle buffer... and shortened the RE accordingly. No magical changes... just a brilliant idea.
And actually had less malfs than the old, proven rifle stock in the USMC's testing of a huge volume of ammo.
I almost sense you have an irrational or emotional bias towards the 14.5 middy. I've ran both the 14.5 middy and the A5 stock for a while now. I did get both for free for T&E so I'm not leaning towards one or the other. I like the 14.5 middy still... I LOVE the A5.
It didn't take me long to figger out that the 14.5 middy is unique in function compared to ALL the other configs I've shot. The odd man out in this thing is without a doubt the 14.5 middy.... And I'm not crapping on the thing. I still like it.
Are you even familiar with what it is?
Is that a serious question? If you read left to right, in a few posts I talk about my direct experience with it. As a matter of fact, when they release the lighter beuffer kits, its an option I may revist after somone comes up with a way to prove the A5 actually has a quantifible benefit.
I almost sense you have an irrational or emotional bias towards the 14.5 middy.
You should be picking up a emotional bias to understanding mechanical concepts and adding aftermarket parts to stray from an original design. If you add the latest new fangled part and have problems, THE PROBLEM IS IN THE NEW PART YOU ADDED. NOT THE ORIGINAL ASSEMBLY.
I have no dog in the fight. I don't even own a 14.5" mid.
I LOVE the A5.
I think we all picked up on that.
Is
I have no dog in the fight. I don't even own a 14.5" mid.
OK. :sarcastic: Well I do and have ran it in every combination of buffer and spring I can think of.
And I've ran the A5 in full auto on standard 20" rifle systems AND the 14.5 middy. The videos have been linked here.
The A2 upper, no surpise, runs like any other m16. The 14.5 middy runs as slow as a BAR. The variable in all this is the 14.5 middy.
I'm not just tossing notions out here because I'm a fan of the A5. I've done the homework.
I read a comment in another thread here that has me thinking.
My next AR added to the stable was going to be a 14.5" LW Middy w/ a permed muzzle device to bring it up to 16". It's going to take over for my current training mule, so it'll see the majority of my round count.
Is there any reason to stick with a 16" middy for reliability reasons?
The small increase in velocity and inter-changeability of muzzle devices is not a concern for me with this build.
Yes and has been since day one. The problem is that people want to shoot cheap (under pressured) ammo with an H2 buffer and an extra power buffer spring.
If you understand how your gun runs and set it up accordingly, then they run very well (especially suppressed).
For me, I HATE pinned muzzle devices as you are stuck if you want to change the rail, FSB, GB, or muzzle device.
I love it when people say that they aren't going to change anything out on the gun. I have pretty much handled EVERY rail, GB, flash suppressor, muzzle break, etc, etc and STILL find myself changing out components.
Go with a 16" middy.
C4
Yes and has been since day one. The problem is that people want to shoot cheap (under pressured) ammo with an H2 buffer and an extra power buffer spring.
If you understand how your gun runs and set it up accordingly, then they run very well (especially suppressed).
For me, I HATE pinned muzzle devices as you are stuck if you want to change the rail, FSB, GB, or muzzle device.
I love it when people say that they aren't going to change anything out on the gun. I have pretty much handled EVERY rail, GB, flash suppressor, muzzle break, etc, etc and STILL find myself changing out components.
Go with a 16" middy.
Agree with all of the above.
I had a 14.5 midlength with a pinned bc 1.5. I recently sold it and bought a 16 inch midlength with an a2, and i couldnt be happier. The 16 inch just shoots so much easier to me, its not as loud and it doesnt have the blast from the BC...I also have a 16 inch carbine length which i liked better than my 14.5 middy.
I had a 14.5 midlength with a pinned bc 1.5. I recently sold it and bought a 16 inch midlength with an a2, and i couldnt be happier.
I like the 14.5 middy with a plain old A2 more than I did with the permed brake that was on it.
On paper the dwell time is woeful. .13 seconds vs the optimal .20.
=================================
Just curious, what is the dwell time on a 16" barrel Middy?
Thanks
.
ffhounddog
05-12-11, 15:33
Well I have to disagree I have a Gemtech G5 and all my AR's but one is going to be able to use it so the Perm Hider is good for me, granted I just have 4. I am just going to run a H buffer in my middy. Should be fine and I have a few.
I like how the carbines at 14.5 run so I am looking forward to running the middy.
ffh
There are no inherent issues if you set it up correctly, and that logic can be applied to any length or gas system. This post is up there with the "What are your favorite guns in COD:MW" from the other day. Next time you are sparked with a notion such as this topic, do us all a favor and go whittle a stick.
Next time you are sparked with a notion such as this topic, do us all a favor and go jerk off.
I'm curious how this statement squares with the biblical quote you have in your sig line...
I'm curious how this statement squares with the biblical quote you have in your sig line...
Your absolutely right; thank you for holding me accountable. On another note, I posted that immature comment in the complete wrong thread. Sorry OP, that was totally not directed at you, I thought I was in the "Why does the 14.5 exist..."
DirtDiver06
05-13-11, 01:22
I like the 14.5 middy with a plain old A2 more than I did with the permed brake that was on it.
What didn't you like about the brake that was on it?
If you want to shoot bad ammo, don't get a 14.5 middy. Steel cased, under powered doo doo sometimes doesn't run in the guns.
Good 223 or 5.56 ammo and nothing heavier than an H buffer and you'll be pleased.
Does this mean the gas port is already maxed out at 0.120 or 0.125?
With an H buffer and M855 or M193 ammo, what is the cyclic rate of fire in FA?
Does this mean the gas port is already maxed out at 0.120 or 0.125?
With an H buffer and M855 or M193 ammo, what is the cyclic rate of fire in FA?
I don't know. I don't have a shot timer. We were going to run the 14.5 middy with my M4-1000 on full auto yesterday, but only ended up shooting it on a semi lower with the M4-1000.
Ran like a champ with the A5 buffer system and H buffer carbine system.
All this adjustment of buffers, springs, and gas lengths reminds me of our MP5s when I started at my PD. We had them in 10mm. The cheif wanted the 10mm light ammo because it was the cheap state bid. We had to put the "low impulse" bolts in the guns. Then the last year we had them the Lt in charge of firearms found a cheap supply of Silvertip loaded to hot levels. They changed over to the "high impulse" bolts to make the guns last longer. We still could use the 10mm light ammo for practice because it would FTE every 4-5 rounds.
The 14.5" midlength sounds like the kind of gun you need to tune to your needs to get out of it what you want.
You want it to be smooth shooting with good ammo? Set it up differently than if you want to shoot inconsistent ammo with it. You want to be able to feed anything to it? Be willing to give up smooth shoting with hotter ammo.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.