I've no clue why SBR's are so popular?
This is by no means criticism, but what do I not understand?
Easier to get on target?
Handier than an AR with a 16" barrel?
Please, clue me in as I've don't know what the appeal is.
Thanks!
Printable View
I've no clue why SBR's are so popular?
This is by no means criticism, but what do I not understand?
Easier to get on target?
Handier than an AR with a 16" barrel?
Please, clue me in as I've don't know what the appeal is.
Thanks!
My 10.5" seems easier to get on target than any of my 16". Might just be perceived though.
Much handier, lighter and so on. The maneuverability is leaps and bounds better.
They're just cool. I waited a long time to finally build one. I wanted one for a long time but never committed. Not sure why I waited so long.
While they may not be the greatest thing in the gun world they serve a purpose of home defense (for me). They are easier to maneuver indoors, lighter weight, and can still hit fair accurately out to distance. Think of them more as a jack of all trades.
I can hit the same targets with my 10.3 inch gun that I can hit with my 16 inch. So for me I see no reason to own a full size AR in my case when my SBR is more versatile. For me SBRs fill a greater role.
Chick magnet.
C4
I consider it a service to my country as I am alleviating the national debt with my $200 tax stamps.
Get in and out of a vehicle a few times with an 'A2 and get back to us.
If you only go to a static range, you won't see any benefit. In matches, courses and other dynamic situations the benefit is the nimbly bimbly factor.
*Barrel points, swings and stops much quicker.
*You get to be the man other guys tell their wives about over dinner.
*You get free NFA operation schooling from random chumps. "You sent in $5,000 to the CIA for that license, right?"
Like Grant said, CDI FACTOR-Chicks Dig It!! Seriously, for ME, shooting from a seated position (wheelchair) it comes down to a balance issue and an SBR does better for me. Running a suppressor on an SBR is good for shorter stature persons like my brother who is about 5'5". 16" with a suppressor is pretty long. 10.3" with a suppressor, back to just 16" or less. They are more maneuverable in and out of a vehicle but guys like Jabo Long of Ronin Combat Strategies can do anything with a 16" that he can an SBR EXCEPT have more rail. Just my 2 cents worth.
Great replies.
Thanks!
C4IGrant,
I spewed coffee out of my nose with your response.
Chick magnet, bwwaahhhaaaaaa!
1) Points quicker
2) Lighter and more maneuverable
3) Special operations guys use them
4) The f@&! the government factor. The $200 tax, which was once so cost prohibitive that it pretty much acted as a ban, now barely puts a dent in a lot of people's paychecks. One of the, for lack of a better word, "good" things that have come from inflation.
In and out of a vehicle or in tight quarters such as in the home, the maneuverability is far superior. You're giving up terminal performance at longer distances for portability and maneuverability. Anything inside 100 yards should still be a chip shot and most scenarios in which a civilian or civilian LE would encounter fall within this range.
If I were getting one tomorrow, it would be in .300 BLK. You're not giving anything up that would really matter with that choice, short of cheap practice ammo. You could still get a 5.56 upper for that.
Because within the most effective envelope of performance (200m), an 11.5 does 85% that a 14.5 does, while packing smaller and moving lighter.
With high-performance ammo, they're about 95%.
With a suppressor, they're about the same size as a 14.5.
If NFA regs didn't include SBRs, I bet that the most popular barrel lengths among our community would be between 10.3 and 14.5.
To me, I think it is mostly about the cool factor than anything else with many who have them. That is except for those who build clones of military type SBRs. Personally, those are the only ones I care to build. I have a Mk18 CQBR clone and a Model 607 clone. I want to build a Colt Commando clone as well.
Let's be honest, the main reason why many of us find SBR's so alluring is the fact that the Federal Government begrudges us having them.
Kind of like teens and alcohol, once they hit 21 it's not "cool" anymore.
Sure the whole small package thing applies but to 99% of gun owners the only time they use the "advantage" of a short barrel is for home defense. I don't know to many SBR owners that routinely get in and out of vehicles with their carbines slung to them. Obviously this doesn't apply to LEO's/MIL who have SBR for work guns, in fact SBRs should be used in these roles unless your AO dictates shooting at distance.
with 223/556, a legal SBR also does the following neat and fun things:
- lower velocity
- increases ballistic drop
- decreases stopping power
- decreases reliability
- greatly increases noise/blast/flash
- tax stamp adds cost/time and adds your name to some fun lists
- limits areas of country you can own or travel with it
(ok, ok, i like 'em too, but honestly, unless one needs a shorter handier barrel (or has it in a canned 300BLK), its more about forbidden fruit and having the coolest toy on the block)
((oh no, i can hear all the nasty comebacks already....))
:-)
Actually, I thought it would be cool to have one but in the end I opted against it. I ended up splitting the difference and went for an SR so that when I finally receive my 'tax trust' I'll be able to shoot with less noise.
ok, i'll bite: when doesn't decreased velocity lower stopping power?Quote:
Stopping power?
Overly generalized.
Personally, I built mine for HD. It's a suppressed 8.5" 300blk. The 300blk was made for such instances. It's a lot easier to handle and maneuver indoors.
Overly generalized perspective.
If talking velocity-dependant projectiles, like SS109, 55gr FMJ, and the like, then you will be able to see a difference.
If using modern, purpose-designed projectiles, those differences will be greatly reduced until you get outside the prime performance range of 5.56, and you would be hard pressed to see a practical performance difference out to 200 between 11.5 and 16 inch barrels.
Most velocity dependant projectiles also suffer from fleet yaw variability performance degradation anyway, which is why most professional users have moved away from those designs.
They are less common. You see stuff like this all over. For example, a vehicle forum I am on, people are paying stupid money for euro spec headrests for the second row seat. No lie. Why? They are slightly smaller and not offered in North America. Its acrazy. So that's one appeal.
The second is all the team guys are shown in military photo shoots with mk18s and hk416s with 10.3s. So there is a bit of hero worship and "they use it so it must be best for me, too! " mentality.
The 3rd reason is that the user is a swat member or someone who uses a suppressor most of the time and works in structures and vehicles quite often or any combo of the above.
I personally have no use for sbrs really. Owned a few. Saw no real benefit.
There are many reasons I like the shorty ARs, (not one of them being the forbidden fruit thing) but the biggest reason is that I enjoy shooting them. Beyond that, all other reasons are secondary. That's true of anything I shoot and I don't care if I have a practical reasons beyond pure enjoyment. Practical reasons can come later. If you want to know what the attraction is, go shoot one. It's enjoyable. So is shooting a shorty AR suppressed. Or in full auto. Be careful of shooting suppressed full auto shorties though, it's nearly addicting
Once I got into suppressors, I figured out really quick that a 16" gun with a full size can on it sucks for any kind of moving and shooting. A shorty and a can is a dream come true.
Yeah that was my concern too! Then again at my age and health most of my shooting is from the bench. 'Youth is wasted on the young'.
Because they are super maneuverable and look badass.
OAL is the big one for me. I wanted to suppress but I didn't want the rifle barrel pushing 2 ft long with a suppressor.
yes, i was referring to standard bullets/loads i've fired over the last 45 years.
ok guys, are you saying that improved bullet design means that lower velocities are no longer an issue at short ranges?
or are you saying you can generate the same velocities with the same bullet weights, out of a 11.5" bbl as we usually see thru a 16", without any increase in flash/blast/noise/ pressure/weapon-wear? if so, how's that even possible?
(being into longer ranges of 100-800meters, and not being a professional user, i just guess my logic doesn't relate)
My 16" m4 with fullsize surefire is shorter
oal than my Benelli with 18.5" barrel...food for thought.
Yup.
Improved projectile design has reduced the need to have +2600 fps impact velocity to provide sufficient wounding capability.
Not as dramatic as a 55gr coming apart in the first inch of travel, but those fail to do that even with 20" barrels enough to not want to bet on it anyway.
Take a look at 50 and 70 gr TSX, 75gr TAP, 62gr TBBC, Win 64gr Bonded PSP, and 55gr Gold Dot. Of course, keeping the velocity high is a good thing if starting out with a short barrel, but terminal performance is the first thing I consider when choosing a round that will be expected to save lives.
That would be a good trick!Quote:
or are you saying you can generate the same velocities with the same bullet weights, out of a 11.5" bbl as we usually see thru a 16", without any increase in flash/blast/noise/ pressure/weapon-wear? if so, how's that even possible?
If you are looking for performance past 300, then an SBR isn't the way to go, in my opinion.Quote:
(being into longer ranges of 100-800meters, and not being a professional user, i just guess my logic doesn't relate)
Pretty much this.
I've shot all common lengths and arrived at the conclusion that 12.5" is the ideal rifle (for me).
Why 16"?
Because some cowboy lever gun had a 16" barrel, and in 1934 it seemed like a logical cutoff?
Why 14.5"?
Because the Commando couldn't mount a bayonet, and thus was unfit as a general issue rifle?
Try them all. See what you like. Don't let the laws dictate your decision.
Bullet expansion has always trumped FMJs, fragmenting or not. Always match bullet construction to impact velocity and target type for best terminal performance. Except where required by law or policy, it's a waste to set up an AR to squeeze the last bit of terminal performance out of non-expanding bullets