Colt 14.5-inch M4 barrel vs SOCOM barrel?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonconsiglio

You mean longer barreled hosts, right...? I have a 10.5 LMT I run suppressed all the time and there's little shift. I've run Surefire on 16" KAC barrels with no more that 1 MOA shift.

You shouldn't see much sag at all in an SBR with any profile really compared to a 16".

---

No. I meant shorter barrels.

Take a 10.3'' LW barrel, and hang an NT4 on it. Then do the same thing with a fatty barrel.

The fatty barrel will have less shift every time, IME.

And Colt's are worth it, because their fat barrels are stupid accurate.

I like 'em.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magic_Salad0892

No. I meant shorter barrels.

Take a 10.3'' LW barrel, and hang an NT4 on it. Then do the same thing with a fatty barrel.

The fatty barrel will have less shift every time, IME.

And Colt's are worth it, because their fat barrels are stupid accurate.

I like 'em.

---

I have. The shift is usually due to something other than the barrel profile on SBR's, like the NT4, which will show shift on everything. I've run Surefires on all different barrel lengths and profiles with very minimal shift regardless though slightly more on longer, thinner barrels.

On a 16" barrel with a heavy NT4, I can see the benefit of a heavy profile, just to be clear.

I'm not saying it won't shift at all, but that's a silly reason to buy a heavy profile SBR... Can you post some pics of your set up or just the targets to show this on the SBR's?

I have both regular profile Colt M-4 and SOCOM, and I like both of them. My last build I used a Colt SOCOM barrel because I got for a very reasonable price. I would not mind building a lightweight for my next build and see the difference.

Thanks guys.

I'm wanting to outfit a couple carbeans to be similar and think with what I've already got the M4 pattern is the easiest/best way to go (...and I know it well). As for lightweight, I've got an Air Force GUU-5/P clone I'm working on; unfortunately the lightweight 14.5-inch 1/7 barrels some of the GUUs have is not to be had on the open market, so mine will wear a M4 barrel in a C7 upper. They're very lightweight, fun to shoot, but can get squirrely on auto. Based on your info and as the M4 build isn't going to be run on auto or be a target rifle, I'm thinking the standard weight M4 barreled upper is the way to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeltaSierra

I really can't understand your hatred of light weight barrels.

---

It's not so much the Barrel profile as it is the homo fad it has become. After 15 years of AR15 experience, I've seen a lot of herd mentality. And usually the more obsessed a shooter is with light weight, the more retarded he is. (not that a heavy gun is the answer)

It's just that light weight retardation leads to Carbon 15 AR and .380 pistol customers. :jester:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markm

It's not so much the Barrel profile as it is the homo fad it has become. After 15 years of AR15 experience, I've seen a lot of herd mentality. And usually the more obsessed a shooter is with light weight, the more retarded he is. (not that a heavy gun is the answer)

It's just that light weight retardation leads to Carbon 15 AR and .380 pistol customers. :jester:

---

I don't care if someone is buying a heavy profile or a lightweight, what bothers me is when they do it based on what they heard or read without any experience of their own.

I see so many people buying lightweight barrels without a reference and without a specific need. I understand it if you're experienced and you need a lighter rifle for training classes or for sme other specific purpose, but I see too many people buy them thinking the only difference between them and the govt pr hevy profiles is weight.

My first AR-15 was a Colt Sporter Lightweight II and I honestly didn't like it .it felt like a weak barrel to me I didn't think it would take the abuse being I was use to AKs .
once I got a hold of a M4 it just fit and was the right weight for me .Plus My time as a Tanker we trained with the M4 and I know what I could do with the weapon and what it would withstand as far as the punishment I put it through .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markm

It's not so much the Barrel profile as it is the homo fad it has become. After 15 years of AR15 experience, I've seen a lot of herd mentality. And usually the more obsessed a shooter is with light weight, the more retarded he is. (not that a heavy gun is the answer)

It's just that light weight retardation leads to Carbon 15 AR and .380 pistol customers. :jester:

---

OK...

Thanks for clearing that up. Now that I understand your reasoning, I have to agree with you....:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonconsiglio

I don't care if someone is buying a heavy profile or a lightweight, what bothers me is when they do it based on what they heard or read without any experience of their own.

---

everybody has to start some where. We are not born with experience.

For a suppressor, or most any use without a barrel mounted M203, the Noveske N4 contour makes much more sense, and it's cheap compared to the Colt SOCOM profile units.

I got a CMMG SOCOM profile 14.5" as my first rifle - have it next to me right now and still love it, but it's a heavier rifle than it needs to be, and having learned what I know now I'd be cost ahead getting a simpler barrel profile and saving money by using a cheaper and lighter stock as well (STR instead of a UBR at the moment) and end up at a lighter overall weapon without giving up accuracy or massively increasing cost.

All the added mass is great for short high round count use, since that's the area of the barrel that gets hot the fastest, but for the volume I shoot through this thing the standard M4 contour would have made more sense.