Ballistic Advantage Hanson Mid vs. Bravo Company Enhanced Lightweight midlength

[Ryno12]

Deleted. Life is too short as it is. mipgolf1 - my deleted response was not directed at you.

Obviously I know it was directed at me.

We should delete AC's sticky also, since it appears to offend people and apparently is no longer valid.

[SeriousStudent]

I keep wondering why I keep seeing the same names in the same arguments over and over......

mjpgolf1 - why don't you take a rest for a while? Seriously, just read for a while and not post.

Because right now it's just a suggestion. I see one more bickering thread, and it will stop being a suggestion.

[26 Inf]

Obviously I know it was directed at me.

We should delete AC's sticky also, since it appears to offend people and apparently is no longer valid.

Hey, you know, maybe I didn't look that close at the plank in my own eye before I spoke, but, dang, I thought you were getting on the guy after he tried to make nice.

[Coal Dragger]

If it helps, all of the groups pictured were shot back to back with only minor adjusting of my red dot in between. But they were shot thru the same magazine within a 2 minute time frame. Whether or not that helps I don't know. Regardless as I mentioned before, we aren't talking about a $500 match grade barrel here. We are trying to establish if the Faxon is a decent conteneder for someone looking at the Ballistic Advantage and the BCM. Which in my opinion taking into consideration the beautiful fit and finish and the small example posted from the range today I would say it's in the running.

Another thing that has me puzzled is how some people could totally disregard fit and finish as a showing of quality. For example I'm a high end watch and car collector and fit and finish plays a huge part in judging the quality of a finely made watch or a well built automobile. If a company is willing to go the extra mile and finish off their product so that it is aesthetically pleasing as well, then that should be a good indicator that they take pride in their product and want it to represent them as a high quality manufacturer. Completely discarding fit and finish as a criteria with an AR is just mind blowing to me. If it wasn't important then companies like Battle Arms, Vseven, SLR Rifleworks, and many others wouldn't be in business and successful. There are different types of AR owners just like with anything. I for one like my rifles to look as good as they shoot.

Well using the car analogy if this were a car forum you'd probably find a lot of hard core racing enthusiasts and industry professionals. This would not be a forum dedicated to Concours de' Elegance or Pebble Beach car show type cars.

While a competitive race car is hugely expensive often times fit and finish of cosmetic components of the car come in a very distant second to functional capabilities: how fast, how durable, how consistent. If it can be made to look pretty as well, then great, but first and foremost it must perform.

This site is in many ways unique because it caters to a lot of knowledgeable professional end users. To these guys a carbine is a tool, tools get dirty, they get abused, they don't need to be pretty. If a modification or other effort is put into changing some aspect of the tool it should serve a purpose beyond looks. For example fit needs to be oriented towards maximum performant and ease of maintenance, and finishes are there to improve part durability and service life in adverse conditions. Remember we're dealing with a service rifle/carbine here, the automotive equivalent of a hard use vehicle be it a race car or commercial vehicle.

[friendlyfireisnt]

To get back on a more technical front, I've got more than a few barrels, including multiple BCM's and also a Ballistic Advantage, and I have done some accuracy tests with a few of them. Some tests were 10-shot groups (some were 3 or more 10-shot groups), some were 5-shot groups. I have avoided 3-shot groups.


Not a 100% fair comparison, because of difference in caliber, and therefore ammunition, and the barrel length and profile are different as well. But it's a good way just to see potential. These are some of the BEST groups I have shot with each barrel, with that specific ammunition choice.

Ballistic Advantage with 110gr Blacktips (5-shot) Group size is 1.452" center-to-center
110 Blacktip #4 by Photographer Pilot, on Flickr

Ballistic Advantage with 110gr VMAX (10-shot) Group size is 1.724" center-to-center
image by Photographer Pilot, on Flickr


BCM Lightweight 14.5" 50gr American Eagle Varmint Group size 1.870" center-to-center
BCM American Eagle Varmint by Photographer Pilot, on Flickr

BCM Lightweight 14.5" 77gr Nosler Handloads Group size 1.684" center-to-center
BCM 77gr Nosler by Photographer Pilot, on Flickr

Now, these were once again, just groups that I have documented with specific barrels and specific ammunition that I have chosen for specific purposes, not necessarily the most accurate ammo. These groups are also done one different days, but with a similar setup and with the same scope and at the same distance (100 yards). Average groups sizes are of course a bit larger than these posted.

To me, what I see is two barrels that are capable of providing adequate accuracy when provided good ammo. That's only part of the story though. Longevity, durability, finish quality and even the chamber dimensions may have some significant differences. Unfortunately, I can't provide any real good data points on those factors.

So to me, while I have a strong bias towards BCM (and DD and Larue), the Ballistic Advantage shows good performance at a good price. I would feel comfortable building another AR using one of their barrels.

As an additional data point, here is a Daniel Defense 16" lightweight barrel with the same 77gr Nosler handloads, shot on the same day as the BCM (group size 1.054" center to center)
DD Nosler 77gr by Photographer Pilot, on Flickr

[websniper]

Wow this thread went to hell quickly. Anyway, I ordered a 16" BA Hanson .625 barrel. Can't wait to get it in and keep working on this upper. It's on an Aero upper and it is getting a 12" ALG EMR V3.

That being said, the one other question I had that didn't really seem to get touched on is that I've read in a few places that these barrels are pretty conservatively gassed. Anyone have issues with .223 ammo such as PMC bronze or the like?

I'm not sure how it stacks up velocity wise (I should check), but the SD load that I've stocked is Hornady TAP .223 75gr BTHP's. Hopefully it is reliable in this barrel. EDIT: The .223 Hornady TAP is listed at 2790 fps at the muzzle, which appears to be several hundred fps less than what something like m855 is listed at. Will have to buy some to function test in this rifle I guess.

Frankly, I'm not as concerned with out and out accuracy in this particular gun. It's a home defense rifle first and foremost, so at those "hallway" type distances it's not super-critical.