View Full Version : Why 14.5" mid length, gov't profile?
What was the thought process behind a 14.5" gov't profile barrel with a mid length gas?
I can understand why we have 16" carbine gas barrels, but 14.5" mid, gov't profile seems to be the result of a great opportunity... Totally missed.
Where did 14.5" barrels originate and how are they beneficial to mid-length barrels?
Why gov't profile? What does the gov't profile do that is beneficial to a mid-length gas barrel?
IMO, the effort of designing the mid-length gas system has been a win for the civilian AR owner. I like the concept and I believe the advantages are real and that there are no downsides to a 16" mid.
I understand the desire for the shortest barrel possible, and the most rail estate. I get it.
But when it comes to mid-length barrels, why not 15"?
How many guys actually run 14.5" barrels on an SBR'd lower? What's the point?
How much maneuverability would be lost by 15" vs 14.5"?
For the non-SBR guys, life would much simpler without having to pin an extended length flash hider, and why would one want the increased diameter from the FSB forward?
Youre really asking 2 questions. On the profile, why not. It's not my preference but the .mil and many civilians already use it and are content with it. In the length, you would still have to pin on an A2 FH so what's the difference. I'll bet than many who buy or build a 14.5 prefer the options in loger muzzle devices. Oh, that and the vast majority of tooling is already set up for 14.5" barrels. Again many already prefer them from their .mil time. 3 of my 4 current builds use 14.5's. Several companies use 14.7 and Noveske uses a 13.7(?) as well. There are many options out there. On a build a few years ago I had ADCO cut the 16" to whatever would make 16 with a pinned short BC. 12 of one a dozen of the other.
...How much maneuverability would be lost by 15" vs 14.5"?
For the non-SBR guys, life would much simpler without having to pin an extended length flash hider, and why would one want the increased diameter from the FSB forward?
14.7" already is available so why not choose that over 15" and still be able to use a standard length muzzle device? Still, a 16" barrel makes more sense for many of us since you don't have to permanently attach the MD.
people are always after the smoothest shooter (longer gas system) and most maneuverable (shorter barrel) rifle that they can, so they attempted to push the boundaries of the platform. personally, I feel as though 14.5" barrels are for carbine gas systems, and 16" barrels are for midlengths.
gov't profile is silly no matter how you slice it.
At this point I'd take any 14.5" Middy. This lack of inventory is annoying as hell.
At this point I'd take any 14.5" Middy. This lack of inventory is annoying as hell.
There seems to be a fair amount moving in the EE if you keep your eyes open.
Personally, I think the 16 inch barrel is just silly. What companies should have done is just offered 14.5 barrels with attached muzzle devices, or left it end user specific. But, yes, I realize there are a bunch of idiots that probably would be running illegal SBRs if this happened. Thats OK - it gives range masters and the ATF something to do all day ;)
Whether they are 'silly' or not, there are some obvious legal reasons that 16 inch barrels exist.
I'm with the OP. I don't get 14.5 mid length either.
CrazyFingers
02-25-13, 08:13
Personally, I think the 16 inch barrel is just silly. What companies should have done is just offered 14.5 barrels with attached muzzle devices, or left it end user specific.
In the absence of legal constraints, you might have a point. But given that we have to abide by the regulations that are in place, I don't see where you're going.
The 16" barrel isn't silly, it's the shortest length that does not require a permanently attached muzzle device. This gives civilian owners who aren't stamp collectors more options.
Most companies do offer 14.5" barrels with pinned muzzle devices. Most companies do offer user specific options.
Or perhaps I'm just confused? (Wouldn't be the first time)
If it was not for the laws that prohibits lowly peasants from owning 14.5" barrels I'd get one. I, however, do not like a pinned muzzle device, and I were to SBR a lower itd be for a 10.5".
To me 16" is not silly, the law is!
And for the profile, m4 profile barrels are weird looking to me, and I never plan on mounting the M203.
I have a Govt' profile, now I want a lightweight barrel. And on a 14.5" I'd choose Mid gas still.
I don't know why... but I shot a 14.5 middy barrel that Iraqgunz gave me Saturday, and it's NICE! An .080 port that runs both .223 and Mk262 very well. Gassed just right.
Sucker shoots MOA too. It's going to make a handy carbine.
Failure2Stop
02-25-13, 08:46
What do you mean by "Government Profile"?
Are you referring to M4 cut barrels, as usually a "government profile" is referring to the A2 style; pencil under HG, thick from FSB to muzzle. M4 profile generally referrs to a 14.5 to 16" barrel with the same profile, but with the 203 notch cut forward of the FSB.
jonconsiglio
02-25-13, 08:47
I don't know why... but I shot a 14.5 middy barrel that Iraqgunz gave me Saturday, and it's NICE! An .080 port that runs both .223 and Mk262 very well. Gassed just right.
Sucker shoots MOA too. It's going to make a handy carbine.
Who make it?
I read somewhere on here that 14.5 mid setups were giving people problems. Maybe crap ammo was causing the problems, don't remember.
Who make it?
Sabre...
Yeah.. the 14.5s can be picky with ammo if the port is .076. This .080 runs a full rifle buffer set up perfectly.
As far as Govt profile... I'd prefer more meat on the barrel under the handguard... but the thing shoots.. so. :confused:
I read somewhere on here that 14.5 mid setups were giving people problems. Maybe crap ammo was causing the problems, don't remember.
I have a 14.5 middie (BCM EAG) that would short stroke on weak ammo for about the first 1K rounds or so; now it can digest anything. I have always used an H buffer though, perhaps a carbine buffer in the beginning may have helped some. Coupled with the 1.5 Battlecomp it is arguably the "softest" shooting carbine I own.
What do you mean by "Government Profile"?
Are you referring to M4 cut barrels, as usually a "government profile" is referring to the A2 style; pencil under HG, thick from FSB to muzzle. M4 profile generally referrs to a 14.5 to 16" barrel with the same profile, but with the 203 notch cut forward of the FSB.
I assumed that by typing gov't profile, that it would be interpreted as 'Government Profile'. A2 profile.
I was only talking about 14.5" midlength barrels. I've never seen an M203 notch on a mid-length barrel...
I agree that the 16" is kind of an arbitrary number for legal purposes.
Why I think that it's silly is like I said - companies can offer the 14.5 inch, pinned to 16 inches, or just ship it as-is. Nearly everyone out there does something to the end of the barrel, right? Flash hider, compensator, silencer, etc. NONE of them actually shorten the OAL ... It just seems that 16 inch was chosen as a CYA for the manufacturers.
After all, it's obviously not illegal to sell a < 16 inch barrel, it's on the owner to follow the law. Which raises the question (like the OP sort of alluded to), why 14.5 inches? What does 16 inch do better? In fact, we could ask why 14.5 inches?
Failure2Stop
02-25-13, 17:22
I assumed that by typing gov't profile, that it would be interpreted as 'Government Profile'. A2 profile.
I was only talking about 14.5" midlength barrels. I've never seen an M203 notch on a mid-length barrel...
That's what I assumed, but wanted to clarify.
Carry on.
I agree that the 16" is kind of an arbitrary number for legal purposes.
...
After all, it's obviously not illegal to sell a < 16 inch barrel, it's on the owner to follow the law. Which raises the question (like the OP sort of alluded to), why 14.5 inches? What does 16 inch do better? In fact, we could ask why 14.5 inches?
The why of the 14.5" gov't profile was answered by the military.
I am wondering why the mid-length was retro-engineered into the 14.5" gov't spec.
The 14.5" mid has had some teething pains and is still not always as reliably functional with all ammo and buffer combinations.
I'm willing to bet that the majority of 14.5" mid barrels end up with a permed muzzle device. 15" would have resulted in a little more dwell time and eliminated the need for an extended flash hider. The gov't profile is of no benefit to anyone.
In my opinion, it would have been great to see the new standard in civilian market barrels go to a 15" or 16" mid with a regular lightweight profile.
Daniel Defense still sells all their mids with gov't profiles with LW as an option, BCM just started putting free float fore ends on their LW uppers. Noveske came the closest with their N4 profile and Skinny 14.5"s.
I'm always reading about 'which buffer for a 14.5" mid?', my mid won't cycle .223', etc... I see pictures of all the extended flash hiders pinned on 'em, everyone likes a lighter carbine.
I've always said: "Why not 15" with lightweight profile?" It seems like it would be an easy answer to a lot of questions...
Yea I have never understood the Gov. profile. Seems like a little thicker under the hand guard would do much better than thick past the gas block.
Not sure if there is any benefit out that far.
Swamp Yankee
02-26-13, 06:49
Due to local laws, I HAVE to have a permanently fixed muzzle device regardless of barrel length. Taking that into consideration, I decided it made more sense to have the shorter 14.5" barrel with the 1.5" muzzle device pinned and welded. I also opted for Noveske's Light Weight Mid-length and it has been exceptionally reliable and accurate with .223/5.56 using just a standard Colt H carbine buffer. I contemplated the A5 system at one time, but after researching it here, it seemed like "too much of a good thing" as some have put it.
I contemplated the A5 system at one time, but after researching it here, it seemed like "too much of a good thing" as some have put it.
The 14.5 middy is the problem. Not the A5.
Swamp Yankee
02-26-13, 06:56
The 14.5 middy is the problem. Not the A5.
Agreed. For that configuration it is unnecessary. If I was using a 14.5" carbine or even a 16" Mid then I would absolutely install one.
My Sabre 14.5 Middy from Iraqgunz has an .080 port, and would run an A5 just fine since it was running the Rifle buffer like a champ.
But the .076 port doesn't work optimally with the A5. It's the gas flow as much as the 14.5/Mid combo that dictates the best buffer system.
My 14.5 BCM middy runs just fine with an A5 standard A5 buffer. Granted, I don't run crap ammo through it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.