View Full Version : 14.5" VS 16"Barrel
MachinegunT
06-08-09, 03:56
Could someone point me in the right direction to find out the pros and cons of each length? I am building a couple rifles right now and am on the fence!
Thanks,
T:)
lanceriley
06-08-09, 05:59
16 would end up a wee bit heavier.
And a wee bit longer, too ...............:p
Robb Jensen
06-08-09, 08:08
16" middy is what I prefer for non-SBR ARs.
There is a small velocity and even slight accuracy difference between a 14.5" as opposed to a 16", with the 16" being the faster and slightly more accurate.
You should also consider you ideal barrel twist ratio. The 1x7 is ideal for heavier rounds and probably your best overall option, but if you are just looking to shoot between 55g and 62g, the 1x9 will do fine.
lanceriley
06-08-09, 08:26
slightly faster I would agree. but slightly accurate? I would doubt that.
You are correct. Barrel length and accuracy are not exclusive.
slightly faster I would agree. but slightly accurate? I would doubt that.
Given barrels of equal quality, there should be no noticeable accuracy difference in practical use. In fact, the 14.5' will have a theoretical accuracy advantage over the 16" due to increased barrel stiffness.
Another fact to consider is the law. A 14.5" barrel will require a $200 tax stamp to comply with federal regulations on short barreled rifles unless you permanently attach a muzzle device to bring the barrel length to 16".
Otherwise, the only real difference is the 1.5" of length. You'll give up a little velocity and gain a little mobility from the more compact rifle.
lanceriley
06-08-09, 08:34
assuming you have the exact same setup...
Carbine Gas system, 7.0 in rail. Frontsight base.. it woudn't really matter
but if you're into longer rails, midlength gas system. you'll end up with a heavier rifle.
Beat Trash
06-08-09, 08:47
If you are going to be doing alot of work from inside of vehicles, I'd go with the 14.5".
My work gun is stored in the trunk (only some officers trained with Patrol Rifle - ALL have 870 in mount in front of car), so the shorter length is a non-issue.
If cars not an issue, then I prefer the extra 1.5" for the increased velocity.
As far as feel and balance, there is a slight difference in the feel of the two lengths, set up the same of course. I feel this is solely a personal preference, kind of like asking which feels better, a commander length 1911 or a full size 1911?
You are correct. Barrel length and accuracy are not exclusive.
While I would not normally reference them, I will say in my humble defense that I remember a very thorough comparison done by a reputable "senior member" of TOS about 4 years ago when I was still a member there. He posted a detailed chart that showed the relevant differences between the 14.5 and the 16.
There was an accuracy difference shown, but to be honest it could have had something to do with barrel twist and stabilization of various bullet weights as opposed to length. I think there was more to it than that, but I certainly could be wrong after all this time. My apologies if that is so.
While I own both lengths, personally I have not experienced any improved accuracy with the 16, but then again I was not nearly as scientific in my approach.
I used to drink the Kool-Aid from the well of "the longer the barrel the more accuracy" until I went to the SPR Course. Watching someone with a 12" PoF .308 hit targets past 600yds was humbling. They also cut barrels on site in previous classes and there was no loss of accuracy at all.
While I would not normally reference them, I will say in my humble defense that I remember a very thorough comparison done by a reputable "senior member" of TOS about 4 years ago when I was still a member there. He posted a detailed chart that showed the relevant differences between the 14.5 and the 16.
There was an accuracy difference shown, but to be honest it could have had something to do with barrel twist and stabilization of various bullet weights as opposed to length. I think there was more to it than that, but I certainly could be wrong after all this time. My apologies if that is so.
While I own both lengths, personally I have not expierenced any improved accuracy with the 16, but then again I was not nearly as scientific in my approach.
I used to drink the Kool-Aid from the well of "the longer the barrel the more accuracy" until I went the SPR Course. Watching someone with a 12" PoF .308 hit targets past 600yds was humbling. They also cut barrels on site in previous classes and there was no loss of accuracy at all.
A 12" 308 hitting at 600 is quite impressive indeed. Very much so in fact.
Still, this brings up the age old rebuttal about snipers using long barreled guns (20" and up) for accuracy, as well as velocity, purposes. But perhaps that is for another thread, I know.
A 12" 308 hitting at 600 is quite impressive indeed. Very much so in fact.
Still, this brings up the age old rebuttal about snipers using long barreled guns (20" and up) for accuracy, as well as velocity, purposes. But perhaps that is for another thread, I know.
I've seen 16" rail guns shoot sub-MOA groups at over 800yds. Longer barrels give you increased velocity (and effective range) at the expense of absolute accuracy.
As a general rule (with all other things being equal), longer barrel = increased velocity and shorter barrel = increased accuracy.
But as you say, that's a topic for another thread.
lanceriley
06-08-09, 09:50
probably due to technology catching up. barrels are made better nowadays compared to a decade ago?
My department also carries rifles in the trunk for the most part, so barrel length is not really an issue for manuvering. My rifle has a 14.5" on it right now, and I have to say it's more than accurate enough for what I want. I can shoot 1 MOA with it a 50 yards consistently, and I'm sure the gun is capable of better. It will also hit a chest sized target at 200 yards, using the aimpoint sight, without having to compensate or change point of aim. I guess it depends on what you want the gun for, but that's more than enough accuracy for my purposes with this one. I am however changing to a 16" barrel. My intent is to get a little more velocity out of the round for penetration and bullet upset. I was also taught at an armorer class recently that it will probably provide more even pressure and reliabilty from the gas system. Just my thoughts.
lanceriley
06-08-09, 10:01
I've seen 16" rail guns shoot sub-MOA groups at over 800yds. Longer barrels give you increased velocity (and effective range) at the expense of absolute accuracy.
As a general rule (with all other things being equal), longer barrel = increased velocity and shorter barrel = increased accuracy.
But as you say, that's a topic for another thread.
so what's a good balance for barrel length and thickness?
600 was easy. He was the instructor and was shooting the same targets we had to shoot. The furthest was right around 900 or so. He was using good quality ammo, he knew his dope and he had good glass.
A 12" 308 hitting at 600 is quite impressive indeed. Very much so in fact.
Still, this brings up the age old rebuttal about snipers using long barreled guns (20" and up) for accuracy, as well as velocity, purposes. But perhaps that is for another thread, I know.
lanceriley
06-08-09, 10:14
wow.. that's like FAR!
CarlosDJackal
06-08-09, 10:17
...Still, this brings up the age old rebuttal about snipers using long barreled guns (20" and up) for accuracy, as well as velocity, purposes. But perhaps that is for another thread, I know.
Quite a few years ago, I seem to remember that Tactical Ordinance (I think) did an experiment using an accurized Remington 700 in .308 Win as the foundation. They started at 24-inches (I think) and proceeded to cut the barrel at regular intervals and tested its accuracy out to 1,000-yards.
What they found is that an 18-inch barrel had comparable accuracy with one that had longer lengths. While their was a loss of MV and ME (duh!!), it did not affect its accuracy. FWIW.
How about one of each... Problem solved! ;)
lanceriley
06-08-09, 18:25
best idea so far ;)
A 12" 308 hitting at 600 is quite impressive indeed. Very much so in fact.
During a recent sniper course at Blackwater, one of my unit members brought his own Remington 700, with an Accuracy International stock, Leupold glass and a custom-made heavy 18" barrel. Some guys in the class smirked, until he out-shot them at 800 yards. Short barrels don't lose accuracy.
In answer to your question, its simply a matter of taste. I would stick to the 16", only because there's less ATF paperwork involved.
lanceriley
06-08-09, 19:10
although OT. it's the same reason why they set the m14 scout at 18inches. it's still accurate at that length.
now for the AR15 platform. it's even accurate when it's already cut down to 10inch of barrel.
ack... this debate again?
14.5 for anything inside of 300, 18 or 20 for anything over. the 16" CM barrel was an attempt at a legal compromise that just leaves you with the worst of both. too long for CQB, too short for long engagements. while i believe gunz's story about the 12" barrel shooting out to 900, you have to consider that the round was probably keyholing or close enough by the time it got there (poor terminal ballistics), and holdover was probably 20 hands. plus the man behind the $3,500 optic was obviously a master with that weapon, if not in general.
everyone else needs a longer barrel to hit anything past 300
i think someone else might have mentioned this, also: most 14.5 barrels are made by quality manufacturers. a 14.5 LMT will most likely outshoot a 16" wilson 20/20, or more.
ack... this debate again?
14.5 for anything inside of 300, 18 or 20 for anything over. the 16" CM barrel was an attempt at a legal compromise that just leaves you with the worst of both. too long for CQB, too short for long engagements. while i believe gunz's story about the 12" barrel shooting out to 900, you have to consider that the round was probably keyholing or close enough by the time it got there (poor terminal ballistics), and holdover was probably 20 hands. plus the man behind the $3,500 optic was obviously a master with that weapon, if not in general.
everyone else needs a longer barrel to hit anything past 300
i think someone else might have mentioned this, also: most 14.5 barrels are made by quality manufacturers. a 14.5 LMT will most likely outshoot a 16" wilson 20/20, or more.
So...I was right afterall? :p
Just kidding.
I've never been able to tell much difference between the 2 inside of 300. I have shot both at 500 yards, but at steel. I've shot a couple of 16" tubes to 600 and not had any problems. The first was a Kreiger and the 2nd is a complete Noveske with a 16" SS barrel. 400 is MOA without issues. When training at 400 if I'm shooting steel it's still head shots 400, even with 5.56. At 500 it begins to open up a bit but still generally 1.5 MOA. At 600 the wind starts having a very negative impact on my shooting skills, especially with a 5.56.
The bottom line for most is pretty much what bkb0000 said. But don't think a 14.5" barrel cannot make good hits at 300-600 yards, because it can. The rack grade military carbines and GI Joe prove it pretty regularly on the various qualification ranges. At those distances it has more to do with the shooter, ammo, and glass than the 1.5 inches of barrel.
For 90% of the shooters out there the 1.5 inches of barrel won't be the deciding factor in whether they hit their target or not.
So...I was right afterall? :p
Just kidding.
i didn't actually read the whole thread.. did i bite your style?
i didn't actually read the whole thread.. did i bite your style?
Not at all, just a little joke.
ack... this debate again?
14.5 for anything inside of 300, 18 or 20 for anything over. the 16" CM barrel was an attempt at a legal compromise that just leaves you with the worst of both. too long for CQB, too short for long engagements. while i believe gunz's story about the 12" barrel shooting out to 900, you have to consider that the round was probably keyholing or close enough by the time it got there (poor terminal ballistics), and holdover was probably 20 hands. plus the man behind the $3,500 optic was obviously a master with that weapon, if not in general.
everyone else needs a longer barrel to hit anything past 300
i think someone else might have mentioned this, also: most 14.5 barrels are made by quality manufacturers. a 14.5 LMT will most likely outshoot a 16" wilson 20/20, or more.
I tested 14.5", 16" and 20" Colt barreled guns and think most discount the 16" barrel unjustly. This was done with XM193 and shot over an Ohler chronograph.
14.5" 1/7 twist 3068 fps
16" 1/7 twist 3169 fps
16" 1/9 twist 3147 fps
20" 1/7 twist 3275 fps
20" 1/12 twist 3279 fps
For me, the extra 100 fps of a 16" barrel is worth 1.5" of handiness where the extra 100 fps of a 20" barrel is not.
Colt and LMT also make 16" barrels but a Wilson match barrel will likely have a match or at least a Wylde chamber that will offer a possibility to be more accurate and will be faster.
ADCO also has opined that a SS barrel will be faster than a CM barrel, add chrome lined and it goes from there.
That said I won't own a Wilson "air gauged" barrel and only own Colt and LMT right now but some time with a Kreiger 17" SS match barrel showed me another side of the story.
I tested 14.5", 16" and 20" Colt barreled guns and think most discount the 16" barrel unjustly. This was done with XM193 and shot over an Ohler chronograph.
14.5" 1/7 twist 3068 fps
16" 1/7 twist 3169 fps
16" 1/9 twist 3147 fps
20" 1/7 twist 3275 fps
20" 1/12 twist 3279 fps
For me, the extra 100 fps of a 16" barrel is worth 1.5" of handiness where the extra 100 fps of a 20" barrel is not.
Colt and LMT also make 16" barrels but a Wilson match barrel will likely have a match or at least a Wylde chamber that will offer a possibility to be more accurate and will be faster.
ADCO also has opined that a SS barrel will be faster than a CM barrel, add chrome lined and it goes from there.
That said I won't own a Wilson "air gauged" barrel and only own Colt and LMT right now but some time with a Kreiger 17" SS match barrel showed me another side of the story.
how much farther is an extra 100fps gonna get you till spin degradation? if it's a third tool in the tool bag, then so be it. i personally DO own a 16" barrel- it's a medium stainless 1/7 with a wyld chamber, and it does just under 1moa with xm193. i modeled the gun after the Recce to be a 500m shooter. that's totally out of the realm of CM and CL guns, however- you're not going to get anywhere near that kind of distance/accuracy out of a CM 16" barrel.
perhaps i'm out of my lane- i haven't done that much shooting with CM 16" barrels, and i sure as shit am not a ballistics expert. but i know that a good 14.5" barrel takes you as far, and then some, as you'll ever need to go with close combat. anything longer just hangs you up. if you're reaching out farther than that, you want the punch you're gonna get with an extra few hundred fps- anything can get you there, and maybe even accurately- but will it do anything once it hits?
As it has been said the 16" barrel will give you more velocity but not more accuracy, if you are using an optic. Generally if you are using iron sights the longer barrel will improve accuracy because the distance between front and rear sights is increased, "sight radius". A longer sight radius helps to minimize the affects of slight misalignment between the sights and the target. Using an optic renders this moot.
As it has been said the 16" barrel will give you more velocity but not more accuracy, if you are using an optic. Generally if you are using iron sights the longer barrel will improve accuracy because the distance between front and rear sights is increased, "sight radius". A longer sight radius helps to minimize the affects of slight misalignment between the sights and the target. Using an optic renders this moot.
there's zero difference in site distance between a 14.5 carbine and a 16 carbine. you have to change your gas system to increase site distance. traditionally, you have to move up to a rifle to get your FSB out farther, but middies work for 14.5s and 16s.
Thanks for the info. I was not sure if there was a difference between carbine and mid-length gas system front sight bases.
Thanks for the info. I was not sure if there was a difference between carbine and mid-length gas system front sight bases.
there is- if clarification is needed.. the carbine system port sits at about 7.20," the middy sits at about 9.20"- so the middy system does push the FSB out farther. either system works with 14.5 or 16. with everyone going to RDSs, though, it's rarely a consideration (site distance, that is).
MachinegunT
06-09-09, 00:21
Thanks for the good information guys! :)
Hello, all! Brand new to this site!
Regarding legality, be sure state/local laws allow SBRs. I live in AL, where they are banned, regardless of Fed hoops :mad: .
As I read the thread, a question comes to mind: Is there a discernible difference in the muzzle blast/flash between 16" and 14.5" barrels?
Also, given the comments about sight radius, wouldn't a "Dissipator"-type (a full M16-length handguard with front sight and 16" barrel ending just in front of the front sight assembly) upper be advantageous for shooting with iron sights?
Thomas M-4
06-09-09, 09:30
Hello, all! Brand new to this site!
Regarding legality, be sure state/local laws allow SBRs. I live in AL, where they are banned, regardless of Fed hoops :mad: .
As I read the thread, a question comes to mind: Is there a discernible difference in the muzzle blast/flash between 16" and 14.5" barrels?
Also, given the comments about sight radius, wouldn't a "Dissipator"-type (a full M16-length handguard with front sight and 16" barrel ending just in front of the front sight assembly) upper be advantageous for shooting with iron sights?
I live in AL too I have a 14.5inch LMT with pinned and welded saber defense FH.
Just so you now it can be done of course you probably already knew that;)
The biggest difference in barrel length is performance of the round, 5.56 needs a certain amount of velocity to be effective, but depending on who you talk too a 14.5" barrel leaves that envelope somewhere between 75 and 90 yards, and a 16" shortly thereafter
IIRC the ideal compromise between performance and length was figured out to be 17 or 18"
This all depends on who you talk to
According to the ammo oracle, m193 needs 2700 fps to break up. The 14.5" drops below 2700fps around 95-100 meters while the 16" guns carry 2700 fps another 50 meters. A 20" barrel carries it another 50 meters or so beyond that.
M855 is close to the same difference.
I don't kick in doors and have never had a problem with bullet performance regardless of 14.5 or 16" for hunting but I also don't use FMJ's for hunting. Just relaying facts.
I live in AL too I have a 14.5inch LMT with pinned and welded saber defense FH.
Just so you now it can be done of course you probably already knew that;)
Hm. I hadn't thought about using a permanently-attached muzzle device to meet the legal length (which I presume you're referring to). For some of us the obvious, ain't.:)
The 14.5" drops below 2700fps around 95-100 meters while the 16" guns carry 2700 fps another 50 meters.
That alone would seem well worth the extra 1.5" to me.
Although,not fooling with the SBR cost/hassle(for a 14.5") or a perm FH was enough for me to go with 16" carbines twice now.Even if many find them unsightly.Mid-lengths aside...I feel the 16" has the advantage over the 14.5" carbines in many respects(outweigh the 1.5" of "decreased mobility" imo).
I'm curious what the size of the increased fragmentation window would be for 75gr TAP and 77gr Sierra(16"-v-14.5").
Hm. I hadn't thought about using a permanently-attached muzzle device to meet the legal length (which I presume you're referring to). For some of us the obvious, ain't.:)
That's what we do with our 14.5" variants as well here in NJ.
That alone would seem well worth the extra 1.5" to me.
I'm curious what the size of the increased fragmentation window would be for 75gr TAP and 77gr Sierra(16"-v-14.5").
http://www.box.net/shared/static/5xb498q4sj.jpg
Excellent!
Much appreciated.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.