View Full Version : Can Someone Explain to Me Why the 14.5 Middy Exists
With all the trouble that people have, why does this exists.
It has neither the benefits of a 16" middy or a 14.5" CAR system.
It is unreliable without special buffer/spring combinations and you cannot use a FSP style rail to mount a light at 12oclock.
I also think it looks like crap.
RAM Engineer
05-11-11, 16:43
Possibilities:
1. Consumer Demand driven: If Midlength is good on a 16" gun, it must be even gooder on a 14.5" gun. Right?
2. The eternal quest for "smooth recoiling guns": See also the rise in compensators, numerous posts on "buffer-ology" to lessen recoil and other crap.
It's funny how on the first page of this forum there are dueling posts for "guns that eat cheap" and "14.5 Middys, are the bugs worked out?". People want EVERYTHING in one gun. Air rifle recoil AND extreme ammo tolerance AND reliability AND durability.
I dunno. I'll stick with the carbine systems. If I ever get around to building an 18" gun, I'll mess with some other gas length.
All what trouble? We have made the 14.5" mid for about 8 years now in SS and just recently CHF, no problems.
Why does the 14.5" barrel length exist at all?
RAM Engineer
05-11-11, 16:47
Why does the 14.5" barrel length exist at all?
You could ask that about almost any length. There are always two barrel lengths on either side of whichever one is in question.
(except 10.3" and 20". Those are really the ends of the practical spectrum)
I am very interested to know this as well. Currently working on a LW upper and is having a a hard time deciding between a 16 mid length gas, 14.5 mid length gas, or a 14.5 carbine length gas.
From the many various threads I read, it seems like the 14.5 mid length shoots smoother than the carbine and weight less than the 16 mid. However like the OP said, some seems to have problem putting under pressured (cheaper ammo I assume) ammo through it. So that why they experiment with different buffer and spring? Or are there are any other reason?
Definitely would like to find out
ghostman1960
05-11-11, 16:50
Because enough people like me like them and spend our hard earned money on them often enough for manufacturers to find them to be a profitable option. Simple really.
What problems are being encountered with the 14.5" middy? Who is having these problems and where are they occurring and under what conditions? How does the frequency of these problems compare to other configurations? Who is manufacturing these 14.5 middies that are having problems?
Anyone with first hand experience with 14.5" middies please answer these questions
If Midlength is good on a 16" gun, it must be even gooder on a 14.5" gun. Right? ...I'll stick with the carbine systems.
The carbine length gas system was designed for the 10" commando, the mid for 16". 14.5" is closer to 16" than 10" if you want to look at it that way.
The 14.5" exists because the gas system designed for a 10" barrel existed and 14.5" of barrel allowed the existing bayonet to be used. While I own and have no problem running them it's NOT an example of a gas system designed for a barrel length.
What problems are being encountered with the 14.5" middy? Who is having these problems and where are they occurring and under what conditions? How does the frequency of these problems compare to other configurations? Who is manufacturing these 14.5 middies that are having problems?
Anyone with first hand experience with 14.5" middies please answer these questions
I have use a Daniel Defense 14.5 inch middy for about 6 months now. It has been run through multiple classes with no issues at all. Literally not a single malfunction except the ones I have induced for training.
I see now why LMT refuses to cater to the rage of the 14.5" middy...nobody tests more than them and nothing leaves their design board unless it's uber reliable.
I'm assuming this thread was inspired at least partially by my post about my woes with the VLTOR A5 system and my 14.5" mid-length.
As someone who owns a 16" mid-length as well, I can honestly say I hands down prefer my 14.5" mid-length over the 16" mid-length in every aspect, save for the welded on flash hider, but that's irrelevant.
The 14.5" mid-length shoots noticeably softer than my 16" mid-length to me, and it also handles a lot better for me.
My reliability with it had been 100% with a carbine receiver extension and H buffer set up beforehand even with steel case like wolf, bear, etc. I really think it was just a matter of an improper set up, not an actual deficiency with the barrel and gas system combination.
I will say that there might be, and I do say might as I haven't had it really proven to me yet, a small hit to reliability over different, especially weaker, ammunition types. However, I still don't think that's true, only a possibility and my own experiences with one and weak ammo has shown that it isn't true. Not fact, just my personal, and admittedly limited, experience.
I'm very pleased with my 14.5" mid-length, and I can certainly say that I would take it over a 16" mid-length. Just my experiences and preferences.
Cagemonkey
05-11-11, 17:24
The reason for reliability problems with the 14.5 middy is because people use underpowered ammunition and experiment with different buffers and new receiver extensions. I bet using a regular carbine buffer would solve these problems. It was good enough for many early carbine variants. Didn't the earlier M4 experience reliability and durability problems attributed to the carbine length gas system? Something about dwell time, port pressures, gas ports rounding off and high cyclic rates that contributed to extraction failures.
With all the trouble that people have, why does this exists.
It has neither the benefits of a 16" middy or a 14.5" CAR system.
It is unreliable without special buffer/spring combinations and you cannot use a FSP style rail to mount a light at 12oclock.
I also think it looks like crap.
I have been running a Centurion Arms 14.5 middy for about six months now, I have never had a problem with about 3000+ rounds down range(1500 of it from last week's 2x 2days combine LEO and open enrollment Jason Falla class). the set up I am running utilize a H2 buffer and standard buffer spring. I am not particular on running the light on the 12 o'clock position so its not an issue for me.
Looks are personal, I actually find the look to be very pleasing.
here is my 14.5 middy build...
http://photos.imageevent.com/smglee/gg/huge/IMG_6839.jpg
What problems are being encountered with the 14.5" middy? Who is having these problems and where are they occurring and under what conditions? How does the frequency of these problems compare to other configurations? Who is manufacturing these 14.5 middies that are having problems?
Anyone with first hand experience with 14.5" middies please answer these questions
1. I believe that the real (and only? :confused: ) problem is that 14.5" mid-lengths don't get as much dwell time between the gas port and the muzzle. As such, I think they may be more sensitive and susceptible to short stroking. Especially with weak ammunition, or as I have recently found out first hand, a heavier than necessary buffer/spring set up (in my case the A5).
2. I am having them currently with my VLTOR A5. I used a standard carbine receiver extension, spring and H buffer beforehand without any problems. The issue seems to be a combination of weaker than "mil-spec" ammunition, and the buffer/spring set up being stronger than necessary for this particular barrel length and gas system combination. I think in my particular case the only problem is the A5 kit, not the upper or ammunition.
3. In my experience I get 3 or so short strokes every 400 or 500 rounds.
4. Mine is a BCM. Once again, I do not blame the upper or the ammunition in any way, nor do I think they are prone to this. I do not blame the VLTOR A5, either. I think the combination of the two (the upper and the A5) is simply a bad configuration that should be avoided, or at least until a lighter A5 buffer designed for 14.5" mid-lengths is released.
1. I believe that the real (and only? :confused: ) problem is that 14.5" mid-lengths don't get as much dwell time between the gas port and the muzzle. As such, I think they may be more sensitive and susceptible to short stroking. Especially with weak ammunition, or as I have recently found out first hand, a heavier than necessary buffer/spring set up (in my case the A5).
2. I am having them currently with my VLTOR A5. I used a standard carbine receiver extension, spring and H buffer beforehand without any problems. The issue seems to be a combination of weaker than "mil-spec" ammunition, and the buffer/spring set up being stronger than necessary for this particular barrel length and gas system combination. I think in my particular case the only problem is the A5 kit, not the upper or ammunition.
3. In my experience I get 3 or so short strokes every 400 or 500 rounds.
4. Mine is a BCM. Once again, I do not blame the upper or the ammunition in any way, nor do I think they are prone to this. I do not blame the VLTOR A5, either. I think the combination of the two (the upper and the A5) is simply a bad configuration that should be avoided, or at least until a lighter A5 buffer designed for 14.5" mid-lengths is released.
I agree with you, the A5 is designed to be an replacement for a A2 stock with 20" bbl, the 14.5 middy with less gas pressure could have result in short stroke issues.
Why all the recent attention to the 14.5 mid lately? I think as long as its from a reputable mfg and you use components that have been proven to work in it (H buffer, carbine rec extension) it will run. Using higher pressure ammo definitely helps, but I've managed on steel for now. Its like any other AR really.
The reason I bought one was because it was in stock at the time and had a pinned comp which I needed for NY regardless of barrel length. It just happened to work out that its a pretty soft system.
With all the trouble that people have, why does this exists.
As an owner of two 14.5 middies, I wonder what trouble you're talking about.
It has neither the benefits of a 16" middy or a 14.5" CAR system.
It doesn't have any disadvantages of those either. It is shorter and more maneuverable than 16 mid, and not overgassed as 14. car.
It is unreliable without special buffer/spring combinations and you cannot use a FSP style rail to mount a light at 12oclock.
It is reliable with a garden-variety carbine spring and range of buffers from carbine to H to H2. You can use a low-pro gasblock, long rail and mount your light at 12 o'clock all you want. Daniel Defense makes a front sight just for those purposes. For those who chose to run FSB without free float rail, it gives a longer handguard that allows for a hand position further out if one so desires.
Thousands rounds through 14.5 middies, I've not found a downside.
I see now why LMT refuses to cater to the rage of the 14.5" middy...nobody tests more than them and nothing leaves their design board unless it's uber reliable.
Does LMT offer anything in midlength? Hard to say from their website.
I also think it looks like crap.
Ah...so just trolling, right? For a minute there I thought you were serious.
Since Colt amd LMT don't make them, they obviously aren't that good.
All of the "problems" that I have here are easily fixable silliness that has nothing to do with some inherent problem with the design.
1. Installing aftermarket stuff and running into problems. ie. Vltor A5 may require replacing 1 or 2 tungsten weights with steel. Think about it...the A5 comes with a buffer which weighs 5.3oz...you cannot expect to stick that in an already soft shooting rifle which has a 3.7oz H buffer. Short stroking should be an obvious consequence. Replace the weights and drive on. I'm not bashing the A5 system at all, just know what you are doing. Fix these super minor issues and you may have a smoother rifle as others have reported.
2. Running weak ammo while still using a heavy buffer. People complaining "it is short stroking with my Hx buffer and my weak ammo". An easy fix is to use a lighter buffer, and/or shoot non-weak ammo.
Pretty simple?
I used to own a mid length, and my long gangly arms enjoyed the extra length over the carbine length. The 14.5'' allows an as short as possible non NFA length. It makes perfect sense to me.
With all the trouble that people have, why does this exists.
It has neither the benefits of a 16" middy or a 14.5" CAR system.
It is unreliable without special buffer/spring combinations and you cannot use a FSP style rail to mount a light at 12oclock.
I also think it looks like crap.
Well, what skin is it off your nose?
You don't like the looks, fine don't buy one.
You think they are unreliable, don't buy one.
This thread helps no one why isn't it closed?
Chris
I've only put around 1000 rds. thru my 14.5 mid of which 100 was wolf with no issues. Reg buffer and spring. But have never shot a carbine length to compare it to.
When I first got mine it ran every buffer we through at it. For whatever reason, it started to fail to lock back with heavier carbine buffers and the rifle buffer. :confused:
It's never actually malfed... bolt over or jammed up or anything. Just some no lock backs. It's just that the heavier buffer or Rifle/A5 stock are a little too much for it.
Running it on an H buffer and carbine spring, it's a machine.
Does LMT offer anything in midlength? Hard to say from their website.
Sure, several of my Rock MRP barrels are midlength...they just don't offer the middy 14.5".
vicious_cb
05-11-11, 19:36
Id like to see a Mike Pannone style test like the one he did with the BCM 14.5" carbine to see if a 14.5" middy can go as long. Im suspecting that a slower BCG velocity will start to work against you as the rifle becomes more and more dirty.
http://www.defensereview.com/the-big-m4-myth-fouling-caused-by-the-direct-impingement-gas-system-makes-the-m4-unreliable/
Even if this is true, you will only see the draw backs in extreme conditions at high round counts where as you will be seeing the benefits of a 14.5" middy starting from round number one.
My only reliability benchmark is will it fire twice as much ammunition as a person is willing to carry as long as it's a quality rifle with quality ammunition. 14.5" Middies can accomplish this, so I fail to see the problem.
In a lightweight, short rifle, shot to shot recovery can be improved, so middy isn't a 'bad' way to approach the problem, and in places where muzzle devices have to be permanently attached anyway, it's a very viable solution.
I really like my 14.5" Middy setup, and with the BC1.5 it stays on target plenty well for a 6# rifle, and I have yet to get it dirty enough to choke on .223 pressure ammunition.
At the last course I went to I didnt see a single mid length malfunction. Not one. And who really gives a rat's a$$ what they look like. Supergay.
eternal24k
05-11-11, 21:16
I too am perplexed about all the problems you speak off.
Like all ARs, buffer and spring compatibility will vary between manufactures.
I am surprised you arent starting a thread bashing the KAC gas system because it has a similar track record when adding buffers that are too heavy (or the mil-spec gas port of early production) :eek:
My own 14.5" middy runs like a champ with A5 and Colt rifle spring shooting PMC to M193
Super Mall Ninja
05-11-11, 21:37
I personally like the look of a 14.5" middy, but I don't know if I'd want to get one after hearing some problems with cheap ammo, unless there is a fix for it.
Eurodriver
05-11-11, 21:51
BCM's website clearly states that their 14.5" Middys have been tuned to be a soft shooting setup, and to please use good ammo.
Good ammo doesn't mean Lake City 5.56 stolen from the nearest army base. I have had no issues with PMC .223 for example.
It means not Tula, Wolf (debatable), and other cheap Russian .223 imports.
If you really want to get into the nitty gritty, people using 16" barreled uppers have just as many and more catastrophic failures with cheap ammo than 14.5" Middys: stuck cases, ripped off case heads, failure to lock the bolt back, failure to eject, stovepiping...
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that if you want to save 9 cents per round to have to bang out your stuck case with a cleaning rod once in a while, buy a 16" Carbine by Bushmaster. Their gas ports are big enough to deal with underpowered ammo. Just understand that you won't get that smooth recoiling 14.5" Middy feel.
FWIW, there are always big discussions on the Mercedes Benz forum where people want to run the 87 Octane stuff in their Benz and then complain it knocks and doesn't perform adequately. So its not just gun owners, everyone wants to keep up with the Jones' in the original purchase but skimp everywhere else. (Why are BSA optics being put on BCM ARs again?)
Hunting_Zombies
05-11-11, 21:59
First off, I am new to the AR15 world and I have learned tons from the forums on this site. So, I don't mean to ask a stupid question here but I have searched for the answer already and I cannot find an answer. Here goes...what's the difference between a 14.5 middy and a 14.5 car? Just a quick simple answer would be great. Thanks in advance.
First off, I am new to the AR15 world and I have learned tons from the forums on this site. So, I don't mean to ask a stupid question here but I have searched for the answer already and I cannot find an answer. Here goes...what's the difference between a 14.5 middy and a 14.5 car? Just a quick simple answer would be great. Thanks in advance.
=================================
Barrel lengths are the same but the Gas Port is 7" from the chamber on a Carbine and 9" on a Mid-Length.
.
Mine is a BCM. Once again, I do not blame the upper or the ammunition in any way, nor do I think they are prone to this. I do not blame the VLTOR A5, either. I think the combination of the two (the upper and the A5) is simply a bad configuration that should be avoided, or at least until a lighter A5 buffer designed for 14.5" mid-lengths is released.
The biggest problem by far here is bad ammo.
Why spend the kind of money it takes to get a BCM just to feed it crap?
Running it on an H buffer and carbine spring, it's a machine.
^This. All of the reported "issues" with the reliability of the 14.5" Middys that I have seen & heard of are due to guys adding buffer/spring combos that never were intended for the 14.5" Middy in a quest to make it the softest shooting AR configuration on earth. Some have achieved that goal via turning their 14.5" Middy into a gun that doesn't run:blink:
Eurodriver
05-11-11, 22:57
^This. All of the reported "issues" with the reliability of the 14.5" Middys that I have seen & heard of are due to guys adding buffer/spring combos that never were intended for the 14.5" Middy in a quest to make it the softest shooting AR configuration on earth. Some have achieved that goal via turning their 14.5" Middy into a gun that doesn't run:blink:
Spikes Buffer and CS spring come to mind :confused:
Shorter OAL, more handguard, and longer sight radias.
No reliability problems with standard spring and Spike's ST2 buffer shooting Hot Shot 55gr., but I'll probably switch to an H buffer.
Mine works fine shooting single shot or even small burst, but if I let a 10rd burst fly and it's at the end of the mag, then sometimes the bolt won't lock to the rear. That's the only kind of problem I have had
Eurodriver
05-11-11, 23:40
Mine works fine shooting single shot or even small burst, but if I let a 10rd burst fly and it's at the end of the mag, then sometimes the bolt won't lock to the rear. That's the only kind of problem I have had
Really?
What type of ammo? Upper? Buffer? Spring?
polymorpheous
05-11-11, 23:41
Running it on an H buffer and carbine spring, it's a machine.
End of thread.
Guys, Guys-
Look, we are just going to have to dump all of these unreliable 14.5 mid guns that we have. It doesn't matter that pretty much all of them are as reliable as a gun can be, even with low pressure ammo. The OP says they are full of problems, and they don't look good, so we must save ourselves the trouble and ditch this system pronto. I don't want to hear anymore comments about how many thousands of rounds of cheap steel ammo my or your 14.5 middy has chewed through. The only proper thing to do is walk away in shame and all go back to carbines with F- front sight bases and 7 inch rails.
Well, what skin is it off your nose?
You don't like the looks, fine don't buy one.
You think they are unreliable, don't buy one.
This thread helps no one why isn't it closed?
Chris
This. This thread is just an attempt by a Colt (who doesn't make a middy) fanboy to discredit something he doesn't like. The black rifle has evolved over the years, as have the shooters who use them. Not every iteration is for everyone, but to post such a negatively toned thread regarding an entire platform that many shooters appreciate for its positive attributes is silly. :rolleyes:
The biggest problem by far here is bad ammo.
Why spend the kind of money it takes to get a BCM just to feed it crap?
Unfortunately, I must disagree. Before using the A5 (once again, the A5 is not to blame, just an overall incorrect combination) I was running a standard carbine receiver extension, carbine action spring, and H buffer.
It chewed through 2,000 rounds of the same ammo I'm using now, along with 2,000 or so rounds of cheap steel case. Never an issue, it ran like a beast.
The biggest problem here is an incorrect set up, not the ammo. And BCMs are not particularly expensive, nor would I feel that a BCM or any other gun would ever be worth paying for if I knew it couldn't run cheap, shitty ammunition without a hitch.
You should not have to feed your gun high quality ammunition for it to run correctly. Ever.
Eurodriver
05-12-11, 00:21
You should not have to feed your gun high quality ammunition for it to run correctly. Ever.
This statement just confounds me. Is the rifle supposed to put extra powder in low quality ammo that the QC process forgot to add? Is the rifle supposed to fire out of spec bullets as accurately as in spec? Is the rifle's chamber supposed to shrink to compensate for the non-expanding steel case to aid in extraction without getting the chamber fouled?
No one is saying the ammo needs to be 77gr match ammo for proper function, just that low quality ammo with poor quality control oversight cause more problems than higher quality ammo with higher quality control oversight.
There is a reason why Pat Rogers will not support students in his class who bring steel ammo anymore, and trust me its not because he hates the Russians.
All anyone needs to do is look at the inconsistency between shots with Tula ammo to see how low quality ammo causes problems.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5qDnKGJb2s
Sure, you can open up the gas port to run tula .223 if you want. BCMs aren't made that way.
TonyTacoma
05-12-11, 00:42
Please send all your ugly junky middys to my house for disposal. That is all, thank you.
Heartbreaker
05-12-11, 00:52
Why do people like things I don't like?
Kuro Ookami
05-12-11, 00:54
Why do people like things I don't like?
Just curious. What is there not to like about them?
I have only had one experience with a 14.5 middy. I built it for a friend and we took it out to function test it. The standard tests I do went without a hitch. We then sighted in the back up irons (one click away from mechanical zero) and there were still no problems. We then installed the RDS and started having failure to feed issues. The spent cases were not falling in a neat little pile. I became flustered because I never encountered a problem like this before. I re-checked my gas block and everything was fine. I finally after about an hour of being totally frustrated and feeling like an idiot for building a gun for my buddy and it not working, I changed the spring. We were just about out of ammo when I did this but we ran about 60 rounds through it with the new(standard) spring and it continues to run like a raped ape!
To make a long story short, so what if you have to play around with the spring and buffer set up. Once it is dialed in, it is the lightest and smoothest shooting gun you can get. A Battlecomp 1.5 doesn't hurt either. :D
BCM is getting an order for another one tomorrow!:big_boss:
This statement just confounds me. Is the rifle supposed to put extra powder in low quality ammo that the QC process forgot to add? Is the rifle supposed to fire out of spec bullets as accurately as in spec? Is the rifle's chamber supposed to shrink to compensate for the non-expanding steel case to aid in extraction without getting the chamber fouled?
No one is saying the ammo needs to be 77gr match ammo for proper function, just that low quality ammo with poor quality control oversight cause more problems than higher quality ammo with higher quality control oversight.
There is a reason why Pat Rogers will not support students in his class who bring steel ammo anymore, and trust me its not because he hates the Russians.
All anyone needs to do is look at the inconsistency between shots with Tula ammo to see how low quality ammo causes problems.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5qDnKGJb2s
Sure, you can open up the gas port to run tula .223 if you want. BCMs aren't made that way.
What I'm saying is, you should not have to pick and choose ammo to run your gun reliably. Your gun should simply run what it's fed without problems. If it doesn't, then I frankly don't think you have a good gun and should return it for a refund, or in my case properly configure it.
I'm not Pat Rogers, and all I can draw from is my experience. That said, I would never buy a gun that I knew would improperly function with cheap ammo like steel case. If my SGL can run any of the cheapest ammo I throw into it, my AR should be able to as well. If it can't, then it's not a good gun and I will ditch it immediately. I'm not saying I don't expect a few bad rounds here and there because of the type of ammo it is, what I'm saying is that my gun should be able to run it without any issues, with the exception being a particularly bad round, not the ammo as a whole.
And I have found that true with all 3 of the BCM uppers I use, with the one exception of my 14.5" which was my fault for the improper set up. All 3 of them have run the shittiest and cheapest of steel case there is, and they have all performed phenomenally and without a single problem that was the gun's or the actual set up's fault (again, with the recent exception). As far as I have seen from other posters, that is very common and normal, not a rarity.
I truly don't believe that the 14.5 middy specifically, is finicky with ammo. What I DO believe is that you have to sacrifice the spring/buffer combination that most people use to keep recoil super smooth to have a more reliable weapon. You have to either use what works with every type of ammunition OR have a smoother cycling rifle that only eats better ammo.
arizonaranchman
05-12-11, 05:05
Zero problems here with 14.5" middy. It's a fantastic carbine. Standard H buffer and spring as it came from BCM.
People who insist on messing with buffers and springs is the problem, not the system. Occasionally light/weak ammo requires a carbine buffer to make it operate well, but otherwise leave it alone. I use steel case russian (Silver Bear) all the time and it's never given me a problem. The only ammo I've swapped a carbine buffer for was with frangible on the indoor range (very few problems, but occasional).
Classic trolling.
find a topic that you know is being heatedly discussed in multiple threads, drop turd in punchbowl with carefully worded post, and sit back and watch the children throw their toys at each other.
Failure2Stop
05-12-11, 05:40
A few points:
Good ammo doesn't mean Lake City 5.56 stolen from the nearest army base. I have had no issues with PMC .223 for example.
Uh, as far as function goes, M855 and M193 are superior performers, especially when compared to PMC.
If you really want to get into the nitty gritty, people using 16" barreled uppers have just as many and more catastrophic failures with cheap ammo than 14.5" Middys: stuck cases, ripped off case heads, failure to lock the bolt back, failure to eject, stovepiping...
Catastrophic failures involve a loud boom and spontaneous disassembly. What you are discussing are stoppages and malfunctions.
This statement just confounds me. Is the rifle supposed to put extra powder in low quality ammo that the QC process forgot to add? Is the rifle supposed to fire out of spec bullets as accurately as in spec? Is the rifle's chamber supposed to shrink to compensate for the non-expanding steel case to aid in extraction without getting the chamber fouled?
Mild steel cases do expand to obturate. If they didn't, every shot would be a kB.
Most Russkie ammo is underpowered compared to Nato pressure ammo, but really, if your gun is setup properly to deal with adverse conditions it will run Wolf in normal conditions.
There is a reason why Pat Rogers will not support students in his class who bring steel ammo anymore, and trust me its not because he hates the Russians.
Pat has a few reasons why he does certain things, which is an advantage of being a well established personality in the industry. If a new student is showing up to a class it is generally advisable to use decent quality ammo to reduce probability of problems and simplify trouble-shooting.
Possibilities:
1. Consumer Demand driven: If Midlength is good on a 16" gun, it must be even gooder on a 14.5" gun. Right?
2. The eternal quest for "smooth recoiling guns": See also the rise in compensators, numerous posts on "buffer-ology" to lessen recoil and other crap.
It's funny how on the first page of this forum there are dueling posts for "guns that eat cheap" and "14.5 Middys, are the bugs worked out?". People want EVERYTHING in one gun. Air rifle recoil AND extreme ammo tolerance AND reliability AND durability.
I dunno. I'll stick with the carbine systems. If I ever get around to building an 18" gun, I'll mess with some other gas length.
Are you implying that it is impossible to maximize all variables...:smile:
You should not have to feed your gun high quality ammunition for it to run correctly. Ever.
This place is turning into ARFcom. :blink:
There is a reason why Pat Rogers will not support students in his class who bring steel ammo anymore, and trust me its not because he hates the Russians.
Oh Crap! I'm in agreement with the Phony, Pat Rogers on a subject. :eek:
Classic trolling.
find a topic that you know is being heatedly discussed in multiple threads, drop turd in punchbowl with carefully worded post, and sit back and watch the children throw their toys at each other.
That's what I was thinking, too.
I have a friend that learned about the platform in the Big Army ca. 1974-76. He thinks everything other than 20" A1s are retarded and unneeded. Aren't you glad that one person like him doesn't control what you can buy?
I don't find it to be trolling. I know where he's coming from.
I mean... you get frustrated seeing shit over and over on the forums.....
Be it the BattleComp, the newest silly rail, or the 14.5 middy. This shit will make you go nuts.
Phony, Pat Rogers
? care to explain that??
Bob
Why does the 14.5" barrel length exist at all?
Why does a 16" barrel exist? Is because of the NFA.
You could ask that question about any length.
? care to explain that??
Bob
No.... His resume embelishments can be found on the internets. He's a whole can of worms. Not too many gun forums that he's allowed to post on anymore if you notice.
Good ammo doesn't mean Lake City 5.56 stolen from the nearest army base.
Huh?
That is the standard load for all western military rifles. It should run with that ammo above all others.
You should not have to feed your gun high quality ammunition for it to run correctly. Ever.
Thats just beyond goofy.
When using substandard ammo results in substandard results...why even make a forum post about it? Just doing what its suppose to do.
Ammunition is very much an assembly of parts within its self. If the gun is intended to be shot with ammo of a given velocity/pressure, and you stray from that, who's fault is it? Is that a failure of the guns design when its being operated outside of its design?
You can find ammo better than Wolf for not that much more. Click some sponsor links.
You should not have to feed your gun high quality ammunition for it to run correctly. Ever.
Exactly.
It should run on everything from .223 Rem hunting loads, to M193, to M855, and steel cased ammo.
It is not unreasonable to expect it to run on steel cased ammo.
It is not unreasonable to expect it to run on steel cased ammo.
I guess those of us with hundreds and thousands of rounds of steel-cased ammo through our 14.5" mid-lengths with no issues beyond the QC of the ammo should go buy lottery tickets then.
:blink:
No.... His resume embelishments can be found on the internets. He's a whole can of worms. Not too many gun forums that he's allowed to post on anymore if you notice.
I notice plenty, I also notice its all BS, and character assassination.
But, I wont drag this off topic.
Bob
With all the trouble that people have, why does this exists.
It has neither the benefits of a 16" middy or a 14.5" CAR system.
It is unreliable without special buffer/spring combinations and you cannot use a FSP style rail to mount a light at 12oclock.
I also think it looks like crap.
I think you might have been reading to many posts where people don't know WTF they are doing and use the incorrect buffer and spring combo's (then want to shoot under pressured ammo).
The MAIN benefit to me is if you shoot suppressed.
Most people like the soft recoil of the weapon and reduced weight (up front). While not for everybody, they are a nice option I think.
C4
The carbine length gas system was designed for the 10" commando,
That isn't really true.
A 14.5" was in the design phase (the Colt 650) when the 10" and 11.5" shorties were being designed. It was never put into production.
The commandos had a moderator to add extra back pressure. The gas port on a 10" XM177E1 and a 11.5" XM177E2 barrel is closer to that of 14.5" barrel than a modern 11.5" barrel.
The moderator was used on the shorty barrel to get more back pressure using the same gas port on the 10", early 11.5", and 14.5".
Thats just beyond goofy.
When using substandard ammo results in substandard results...why even make a forum post about it? Just doing what its suppose to do.
Ammunition is very much an assembly of parts within its self. If the gun is intended to be shot with ammo of a given velocity/pressure, and you stray from that, who's fault is it? Is that a failure of the guns design when its being operated outside of its design?
You can find ammo better than Wolf for not that much more. Click some sponsor links.
The idea that so called "low quality ammo" cannot be made to work in the configuration described or any other is just plain ignorant, and is most often perpetuated by those who in the same breath disdain it's use to the point of "I'd never use that junk in my gun".
Much like in the "what eats crap ammo" thread, the discussion should be limited to those interested in the topic and those with actual experience. Otherwise it's like some 13-year-old kid with a chronic wanking problem offering up advice about sex.
The MAIN benefit to me is if you shoot suppressed.
I'm going to have to try that again. My first, brief tinkering with the can on the 14.5 middy I'm running seemed friggin LOUD. :confused:
I don't know what it was, atmospheric conditions, temp at that time, or what... but it was so thumpy, I pulled the can to see if there was a problem.
Just a quality post all over Rob.
Exactly.
It should run on everything from .223 Rem hunting loads, to M193, to M855, and steel cased ammo.
It is not unreasonable to expect it to run on steel cased ammo.
You are right. Your gun should run anything with NORMAL pressure levels. Where the problem becomes apparent is when people shoot UNDER PRESSURED ammo (which is fairly common with most steel cased ammo).
C4
I'm going to have to try that again. My first, brief tinkering with the can on the 14.5 middy I'm running seemed friggin LOUD. :confused:
I don't know what it was, atmospheric conditions, temp at that time, or what... but it was so thumpy, I pulled the can to see if there was a problem.
Hmm. Strange.
C4
I always figured that the 14.5" middy came about to make the shortest possible non-NFA rifle (ala the 14.5" carbines), and when they stuck a middy gas system on it people found they shoot pretty soft, so they got popular.
It's also a pretty logical evolution of the middy. Shortest, lightest-weight middy possible while still being reliable (assuming default buffer setup), that just happens to shoot a little nicer than the longer barrels.
Now I'm just a noob, but the disdain for the 'bad' ammo baffles me. Isn't a combat rifle that can shoot a wider variety of ammo with combat acceptable performance and reliability by definition superior to a rifle that can only shoot the 'good stuff'?
Failure2Stop
05-12-11, 09:17
I guess those of us with hundreds and thousands of rounds of steel-cased ammo through our 14.5" mid-lengths with no issues beyond the QC of the ammo should go buy lottery tickets then.
:blink:
Rob, can you clarify this statement?
As I am reading it you are either in agreement that the virtue of being steel cased in and of itself, is not a problem OR that you see a distinct issue with steel cased ammo QC.
Hmm. Strange.
It ran fine and all... just sounded weird. I'll have to put a mount back on the barrel and get back out there.
I always figured that the 14.5" middy came about to make the shortest possible non-NFA rifle (ala the 14.5" carbines), and when they stuck a middy gas system on it people found they shoot pretty soft, so they got popular.
It's also a pretty logical evolution of the middy. Shortest, lightest-weight middy possible while still being reliable (assuming default buffer setup), that just happens to shoot a little nicer than the longer barrels.
Now I'm just a noob, but the disdain for the 'bad' ammo baffles me. Isn't a combat rifle that can shoot a wider variety of ammo with combat acceptable performance and reliability by definition superior to a rifle that can only shoot the 'good stuff'?
I'm just tried of the midlength group think. Yes they are nice is some applications. I have a 16" noveske myself and I like the extra handguard length.
Other than a 16" barrel, I don't see the point of a midlength.
Rob, can you clarify this statement?
As I am reading it you are either in agreement that the virtue of being steel cased in and of itself, is not a problem OR that you see a distinct issue with steel cased ammo QC.
I'm saying that you can't blame the gun if it the only problems it has with steel-cased ammo is the occasional FTF, FTE, etc. that are the result of lower QC which in turn is a contributing factor to the ammo being so cheap, which is why you bought it in the first place.
My typical failure rate for steel-cased ammo (issues with stuck cases and Wolf last year notwithstanding) is 2-4 FTE/FTF per 1k round case. Considering that push/pull, rack & roll solves these problems in virtually no time, that I'm using said ammo in a training environment, practice environment, or match environment and there is no risk to life/limb in the time it takes to clear the malfunction, this has always been a non-issue for me.
and to the topic at hand (and why we now need 3-4 concurrent threads on this topic is beyond me), and to the original question that started this sub-discussion:
"You should not have to feed your gun high quality ammunition for it to run correctly. Ever. "
that point is exactly right. If my BCM fails to fire a round of Brown Bear because of a hard primer that is not a failing of the gun.
Now I'm just a noob, but the disdain for the 'bad' ammo baffles me. Isn't a combat rifle that can shoot a wider variety of ammo with combat acceptable performance and reliability by definition superior to a rifle that can only shoot the 'good stuff'?
Yes they should AS LONG AS the pressures are correct. What most people fail to realize that the majority of the steel cased ammo is under pressured.
C4
I'm just tried of the midlength group think. Yes they are nice is some applications. I have a 16" noveske myself and I like the extra handguard length.
Other than a 16" barrel, I don't see the point of a midlength.
Seems like the virtues have been covered in depth. If you fail to see them or choose to feel they are not advantages then there is really nothing more to discuss I guess. When I first read this thread I hoped it would be a good discussion. Instead it seems like you are just trying to vent your distaste for something newer on the market.
Yes they should AS LONG AS the pressures are correct. What most people fail to realize that the majority of the steel cased ammo is under pressured.
Not only that... much of the brass cased import crap has had the WRONG propellents. Wrong pressure curves will mess with a guns function for sure.
The idea that so called "low quality ammo" cannot be made to work in the configuration described or any other is just plain ignorant, and is most often perpetuated by those who in the same breath disdain it's use to the point of "I'd never use that junk in my gun".
Much like in the "what eats crap ammo" thread, the discussion should be limited to those interested in the topic and those with actual experience. Otherwise it's like some 13-year-old kid with a chronic wanking problem offering up advice about sex.
Why should you have to make your weapon work? I am certain that a weapon that has been "made" to work with low pressure ammunition is going to suffer from reliability issues in the long run.
By the way, I'd never use that junk in my gun...
By the way, I'd never use that junk in my gun...
Same here.
I don't see the point of a midlength.
And I don't see the point in custom knives over $300, high powered front wheel drive cars, or ruining cucumbers by soaking them in vinegar to make pickles. Does that mean that people shouldn't be allowed to buy, sell, manufacture and discuss them freely?
And I don't see the point in ...ruining cucumbers by soaking them in vinegar to make pickles. Does that mean that people should be allowed to buy, sell, manufacture and discuss them freely?
Pickles rock. What's the matter with you? :cool:
14.5 middy's exist because, as designed - and reliably manufactured, they work and there's a market for them.
/thread.
Can we close this now?
Originally Posted by Eurodriver Good ammo doesn't mean Lake City 5.56 stolen from the nearest army base.
Huh?
That is the standard load for all western military rifles. It should run with that ammo above all others.
It's not that hard a concept to understand. Hes saying you don't need to rob a US army base to find good ammo, 14.5" middys shoot ammo that is widely available
Magic_Salad0892
05-12-11, 11:40
This is a retarded argument.
14.5'' Midlengths run. They run well. Markm, rob, and others can vouch for it. I can also vouch that a 14.5'' Knights INT system will run. (Though I didn't try for very long before it got cut... again.)
Using low pressure ammo and not working is lame, but why do you care if you run NATO powered ammo for duty/SD/HD/SHTF ammo?
It runs on M855. It runs on Mk. 262. It runs on M193. It runs on TAP.
Even with VLTOR A5 with lightest buffer, it should run on NATO ammo.
Why are we even debating this?
If my BCM fails to fire a round of Brown Bear because of a hard primer that is not a failing of the gun.
Great example of being realistic with expectations when buying something made to meet a price point not a spec.
Isn't a combat rifle that can shoot a wider variety of ammo with combat acceptable performance and reliability by definition superior to a rifle that can only shoot the 'good stuff'?
That is how a third world country would select a rifle. They get excessive recoil from a rifle designed to run on anything and poor accuracy from the cheap, inconsistent ammo.
The AR is not designed for third world countries or ammo that can't be made to a reasonably consistent standard.
Eurodriver
05-12-11, 12:07
Huh?
That is the standard load for all western military rifles. It should run with that ammo above all others.
You're absolutely correct, where did I say that it wasn't?
I was implying there are hundreds of other choices of quality 5.56 ammo BESIDES Lake City 5.56...sorry you didn't pick that one up.
The idea that so called "low quality ammo" cannot be made to work in the configuration described or any other is just plain ignorant, and is most often perpetuated by those who in the same breath disdain it's use to the point of "I'd never use that junk in my gun".
Much like in the "what eats crap ammo" thread, the discussion should be limited to those interested in the topic and those with actual experience. Otherwise it's like some 13-year-old kid with a chronic wanking problem offering up advice about sex.
Rob, are you saying that Tula ammo can be made to work? We sat down with 5 boxes of Tula .223 and the extreme spread between 100 rounds of ammo was over 250 fps. How can you expect to get that stuff to function without it beating your gun up using normal pressured 5.56? It should also be mentioned we had over 20 failure to extracts with the stuff too. BCM 14.5" Midlength.
This isn't to say wolf, brown/silver bear may not function, I'm specifically talking about Tula. Tula is shitty, unreliable ammo.
As you said in another post, that is not the fault of the gun but somehow people still blame it.
Id say they exist because people like myself seek them out for their length weight and performance. We pay good money for them, therefore the manufacturer continues to advertise and distribute them.
I dont know if Ive just been lucky but mine has been very reliable. It is my favorite AR.
EDIT: Maybe its because I use good quality handloads.
Eurodriver
05-12-11, 12:13
A few points:
Uh, as far as function goes, M855 and M193 are superior performers, especially when compared to PMC.
Mild steel cases do expand to obturate. If they didn't, every shot would be a kB.
Most Russkie ammo is underpowered compared to Nato pressure ammo, but really, if your gun is setup properly to deal with adverse conditions it will run Wolf in normal conditions.
Pat has a few reasons why he does certain things, which is an advantage of being a well established personality in the industry. If a new student is showing up to a class it is generally advisable to use decent quality ammo to reduce probability of problems and simplify trouble-shooting.
Uh, ok its apparent that I didn't clarify this correctly. I meant that you do not need to buy the latest and greatest Lake City 5.56 to have "high quality ammo". That there are comparables out there that will function with reliability above steel cased ammo like Federal AE, PMC, Winchester, etc. It doesn't even need to be 5.56. Russian QC is the issue with steel cased ammo, not the steel cases.
Yeah, it'll run Wolf. But I'm not talking about Wolf. I'm talking about Tula.
Why would a new student need to use decent quality ammo if a properly set up gun will fire wolf under normal conditions?
Edit: We are on the same side of the arguement...I don't know why we're disagreeing. My beef is with Tula, not Russian ammo in general.
Eurodriver
05-12-11, 12:17
It's not that hard a concept to understand. Hes saying you don't need to rob a US army base to find good ammo, 14.5" middys shoot ammo that is widely available
Thanks. I was beginning to question my mind for a second. I'm glad someone picked it up. :blink:
Uh, ok its apparent that I didn't clarify this correctly. I meant that you do not need to buy the latest and greatest Lake City 5.56 to have "high quality ammo". That there are comparables out there that will function with reliability above steel cased ammo like Federal AE, PMC, Winchester, etc. It doesn't even need to be 5.56. Russian QC is the issue with steel cased ammo, not the steel cases.
Yeah, it'll run Wolf. But I'm not talking about Wolf. I'm talking about Tula.
Why would a new student need to use decent quality ammo if a properly set up gun will fire wolf under normal conditions?
Edit: We are on the same side of the arguement...I don't know why we're disagreeing. My beef is with Tula, not Russian ammo in general.
during a four day carbine class with Jason Falla, I have fired a total of 1500rds, of those, including M193, M885, new Q3131, dirty PD range pick up Q3131, PMC, and some silver bear. Silver bear was the cheapest, the range pick up was dirtiest and some of those pick ups have corrosion on the brass surface from salt water. my Centurion Arms middy 14.5 carbine shot all of them without a hiccup. a properly sprung carbine can do wonders, but when a carbine like the 14.5 middy are mate to a A5 type of stock or extra power recoil spring with 9mm buffer, you will run into problems.
So if I understand this correctly, all the cheap ammo that causes stoppages in a mid length, will never cause that stoppage in a Colt with a carbine length gas system?
Good to know :rolleyes:
So if I understand this correctly, all the cheap ammo ammo that causes stoppages in a mid length, will never cause that stoppage in a Colt with a carbine length gas system?
Good to know :rolleyes:
I don't know who said that, but that is not correct. Middy guns (as a whole) CAN struggle with the pressure issues more than a carbine gased AR will.
C4
So if I understand this correctly, all the cheap ammo that causes stoppages in a mid length, will never cause that stoppage in a Colt with a carbine length gas system?
Good to know :rolleyes:
Who is saying that?
Thats my point, cheap ammo causes stoppages generally associated with being underpowered, would that not also cause stoppages in a carbine length?
Is there a defenitive answer?
If both guns are of good quality, can anyone say definetively that the cheap ammo that caused a stoppage in a mid length, would not have done the same in a carbine?
, would that not also cause stoppages in a carbine length?
Shitty ammo was jamming up ARs LONG before the middy was ever being used in any quantity.
I used to bring my one piece cleaning rod to class to bang out stuck cases incase some doucher showed up with steel cased ammo.
Thats my point, cheap ammo causes stoppages generally associated with being underpowered, would that not also cause stoppages in a carbine length?
Is there a defenitive answer?
If both guns are of good quality, can anyone say definetively that the cheap ammo that caused a stoppage in a mid length, would not have done the same in a carbine?
Carbines have a lot more pressure than a middy so it is really hard to say as there are lot more issues going on here.
Other problems with steel ammo is that you typically accumulate more debris (powder and such) in the chamber and if your chamber is not cleaned well (or if you have an out of spec chamber), this can cause stuck casings. This problem affects carbines and middy's alike.
I JUST worked on an M4 with extraction issues when using wolf ammo. So carbines have issues with this ammo as well.
C4
I used to bring my one piece cleaning rod to class to bang out stuck cases incase some doucher showed up with steel cased ammo.
LOL, I am sure you rode them like a show pony too. Poor bastards. :D
C4
Would it also be a correct assumption then, that a carbine would then have a reliability edge in cold weather?
Well, what skin is it off your nose?
You don't like the looks, fine don't buy one.
You think they are unreliable, don't buy one.
This thread helps no one why isn't it closed?
Chris
why isn't it closed? because it's a discussion. on a discussion forum...
discussions can proceed from a variety of ways but the benefit is the back and forth, the give and take. from this people can learn other viewpoints and experiences. why would you limit that?
to be honest, I'm a little disappointed at the frequency that discussions are being shut down around here of late. what does discussion hurt? is the bandwidth so precious that it gets rationed out like cups of water in a drought to only those who go along with the crowd?
it's been said before but I'll say it again, if you don't have anything to add, don't add anything. if you don't like the topic of discussion you have the right to stay away. jumping in with posts like yours (and mine) are what really helps no one...
Guys, Guys-
Look, we are just going to have to dump all of these unreliable 14.5 mid guns that we have. It doesn't matter that pretty much all of them are as reliable as a gun can be, even with low pressure ammo. The OP says they are full of problems, and they don't look good, so we must save ourselves the trouble and ditch this system pronto. I don't want to hear anymore comments about how many thousands of rounds of cheap steel ammo my or your 14.5 middy has chewed through. The only proper thing to do is walk away in shame and all go back to carbines with F- front sight bases and 7 inch rails.
I think you overstate the case. everything in life has a "sweet spot". from gas systems to carb tuning to amount of spice in a recipe, everything has latitude where at either end things begin to get less desirable but somewhere towards the middle you get the best results.
on a 16" barrel the mid length/9" gas system approaches the sweet spot. as does shortening the barrel on a carbine length/ 7". either of these will run well with just about all combinations of ammo or buffer. however, when we combine the shorter barrel of the 14.5 with midlength gas system, we see limitations start to creep up.
this says to me that the 14.5"/middy combination is not the "sweetspot". personally, for a serious purpose carbine, I want the combination that will provide the best results over the greatest range of conditions.
I don't know why but I can guess the reason behind most peoples' desire for a 14.5/middy but it's fair to say that some accommodations are generally made with this. to those who understand and are willing to work within this narrowed window of reliability, I think they offer the benefits they are looking to achieve. but please, no matter how you justify it, don't try to say that it is the "sweetspot" - it just skews the equation toward the "softer shooting/lighter recoiling" side at the expense of narrowed performance margins...
I truly don't believe that the 14.5 middy specifically, is finicky with ammo. What I DO believe is that you have to sacrifice the spring/buffer combination that most people use to keep recoil super smooth to have a more reliable weapon. You have to either use what works with every type of ammunition OR have a smoother cycling rifle that only eats better ammo.
there it is...
:
Originally Posted by CoryCop25
I truly don't believe that the 14.5 middy specifically, is finicky with ammo. What I DO believe is that you have to sacrifice the spring/buffer combination that most people use to keep recoil super smooth to have a more reliable weapon. You have to either use what works with every type of ammunition OR have a smoother cycling rifle that only eats better ammo.
there it is...
I just don't understand why everyone continue to speak about the middy 14.5 requires a specially sprung system in order for the gun to work.
My middy 14.5 run on H, H1, or H2 buffers on standard carbine buffer springs. it will eat silver bear, PMC, M193, M855, Q3131 and Mk262 alike. I have not yet find the A5 or A2 stocks to be a commonly used recoil set up on a carbine.
Eurodriver
05-12-11, 14:21
I just don't understand why everyone continue to speak about the middy 14.5 requires a specially sprung system in order for the gun to work.
My middy 14.5 run on H, H1, H2 buffers on standard carbine buffer springs. it will eat silver bear, PMC, M193, M855, Q3131 and Mk262 alike. I have not yet find the A5 or A2 stocks to be a commonly used recoil set up on a carbine.
Exactly.
14.5" Middys are reliable with a standard carbine spring and H buffer. Is anyone really doubting that? I haven't read enough of the thread to notice. Or is this thread mainly about "I don't want a gun that doesn't fire with out-of-spec ammo"?
I have not yet find the A5 or A2 stocks to be a commonly used recoil set up on a carbine.
It's not common because most people don't get it... at all.
The other factor is that the carbine action has been greatly improved by the common availability of Heavier buffers. So there are much less malfs from the system than in past years... and most will kid themselves into blaming the lube or magazine before they figure out the carbine is a tighter and rougher running recoil system.
...Mild steel cases do expand to obturate. If they didn't, every shot would be a kB...
This is not true. One sign of a load being low pressured is that the neck does not expand enough to seal the chamber against the gases. This doesn't result in a "kaboom".
The HK roller lock has flutes which allows the gases to enter the chamber to help float the case. The case doesn't "obturate" enough to keep these gases from doing so and again this happens with no "kaboom".
Steel cases do not seal the chamber as well as brass. The evidence of this is the carbon residue left in the chambers.
Steel has less ductility and elasticity than brass. If steel cases were loaded so that they sealed the chamber as effectively as brass cases, they would not shrink enough to allow reliable extraction.
TANSTAAFL. To run steel cased ammo, there are trade-offs. One of those trade-offs is reducing pressure to keep the cases from getting stuck in the chamber
The reason for reliability problems with the 14.5 middy is because people use underpowered ammunition and experiment with different buffers and new receiver extensions.
Exactly. I picked up a BCM EAG midlength 14.5" upped, slapped it on the lower from my Colt 6940 and have run over 2000 rounds with no issues that I can attribute to the midlength. I think I had one blown primer that found its way to the trigger/sear area. Other than that it has run Fiochi & Black hills .223, M855, and some Mk318 without any issues.
Failure2Stop
05-12-11, 20:10
This is not true. One sign of a load being low pressured is that the neck does not expand enough to seal the chamber against the gases. This doesn't result in a "kaboom".
The HK roller lock has flutes which allows the gases to enter the chamber to help float the case. The case doesn't "obturate" enough to keep these gases from doing so and again this happens with no "kaboom".
Steel cases do not seal the chamber as well as brass. The evidence of this is the carbon residue left in the chambers.
Steel has less ductility and elasticity than brass. If steel cases were loaded so that they sealed the chamber as effectively as brass cases, they would not shrink enough to allow reliable extraction.
TANSTAAFL. To run steel cased ammo, there are trade-offs. One of those trade-offs is reducing pressure to keep the cases from getting stuck in the chamber
I'm sorry, but mild steel cases absolutely do obturate. Different types of steel have different properties, and steel can be (is) made to perform adequately as a rifle cartridge case.
They do not behave identically to brass cases, but they do the job they must do.
When it comes to fluted chambers, the flutes do not extend from the leade to the breach, but only at the side wall, which allows the mouth and neck to expand, creating the seal within the chamber.
Are we finally getting to the point that we can agree that most quality (BCM, DD, Noveske, Centurion, etc) 14.5 middies will run just fine with low pressure steel case ammo and a standard spring w/ H buffer? Is a GI spring and H buffer the standard for military issue M4s? Or do they use a heavier buffer now? What I'm saying is the 14.5 mid and carbine will run using the same setup.
I think the point that myself and most other 14.5 mid/ steel case shooters are trying to make is: if the gun can run on steel, it will most definitely run on 5.56 pressure ammo.
Can we just get past the fact that some people refuse to shoot steel cases (like they will sneak out of the ammo can at night and rape their family), and others like shooting cheaper ammo? If you don't want to shoot steel, fine, but quit acting like we're lesser people because we can shoot so called "junk" without issue. Some people are acting like it's a personal insult, when we say that our gun runs fine on the cheap stuff.
Nobody is saying carry steel ammo for duty, or HD (I carry Fed bonded and Speer GD for that). All we're doing with it is poking holes in paper/cardboard or pinging steel, and that's all I need in a training round. It doesn't bother me at all that my .22 hole cost less to make than someone else's
I'm just tried of the midlength group think. Yes they are nice is some applications. I have a 16" noveske myself and I like the extra handguard length.
Other than a 16" barrel, I don't see the point of a midlength.
What is really amazing is how if anyone around here has an opinion other then what is considered to be acceptable by a chosen few they are labeled a troll, or put down. I like all the AR variations, but why all the put downs because he has his own opinion??
Thomas M-4
05-12-11, 23:00
When it comes to fluted chambers, the flutes do not extend from the leade to the breach, but only at the side wall, which allows the mouth and neck to expand, creating the seal within the chamber.
You have me a bit confused :confused: You mean to say they start at the throat and end before the breach correct.
I'm sorry, but mild steel cases absolutely do obturate. Different types of steel have different properties, and steel can be (is) made to perform adequately as a rifle cartridge case.
They do not behave identically to brass cases, but they do the job they must do.
When it comes to fluted chambers, the flutes do not extend from the leade to the breach, but only at the side wall, which allows the mouth and neck to expand, creating the seal within the chamber.
I do not make the claim steel cases do not expand at all. Steel cases do not expand enough at the mouth to completely seal the chamber and there is some blow-by. This is why chambers are dirtier when steel cased ammo is used. If a steel case were to expand enough to seal a chamber as completely as brass, it would likely not shrink enough to allow extraction.
However, a case not completely sealing the chamber does not mean a "ka-boom" as the leakage isn't sudden as it would be if there was a rupture in the case head.
The flutes in the 91 chamber I personally examined reach all the way up to the case mouth. Fired brass from 91s I have examined show marks from the fluting all the from the case web to case mouth
http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n289/SgtSongDog/Other/DSC_01874.jpg
Failure2Stop
05-13-11, 06:20
Sorry, I was distracted and my last post was not terribly clear.
Agree on the "less than perfect" seal of most steel cased ammo.
HK chamber fluting: what I intended to convey was that the flutes do not allow gasses to fully bypass the cartridge case. Fluting does run from the neck, rearward, but they do not extend all the way through to the breach.
Anyway, I helped hijack this thread, but it needs to be brought back in line.
If anyone wants to discuss steel cased ammo, please start a thread.
I'm in agreement with the Phony, Pat Rogers on a subject. His resume embelishments can be found on the internets. He's a whole can of worms. Not too many gun forums that he's allowed to post on anymore if you notice.
This may well be my last post on here if it gets me banned, but markm, you can go f*ck yourself for that comment right there. Show me your DD214 and we can talk, otherwise, refer back to my last comment. I don't know how this kind of crap is allowed on here. The man has done more in a year than you've probably done in your whole XBox career.
Disgusting
Failure2Stop
05-13-11, 07:13
This thread has gotten far off topic and has reached a tone that is not conducive to the intent of M4Carbine.
I'm closing it down.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.