-
I would rather have a 16" 7.62 than a 16" 5.56 as a "GP" carbine that might be called on to do a wide range of duties. Not because they have any guarantee of being more accurate, but rather that they can deliver more effect on target and have a wide range of ammunition for specialty application. No free lunch though; they're heavier, have reduced capacity, and are more costly in nearly every aspect of logistics and support.
I really like 11.5 5.56 guns, especially if application is biased toward sub-200 meters.
.300 Blk fills a nice role for 9.5" guns, guns that NEED to be very quiet, or if I want to share a single highly effective suppressor between a long gun and a short gun.
A 7.62 16" semi-auto is the best answer for problems that call for 7.62, but most folks don't have a real "need" for 7.62, or the resources to fully support their integration. Just about everyone has a good use for an SBR 5.56 lower.
-
Thanks for the additional good input everyone! I've decided to keep the .308. It is a very useful tool, even if not used frequently. To scratch the 12.5" SBR itch, I'm selling a high-end Leupold target scope off a .22 that also doesn't see as much use as I thought it would. That gives me $650 to start building my upper. I can use it right away on my MK18 lower while I wait for the stamp to go through on my Noveske lower. I already have some parts, just need a barrel, rail, and BCG.
Now I'm just debating on SS vs CHF on the barrel, DD vs Noveske (or BCM 410). The issue is balancing accuracy against hard use. Since this would serve as a backup to my MK18, I don't want to burn out a $350 SS barrel too quick, especially since suppressors are involved as well. At the same time, I would want at least MOA accuracy with match ammo. A previous 16" DD lightweight barrel would do about 1.5 MOA.
Thanks for input on the barrel, looking forward to getting this built!
ETA: reason for sticking with 12.5" barrel is an SPR-M4 suppressor.