Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 167

Thread: Why do mfgs still make carbine length gas systems?

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Southern WV
    Posts
    577
    Feedback Score
    0
    When I built my carbine I went back and forth on the gas systems. I chose the carbine gas. I was pleasantly surprised when I started shooting my reloads. The rifle cycled fine with the minimum/starting loads behind a 55gr bullet. I thought for sure it would short stroke.
    John

    If you spend much time around the guys who really, really know their craft, and who truly live this stuff, you tend to find that they are very soft-spoken and modest -- almost to the extreme. To my mind, that is a model worthy of emulation

    AC

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Hamburg PA
    Posts
    3,506
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Not taking a shot at a carbine gas system, but in regards to the reliability of the mid length system, at least in regards to BCM's, how many tens of thousands of rounds did Pat Rogers run through filthy 14? Just saying, and will freely admit when I did build my personal rifle build I chose my upper based on that torture test. As far as my personal rifle, BCM BFH 16 inch upper, BCG BCG, H buffer ,carbine spring, and the only issues I have had with it has been from Tula 55gr steel cased, 5.56 NATO has run great,brass cased .223 not a problem.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Central New Yorkistan
    Posts
    1,230
    Feedback Score
    0
    Others have mentioned the "why do they" part of this.

    I'll add, I'm glad they make both (and the dissipators for the guys/gals that like those). My first AR was back in '02 and was a RRA 16" mid-length setup. Honestly, I bought that one because I liked the look of the longer hand guard and didn't know anything about AR's, good or bad. Didn't use it much so I traded it, which I shouldn't have.

    Early last year I got the AR bug again and a friend got his FFL and gave me a killer deal on a Stag Model 1 w/ plus package. It has the carbine gas system. I really didn't think to much about it to be honest.

    Then I wanted a service grade AR and really had a thing for a Colt. I don't know why, I just did. So my AWESOME wife bought me a COLT MT6400 (post-ban compliant version of the LE6920) for my birthday and Christmas last year. I knew it had the carbine gas system but I figure if that setup worked in the M4 Carbine then it would work for me.

    If Colt had the option of getting a mid-length gas system I would have gotten it, if for no other reason then I like the look and the added length of the hand guard to put my arm out a little farther. It's never been a deal breaker for me though. If/when I get another upper I'll more then likely get a mid-length upper if available.

    NYH1.

    Take nothing I say personal, remember....it's just the interweb!
    ROLLTIDE!
    Fair Winds and Following Seas AC & IG!
    New Yorkistan sucks.
    NRA, NYSRPA, S.C.O.P.E. Member.
    FUAC

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    South La.
    Posts
    1,892
    Feedback Score
    9 (100%)
    .

    Would this be a fairly accurate statement?

    With a proper gas port sizing, the carbine length gas system has a wider range between "over gas'd" and "under gas'd" than a mid-length gas system.

    Just wondering...???

    .

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    AZ-Waging jihad against crappy AR's.
    Posts
    24,902
    Feedback Score
    104 (100%)
    In theory you are correct, but you are talking about a sample of one. I'm not saying that BCM isn't good, they absolutely are. But, since 1997-ish the type classified M4 carbine with a carbine gas system has been deployed world wide and is 100% combat proven if people do their job with lube and magazines.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kain View Post
    Not taking a shot at a carbine gas system, but in regards to the reliability of the mid length system, at least in regards to BCM's, how many tens of thousands of rounds did Pat Rogers run through filthy 14? Just saying, and will freely admit when I did build my personal rifle build I chose my upper based on that torture test. As far as my personal rifle, BCM BFH 16 inch upper, BCG BCG, H buffer ,carbine spring, and the only issues I have had with it has been from Tula 55gr steel cased, 5.56 NATO has run great,brass cased .223 not a problem.



    Owner/Instructor at Semper Paratus Arms

    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SemperParatusArms/

    Semper Paratus Arms AR15 Armorer Course http://www.semperparatusarms.com/cou...-registration/

    M4C Misc. Training and Course Announcements- http://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=141

    Master Armorer/R&D at SIONICS Weapon Systems- http://sionicsweaponsystems.com

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Back where I belong
    Posts
    1,661
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I will add...

    In F/A the 14.5 middy DD barrel I used had a few issues if I didn't change the buffer from when it was S/A. No issues with BCM and DD 16" in F/A with same buffer. Never figured it out but I never measured gas port. Sold them and I'm a little pissed at myself.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Southeast Texas
    Posts
    226
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    In theory you are correct, but you are talking about a sample of one. I'm not saying that BCM isn't good, they absolutely are. But, since 1997-ish the type classified M4 carbine with a carbine gas system has been deployed world wide and is 100% combat proven if people do their job with lube and magazines.
    In your opinion, do you think the mid length will replace the carbine for military applications?

    If not replace, is there a reason for the military to start using the mid length?

    Between the rifle length, and carbine, is the mid length even needed? Its like trying to create a better mouse trap. Consumers and the military already have two mouse traps that work - rifle length and carbine. Do civilians and the military need a third option?
    Last edited by ~kev~; 10-08-13 at 10:09.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    966
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ~kev~ View Post
    In your opinion, do you think the mid length will replace the carbine for military applications?

    If not replace, is there a reason for the military to start using the mid length?

    Between the rifle length, and carbine, is the mid length even needed? Its like trying to create a better mouse trap. Consumers and the military already have two mouse traps that work - rifle length and carbine. Do civilians and the military need a third option?
    The very purpose for the midlength gas system is the mandated 16" minimum barrel length for civilian rifles. The carbine system was designed for 14.5" and shorter barrels.

    As the military does not have a use for 16" barrels (since they are not bound by the civilian law), there's no purpose for the military to use mid-length gas systems.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Southeast Texas
    Posts
    226
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by HackerF15E View Post
    there's no purpose for the military to use mid-length gas systems.
    Smoother recoil and longer life of parts is not a reason?

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Duat
    Posts
    730
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ~kev~ View Post
    Smoother recoil and longer life of parts is not a reason?
    How much smoother? How much longer do parts last?

Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •