Is a 7.5" Barrel Viable?

[georgeib]

So as the title asks, is a 7.5" barrel viable? I was involved in a discussion on a small forum I frequent, and one of the posters seemed to think so. I know what I've read here that a 10.5" barrel is really the minimum viable length, and tried to explain that terminal ballistics suffer dramatically below that length. I explained that rifle wounding is based on hydrostatic shock, and that once you lose that much velocity, you may as well be using a PCC.

His response was that he was getting 2300 fps with Barnes 60 grain TSX bullets, and that they expand down to 1800 fps, and that hits at 100 yards were easy. Doesn't this just bolster my comparison to a PCC?

Would any of you kindly educate me a bit further, please?

[TonyAngel]

I did a bunch of reading up on this too. What I came up with is that it is viable as a very short range tool. With modern ammo that does its work at lower velocities, it should work. It won't be ideal though. I stayed with a 11.3 because of the muzzle blast and reliability over a broad range of ammo types.

[PracticalRifleman]

The shorter the barrel, the less range it is effective and the more important ammo selection is. If going under 11.5”, I would choose .300 Blackout.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cosmo223]

Well, if by viable you mean would I want to get hit by a bullet coming out of a 7.5" barrel, then yes, sure they are viable. But you are absolutely giving up a lot of velocity, and with it potential terminal performance and, IMHO getting almost nothing back in return. I owned a 7.5" upper for a while, but rarely shot it and eventually sold it. At that length you are getting a huge fireball out the end of the barrel. Also, you end up having to put your support hand almost against the receiver. I'm not someone who does that whole "C clamp" thing with my support hand, but having to put your support hand that far back is just not ideal.

To me, if you are going the SBR route, a barrel between 10.5" and 12" is the ideal. Still very short, maneuverable and light, yet you maintain decent velocity. Or you could just switch to 300 BO and get even better ballistics.

[prepare]

Viable for a small niche. Discrete carry, break contact type weapon system. That’s what they’re for.

[georgeib]

Viable for a small niche. Discrete carry, break contact type weapon system. That’s what they’re for.

I think this is really it's niche, right here. But the question I have is why would this be any better than a PCC?

[Nowski87]

There is a youtube channel that I subscribe to, the guy is former LEO and worked in the industry blah blah. But he swears by the 7.5 for vehicle stuff due to the over all size, but I really can't behind the whole thing especially when he says 55grn is as heavy as he can use to be effective or accurate.

[ggammell]

There is a youtube channel that I subscribe to, the guy is former LEO and worked in the industry blah blah. But he swears by the 7.5 for vehicle stuff due to the over all size, but I really can't behind the whole thing especially when he says 55grn is as heavy as he can use to be effective or accurate.

And?? Who is it?

[Nowski87]

The cahnnel is under Abner Miranda. I hope I spelled that right, I like his info as another perspective.

[Stickman]

So as the title asks, is a 7.5" barrel viable? I was involved in a discussion on a small forum I frequent, and one of the posters seemed to think so. I know what I've read here that a 10.5" barrel is really the minimum viable length, and tried to explain that terminal ballistics suffer dramatically below that length. I explained that rifle wounding is based on hydrostatic shock, and that once you lose that much velocity, you may as well be using a PCC.

His response was that he was getting 2300 fps with Barnes 60 grain TSX bullets, and that they expand down to 1800 fps, and that hits at 100 yards were easy. Doesn't this just bolster my comparison to a PCC?

Would any of you kindly educate me a bit further, please?

That condensed generic answer is no, 7.5" is not a viable barrel length for shooting people who are intent on killing you (assuming we are talking 5.56 / .223). Don't listen to people who comment that they can get hits at 100 yards as that means nothing. EFFECTIVE rounds on target is what counts.

I know some people will say that it is only for short range engagements, but the problem is that you don't get to pick and choose your distances. I don't care if you think you will only shoot in your house, a 7.5" barrel still sucks.

I also know that some people like to say. "Would you want to get shot by it"? My answer is yes, I would much rather be shot by a 7.5" barrel than an effective barrel length like 10.5"+ barrel lengths. Once again, ignore the ignorant people who are making comments like that.