Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 91

Thread: Carbine vs Mid

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE FL
    Posts
    14,148
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by CrossedRifles View Post
    Yes, the carbine system will wear "faster" than a middy system. Will you notice it? Not likely. A carbine gas system from a good mfg will last you a very long time.

    I will add, "bias" towards the mid length system is like some one saying, "fitness experts are biased because they say more excercise can lead to a longer life." The fact is a mid length gas system is not as rough on internals, but that does not mean a carbine will automatically fail you.
    I'm still waiting for the testing that demonstrates this. It's one of those things that's been said enough, and seems logical enough with a basic understanding of the system, but that there has been no documented evidence that I'm aware of.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    AF
    Posts
    190
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by subzero View Post
    Let's not get too carried away with the hyperbole. That "poor engineering" has enabled millions of rounds sent downrange at and into bad guys. It has done, and will continue to do, a tremendous job.
    I was just about to say THIS.

    There are hundreds of thousands of carbines out there which has proven themselves under the harshest conditions.

    Is a middy better...yes...noticeably...maybe...but like myself and others have stated in carbine -v- middy threads before, has the quantitative testing been done to determine if there is a statistically significant difference? At least not yet.

    It will be a helluva long time, if ever, before middies out number carbines.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    AF
    Posts
    190
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SA80Dan View Post
    I'm an owner of a carbine length gas system rifle...I shoot 1000 rounds a month. Coming up for about 18 months of that now, and its not worn out yet, so at 1000 rounds a year, I think you'll be good for a while...

    That said, if you don't already own a carbine lengthed rifle - as the others have said, there really is no point in ever choosing that over a middy (in a 14.5 or 16 inch barrel....shorties obviously excepted). When I have to rebarrel mine, I will be putting a mid length on there.
    Yes, there is no reason to rebarrel just to go midlength.

    In 20 or so years (@1,000 rnds/yr) when it's time for you to start thinking about a new barrel, the whole middy vs. carbine thing will have sorted itself out...maybe.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    157
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by subzero View Post
    Let's not get too carried away with the hyperbole. That "poor engineering" has enabled millions of rounds sent downrange at and into bad guys. It has done, and will continue to do, a tremendous job.
    That's a good point. Are there any middies in the Military? Are any units deploying any middies?
    If you're in range, so are they...

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,714
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
    I'm still waiting for the testing that demonstrates this. It's one of those things that's been said enough, and seems logical enough with a basic understanding of the system, but that there has been no documented evidence that I'm aware of.
    I think it's pretty easy to demonstrate the principles that support the concept - shorter dwell, delayed extraction, lower gas volume, lower bolt speed, distance and arc of ejected cases, etc., can be observed and measured in a midlength. given these factors it's logical to assume lower stress to the parts of the mechanism.

    I know you are asking for empirical testing that compares something like a large quantity of middies vs. CAR firing same ammo in same conditions and evaluating failures but do we actually have to do that to be able to infer, scientifically, that one is more longterm reliable than the other?

    I mean, no one really knows what the atmosphere of Saturn is made up of but through radiographic spectral analysis, we can take a pretty good guess, right?
    never push a wrench...

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,714
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JDW67 View Post
    That's a good point. Are there any middies in the Military? Are any units deploying any middies?
    I don't believe so, but they also aren't using 16" barrels on carbine gas systems either...
    never push a wrench...

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE FL
    Posts
    14,148
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ra2bach View Post
    I think it's pretty easy to demonstrate the principles that support the concept - shorter dwell, delayed extraction, lower gas volume, lower bolt speed, distance and arc of ejected cases, etc., can be observed and measured in a midlength. given these factors it's logical to assume lower stress to the parts of the mechanism.

    I know you are asking for empirical testing that compares something like a large quantity of middies vs. CAR firing same ammo in same conditions and evaluating failures but do we actually have to do that to be able to infer, scientifically, that one is more longterm reliable than the other?

    I mean, no one really knows what the atmosphere of Saturn is made up of but through radiographic spectral analysis, we can take a pretty good guess, right?
    I didn't really want to turn this into yet another science debate, I just wanted to point out that things that people have a tendency of going around spouting as if ffact are too often things that they are only repeating.

    and yes, I'd still like to see someone quantify all these claims in some way other than grainy high-speed video.

    and I'd also like to know if "stress on the parts" is considered to be high enough to be cumulative and if that cumulative stress really matters in any meaningful way. After the whole debacle of the HPT debate it's clear that many people have just enough knowledge of things to be dangerous and perhas too much to be willing to ask questions.
    Last edited by rob_s; 11-08-10 at 13:41.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,217
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    I have a POS Bushmaster 14.5" carbean upper with like 30k rounds through it. It still head spaces ok, and will hold under 2" groups at 100 as of last weekend.

    If you're shooting only 1000 per year... you'll get at least 30 years useage out of it.... give or take.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    106
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    This thread is a big relief to me. I just purchased a ddm4 carbine about 2 months ago. I was sure that I had bought the best carbine in my price range until I started seeing the craze for midlength systems. I found thinking that I may have made the wrong decision and maybe should have bought a midlength carbine. I am new to the rifles and am trying not to get too caught up in the newest coolest shit craze. I almost bought a new lower to build a midlenght m4 recently but now I think that the money would be better spent on ammo and learning to shoot the carbine length system I have. I will probably shoot no more than 5k next year and I am sure the ddm4 will serve me well.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,217
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by glockkid88 View Post
    This thread is a big relief to me.
    The middies are nice and shoot a bit smoother.... but not worth dumping a perfectly good carbean over. You just build another gun and go from there.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •