Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 52

Thread: Thinking about going from 11.5" to 10.5"....

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    933
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by scottryan View Post
    The Colt product line.
    Why must you bring colt into every thread?

    I can understand that they wanted the shortest reliable set up. I dont undetstand why crane would select a rifle that is considered by many here to not be as reliable as the 11.5. Im sure they know what they are doing correct? My question is if the 11.5 is more reliable than the 10.5 why doesnt crane use the 11.5? The main defence is that its "only one inch". Crane seems to think that "one inch" was worth it...
    FFL/SOT

    Chuck Norris has to maintain a concealed weapon license in all 50 states in order to legally wear pants.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    7,868
    Feedback Score
    0
    It's standard to the Colt product line. He would have said the same about FNH, KAC, LMT, or BCM if they were the ones who supplied the M4/A1/CQBR/Mk. 18 guns to the military.

    What is wrong with you? Are you trying to pick a fight?

    They wanted the overall shortest possible setup that maintained reliability.

    Yes the difference is ONE INCH. But ask every member here who prefers 14.5'' to 16.1'' guns why they do? It makes a difference in handling.

    Have you shot an 11'', and 10.5'' side by side?

    A 10 is smaller by a little, is faster handling, and the rail reaches out to the barrel further. (IMO)

    Crane wanted short. They got short. It's not like they used an 11.5'' and said ''Oh this blows.'' then went 10.5''.

    They had M4s. They cut them to an arbitrary length that had been used a bit before. (10'', or so.) went a little longer, (10.3'') and saw that it worked.

    Used ever since.

    That's how I understand it happened, was from cut Colt M4 barrels.

    What part is so hard to understand?

    I like the 11.5'' because it doesn't beat up a suppressor too bad, and you get better fragmentation range, and dwell time.

    However 10.5'' IMHO is faster, more portable, and looks a lot cooler.
    We miss you, AC.
    We miss you, ToddG.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    933
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Not trying to be a dick, I know about the colt end of it. Ill do some searching and see if I can find more about it. All Im saying a bunch of guys here say dont get a 10.5 cause its not as reliable as the 11.5. I dont find this to be true, I understand the issues at hand with dwell time but if its good enough for crane I think most of us will do fine with it. As I said, the only way I will know for sure is to try it. Ive run my 11.5, now Ill try the 10.5....
    FFL/SOT

    Chuck Norris has to maintain a concealed weapon license in all 50 states in order to legally wear pants.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    oregon
    Posts
    7,126
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    few people will tell you tenfives or tenthrees are no-go. they're not no-go. but in the context of this thread, you're trading something that's go for something thats slightly less go... so that's the perspective that everyone's arguing from.

    10 guns are great.. love 'em. but i'll just reiterate- i would not trade an 11 for a 10. 11s are, on the whole, "better."

    i think you just have to learn to accept that not every design is 100% engineered... some decisions are arbitrarily made, believe it or not.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,427
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Building off what other people have said, i will add further.

    10.5" have to be built right with no leeway.

    That means a high quality 10.5" barrel with the correct USGI springs in the buffer tube and bolt catch. Correct 5.56 chamber.

    The gas port must be correct along with the correct buffer weight.

    If you do all of this the 10.5" will be fine.
    "Not every thing on Earth requires an aftermarket upgrade." demigod/markm

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    3,459
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic_Salad0892 View Post
    They had M4s. They cut them to an arbitrary length that had been used a bit before. (10'', or so.) went a little longer, (10.3'') and saw that it worked.
    Actually they cut them down so the muzzle threads would stop just short of the bayonet lug, allowing silencers to be mounted without cutting off the lug.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    7,868
    Feedback Score
    0
    Great piece of information there. Thanks Todd?

    Was that so that they didn't have to modify the Front Sight Tower?

    Still seems a bit arbitrary.
    We miss you, AC.
    We miss you, ToddG.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,427
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Todd.K View Post
    Actually they cut them down so the muzzle threads would stop just short of the bayonet lug, allowing silencers to be mounted without cutting off the lug.

    This is true.
    "Not every thing on Earth requires an aftermarket upgrade." demigod/markm

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Northern Command
    Posts
    1,897
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 99HMC4 View Post
    The standard for who? The point Im making is most say the 11.5 is more reliable but crane uses the 10.5. Im sure they need more reliabilty than 99% of us here.....
    I don't see how the 11.5" is "more reliable", in what way? I have a LMT 10.5" that has never had a failure to feed, fire or eject in several thousand rounds. I wonder how it would be classed as "less reliable".

    I think an 11.5" simply has a little more dwell time and therefore is a little easier on components, but an SBR is a compromise you take the utility of a short barrel knowing that it will have a cost in other areas, such as replacing springs and such.

    Cameron
    Last edited by Cameron; 12-11-10 at 20:42.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UT
    Posts
    4,596
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Cameron View Post
    I don't see how the 11.5" is "more reliable", in what way? I have a LMT 10.5" that has never had a failure to feed, fire or eject in several thousand rounds. I wonder how it would be classed as "less reliable".

    I think an 11.5" simply has a little more dwell time and therefore is a little easier on components, but an SBR is a compromise you take the utility of a short barrel knowing that it will have a cost in other areas, such as replacing springs and such.

    Cameron
    There is an lingering opinion that the 11.5" barrel due to timing. dwell time, etc etc etc.

    I still prefer 10.5"
    Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
    What Happened to the American dream? It came true. You're looking at it.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 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
  •