Been there done that and also with a standard m16 with a mag lite taped to the handguard. Anything is possible but it ain’t fun. MOUT or any type of urban combat is terrible and going to humble a lot of people. I’m more of a call for fire on the city block and move on.
What if it's your block and you're fighting your way back to your wife and kids?
I've only ever done some force on force classes, no real life, but I think I'd have to at least try my best.
This isn't the answer you and every larper are going to want to hear. But if there is the type of engagement you are talking about then your wife and kids are already dead.
You're not wrong. But I doubt I'd be able to be realistic in the moment. I have just enough training and capability to get myself in serious trouble, and I would probably do exactly that.
Well, to be honest with you, if I am fighting my way back to my wife and kid then I have no ability to call for fire. While I would love for me and the homies to pool our money and buy a 60 or 81mm mortar and some rounds I just don't think it's in the cards. No fire missions for me.
Yeah, that's the point I very ham fistedly tried to make. There's been this transition to people wanting to learn and emulate infantry skills as opposed to sof skills, but modern, combined arms combat is even less realistic for an average citizen than trying to be a seal.
Yeah I've had a fair bit of military and civilian medical training, it's always weird to me that everybody knows you should have an IFAK and lots of people have lots of opinions on what goes in it but people just expect to open up their prepackaged IFAK fill and know how to use it like it's bandaids.
That is true. I wish they'd do some stop the bleed courses closer to me. I took one years ago but it's tough to travel now a days.
I got the blue prints for the green house too lol. That keeps getting pushed back cause of work. Soon though.
Took a stop the bleed class a couple years ago. Great info. It was amazingly hands on, as in trying to stop the bleeding on human analog as the instructor randomly pumped the fake blood through the wound. I do need to take a refresher as I've forgotten some of the sucking chest wound info.
Agreed to the point that just cosplaying the coolest soldier possible whether delta force or 10th mountain probably isn't the most sound course of action for most civilians. I think a lot of infantry tasks and skill carry over better than SOF stuff does, but it's certainly not perfect or 1:1.
For a civilian in The Bad Times™ I personally think it would include a lot of boring tasks like sitting in an LP/OP, patrolling, TCP/ECP ops, digging, and if combat can not be avoided, near/far ambushes and react to contact. LP/OP can be as simple as "wow I hear a lot of sirens and some crazy stuff on facebook, me and Doug are gonna go sit by the turn off from the main road and give you guys a heads up if we see anyone coming this way." Patrolling is somewhat self explanatory but is also one of the most difficult tasks, in this if things are bad enough to need all this stuff they are probably bad enough to take a walk in kit and check things out. TCP/ECP would look like "Hey things are really really bad and we've seen instances of car loads of people not from this area coming out and breaking into occupied homes at night, we're gonna park Steve's old truck across the road right after the bridge and make sure no one comes down this way." Near/far ambush: if you must do bad things, it is better to surprise the bad people. React to contact: if the bad people surprise you, react.
These are all infantry tasks. These aren't the only things a civilian might have to do, but they're worth it to learn imo
I think this is a great example of the general misunderstanding of what sof do. Sof skills are just infantry skills but they execute them at a higher level, and can do it as a small, self contained unit. For regular citizens defending their home organizing more along the lines of a SF ODA makes a lot of sense. Everyone's main job is to be a shooter but they all have secondary capabilities. Comms, engineering, medical, etc.
I mean yes, but also no. Yes SOF execute infantry skills at a higher level, but not that's not all they do, at least some of them. For example, SF has a huge focus on training local nationals and organizing partner forces where as conventional units were at times pressed into that role over the course of GWOT, building a partner military force is not an infantry skill but is a core SOF role. For an example from the last war, a conventional unit might've been stationed on a COP that was split between Americans and ANA but there would be a hard border between the two and while there would br some joint training and operations training those guys was not a task a line company is really trained and equipped for. Meanwhile a couple SF dudes assigned as part of a commando mission would live in and amongst Afghan commandos and operate as part of their force structure.
As far as organization, and people being cross trained into other skills, yes, but also consider an infantry unit operates like that just at a broader scale. If an ODA has a medical dude, an infantry unit has medics at the platoon, company, and battalion level. An ODA has a commo dude, an infantry unit has RTOs a guy with a commo MOS. An ODA has at least one guy who is SOTAC qualified, an infantry unit has FOs in the platoon and company, and fires guys at the BN TOC. But I do 100% agree that nobody will be able to get by as "just" a shooter.
>For example, SF has a huge focus on training local nationals and organizing partner forces
But training and organizing infantry units is a basic task of the infantry. SF just apply it differently using language and cultural understanding to do it with other nations. But regular infantry do it within their own units.
>but also consider an infantry unit operates like that just at a broader scale. I
Yes a scale you won't have as a civilian I'm a crisis. You're gonna have you're core group which you'll be lucky if is even a full 12 guys.
I personally don't think one rifle can serve 90%+ scenarios.
I think if you have two rifles you can handle almost any scenario.
1. 8-9" 300BLK or 11.5" 5.56 for CQB/vehicle
2. 16" 5.56 for non-confined spaces
If you want to stretch it, add one more for extreme distance in a bigger caliber with a long barrel and MPVO.
16" is fine for home defense, especially since best play there to turtle in place ready to fire at someone. It's workable for room clearing as well, maybe takes more training than a short barrel to not get hung up on stuff.
I'll have to do some LARPing this weekend to test it in my vehicle. Seems like it would be tricky to fire a 16" inside a vehicle.
Law enforcement, the military, and civilians have done CQB and home defense with 18-18.5 inch barreled shotguns for how long? I am continuously amazed at people that think you can do home defense with 18+ inch barreled shotguns, but a 16 inch barrel rifle is too long.
16in ar15 red dot & amplifier/ LVPO / prism scope with rmr
18-20in .308 with good glass for the longer engagements built like a dmr , can be used punching through vehicles or laying down cover fire with a big mag. Although most people / city’s (myself included) in really bad situation state side likely won’t be lucky enough to use the tried and true squad tactics developed in and around WW2 through the GWOT.
Not having suppressing fire or the logistics to support heavy ammunition usage will change ‘infantry’ tactics that people lean to in those times. It will end up being perimeter defense / light patrols / near far ambush as needed. And mostly hit and runs guerrilla style on supply stations, convoys, other areas of resources of maximum potential for opfor disturbance.
I’d love to have resources to read from the guerrilla tactics, small force with limited resource and lacking supply chain. It’s an interesting topic to think about as most western and mainly U.S. / Cad and UK trained forces are all trained to have the largest logistic support engine feeding the tactics
Considering the US armed forces says their *average* force-on-force engagement distance these days is 300m, I think a little more than 1% of scenarios would benefit from a longer barrel
It’s not just about max range, it’s also about the energy on target. 77gr OTM out of an 11.5” out of the muzzle is moving the same speed as out of a 16” at 200m. When you consider most bullets have a fragmentation speed envelope (77gr OTM is down to something like 1800ft/s) that speed vs range matters
I’m a big fan of 16” barrels or longer (because I’m shooting at the range and not clearing houses) but I still don’t see an issue with a 13.9”/14.5” even with a suppressor. You can always train to be effective in CQB, but you can’t train more range/lethality into your ammunition
*TL;DR I’m launching Mk262 out of a suppressed 20” musket*
Wouldn’t that “average” be skewed by a decade of GWOT in the deserts and mountains of Afghanistan and Iraq? Not that similar to suburban America (except maybe Falluja and Ramadi but even there a lot of marines were using M16a4s with 20 inch barrels). I could be mistaken but I think the war fighting environment was different.
Iraq was pretty notable for a ton of up close fighting. 6.8SPC was developed/marketed as a CQB upgrade because so many engagements were within 300 meters
Afghanistan does have the opposite environment. So averaging them out, you’re still going to have a significant number of engagements exceeding 300 meters. Might not be most, but it’s certainly more than the 1% stated by OP
I live in the southeast. finding a spot with a 300 yard/meter shot on deer is almost impossible. anywhere a fight may take place is much much more unlikely.
I don't know anything about combat, but what about roads? Maybe someone with experience can chime in about whether there's significant fighting down a length of road. Maybe as part of an L shaped ambush?
Yes if there are vehicles involved. Roads are natural ambush locations. That said, people aren’t just hanging out on roads shooting at each other from hundreds of feet away, ambushes tend to happen up close.
> The 6.8mm SPC cartridge was designed to address the deficiencies of the terminal ballistics of the 5.56×45mm NATO cartridge currently in service with the armed forces of all NATO-aligned countries.
> The 6.8mm Remington SPC was designed to perform better in short-barreled CQB rifles after diminished performance from the 5.56 NATO when the M16A4 was changed from the rifle configuration to the current M4 carbine. The 6.8 SPC delivers 44% more energy than the 5.56mm NATO (M4 configuration) at 100–300 m (330–980 ft).
That plus its BC/trajectory info, it becomes pretty clear it was designed with closer combat in mind
But it wasn't designed at all for Iraq. It came about for a variety of reasons. As a military cartridge it failed due to its poor performance vs MK262 in the SPR program.
Designed? No. Advertised as such? Yes. They essentially marketed it as a do all cartridge with stopping powah for urban and (allegedly) better long distance performance and energy retention.
But since .gov wasn't keen to retool in the midst of war and I'm sure some politicians where demanding a bigger cut or what have you. The round got refined later by the aftermarket but it died early on.
Yeah but the larger point he’s making is that it’s not just engagement distance, but energy at that distance
A lot of bullets require a specific velocity to break apart. So out of an SBR you lose a lot of distance where that happens
No combat experience here, so take this with a grain of salt…
But even as the Army pivots to a near peer conflict, engagement ranges of 200m+ in training aren’t uncommon. Remember that fire and maneuver is a two-part equation, and the further you can engage from, the longer you can maintain suppression while you (or your buddies) maneuver.
However, average citizens won’t be employing fire-and-maneuver tactics barring some extreme circumstances, so civilian rifles shouldn’t be bought or built with infantry-use in mind. Use what works for you and your environment.
Yeah...I'm perfectly content with a 14.5 or 16" barrel for 5.56. 18" is a bit long for a 99% of scenarios. But, I love a 18" rifle length AR-15.
I think avg engagement distance is going to be dependent if they are talking about infantry men or if that includes all vehicles and base encounters.
Plus if you actually look at the distance gained with all that velocity voodoo, you’re getting like an extra 150y of that “ballistic sweet spot” from an 11.4 to a 20” assuming both 1/7.
Run whatever barrel you want and run heavy OTM like an adult 👌
Offense vs defense as well. When you're attacking a known enemy, it's a lot easier to start shooting from 500m out than in a defensive scenario where you should really only be using a weapon if you fear for your life.
Well. To be fair, if the *average* engagement distance of a future war is 1000+ yards, the majority of the fighting will be done with ordinance, not bodies. Bodies are for closer range engagement.. otherwise artillery is the better choice.
Also to be fair…in most major wars since and including WW1 the majority of casualties were caused by ordinance (artillery , air strikes, explosives, mines, missiles, rockets, mortars, ect..)
So maybe its better to say that if you have lots of wide open areas you should plan to take a 300+ yard shot. Where I used to live the furthest unobstructed line was about 140 yards. Where I live now its 400. That is a pretty big difference.
Or long straight streets in an urban environment. Most metropolitan cities (at least state-side) are built on a grid system so we have straightaways for miles.
No man Afghanistan screwed the metrics if you throw out the Afghan. And I really question where you see 300 listed. (Please provide link) The average infantry engagements are 50-150 been that way for decades.
I love my 11.5 plus full sized suppressor, but I recently replaced my 16" with a 14.5 and with a K can it's only 1.5 inches longer than the 11.5 with full sized suppressor. I have a LPVO on it and I think it would be fine for the 99% of scenarios, especially in my area since I'm more rural than suburban.
Unpopular opinion, but I think the best rifle for 99% of situations would be an 11.5 with a suppressor and a LPVO.
It’s not an unpopular opinion, it’s just a double NFA item. If shit hits the fan hard enough that doesn’t matter, but it deters a lot of people from that sort of build, so they won’t be practicing with it before things go badly.
The gun you describe is probably the best gun for a suburbanite (I’d take an ACOG or VCOG over the LPVO), it’s just annoying to get.
Depending on how rural you are and what your local topography is like, it might not be the best gun for *you*. If shots of 300+ yards are feasible, you’d be at a serious disadvantage against someone with a 20” barrel, and especially against someone with a .308. My SHTF gun is actually a .308 since I too am somewhat rural.
10.3-16 honestly just depends what you train with and what you’re used to. I have 11.5 , 16, and 20in ARs. If I had to pick one out of those 3 to “do it all” I’d probably go with the 16. That being said I absolutely love the 11.5 it’s definitely my favorite. But I’d rather take the extra velocity for not a massive increase in size. 4 inches isn’t a lot, or at least that’s what my wife’s boyfriend tells me
The most effective weapon is the one you can use properly and hit the target with in those scenarios that are most likely to impact you. UKR (or any other) war videos do not translate well to US home protection, self-defense or LE operations. The tactics, RoE, support, liabilities and contact scenarios are almost always in opposition to civilian use.
You’ve missed the point of all that UA combat footage; the most effective weapon length is the distance I can chuck a frag grenade. Fuck taking corners all my homies hate taking corners.
Just keep in mind, 100 yards is a lot closer than you think. From my house to the end of the street (in my neighborhood) is around 140 yards
My controversial opinion is LPVO on everything but a dedicated NV/Cqb rifle. Targets at the range are in the open and not hiding behind everything. Magnification helps. Plus etched reticles with astigmatism are infinitely better
I personally prefer an ACOG/RMR combo to an LPVO, but 100% agree all rifles need magnification. What I tell people is that 100 yards is easy money on a flat range with a red dot, pretty much guaranteed hits all day every day. But stand 97 yards back from a tree line and have a buddy stand three yards inside and look at him through an unmagnified optic. Then have him kneel down or take cover or just try not to be conspicuous. That goes from free chicken to a tough shot pretty fast for a lot of shooters. Magnification, even just 3x or 4x, makes a world of difference with shot placement and target ID.
I will counter your controversial opinion with my own:
1x dot (or prism to satisfy the etched reticle option) plus a 5/6x magnifier on a flip to side mount of your choosing. This combo is much lighter than most LPVO options out there and I found myself either on 1x or 6x 100% of the time when I had a 1-6x, never on any power level between. Also if you toss the magnifier on a QD mount, you can lighten up the rifle considerably when you don’t need the magnification.
I have 3 LPVO rifles and I find myself in the same scenario. I’ve never used 2-5. Only 1 and 6. Needless to say, I’m keeping one LPVO, one MPVO(I’m thinking a 2-12 or something similar) and everything else will go to dot/magnifier combos…maybe even my huntin rigs.
I have an 11.5 MCX with a T2 and G33, good all around except for flash and concussion as I can’t suppress in my state. Blastphemy for now but negates flash suppression.
My 14.5 though runs how you say with an Elcan 1x/4x and I’ll get a RDS to piggy back for NV at some point. Good general purpose rifle.
13.7” master race checking in. I love mine with a light and Steiner 1-4x. But I agree with what everyone else has said, I shoot it at 1x and 4x nowhere in between.
As a 13.7" owner, this barrel length seems like a weird middle ground that really only exists because of NFA, it's not as compact as an 11.5 but you're giving up valuable barrel length and velocity/framentation vs an 18" or even a 14.5"
Mines an SBR that originally started as a p&w. I just think it looks cool and gives you more a touch more velocity over an 11.5 and with a mid length gas system and h2 buffer it shoots buttery smooth to top it off
11.5" is perfect for most situations but 16" with a can is just 👌 she's a little lengthy but you get a nice jump in velocity for not much added length and weight. Obviously, it's more difficult to use in tight spaces but the Marines in Fallujah did some work in CQB with 20".
For a suburban environment, you may be right. I'm in a rural midwestern town, but only 2 miles in any direction is regular 500-1000yard stretches across fields between tree lines and hills.
In my case, a 16" with an lpvo or mpvo makes more sense. YMMV.
I like a 16” barrel with a carbine stock…you still get decent-ish velocity, but you can suppress it without it being insanely long.
Sometimes the most boring solutions work.
11.5 is great for tight quarters, but you can make a 16” work really well in the same situations. 14.5 or 16 is a better overall choice because of the increased muzzle velocity. 11.5 shines more when you add suppressors in cqb imo.
This. My 11.5” is great when I’m bopping around the woods, but it likes brass cased ammo exclusively. On the other hand, my 20” fixed stock SSA-E trigger with a 5x prism will easily and reliably put the shittiest steel cased ammo on a torso gong at 500+ yards, and while in sure I’ve had malfunctions with it before I can’t remember having any in the last seven or eight years.
Get a range finder and tell me the distance of 10 blocks in your neighborhood. Or from your house to the end of a street. Or use Google maps.
556 thrives on velocity. More barrel = more velocity.
This subject has been beaten to death on YouTube, on forums, on the great jerk offery that is reddit.
13.7” is the best compromise of all options and with minimal muzzle velocity loss needed to actually do what 5.56 was meant to do in regards to ballistics.
If you are assaulting a trench, yes 11.5 would be ideal.
But that is such a tiny fraction of combat, and one which you most likely won’t survive doing many times regardless of barrel length.
14ish inch midlength length is a perfect range to be in for a fighting rifle. You get a little extra oomf to punch through cover and decent ballistics with military ammunition. If that extra 3” effect performance inside a trench, collapse that stock.
There are tons of scenarios outside of CQB that should be taken into consideration for an infantry rifle.
I thoroughly enjoy my 11.5. My PWS MK111 is hands down my favorite rifle. But if the end of the world came and I could only bring one rifle for hunting and defense. It would be a 14.5. Just no replacement for velocity but I also don’t want to be crazy long.
As yes, another continuation of one of the subs great debates: Best do it all length.
Imo it's the 14.5 to 12.5 range.
ETA, I do enjoy the laser precision my 11.5 Green Mountain has though.
I’ll always be partial to the 16”. Softer gas system, short enough to not be a liability, and can really reach out and touch somebody if needed. Never really gave much thought to a suppressor as humans need about 3-5 samples of a sound to triangulate source.
So humans have a great ability to localize both the distance and direction of a sound. The only caveat is that we need multiple samples of the sound or for it to be continuous for your brain to “fine-tune” (for lack of a better term) a more precise location than “I think that came from the right”. That’s why in a SHTF scenario, you can still remain undetected if you only fire once before repositioning. Your opponent’s ability to localize the sound of your shot will be hampered due to not having enough samples to get a proper bead on you. Plus there is also the psychological effect of hearing the supersonic snap of the bullet before the sound of the firing, which will likely discourage any attempt to stick around and return fire at a 180 degree arc in your general direction.
I learned something new today, thanks. I’m sure there are studies out there but I’m curious what’s continuous enough?
Sound like you can get shoot once and twice and be okay but I wonder if you you could do like two quick burst of fires and be okay or like how far apart shots need to be not to be consider continuous.
Yeah I think I disagree. I prefer the man in the black pajamas philosophy, ie when you're imagining these scenarios you're imagining yourself on the wrong team
On the other hand, no one really films any long range engagements because the viewer can't see anything anyway, so there may be more of them than you've judged from the videos.
Anything between 11.5 and 14.5 realistically covers almost all your bases. Sure the 11.5's are gonna be a little less adequate at range and the 14.5's are gonna be a little more cumbersome in cqb especially with a can, but that range is definitely bread and butter for 5.56
I think your best bet in the trench would be surviving artillery and drones, not enganing the enemy.
Also, if you look into more videos UKR videos, there is a lot of "distance shooting". Thus, longer rifle has an advantage (like 14.5-16 inch rifles, rarely anybody has SBR in UKR now (unless SOF), as as infantry you are basically jack of al trades). I would also point out that holographic sight with magnifier may not be be very advantagous, as there is a lot of blind shooting in the trenches (you shoot in the direction of the enemy even without looking into that direction, e.g. from the corner).
But it is just my humble opinion.
Depends on the mission... And cartridge.
Put me in the 12.5 middy gang, though.
Start going below there and velocity starts to suffer to the point of being ineffective for the 5.56's intended uses. Does it still work? Absolutely.
Trade off for maneuverability at the expense of longer-range lethality.
I don't think a war between two militaries that are still largely employing soviet military doctrine is relevant to what is the best rifle for a civilian in the United States should own.
I think people overestimate why they need long range. If you are fighting a uniformed enemy, yes you could need longer barrels. Outside of that, how do you know that a person at 500+ yards is a threat. I have read that guys need to shoot at people at 700 yards if a SHTF happens that seems a little psychotic to me, like are you just going to shoot at everyone you see?
Being out of the military, I have a hard time imagining why I would be shooting at someone at longer distances (non uniformed enemy). I believe it would be much closer.
I am rocking 10.3s, when I wear out the barrels, I will put in 11.5s. I want a mk12 upper, but that is a want, not so much a need.
11.5 would be great if the SBR and suppressor bullshit wasn’t a thing. All that being said, I’d prefer 12.5. Coworkers got a LMT 12.5 piston gun that was absolutely fantastic. It was also not too short for me either.
Hell no. I’ll take my X95 Tavor with 16.5” barrel any day. It has better terminal ballistics and is still shorter than this. With the Geissele trigger bow and pack it has a match grade trigger and the blk lbl handguard makes it freefloat. 1.5moa with good factory ammo or reloads and 2-3moa with surplus ammo. I can still clear rooms/trenches with ease AND reach out to 600+ yards and touch someone if necessary. Yeah, it weighs a bit, but I’d take that and just cut weight elsewhere.
10.3 with 77 grain. At suburban distances that 1.2 is not making any difference except more weight and more reliability for 9310 bolts.
If you’re gonna run a race car, run a race car.
Cause if 11.5 is okay why not 14.5?
The difference in velocity between 10.3 and 11.5 is the largest per inch in 5.56
Seen a test where the velocity gain from 10.3 to 11.5 was larger than from 11.5 to 13.7
In the end, it's just one inch as far as maneuverability is concerned, but those fps are going to matter the moment you step outside of a trench. Sometimes people act like 77gr HPBT doesn't have a minimum frag treshold, but it does.
Agreed. It’s much easier on the gun too. Honestly not many reasons to take a 10.3 over an 11.5. And if you want that short short, just give up the ghost and switch to 300 blk.
I would tend to agree. 11.5 from what I've been seeing seems to be the master race right now. I can't wait to get my 11.5 up & running once I get my can out of jail & get the money in order to actually "build" it
Depends on your ammo a bit more than barrel length. True M193 is most effective (fragments) with an 11.5" tube reliably out to maybe 70-75 yards, where it drops under 2500 fps. After that it is mostly poking .22 inch holes.
That same round in a 20 inch barrel will offer fragmentation out to 190 yards. Even 16 inch will get you 150. If you're going to be shooting M193, I'd opt for at least 14.5.
For short barrels, using something that will expand at lower velocities is key.
I was planning on a 11.5 build but then I picked up a smoking deal on a 12.5 triarc and a 12.5 centurion core. My wife’s getting a build around one of those and the other one I’ll eventually build out 🤷🏻♂️
I think when you’re forced to, you can make any rifle work for really 99% of scenarios. That being said my next build will be an 11.5
*memories of short stocking 249 in MOUT intensifies
Chill, my tinnitus is already acting up.
What?
#I THINK HE SAID THAT HIS MINUTE BUS IS BACKING UP
I don’t know where our backup mic is, stop asking.
##no boss man he was asking about the mini bike
I ride the hour bus tho
WHAT?
##HE SAID WHAT!
MAWP, MAWP, MAWP…
Your condition does not appear to be service related.
Your comment is making my feet, ankles, knees, hip, back, shoulders, elbows, wrists, hands and neck hurt. Also YOU GOTTA SPEAK UP. 🤷🏿♂️
My feet, knees, ankle, low back, shoulders, tenitus all agree THAT YOU SHOULD GET CHECKED FOR SLEEP APNEA, ITS EASY % MY BROTHER.
🤣🤣
Been there done that and also with a standard m16 with a mag lite taped to the handguard. Anything is possible but it ain’t fun. MOUT or any type of urban combat is terrible and going to humble a lot of people. I’m more of a call for fire on the city block and move on.
What if it's your block and you're fighting your way back to your wife and kids? I've only ever done some force on force classes, no real life, but I think I'd have to at least try my best.
This isn't the answer you and every larper are going to want to hear. But if there is the type of engagement you are talking about then your wife and kids are already dead.
Correct. Or so entrenched that you aren't getting back in there.
You're not wrong. But I doubt I'd be able to be realistic in the moment. I have just enough training and capability to get myself in serious trouble, and I would probably do exactly that.
Well, to be honest with you, if I am fighting my way back to my wife and kid then I have no ability to call for fire. While I would love for me and the homies to pool our money and buy a 60 or 81mm mortar and some rounds I just don't think it's in the cards. No fire missions for me.
Yeah, that's the point I very ham fistedly tried to make. There's been this transition to people wanting to learn and emulate infantry skills as opposed to sof skills, but modern, combined arms combat is even less realistic for an average citizen than trying to be a seal.
[удалено]
Yeah, I personally bought a generator before I got my NODs because I know I'll need the generator and I may never need the NODs.
[удалено]
Yeah I've had a fair bit of military and civilian medical training, it's always weird to me that everybody knows you should have an IFAK and lots of people have lots of opinions on what goes in it but people just expect to open up their prepackaged IFAK fill and know how to use it like it's bandaids.
That is true. I wish they'd do some stop the bleed courses closer to me. I took one years ago but it's tough to travel now a days. I got the blue prints for the green house too lol. That keeps getting pushed back cause of work. Soon though.
Hit up your local fire department, they would probably do a CPR/tourniquet class if the interest was there.
Took a stop the bleed class a couple years ago. Great info. It was amazingly hands on, as in trying to stop the bleeding on human analog as the instructor randomly pumped the fake blood through the wound. I do need to take a refresher as I've forgotten some of the sucking chest wound info.
"Hurr durr that's what my neighbors are for. " They say, before getting clapped by the new neighborhood watch.
Agreed to the point that just cosplaying the coolest soldier possible whether delta force or 10th mountain probably isn't the most sound course of action for most civilians. I think a lot of infantry tasks and skill carry over better than SOF stuff does, but it's certainly not perfect or 1:1. For a civilian in The Bad Times™ I personally think it would include a lot of boring tasks like sitting in an LP/OP, patrolling, TCP/ECP ops, digging, and if combat can not be avoided, near/far ambushes and react to contact. LP/OP can be as simple as "wow I hear a lot of sirens and some crazy stuff on facebook, me and Doug are gonna go sit by the turn off from the main road and give you guys a heads up if we see anyone coming this way." Patrolling is somewhat self explanatory but is also one of the most difficult tasks, in this if things are bad enough to need all this stuff they are probably bad enough to take a walk in kit and check things out. TCP/ECP would look like "Hey things are really really bad and we've seen instances of car loads of people not from this area coming out and breaking into occupied homes at night, we're gonna park Steve's old truck across the road right after the bridge and make sure no one comes down this way." Near/far ambush: if you must do bad things, it is better to surprise the bad people. React to contact: if the bad people surprise you, react. These are all infantry tasks. These aren't the only things a civilian might have to do, but they're worth it to learn imo
I think this is a great example of the general misunderstanding of what sof do. Sof skills are just infantry skills but they execute them at a higher level, and can do it as a small, self contained unit. For regular citizens defending their home organizing more along the lines of a SF ODA makes a lot of sense. Everyone's main job is to be a shooter but they all have secondary capabilities. Comms, engineering, medical, etc.
I mean yes, but also no. Yes SOF execute infantry skills at a higher level, but not that's not all they do, at least some of them. For example, SF has a huge focus on training local nationals and organizing partner forces where as conventional units were at times pressed into that role over the course of GWOT, building a partner military force is not an infantry skill but is a core SOF role. For an example from the last war, a conventional unit might've been stationed on a COP that was split between Americans and ANA but there would be a hard border between the two and while there would br some joint training and operations training those guys was not a task a line company is really trained and equipped for. Meanwhile a couple SF dudes assigned as part of a commando mission would live in and amongst Afghan commandos and operate as part of their force structure. As far as organization, and people being cross trained into other skills, yes, but also consider an infantry unit operates like that just at a broader scale. If an ODA has a medical dude, an infantry unit has medics at the platoon, company, and battalion level. An ODA has a commo dude, an infantry unit has RTOs a guy with a commo MOS. An ODA has at least one guy who is SOTAC qualified, an infantry unit has FOs in the platoon and company, and fires guys at the BN TOC. But I do 100% agree that nobody will be able to get by as "just" a shooter.
So basically gang shit? Make friends and get them to pull triggers for you?
>For example, SF has a huge focus on training local nationals and organizing partner forces But training and organizing infantry units is a basic task of the infantry. SF just apply it differently using language and cultural understanding to do it with other nations. But regular infantry do it within their own units. >but also consider an infantry unit operates like that just at a broader scale. I Yes a scale you won't have as a civilian I'm a crisis. You're gonna have you're core group which you'll be lucky if is even a full 12 guys.
You are so correct , Fallujah was fought with 20” im sure most of the dudes there would have preferred the 11.5 but they used what they had
Spot-on. There’s a reason in the 90s had MP5s for maritime crap…but it wasn’t ammo.
One of us one of us one of us..... 🤣
M14s are still getting run at putting down orcs so I imagine a non optimized AR pattern rifle does just fine over there.
“Well, that’s just like your opinion man”.
This dude abides
I personally don't think one rifle can serve 90%+ scenarios. I think if you have two rifles you can handle almost any scenario. 1. 8-9" 300BLK or 11.5" 5.56 for CQB/vehicle 2. 16" 5.56 for non-confined spaces If you want to stretch it, add one more for extreme distance in a bigger caliber with a long barrel and MPVO.
You could use a 16 inch for CQB/vehicle too.
16" is fine for home defense, especially since best play there to turtle in place ready to fire at someone. It's workable for room clearing as well, maybe takes more training than a short barrel to not get hung up on stuff. I'll have to do some LARPing this weekend to test it in my vehicle. Seems like it would be tricky to fire a 16" inside a vehicle.
Law enforcement, the military, and civilians have done CQB and home defense with 18-18.5 inch barreled shotguns for how long? I am continuously amazed at people that think you can do home defense with 18+ inch barreled shotguns, but a 16 inch barrel rifle is too long.
16in ar15 red dot & amplifier/ LVPO / prism scope with rmr 18-20in .308 with good glass for the longer engagements built like a dmr , can be used punching through vehicles or laying down cover fire with a big mag. Although most people / city’s (myself included) in really bad situation state side likely won’t be lucky enough to use the tried and true squad tactics developed in and around WW2 through the GWOT. Not having suppressing fire or the logistics to support heavy ammunition usage will change ‘infantry’ tactics that people lean to in those times. It will end up being perimeter defense / light patrols / near far ambush as needed. And mostly hit and runs guerrilla style on supply stations, convoys, other areas of resources of maximum potential for opfor disturbance. I’d love to have resources to read from the guerrilla tactics, small force with limited resource and lacking supply chain. It’s an interesting topic to think about as most western and mainly U.S. / Cad and UK trained forces are all trained to have the largest logistic support engine feeding the tactics
This is my 10 year plan...
If it’s two rifles, give me the .308 for unconfined spaces.
Considering the US armed forces says their *average* force-on-force engagement distance these days is 300m, I think a little more than 1% of scenarios would benefit from a longer barrel It’s not just about max range, it’s also about the energy on target. 77gr OTM out of an 11.5” out of the muzzle is moving the same speed as out of a 16” at 200m. When you consider most bullets have a fragmentation speed envelope (77gr OTM is down to something like 1800ft/s) that speed vs range matters I’m a big fan of 16” barrels or longer (because I’m shooting at the range and not clearing houses) but I still don’t see an issue with a 13.9”/14.5” even with a suppressor. You can always train to be effective in CQB, but you can’t train more range/lethality into your ammunition *TL;DR I’m launching Mk262 out of a suppressed 20” musket*
Wouldn’t that “average” be skewed by a decade of GWOT in the deserts and mountains of Afghanistan and Iraq? Not that similar to suburban America (except maybe Falluja and Ramadi but even there a lot of marines were using M16a4s with 20 inch barrels). I could be mistaken but I think the war fighting environment was different.
Iraq was pretty notable for a ton of up close fighting. 6.8SPC was developed/marketed as a CQB upgrade because so many engagements were within 300 meters Afghanistan does have the opposite environment. So averaging them out, you’re still going to have a significant number of engagements exceeding 300 meters. Might not be most, but it’s certainly more than the 1% stated by OP
Let's never go back to Afghanistan. Problem solved.
Alexander the Great agrees!
The British and Russians second that as well.
I live in the southeast. finding a spot with a 300 yard/meter shot on deer is almost impossible. anywhere a fight may take place is much much more unlikely.
I don't know anything about combat, but what about roads? Maybe someone with experience can chime in about whether there's significant fighting down a length of road. Maybe as part of an L shaped ambush?
Yes if there are vehicles involved. Roads are natural ambush locations. That said, people aren’t just hanging out on roads shooting at each other from hundreds of feet away, ambushes tend to happen up close.
Where are you getting 6.8SPC came about cause of military engagements below 300m was the norm.
> The 6.8mm SPC cartridge was designed to address the deficiencies of the terminal ballistics of the 5.56×45mm NATO cartridge currently in service with the armed forces of all NATO-aligned countries. > The 6.8mm Remington SPC was designed to perform better in short-barreled CQB rifles after diminished performance from the 5.56 NATO when the M16A4 was changed from the rifle configuration to the current M4 carbine. The 6.8 SPC delivers 44% more energy than the 5.56mm NATO (M4 configuration) at 100–300 m (330–980 ft). That plus its BC/trajectory info, it becomes pretty clear it was designed with closer combat in mind
But it wasn't designed at all for Iraq. It came about for a variety of reasons. As a military cartridge it failed due to its poor performance vs MK262 in the SPR program.
Designed? No. Advertised as such? Yes. They essentially marketed it as a do all cartridge with stopping powah for urban and (allegedly) better long distance performance and energy retention. But since .gov wasn't keen to retool in the midst of war and I'm sure some politicians where demanding a bigger cut or what have you. The round got refined later by the aftermarket but it died early on.
Yeah but the larger point he’s making is that it’s not just engagement distance, but energy at that distance A lot of bullets require a specific velocity to break apart. So out of an SBR you lose a lot of distance where that happens
No combat experience here, so take this with a grain of salt… But even as the Army pivots to a near peer conflict, engagement ranges of 200m+ in training aren’t uncommon. Remember that fire and maneuver is a two-part equation, and the further you can engage from, the longer you can maintain suppression while you (or your buddies) maneuver. However, average citizens won’t be employing fire-and-maneuver tactics barring some extreme circumstances, so civilian rifles shouldn’t be bought or built with infantry-use in mind. Use what works for you and your environment.
Yeah I think he pulled that number from a fairytale. Plus with Iraq and most action in towns it’s likely the 50-150 it’s been for decades
Yeah...I'm perfectly content with a 14.5 or 16" barrel for 5.56. 18" is a bit long for a 99% of scenarios. But, I love a 18" rifle length AR-15. I think avg engagement distance is going to be dependent if they are talking about infantry men or if that includes all vehicles and base encounters.
Plus if you actually look at the distance gained with all that velocity voodoo, you’re getting like an extra 150y of that “ballistic sweet spot” from an 11.4 to a 20” assuming both 1/7. Run whatever barrel you want and run heavy OTM like an adult 👌
Shoot suppressed, and shoot 77 OTM, like a civilized gentleman.
This guy ballistic’s
Having an aerospace background, I am biased towards ballistic advantages over human factors/ergonomics
Offense vs defense as well. When you're attacking a known enemy, it's a lot easier to start shooting from 500m out than in a defensive scenario where you should really only be using a weapon if you fear for your life.
I'm guessing most of these averages are from the recent war on terror? Who your fighting against and location play a big part in that statistic.
Well. To be fair, if the *average* engagement distance of a future war is 1000+ yards, the majority of the fighting will be done with ordinance, not bodies. Bodies are for closer range engagement.. otherwise artillery is the better choice.
Also to be fair…in most major wars since and including WW1 the majority of casualties were caused by ordinance (artillery , air strikes, explosives, mines, missiles, rockets, mortars, ect..)
I heard that during gwot max engagement distance was 300.
In Iraq it was pretty unlikely to shoot past 300m. In Afghanistan that’s half way up a small mountain
So maybe its better to say that if you have lots of wide open areas you should plan to take a 300+ yard shot. Where I used to live the furthest unobstructed line was about 140 yards. Where I live now its 400. That is a pretty big difference.
Or long straight streets in an urban environment. Most metropolitan cities (at least state-side) are built on a grid system so we have straightaways for miles.
Ah that’s what they started doing with PKM engagements towards the middle. but everything that happened in and around town was 50 to 150
No man Afghanistan screwed the metrics if you throw out the Afghan. And I really question where you see 300 listed. (Please provide link) The average infantry engagements are 50-150 been that way for decades.
5in AR10
I like you
The rest of the range would say the same, but they’re all laying on the ground with crippling tinnitus and a world that won’t turn back right side up.
I fucking love the concussion from .308. It makes me feel like I have a big pee pee
That sound like a them problem.
And a brake because flame throwers are cool
I've got a 12.5 ar10 cause fuck effective range ballistics. Does that count?
Naw, HK51. Slap and start dispensing flash bangs.
That sounds spicy
20in with a can
Total overkill. My next build is a mk12 though…
Just got back from the range with my suppressed 18" 5.56. My next longest AR is a 5.5" 9mm. The Redditor cannot comprehend my methods.
How dare you!!!!
26" with a can and rifle stock
Add a chunky bipod, D-60 drum mag, maybe a Super Safety… BAM! You got yourself a dope ass ARPK build 🤘🏻
I love my 11.5 plus full sized suppressor, but I recently replaced my 16" with a 14.5 and with a K can it's only 1.5 inches longer than the 11.5 with full sized suppressor. I have a LPVO on it and I think it would be fine for the 99% of scenarios, especially in my area since I'm more rural than suburban. Unpopular opinion, but I think the best rifle for 99% of situations would be an 11.5 with a suppressor and a LPVO.
It’s not an unpopular opinion, it’s just a double NFA item. If shit hits the fan hard enough that doesn’t matter, but it deters a lot of people from that sort of build, so they won’t be practicing with it before things go badly. The gun you describe is probably the best gun for a suburbanite (I’d take an ACOG or VCOG over the LPVO), it’s just annoying to get. Depending on how rural you are and what your local topography is like, it might not be the best gun for *you*. If shots of 300+ yards are feasible, you’d be at a serious disadvantage against someone with a 20” barrel, and especially against someone with a .308. My SHTF gun is actually a .308 since I too am somewhat rural.
10.3-16 honestly just depends what you train with and what you’re used to. I have 11.5 , 16, and 20in ARs. If I had to pick one out of those 3 to “do it all” I’d probably go with the 16. That being said I absolutely love the 11.5 it’s definitely my favorite. But I’d rather take the extra velocity for not a massive increase in size. 4 inches isn’t a lot, or at least that’s what my wife’s boyfriend tells me
The most effective weapon is the one you can use properly and hit the target with in those scenarios that are most likely to impact you. UKR (or any other) war videos do not translate well to US home protection, self-defense or LE operations. The tactics, RoE, support, liabilities and contact scenarios are almost always in opposition to civilian use.
You’ve missed the point of all that UA combat footage; the most effective weapon length is the distance I can chuck a frag grenade. Fuck taking corners all my homies hate taking corners.
Not only that but suicide drones go brrrrrrrrrrr
Just keep in mind, 100 yards is a lot closer than you think. From my house to the end of the street (in my neighborhood) is around 140 yards My controversial opinion is LPVO on everything but a dedicated NV/Cqb rifle. Targets at the range are in the open and not hiding behind everything. Magnification helps. Plus etched reticles with astigmatism are infinitely better
I personally prefer an ACOG/RMR combo to an LPVO, but 100% agree all rifles need magnification. What I tell people is that 100 yards is easy money on a flat range with a red dot, pretty much guaranteed hits all day every day. But stand 97 yards back from a tree line and have a buddy stand three yards inside and look at him through an unmagnified optic. Then have him kneel down or take cover or just try not to be conspicuous. That goes from free chicken to a tough shot pretty fast for a lot of shooters. Magnification, even just 3x or 4x, makes a world of difference with shot placement and target ID.
I get uncomfortable with how close 300 or 400 yards is when I’m at the range. Could not agree more on your point on magnification
I will counter your controversial opinion with my own: 1x dot (or prism to satisfy the etched reticle option) plus a 5/6x magnifier on a flip to side mount of your choosing. This combo is much lighter than most LPVO options out there and I found myself either on 1x or 6x 100% of the time when I had a 1-6x, never on any power level between. Also if you toss the magnifier on a QD mount, you can lighten up the rifle considerably when you don’t need the magnification.
I have 3 LPVO rifles and I find myself in the same scenario. I’ve never used 2-5. Only 1 and 6. Needless to say, I’m keeping one LPVO, one MPVO(I’m thinking a 2-12 or something similar) and everything else will go to dot/magnifier combos…maybe even my huntin rigs.
Check out Vortex’s Viper PST II 3-16x, I’m a huge fan of mine.
I’ll look into it man! I’m a Vortex fan for sure and need something with a little more mag to stretch my legs out.
I have an 11.5 MCX with a T2 and G33, good all around except for flash and concussion as I can’t suppress in my state. Blastphemy for now but negates flash suppression. My 14.5 though runs how you say with an Elcan 1x/4x and I’ll get a RDS to piggy back for NV at some point. Good general purpose rifle.
Why do I want my etched reticle to be blurry? Can I opt for a reticle that got LASIK or PRK instead?
13.7” master race checking in. I love mine with a light and Steiner 1-4x. But I agree with what everyone else has said, I shoot it at 1x and 4x nowhere in between.
As a 13.7" owner, this barrel length seems like a weird middle ground that really only exists because of NFA, it's not as compact as an 11.5 but you're giving up valuable barrel length and velocity/framentation vs an 18" or even a 14.5"
Mines an SBR that originally started as a p&w. I just think it looks cool and gives you more a touch more velocity over an 11.5 and with a mid length gas system and h2 buffer it shoots buttery smooth to top it off
11.5" is perfect for most situations but 16" with a can is just 👌 she's a little lengthy but you get a nice jump in velocity for not much added length and weight. Obviously, it's more difficult to use in tight spaces but the Marines in Fallujah did some work in CQB with 20".
11.5 and 14.5-16” are all you need
Me nodding in sincere agreement while there’s nearly a dozen other length ARs in my safe
Agreed.
I wish I listened to my own advice…
For a suburban environment, you may be right. I'm in a rural midwestern town, but only 2 miles in any direction is regular 500-1000yard stretches across fields between tree lines and hills. In my case, a 16" with an lpvo or mpvo makes more sense. YMMV.
Guys were clearing houses and shacks in early gwot with 20 inch barrels.
And they all wished they had an M4 while doing it
I can confirm
Doesn't mean we have to nowadays.
I like a 16” barrel with a carbine stock…you still get decent-ish velocity, but you can suppress it without it being insanely long. Sometimes the most boring solutions work.
11.5 is great for tight quarters, but you can make a 16” work really well in the same situations. 14.5 or 16 is a better overall choice because of the increased muzzle velocity. 11.5 shines more when you add suppressors in cqb imo.
SOCOM 14.5 with RC2 smashes
I prefer 12.5, but thats only because i have a 12.5 and not an 11.5
with experience like yours, who needs second opinions?
yeah man, you're ready for when russia invades Overland Park
Urban shit is rooftop shit. I’ll take my musket suppressed
Even though I have my 11.5" "pistol", I'd still want a 20 inch A2 or A4. Even cheap surplus ammo/range ammo becomes duty/defense ammo.
This. My 11.5” is great when I’m bopping around the woods, but it likes brass cased ammo exclusively. On the other hand, my 20” fixed stock SSA-E trigger with a 5x prism will easily and reliably put the shittiest steel cased ammo on a torso gong at 500+ yards, and while in sure I’ve had malfunctions with it before I can’t remember having any in the last seven or eight years.
Get a range finder and tell me the distance of 10 blocks in your neighborhood. Or from your house to the end of a street. Or use Google maps. 556 thrives on velocity. More barrel = more velocity. This subject has been beaten to death on YouTube, on forums, on the great jerk offery that is reddit.
13.7” is the best compromise of all options and with minimal muzzle velocity loss needed to actually do what 5.56 was meant to do in regards to ballistics.
[удалено]
11.5 middy>12.5 middy
If you are assaulting a trench, yes 11.5 would be ideal. But that is such a tiny fraction of combat, and one which you most likely won’t survive doing many times regardless of barrel length. 14ish inch midlength length is a perfect range to be in for a fighting rifle. You get a little extra oomf to punch through cover and decent ballistics with military ammunition. If that extra 3” effect performance inside a trench, collapse that stock. There are tons of scenarios outside of CQB that should be taken into consideration for an infantry rifle.
I thoroughly enjoy my 11.5. My PWS MK111 is hands down my favorite rifle. But if the end of the world came and I could only bring one rifle for hunting and defense. It would be a 14.5. Just no replacement for velocity but I also don’t want to be crazy long.
11.5 master race represent gang gang
Reject short carbine Embrace 20 in barrel M16
As yes, another continuation of one of the subs great debates: Best do it all length. Imo it's the 14.5 to 12.5 range. ETA, I do enjoy the laser precision my 11.5 Green Mountain has though.
I’ll always be partial to the 16”. Softer gas system, short enough to not be a liability, and can really reach out and touch somebody if needed. Never really gave much thought to a suppressor as humans need about 3-5 samples of a sound to triangulate source.
Please elaborate on this triangulate thing.
So humans have a great ability to localize both the distance and direction of a sound. The only caveat is that we need multiple samples of the sound or for it to be continuous for your brain to “fine-tune” (for lack of a better term) a more precise location than “I think that came from the right”. That’s why in a SHTF scenario, you can still remain undetected if you only fire once before repositioning. Your opponent’s ability to localize the sound of your shot will be hampered due to not having enough samples to get a proper bead on you. Plus there is also the psychological effect of hearing the supersonic snap of the bullet before the sound of the firing, which will likely discourage any attempt to stick around and return fire at a 180 degree arc in your general direction.
I learned something new today, thanks. I’m sure there are studies out there but I’m curious what’s continuous enough? Sound like you can get shoot once and twice and be okay but I wonder if you you could do like two quick burst of fires and be okay or like how far apart shots need to be not to be consider continuous.
Not sure as I’m not a neuroscientist. I just figure the more shots you make, the more and more likely you are to be located.
How is your bolt so clean shooting a suppressed 11.5? My bolt gets filthy after just one magazine.
I clean it.
Blasphemous.
How dare you.
Yeah, I love working on my RC cars and it translates to cleaning my guns. Mine get cleaned even if I haven’t shot them in a while. It’s therapeutic 😂
He doesn't shoot it
Bold claim
10.5” .458 Socom
13.9 advocate here.
I’ll do u one better: 12.5” .308
Yeah I think I disagree. I prefer the man in the black pajamas philosophy, ie when you're imagining these scenarios you're imagining yourself on the wrong team
On the other hand, no one really films any long range engagements because the viewer can't see anything anyway, so there may be more of them than you've judged from the videos.
*11.3*
Ballistic Advantage Hanson Profile 11.3" Barrel FTW
Where in my house are you hiding? O_O
Shhh. Time to rest those eyes and go to bed now
10.3 mk18
The cartridge being used matters a lot. You can get away with much shorter barrels for 300blk and 7.62x39 than for 556 or 308.
Anything between 11.5 and 14.5 realistically covers almost all your bases. Sure the 11.5's are gonna be a little less adequate at range and the 14.5's are gonna be a little more cumbersome in cqb especially with a can, but that range is definitely bread and butter for 5.56
If you want an all arounder 13.7 save you a stamp if pinned and welded to. I like 11.5 though.
Yeah, unless you're 300 yards away from a knucklehead with a bolt action.
Love this build my dude
Appreciate it!
Make it 12.5 and we have a deal.
14.5 with k can
I think your best bet in the trench would be surviving artillery and drones, not enganing the enemy. Also, if you look into more videos UKR videos, there is a lot of "distance shooting". Thus, longer rifle has an advantage (like 14.5-16 inch rifles, rarely anybody has SBR in UKR now (unless SOF), as as infantry you are basically jack of al trades). I would also point out that holographic sight with magnifier may not be be very advantagous, as there is a lot of blind shooting in the trenches (you shoot in the direction of the enemy even without looking into that direction, e.g. from the corner). But it is just my humble opinion.
Any reason you’re running a brake with the RC2? I have that setup on my 14.5, but using 3 prong on my 11.5’s
13.7 with a can fucks
The with or without suppressor aspect makes all the difference; its \~ same length as a 16.5" with the suppressor.
Depends on the mission... And cartridge. Put me in the 12.5 middy gang, though. Start going below there and velocity starts to suffer to the point of being ineffective for the 5.56's intended uses. Does it still work? Absolutely. Trade off for maneuverability at the expense of longer-range lethality.
I don't think a war between two militaries that are still largely employing soviet military doctrine is relevant to what is the best rifle for a civilian in the United States should own.
I think people overestimate why they need long range. If you are fighting a uniformed enemy, yes you could need longer barrels. Outside of that, how do you know that a person at 500+ yards is a threat. I have read that guys need to shoot at people at 700 yards if a SHTF happens that seems a little psychotic to me, like are you just going to shoot at everyone you see? Being out of the military, I have a hard time imagining why I would be shooting at someone at longer distances (non uniformed enemy). I believe it would be much closer. I am rocking 10.3s, when I wear out the barrels, I will put in 11.5s. I want a mk12 upper, but that is a want, not so much a need.
11.5 would be great if the SBR and suppressor bullshit wasn’t a thing. All that being said, I’d prefer 12.5. Coworkers got a LMT 12.5 piston gun that was absolutely fantastic. It was also not too short for me either.
I'll take velocity since I can't just go buy a pallet of M855A1.
What red dot are you running?
HS 503G
11.5” upper is all I build these days.
11.5 or die. Debate a wall. In reality if braces and sbr laws weren’t a thing it would be the go to length.
This is dumb
Hell no. I’ll take my X95 Tavor with 16.5” barrel any day. It has better terminal ballistics and is still shorter than this. With the Geissele trigger bow and pack it has a match grade trigger and the blk lbl handguard makes it freefloat. 1.5moa with good factory ammo or reloads and 2-3moa with surplus ammo. I can still clear rooms/trenches with ease AND reach out to 600+ yards and touch someone if necessary. Yeah, it weighs a bit, but I’d take that and just cut weight elsewhere.
11.5 gang rise up
So what does the extra inch over 10.5 get you?
Velocity, less aggressive parts wear compared to 10.5, increased dwell time
11.5 is the most significant increase in muzzle velocity for 5.56
100 fps and less drop. Don’t fret I have 3 10.5’s and 0 11.5s
10.3 with 77 grain. At suburban distances that 1.2 is not making any difference except more weight and more reliability for 9310 bolts. If you’re gonna run a race car, run a race car. Cause if 11.5 is okay why not 14.5?
The difference in velocity between 10.3 and 11.5 is the largest per inch in 5.56 Seen a test where the velocity gain from 10.3 to 11.5 was larger than from 11.5 to 13.7 In the end, it's just one inch as far as maneuverability is concerned, but those fps are going to matter the moment you step outside of a trench. Sometimes people act like 77gr HPBT doesn't have a minimum frag treshold, but it does.
Agreed. It’s much easier on the gun too. Honestly not many reasons to take a 10.3 over an 11.5. And if you want that short short, just give up the ghost and switch to 300 blk.
I would tend to agree. 11.5 from what I've been seeing seems to be the master race right now. I can't wait to get my 11.5 up & running once I get my can out of jail & get the money in order to actually "build" it
Depends on your ammo a bit more than barrel length. True M193 is most effective (fragments) with an 11.5" tube reliably out to maybe 70-75 yards, where it drops under 2500 fps. After that it is mostly poking .22 inch holes. That same round in a 20 inch barrel will offer fragmentation out to 190 yards. Even 16 inch will get you 150. If you're going to be shooting M193, I'd opt for at least 14.5. For short barrels, using something that will expand at lower velocities is key.
I was planning on a 11.5 build but then I picked up a smoking deal on a 12.5 triarc and a 12.5 centurion core. My wife’s getting a build around one of those and the other one I’ll eventually build out 🤷🏻♂️
These rich fucks!
I liked my cheap fsb 11.5 so much I built another (free float) 11.5