|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:10 am
 |
|
|
 |
Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel >>want precision >>16" barrel Wat. AR15 in itself is already precision. I wonder how shoddy an AR would have to be made in order to compete with an AK? 11.5" pencil profile barrel in a non-free-floated handguard? And a notch rear sight, of course. xd lol. well from what i've read, dissipator style uppers are capable of achieving similar accuracy to 20" rifles it's mostly to do with the sights, thats why most 16" carbines arent as accurate due to the smaller sight radius Right, I've heard before that 90% of the accuracy increase in a longer barrel is because of the extended sight radius. I kind of wish I could play around with a 16", a 14.5", and a 20" upper, to see how the balance and overall weight change. Maybe a 24", also. Always been interested with the idea of a 24" upper on an AR. yup. and to correct the short gas system deal, I could always use a carrier weight or a heavy buffer, or both...but a carbine gas system never really gave me trouble. maybe I could use them to play around with cycling rates when I get a slide stock |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:15 am
|
|
|
|
Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel I wonder how shoddy an AR would have to be made in order to compete with an AK? 11.5" pencil profile barrel in a non-free-floated handguard? And a notch rear sight, of course. xd lol. well from what i've read, dissipator style uppers are capable of achieving similar accuracy to 20" rifles it's mostly to do with the sights, thats why most 16" carbines arent as accurate due to the smaller sight radius Right, I've heard before that 90% of the accuracy increase in a longer barrel is because of the extended sight radius. I kind of wish I could play around with a 16", a 14.5", and a 20" upper, to see how the balance and overall weight change. Maybe a 24", also. Always been interested with the idea of a 24" upper on an AR. yup. and to correct the short gas system deal, I could always use a carrier weight or a heavy buffer, or both...but a carbine gas system never really gave me trouble. maybe I could use them to play around with cycling rates when I get a slide stock From what I've heard, the carbine failure is in the pressure. The ejection sequence starts too quickly, which often leads to FTE's due to the still-expanded shell sticking in the chamber, and the extractor claw slipping off. So they remedied that by replacing the extractor spring with a stronger one, so now it just tears rims instead of slipping. It would work fine with some sort of a delay... maybe a collapsing gas piston? The piston collapses into itself for two or three inches before exerting a force on the bolt carrier. Sounds like it might work to me... |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:09 pm
|
|
|
|
Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel I wonder how shoddy an AR would have to be made in order to compete with an AK? 11.5" pencil profile barrel in a non-free-floated handguard? And a notch rear sight, of course. xd lol. well from what i've read, dissipator style uppers are capable of achieving similar accuracy to 20" rifles it's mostly to do with the sights, thats why most 16" carbines arent as accurate due to the smaller sight radius Right, I've heard before that 90% of the accuracy increase in a longer barrel is because of the extended sight radius. I kind of wish I could play around with a 16", a 14.5", and a 20" upper, to see how the balance and overall weight change. Maybe a 24", also. Always been interested with the idea of a 24" upper on an AR. yup. and to correct the short gas system deal, I could always use a carrier weight or a heavy buffer, or both...but a carbine gas system never really gave me trouble. maybe I could use them to play around with cycling rates when I get a slide stock From what I've heard, the carbine failure is in the pressure. The ejection sequence starts too quickly, which often leads to FTE's due to the still-expanded shell sticking in the chamber, and the extractor claw slipping off. So they remedied that by replacing the extractor spring with a stronger one, so now it just tears rims instead of slipping. It would work fine with some sort of a delay... maybe a collapsing gas piston? The piston collapses into itself for two or three inches before exerting a force on the bolt carrier. Sounds like it might work to me... carrier weight should work fine. gives the gas more time to dissipate before pushing the carrier back enough to open. couple it with a heavier buffer and you've slowed it down some more. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:21 pm
|
|
|
|
Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Right, I've heard before that 90% of the accuracy increase in a longer barrel is because of the extended sight radius. I kind of wish I could play around with a 16", a 14.5", and a 20" upper, to see how the balance and overall weight change. Maybe a 24", also. Always been interested with the idea of a 24" upper on an AR. yup. and to correct the short gas system deal, I could always use a carrier weight or a heavy buffer, or both...but a carbine gas system never really gave me trouble. maybe I could use them to play around with cycling rates when I get a slide stock From what I've heard, the carbine failure is in the pressure. The ejection sequence starts too quickly, which often leads to FTE's due to the still-expanded shell sticking in the chamber, and the extractor claw slipping off. So they remedied that by replacing the extractor spring with a stronger one, so now it just tears rims instead of slipping. It would work fine with some sort of a delay... maybe a collapsing gas piston? The piston collapses into itself for two or three inches before exerting a force on the bolt carrier. Sounds like it might work to me... carrier weight should work fine. gives the gas more time to dissipate before pushing the carrier back enough to open. couple it with a heavier buffer and you've slowed it down some more. That sounds like a recipe for short-stroking if I ever heard one.
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=598476 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:49 pm
|
|
|
|
Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Right, I've heard before that 90% of the accuracy increase in a longer barrel is because of the extended sight radius. I kind of wish I could play around with a 16", a 14.5", and a 20" upper, to see how the balance and overall weight change. Maybe a 24", also. Always been interested with the idea of a 24" upper on an AR. yup. and to correct the short gas system deal, I could always use a carrier weight or a heavy buffer, or both...but a carbine gas system never really gave me trouble. maybe I could use them to play around with cycling rates when I get a slide stock From what I've heard, the carbine failure is in the pressure. The ejection sequence starts too quickly, which often leads to FTE's due to the still-expanded shell sticking in the chamber, and the extractor claw slipping off. So they remedied that by replacing the extractor spring with a stronger one, so now it just tears rims instead of slipping. It would work fine with some sort of a delay... maybe a collapsing gas piston? The piston collapses into itself for two or three inches before exerting a force on the bolt carrier. Sounds like it might work to me... carrier weight should work fine. gives the gas more time to dissipate before pushing the carrier back enough to open. couple it with a heavier buffer and you've slowed it down some more. That sounds like a recipe for short-stroking if I ever heard one. bah, the carrier of a carbine gas system already comes back faster with a greater force than a rifle length, if anything it's a recipe for regulating the speed of the BCG. but still the 16" system is reliable enough to not need it. http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=598476 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 1:25 pm
|
|
|
|
Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel From what I've heard, the carbine failure is in the pressure. The ejection sequence starts too quickly, which often leads to FTE's due to the still-expanded shell sticking in the chamber, and the extractor claw slipping off. So they remedied that by replacing the extractor spring with a stronger one, so now it just tears rims instead of slipping. It would work fine with some sort of a delay... maybe a collapsing gas piston? The piston collapses into itself for two or three inches before exerting a force on the bolt carrier. Sounds like it might work to me... carrier weight should work fine. gives the gas more time to dissipate before pushing the carrier back enough to open. couple it with a heavier buffer and you've slowed it down some more. That sounds like a recipe for short-stroking if I ever heard one. bah, the carrier of a carbine gas system already comes back faster with a greater force than a rifle length, if anything it's a recipe for regulating the speed of the BCG. but still the 16" system is reliable enough to not need it. http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=598476 Well, can't argue with David Tubb...
DAAAAVIIIIDDD TUUUUUBBBBB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 7:55 pm
|
|
|
|
Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel Recon_Ninja_985 Fresnel From what I've heard, the carbine failure is in the pressure. The ejection sequence starts too quickly, which often leads to FTE's due to the still-expanded shell sticking in the chamber, and the extractor claw slipping off. So they remedied that by replacing the extractor spring with a stronger one, so now it just tears rims instead of slipping. It would work fine with some sort of a delay... maybe a collapsing gas piston? The piston collapses into itself for two or three inches before exerting a force on the bolt carrier. Sounds like it might work to me... carrier weight should work fine. gives the gas more time to dissipate before pushing the carrier back enough to open. couple it with a heavier buffer and you've slowed it down some more. That sounds like a recipe for short-stroking if I ever heard one. bah, the carrier of a carbine gas system already comes back faster with a greater force than a rifle length, if anything it's a recipe for regulating the speed of the BCG. but still the 16" system is reliable enough to not need it. http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=598476 Well, can't argue with David Tubb... DAAAAVIIIIDDD TUUUUUBBBBB  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
