If you could only bring one AR with you

16" midlength, it's what I'm most familiar with despite also owning a 14.5 pinned and welded.

11.5"

If the M4A1 was perfect for entry why did delta use the MP5 until the MK18 came out?

14.5

I'd assume because they're more likely to implement suppressors

7 inch pistol. 1 inch groupings at 1000 meters in a Category 6 hurricane.

12.5 and here is why...

Can use it on most hand rails that are normally 12 inches, and the extra 0.5in clearance makes using suppressors a breeze, lastly having 2 more inches than a 10.5 helps stabilize the 62 grain 5.56 better.

Case in point 12.5 is ideal.

Actually desu that is true from what I was told by someone who got sectioned out of the 75th and ended up in a scout company in the mid 80s.

11.5" with a Surefire RC2 suppressor

14.5 foot barrel, ah yes the polearm of rifles

11.5in faggots who watch Chris Costa Magpul series.

20", just like god and Eugene intended.

>soft shooting
>5.56
user pls. I own and regularly shoot a 20", but soft shooting is a meme unless you actually have full auto. Even then, it's 5.56. It's an advantage, maybe, but one not worth sacrificing the extra length for.
I'm laughing at you because you just learned about m855a1 and bought into the hype, this has nothing to do with barrel length. But if you want to go down that road:
Lots of SF groups used m16/m4 variant carbines. The Car15 carbine/xm177/etc for example were tailor made for them. Plenty of SF used m4s as well.

The other major reason being 5.56 suppressed is absolute dogshit, 9mm is somewhat capable. This is the root of a lot of in somewhat retarded (but cool) ideas various SF groups had. Especially the mk23. .300blk wasn't a thing yet, if you wanted a compact gun with a suppressor, you were looking at an SMG or pistol.

Go ahead and explain why the mk18 was a mistake.

Earlier in the thread I explicitly said that the 14.5 was a better all around rifle unless your only usage is room clearing/entry.

12"

20"

Attached: ss+(2015-08-31+at+08.58.49).jpg (388x499, 57K)

I'll grant you that barrel length doesn't make all that much difference but if you've ever shot a standard recoil system on a 16" carbine length side by side with an 18" rifle length with an A5 you wouldn't say "muh 5.56"

Also in theory an 18" would have less gas than a 20". Not a lot though due to gas port sizes.

Only answer.

Attached: 1460589013839.jpg (344x344, 30K)

20"

Not sure what your point is about m855a1.

I said that the 14.5 was not THE BEST infantry rifle. I didnt' say it was bad, I actually said it was the best all around do anything length. Of course I understand why SF groups used 14.5 and shorter variants through the years, most infantry engagements the would get in are at less than 300yd anyways.

>but if you've ever shot a standard recoil system on a 16" carbine length side by side with an 18" rifle length with an A5 you wouldn't say "muh 5.56"
Uh, I have. Yesterday I had all my ARs at the range. On is an 18" rifle gas. One is 20", obviously rifle gas. One is 10.5". Final is 11.5".

All the way down to 10.5 it's still
>lol 5.56

20" as God intended

Whatever m8.

I guess I'm just bad at shooting and so is anyone who does anything with their buffer system.

The mk18 is outdated you faggot daddy garandthumb said so and you know his sf popop t haley told him so.

>Not sure what your point is about m855a1.
My point is you bought into hype, the real high performance round is mk262.
>I said that the 14.5 was not THE BEST infantry rifle
No, you said it wasn't the best entry rifle. It is definitely in a pretty good spot to claim the title of best infantry rifle.
>Of course I understand why SF groups used 14.5 and shorter variants through the years
Then why did you ask?

But, again, I don't care about any of this. I'm just here to laugh at you for acting like m855a1 is something special. If you need to penetrate mild steel at 300 yards, maybe. But that's a pretty niche use.

????????

My point was just that m855a1 gets good performance out of a short barrel vs m855.

And using nice ammo, including mk262, I agree with you its in a good spot to claim the title of best infantry rifle, what I said was its not amazing with ammunition designed specifically for a 20" barrel.

10.5 in Mk 18 form

Attached: 4BBAB680-C0F4-4247-A027-5BEC37B0E04E.jpg (2048x1596, 553K)

Amen

Attached: A4.jpg (3884x1467, 994K)

>I have a diamondback ar
No I think you're the faggot

There's literally nothing wrong with suppressed 5.56

This senpai.

A supersonic crack means that you won't be using it in the hopes that you won't be noticed at all, but it can mask your exact location and it makes it less harsh on the shooter's ears. Military trials also found that it allowed people to communicate better.

Eh, I dunno about that. I just disagree with you. 16" with a mid length gas system is nothing short of mild and pleasant to shoot. It's not a personal attack or anything, I just don't see the issue of recoil or gas blowback being a genuine concern until you start really pushing things way lower than the lengths you're talking about.
>????????
I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about. Dicksucking m855a1 is a dead giveaway.
>not amazing with ammunition designed specifically for a 20" barrel
m855a1 is better than m855. That's great and all, but literally everything is better than m855. m193, which is older, is better than m855.

16.5 shooting 300 Blackout. Why you might ask? Cause it’s fun.

fake dissy16 inch midlength freefloat marksman tube with triangle A! guards

Sure, I should have said subsonic 5.56. Because people aren't mounting suppressors while room cleaning to hide their shot signature, they already know where you are.

I think there are things wrong with subsonic 5.56 though...

300blk a shit though.

It's just a goofy way to have a gas operated rifle perform like a PCC or like an AK depending on what ammo you use.

The supersonic loads way overgas most barrels though.

Nobody uses subsonic 5.56 retard
Nobody uses .300blk either because the guns made for it suck dick (other than the honey badger and CSW but it's rail sucks dick) and the .300 subsonic performance sucks too, it just doesn't have enough energy to dump

You seem very willing to share uninformed opinions

This senpai.

Though to be fair, if the government is paying for your ammo, 300blk subsonic has an edge over 9mm because it can be fired out of a proper gas op assault rifle.

Exactly
I don't think you understand what you are arguing, and are jumping into a comment chain you have no part in. Either that or you are illiterate.

What I said is, SF in the 90s weren't using suppressed m4s very often, because suppressed 5.56 is terrible. What I meant by this is subsonic 5.56 is terrible. Because SF in the 90s using mp5s were wanting their guns to be suppressed in order to be subsonic, not to mask their sound signature, because wouldn't you know it, they weren't firing those mp5s at 300 yards.

It is very annoying to have to explain multiple posts worth of conversation, so either keep up, read the linked posts, or don't interject retarded opinions you have no place making.
>300 subsonic performance sucks too
Aren't you full of hot opinions. No shit, this is how suppressing works. You have a fixed limit on the speed of a projectile if you want it subsonic. You can't change that, sound barrier isn't bending just because you want ballistic effectiveness. No subsonic round has particularly stellar performance.
>Nobody uses .300blk either
I mean, except for SOCOM giving Sig a 48 million dollar contract for .300 blk carbines, sure. Nobody.

I'm sorry that you're unable to differentiate between the words "suppressed" and "subsonic"

Sig got that contract because of bribery and political corruption and I hope their Jew CEOs get cancer

Do you argue just to read your own words?

Slightly unrelated but is CHF worth it? It’s like $70 extra on the MCMR

CHF gives you prettier rifling that lasts for more rounds. In some cases it's actually less precise.

Like the difference between chromed and nitrided, its something that some people are really into but its a tradeoff and for the most part it will never make much difference for a semiautomatic weapon.

12.5" because I'm not a good enough shooter to make use of the advantages of a longer barrel. Besides I'm in an urban area and everything beyond that is forrests and swamps.

I'm one of those snowflake kind of guys (not in terms of politics though). I would want something like this

>14.5 with pinned and welded muzzle brake
>a2 fixed carry handle
>a1 fixed stock
>OD green magpul furniture (to distinguish it from 5.56 chambered ARs)
>tritium front sight
>300 blackout (some states have caliber restrictions for hunting game)

That seems fine, but most people won't get a fixed stock since they don't allow for manlets to fire with a squared up stance.

What ammo do I have? If m193 then 16 inch, if 77g smk then 11.5-12.5

Good point. Maybe just a regular 6 position magpul then, as a replacement.

Yeah the moe SL is nice.

I also recommend an A5 7 position, which is compatible with the moe SL.

Flat wire springs are good as well.

I really, really, really like this image.

The point of 300blk is that you DONT need a 16” barrel. Full powder burn at 10.5”, and diminishing returns in velocity increases above that length too.

24inch 6.5 creedmoor

The difference between 14.5p+w and 16 is negligible

18"

Any idiot that says below 16" doesn't understand ballistics. The caliber sucks out of short barrels and doesn't fulfill its purpose of fragmenting most of the time when it doesn't reach high enough velocity.

14.5-16" is about there

14.5" seems to be the winner here.

>TFW no real life honor guard with Siminov halberds

Attached: 11925-15-1460515327.jpg (1422x800, 436K)

Any idiot who says this has no idea what 5.56 velocity is like. Those two inches get you 50-100 FPS.

Congratulations, you've extended your fragmentation range by a solid three feet.

13.7

Probably my 18", just to piss off /arg/

That lack of a definitive answer just goes to show how infested this board is with nogunz.

Or, that we all own ARs of different lengths, because we all have different preferences and experiences with our rifles.

I'd probably choose an expensive one, sell it and but a gun in a decent cal suitable for my purpose, a precise rife in a distance cal, large cal revolver, reliable semi 12 gague, suppressed 22LR or 45 bolt action, or a garand,G3 or fal. I have no use for an AR. You should be free to buy it and own it but guns are tools and I don't need a shitty leather man that does nothing best standing in for a real saw, wrench or screwdriver.

20" master race

Attached: arf.jpg (1000x750, 248K)

I wasn't saying anything about 16". Of course an inch and a half won't make much difference.

You have to consider that some ammo does fine out of 14.5 even at range, and that people don't intend to fire things any shorter than that at a range over 200 or so yards.

24"

Attached: 12.5.jpg (1024x604, 226K)

why the fuck do people put pistol lights on rifles? It always looks ghetto as fuck.

>7 foot long rifle
>red dot

Always wanted an 18er, seems pretty comfy desu

14.5 unuppressed, 10.5 suppressed
Also, LMT 10.5 CQBR upper > BCM 11.5

"16

14.5 mid length with the PWS FSC556 on it.

This thread is the reason why bullpups exist.

ps ARs are for fags

Mk 18 upper 10.3 in
Giessle rail
Surefire war comp
Magpul afg
Surefire m622u
Peq 15
Cloud defense duel pressure pad
DD front sight post
Eotech xps 3
DD bolt
Radian arms ch
Troy folding rear sight
Minimalist stock
Aero m4 lower
Giessle sd-c flat face trigger
Magpul moe pistol grip
Giessle lower parts kit
Bad lever
Blue force Vickers sling

12.5 Kino.

20" like it was intended

It's a tlr, it was made to be a pistol and rifle light, it's why they even sell the pad switch for them too.

lucky 13 with a 5 inch solvent trap

5secondfirearm.com

>comfy
seconded