- Thread starter BP 3papa 7sierra
- Start date
Nothing wrong with a gun that can do it all okay.
I think some of the 18” SPR revival is the reality that if things go to shit and you need to survive, doing CQB is a last resort, whereas shooting and doing PID at distance is a very real reality.
I think some of the 18” SPR revival is the reality that if things go to shit and you need to survive, doing CQB is a last resort, whereas shooting and doing PID at distance is a very real reality.
So once I put an lpvo and offset red dot, does that start to infringe on the SPR a bit?
A little, but not that much IMO. 14.5 with an LPVO can be stretched pretty far, but at a certain point the lack of velocity, and tight FOV of the LPVO on max magnification make shooting at distance a challenge. It can be done, but it takes a good bit of training to become proficient at consistent hits beyond 500 with this setup.
If I’m building out an SPR it’s not getting an LPVO. 10-15x top end scope with >36mm objective, and either an offset or a piggyback RMR.
Sounds like maybe I split the difference and mount the new March 1.5-15.
Or stop trying to do everything with one rifle, horses for courses.
Build up your 14.5 into a great, light, easily manoeuvrable, accurate, closer quarters weapon, say 0 to 400 yards targets.
Then if you want a longer distance Semi-Auto, build up a more dedicated marksman rifle, that is setup for mostly longer range, well aimed shots.
Possibly not even in .223 but something that hits harder at further distances, say in the 6mm or 6.5mm or so type caliber.
People put such a stupid degree of importance on such trivial shit as a few inches of barrel length.
I don't get it.
Skill matters so much more.
I don't get it.
Skill matters so much more.
Seems like sound advice to me, but then I’m simple and have a 16 for general use and a nice 22” .224 for 500-700. Lots of other for longer.
For the cost of that optic you could just build a decent 18” with mid-tier MPVO that’s going to do long range better.
Trying to do to many things with one gun results in a gun that can do, but kinda sucks ,at everything.
Give me a 14.5" rifle with a 1-6X on it and I'll do both.
It's the pilot, not the plane.
I totally admit to not knowing based upon actual use, so what makes a 14.5” better than a 16”? Serious question.
WTF is an SPR even anyway? It's just a dumb name.
Fuck the offset red dot. All you need is a good 1-6X scope with a daylight bright center dot and a usable reticle for drop compensation.
Unless you just want to blow money on gear queering.
Nothing. I just picked the number that the OP started with plus it's the M4's original barrel length.
All I said applies to a 16 as well.
In my opinion, a 14.5" with a K can is an excellent general purpose setup. I can still move around a course quickly and effectively. Its also pretty reasonable on the ears. If your not using a can, I dont see any real difference. My 16" uses a full size can and isn't really a run and gun setup. All of these options relate to the total system you're building. One part doesn't make much if any difference. I use a Geissele single stage on my 14.5 and a Geissele 2 stage on my 16". Still, the total length between the two rifles is like 4".
5.56 is so weak at distance though, that it really doesn’t matter. I know a lot of people are used to calling 14.5” a rifle, but it’s best left in the carbine category.
When you run the numbers on 12.5”, 14.5”, and 18” out at 400yds even, it just doesn’t matter. Sure there are differences, but they are minuscule, in effect pole-vaulting over mouse turds.
400yds impact energy with 77gr Mk.262
18” 572ft-lbs (weak)
16” 548ft-lbs
14.5” 492ft-lbs
12.5” 459ft-lbs
The additional barrel length does not justify itself for performance on-target. The 18” RLGS suppressed will shoot much smoother though than the others due to port location/pressure.
14.5” really only sells itself for someone who is looking to have an M4rgery, or P&W for 16”. 14.5” MLGS runs pretty smooth with the right port and ammo though, one of which I have from BCM I built way back for a high volume CQM beater.
You can see the performance difference between 12.5” and 14.5” isn’t worth the extra length.
Go to a different cartridge and you’ll see significant steps up in energy on-target, which you will notice from shooter’s position with visual impact and audible feedback.
400yds impact energy with different higher performance cartridges from 12.5” barrels:
6.8 SPC 120gr SST 699ft-lbs
6.5 Grendel 123gr ELD-M 730ft-lbs
6.5 Grendel 130gr ELD-M 854ft-lbs
6mm ARC 108gr ELD-M 762ft-lbs
400yds .308 Win 12.5” for reference:
.308 168gr ELD-M 1053ft-lbs
The only places the 5.56 really sells itself are in commonality, mag capacity, and close range work. It’s easier to stay on-target with rapid strings of fire with 5.56 carbines. You’ll still be around 700ft-lbs of energy at 200yds with a 12.5”, and you can hear it hit hard at that distance. It really starts dropping off after that.
Is 14.5" the new, anything?
Maybe for CQB and anything within mark one mod oh eyeball range.
(I'll admit they're handy when short)
Then again there are several states not recognizing a muzzle device even if it's blind pinned and brazed ~if it's threaded!
I've done .308 at 14.5 and the most obnoxious brake possible. If I ever do that again it will be for the sole purpose of pissing everybody off, with OB tampons stuffed in my ears, ( to stop the bleeding not the noise).
Maybe for CQB and anything within mark one mod oh eyeball range.
(I'll admit they're handy when short)
Then again there are several states not recognizing a muzzle device even if it's blind pinned and brazed ~if it's threaded!
I've done .308 at 14.5 and the most obnoxious brake possible. If I ever do that again it will be for the sole purpose of pissing everybody off, with OB tampons stuffed in my ears, ( to stop the bleeding not the noise).
I am having a hard time justifying a LPVO for a 14.5" at the moment, still seems to be RDS territory for the caliber IMHO. A flip to the side 3x or 6x magnifier as an option.
A lot of folks like the idea of an LPVO on a 14.5-16” carbine until they start doing multiple evolutions of walking drills. Then they see why an Aimpoint T1/T2 is more desirable (i usually leave the 3x magnifier off unless im doing supported/prone shots at 200+).
ETA: 11.5-12.5” is optimal IMO for a gen purpose carbine.
Last edited:
There are?
As someone who owns multiple AR's, there's definitely a place for 14.5" AR, either if you want a single sort of do it all rifle, or you have multiple rifles.
P&W a muzzle brake and avoid the whole SBR/pistol brace nonsense. Now that I'm running most of my guns suppressed, I want a brake that works with my Dead Air Keymo mount anyway.
Slap an ACOG or a 3-4x prism scope on it and it's a pretty versatile rifle. Although certainly not ideal, I can make it work at 50 yards, maybe even 25 yards, and take it out to 400, maybe even 500 if I'm shooting steel IPSIC sized targets and I'm willing to tolerate a few misses.
Although I will admit I definitely shoot my 10.5" and 11.5" rifles a lot more. And if I want to shoot with any real precision at 4-600 yards it's going to be with either my 18" CLE upper with a high powered variable scope, an AR10 or, if I don't need to put a lot of rounds down range quickly, a bolt action rifle.
P&W a muzzle brake and avoid the whole SBR/pistol brace nonsense. Now that I'm running most of my guns suppressed, I want a brake that works with my Dead Air Keymo mount anyway.
Slap an ACOG or a 3-4x prism scope on it and it's a pretty versatile rifle. Although certainly not ideal, I can make it work at 50 yards, maybe even 25 yards, and take it out to 400, maybe even 500 if I'm shooting steel IPSIC sized targets and I'm willing to tolerate a few misses.
Although I will admit I definitely shoot my 10.5" and 11.5" rifles a lot more. And if I want to shoot with any real precision at 4-600 yards it's going to be with either my 18" CLE upper with a high powered variable scope, an AR10 or, if I don't need to put a lot of rounds down range quickly, a bolt action rifle.
I'd say weak is an overstatement. Using your own 77gr data at 400yds it beats 90% of 45acps loads and 99% 9mm loads(including +p+) at the muzzle with all the lengths except maybe 12.5". Maybe not ideal but not weak.... All those larger cartridges may have more energy but have various other issues especially in the AR platform(feeding issues, parts breakage, parts incompatibility, cost, etc).
OP: As far as the 14.5 goes it's a tweener. If it's a pin and weld 13.9s and 14.5s still has to be 16" so you might as well go with a 16" go with a short muzzle device and get the velocity bump and not have to deal with the P/W bs. If you want to go the SBR route the 12.5 is attractive but at that length or shorter I'd at least consider 300blk. With all that said since you already have a 14.5" I wouldn't get rid of it for a little shorter or longer. If you really want something new 16" is hard to beat as a general purpose length 5.56 AR.
20in all the way!!! M16a2/a4 clones are the best!!!
Yes, common pistol cartridges are underwhelming. Only roughly 25% of people die when shot with most handguns.
I’ve been shooting 11.5” and 14.5” 5.56 since 1997, 20” since 1987. It’s great within 200yds and will certainly poke holes at 400yds, but if you’re shooting steel, it sounds like a tiny little mouse fart on-target.
I’ve been shooting 6.5 Grendel since 2009 across a lot of different barrel lengths and haven’t had the feeding issues or parts breakage issues commonly referenced.
If you put them side-by-side, you’d see immediately what I’m talking about. I have a bunch of both, so don’t get me wrong, but 5.56 has a pretty limited niche in terms of terminal ballistics.
That's our modern medical system at work, unless someone gets shot in the head the doctors will likely save them.
Mouse fart on steel at 500-600 is kinda true, 308 makes a big WHAM by comparison, still wouldn't want to stand there and try to catch the 223 bullets.
If it weren't for our gun laws I think a ton of people would be shooting 11.5-12.5 barrels exclusively.
I go back and forth between the following optic setups for the 14.5".
1) Vortex Razor 1-6X-Great at 1x, ok at 6x, 1.5lbs in a mount.
2) NF NX8 1-8x-Not so good at 1x, decent at 6-8x, possibly needs an offset RMR for faster close in work, 23 oz in mount. Pricey altogether if adding a RMR.
3) Eotech EXPS3-0-Nothing better at 1x, excellent with NV, needs 3x or 5x magnifier, mounts for both, just as expensive and heavy in the end as the previous two options.
4) Elcan Spectre 1-4x-Pretty good at 1x, decent at 4x, crap mount/levers, pricey, same weight as others.
5) ACOG 4x32 RCO-Not really serious about this option as it still needs a piggy backed RMR, more of a nostalgia option.
1) Vortex Razor 1-6X-Great at 1x, ok at 6x, 1.5lbs in a mount.
2) NF NX8 1-8x-Not so good at 1x, decent at 6-8x, possibly needs an offset RMR for faster close in work, 23 oz in mount. Pricey altogether if adding a RMR.
3) Eotech EXPS3-0-Nothing better at 1x, excellent with NV, needs 3x or 5x magnifier, mounts for both, just as expensive and heavy in the end as the previous two options.
4) Elcan Spectre 1-4x-Pretty good at 1x, decent at 4x, crap mount/levers, pricey, same weight as others.
5) ACOG 4x32 RCO-Not really serious about this option as it still needs a piggy backed RMR, more of a nostalgia option.
How far are you trying to shoot with it?
Is this more a range toy or something you actually will be using for Self Defense at realistic .223 SD ranges?
At what ranges to you want it to be the perfect solution and then at what ranges is "good enough" okay?
Also what is your realistic budget range?
For me, and my planned usage and such, the Primary Arms PLX 1-8 with an offset RDS works well.
If you were going to be mostly all up close in the 0 to 50 and then maybe out to 100 range, a good large window holographic sight would probably be the fastest thing to use.
It’s secondary (fourth in line) in terms of pecking order in my Carbine lineup. My 11.5’s get the majority of use and they have Eotechs with magnifiers hence why I thought about mixing it up with this heavy long daddy 14.5” with a full monolithic quad rail.
I rarely shoot my 556 rifles beyond 200yds but I can take them out much further if I like. It’ll see use as a backup for classes or a loaner for buddies. If it ends up with a LPVO I might take a Carbine class with it simply to train with something different than the norm.
Budget isn’t really a concern but I don’t like to hemorrhage money just for the sake of doing so either. That said, it’s an LMT that already has a Proof Carbon barrel so it isn’t exactly a budget build so maybe it warrants a more quality optic setup?!
I rarely shoot my 556 rifles beyond 200yds but I can take them out much further if I like. It’ll see use as a backup for classes or a loaner for buddies. If it ends up with a LPVO I might take a Carbine class with it simply to train with something different than the norm.
Budget isn’t really a concern but I don’t like to hemorrhage money just for the sake of doing so either. That said, it’s an LMT that already has a Proof Carbon barrel so it isn’t exactly a budget build so maybe it warrants a more quality optic setup?!
12.5" 5.56 with a LPVO that is usable as a red dot at 1x
This is the way
This is the way
If you want to spend money and it sounds like this will be more of a range gun, there is some higher end options such as:
Vortex Razor III 1-10
S&B Dual CC
March 1-10
March 1.5-15
Spend a bit extra for a side mounted RDS to go with it and you'll be good to go.
I'm by no means promoting the cartridge as a good round at 400 but bullet choice and velocity can make a difference at that distance and not so much energy on target but the bullets ability to fragment.
The 77 TMK is probably the best projectile currently available and would be my first choice for any AR of any barrel length. It creates a nasty wound and plenty of penetration up close and I have seen plenty of reports of fragmentation on game down to 1600 fps.
Keep your muzzle velocity at 2500 or better and you still have an effective (never said ideal) round at 400 yards. It surpasses the performance of the MK 262 due the plastic tip allowing it to fragment at a lower velocity, therefore extending it's effective range.
I’ve had the S&B CC in the past, never owned any March optics. The Razor 1-10x was initially my first choice but there seems to be an extremely high turnover of them in the classifieds both here and on barfcom.
That and shot placement. Having to shoot VA state and federal qualification for the past 12 years the standards are low and many just barely meet them. It's sad how many people carry a firearm for a living and never practice or even care....
My guess would be that folks buy it, realize it probably is better suited for use at max magnification than at 1x, realize that what they are mostly using it for is a range / target scope, realize how much money they just spent and then sell it and get a nice scope and something cheaper for their LPVO needs.
In my opinion it's a great optic, but it's more biased to being excellent for range / target work at higher magnifications, while being just okay at the 1x range.
So for just about the same money for example you could have a 6-36 Razor III, which if you are always having to dial up to 6 or 8x to use the reticle on the LPVO anyways...
Compared to say the PA PLX series which is heavily biased towards usable at the low end, and okay at the high end.
March and S&B both hit this problem from the more expensive side by making dual reticles, essentially making a scopes that were both SFP and FFP
However the cost of those is hard to justify for most folks.
I was all-in on 5.56 NATO since the 1980s because that’s all there was.
My dream blaster was a 7.62 NATO “CAR-15” ie XM177E2 but in AR-10 format. I figured it would never happen because the assault weapons bans were on the rise in the late 1980s with Roberti-Roos, then the Clinton/Biden/Feinstein AWB for the Nation. Then Knights made 100 limited SR-25Ks in the early 1990s. I was a young PFC at the time and checked my bank account, and realized I wasn’t going to get my SR-25K. That left a particularly bad taste in my mouth about the AWB.
Thankfully, the Clinton AWB sunset after 10 years and AR-10s were on like Donkey Kong. I was more focused on long range set-ups by then, so 24”, heavy, larger optics for matches and LR shooting.
I got into .260 Remington after being forced to accept the limitations of .308 at the time, and got 2 different LR-260s along the way, the best one being built by George and Jeff over at GA Precision, with a Bartlein barrel.
6.5 Grendel came out in 2003, so I waited 5 years to let the bugs get worked out, then started getting into that hesitantly due to questions about magazines in the 2000s. It was more of a play thing/experiment, then started to really grow on me as I watched how easy it was to make hits at distance and just spot your own impacts without much sight picture disturbance.
A bunch of Grendels later and I’m realizing I haven’t given much love to all my 5.56 blasters, so I’m trying to get excited about 5.56 just to standardize or update certain things that were neglected. I have just used 5.56 for CQM more than anything, with loaners available for DM courses set-up as Block II SOPMOD with DD 12” and LPVO, or JP free-floated HG on 2000s-era 16” blasters, BCM 14.5” MLGS, etc.
I’m trying to get excited about something in 5.56 NATO, but I’m drawing a big fat blank. Feels like I’ve maxed out in that department, although I would prefer for pretty much everything to be 12.5” or less. I really liked my 11.5” AR-15s in the 1990s.
Big thing with optics is what part of the Country you live.
East of the Mississippi and closer to sea level, 1-4x is plenty for LPVO for most things, but RDS makes a lot of sense for most scenarios.
Once you get up into "higher altitudes” in the hills of the Appalachians, 1-6x, 1-6x, and 1-10x might be more useful if you have longer distances to PID/shoot.
West of the Mississippi, especially in the Mountain West region with wide open spaces and long distances, the higher top-end mag LPVOs are more useful outdoors, but so is a better chambering. Compact little blasters for the house/hood in 5.56 or 300 Whisper with RDS, Intermediate Cartridge for the mountains with 1-6x, 1-8x, 1-10x LPVO or 2-12x + offset MRDS.
call it whatever you want, just make sure it does what you want it to
Texas coastal plains and hill country for me. I settled on a 1-8x and it should be here this summer when NF ships it. Now to decide if it deserves a PEQ/MAWL for NV work.
razor is a fantastic lpvo, great glass, full picture, tough etc. but is it' really 1400 better than other rt6? I know people that switched to RT6 as the 1x is good, clear through 6x, light, small, tough, decent enough reticle that tracks well and fund spent on other items. He's not kidding, razor turnover is high as fk.
Last edited:
It's an FAL. If they get close enough I just beat them to death. Try that with a mouse gun.
The H&K from the same era beats that.
If the bullet doesn't get them the ejected case flying at them might get them.
I competed with the Vortex 1-10 on a 14.5” at the 2021 Legion match. It’s a good scope. 1x is not problem but for barricade work, shooting under walls, etc it’s no red dot. It’s also too damn heavy for a handy rifle IMO. I built another 14.5 upper and run an ACOG/RMR combo and it was much easier at all seven stages. The 1-10 is still mounted up but in for my uses, I think it’s a better DMR scope and is better suited in an 18-20”.
Having done a couple matches with 14.5s in the last couple year, I think the 14.5 is fine out to 600, but like everything else you (I) need to train to its limitations .
I love me a good 14.5". But then, I love all barrel lengths below 18"...
Last edited:
Maybe I am just lucky.
First trip to the range with my 16” and 1-8 NF, hits to 600 were pretty easy.
66% ipsc target.
Before that I had ran a bunch of drills 20-50 yds on 1x.
If I was doing a lot shooting or actual work with it, it would wear an offset rds
CO elevations/thin air with low wind conditions makes a 14.5” perform about as good as a 20” at sea level.
Similar threads
