Army Chief
22 March 2009, 04:26
A recent discussion thread (http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=27592) on M4CN on this topic seemed to elicit some charged -- and not especially civil -- dialogue on the relative merits of the the popular 14.5" non-NFA (permanently-affixed flash suppressor) configuration, as opposed to the baseline 16.1" configuration.
Without recounting all of the particulars, the discussion followed a predictable path ...
- The 14.5" is better because of its improved handling characteristics, and the fact that it offers a true M4 configuration without the NFA complexities, etc.
- The 14.5" is worse because it suffers from velocity loss, and a permanently-installed flash suppressor will prevent you from ever installing a free float rail, etc.
... but things really turned ugly when the topic of cleaning an maintenance.
Some experienced users claimed that regular removal of the flash suppressor is essential on high-round-count weapons because of the potential for pitting, carbon fouling and other residue which accumulates in the gap between the end of the barrel and the mating surface of the flash suppressor.
Others asserted that such fouling -- even in suppressed applications -- was pretty minimal, and unlikely to result in any real problems, provided that the area received a basic level of attention during routine cleaning.
The fact of the matter is that not-every AR owner has the option to go the SBR route, and even then, many simply choose not to so as to avoid the hassles of dealing with a Title 2 weapon. Further, those who might qualify as truly "hard-use" operators tend to have some agency or SOT exemption that eliminates the need for them to even consider a non-NFA 14.5" configuration. We end up with two distinct camps.
Now, I'm not especially interested in revisiting the ballistics arguments and such that go along with any 14.5" v. 16.1" debate: what I am interested in is this notion that a permanently-installed flash suppressor is a recipe for disaster (to over-state things slightly).
Some would disagree, but I doubt seriously whether Noveske would offer this as such a prominent feature on so many of his weapons if it were truly rife with long-term problems. Even if it were, very high-round count weapons that were potentially exhibiting signs of trouble could always have their flash suppressors removed for cleaning and a new one installed (permanent isn't really permanent, but the old flash suppressor will likely be damaged during removal).
It comes to this: for those with NFA 14.5" (or shorter) configurations, how often do you make a habit out of removing the flash suppressor for cleaning (i.e. not just to try out a different type), and how bad is the fouling problem on the crown and threads once the flash suppressor is pulled?
Is this much ado about nothing, or something worthy of collective concern?
AC
Without recounting all of the particulars, the discussion followed a predictable path ...
- The 14.5" is better because of its improved handling characteristics, and the fact that it offers a true M4 configuration without the NFA complexities, etc.
- The 14.5" is worse because it suffers from velocity loss, and a permanently-installed flash suppressor will prevent you from ever installing a free float rail, etc.
... but things really turned ugly when the topic of cleaning an maintenance.
Some experienced users claimed that regular removal of the flash suppressor is essential on high-round-count weapons because of the potential for pitting, carbon fouling and other residue which accumulates in the gap between the end of the barrel and the mating surface of the flash suppressor.
Others asserted that such fouling -- even in suppressed applications -- was pretty minimal, and unlikely to result in any real problems, provided that the area received a basic level of attention during routine cleaning.
The fact of the matter is that not-every AR owner has the option to go the SBR route, and even then, many simply choose not to so as to avoid the hassles of dealing with a Title 2 weapon. Further, those who might qualify as truly "hard-use" operators tend to have some agency or SOT exemption that eliminates the need for them to even consider a non-NFA 14.5" configuration. We end up with two distinct camps.
Now, I'm not especially interested in revisiting the ballistics arguments and such that go along with any 14.5" v. 16.1" debate: what I am interested in is this notion that a permanently-installed flash suppressor is a recipe for disaster (to over-state things slightly).
Some would disagree, but I doubt seriously whether Noveske would offer this as such a prominent feature on so many of his weapons if it were truly rife with long-term problems. Even if it were, very high-round count weapons that were potentially exhibiting signs of trouble could always have their flash suppressors removed for cleaning and a new one installed (permanent isn't really permanent, but the old flash suppressor will likely be damaged during removal).
It comes to this: for those with NFA 14.5" (or shorter) configurations, how often do you make a habit out of removing the flash suppressor for cleaning (i.e. not just to try out a different type), and how bad is the fouling problem on the crown and threads once the flash suppressor is pulled?
Is this much ado about nothing, or something worthy of collective concern?
AC