MidLength vs Carbine?

[d.hodgee]

First off...
I'm new to this site. I'm generally a "read more post less" person. But I've asked this question on another website and haven't really got an answer aside from the looks of a midlength vs carbine.

I'm more interested in reliability, life length difference (if any), and function differences.

I'm currently running a 16'' cmmg med con carbine length upper.

What would be the advantages in having the same upper or any 14.5 or 16.o upper just in mid- length?

thanks for your help/advise/Intel!

[RD62]

Longer sight plane on the mid-length, but if you are running folding sights or optics, it kind of negates that point. The gas pulse on the mid-length is somewhat softer due to the longer gas tube and the gas port being located closer to the muzzle of the barrel. I have read that this makes extraction easier as the pressure in the chamber has more time to drop before the case extraction begins. This may help lengthen extractor life, and negate the need to run an o-ring and black insert in addition to a heavy-duty extractor spring, which many recommend for carbine length systems. Some say the softer extraction process gives a softer recoil, I can't tell the difference, but that's probably just me. The easier extraction process, etc may be less punishing to the system as a whole, but the carbine system when done right is pretty darn reliable. I haven't seen any military/LE agencies running out to swap carbines for middies. The carbines due tend to get the new rail systems etc first, if that's important to you. Other than that I can't think of many differences.

I love my mid-length gun, but as an owner of a middy, I wouldn't run out and replace a perfectly good properly functioning carbine gas system upper/barrel with a new middy.


-RD62

[John Hwang]

RD62 pretty much nailed it. I'd like add that Med Length is more reliable in theory...kind of like M4 feedramps. I have Carbine systems that have seen its fair share of use without issue and same goes for rifles without M4 feedramps. The reason I say in theory is that too many people get hung up on internet information. Meaning, they have too much information at times and it can be a little misleading. If you don't have 1/7 twist with M4 feedramps, Chrome lined Barrel, Midlength gas system, your rifle was blow up. J/K of course If I were building a 16" rifle from scratch, I would always go with M4 feedramps & Med length gas system as it doesn't hurt and it's the best setup available. If I already had a carbine system, I wouldn't change to mid length just for the sake of upgrading. I do notice a little softer recoil but you really have to shoot it right after one another to be able to tell the difference.

The main 2 advantages in Midlength gas system is longer sight radius & rail space (if you choose to go this route). With a carbine setup, you are almost forced to use a vertical grip as there isn't much room for anything else. With a Midlength rail system, even with rail panels installed, you have room for lights and such even if you grab the rifle in the traditional fashion.

[d.hodgee]

Hey Guys...

Thank you so much for the great information!
Exactly what I was looking to find out.

[VictorMikeLima]

Great information! I'm a little late on reading this thread, but information is information regardless of time! Anyways, this definitely cleared up my questions. Thanks to Rodman24 for the referral!

[Gator]

I love my mid-length gun, but as an owner of a middy, I wouldn't run out and replace a perfectly good properly functioning carbine gas system upper/barrel with a new middy.

This is the conclusion I have come to myself. At the peak of the middy rage, I got both the 14.5 and 16 but ended up only keeping the 16. Though it was mostly out of laziness to build, it was also in part due to the fact that my 14.5 car was and is perfectly fine.