Considering one of two carbines

[1168]

I actually didn't have a particular target size in mind.

You’re going to have to put some thought into that. There’s a big difference in an E-type and a 8” gong at distance. I can say for sure that someone can hit a known-distance E-type at 600 in still air with any decent rifle, including a 6920 with a Centurion rail, because it’s a 3 moa wide target. I’d imagine a Smith or FN could do it, too, maybe.

And there’s a big difference between known-distance and unknown-distance targets. Or targets that are trying not to be shot.

Do you have any experience shooting out to ~750m? How did you come up with that requirement, and is it truly realistic?

So here is what I've learned over the years I've been shooting.

The guys on the net going "these [insert name of budget optics] are great, they do the same job as [insert name of high end optics] for half the money" have never actually owned any of those high end optics. They guys raving about their Springfield Armory, Rock Island Arsenal, Auto Ordnance $500 1911s have never shot anything better so they have nothing to compare it to so obviously theirs are awesome.

When somebody comes along that says "I've owned Nightforce, Zeiss and Swarovski but they just aren't as good as my Bushnell" then I'll consider listening. Now if Bushnell is all you can afford right now, that is what you are using and a budget scope you have now is better than the wonder scope you hope to buy one day but don't actually have. So keep that in mind when you talk about "got great online reviews", "passed online torture test" or any other similar metric.

Most people here have shot and owned just about everything out there. If an entry level Bushnell did everything a Vortex will do, we'd all be running Bushnells. We spend the money on higher end stuff because we've seen the "budget brands" fail enough times to know we don't want to bet on them.

There’s also a lot of undisclosed marketing.

[Hank6046]

Yes, but they are 14.5". There is a velocity difference. 16" is the shortest I will go. No shorter!

I love this type of post because it tells me a few things.

1.) You don't have a lot of practical application
2.) You're not experienced enough to know what you don't know
3.) You should buy the FN or the S&W and go take a few classes and in a year you'll back on here asking about buffer weights and gas blocks and then you'll start to get it.

[fedupflyer]

Hank6046, I agree with you.

The OP needs to read an article like this,

https://www.everydaymarksman.co/equi...rel-selection/

[1168]

I love this type of post because it tells me a few things.

1.) You don't have a lot of practical application
2.) You're not experienced enough to know what you don't know
3.) You should buy the FN or the S&W and go take a few classes and in a year you'll back on here asking about buffer weights and gas blocks and then you'll start to get it.

Yeah, a 14.5” isn’t much of a hindrance unless we’re comparing it to 18”+ barrels. And it’s mostly only noticeable with unknown-distance (UKD) targets due to range estimation error with 18”-24” vs 14.5”.

The difference in distance to transonic between a 14.5” and a 16” is very small, so with known-distance (KD) targets they are essentially equal. I shoot matches that go to 500yds routinely with whatever gun I have with me as I travel, and that’s often a 12.5” or 14.5” with BDC LPVO, and I usually place well*. I also casually shoot to 600 with whatever AR I have with me at least annually, and again, the gun seems to work fine. I start to notice the weakness of SBR barrels on the UKD range, or at 800yds, though. We’re talking about E-Types, F-Types, 2/3 and B/C silhouettes, and iron maidens here.

*I did extremely poorly in such a match last month with a 18” SPR using 69gr BTHP…bad DOPE and 6”-8” targets.

Hank6046, I agree with you.

The OP needs to read an article like this,

https://www.everydaymarksman.co/equi...rel-selection/

That’s a very good blog to read, for any skill level.

[Hank6046]

Yeah, a 14.5” isn’t much of a hindrance unless we’re comparing it to 18”+ barrels. And it’s mostly only noticeable with unknown-distance (UKD) targets due to range estimation error with 18”-24” vs 14.5”.

The difference in distance to transonic between a 14.5” and a 16” is very small, so with known-distance (KD) targets they are essentially equal. I shoot matches that go to 500yds routinely with whatever gun I have with me as I travel, and that’s often a 12.5” or 14.5” with BDC LPVO, and I usually place well*. I also casually shoot to 600 with whatever AR I have with me at least annually, and again, the gun seems to work fine. I start to notice the weakness of SBR barrels on the UKD range, or at 800yds, though. We’re talking about E-Types, F-Types, 2/3 and B/C silhouettes, and iron maidens here.

*I did extremely poorly in such a match last month with a 18” SPR using 69gr BTHP…bad DOPE and 6”-8” targets.

That’s a very good blog to read, for any skill level.

When I first read that OP post it took me back to 2013 when I was debating getting another 16" gun or going 14.5", I remember going through forums, and Youtube videos only to find out that the ammo had much more to do with velocity then the barrel did at both those lengths. M193 was something like 3000 fps out of a 16" and 14.5" was around 2870, or just a menial difference. Meanwhile the profile of the barrel, the materials used in construction, the rifling, the manufacturing process probably matter much more then length (That's what she said joke here).

I don't shoot out passed 150-200 yards often with my ARs but I've gotten well out to 600+ with my 11.3 and rung 10" plates just fine, although it does teach out about wind and a 55gr-69gr round.

I think that people are constantly looking for a one size fits all solution and it doesn't exist. We all have our Go-to rifle, but they all come at a compromise, you just have to train for that. I had a GySGT who used to tell us NCOs when we got mad at the boots " Their just in the shallow end of the pool" and that's where the OP is.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

If ya want an M&P, get one. Owners of M&P, including Sport, that I personally know have been satisfied. Maybe talk to the guys on S&W Forums before deciding but I wouldn't agonize and overthink if it's your first rifle. Pick one, shoot it, learn what you like and don't like, then go from there. Good luck.

[PNorris]

Boom!!!!!!!!!!!!!

https://armsunlimited.com/colt-6960-...bly-16-barrel/

Get your lower of choice and Rock on!!

[Waylander]

Boom!!!!!!!!!!!!!

https://armsunlimited.com/colt-6960-...bly-16-barrel/

Get your lower of choice and Rock on!!

OP wants a heavy profile barrel not skinny.

[PNorris]

OP wants a heavy profile barrel not skinny.

Gotcha!! That is a smokin' deal for a nice complete upper though. I was very tempted.

[fedupflyer]

OP wants a heavy profile barrel not skinny.

But he wants to do CQB and run and gun with it too.
Wants accuracy but is looking at non-free float.
(Sigh)