With all the trouble that people have, why does this exists.
It has neither the benefits of a 16" middy or a 14.5" CAR system.
It is unreliable without special buffer/spring combinations and you cannot use a FSP style rail to mount a light at 12oclock.
I also think it looks like crap.
Possibilities:
Consumer Demand driven: If Midlength is good on a 16" gun, it must be even gooder on a 14.5" gun. Right?
The eternal quest for “smooth recoiling guns”: See also the rise in compensators, numerous posts on “buffer-ology” to lessen recoil and other crap.
It’s funny how on the first page of this forum there are dueling posts for “guns that eat cheap” and “14.5 Middys, are the bugs worked out?”. People want EVERYTHING in one gun. Air rifle recoil AND extreme ammo tolerance AND reliability AND durability.
I dunno. I’ll stick with the carbine systems. If I ever get around to building an 18" gun, I’ll mess with some other gas length.
All what trouble? We have made the 14.5" mid for about 8 years now in SS and just recently CHF, no problems.
Why does the 14.5" barrel length exist at all?
You could ask that about almost any length. There are always two barrel lengths on either side of whichever one is in question.
(except 10.3" and 20". Those are really the ends of the practical spectrum)
I am very interested to know this as well. Currently working on a LW upper and is having a a hard time deciding between a 16 mid length gas, 14.5 mid length gas, or a 14.5 carbine length gas.
From the many various threads I read, it seems like the 14.5 mid length shoots smoother than the carbine and weight less than the 16 mid. However like the OP said, some seems to have problem putting under pressured (cheaper ammo I assume) ammo through it. So that why they experiment with different buffer and spring? Or are there are any other reason?
Definitely would like to find out
Because enough people like me like them and spend our hard earned money on them often enough for manufacturers to find them to be a profitable option. Simple really.
What problems are being encountered with the 14.5" middy? Who is having these problems and where are they occurring and under what conditions? How does the frequency of these problems compare to other configurations? Who is manufacturing these 14.5 middies that are having problems?
Anyone with first hand experience with 14.5" middies please answer these questions
The carbine length gas system was designed for the 10" commando, the mid for 16". 14.5" is closer to 16" than 10" if you want to look at it that way.
The 14.5" exists because the gas system designed for a 10" barrel existed and 14.5" of barrel allowed the existing bayonet to be used. While I own and have no problem running them it’s NOT an example of a gas system designed for a barrel length.
I have use a Daniel Defense 14.5 inch middy for about 6 months now. It has been run through multiple classes with no issues at all. Literally not a single malfunction except the ones I have induced for training.
I see now why LMT refuses to cater to the rage of the 14.5" middy…nobody tests more than them and nothing leaves their design board unless it’s uber reliable.
I’m assuming this thread was inspired at least partially by my post about my woes with the VLTOR A5 system and my 14.5" mid-length.
As someone who owns a 16" mid-length as well, I can honestly say I hands down prefer my 14.5" mid-length over the 16" mid-length in every aspect, save for the welded on flash hider, but that’s irrelevant.
The 14.5" mid-length shoots noticeably softer than my 16" mid-length to me, and it also handles a lot better for me.
My reliability with it had been 100% with a carbine receiver extension and H buffer set up beforehand even with steel case like wolf, bear, etc. I really think it was just a matter of an improper set up, not an actual deficiency with the barrel and gas system combination.
I will say that there might be, and I do say might as I haven’t had it really proven to me yet, a small hit to reliability over different, especially weaker, ammunition types. However, I still don’t think that’s true, only a possibility and my own experiences with one and weak ammo has shown that it isn’t true. Not fact, just my personal, and admittedly limited, experience.
I’m very pleased with my 14.5" mid-length, and I can certainly say that I would take it over a 16" mid-length. Just my experiences and preferences.
The reason for reliability problems with the 14.5 middy is because people use underpowered ammunition and experiment with different buffers and new receiver extensions. I bet using a regular carbine buffer would solve these problems. It was good enough for many early carbine variants. Didn’t the earlier M4 experience reliability and durability problems attributed to the carbine length gas system? Something about dwell time, port pressures, gas ports rounding off and high cyclic rates that contributed to extraction failures.
I have been running a Centurion Arms 14.5 middy for about six months now, I have never had a problem with about 3000+ rounds down range(1500 of it from last week’s 2x 2days combine LEO and open enrollment Jason Falla class). the set up I am running utilize a H2 buffer and standard buffer spring. I am not particular on running the light on the 12 o’clock position so its not an issue for me.
Looks are personal, I actually find the look to be very pleasing.
here is my 14.5 middy build…
I believe that the real (and only? 
) problem is that 14.5" mid-lengths don’t get as much dwell time between the gas port and the muzzle. As such, I think they may be more sensitive and susceptible to short stroking. Especially with weak ammunition, or as I have recently found out first hand, a heavier than necessary buffer/spring set up (in my case the A5).
I am having them currently with my VLTOR A5. I used a standard carbine receiver extension, spring and H buffer beforehand without any problems. The issue seems to be a combination of weaker than “mil-spec” ammunition, and the buffer/spring set up being stronger than necessary for this particular barrel length and gas system combination. I think in my particular case the only problem is the A5 kit, not the upper or ammunition.
In my experience I get 3 or so short strokes every 400 or 500 rounds.
Mine is a BCM. Once again, I do not blame the upper or the ammunition in any way, nor do I think they are prone to this. I do not blame the VLTOR A5, either. I think the combination of the two (the upper and the A5) is simply a bad configuration that should be avoided, or at least until a lighter A5 buffer designed for 14.5" mid-lengths is released.
I agree with you, the A5 is designed to be an replacement for a A2 stock with 20" bbl, the 14.5 middy with less gas pressure could have result in short stroke issues.
Why all the recent attention to the 14.5 mid lately? I think as long as its from a reputable mfg and you use components that have been proven to work in it (H buffer, carbine rec extension) it will run. Using higher pressure ammo definitely helps, but I’ve managed on steel for now. Its like any other AR really.
The reason I bought one was because it was in stock at the time and had a pinned comp which I needed for NY regardless of barrel length. It just happened to work out that its a pretty soft system.
As an owner of two 14.5 middies, I wonder what trouble you’re talking about.
It doesn’t have any disadvantages of those either. It is shorter and more maneuverable than 16 mid, and not overgassed as 14. car.
It is reliable with a garden-variety carbine spring and range of buffers from carbine to H to H2. You can use a low-pro gasblock, long rail and mount your light at 12 o’clock all you want. Daniel Defense makes a front sight just for those purposes. For those who chose to run FSB without free float rail, it gives a longer handguard that allows for a hand position further out if one so desires.
Thousands rounds through 14.5 middies, I’ve not found a downside.
Does LMT offer anything in midlength? Hard to say from their website.
Ah…so just trolling, right? For a minute there I thought you were serious.
Since Colt amd LMT don’t make them, they obviously aren’t that good.
All of the “problems” that I have here are easily fixable silliness that has nothing to do with some inherent problem with the design.
Installing aftermarket stuff and running into problems. ie. Vltor A5 may require replacing 1 or 2 tungsten weights with steel. Think about it…the A5 comes with a buffer which weighs 5.3oz…you cannot expect to stick that in an already soft shooting rifle which has a 3.7oz H buffer. Short stroking should be an obvious consequence. Replace the weights and drive on. I’m not bashing the A5 system at all, just know what you are doing. Fix these super minor issues and you may have a smoother rifle as others have reported.
Running weak ammo while still using a heavy buffer. People complaining “it is short stroking with my Hx buffer and my weak ammo”. An easy fix is to use a lighter buffer, and/or shoot non-weak ammo.
Pretty simple?
I used to own a mid length, and my long gangly arms enjoyed the extra length over the carbine length. The 14.5’’ allows an as short as possible non NFA length. It makes perfect sense to me.