I have been planning on purchasing maybe a 14.5" but probably a 16" LMT upper. I have read how highly thought of LMT is. Well, I found out today that LMT does not make an upper with a mid length gas system. I would have to go with a carbine length system. But, I have learned that mid length gas systems are the way to go (more reliable or less stress on the bcg? I can’t remember at this point). My original idea was to get a stag upper, but I kept reading about how good LMT is and stags occasional bug. Am I offsetting the advantages that comes with LMT quality with problems caused by the carbine gas system? Forgive me b/c right now I am in information overload and have gotten a little confused.
Thanks for all the help again.
Kevin
Have you considered RRA Mid-Length?
A lot of us have been using the carbine length system for years without problems. While I don’t dismiss the benefits of the mid length system, the carbine will serve you fine.
Not to overstate the obvious, brother, but if the “dissapator” or mid-length system were truly superior, I’m sure the military would have at least considered fielding it in lieu of the M4/M4A1. To my knowledge, they did not. I’m equally confident that Colt Defense would be cataloguing a couple variants for military and/or LE sales. Again, I am not aware of any such offering.
Like Eric, I’m not suggesting that a mid-length isn’t worthy of consideration, but I do think it’s a stretch to suggest that it addresses some perceived shortfall associated with the carbine length arrangement. Unless you’re just really, really into having a longer sight radius to work with, the point is probably moot, and a standard carbine configuration will likely be easier to keep running over time (spare parts, etc.).
Chief
Just WHAT are the advantages of a mid length system?
Speaking purely from personal experience as a LEO with state and local experience, what a part of the government(in this case the military and law enforcement agencies) does frequently has more to do with what was done or available in the past and/or what’s cheaper short term, than what’s available and/or better long term.
That being said, unless someone intends to fire several hundred rounds a month or fire full auto, the main benefit of a midlength is longer sight radius and more area up front to hang stuff on or to hold on to.
Lower, more consistant bolt velocity resulting in more consistant extraction and less bolt carrier assembly, and upper receiver wear. Basically the same as installing a H buffer.
… what a part of the government (in this case the military and law enforcement agencies) does frequently has more to do with what was done or available in the past and/or what’s cheaper short term, than what’s available and/or better long term.
Definitely concur. That said, I think it is worth taking note of the fact that much of what we’ve seen done to – and for – the ongoing development of the M4/M4A1 system has come out of SOCOM, and they tend to get whatever it is that they want. 
Chief
good and thanks for the replys. I went ahead and ordered the LMT. I’m planning on probably putting a socom stock on it. I guess I need to get an H buffer with the carbine gas system?
Thanks
Kevin