Daniel defense carbine vs mid length gas system? Which [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Daniel defense carbine vs mid length gas system? Which


WarEagle32
07-19-2012, 18:12
The Different types of gas system is new to me. I hear the DD carbine is dependable enough with the H buffer. I have just learned about this topic. The mid length system I understand is all around better. If I buy a DD im stretching myself on the price as is. I can get a V1 carbine about 125 cheaper than a V5 mid length system. Is the difference in systems worth the money or do I follow my gut and buy the DD carbine system?

EL COLONEL
07-19-2012, 19:56
Middy !

12131
07-19-2012, 20:03
Middy !
Because?

WoodenPlank
07-19-2012, 20:05
Because?

Slight improvements in dwell time, reliability, less wear and tear, and slightly less felt recoil.

12131
07-19-2012, 20:24
Slight improvements in dwell time, reliability, less wear and tear, and slightly less felt recoil.
I know all about the supposed "improvements". Have both, shoot both, and they are both reliable. Recoil difference? Imperceptible. Recoil of a 5.56 is not much to begin with, anyway. Less wear and tear? Ok, maybe. To an average shooter like me, they are really the same. The only "improvement" of the middy for me personally is the the longer handguard, as I like to extend my support hand further forward. But these days, with all the extended FSP rails made for the carbine system, it all evens out for me.
My opinion is that a lot of folks (not all) just jump on the middy bandwagon, just because it's popular these days, and not because they know any improvements of the system.

TactiCool
07-19-2012, 20:27
I like the recoil impulse of the mid, and I can fit a bayonet on my 16". Can't do that w/ a carbine length, 16" barrel. There is also more handguard purchase and extended sight radius if one keeps the F-marked FSB.

WarEagle32
07-20-2012, 02:04
Is it mid worth the extra $ when the DD is a stretch in the first place?

Zombie Steve
07-20-2012, 06:59
Not much difference, but I like the mid-length a little better. I'm generally not big on rails and gadgets... I do like to get my left hand out a little further for a little better control in run and gun games.

Besides, the pig sticker looks funny on a carbine.

http://i812.photobucket.com/albums/zz50/billt460/M-9BayonetOnAR-15Rifle002.jpg

:whistling::supergrin:

DrewF86
07-20-2012, 09:03
Mid-lengths systems have a lot of benefits, however slight. Slightly softer recoil, more handguard space (good for controlling the rifle, or mounting things if you want to), better mechanics, longer sight radius. And any more, mid-lengths cost the exact same as carbine systems.

Unless there was a huge price different, or a mid-length system wouldn't fit on your barrel (super short SBR), I just don't see any reason to not get one.

Cycletroll
07-20-2012, 10:09
I have a middy v7. Incredible gun. Shoots sub MOA with most everything I put through it. One of the main reasons I bought a mid-length is that I want to safely shoot 5.56 level loads and warmer handloads without having reliability and wear and tear problems.
My v7 shoots 75gr and 77gr at 5.56 velocities with no undue stress on the brass or extractor. With a shorter gas tube hotter loads can get ripped out of the chamber while pressures are still high which increases likelihood of an FTE and wear/damage to extractor.
You are already looking at spending a lot; $125 more is peanuts in the life of the rifle. Hell, that's not even half a case of .223!

cowboy1964
07-20-2012, 11:09
Middies will be a bit heavier, correct?

Reliability and wear and tear, seriously? A 5.56 carbine is made to "safely" shoot 5.56. There should be no issues.

But I'm all for taming the MASSIVE recoil of the 5.56 :upeyes:

Kimura
07-20-2012, 11:28
Slight improvements in dwell time, reliability, less wear and tear, and slightly less felt recoil.

In theory, it makes perfect sense; however, unless you know something I don't, there is no empirical data to support the hypothesis that the mid length gas system is significantly easier on parts or is more reliable than a carbine.

Wareagle, it depends on what you want. Both are fine rifles, so I would be ok with either. Which is going to fit your needs better? I think you need to decide what the rifle is for and how you want to set it up and go from there. If all you're going to do is put a white light and an RDS on it, either is a good choice. If you're going to put a magnified optic on it, would you prefer to have folding sights? I think if you know you're set up, you'll be able to answer your own question.