AR-15 barrel length/stock length correlation

>not collapsing a stock all the way so you can look like a high speed Hunchback of Notre Dame while you shoot

>>34596949
It never bothered me. I think that 20" barrels on AR's are still the gold standard for sexy.

>>34597001
>not taping a piece of cardboard to your naked buffer tube
>>34597013
I think they're the most aesthetic but for a caliber such as .223 the unnecessary length always bothered me

>>34597013
10.5, 14.5, or 20. There is no room for the indecisive.

>>34596949
I for one agree. I'm likely going to get an aero receiver with magpul's fixed rifle stock. Collapsing stocks are alright but the dam thing stays at one length anyway

>>34597038
>I want it to sting, I want it to hurt, I want it to kill

>>34597441
>Collapsing stocks are alright but the dam thing stays at one length anyway
My main reason for buying the fixed rifle stock was because I assessed how much I actually utilize a collapsing stock. Never touched it a day in my life. You'll love the fixed one if you go with it, basically a more modern/lighter A2.

>>34597035
>for a caliber such as .223 the unnecessary length
Are you retarded?

>>34597555
https://youtu.be/YgHNtzxO0y8

>>34597568
Answer the question idiot
How is a long barrel, which imparts increased velocity upon its velocity dependent projectile unnecessary?

I dont hate them

>>34597578
I don't reply to you guys, take it off and I'll answer you, and bigger words don't make your case any better

>>34597588
Sorry, I get verbose when I'm angry.

>>34597628
That's better. I think that, while obviously .223 performs better with a longer barrel (as does any round), the extra four inches is unnecessary. 16" is perfectly long for good enough performance. The military uses 14.5", makes you think.

Having a longer barrel is a good thing, doesn't hurt the gun in the slightest, but for my uses (and probably a lot of other people's uses) 16" is far more than enough length.

>>34596949
That's a neat setup.

File: heath.png (1MB, 900x1199px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 900x1199px

hey Im in an argument on /sp/ right now.
can someone identify the rifles in this picture?
just the kind of gun. not the manufacturer.

File: IMG_1784.jpg (216KB, 1344x756px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 1344x756px

>>34596949
Fixed stocks trigger autism about states that violate the 2nd Amendment.

>>34597957
The one on the left is either an ar10 or a falkor petra. The one on the right is an ar15 with what I think is a hogue handguard.

>>34598089
The one on the right looks like a Remington.

>>34597578
>OTM bullet is velocity dependent
>everything is M855

Kill you'reself

>>34598089
>>34598104
thank you
guy is trying to tell me they arent AR's

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-19 at 7.11.42 PM.png (140KB, 755x361px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 755x361px

>>34597957
one on the left is some sort of Daniel Defense AR10 in 7.62 with a suppressor and, Right some kind of AR 15. Looks like they both have a night vision scope

>>34598112
They are all velocity dependent, but the difference between a 14.5" and 20" tends to be greatly exaggerated.

The biggest pro of a 20" is rifle length gas.