Should I by a Carbine 15 Assault rifle or AR15 Assault Rifle?

Question

The Cardine 15 assalut cost 1.000-$ And the AR15 Assult 836-$
But the Carbine has better range and the AR has more damage.?? Witch one should I get?

Answer 1

Bound's hubby here:

The AR-15 Service Rifle is available in two configurations: rifle (20 in+ barrel) or carbine (under 20 in barrel). The carbine may have a collapsible stock. As a rule of thumb, the longer the barrel, the more accurate the rifle. Both are chambered for the .223 Remington round so the amount of damage either rifle causes will be comparible. Look at NRA Service Rifle competition and CMP matches (President's 100 and National Trophy Matches) and the competitors on all of these events use the rifle version with fast twist barrels (1:7 or 1:8) to stabilize the heavier bullets at longer ranges (600 yards).

What you buy should be determined by your intended use for the rifle. Buy the rifle and add $400 worth of parts and you have a rifle competitive with any other match rifle. A chrome lined barrel will not affect match accuracy. My AR has a Colt chrome lined 1:7 barrel and I can shoot in the high 90% averages with it.

I suggest you go with the rifle which gives you more flexibility and more legitimate use.

Good luck.

Answer 2

The rifle, not the carbine, has greater velocity and better long-range accuracy due to the longer 20" bbl.
The terminal damage caused by either rifle's .223 bullet is roughly the same. The carbine is easier to carry and weighs a little less, but those extra 4 inches of bbl. on the rifle allow for greater accuracy - and AR-15's are VERY accurate rifles!

That being said, CAR-15's and M-4's Do look VERY COOL with their stepped barrels and collapsable stocks. it's ultimately your call. Are you planning on shooting at ranges greater than a couple of hundred yards? Get the rifle. Less? get the carbine.
Targets? Get the rifle. Backpacking? Get the carbine.
See?

Incidentally, AR-15's are NOT actually assault rifles. By proper definition an assault rifle is capible of FULL AUTOMATIC FIRE - An AR-15 is not. The assault rifle tag was placed on these guns by THE MEDIA, who assume that because an AR-15 LOOKS like an M-16, that it is the same thing.....And it isn't.
The reason I mention this, is that it is up to the owners of such guns to clear up this widespread public misconception.
If you're gonna buy one, Then you need to be able to explain the difference.

Answer 3

So we are talking about a CAR-15 or an AR-15?

Ditto to the above, stick to forged alloy lowers from reputable manufacturers. I am rather attached to Stag, but others are just as good.

It depends what you want to do with them. There is such a vast variation in AR15 uppers, that's mostly what we are talking about here, that you really need to buy what suits your purpose.

If you want to shoot long range then a heavy stainless free floated barrel is going to give you the best accuracy. If you are going to shoot a lot and clean little then go for the military spec with the chrome lines barrel. If you want the round to perform against critters out past 200 yards then don't buy a short barrel.

My main two are a free floated 20" bull barrel with an A2 stock and flat top upper receiver and a huge sight for target shooting and a 16" medium weight stainless barrel with an M4 front end and a six position collapsable stock and iron sights which I use for short range off-hand shooting. It's still goof for 100 yard tin cans.

Whatever you buy, I recomend swapping out the trigger for a RRA National Match trigger, probably the best $100 I ever spent on a rifle.

To address the effectiveness of 5.56x45NATO (223 Remington): the military rounds, such as the SS109 and M885 are designed to tumble and break up after impact with a target, thus providing a much more serious injury than a .22" hole would have. The study of such things is known as terminal ballistics. At a range of around 500 yards the 223 doesn't have enough velocity to fragment after impact when fired from a 20" barrel. The short barreled rifles, such as the M4, have significantly lower muzzle velocity and thus the rounds drop below the threshold at shorter ranges. At very short range the 223 is also too stable and tends to punch through the target whilst inflicting little damage.

In Iraq the military are complaining that the 223 doesn't do what they need, they have been quietly evaluating the 6.8 SPC as a possible solution to this problem, the new rounds provide much more power than the 223 and sacrifice little in terms of magazine capacity. I have a 6.8 lower, but I haven't decided on an upper yet. Anyway, read the military.com article linked below, it's quite interesting, though I don't expect the 6.5 Grendel is going to get anywhere, it solves a long range problem that most troops don't have.

Answer 4

You can change the barrel later on the AR and get more distance from it. It would depend on what the damage was but there are a lot of parts on the market for the standard AR's.

The Carbine you talked about if it is the Bushmaster's carbon
15 which is a composit instead of alum. it is not very reliable.
It would not be a good choice in the long run and I think you will be happier with the AR.

Answer 5

For that price AR-15

Answer 6

I own 2 AR 15s and in my oppinion you cant go wrong with them

Answer 7

i would probably go with the AR 15, .223 rounds are fairly reasonable to shoot and the AR can make a good varmit gun with the right setup.

Answer 8

AR. go for damage. :)