The Great Debate: 16" vs 18" vs 20" Barrel Lengths
Dec 24, 2014 10:39:19 GMT -5
Hawkeye and panzer0170 like this
Post by Diz on Dec 24, 2014 10:39:19 GMT -5
Hudson, Panzer:
My bad, did not mean to go high right on you guys. For the record, I don't think Hudson is a hobbyist, or gay for that matter. Both you guys are good contributors and serious students of combative arts.
What I'm trying to say is that you have to shoot for a middle ground here. With all these choices, and opinions, it's easy to get "analysis paralysis", in that we are constantly evaluating, upgrading, etc. and never get anything done. On the other hand, some guys don't have much choice at all in the matter. Either way you aren't as prepared as you need to be.
I try not to trot this out all the time because I don't want people to think I'm hiding behind a REAL operator. But this is an exact quote from a 4-tour GWOT veteran of special operations. We were talking about all this stuff one day, and he just flat stated that all this chatter about bbl lengths, velocity, bullet weight, etc is just gay. They take what they have and shoot motherfuckers in the face with it. He doesn't really care if it's 12", 14.5", or 16" bbl. He doesn't care what round it is. Anyways, point being a lot of this stuff sounds real good in theory, but in practice, it isn't what's important to win the gunfight.
I think James Williams said it best, in that your fight is going to be, what it's going to be. We may scheme, plan, and practice, but in the end, your fight is going to be unique to you and your circumstances. No amount of prep or training is going to exactly mimic what you may be facing. The fight may be inches, or it may be 500m. Who knows. But the point is to prepare in a way that leaves you free to react to your particular sit, not set circumstances that you think you may encounter.
In this particular case, you may be concentrating on ballistic performance at 400m, when your gunfight is at 10m. What would bbl length and all that other stuff matter in that case? It would be more important to have an utterly reliable weapons system that functioned as advertised, rather than optimum performance at a longer distance. And probably knowing some combatives wouldn't hurt either.
My bad, did not mean to go high right on you guys. For the record, I don't think Hudson is a hobbyist, or gay for that matter. Both you guys are good contributors and serious students of combative arts.
What I'm trying to say is that you have to shoot for a middle ground here. With all these choices, and opinions, it's easy to get "analysis paralysis", in that we are constantly evaluating, upgrading, etc. and never get anything done. On the other hand, some guys don't have much choice at all in the matter. Either way you aren't as prepared as you need to be.
I try not to trot this out all the time because I don't want people to think I'm hiding behind a REAL operator. But this is an exact quote from a 4-tour GWOT veteran of special operations. We were talking about all this stuff one day, and he just flat stated that all this chatter about bbl lengths, velocity, bullet weight, etc is just gay. They take what they have and shoot motherfuckers in the face with it. He doesn't really care if it's 12", 14.5", or 16" bbl. He doesn't care what round it is. Anyways, point being a lot of this stuff sounds real good in theory, but in practice, it isn't what's important to win the gunfight.
I think James Williams said it best, in that your fight is going to be, what it's going to be. We may scheme, plan, and practice, but in the end, your fight is going to be unique to you and your circumstances. No amount of prep or training is going to exactly mimic what you may be facing. The fight may be inches, or it may be 500m. Who knows. But the point is to prepare in a way that leaves you free to react to your particular sit, not set circumstances that you think you may encounter.
In this particular case, you may be concentrating on ballistic performance at 400m, when your gunfight is at 10m. What would bbl length and all that other stuff matter in that case? It would be more important to have an utterly reliable weapons system that functioned as advertised, rather than optimum performance at a longer distance. And probably knowing some combatives wouldn't hurt either.
