22-250 rifle

[tangolima]

Yeah I may monkey with the gas block to turn it into a straight pull. I live behind enemy line in California. I will turn it back on when we regain our rights.

At least on GRT, MV goes up by a few percent if I shut the gas. I look for speed at the muzzle not in cycling, so works out.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[44 AMP]

I look for speed at the muzzle not in cycling, so works out.

I didn't see where you gave the barrel length of the upper you ordered.

Just curious, you're not looking for speed out of one of the short barrels are you?

[tangolima]

24". The longest they are selling.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[44 AMP]

24" makes it "real" rifle, good to hear it was your choice.

Personally, I think that turning a .243 into a short barrel CQB carbine is a waste of potential.

[tangolima]

Oh I already a few of those, although it is my thing. PTR91 in .308 with 16" barrel is one.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[taylorce1]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

24" makes it "real" rifle, good to hear it was your choice.

I would have gone 20", as I favor maneuverability and the ability to keep it under 26" suppressed. However, a 24" barrel is easy enough to shorten if you find you dont like it.

[44 AMP]

Different strokes for different folks and of course you should do what best suits your wants and needs.

I just don't see the point in an AR 10 class .243 chopped down to "tactical length". IF you do, fine, do it. Serves no purpose for me. I don't do houseclearing, don't climb in and out of vehicles (choppers, humvees or apc) and when I'm in thick brush I'm hunting, and for that I have an entirely adequate 20" .243 bolt action, which is lighter than any AR in .243 that I'm aware of.

As a rifle for accuracy, performance at longer ranges, an AR 10 could do very well. Personally I'd want enough barrel to get the maximum practical performance. And for me that would be 22" or more.

[tangolima]

I like long rifles for their "efficiency". It gets higher MV, hence more energy, without burning more fuel (powder). I have a few shorter ones for hopping around with if I need to; M1 carbine, mini 14, PTR 91, AR-15.

Swedish Mauser has 30" barrel. It may be the longest rifle in my small collection, or it could be the Persian Mauser, the Vetterli, or the swiss m1911.

Why didn't I have normal bolt gun in .243 win, instead of AR-10? It is because I don't have an AR10, yet. And I want to have one in funky caliber.

-TL



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[taylorce1]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

when I'm in thick brush I'm hunting, and for that I have an entirely adequate 20" .243 bolt action,

Do you have a 24" .243 Win to compare it to and is there a huge difference between the two? If you do see which one comes up better and points easier to get you on target faster. This is what I mean by maneuverability. I also use a suppressor when direct threaded adds about 5.75" to the length of the barrel, so keeping the length of the barrel suppressed between 22-26" is a big deal to me.

Originally Posted by tangolima

I like long rifles for their "efficiency". It gets higher MV, hence more energy, without burning more fuel (powder).

If efficiency was your goal, then why the .243 Win? All things being equal, the 6mm Creedmoor has better efficiency in the AR-10 platform. It gets you .243 Win velocity, and fits the magazine better without the sacrifice of powder capacity with bullets over 100 grains. In a custom built bolt action with 1:7.7 twist or faster, that allows for longer COAL than 2.8" in the magazine then there is no reason not to use the .243 Win or AI version.

If you want efficiency in an AR platform the the 6X45 is the darling. It gets you 80% percent of the velocity burning 60% of the powder of the .243 Win with 100 grain bullets in the same length barrel. That's pretty impressive from such a diminutive cartridge.

You might think I hate the .243 Win, quite the contrary I like it a lot. It's the first rifle I ever bought with my own money. I've killed several deer and pronghorn over the years with it. I've even built a fast twist 26" barreled rifle that could handle a COAL of almost 3.2", and shot sub ½ MOA goups at 400 with 105-115 bullets. It was just heavier, unwieldy, and more work than it needed to be.

[tangolima]

There really isn't a why. I want an AR10. .243 win is funky caliber to me, although I originally was looking at 22-250. Then I want to have efficiency.

-TL



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[44 AMP]

Do you have a 24" .243 Win to compare it to and is there a huge difference between the two?

No, I don't have a 24" .243 to compare it to. Don't really need one, I think. What I was talking about with the 20" carbine was the shorter carbine's handling in brush vs. a longer barreled rifle.

I've had and used rifles with barrel lengths ranging from 18.5" to 30" (book says 29.1" ) and am well aware of the different handling of the different size guns.

And since I don't run suppressors, needing a shorter barrel to keep the overall length within a given limit doesn't matter to me. Clearly it matters to the OP, so, I'm fine with his choices for his stuff.

An AR 10 in .243 would be cool, might be a lot of fun. Recoil would be very light. Could be a lot of fun. Could be very accurate. Wouldn't be the most practical choice for some things, but so what??? I've had, and have a lot of guns that most other people would not think are practical. Machts Nichts!

I enjoy them, and that all that matters. A long time ago I considered getting one of Springfield Armory's M1As in .243. I love mine in .308. Never did get around to it,

We're a ways off from .22-250 now, so probably time to leave this thread. Please start a new one after you get going with your .243 AR and let us know about it!

[tangolima]

Jawohl.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk