LSUTiger wrote:A shouldered/stocked SBR is preferable but an AR pistol is a viable alternative to an SBR with no paperwork and NFA hassle. The buffer tube of the AR pistol adds a 3rd point of contact as a cheek rest and when proper technique/properly used with a sling gives added support that is a reasonably stable facsimile to a stocked/shouldered SBR.
I'm with ya. For every application I can think of, an AR SBR is preferable to a pistol. It might be argued that, all else being equal, the pistol provides slightly more portability, but a fully-collapsed M4 stock would add only about a half-inch of length, and if you use a minimalist, slim-line stock like something from Magpul or VLTOR, you add very little weight and not much of a height footprint. That said...
An AR pistol does require an adjustment in presentation (whether you have a blade or brace on the buffer tube, or just a padded tube; what kind of sighting system you're using; if a sling is used, what kind, and how it's attached; etc.) but these differences are fairly minor. For example, I've found that a more traditional pistol grip works best for me, meaning that the forearm, wrist, and firearm are aligned in the same plane, with my offhand holding the fore-end the same way I would a carbine; that necessitates canting the gun inward several degrees to get a quick and repeatable sight picture. I put a micro RDS on mine, and I also found that I needed to mount it on a riser to get some extra height above the barrel so that I can hold the gun slightly lower than I would an iron-sight pistol. And a caveat: my AR pistol is still relatively new; I have a few hundred rounds down the pipe, and may make further adjustments.
But those differences are effectively miniscule and change the manual at arms not at all.
A frequent dis against AR pistols is that the shorter barrel impedes ballistic performance. Absolutely true. Given an identical platform with an identical twist rate and identical ammo, the shorter the barrel the lower the muzzle velocity and the poorer the ballistic performance over distance.
But different tools have different purposes. My .308 rifles are kitted primarily for distances of 100 yards or more; though I do, on most, have a reflex sight for CQB, that's not their main function. Likewise, I don't have a powered optic on my EDC handgun.
I would hazard that if someone were looking for 1 MOA at 100 yards as a criterion for a handgun, they're almost always talking either a long-range competition pistol or a scoped big-bore hunting handgun. If the AR pistol didn't have a big brother, we'd probably be marveling at how accurate it can be, for a handgun, at distances of 50 or even 75 yards. But because the 5.56 round can be fired with precision to 300 yards out of a rifle with a 20-inch barrel, a lot of people disregard the potential of the AR pistol and deem it worthless.
I opted for a 7.5" barrel because I figured 10.5" and longer really made more sense as an SBR, that for a pistol platform one of the great virtues was its compact size and a longer barrel compromised that. Even at 7.5" it has the longest barrel of any handgun I own.
Also don't know why some think an AR with a 7.5" barrel has significantly more recoil than a carbine with a 16" barrel. It doesn't. It fires the same round out of a barrel that's 54% as long; and mine--with a 6 3/4" aluminum quad rail, a SIG brace, and the micro RDS--still weighs over 5.5 lbs with no mag...which is significant mass behind a 5.56 round that doesn't have much recoil to begin with. Anyone who thinks an AR pistol is difficult to control for follow-up shots has, I imagine, not shot an AR pistol much. Never will be as good as having a stock and a cheek weld, but with a fully-charged 30-round mag in place, you have about 6.5 lbs of mass between you and that 55 grain or so bullet exiting the barrel. It is actually very easy to control for follow-up shots with little muzzle flip.
It may be marginally louder than a carbine because the exiting gases have a shorter distance to travel before reaching the muzzle (which is why the pistol definitely has a larger muzzle flash). But it's the same ammunition with the same powder charge and the same gas pressures. I don't have a decibel meter to test it, but my subjective opinion is that my 7.5" barrel pistol and one of my 16" barrel carbines aren't significantly different in volume. I'm sure the pistol is a little louder, but I'd say no more than 15%, if that. Where this rep comes from is, I believe, when using a short barrel with the buffer tube as a cheek brace, the business end of the gun is only about 20" from your ears (with a 7.5" barrel) compared to 32" or 33" with a 16" barrel carbine. It
seems much louder because the report is 40% closer to your face.
Last, it's a pistol. No NFA paperwork, no need to register the serial number of that specific gun with the feds, no Form 1 and $200 check for the BATFE, no waiting to receive the tax stamp back from the BATFE before you can start building your gun. And because it's a pistol, it falls under carry options of your LTC. Would I ever want to carry it in a holster? Probably not, unless possibly as a sidearm while hunting. But if I wanted to, I could. One option for that is the SARRP from Redline Pro Gear (don't remember who first brought it to my attention in a post here a week or so ago, but thanks):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2IiKyMqCf8
At 22.5" OAL, my AR pistol will drop into any modest size bag to travel with me if I choose, and it would make a great "trunk gun" because it's size makes it easier to deploy in a vehicle than a carbine.
Am I sold on switching from a 16" carbine to my AR pistol for home defense? Not just yet. Maybe given more time and testing. I'm waiting to try some Hornady 75 grain Interlock HD SBR Black ammo in it; I'm leaning toward that as an HD round if it shoots well. But it
is an AR and fires a rifle cartridge. Slap a 40-round PMAG in it, and you have a pretty formidable pistol. In the Caliber Wars, folks joke about no one wanting to volunteer to take a .380 round COM to prove it's ineffective. I don't know anyone who would deem it a dream job to take a couple of 75 grain controlled pairs at 15 yards from an AR pistol.
I still think the carbine is king. But it isn't ideal for home defense, most especially if you're the only armed defender. Clearing rooms in sharp, tight angles and confines is not best done with a carbine or a shotgun: space is just too tight.
The best choice may be what TAM put together: a suppressed SBR in .300 Blackout. Highly effective CQB round with noise suppression in a smaller package. Another option might be a bull-pup design like a TAVOR...but those are still pricey and, frankly, I've never met a trigger on a bull-pup that I could fall in love with, just the nature of the design.
So I never viewed it as, "Why choose an AR pistol
instead of an AR carbine?" It was, "Why not have both?"
While I admit I've seen some firearms whose functional utility I've questioned, for 98% of them I can understand the role they might fulfill. Right purpose, right tool. And I think the AR pistol can fit a purpose.