As it should be. Even short dudes can shoot like that - training tells you to keep the stock fully extended and use an L stance when shooting standing, UNTIL you put on armor. When wearing armor you then shorten the stock and use a wider stance. But initial basic rifle training does involve full open stock, and everyone not a midget can actually shoot fine with that. That is what the army trains.
Your training may differ out of convenience for civilians, but the collapsible stock is not for user arm comfort, it is for compensating when wearing armor vests, which prevent normal shouldering. Everyone could shoot fine using a full length stock before the collapsible was introduced - standard service rifles for the hundred+ years before the m4 were issued worked fine.
And then it doesn't line up at all with how you have to use it with armor, when you can't shoulder it properly. You also get an inconsistent sight picture between the two. It matters less with modern optics than it does with irons, but fuckabout tacticool room clearing drills and practical marksmanship are different things.
Shorter lever to rotate around the shoulder point of contact means the muzzle moves less
That entire sentence is word vomit with no effective meaning. You aren't doing long range shooting while standing, and indoors that is a completely irrelevant metric.
Lemme guess, it's some bullshit sbr with no effective use beyond 100 yards, too. The ATF going mad over them is one of their greatest tricks - convinced tens of thousands of retards to intentionally buy shit rifles.
20" barrel like god intended. Now get it in a real caliber, because 5.56 is good for platoons with autos in cities but most SHTF scenarios will have you alone or in small groups, and having a .308 is magnitudes more versatile.
Realistically even the m4 length barrel is wasteful outside of cqb - it drastically reduces effective range. The difference between 14.5 and 20 is the difference between being able to effectively hit at 300 vs 500 yards. Afghanistan really made clear how shit that is, because average engagement ranges were about 800, so only the m240 gunners and the radio operators had much use without spending several minutes bounding towards shit.
As it should be. Even short dudes can shoot like that - training tells you to keep the stock fully extended and use an L stance when shooting standing, UNTIL you put on armor. When wearing armor you then shorten the stock and use a wider stance. But initial basic rifle training does involve full open stock, and everyone not a midget can actually shoot fine with that. That is what the army trains.
Your training may differ out of convenience for civilians, but the collapsible stock is not for user arm comfort, it is for compensating when wearing armor vests, which prevent normal shouldering. Everyone could shoot fine using a full length stock before the collapsible was introduced - standard service rifles for the hundred+ years before the m4 were issued worked fine.
And then it doesn't line up at all with how you have to use it with armor, when you can't shoulder it properly. You also get an inconsistent sight picture between the two. It matters less with modern optics than it does with irons, but fuckabout tacticool room clearing drills and practical marksmanship are different things.
That entire sentence is word vomit with no effective meaning. You aren't doing long range shooting while standing, and indoors that is a completely irrelevant metric.
Lemme guess, it's some bullshit sbr with no effective use beyond 100 yards, too. The ATF going mad over them is one of their greatest tricks - convinced tens of thousands of retards to intentionally buy shit rifles.
20" barrel like god intended. Now get it in a real caliber, because 5.56 is good for platoons with autos in cities but most SHTF scenarios will have you alone or in small groups, and having a .308 is magnitudes more versatile.
Realistically even the m4 length barrel is wasteful outside of cqb - it drastically reduces effective range. The difference between 14.5 and 20 is the difference between being able to effectively hit at 300 vs 500 yards. Afghanistan really made clear how shit that is, because average engagement ranges were about 800, so only the m240 gunners and the radio operators had much use without spending several minutes bounding towards shit.
How do you move about with your arms all scrunched up? I find that exceptionally uncomfortable, and I'm, about your size.