User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/6/2005 7:16:48 PM EDT
[#1]
Roger on the search button (will look into it). I have now put items in catagory (as I said) so if your looking for a collapsible stock you can look at all the ones we offer, their price and availability. C4 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/6/2005 7:35:30 PM EDT
[#2]
Bingo! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 10:19:55 AM EDT
[#3]
I happen to live around a post office that has a digital scale where anyone can come in and use it. So I took the 9mm buffer, and weighed it... it was EXACTLY 5.50 ounces.
Yes, i would like to take my AR, and get an exact weight, down to the ounce... but I think I would scare the hell out of them if I just walked thru the front door with it.  And I think there are laws or something against that  S |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 10:26:05 AM EDT
[#4]
+1 A call to Ken Elmore required for this Poppycock! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 10:34:43 AM EDT
[#5]
Are the H3 and the 9mm buffers the same thing?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 10:37:38 AM EDT
[#6]
I_B - I think they are extremely close but not quite the same: 9mm = 5.46 while the H3 = 5.6. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 11:44:21 AM EDT
[#7]
Hell, the sign says no concealed weapons and nothing about plain site unloaded weapons 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 11:50:07 AM EDT
[#8]
Just make sure your not wearing a ski mask i think you wont shock them too bad........ Whats with all this argument over buffers? Get an edgewatter buffer! 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 12:19:27 PM EDT
[#9]
I've been running the 9mm tungsten buffer for sometime and I'm convinced that the it makes my carbine more reliable and better handling.
 A good reliability enhancing combo is the Tungsten H-Buffer and a Wolf extra power extractor spring! BTW, has anyone noticed any negative effects of using the the 9mm H-Buffer in a mid-length gas system? I'm wondering if I should also use one on my Giffman middy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 1:12:41 PM EDT
[#10]
I'll let you know. I am building 3 "giffmann-special" midlengths. I will be running each of them a little differently to start: 1 with a regular CAR buffer 1 with a CMT H2 buffer 1 with a tunsten solid buffer I'll let you know what I like better when the barrels arrive and I get them put together. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 1:52:01 PM EDT
[#11]
take it in pieces. Do the lower with the pistol grip removed, then later on do the upper. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 1:56:13 PM EDT
[#12]
- or just put in a box, weight it, then weigh the box later (same idea, different execution).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 2:06:09 PM EDT
[#13]
I weighed my fully-dressed Remington 700 PSS on the digital deli scales at the local grocery store.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 6:22:12 PM EDT
[#14]
WHA?!?! S |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 7:13:28 PM EDT
[#15]
Guys, who sells the H3 buffers?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 7:18:24 PM EDT
[#16]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 8:24:56 PM EDT
[#17]
Are all 9mm buffers the same?
The one I have is from DPMS; it is a two-piece design like a "dead blow" hammer that uses a second impact to prevent bounce. Is this the one you guys are talking about? My AR is at the gunsmith being built so I have not tried it out yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2005 8:34:02 PM EDT
[#18]
Note that more reciprocating mass makes the gun and sight picture move more when that mass stops moving, which happens twice during action cycling. It also takes longer for the entire process to finish. Just something to think about.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 7:00:24 AM EDT
[#19]
Zak, I know that you are all about the lighter weight reciprocating mass and running full gas to get the whole cycling process over with faster. But there are some differences with this. These guys are using carbine gas systems. You talk about mostly using a rifle length gas system. Carbine gas systems run a lot higher pressure in the bolt carrier group and tend to accelerate the bolt group quicker than rifles. This leads to the extractor spinning outwards due to rotating motion. If it does not recover and settle back down, it can either jump the extractor groove or miss it completely in far out circumstances. This is why some people use either a heavier buffer to tame this quick rotation or use an o-ring extractor enhancement to over power it. These are reliability fixes in these cases. These guys are also just running flash hiders. You run a comp. It is quite possible that since we are not talking apples versus apples, a light reciprocating mass with a rifle gas system and a comp might be just the ticket but for a carbine without a comp, a heavier buffer is both a reliability enhancer as well as a muzzle bounce, shoot fast enhancer. The heavier stuff does take longer to cycle. It is also quite possible that someone using a carbine buffer could be bounce further off target but because the gun cycles quicker, be able to use that time to reaquire the target and shoot again in just as fast a time as the guy using a 9mm buffer, even though the guy with the 9mm buffer didn't get bounced as far away from the target. So maybe using a 9mm buffer, everything just *feels* better Lately I have been thinking that probably the best fix is a carbine gas system that has the volume of the rifle tube to buffer and smooth out pressure spikes and provide a longer, lower peak pressure in the bolt carrier group. But this would require openning up the port a little bit to provide the needed volume of gas. Just my opinion panderings of an idiot, take it for what it is worth. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 7:53:11 AM EDT
[#20]
Great point about the carbine-length gas systems. I've verified the effects of light vs. heavy in mid-length systems and it all works about the same as rifle, but I haven't done any amount of testing reciprocating mass vs. carbine system.
I'm not necessarily talking about using some "race" super-lightweight carrier, just the difference between a JP SS and a regular AR15 or M16/NM carrier. Also note that this does not necessarily apply to full-auto.
Then they need to get over their "feelings" and shoot faster! I'm not saying that everyone should go light weight. It's just that the discussions of carrier and buffer weights always seem to end up advocating the heaviest systems possible, with virtually no discussion of the drawbacks of those choices. -z |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 8:20:02 AM EDT
[#21]
One choice from Brownells has been posted:
231-000-039 DPMS CAR-15 COUNTERWEIGHT BUFFER I wouldn't want to pay retail for it, but the $25 dealer price is much nicer. The regular retail for the RRA version (looks exactly like the DPMS, above) from ADCO or Eagle Firearms is an even better deal. But FYI Brownells also carries the Colt standard 9mm buffer: 160-307-101 Retail is $31.90, dealer is $24.90. They look just like standard CAR buffers, just heavier and are not articulated like the RRA/DPMS ones. Apples to apples, price-wise, I prefer these to the articulated ones for how they fit inside the CAR spring if for no other reason -- the DPMS ones are thicker and rub inside the spring for their full length, whereas the Colts fit snuggly on the end of the spring only. I have at least one of each, and both work great. I have to agree with others that having bought 1 I soon replaced them in all of my carbines for they really do make the lighter guns handle more like rifles during firing IMO. Cheers, Otto |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 8:26:20 AM EDT
[#22]
I'm using an A2 buttstock with the rifle buffer, can I benefit from using a RRA 9mm tungsten buffer?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 8:27:46 AM EDT
[#23]
Zak the engineer,
Which would cause the most movement in the rifle? -Heavy carrier and buffer at low speed -Light carrier and buffer at high speed -light carrier and heavy buffer at medium speed My guess would be that since the buffer is designed to bottom out in the tube the harder it hits the bottom the more movement in the rifle. If all of the energy of the heavy reciprocating parts is being absorbed by the buffer spring then the rifle wouldn't move much. These parts are moving inline with the sights so my guess is any movement is on that plane. Does this sound correct? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 8:32:53 AM EDT
[#24]
ag
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 8:41:17 AM EDT
[#25]
There's a lot of good info in this thread: AR15.Com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=209756&page=1 If we're talking about the effects of movement and timing, namely the time it takes to reacquire sight picture and press the trigger again, then "B" will be faster, "C" will be next, and "A" will be slowest. This isn't really a novel concept. IPSC shooters have been using light weight recoil springs in their 1911's to decrease cycle time and decrease muzzle flip for years. Yes, the slide/BCG "bottoms out" at a higher terminal velocity, but the whole process gets done faster and the gun "torques" up less since more force is transmitted at the far rear of the stroke vs. levering throughout its travel while the spring is compressing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 8:49:51 AM EDT
[#26]
I don't think so, for they are about the same weight. And if anyone tries it, be sure to use the spacer for the shorter buffer in the rifle tube or the gas key on the bolt carrier will impact on the lower receiver extension ring (too much travel) and could bust the lower (or worse) with even the first shot. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 9:09:12 AM EDT
[#27]
Dont go mixing parts and there will be no accidents..... either run a rifle stock with rifle parts --- OR --- CAR stock with CAR parts. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 11:01:05 AM EDT
[#28]
For those of you still looking for one....
ADCO Firearms 9mm Buffer for $23.50 Mine weighed in at 5.50 ounces. S |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 12:20:35 PM EDT
[#29]
From what I can tell the Tubbs Carrier Weight System (CWS) essentially provides the same benefit with the added benefit of being able to add additional weights in 3 different increments. The downside is, that without any counterboring of the carrier, you need to remove both the back and front pins to clean the upper -- with the stock CWS, you can't pull just the rear pin and rotate the upper.
Again, as I understand it, the whole point of increasing weight is to delay unlocking for a small period so that gas pressure can subside. The benefit is easier extraction and a fully locked up bolt so the probability of leaking primers is reduced. But IIRC the gas pressure delivered to the carrier remains the same, so it's not like you are running a piston upper or a gas trap system. Regarding running lighter weight carriers for competition, do you need to achieve some baseline power factor with your ammo, or do competition guns run at slower velocities/less gas than regular ammo? If you do need to run up around XM193 -equivalent pressures, how do competition guns hold up? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 12:25:22 PM EDT
[#30]
I run XM193, Black Hills 75-77gr, and sometimes Q3131A etc with no problems using either the JP SS carrier or the MSTN "LW" steel carrier, and standard CAR buffers.
The JP low-mass aluminum carrier runs fine when clean but bogs down when dirty. It's really a competition only item, since it requires very frequent cleaning. -z |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 12:26:31 PM EDT
[#31]
Do you have problems with extraction or carrier keys? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 12:35:44 PM EDT
[#32]
Never had a problem with either, but like I said, all my barrels have either rifle or mid-length gas systems.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 2:05:18 PM EDT
[#33]
Received my 9mm buffer order from Adco today. Looking forward to hitting the range this weekend and seeing if it lives up to the hype.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 3:23:12 PM EDT
[#34]
Does anyone anticipate a problem using an M-16 carrier and the 9mm buffer? I'm going to be shooting highpower for scores in a few months, and I'm looking to get the SMOOTHEST running match AR I can get.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 4:30:16 PM EDT
[#35]
Are you using a tele stock? If you are using a standard A2 stock, then you have to stay with the rifle length buffer. S |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 4:38:21 PM EDT
[#36]
Yep, you put a carbine buffer in a standard buffer tube you can destroy your lower reciever.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 4:40:30 PM EDT
[#37]
All you need is a spacer to take up the difference in internal length. JP Enterprises makes such a spacer. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 4:47:20 PM EDT
[#38]
So does RRA, they call it a 9mm spacer. Of course, if you are running a full stock with 9mm, you can just use the standard rifle buffer. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 5:15:21 PM EDT
[#39]
Pardon my ignorance, but why/how would this damage the lower? Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 5:18:43 PM EDT
[#40]
Because the shorter carbine length buffer in a long tube will allow the rear of the bolt carrier key to stop the bolt on the lower reciever bridge as opposted to the buffer bottoming out on the bottom of the tube. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 5:22:21 PM EDT
[#41]
Ahh, makes sense. Thanks. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 8:23:47 PM EDT
[#42]
tagarooney..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/9/2005 9:17:38 PM EDT
[#43]
But if you use a spacer block in the back of the tube, you can use the carbine buffer and spring in a standard stock tube. Edit- looks like it was said way above..... |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2005 4:34:16 AM EDT
[#44]
tag
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2005 7:43:11 AM EDT
[#45]
Recoil, of course isn't much of an issue in an AR, but if possible, I'd like to cut even more. Which buffer would do that best? My issue weapon is a Colt M4A1, and deployment OCONUS is likely this year. I own a RRA midlength CAR A4. I'd like something that would work in either. Has anyone used the MGI recoil reducing buffer? It's expensive at $150. If a $25 9mm buffer would cut a lot of recoil, I'd just go that route.
I had no idea there were this many choices until I looked into buying an AR last fall. I always just took what was issued to me. Thanks, Mark |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2005 8:13:14 AM EDT
[#46]
OK, I am confused (a condition becoming more frequent these days)
Rifle tube + A2/CAR Spacer + CAR Spring + CAR Buffer = Good Rifle tube + Rifle Spring + CAR Buffer = BAD? If these statements are correct, what spacer is used for the second combination above? Also, with so many buffer weights avail, is the statement "Heavier is Better" correct? Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2005 8:27:40 AM EDT
[#47]
RE: ^
I'll give this a shot... The spring length (which isn't very different anyway) is not going to do anything to stop the overtravel of a CAR buffer in a rifle-length tube if there is no spacer. Spring lenth primarily effects that "rebound" of the buffer after its rearward travel stops (make sense?). In the case of a 9mm spacer in a rifle-length tube, the spacer will be seated against the buttplate and prevent the shorter CAR buffer from traveling so far that the carrier (which is pushing on it after a shot is fired) moves into the extension/buffer tube, thereby overtraveling and damaging it and your receiver. A spacer is not needed for a rifle-length buffer because it is longer and thus it "bottoms out" at the right "depth" all by itself (having the same effect as a CAR-length buffer + spacer). Take a look at the relative lengths of the rifle-length and CAR-length buffers...and I think it will make sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2005 8:31:54 AM EDT
[#48]
A heavier buffer (and/or heavier bolt carrier) will: make the action cycle slower, make the recoil less abrupt because the buffer will bottom out in the receiver extension at a lower velocity, and delay bolt unlocking slighty. A slower-cycling bolt carrier group often fixes magazine related issues. A slower cycling action will reduce the cyclic rate when firing full auto. Effects #1 and #2 have other side effects noticable in practical shooting which I've detailed prior posts. My advice is to stick with the "stock" setup unless you have some issue, and then go from there. -z |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2005 8:53:16 AM EDT
[#49]
You will either use this assembly -
 ---OR-- this assembly -  Do not go mixing parts between them. All the VOO-DOO attached to "9mm"buffer.... it is just another CAR buffer that happens to weigh 5.6oz... Rifle buffer weigh5.1/5.2oz average. Does it matter, no. Weight is only important when doing full-auto to adjust cyclic rate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2005 8:56:35 AM EDT
[#50]
My M4gery has been flawless after 4K rounds, just took my newly installed 9mm buffer & Viton O-ring for a test drive. After 300 rds of WWB & 100 rds of Q3131A, it so sweet, 100% flawless.
Recoil much is less, kind of like a push instead of a snappy impulse, and ejection was much more stronger/positive w/ the O-ring, shells flying about 2 extra feet. I did lots of fast ammo dumping to see if the heat will melt the O-ring, after the cleaning my O-ring still looks brand new after 400rds My 50 O-ring bag will last me a lifetime. This sweet shooter has become a sweeter shooter  I am ready again for my upcoming hog hunts...  Thank you Stainless for sharing the love ! 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
