AR Sponsor
Posted: 12/4/2006 7:00:32 AM EDT
|
Does anyone have any experience with this CRR? www.advancedarmament.com/products/ar15.asp Seems like a pretty good price versus the others on the market. |
Mark, What's "wrong" with the standard rate of fire is that it doesn't remain "standard". Yup, that's right, not even in a Colt. Gas ports in carbines erode open during the life of the barrel, and it increases the rate of fire, and also increases action speeds, leading to battering of the action parts, and possibly contributing to early failure or breakage of said parts. Additionally, this over-gassed condition causes perceived recoil and muzzle flip to increase, thus reducing the handling qualities of the weapon over time. The circumstance is the same in semiauto or full-auto rifles, but full-auto people notice the rate of fire increase much easier, due to their paying attention to the cyclic rate. This is documented fact. An AR15 or M16 carbine may be "in-spec" from the factory, but it won't remain there for its entire lifetime of the barrel. It will change its gas metering because of port erosion, and it happens in all carbines at a faster rate than the original rifle design with the longer gas system. |
Its not nonsence when my M16 on a 10.5 will bolt bounce but with a AAC rate reducer it runs fine. Its one of the first tried fixes in a 10.5 that wont run auto, and it usually works. Honestly, if you have an upper that runs great 11" or less with a standard buffer out of the box, please let me know... Anyway like I said I use the AAC and it works great for me, I wouldnt worry about it in a semi |
|
I used the AAC rate-reducer before I started working for MGI. The AAC works, but it's not as good as the MGI. I sold my AAC after getting the MGI buffer. However, it does work, and it is a pretty good unit, and it is noticeably less expensive than the MGI, so it may fit your application and budget, if money is the issue. |
|
I've got a little collection of buffers. The old AAC buffer was better than the current model IMHO. The old ones used Tungsten while the newer ones are just steel. There are also two different versions of the old one for the collapsible stock. One had a larger diameter so you had to use their special buffer spring. They also made some that took standard springs which is what I have. My old one weighs 7.4 oz. While the MGI weighs 6.9 oz. The current production one weighs 5.3 oz. I don't use it much since it doesn't work as well as the old one or the MGI or Enidine for that matter. It doesn't reduce ROF as nicely as the old one or the MGI. In addition, I think the MGI is superior as I had the AAC one fail on me. It has a "spring" pin that holds it all together and it sheared off on me. Same thing happened to a friend of mine as well. Not a big deal to fix it as you just replace the pin but still something to worry about. I don't see how the MGI has anything to fail. It is built more solidly. |
AR Sponsor