Vltor A5 vs. Geissele Super 42, which is better?

[tom12.7]

Dunno what thay would be. All testing I've seen shows inadequacy of the milspec spring. It's about 400% less consistent in cyclic rate, too, due to variance when stripping rounds in full auto fire. It's just anemic.

I would argue that point for a few models at the least. None required as a whole more L1 spring, adding more L1 tension does not automatically mean a higher degree of function for the system as a whole, there are negatives associated with that.
400% variance in cyclic rate is well beyond normal, that system has some other items that are issue. With that 4X variance, do you think that an M16 would be acceptable with an RPM range of that? Not likely at all.
You could be some of the unfortunate ones that believe that they can make the "best" frankenAR without knowing how the stack up of tolerances can add up in the system and induce issues. You could be an unfortunate one that bought a factory gun that had base issues and wanted to fix them on their own. Maybe something in-between with an outside issue involved, or a good system with outside issues. You could fall into any of that, or a combination of.
I've seen easy things like primer or brass parts causing binding, expensive things like transferable lowers that were incorrect causing binding, and about everything in between. Binding is still binding, a cheap spring may help an expensive lower, but would that make a better solution for all, or that case?

[WS6]

I think those are just problems associated with the carbine length systems in general. You have a weaker spring combined with half the mass in the buffer. I've been told it's something to do with the compression rate, but I'm pretty vague on that term.

Looks like I will be going with the A5.

My issues occurred with the A5, also. I have THAT on video in my other thread. That said, BOTH systems function fine with the correct spring and buffer tailored to YOUR system. I will have Vltor A5 data up shortly (slow motion video).

[WS6]

I would argue that point for a few models at the least. None required as a whole more L1 spring, adding more L1 tension does not automatically mean a higher degree of function for the system as a whole, there are negatives associated with that.
400% variance in cyclic rate is well beyond normal, that system has some other items that are issue. With that 4X variance, do you think that an M16 would be acceptable with an RPM range of that? Not likely at all.
You could be some of the unfortunate ones that believe that they can make the "best" frankenAR without knowing how the stack up of tolerances can add up in the system and induce issues. You could be an unfortunate one that bought a factory gun that had base issues and wanted to fix them on their own. Maybe something in-between with an outside issue involved, or a good system with outside issues. You could fall into any of that, or a combination of. I could. And it could have happened every time I bought an AR. And when Mike Pannone bought an AR. And Andrew Touhy. but I kindof doubt the odds.
I've seen easy things like primer or brass parts causing binding, expensive things like transferable lowers that were incorrect causing binding, and about everything in between. Binding is still binding, a cheap spring may help an expensive lower, but would that make a better solution for all, or that case?

There is NADA binding in my weapon system. Zip. Nothing. What can I do to show this to you to get you off that horse? It functions 100% with Tula and Wolf (except won't lock back every mag) and a nearly 7oz buffer and Vltor Green with a 0.074" gas port. Do you really think it's "binding"? Really?

Okay, Andrew Touhy showed 1000% variable in carrier return velocity. I tested MY rifle and have the video to prove it. Go see my thread. Now, I don't have the fancy gadgets he does, but you can see with your naked eye how bloody inconsistent the function of the Mil-Spec spring was in comparison. It's glaring. Slings cases all over, while the OTHER springs do NOT. couple my quick and cheap test with his test, and you kindof have to admit...Mike Pannone, Andrew, Myself, Bill G. the guys at Sprinco...we might be onto something.

[tom12.7]

Then continue to do so as you wish. I am quietly anticipating this change in spring value to improve overall function of this system.
Is another "biased" sand test in order? Why wouldn't you think that the system going into "battery" was not involved in this to begin with? What a shortfall of our logic on our part was to not think of this?
Too bad the M16 or it's FOW could not run. How frightening it was to our prospect of our future. It needed a FA smack that still could not help it to run.

[WS6]

Then continue to do so as you wish. I am quietly anticipating this change in spring value to improve overall function of this system.
Is another "biased" sand test in order? Why wouldn't you think that the system going into "battery" was not involved in this to begin with? What a shortfall of our logic on our part was to not think of this?
Too bad the M16 or it's FOW could not run. How frightening it was to our prospect of our future. It needed a FA smack that still could not help it to run.

Okay, how much derp would I have to be full of to change a system THAT HAS NEVER FAILED for one that FAILS OFTEN, just because some guy on the internet says "You should!"? Seriously? Why would I do what you are suggesting when I have seen and experienced failure after failure after failure, year after year, rifle after rifle, doing that? I may not be a genius, but I'm not stupid, either.

[WS6]

[HansTheHobbit]

I'm really confused what you're trying to do. As far as I can see, everything is completely normal there.

[WS6]

I'm really confused what you're trying to do. As far as I can see, everything is completely normal there.

Yep. It is. 100%.

[tom12.7]

That is not a comprehensive determination of the system. Not sure what you are getting at?

[wetidlerjr]

I was already set to convert my carbine systems to A5, but then I saw the Geissele Super 42 braided spring and buffer. Does anyone have any opinions on which is the better system?

I just installed one on a BCM carbine length gas 16" and it made a noticeable difference in recoil and smoothness compared to a BCM mid-length gas 16" with a standard H buffer and spring. I only shot about 60 rounds with it but I was impressed. This is, of course an "example of one" and will require much more use to make a definitive opinion but it looks promising. As always, YMMV. No opinion on the A5 system as I don't have one.