View Full Version : Basic Question: Does a Rifle Length Gas System Need a Rifle Length Buffer Tube?
R.A.N.G.E.R
02-05-19, 14:14
Or will a carbine length receiver extension and 3oz weight work ok?
Thos is for a 20” barrel that uses rifle length gas tube.
Hope this basic question is ok in this forum.
Thanks
yes.
Eta: Hope I didnt cause confusion. I meant yes it will work with carbine RE/buffer, not yes it needs a rifle RE. Oops.
Carbine tube, buffer, and spring.
Not sure what weight buffer to use.
Or will a carbine length receiver extension and 3oz weight work ok?
Thos is for a 20” barrel that uses rifle length gas tube.
Hope this basic question is ok in this forum.
Thanks
You can use a carbine RE assembly with a rifle upper. I'd start with an H2 buffer.
The Canadians use such a configuration as their C7A2 service rifle. IIRC it uses an H3 buffer or equivalent.
Someone will probably recommend the Vltor A5 kit as well. I can't recommend it from any first-hand experience, but I seem to recall that it was designed with a 20" barreled rifle in mind.
R.A.N.G.E.R
02-05-19, 16:21
It looks like rifle and carbine buffers have the same length of travel, but the rifle system has a longer buffer in a longer tube and has heavier weight in the buffer. If that’s the case, then it’s pretty simple to find tungsten weights to make a carbine system buffer and tube work with a rifle length gas system on my 20” barrel. Yes, the tungsten weights aren’t cheap, but it would add flexibility designing a system.
If they’re not using tungsten, but the actual buffers are the same size (C = H1 = H2 = H3 (size)), then do heavier buffers use lead for weights instead of steel?
The Canadians use such a configuration as their C7A2 service rifle. IIRC it uses an H3 buffer or equivalent.
Someone will probably recommend the Vltor A5 kit as well. I can't recommend it from any first-hand experience, but I seem to recall that it was designed with a 20" barreled rifle in mind.The A5 buffer system gets it's name from being part of Vltor's proposal for an M16A5 upgrade program.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
It looks like rifle and carbine buffers have the same length of travel, but the rifle system has a longer buffer in a longer tube and has heavier weight in the buffer. If that’s the case, then it’s pretty simple to find tungsten weights to make a carbine system buffer and tube work with a rifle length gas system on my 20” barrel. Yes, the tungsten weights aren’t cheap, but it would add flexibility designing a system.
If they’re not using tungsten, but the actual buffers are the same size (C = H1 = H2 = H3 (size)), then do heavier buffers use lead for weights instead of steel?
The H3 weighs about the same as a rifle buffer.
The H6 is the official carbine buffer to use with a 20" rifle gas.
My experience is that you can really run any buffer with a 20" rifle.
ViniVidivici
02-05-19, 22:54
My 18 inch SPR (rifle length gas) runs fine with standard carbine buffer and spring.
If they’re not using tungsten, but the actual buffers are the same size (C = H1 = H2 = H3 (size)), then do heavier buffers use lead for weights instead of steel?
Carbine buffers are all the same size, but different weights. The H number represents how many steel buffer weights are replaced by tungsten weights - a H2 buffer has 2 tungsten weights and one steel weight.
Rifle buffers are much longer and use steel weights and an aluminum spacer. Generally speaking, rifle buffers are approximately 5.2 ounces and there are no "H" rifle buffers.
R.A.N.G.E.R
02-05-19, 23:17
Carbine buffers are all the same size, but different weights. The H number represents how many steel buffer weights are replaced by tungsten weights - a H2 buffer has 2 tungsten weights and one steel weight.
Rifle buffers are much longer and use steel weights and an aluminum spacer. Generally speaking, rifle buffers are approximately 5.2 ounces and there are no "H" rifle buffers.
Great info, really fills in the gaps, thanks!
This is good rule of thumb info, but ultimately going to depend on gas port size. If you have a rifle that is under-gassed a heavier buffer is going to cause problems. There are also different gas tubes on the market now that have different internal diameters which can also cause gremlins.
Here is a reference table for gas port sizing--there is no way to tell this info without removing gas block/FSP.
http://www.tacticalmachining.com/learn/ar-style-rifles/ar-15-gas-port-sizes.html
Hammer_Man
02-06-19, 12:46
If you run a carbine RE, then I believe the correct weight buffer would be an H6, however I have yet to find a reliable source for one. My suggestion based on first hand experience, would be to run a Vltor A5 system. I equipped my last rifle length gun with an A5 system, and it ran as smooth as silk. It also ate every type of ammo I gave it, so I would not hesitate to use it again.
H6 buffer thread for reference:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?147657-H6-Buffer
Damage Industries sells the H6 buffer.
Andy
H6 buffer thread for reference:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?147657-H6-Buffer
Damage Industries sells the H6 buffer.
AndyThe Damage industries H6 is what I run. Prior to that I ran an H2 with no problems either.
18" SPR with rifle gas.
Here is this thread on rifle plus carbine RE
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?10502-Rifle-gas-system-telestock-buffer-spring
Toyoland66
02-06-19, 21:21
The Canadians use such a configuration as their C7A2 service rifle. IIRC it uses an H3 buffer or equivalent.
Someone will probably recommend the Vltor A5 kit as well. I can't recommend it from any first-hand experience, but I seem to recall that it was designed with a 20" barreled rifle in mind.
The A5 buffer is close to the same length as a rifle buffer minus the fixed spacer.
This has come up several times. I have built a few rifles for guys locally using correctly gassed 20" barrels, Sprinco blue springs and an H3 buffer. They ran perfectly fine.
The A5 buffer is close to the same length as a rifle buffer minus the fixed spacer.
That portion of the rifle buffer is about a half inch longer than the A5 buffer.
Ive been trying to figure out an answer to this question for a little bit now. Got a pretty decent 20" hbar build ordered, but I can not for the life of me figure out what is going on with the buffer/stock portion of the industry. Theres like a total of 6 full sized fixed stocks available compared to the 6 million mall ninja collapsible stocks on offer. And then there is the A5 buffer stuff. The best I can tell is its mainly being used to give carbine/mid gas systems access to a rifle spring. And everything that I can find on them is stuff like "it works perfectly fine" or "as long as you get the 'good spring' it works perfectly fine". But, that sounds awfully relative to me, how does "perfectly fine" compared to "40 years of proven reliability".
Is it that the A5 makes a decent range toy or can it actually be depended upon?
vicious_cb
02-10-19, 16:13
Ive been trying to figure out an answer to this question for a little bit now. Got a pretty decent 20" hbar build ordered, but I can not for the life of me figure out what is going on with the buffer/stock portion of the industry. Theres like a total of 6 full sized fixed stocks available compared to the 6 million mall ninja collapsible stocks on offer. And then there is the A5 buffer stuff. The best I can tell is its mainly being used to give carbine/mid gas systems access to a rifle spring. And everything that I can find on them is stuff like "it works perfectly fine" or "as long as you get the 'good spring' it works perfectly fine". But, that sounds awfully relative to me, how does "perfectly fine" compared to "40 years of proven reliability".
Is it that the A5 makes a decent range toy or can it actually be depended upon?
The A5 system is superior to both the carbine and rifle receiver extensions as per USMC reliability testing.
Ive been trying to figure out an answer to this question for a little bit now. Got a pretty decent 20" hbar build ordered, but I can not for the life of me figure out what is going on with the buffer/stock portion of the industry. Theres like a total of 6 full sized fixed stocks available compared to the 6 million mall ninja collapsible stocks on offer. And then there is the A5 buffer stuff. The best I can tell is its mainly being used to give carbine/mid gas systems access to a rifle spring. And everything that I can find on them is stuff like "it works perfectly fine" or "as long as you get the 'good spring' it works perfectly fine". But, that sounds awfully relative to me, how does "perfectly fine" compared to "40 years of proven reliability".
Is it that the A5 makes a decent range toy or can it actually be depended upon?
Collapsible stocks are not just for mall ninjas. I just got home from the range where it was beneficial to shorten the length of pull on a scoped AR to allow my small statured friend to shoot it comfortably and to make up for the warm clothes I was wearing when I shot it. The adjustable stock also allows my 6'5" brother to shoot my AR without looking like he's shooting a toy gun.
My body armor days are behind me, but I know adjustable LOP stocks are a boon to the LE and Mil folks who wear it.
I use a 16" and a 20" rifle upper on a lower running the A-5 system with a standard rifle spring and A5H2 (standard) buffer. Both uppers are perfectly reliable with ammunition from mild handloads to Mil spec M193 and green tip. The A5 system works, period.
Your 20" HBAR will run reliably on a carbine RE with H2, H3 or H6 buffer, an A5 RE with an A5H2 buffer, or with a standard rifle RE and buffer.
The most obvious functional difference is that a rifle RE limits you to a fixed LOP.
Using Mall ninja and M4 collapsible stocks together ruin any chances for someone to take you serious.
Ive been trying to figure out an answer to this question for a little bit now. Got a pretty decent 20" hbar build ordered, but I can not for the life of me figure out what is going on with the buffer/stock portion of the industry. Theres like a total of 6 full sized fixed stocks available compared to the 6 million mall ninja collapsible stocks on offer. And then there is the A5 buffer stuff. The best I can tell is its mainly being used to give carbine/mid gas systems access to a rifle spring. And everything that I can find on them is stuff like "it works perfectly fine" or "as long as you get the 'good spring' it works perfectly fine". But, that sounds awfully relative to me, how does "perfectly fine" compared to "40 years of proven reliability".
Is it that the A5 makes a decent range toy or can it actually be depended upon?
The A5 system is superior to both the carbine and rifle receiver extensions as per USMC reliability testing.
I just tried googling that and Im getting goose eggs. You happen to have a citation?
Collapsible stocks are not just for mall ninjas. I just got home from the range where it was beneficial to shorten the length of pull on a scoped AR to allow my small statured friend to shoot it comfortably and to make up for the warm clothes I was wearing when I shot it. The adjustable stock also allows my 6'5" brother to shoot my AR without looking like he's shooting a toy gun.
My body armor days are behind me, but I know adjustable LOP stocks are a boon to the LE and Mil folks who wear it.
I use a 16" and a 20" rifle upper on a lower running the A-5 system with a standard rifle spring and A5H2 (standard) buffer. Both uppers are perfectly reliable with ammunition from mild handloads to Mil spec M193 and green tip. The A5 system works, period.
Your 20" HBAR will run reliably on a carbine RE with H2, H3 or H6 buffer, an A5 RE with an A5H2 buffer, or with a standard rifle RE and buffer.
The most obvious functional difference is that a rifle RE limits you to a fixed LOP.
Limited to a fixed minimum length of pull but not maximum. I dont even really get the purpose of collapsible stocks to be honest, I mean theres the argument for cqc and mounted patrols but I never had any problem shortstocking my rifle. So if thats the 'most obvious' difference then it sounds like my assessment was correct.
Using Mall ninja and M4 collapsible stocks together ruin any chances for someone to take you serious.
You'd love my opinion of aimpoints then.
vicious_cb
02-10-19, 18:02
ESED DTR10-JXPLN-055
Detailed test report
Reliability Comparison
M16A4, M16A4 with H6 Buffer, M16A4 with VLTOR Stock Assembly.
January 2010
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-hudcJT-wfAo/VHNSFw3-aPI/AAAAAAAAAjg/gnQ7MS3kOUs/w438-h567-no/Vltor.jpg
I just tried googling that and Im getting goose eggs. You happen to have a citation?
Limited to a fixed minimum length of pull but not maximum. I dont even really get the purpose of collapsible stocks to be honest, I mean theres the argument for cqc and mounted patrols but I never had any problem shortstocking my rifle. So if thats the 'most obvious' difference then it sounds like my assessment was correct.
You'd love my opinion of aimpoints then.
What exactly are you trying to prove?
ESED DTR10-JXPLN-055
Detailed test report
Reliability Comparison
M16A4, M16A4 with H6 Buffer, M16A4 with VLTOR Stock Assembly.
January 2010
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-hudcJT-wfAo/VHNSFw3-aPI/AAAAAAAAAjg/gnQ7MS3kOUs/w438-h567-no/Vltor.jpg
Thats interesting. The closest thing I found to that was forum chatter about the h6 buffer failing to meet requirements. Ive been looking into these buffers for a while and thats the first decent bit of info (as in actual data) that Ive come across, thanks.
My Troll Fu is weaker than IGs.
To Doc I must say:
Yet they will ban thee with much cherishing.
Good night, good night! parting is such
sweet sorrow,
That I shall say good night and watch the hammer fall.
My Troll Fu is weaker than IGs.
To Doc I must say:
Yet they will ban thee with much cherishing.
Good night, good night! parting is such
sweet sorrow,
That I shall say good night and watch the hammer fall.
Having an apparently unpopular opinion is trolling? If you refer to my reply above you would see that I am/was looking for actual data rather than anecdotes about how great it is. If I wanted to troll Id have said something about this place compared to you know where. And, since Ive already been accused of trolling I might as well... For as much of a paid shill fest as that place is at least they can take someone stating they dont like collapsible stocks without accusations of trolling.
vicious_cb
02-10-19, 19:13
Having an apparently unpopular opinion is trolling? If you refer to my reply above you would see that I am/was looking for actual data rather than anecdotes about how great it is. If I wanted to troll Id have said something about this place compared to you know where. And, since Ive already been accused of trolling I might as well... For as much of a paid shill fest as that place is at least they can take someone stating they dont like collapsible stocks without accusations of trolling.
Its generally not a good idea to call what 99% of people use, "mall ninja" shit.
Having an apparently unpopular opinion is trolling? If you refer to my reply above you would see that I am/was looking for actual data rather than anecdotes about how great it is. If I wanted to troll Id have said something about this place compared to you know where. And, since Ive already been accused of trolling I might as well... For as much of a paid shill fest as that place is at least they can take someone stating they dont like collapsible stocks without accusations of trolling.
If you don't like stocks that adjust, that's fine, but don't shit in a thread that is precisely about using a carbine RE and collapsible stock with a rifle gas upper.
Start your own get off-my-lawn thread about how great fixed stocks are and opine to your heart's content.
Actually your opinion means jack shit in the bigger scheme of things. There are a valid reason for adjustable stocks and that is the de facto standard for the moment.
I just tried googling that and Im getting goose eggs. You happen to have a citation?
Limited to a fixed minimum length of pull but not maximum. I dont even really get the purpose of collapsible stocks to be honest, I mean theres the argument for cqc and mounted patrols but I never had any problem shortstocking my rifle. So if thats the 'most obvious' difference then it sounds like my assessment was correct.
You'd love my opinion of aimpoints then.
You'd love my opinion of aimpoints then.
I normally don’t like derailing, but please inform us of your opinion. I’m genuinely curious.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
This has come up several times. I have built a few rifles for guys locally using correctly gassed 20" barrels, Sprinco green springs and an H3 buffer. They ran perfectly fine.Seeking clarification on this, are you speaking of using the green spring in a carbine RE. The green spring is rifle length, does it fit or did you mean the blue spring?
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
titsonritz
02-11-19, 18:57
Seeking clarification on this, are you speaking of using the green spring in a carbine RE. The green spring is rifle length, does it fit or did you mean the blue spring?
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
I believe he is referring to an A5 not a carbine RE.
Correction made, I had green on the brain. Blue spring with USGI H3 buffer.
Seeking clarification on this, are you speaking of using the green spring in a carbine RE. The green spring is rifle length, does it fit or did you mean the blue spring?
Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk
Gunnar da Wolf
02-12-19, 06:48
I dont even really get the purpose of collapsible stocks to be honest, I mean theres the argument for cqc and mounted patrols but I never had any problem shortstocking my rifle
Then you never tried teaching a class composed of every body type from 5’ 1 1/2” women to 6’8” guys wearing everything from a t-shirt to concealable armor to plate armor. For AR shaped objects we should change the terminology from “collapsible” to saying our stocks identify as “adjustable”.
titsonritz
02-12-19, 09:35
I believe he is referring to an A5 not a carbine RE.
...but I could be wrong
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.