View Full Version : If I don't have an H buffer
I have both carbine and midlength gas guns w/ regular buffers. Does that just mean they will have a little more recoil? Should I change them out for H buffers? Would H2 be even better?
I've never seen a gun that runs optimall with a standard CAR buffer. But your gas length system ALONE won't dictate what buffer is best, JETHRO!!!
Gas system length, buffer weight and spring rate has no affect on how much recoil is generated. What it can change how the recoil feels, the perceived recoil. The answer to your fist question is no, a standard carbine buffer does not mean your rifles have more recoil. The energy is the same.
Changing buffer weights can change the feel of the recoil impulse, can soften or sharpen it. It can stretch out how long the impulse is by slowing down the BCG velocity, or shorten the impulse by allowing the BCG to move faster.
Lots of shooters prefer the feel of the heavier buffers.
In my opinion, the ideal buffer weight is what allows the rifle best function and reliability, with recoil impulse being a secondary consideration. If you can find a buffer weight that allows best function and reliability and improves recoil management, that's even better.
It seems the general consensus is that an H or H1 gives good function and improved recoil management in carbines. The only way to tell if that's true with your rifles is to shoot them with the buffers installed
I've never seen a gun that runs optimall with a standard CAR buffer. But your gas length system ALONE won't dictate what buffer is best, JETHRO!!!
You mean like an SR15e3? ;)
It seems the general consensus is that an H or H1 gives good function and improved recoil management in carbines.
Did you mean H and H2?
If you insist on dicking with your buffers, I would encourage you to do some reading first to understand why you are doing so.
There are literally dozens of buffer threads here.
In the end if you are going to play with them, make sure that your weapon will work will all of the ammo you intend to shoot.
Yeah, working from memory here. That's why I use the disclaimer "seems to be the general consensus". To further clarify, I do not offer those buffers as a recommendation, but as a starting point for further research. Currently, my PSA carbine runs a standard carbine buffer and while it works fine, it seems there is a certain mechanical sharpness to the recoil impulse as if the reciprocating mass is bottoming out harder than it should. I won't know if that's my imagination or if there is something to it until I actually try different, heavier buffers
ETA- Listen to IG. He speaks the truth and from experience
It's worth saying you'll notice a change in recoil depending on the ammunition you shoot.
I think there is something to that, not only 5.56mm vs .223, but even burn rate.
Maybe when I start reloading I'll dive into that more.
lethal dose
11-30-11, 21:54
if i run underpowered ammo, i have the best luck with a car buffer. for nato, h.
There is no imperative to change from a carbine buffer to an H or heavier if the gun is running. People get really wrapped around that axle.
Whether or not there is a merit, liability, or perceived change depends on how your gun is gassed. It's all a balance of variables. I have a mid-length that is dangerously close to functional threshold with an H buffer and certain economy training ammo. Others will run with H2s all day long.
Then you can get into burst and auto guns, which can present even more variables depending on selector setting.
my BCM barreled middy runs min TAC (powder) load to max TAC load nicely with an H buffer. even feeds off of some bad mags more reliably this way..
just my experience. test your stuff when you make any changes.
my BCM barreled middy runs min TAC (powder) load to max TAC load nicely with an H buffer. even feeds off of some bad mags more reliably this way..
just my experience. test your stuff when you make any changes.
Have you found any difference/effects using faster or slower burning powder?
The 5.56 is a small capacity case. There's not a whole lot of variance in the burn rates of suitable powders
You mean like an SR15e3? ;)
I don't know what that is... :confused:
The Knights Ammament SR-15E3? You've never heard of it? :confused:
It has a reputation for being one of the softest shooting guns around, and does so with a carbine buffer.
The Knights Ammament SR-15E3? You've never heard of it? :confused:
It has a reputation for being one of the softest shooting guns around, and does so with a carbine buffer.
I've heard of it, but know nothing about it.... So I can still say I've never seen a gun that shoots optimally with the carbine buffer. :D
Ha! It uses a .308 SR25 gas tube IIRC. This places the gas port about 11.2" (about) from the face of the receiver on a 16" barrel. So longer than mid-length.
I have both carbine and midlength gas guns w/ regular buffers. Does that just mean they will have a little more recoil? Should I change them out for H buffers? Would H2 be even better?
Who made your uppers? This will allow us to better understand any possible over gassing issues.
C4
The Knights Ammament SR-15E3? You've never heard of it? :confused:
It has a reputation for being one of the softest shooting guns around, and does so with a carbine buffer.
Mine actually runs very reliably with an h buffer, even with quality low powered .223 ammo like pmc & centurion.
Have you found any difference/effects using faster or slower burning powder?
i just did basic function testing.. i used tac only, so burn rate was the same throughout. basically i just loaded one round in a mag 20 times and made sure the bolt locked back. definitive function testing would probably require a high speed camera.
one thing i did try several years ago in regard to fast powder was h4198 (i think) which is a very fast burning powder. my cmmg middy (old gun i don't have anymore) functioned fine on it, but the bolt speed was noticeably slower. I'd definitely stick to TAC or h335 or other powders in that range of burn speed when reloading for the ar15.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.