Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 96

Thread: How reliable are Low Mass BCGs

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Pleasure Island
    Posts
    2,338
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    this isnt really the best place for 1st hand knowledge on this. "Gamer stuff" usually gets the same reaction as Miley at the VMA's

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    38
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)
    Another thing to consider is bolt bounce which can aggravate any of the issues already mentioned, especially the running dirty part. In my non-expert opinion that could be a problem without proper lubrication. I keep mine wet. Get some high speed footage of your bolt cycling with your low mass components and see what happens.

    Also consider that you're making your AR more sensitive to magazines by marginally increasing the cyclic rate. Think of the all too common bolt-over-base malfunction with overgassed and/or suppressed weapons. All this probably means - at least all it means for me - is that you want to keep some new-ish mags around for any "serious" purposes, and not rely on those beat up GI mags you've been taking to practice sessions for years now. Just by purely subjective measurements I get the feeling Lancers have the strongest springs on the market.

    For myself, I'm running a rifle length 18" with a Syrac gas block, A5H0 buffer (3.9oz) and a Young NM Lite carrier, neither of which are quite as light as the corresponding JP LMOS components. I dig it. In the future I might feel the need to push harder for more weight savings, in which case I might empty out the buffer, but that day hasn't come.

    My other rifle though is a 16" middy with the same Syrac, but a full-weight A5 buffer and a BCM BCG. So maybe that makes me a hypocrite. Haven't shot it yet though, and I don't think I'll have much of an objection to tweaking the buffer weight a bit - maybe down to the A5H1 range.

    I don't see any reason why I wouldn't keep either rifle loaded at my bedside or something, as my standards for reliability are the same for all of my guns no matter their purpose.

    Oh, and TBK, you suck. <3

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    7,905
    Feedback Score
    9 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ryu_sekai View Post
    But there is also less mass to push forward right? So less "power" is need it to seat the bolt?

    No premature unlocking issues?
    No issues with premature unlocking but of course you should run one with adjustable gas. They are common in three gun among the top shooters. The only issue I have had is chambering the first round when the gun has been fired more than 200 rounds or so. Usually hand cycling it will not work. I have to drop the bolt from the locked back position. I just started cleaning the chamber before every match. No more issues.
    Last edited by Alaskapopo; 08-30-13 at 03:31.
    Serving as a LEO since 1999.
    USPSA# A56876 A Class
    Firearms Instructor
    Armorer for AR15, 1911, Glocks and Remington 870 shotguns.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,095
    Feedback Score
    7 (89%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ryu_sekai View Post
    This was a post by "badazzar" tom from Spikes Tactical.

    Don't worry about any extra forward momentum that you would get from using a heavier carrier, the reduced carrier weight allows the recoil spring to push the carrier back into battery that much harder and that much faster. The spring has less weight to push forward, making the spring that much more effective, almost as if it's slightly extra power. Also debris/carbon will not build up in an area where moving parts are contacting each other, every time you pull the trigger the debris is forced out of those areas. Ever seen a rifle that wasn't cleaned for thousands of rounds? The gunk and build up will always be in the dead areas where it doesn't matter anyway.

    We are not HK, KAC, Larue, FN, or Magpul, but we are using lightweight carriers in the ST Compressor as well as some other custom rifles.
    You do realise thats the same guy who was braggin to TOS about how all the special forces are adopting their compressor and are in use by Delta?
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant View Post
    Colt builds War Horses, not show ponies.
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    This is 2012. The world is going to end this December and people are still trying to debate the merits of piece of shit, cost cutting crap AR's. Really?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Plano, TX
    Posts
    331
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by VIP3R 237 View Post
    Your gun already runs 100%, why mess with it?



    I think that answers that with this statement.

    I feel use the heaviest setup that your rifle can run. I have seen too many gamer guns with low mass components go down in classes that I would not risk my life with one.
    Prob same reason why a lot of people have migrated from the carbine length gas system to the middy gas system. carbine works 100% but Middy technically works a little better.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,177
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ryu_sekai View Post
    Trying to build a very soft shooting AR 15 by using low mass parts, I don't want to sacrifice reliability though.

    I am currently using a SYRAC adjustable gas block, M16 BCG, and CAR buffer. It has been tuned to lock back with tula ammo, however I usually shoot higher pressure rounds. This set up has been 100% after a couple of carbine classes.

    If I switch to a JP LO MOS BCG and tune the gas to lock back with tula again will there be any reliability issues? Any issues with the bolt not staying locked long enough because of the lighter weight behind it.?
    Sounds like a good setup.

    I would strongly suggest swapping out your receiver extension and buffer assembly for a VLTOR A5. You will probably notice the effect that you're looking for without reducing reliability.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    407
    Feedback Score
    44 (100%)
    Does high-reliability for you mean lock back on empty when shooting weak .223 (i.e. Tula)? Are reliable feeding and extraction as important to you? Honest questions here, no sarcasm.

    I think low-mass components make your AR more sensitive to variations in magazines, ammo, being dirty, amount of lube, environment, etc. In other words, the window of reliability shrinks. You can tune it to run fine under a certain set of conditions, but step outside of that and the gun is not as forgiving as a stock rifle from a reputable brand.

    Just for fun, my dream soft-shooting duty/defense build would have:
    17" midlength barrel
    Syrac GB
    LMT Enhanced BCG, carrier NiB coated
    Vltor A5 with A5H4 buffer
    Sprinco Green action spring
    GA Flash Comp or Proto Z-Comp

    I have no idea if it'll work... maybe I should build it and find out .

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Plano, TX
    Posts
    331
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by bruin View Post
    Does high-reliability for you mean lock back on empty when shooting weak .223 (i.e. Tula)? Are reliable feeding and extraction as important to you? Honest questions here, no sarcasm.

    I think low-mass components make your AR more sensitive to variations in magazines, ammo, being dirty, amount of lube, environment, etc. In other words, the window of reliability shrinks. You can tune it to run fine under a certain set of conditions, but step outside of that and the gun is not as forgiving as a stock rifle from a reputable brand.

    Just for fun, my dream soft-shooting duty/defense build would have:
    17" midlength barrel
    Syrac GB
    LMT Enhanced BCG, carrier NiB coated
    Vltor A5 with A5H4 buffer
    Sprinco Green action spring
    GA Flash Comp or Proto Z-Comp

    I have no idea if it'll work... maybe I should build it and find out .
    Reliability means no malfunctions with any type of ammo.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    293
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ryu_sekai View Post
    Reliability means no malfunctions with any type of ammo.
    Then you are going in the wrong direction. By "fine tuning" a low mass rig, you are by design, "de-tuning" the reliability to make the rifle function within a much narrower margin, but to perform BETTER in that narrow margin than a more reliable rifle would function in a larger margin...

    Confused or enlightened?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Plano, TX
    Posts
    331
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mall_Ninja View Post
    Then you are going in the wrong direction. By "fine tuning" a low mass rig, you are by design, "de-tuning" the reliability to make the rifle function within a much narrower margin, but to perform BETTER in that narrow margin than a more reliable rifle would function in a larger margin...

    Confused or enlightened?
    what is the narrower margin?

    Seems seems like people generally "tune" their rifle by changing out Buffers or BCGs, because they cant change the size of the gas port. If the gun is under gassed they make it more reliable by going with a lighter buffer. If its over gassed, they increase the buffer weight. seems like if you have a set weight for the buffer, BCG and tune the gas port, it should be reliable. Although people have said the lighter BCG makes it have less force to seat a round, but others say they run it in carbine classes and shoot the piss out of it and it works great.


    So far both my tuned rifles (11.5/16) have been 100% after a lot of shooting and no cleaning. If i used a lighter bcg, will that jack everything up?
    Last edited by ryu_sekai; 08-30-13 at 14:55.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •