Theoretical advantage of A5 buffer system?

[Disciple]

What is the theoretical advantage of the A5 buffer system over a carbine buffer system with a flat-wire spring?

Use of flat-wire allows for a longer spring with a lower spring constant which should be able to match the A5 force curve unless the latter used an even longer flat-wire spring.

The A5 buffer itself is longer, uses four weights instead of three, and includes a bias spring. Perhaps having more pieces provides an improved dead-blow effect even when the mass is similar, e.g. H2 and A5H1. I suppose the bias spring makes the system more consistent, e.g. between muzzle up and down, but does it do more? Does the longer body itself contribute to smoother cycling, such as by being less prone to pitch or yaw?

[markm]

The flat wire spring variable throws me for a loop. I've no idea what that is/does.

The A5 notion is that you get the Rifle buffer weight/spring with it's longer compression position in an RE almost as short as the carbine.

[Disciple]

A flat wire spring can provide the "longer compression position" (lower spring constant, flatter force curve) of a standard rifle spring in less space, i.e. a carbine extension. I think there's more to the A5 than that however. If it were merely mass and spring constant it should be possible to duplicate that (the common A5 setup) with an H3 and the right strength of flat-wire spring.

[markm]

A flat wire spring can provide the "longer compression position" (lower spring constant, flatter force curve) of a standard rifle spring in less space, i.e. a carbine extension. I think there's more to the A5 than that however. If it were merely mass and spring constant it should be possible to duplicate that (the common A5 setup) with an H3 and the right strength of flat-wire spring.

Rsilvers best duplicated the A5 or Rifle system with the carbine standard spring and H2 buffer. I forget his measurements, but the flat spring wasn't part of his testing. I forget exactly how close it matched the A5/rifle.

[Disciple]

Clint, I shall read more.

corey4, do you use the standard length Tubb spring?

markm, is that on this forum?

[markm]

markm, is that on this forum?

Yes, sir. It's a few years back. "rsilvers" was the guy (formerly of Advanced Armament)

[corey4]

Clint, I shall read more.

corey4, do you use the standard length Tubb spring?

markm, is that on this forum?

i use the ar15 version: http://www.davidtubb.com/ar15-bufferspring and i use the 308 version for my 308s.

[davidjinks]

Theoretically it’s supposed to give you less felt recoil ala rifle type buffer system.

Just as markm stated below.

What is the theoretical advantage of the A5 buffer system over a carbine buffer system with a flat-wire spring?

Use of flat-wire allows for a longer spring with a lower spring constant which should be able to match the A5 force curve unless the latter used an even longer flat-wire spring.

The A5 buffer itself is longer, uses four weights instead of three, and includes a bias spring. Perhaps having more pieces provides an improved dead-blow effect even when the mass is similar, e.g. H2 and A5H1. I suppose the bias spring makes the system more consistent, e.g. between muzzle up and down, but does it do more? Does the longer body itself contribute to smoother cycling, such as by being less prone to pitch or yaw?

I never used the flat wire springs. But the A5H2 I used was pretty meh.

The flat wire spring variable throws me for a loop. I've no idea what that is/does.

The A5 notion is that you get the Rifle buffer weight/spring with it's longer compression position in an RE almost as short as the carbine.

This is what I currently use in all of my non-SBR rifles and they work well. For the SBR’s, they get the H3.

Rsilvers best duplicated the A5 or Rifle system with the carbine standard spring and H2 buffer. I forget his measurements, but the flat spring wasn't part of his testing. I forget exactly how close it matched the A5/rifle.

[Disciple]

BufordTJustice, I read your entire thread about the A5 and LMT e-carrier and I have a question. Rather than necro-post I'll ask here. With the A5H4 and a standard rifle spring, and with the carbine aimed straight up, does it still easily strip the first round from a magazine when released with the BHO?

[Clint]

You've got the right idea.

There are however at least two mega threads covering the A5 system here and a quick search should reveal a goldmine of information on it.

The A5 buffer itself is longer, uses four weights instead of three, and includes a bias spring. Perhaps having more pieces provides an improved dead-blow effect even when the mass is similar, e.g. H2 and A5H1. I suppose the bias spring makes the system more consistent, e.g. between muzzle up and down, but does it do more? Does the longer body itself contribute to smoother cycling, such as by being less prone to pitch or yaw?