Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 55

Thread: Am I "over-buffered"????? H2 Buffers...

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    599
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I have no Idea what a 6920 is.
    http://colt.com/law/lecarbine.asp

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by sgtrock82 View Post
    I have had issue related to this topic so i will ask about it. I have a BM patrolmans carbine, with roughly around 350 rnds through it. Being it is winter, tax return time I decided to try, at the recomendations here an ISMI spring and H2 buffer. It would fully function only with American eagle 55grn. .223, korean 55grn 5.56, and ADCOM 62grn 5.56. The Wolf 55grn .223, and brit. 62 grn 5.56 would not. I changed the buffer back to carbine weight, same results. I changed to standard spring and H2 buffer, ran like a top. Reading the above maybe i will wait and try ismi spring again in a few k rounds. But was also curious as to other possibilities. Temperature, it was in the teens when i did this. May be lube gummed up. I have grease on buffer spring and kel-lube on rest. also noted that BM non mil spec receiver extension is longer than standard mil spec. Could this dimension alter performance of the spring?


    To be honest, the ammo you listed reads like the who's who of underpowered ammo with Wolf being the worst.

    C4

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Skintop911 View Post
    In a couple of batches of RRA Gov Carbines and Colt M4s, H2 buffers became necessary to prevent malfunctions with certain loads in burst and automatic fire. In semi-auto, any buffer worked fine.

    IMHO, I don't find that there's a substantial enough difference in felt recoil, or other variable, to warrant a change to the H, H2, or greater unless there's a functional issue.

    There is a point of diminishing return when you increase the mass of the buffer (and bolt carrier), and/or the resistance of the action spring. You can get too close to the functional threshold of the gun in a hurry without careful balancing of the components. Add now the economy/import/junk ammo so many use, and there's a recipe that's anything but "improvement."

    I agree. You have to pay attention to what ammo your using and use the proper buffer.

    I ONLY run M855 so my H3 buffer and ISMI spring runs great.


    C4

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    305
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Having a gun that will only run on a single type of ammo that may or may not be available to me when the SHTF is sort of like having an automobile that won't run on pump gasoline.

    Who says I'm going to fight with my own ammo? (Analogous to Clint Smith: "Who says you're going to fight with your own gun?").

    If I KNEW that I would always have a ready supply of Mk262 or 5.56 TAP, and if I knew that those I might be swapping mags with when Murphy comes calling would ONLY have the same ammo, then I might be comfortable knowing that my rifle would not work with "the who's who of underpowered ammo."

    It baffles me why someone would spend hard-earned dollars on a precision barrel and then shoot ONLY SS109 bullets through it.

    I believe that there is probably a certain degree of buffer/spring envy that gets promoted by these forums. "My carbine must be inferior; I don't have an H/H2/H3/9mm buffer. While I'm at it, I might as well replace that cheap spring. I just know that it's shrinking."

    What most fail to realize is that all of the components work together as a system that must be in balance in order to ensure reliable function. Changing the spring RATE, buffer mass, carrier mass, friction due to gas ring(s), friction due to lube, ammo pressure, gas port diameter (modification or erosion) and any of a host of other factors can have a direct influence on the delicate balance.

    Notice that I said "spring RATE". Changing the spring rate (e.g., force required to compress a coil spring a specific distance) changes the system balance. I have no issue with using superior spring materials from a fatigue (spring life) standpoint. The concern I have is that many may not understand that all available springs are likely NOT providing the same spring rate.

    Ever put shorter/stiffer springs on a car? Ever install "sport-tuned" shocks/struts/dampers? Ever switch to low-profile tires? Ever add a significant amount of weight/load on a truck? Did these things affect the ride/handling? These are crude analogies to how changing carbine components might affect function (and they will affect function).
    Aubrey<><

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Aubrey View Post
    Having a gun that will only run on a single type of ammo that may or may not be available to me when the SHTF is sort of like having an automobile that won't run on pump gasoline.

    Who says I'm going to fight with my own ammo? (Analogous to Clint Smith: "Who says you're going to fight with your own gun?").

    If I KNEW that I would always have a ready supply of Mk262 or 5.56 TAP, and if I knew that those I might be swapping mags with when Murphy comes calling would ONLY have the same ammo, then I might be comfortable knowing that my rifle would not work with "the who's who of underpowered ammo."

    It baffles me why someone would spend hard-earned dollars on a precision barrel and then shoot ONLY SS109 bullets through it.

    I believe that there is probably a certain degree of buffer/spring envy that gets promoted by these forums. "My carbine must be inferior; I don't have an H/H2/H3/9mm buffer. While I'm at it, I might as well replace that cheap spring. I just know that it's shrinking."

    What most fail to realize is that all of the components work together as a system that must be in balance in order to ensure reliable function. Changing the spring RATE, buffer mass, carrier mass, friction due to gas ring(s), friction due to lube, ammo pressure, gas port diameter (modification or erosion) and any of a host of other factors can have a direct influence on the delicate balance.

    Notice that I said "spring RATE". Changing the spring rate (e.g., force required to compress a coil spring a specific distance) changes the system balance. I have no issue with using superior spring materials from a fatigue (spring life) standpoint. The concern I have is that many may not understand that all available springs are likely NOT providing the same spring rate.

    Ever put shorter/stiffer springs on a car? Ever install "sport-tuned" shocks/struts/dampers? Ever switch to low-profile tires? Ever add a significant amount of weight/load on a truck? Did these things affect the ride/handling? These are crude analogies to how changing carbine components might affect function (and they will affect function).
    I agree. That is why I shoot all my weapons with TAP, BH, XM193 and Federal. All work well for me.

    You would be amazed how well M855 will shoot out of a Noveske barrel.

    I don't follow the spring/buffer envy comment. We are all here to try and build the most accurate/reliable weapons. This takes trying various things to find out what works and what doesn't. I am kind of happy to see people trying different things (buffers and springs) instead of just accepting the norm.

    I personally am against extra power springs in both the extractor and the buffer. I do however like springs with longer life (less likely to cause a malfunction due to loss of tension).

    I was speaking with the guys at Tubbs that other day about spring life. They explained to me that a normal SS buffer spring is at about 90% of its useful life right out of the gate.



    C4
    Last edited by C4IGrant; 02-27-07 at 13:30.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    NoVa
    Posts
    2,906
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    FWIW the Canadian Forces when switching to the C7A2 (20" bbl and telestock) ran testing to see which buffer was the best for NATO ammo in various barrel lengths (many units are issues two uppers of different barrel lengths - some three - and inside CANSOFCOM 6+)
    The H2 buffer was found to cycle the most reliably throught the NATO 5k testing program in the following lengths 10" (flat 10 not 10.3 or 10.5) 10.5, 11.5, 14.5, 16, 20, than the other weights.

    As a result Canada standardized the H2 buffer for all telestock equipt gun in conventional force inventory.


    (I've seen H2's used in 4"-6" M16FOW based PDW's as well)


    I predominately use H2 buffers in all my guns --

    IF the end of the world happens -- at least they will work with M855/SS109 stuff
    Kevin S. Boland
    Manager, Federal Sales
    FN America, LLC
    Office: 703.288.3500 x181 | Mobile: 407-451-4544 | Fax: 703.288.4505
    www.fnhusa.com

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinB View Post
    FWIW the Canadian Forces when switching to the C7A2 (20" bbl and telestock) ran testing to see which buffer was the best for NATO ammo in various barrel lengths (many units are issues two uppers of different barrel lengths - some three - and inside CANSOFCOM 6+)
    The H2 buffer was found to cycle the most reliably throught the NATO 5k testing program in the following lengths 10" (flat 10 not 10.3 or 10.5) 10.5, 11.5, 14.5, 16, 20, than the other weights.

    As a result Canada standardized the H2 buffer for all telestock equipt gun in conventional force inventory.


    (I've seen H2's used in 4"-6" M16FOW based PDW's as well)


    I predominately use H2 buffers in all my guns --

    IF the end of the world happens -- at least they will work with M855/SS109 stuff
    Interesting Kevin. It appears that everyone has switched to the H2 buffers.


    C4

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NoVA
    Posts
    10,780
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Brownells has standard power chrome silicon springs for carbine and rifle length in 3pks for less than $12 for people who want to use an H2 and an ISMI is too powerful.

    Brownells
    078-000-087 M4 Recoil Spring (CS), 3-Pak $11.76
    078-000-102 AR-15 A2 Action Spring (CS), 3-Pak $11.76

    They have extractor and ejector springs in chrome silicon as well.
    Chief Armorer for Elite Shooting Sports in Manassas VA
    Chief Armorer for Corp Arms (FFL 07-08/SOT 02)

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    404
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinB View Post
    IF the end of the world happens -- at least they will work with M855/SS109 stuff
    My version of hell: Not having a neverending supply of Mk262 and having to defile my weapon with M193 & M855
    Life is too short to deal with Blonde women, or carbine barrels over 10.5 inches

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,177
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by LukeMacGillie View Post
    My version of hell: Not having a neverending supply of Mk262 and having to defile my weapon with M193 & M855
    **** you, ya prick....rub it in, why don'tcha?

















Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •