Page 9 of 23 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 229

Thread: Switch to A5 System?

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    2,047
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by skullworks View Post
    I don't know if it would be feasible to use a carbine buffer with a rifle spring in an A5-tube?
    Does the CAR buffer allow the bolt carrier to extend too far into the receiver extension?

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Malmo, Sweden
    Posts
    678
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by orionz06 View Post
    Does the CAR buffer allow the bolt carrier to extend too far into the receiver extension?
    In an A5-tube, yes it could. I would hazard to think that the A5 buffer was designed to fit the A5-tube, and not the other way around. So, if you want a longer tube then you need a longer buffer to be on the safe side of the equation.

    Also, another (hypothetical?) factor that hasn't been addressed is the fact that with a longer buffer you also have more surface area for the buffer spring to friction against during compression - which also slows down the speed of the buffer. Granted, I'm not smart enough to weigh in on how much that would be a factor - but it is a factor.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,216
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by dpaqu View Post
    If the harmonics of the spring don't play a factor then it sounds like we have been sold some snake oil by vltor.
    I'm doubtful that it's snake oil. I'd guess that the Marine Corps knows a little bit about the M16 rifle.
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,216
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by skullworks View Post
    I don't know if it would be feasible to use a carbine buffer with a rifle spring in an A5-tube?
    Definitely not.
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,216
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by skullworks View Post
    Also, another (hypothetical?) factor that hasn't been addressed is the fact that with a longer buffer you also have more surface area for the buffer spring to friction against during compression - which also slows down the speed of the buffer.
    That's only an issue with crappy REs that aren't mirror smooth internally.
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    2,047
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    The springs are different, the rates, original length, coil count, start force, and compressed force. That amounts to a decent difference. Compare it to an H2 with a carbine spring and there is less of a difference, but it is still there. The relevance of that difference is in the eyes of the buyer.

    In the grand scheme of things most people are best served selling their A5 and buying ammo to train with, but they are not buying snake oil.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,216
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by orionz06 View Post
    The springs are different, the rates, original length, coil count, start force, and compressed force. That amounts to a decent difference. Compare it to an H2 with a carbine spring and there is less of a difference, but it is still there. The relevance of that difference is in the eyes of the buyer.

    In the grand scheme of things most people are best served selling their A5 and buying ammo to train with, but they are not buying snake oil.
    Silvers is saying the above red is THE SAME for carbine if I'm reading him right.

    And I don't think I've read a single A5 user's reply that said they didn't feel an improvement in cycle smoothness.... how ever subjective that may be.
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    2,047
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rsilvers View Post
    Here is spring data I have...

    M16 rifle:

    When at rest in the rifle, it is 8.19 inches long and 5.8 lbs of force.
    When at full recoil, it is 4.415 inches long and 10.9 lbs of force.
    The stress as a percentage of material tensile strength is 22% (anything 45% or under is good).

    Note that the A5 may compress the spring more than a rifle buffer - which may raise the stress equal to or higher than a carbine spring in a carbine tube. I think I did this calculation, but did not save the results.

    The M4 spring model I have is:
    5.960 lbs at rest (when 6.894 inches long).
    12 lbs at 3 inches long (the shortest the buffer allows it to get).
    The stress at full recoil is 24% - also very low.
    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    Silvers is saying the above red is THE SAME for carbine if I'm reading him right.
    He listed the rifle specs, not the A5. The rifle forces are different, the A5 might be a little more different. Without someone who has the means to measure the right springs in each gun with each RE we wont know exactly but it is safe to say the A5 is still different.


    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    And I don't think I've read a single A5 user's reply that said they didn't feel an improvement in cycle smoothness.... how ever subjective that may be.
    I am not on an infinite budget and would rather shoot than buy gadgets so I do not know, but people I trust have been able to blindly distinguish the differences between guns with A5's and ones without.

  9. #89
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,095
    Feedback Score
    7 (89%)
    Quote Originally Posted by markm View Post
    Silvers is saying the above red is THE SAME for carbine if I'm reading him right.

    And I don't think I've read a single A5 user's reply that said they didn't feel an improvement in cycle smoothness.... how ever subjective that may be.
    i shot a quick email to VLTOR and they said the stock system went through testing with the USMC, USSOCOM both of which found that it increased reliability over the carbine stock, the USMC found it was more reliable than the rifle stock.

    they also pointed out that it gives a consistent carrier velocity, as well as increased controllability and reduced recoil.

    personally having come from a 14.5" BCM using a carbine stock to now having a lower with the A5 i can tell a reduction in recoil as well as an increase in controllability using all my uppers
    Last edited by sinlessorrow; 01-04-12 at 10:52.

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    27,216
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by orionz06 View Post
    I am not on an infinite budget and would rather shoot than buy gadgets so I do not know, but people I trust have been able to blindly distinguish the differences between guns with A5's and ones without.
    Same here. That said, I did buy an A5 out of my pocket for full retail.

    When replacing an H3 carbine buffer system, I couldn't feel a difference. On lighter carbine buffers, the cyclic rate change is huge.
    "You people have too much time on your hands." - scottryan

Page 9 of 23 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... 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
  •