Anyone running this in their suppressed SBR? I'm quickly becoming a fan of Griffin's products and for the price, this seems like a good choice. I'll also be using it with an adjustable gas block, FWIW.

If you have a adjustable gas system you would go the opposite way and run a lighter buffer system, like a carbine buffer or a buffer with all the weights removed, and turn down the gas system until it just functions. The Griffin is heavier and appears designed to compensate for being over-gassed, a like standard AR that is suppressed without the adjustable gas system.

This always gets me about DI shooters who seem to completely ignorant of the way their rifle works.  The AR-15 was designed to work with a 20" barrel, extruded powder, and a rifle-length gas system.  Since then, people have been trying to shoe-horn every possible configuration possible into an already finicky system.

A properly gassed 14.5 or 16" barrel will be OVERGASSED with a suppressor on it.  Add to that, the DI gun vents out the ejection port.  Unless you have a muffler on your ejection port, you're going to hear that.  On an overgassed gun, that'll be loud no matter what your buffer weighs.  The solution is NOT adjustable gas block, it's a piston setup.  I chose to run the Adams Arms because it is a closed gas system that you just flip over to suppressed when you mount your can.  What I mean by 'closed' gas system is that there is no vent hold.  Like the M1 Carbine, the piston just stops and excess pressure goes back into  the barrel.

You can also turn off the gas system for really quiet shooting or, as I use it, for subsonic loads.  Sure, they're not as heavy as 300 Blackout, but they're better than 22 lr!   I watch videos and hear about people fine-tuning the crap out of their DI guns with port size adjustments, adjustable gas blocks, buffer weights, different powders, adjustable gas tubes, etc.  Save all that time and invest that money into a piston setup.

The buffer does need some work, though.  The JP silent piston is a good addition to a suppressed gun.  That spring gets REALLY loud when the rest of the gun is quiet.

But C5 is right, I'm already mitigating the extra gas with an adjustable gas block.

I just couldn't tell if this buffer had an extra piston system that would provide a benefit.

It is common and very well proven in shooting sports to run lighter BCG and buffer systems and during the gas down as the ideal low recoil setup.  Products like the Switch block and WAR uppers are very well reviewed.  Micro MOA did extensive testing on suppressed and unsuppressed gas port sizes and published that information on their website.  I've observed on multiple well known barrel brands that adding a suppressor adds a significant amount of blow back, and turning down the gas system leads to less blow back, recoil, and perceived sound at the shooter's ear.  In my last range trip I turned a set screw restricted key to less than 1/4 turn from completely closed on a Suppressed 12.5" Compass Lake build, and it still functioned with a A5 buffer system with the A5H2 buffer.

If you have taken the time in your testing to turn the system down to the minimum required for a light buffer, then adding the heavier buffer should require you to open the gas system up more.  The Griffin buffer appears to be a better solution if you didn't have an adjustable gas system, where the heavier weight and the cushion would slow down the recoil a bit.

I'll be running the tuned MicroMOA barrel and block, so the heavier buffer is unnecessary. Thanks.

How about an AR firing 45ACP out of a 5" barrel with an adjustable DI gas block, dual springs and no buffer?
Because that works just fine too.

Just rereading your post. You don't believe in DI suppressed SBRs? I'm not following your post. But it could be me.

You make it sound like God or Santa Claus.  No, I own a couple of DI guns that I suppress.  That's not what I'm saying.  Imagine you have a bone-stock $599 special AR-15 and you screw or QD-mount a suppressor on it.  That gun will likely be significantly overgassed.  Now, you've got most of the gas popping out of the ejection port.  Here are the solutions:

1) Heavy Buffer: this was the OP's question.  Well, that just slows the opening of the bolt somewhat but still dumps almost as much gas out the ejection port through the gas relief ports in the side of the bolt.  Additionally, when you want to change back to shooting unsuppressed if your gas system is balanced with the can, it will be unbalanced without it and 'undergassed'.  You can combine a heavy buffer with an adjustable gas block.

2) Adjustable Gas Block:  so, you have a big port in the barrel and then some way of tuning the gas that STILL goes back into your receiver so that it works.  Optimally, you want two settings so that when it's suppressed, you have optimal gas, but not too much.  When it's unsuppressed, you will need a different setting.  I understand that Micro MOA did lots of testing and I've seen videos and read up on that.  But WHY did they have to do all of that testing?

3) Gas Piston System:  well, the reason they have to test DI port sizes is because it's finicky.  A gas piston (specifically the Adams Arms) is closed and easily adjustable.  I haven't seen a DI system that you just push a detent and turn a switch and it works.  Honestly, that may exist, but hear me out.  The piston retrofit kit costs LESS than the heavy buffer, adjustable gas block, and all of the testing that the end user has to do.  It also STILL vents gas out the ejection port.  It is also MUCH cleaner when running suppressed.  Still not a cake walk to clean, but easier.

Yeah, I'm an AA fan boy, but why not?  I think the main reason more people don't go that way is because so many people are Stoner-Zombies.  They think that because Gene Stoner invented it, then it was perfect.  Bullshit.  Stoner IMMEDIATELY turned away from direct impingement and his future guns (the AR-16 and Stoner 62) were both piston guns.  Ever heard of the AR-16?  The counter-argument, of course, is that DI worked for my father and his father and GLOCK blah-blah-blah.  I understand.  It sorta works most of the time, but it sucks with a suppressor.  You can fine-tune it to work with your particular can, your ammo, etc. but that involves modifying the rifle.  If you're modifying it, then the piston system solves all of your problems in one fail swoop.  Is it the end-all and be-all?  No.  There are some problems, but not nearly as many as you get running DI suppressed.

Would I go back to DI?  Yeah, if there were a self-compensating system like the old M-14 White-patent gas expansion and cutoff system.  Even adjustable DI blocks currently are either infinitely adjustable or limit you to two ports that you have to 'tune.'  I have had to do no such thing with my AA guns.

A piston system still vents gas (noise), just not at the ejection port. From Adams Arms YouTube video:



It sounds like you prefer a gas piston system, which is fine; I haven't been convinced enough to own one yet.

But I do own a couple of Govnahs.

Yeah, I've seen that video.  They paid too much for the animation and are missing one of the best selling points.  It's a closed system, like the M1 Carbine.

-MicroMOA Gov'nah
-Noveske Switchblock
-JP
-Fulton
-Innovative Arms W.A.R. upper

Just because you like what you have doesn't mean that it's the only viable option.
You're overthinking the complexity of getting a DI rifle to run with and without a suppressor.
You can throw in a RCA adjustable gas key for $40, tune it to just lock back unsuppressed, and it will run just fine with any combination and not be violently overgassed.

Even a PERFECTLY tuned DI system will still pop out the ejection port.  The Adams Arms won't.  As stated earlier, I've looked into them.  I'm not ignorant, just I dismissed them all for one reason or another.  The Govnah was rejected based on the following picture.  This just means, "TONS AND TONS OF TUNING" to me!

I think you missed the manufacturers post above. I didn't have to tune anything. I picked a plate with preset holes that matched my barrel and never looked back.

You make assumptions on something you've never used and excuses (animation?) for the products you do use. It's difficult to take your statements seriously.

Okay, so I drop $150 on this and solve one of my problems.  They have 11 different plates to choose from.  Which one do I choose?  Apparently, that's not enough because some are 'custom' where you get to drill your own hole.  If I knew which of the 11 blocks I needed and successfully got that installed on a handguard specifically designed for it, I've still got port pop.  Yep.  Dude, I like the MicroMoa and think it's the BEST option for suppressing a DI gun... but why suppress a DI gun when you can spend a bit more and get a conversion kit from Adams Arms.  You can use the best polish on the market, but if you're polishing a DI gun, you're polishing a turd.  That doesn't mean that the Gov'nah is a bad product, only that it is an orgy of evidence that DI is the wrong way to go for rifles in general.  Nothing personal.  No, I'm not dense.  I've done my research for decades and adjustable gas blocks are ALL limited by the problems that they are designed to solve.

I've ranted about this before and, again, I don't intend anything to be personal.  I have a problem with the DI system.  Is it the worst system in the world?  YES!  Just because everybody's using it, does not mean it's good.  Liken it to a carburetor vs. a fuel injection.  When everybody was running carbs and I was running my 71 VW Squareback with fuel injection, it felt the same way.  Carbs are GREAT!  Why would you ever want fuel injection?  Let me ask you this, if the M16 was a piston gun and nobody had ever heard of direct impingement, do you think that anybody would EVER give DI the time of day?  That'd be a hard sell, even a kick-butt adjustable gas block.

I've tried to solve it myself, before.  In the 90's, I bought a few spare gas tubes and started splicing in valves and set screws.  Couldn't keep them tight so I went with bushings in a drilled-out sight tower.  Impossible to adjust without pulling the sight tower off every time, but I could cut down on gas at least. Got the idea from some guy doing the same thing with the Mini-14.  I have a box somewhere in the garage with the leavings, because I gave up on it.  Why?  Because I was polishing a turd.  I don't have a full-auto and when I was doing this, there was no way of judging carrier velocity other than reducing the size of the gas port and waiting till the bolt didn't lock back.  Was working basically like you would an FAL.

I'm not perfect, but if I could get one cheap, I'd test it and toss it back on EE if I didn't like it.  For my money, I wanted one that worked out of the blocks with no carrier port pop.

Yes, I missed his post.  I'm actually one of the 44 subscribers to his youtube channel and have been subscribed for a while.  

Again, nothing personal to him, you or ANYBODY else.  I am not making excuses, the animation shows gas venting forward.  None vents forward on my gun because it's not designed to.  The animation is wrong.  Done!  Never used the MicroMoa, but again, I've followed the product and as I told the manufacturer, I rejected the idea because it looked like a complicated half-solution to the problem at hand.  The best solution?  Possibly.  Have you ever tried the Adams Arms?  I'd run my gun next to yours... tuned ANY WAY YOU WANT IT, and I'd guarantee that mine would be quieter at the ear.  It's just physics.  The DI gun... ANY DIRECT IMPINGEMENT GUN... will blow its excess gas out the vent holes in the side of the bolt carrier and out the ejection port.  That pop, added to the pop from the chamber, gives you noise and gas blowback that you just don't get with the AA.

Again, nothing personal.  If all guns were DI guns, I'd probably run the MicroMOA.  Because they aren't, I don't.

Yes, I do understand that the bolt acts as a piston and the carrier acts as a cylinder.  This is the internet.  When you disagree with somebody, you call them ignorant, a moron, etc so I'm used to it and let it slide.  Fact is, I do happen to know a shit-ton about these things, but my experiences and opinions differ.  I can understand people saying, you don't agree just 'cuz you don't know.  That's like John Hinkley Jr. saying, "Jodi Foster doesn't like me because she doesn't know who I am."  Yes, I get it.  I understand the advantages.  I just weighed the advantages and found that the disadvantages outweighed the advantages.  If DI were so good, why is it used on only one gun?  Popular, yes, but why isn't everybody using it?

So the #2 most popular combat carbine/rifle in the last 50 years isn't everybody.  It's just a whole lot of people.
The rest are using AKs and FALs.

Shoe-horn? Finicky? Shouldn't the plethora of available configurations show just how versatile the AR-15 operating system is? The fact that a ton of people have barrels from 7.5" to 24" in every caliber known to man tells you that it's finicky?

Quit trying to shoe-horn a piston into DI guns.

No, actually, I can.  As I told somebody else, I am one of your 44 subscribers and have been for a while.  I like the idea and it's a very elegant solution to the problem.  That said, it's still a problem that was SCREAMING for a solution but if that solution means that I have to 'tune' the plate to my rifle, then I'm not down with that.  11 plates?  I don't know what your advertising model is, but that sounds to me like I'm going to be tuning it.  Is it a drop-in solution?

Your experiences are different than mine.  I don't think "snappy" would be the way I describe my recoil experience and I get ZERO crap to the face from the gas system.  Still get some ejection port blowback from the back pressure of the suppressor, but not bad.


Okay, so he was running 5.45 on an 8.5" barrel.  Also, based on the date, the kit was probably from around 2011.  I have newer kits and have not had any issues.  I do not own any of the older kits, but I have read of a few people having problems with the 5.45 guns as well as bent op rods and broken parts.  I have also read the reports of the TCC about how bad the DI system was even with the whole weight of Gene Stoner, Colt, and the US Government behind it trying to fix it.  Even John Browning's designs had gremlins.

I will concede that point, if you will concede that the SAR-21 and ULTIMAX are smoother still than a DI Stoner.  I've shot the ULTIMAX and there is no equal on the market today.  Yes, in-line pistons are an absolutely brilliant idea.  There will be no argument from me on that point... but I'll still bitch about cleaning the gun afterwards.  The real reason that in-line recoil works is because they tuned the weight of the buffer system to work with a SINGLE LOAD of extruded powder.  Switching powders meant switching buffers, but that lesson was learned at the cost of blood from unreliable guns in Vietnam.  Why do I bring that up?  Because a DI system AMPLIFIES differences in bullet weight and powder charge.  Even the Army had to play with carrier weights to get everything working right, and they're only dealing with one loading.  The only reason this gun works at all today is because there were DECADES of fine tuning that went into the system.  It's still finicky.


I'm aware that it is customary to insult people during arguments on the internet, but I'll refrain from doing so.  Yes, sir, I do know that short-stroke tappet pistons were available when Stoner was designing the AR-10.  I believe you should be aware that David Marshall Williams and the US Government held the patents on the short-stroke tappet piston.  You therefore could not make a gun at that time with a piston that violated the Winchester/Carbine Williams/US government patents.  The only real competitor to the AR-15 at the time was a tappet system... basically a souped-up M1 Carbine.   You know about that rifle, right?  It also had a tappet system using Williams' patented short-stroke piston. Only Winchester was legally able to do that and they did.  So, to answer your question: yes it was around, but no, Stoner could not legally use it.  I'll assume that was your point even though you didn't come out and say, "why didn't Stoner use the short-stroke piston if it was so good?".  Why?  It was patented.


Okay, I believe this is a bad analogy and missing some crucial info.  First, take stuff that was a solid a millisecond earlier but you heated up QUICKLY.  Now, take that same stuff, now a gas, and blow it down a tiny tube into a cylinder.  All the solids combustion remanants that WERE in a gas form will start to condense.  I cannot concede your point because the reality is you can SEE, feel, touch, and taste the fouling on the bolt of a DI gun.  That's the cloud of smoke coming out the side of the gun, out the ejection port, out the end of the muzzle, etc.  You cannot be seriously be arguing that it is BETTER to shit where you eat, only that it's not ALL bad that this happens.

When I was younger, I owned a 180-series Mini-14 and my Father had a CAR-15.  I loved the CAR.  By that age, my dad was tired of cleaning his guns and taught me how to clean.  So, every range session we'd come home and I'd clean the CAR meticulously.  Dad's a Korean war vet and can tell you how bad shit can get when you don't clean the BAR.  Anyway, first session out with the Mini-14 and I asked my dad how to disassemble and clean the gun.  His response was something to the effect of, "you don't have to."  Why?  Because the combustion gasses were condensing in the handguard, the piston was self-cleaning, and the gas blown back into the receiver area didn't effect the operation of the gun one bit.  He was right.  Stoner's solution was to put a port cover and completely enclose the bolt to keep gunk OUT, but then replace it with blowing gunk INTO the receiver.  I've cleaned a shit-ton of AR-15's in my time and my daughters have probably got more bench time cleaning the AR-15 than a retired Marine.


Yes, and I wear hearing protection when I run any centerfire rifle suppressed.  But that's not the point.  The point is that it IS louder and I can tell the difference.  If you cannot, then your tolerance for such things might be higher than mine.

Summary so far:
1) DI guns are smoother than traditional piston systems - point conceded but only if you concede that they aren't as smooth as a balanced recoil system
2) Regulating the gas to a DI gun is a great idea - point conceded with the condition that your gun is still harder to clean and and less reliable than a brute-force piston gun (we'll say AK-74 in this case since you obviously have a beef with AA)
3) The MicroMOA is a well-designed, elegant solution to regulating gas to a DI gun - point conceded and if my finances would allow, I'd review it and post it on my YouTube channel.
4) DI guns are dirty and require more cleaning than piston guns - I assume you concede that point

So where we disagree:
1) The Adams Arms is a closed gas system - you don't agree, but I have three and they are closed
2) AA guns are unreliable - not mine
3) AA repair parts are expensive - not sure where you got that from, but every instance I've heard of, they were FREE.
4) Gas vent pop is not really that bad - you can say that all you want and that is your subjective opinion, but objectively it is greater
5) Gas venting out the side of the bolt carrier is better than gas venting on the Adams Arms - no way in hell.  As said earlier, but not conceded, the AA system is CLOSED.  It leaks gas, but does not VENT gas.  Excess gas is returned to the bore like an M1 Carbine.
6) Junk flies back in your face when shooting the AA system -  not mine.
7) The MicroMOA is not complicated - well, why do you have 11 different plate styles?  Really, before I bought my second and third AA conversion kit, I had an 11.5" and a 14.5" barreled upper.  Since my 7.5" was running fine with the AA, my first option was the AA, but I figured I could save $200 or so by going with the MicroMOA for one or both of those guns.   So what do I have to get to run my carbine-length gas systems with those barrel lengths, JP silent spring, M16 bolt carrier, 30 caliber YHM titanium can, and handloaded 68 grain BTHP bullets?  Maybe I'm an idiot, but I could not figure it out.  Tell me, and I might run some tests.  Otherwise, whether it's intended or not, I will assume from the wide array of choices that you have to buy the right plate and gas block plus have the right hole drilled in your barrel to tune the gun.  I'm done with tuning.  I don't like it.  I load for accuracy in my 16" DI carbine and then test for accuracy and function in the other guns.  My youngest just started pre-med, so I'm a little strapped for cash now, but I wouldn't mind giving the Govnah a try, just might be a few years.  In the meantime, I'll be happy as pie running my reliable, unbent, gas blowback reducing, low port pop, easy to clean AA guns.

Sorry for the hijack.  My original intent was to say that you don't need all those bandaids.  The DI was the cause of the problems.  I'm quick to the trigger to argue the relative merits of the DI system vs. a piston gun.

I'll take up that argument any day on the general discussion, but I think that debate is beyond the realm of the armory. Bottom line is that popularity does not mean superiority.  Kim Kardashian is popular.  Case in point.

The fact that products like heavyweight buffers, adjustable gas blocks, and piston retrofit systems is an ORGY of evidence to refute your point.  Having built my share of custom guns for customers and test fired all of them, I'll just disagree.


There is no try and no need to.  My piston kits were plug and play compared to tuning a DI gun, but good try.

My DI guns worked fine from day one, suppressed or unsuppressed. You build "custom" guns, but you're against tuning things?

I don't understand where you're coming from. DI guns work great. They work even better when you have the barrel length, gas port, buffer weight, etc. working in perfect harmony. A few thousand rounds through my 10.5" suppressed without cleaning it will back that up.

Badger, you prefer piston guns. Great. But your reasoning and comprehension skills in this thread are lacking.

Since I'm the OP, I'm declaring piston guns null and void in this discussion.

LOL, just thwarting the hijack, eh?  My comprehension skills are just fine.  I may not be able to eloquently present my case and I am just fine with people disagreeing, but this stuff is crystal clear to me.

I'm against HAVING to tune something.  If you read through any of what I said, I'll restate that it's the difference between a carburetor and fuel injection.

As stated earlier the SAR-21 and the ULTIMAX... neither of which can be had on the civilian market.


No.  Do you?  And then you mention the 416 that vents out the front.  Good gun, but not optimal to suppress.



There you go talking about full-auto.  I would think that since we're in a suppressor forum, we'd talk about suppressed.  Which is better for suppressing?  Govnah plates have, at the most, three settings and you can replace them to tune it to your particular barrel length, load, etc, whatever.  So, optimally, we want one for unsuppressed, one for suppressed, and one for either 'emergency' or gas cutoff depending on how you operate.  I need the gas cutoff and would prefer the unsuppressed to be overgassed and act also as an emergency because, frankly, I want to shoot suppressed most of the time so unsuppressed WILL BE emergency.


Again with the, "Everybody else is using it" fallacy.  Yes, millions of people are shooting AR's... but that doesn't mean it is not without its flaws.  You have a product which DIRECTLY ADDRESSES one of those problems so you've conclusively conceded that point.  I'm with you.  Why are there products like yours and the dozen or so other adjustable gas systems on the market as well as the tens of gas piston retrofits.  If the DI system was perfect and I'm just an outlier, there would be nothing to discuss and no piston retrofits or adjustable gas blocks.  The fact that there are a PLETORA of those on the market MEANS something.

I'll let it go.  If I do a positive review, I'll eat the crow in the review and post it in this forum.

Sorry but I just don't think you are going to get it. I have run 5 different barrel lengths, and 3 different gas systems lengths using the the govnah gas blocks, suppressed and unsuppressed, and have only used 1 plate, and if pushing the plate from 1 postion to the other postion is "tuning" it is not for you. And I also own an AA kit, and have alot more tuning just installing it, before I started playing with buffers to try and get it to shoot like my other "DI" guns...

- you can have the last word.

I have the Govnah, I used to have the AA Piston Kit.

I hated the piston kit. I could not fine tune it, it was still overgassed with only 5 options, one of them being closed. It was heavy as hell. There is not that much difference with running suppressed or unsuppressed in terms of a dirty AR IMO.

The Govnah gives me the precise amount of gas I want. Giving my 4 o clock ejection when running suppressed and 4 o clock ejection running unsuppressed just by moving the plate over. I used to have the SLR Sentry 7, that thing gummed up and the adjustment screw broke, making me lose adjustability. For suppressed guns, the Govnah is the ultimate gas block.

Regulating the gas, slows down the carrier, in turn, making buffer weights kind of pointless. Imaging tossing a tennis ball at the ceiling. If you get it as close as you can to the top without bouncing, it is in the air more time. If you toss it up quickly, let it bounce, and come back at you, there is less time. So this ensures the mag stack is to the top, proper ejection, less wear, less recoil, etc. Keep in mind,  buffer weights still might be needed for the weights to bounce and give it that extra push if your AR is not broken in or really dirty.

That one guy from battle field las vegas said all of his piston systems failed and broke. It's adding more parts when it's not needed. Stick with DI and stick with the Govnah for suppressed.