Which is better the Blitzkrieg AR-15 9mm Hydraulic Buffer or the CTS 9mm AR-15 AKTIVE Buffer?

Haven't tried the CTS, but I have the Blitzkrieg and love it.  It's the only thing I really splurged on in my budget build.

Consider TACCOM's buffer. It cushions the bolt at both ends of travel. No oil to leak, no o-rings to wear out.

https://taccom3g.com/product/taccom-pcc-adjustable-buffer-system/

There is a lengthy discussion on the Brian Enos forum and video on Youtube explaining how it works.

A spring system (ex. MBX) is good for slowing down the bolt as it moves rearward, but once the bolt starts
to move forward, all of the energy stored in the spring(s) needs to go somewhere, and somewhere
is slamming the bolt into the hold-on device or into the breach face.

Am I wrong in this analysis?

Any experience with it?  I like the Taccom guys and they make some neat stuff.

That Tacom looks sweet, and cheaper than a hydraulic.

What barrel length are we talking about?

I have that 4" that I am thinking a one of those two buffers might help make slightly less snappy, but I don't know if it is worth it or needs a different spring either?

That's true but it's just the nature of straight blowback. It would be the same with a standard buffer setup as well. More important is you don't want the bolt bouncing off the barrel and giving you an out of battery detonation. A buffer with reciprocating weights will help prevent that from happening (which I can say from personal experience using a solid vs reciprocating weight buffer).

But as one previous poster mentioned, the taccom system cushions both the forward and rearward travel of the bolt. I own one myself and can attest it softens the recoil impulse rearward and forwards. No experience with the MBX but iirc it should do something similar. I just went with the taccom because it was cheaper

How well does the taccom system work with a suppressor?