Armory Sponsor
Joined:
Jun 2023
Posts:
86
EE: 0% (0)
OK, USA
Posted: 4/15/2024 2:40:41 PM EDT
| It is my understanding that the buffer weight has an effect on the rpm since heavier weights cause the rifle to take longer to cycle. I am getting a SP1 conversion soon and would like to save costs on ammo (really funny that I'm penny pinching after buying a 25k-30k gun) and increase controllability. What are y'all experience with different buffer weights? Is there a major difference between carbine and H4? How about weights that are one step from each other like H1 vs H2? Thanks in advance. |
|
Look at this thread just a few down the page: https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/M16-Ultimax-/23-544953/ Bunch of info on my site: https://c3junkie.com/?page_id=164 Kinda scattered though. This is also relevant with some cylic rate info as well: https://c3junkie.com/?page_id=977 |
Joined:
Jun 2023
Posts:
87
EE: 0% (0)
OK, USA
|
Originally Posted By amphibian: Look at this thread just a few down the page: https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/M16-Ultimax-/23-544953/ Bunch of info on my site: https://c3junkie.com/?page_id=164 Kinda scattered though. This is also relevant with some cylic rate info as well: https://c3junkie.com/?page_id=977 Sweet, thanks! |
|
Originally Posted By TonyRumore: There are also the two-piece buffers, but I have never tested them as far as cyclic rate goes. However I do know, they eliminate bolt carrier bounce completely. Tony https://i.imgur.com/XGdbwIl.jpg I've ran M16 9mm ROF tests on a number of buffers. For the type of buffer pictured (two-piece steel 9mm mechanical, 5.6 oz.); using a Colt M16A; Colt 16 in. 9mm ‘pencil’ barrel installed in Gibbz Arms G9 side charge upper receiver; 9mm, ramped, direct blowback bolt carrier group (15.6 oz.); standard, mil spec, six position carbine length buffer tube without spacer; and standard round wire carbine length recoil spring and obtained 869 RPM as an average of five runs (10 rounds per run). MHO, YMMV, etc. ETA: And as a couple of points for comparison using the same configuration except for the buffer used - H3 buffer(5.6 oz.): 971 RPM, and Steel shell carbine length buffer w/3 tungsten weights (7.5 oz.): 886 RPM. AETA: [Note that even though the steel shell with tungsten weights buffer weighs more than the two-piece steel 9mm mechanical buffer, the rate of fire is higher. Buffer configuration also is part of the ROF achieved]. Assuming one is discussing centerfire calibers, to get the lowest rate of fire, one probably has to use a hydraulic buffer in connection with whatever other elements are implemented in their configuration. |
Joined:
May 2024
Posts:
66
EE: 0% (0)
PA, USA
|
I've been shooting FA for about 12 years. I don't think that ROF ever had any effect whatsoever on my ammo consumption. Because I mostly shoot in bursts. I generally end up shooting as much ammo as I bring with me. Maybe 250 to 300 rounds of 9mm or 45acp. I haven't done an actual range trip with my new M16 yet, just a test firing, so I don't know what the 223 ammo bill is going to be. |
| I have an MGI rate reducer, significant ROF with mil spec ammo. With a carbine or H2 Ill bet its close to 900rpm. Too fast. The MGI and Tula or silver bear is much more manageable. Ive also a .380 M11 that I have doubled the urethane buffer (stacked 2) as they are 1/8" thick and polished all mating surfaces. With the can Ill bet that thing is near 2500 RPM... Maybe more. Stupid fast, sounds like a chain gun. Ive slowed my M16 and really sped up the MAC. Itll dump a 32 round mag in about .75 seconds |
Armory Sponsor