Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
Armory Sponsor
10/21/2024 1:38:10 PM EDT
https://www.lockharttactical.com/raven/product/cadex-defence-c9-m249-buttstock-adaptor

I know it will fit on the M249S, but will it work, since it doesn't have the buffer built into it like the other stock options do?
“The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates.”

"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
10/21/2024 4:00:17 PM EDT
[#1]
Pretty sure the answer is no, because you’d need the old 1980s style recoil spring assembly (with the thicker impact spring, normally painted yellow) and I don’t believe that is compatible with the rear of the M249S semi-auto parts.
10/21/2024 4:11:20 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote History
Originally Posted By KitBuilder:
Pretty sure the answer is no, because you'd need the old 1980s style recoil spring assembly (with the thicker impact spring, normally painted yellow) and I don't believe that is compatible with the rear of the M249S semi-auto parts.
View Quote
Thanks.  I thought that was the case.  I do have one of those recoil assemblies that I got for my Minimi "outfit" for my M249s - but you're right, I don't think it will work in the semi-auto.



Do the full auto M249's require the hydraulic buffer on the stocks?  Are the internals different on the FN Minimi and the M249?  I didn't think they were, which is why I was a bit confused on when that built-in hydraulic buffer is needed, or if it's just a 'nice to have'.
“The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates.”

"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
10/21/2024 5:25:27 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote History
Originally Posted By jtb33:

Do the full auto M249's require the hydraulic buffer on the stocks?  Are the internals different on the FN Minimi and the M249?  I didn't think they were, which is why I was a bit confused on when that built-in hydraulic buffer is needed, or if it's just a 'nice to have'.
View Quote

All the 249's we had in the Army with the para stocks had the hydraulic buffers, so I think they're "required." Haven't seen one without the buffer.
10/21/2024 5:59:59 PM EDT
[#4]
The FM Minimi's para stock (see my pic above) don't have one.  They are like the adapter in the link in my original post.

Wondering if some of the internals between the Minimi and M249 are different.  I didn't think they were - but someone with more knowledge than I will need to respond to the difference in operating systems and internals on those two MG's.
“The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates.”

"And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods."
10/21/2024 8:50:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: KitBuilder][Edited] [#5]
Quote History
Originally Posted By jtb33:
Wondering if some of the internals between the Minimi and M249 are different.
View Quote
No, not really.
It's like you say, the hydraulic buffer is just "nice to have". It goes hand-in-hand with the rectangular recoil spring guide assembly. You've got to have both, or shouldn't use one without the other. (Damage will result.)

The hydraulic buffer was a result of the US Army's M249 PIP (Product Improvement Program) in the early 1990s. The M249/Minimi guns used in Desert Storm didn't have hydraulic buffers, and they vibrated more during recoil (and transferred increased felt recoil to the gunner). It was one of the requests by troops which was addressed. Another was improved handguard(s) for more protection from burns. Also a folding barrel handle (original Minimi handles are fixed in place and don't fold).

Then the Army decided they didn't want anyone using the Adverse gas setting so they got rid of it.

There are some internal differences for MK46 parts (and receivers) but mainly just no magazine well.
The MK46 receiver also omits the mounting points used for tripod and vehicle mounting.

M249S civilian guns also ship with (what used to be exclusively) MK46 skeletonized charging handles and (chrome?) plated feed pawl assemblies. Unsure if these MK46 upgrades are also present in US military production M249 guns nowadays.

I tried Google to confirm if the feed pawl body is plated with chrome and not nickel, but all I found was this cool PDF from NSWC Crane.
https://ndia.dtic.mil/wp-content/uploads/2016/armament/18355_Armstrong.pdf

Sign up to continue the discussion

Create a free account to share your thoughts, follow topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.

Already a member? Sign In

Armory Sponsor