AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/27/2021 12:40:52 AM EDT
I have owned over 100 Edgewater buffers, and still have 20+ of them in my builds. I have noticed three varieties and wonder if anyone else has seen more (I do have an original prototype Edgewater buffer as well, so I guess I have four varieties). I have the long 601 variety with the dimple on the end, the standard short variety with dimple on the end, and the standard length without dimple. Of all of the Edgewaters that I have owned, only a couple have been the long variety that reference works attribute to the early 601’s. Notice the area underneath the spring stop is much shorter and has a sharper angle on it than the the later edgewaters. So, based on my small sampling, they do not appear to be very common. Is that what others have noticed?  OK, I just dug out my prototype Edgewater buffer, and it is the EXACT same length as the “early 601 long variety”, so that adds credence to the EARLY 601 providence.   
|
|
Quoted: Thanks Tom. This was something I had questions about but never asked/had the answers. More than likely it’s a subcontractor thing. They were all made about the same but maybe each manufacturer had their own process. Colt didn’t make everything in house so quite a bit had to be outsourced. No real way to tell unfortunately. Lost to history |
|
Quoted: More than likely it’s a subcontractor thing. They were all made about the same but maybe each manufacturer had their own process. Colt didn’t make everything in house so quite a bit had to be outsourced. No real way to tell unfortunately. Lost to history I’ll have to go through my 1963 spreadsheets and see if I can find anything about it. |
|
Quoted: More than likely it’s a subcontractor thing. They were all made about the same but maybe each manufacturer had their own process. Colt didn’t make everything in house so quite a bit had to be outsourced. No real way to tell unfortunately. Lost to history I have read in a couple of sources that the first 601 edgewater buffers were longer. You would think that if Colt was subcontracting them out, they would have had strict measurement (length) specifications. |
|
One of the books, maybe TBR, or maybe some other source, mentions that they shortened the buffer very early on because it wasn't reliably catching the bolt stop on the last round. Could it also be that the anodizing is worn away from the edge by the compression of the spring? |
|
Quoted: One of the books, maybe TBR, or maybe some other source, mentions that they shortened the buffer very early on because it wasn't reliably catching the bolt stop on the last round. Could it also be that the anodizing is worn away from the edge by the compression of the spring? It looks like the increased raised surface area underneath the spring stop ring would be an improvement as well. This would provide much more surface area for the recoil spring to stick to the Edgewater buffer. |
| I just got together with a friend who owns three untouched/unmodified/unaltered three digit Colt 601’s and ALL THREE have this early style 601 Edgewater buffer in them. So, this WOULD “be a way to tell”, and the info is not “lost to history”. Sure, it is a sample size of only three, but I find it awfully compelling. |
|
Quoted: So then this begs the question when did the switch happen The Colt/Army change log lists the action spring guide assembly and all of it's components in a large lot of drawing changes for May 14th 1964. Another entry on May 27th 1964 asks to void changes to the action spring guide drawing 61580 (the buffer body) requested on May 12th. Two more entries on Jun 12th and August 6th 1964 list the action spring guide in smaller groups of drawing changes. The final entry noting the action spring guide is a request to replace assembly 62119 with buffer assembly 62339 on March 4th 1966. |
|
Quoted: The Colt/Army change log lists the action spring guide assembly and all of it's components in a large lot of drawing changes for May 14th 1964. Another entry on May 27th 1964 asks to void changes to the action spring guide drawing 61580 (the buffer body) requested on May 12th. Two more entries on Jun 12th and August 6th 1964 list the action spring guide in smaller groups of drawing changes. The final entry noting the action spring guide is a request to replace assembly 62119 with buffer assembly 62339 on March 4th 1966. Thanks for the info, so would it be safe to assume the model 02 would of had the second short variation with dimple ? |
AR Sponsor