AR Sponsor
Posted: 1/16/2014 9:16:07 AM EDT
|
It seems to me that the only place I see carbine buffers being offered are when they come with a receiver extension kit of some sort.
Most complete carbines come from the factory with an H buffer, I know Colt, BCM and others send out complete guns with an H buffer, not the standard. I also know that the H buffer is the standard for the M4, not the standard weight buffer. So my question is, when did the seemingly complete abandonment of the standard weight buffer happen? Why is the H buffer now the standard on most complete guns, but the standard buffer is still offered as part of receiver extension kits from many manufacturers? It seems that the heavy buffers (H, H2, H3, STT2, 9mm) are all more widely used than the standard, so I am just wondering when that change came about. Thanks! |
|
Early 2000's
US Army M4 A1 were having a problem with "carrier bounce". The M4A1 (SOCOM stuff) has a extra heavy barrel. It was thought that due to the extra heavy barrel that extra mass was the cause the have the BCG bounce instead of lock-up. Personally I think they wanted a smoother shooting gun and the heavy buffer seems to help so the BCG bounce became an issue. So first it was the H buffer, then the race was on. Next the H2; and the rest followed. It does seem to help the over gassed carbine problem and slightly slow down the rearward velocity of the BCG. Since the Army is not going to go a adjustable gas block (unless SF does; and others get that jealous) heaver buffers will be the fix until the next weapon. Now they are the rage; you can buy them on Amazon. I experimented and filled a standard buffer with lead shot and it worked great. Remove the roll pin, remove rubbery end, remove the discs. Replace with lead shot, reassemble. Test fire. |
|
Quoted:
Right. The H2 was developed for M4s with SOCOM profile barrels. Quoted:
Quoted:
Are you saying that original M4 carbines came with standard weight buffers? I was under the impression that they had H buffers from their introduction. Right. The H2 was developed for M4s with SOCOM profile barrels. This much I know. What I am asking, is when was the H buffer developed? Was it also when trying to solve issues related to the SOCOM barrel profile in the M4A1? Or was the M4 introduced originally with an H buffer, and the H2 came about later as noted above? |
|
Regular Army guys have M4 (with 3 round burst...or bust) soon all will be right with full auto again
SOCOM guys have M4A1 (full auto) M4 have regular buffers (or did until late 2000's) when M4A1 got thicker barrel shortly after that they got H buffers (early 2000's) |
|
I could not find the national stock number for a H buffer, so I was not able to find any information on it. But, I did come across the H2 buffer's national stock number. The H2 buffer, NSN 1005-01-522-0772, was assigned on July 16, 2004. The FedBizOpps solicitation under the requirements section has a description for this NSN to show it is for a H2 buffer.
NSN-NOW FedBizOpps.gov H2 Solicitation |
|
I recently purchased a GunTechUSA buffer that weighs in at 4.4oz, it is .10 oz over the tungsten powder filled buffer from a popular vendor.
It dramatically tamed down my rifle for a total cost of $24.00 out the door at a local gun show. Very happy with it. Why do I care about if the weights slap around in the buffer over the huge bang it creates. Some folks are just silly about what they complain about.... If it gets the job done... what's the problem? And It's made in the USA. I believe that the weights following through help reduce bolt bounce, for what that's worth on a semi auto weapon. But this is also debatable. But a science in its self. |
|
Quoted:
I could not find the national stock number for a H buffer, so I was not able to find any information on it. But, I did come across the H2 buffer's national stock number. The H2 buffer, NSN 1005-01-522-0772, was assigned on July 16, 2004. The FedBizOpps solicitation under the requirements section has a description for this NSN to show it is for a H2 buffer. NSN-NOW FedBizOpps.gov H2 Solicitation Interesting, thanks! It says the H2 is for use on the M4 and the M4A1, so I guess they just decided to go with H2s on all the carbines, regardless of the barrel profile. |
| I really fail to realize how the physical weight or profile of a barrel can cause the Bolt Carrier to bounce. It literally just doesn't make any sense. The weight of the BUFFER would have an effect on the Bolt and Carrier rebounding, but you really aren't going to see it unless you are operating full auto, or at a cyclic rate real close to full auto, and even then, only if you combined it with a buffer that is too lightweight (i.e. Standard Buffer and maybe even an H buffer) which is why the M4A1 (Select-Fire Full Auto) run H2s as the standard. |
|
The M4 always hsd the H bufffer.
The only real reason the so called standard buffer is common at all is price. People ar cheap. It's why companies like... nevermind, different argument... Tungsten is twice the cost of steel. Commercial grade companies found they could save like $10 per gun sold, and when you sell 100,000 you end up making a nice chunk of change. And if your customers wear out thir fire control groups faster, then you get to sell more replacement parts. |
|
Quoted:
According the The Black Rifle II in 1994 the H buffer was developed during testing for the XM-4 and should be in all USGI M4s In 2003 the SOCOM profile barrel and H2 starting equipping M4A1s Quoted:
According the The Black Rifle II in 1994 the H buffer was developed during testing for the XM-4 and should be in all USGI M4s In 2003 the SOCOM profile barrel and H2 starting equipping M4A1s This is the exact information I was looking for, thanks! Quoted:
The M4 always hsd the H bufffer. The only real reason the so called standard buffer is common at all is price. People ar cheap. It's why companies like... nevermind, different argument... Tungsten is twice the cost of steel. Commercial grade companies found they could save like $10 per gun sold, and when you sell 100,000 you end up making a nice chunk of change. And if your customers wear out thir fire control groups faster, then you get to sell more replacement parts. So is it safe to say that the standard weight buffer as we know it today was pretty much only used on the CAR-15 and other, pre-M4 carbines? With the M4 came the H, and with the M4A1 came the H2. So basically the standard weight buffer is no longer used in any carbine configuration in the military today. Which comes to the point I wanted to make originally, other than being the cheapest alternative to a working buffer, for what purpose does the standard weight buffer exist if the M4 (14.5in carbine gas) is meant to use the H, and as barrels get shorter people put heavier buffers not lighter? What's the point of having the standard weight buffer, other than it is the cheapest part that will work decently? From what I can tell it offers no performance increase and can actually cause the rifle to malfunction because it doesn't slow the bolt down enough to let the chamber pressure subside adequately in order to achieve optimal extraction. |
AR Sponsor