AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/1/2026 5:51:51 PM EDT
|
Going to piece together another rifle this year and since I have a bunch of rifle length buffer springs laying around from those days when that's all I had in thinking about using an A5 buffer to use them up. Is it worth it over a standard carbine setup? Don't have exact specs on what the rifle will be but this is what I know right now 14.5 or 16" mid length from either BCM or Geissele but won't rule out using another DD barrel as I've had great luck with them in the past. Will be pretty much a dedicated suppressor host but needs to function without. Suppressor will be either a Surefire RC4 or another Hux 556k like I already have. Also, I wouldn't rule out an Arc Fire finding it's way into the gun. Odds are low since this would be a SHTF type rifle and I would need to see more long term durability of them but it's still an option to think about. Eta. Current favorite rifle is a mutt build with a 16" mid length DD barrel, Hux 556k suppressor and a carbine spring with H buffer. It is a touch over gassed but it runs in all conditions with all ammo. |
|
Quoted: I'll know next week. 2 A5's on the way. I don't want to run an adjustable gas block, so trying an A5 to see if it helps some. I'm against adjustable gas blocks also. The Hux can I have really didn't seem like it added too much extra back pressure but it's also not as quiet as other options. |
|
I use one on a Mk12-ish SPR build. IIRC, A5 was developed specifically to adapt a collapsible stock to the M16 series rifle. If you’ve ever shot an M16, or AR-15 with rifle gas and buffer configuration you would note that the recoil impulse is much smoother than an M4 or carbine AR. The reasons for that is the heavier buffer and lower port pressure from the rifle length gas system spread the recoils impulse over more time. Using an A5 on a carbine gives you the ability to add buffer weight (slows recoil impulse) with a |
|
I understand the purpose behind the system, but dislike the added lop. You could do essentially the same thing with an extra heavy carbine buffer and a tubbs flatwire variant. I remember reading of someone doing it with full auto and multiple different setups to get the lowest rpm with best recoil mitigation. Edit to add, quick internet search shows amphibian c3junkie did it. |
|
I went the A5 route on a BCM lower and DD4V7 upper in 2018 using a Surefire RC2. Once you go A5, you will never look back. I’m surprised it took this long for people shooting the SOLGW Mk1 to realize this. Many people on this website and on M4carbine.net praised it’s benefits in the early 2010s. Only thing is, with the advent of low back pressure suppressors, the A5’s advantages aren’t as great as they used to be. Running full auto however, there is a huge upside. An appropriately tuned carbine length buffer system though will work nearly as well with modern low back pressure suppressors IMHO. The A5 buffer system still is smoother though. |
|
All my guns except one have the A5 system. It smooths them out a bit but the biggest benefit is a wider range of reliability. For example, I can and have tested different weight buffers that all locked open on last rounds from all steel weights installed in buffer up to an H3 without issue. I've settled on A5-H2's in all except one that was a bit overgassed to begin with. It's worth it IMO. |
|
Quoted: A5 has some virtues for sure. Longer spring makes tuning a little easier. No downside, and the set up isn't really much different in price assuming similar quality parts This, only downside is the cost/weight/length added, which can be a benefit if you like a long length of pull, or want to balance a nose heavy gun. More overhead for tuning via buffer weight, either for legacy suppressors or to adjust cyclic rate on a FRT. Got fewer options for a stronger action spring, Griffin offers one at +15%. Think I recall some engineer from Vltor claiming the rifle length spring lasts longer than standard carbine springs, and is more consistent between manufacturers. Same benefits as the G 42 braided action spring, but also gives you the larger buffer. |
|
Quoted: This, only downside is the cost/weight/length added, which can be a benefit if you like a long length of pull, or want to balance a nose heavy gun. More overhead for tuning via buffer weight, either for legacy suppressors or to adjust cyclic rate on a FRT. Got fewer options for a stronger action spring, Griffin offers one at +15%. Think I recall some engineer from Vltor claiming the rifle length spring lasts longer than standard carbine springs, and is more consistent between manufacturers. Same benefits as the G 42 braided action spring, but also gives you the larger buffer. I shouldn't notice the extra length since I set the stocks on carbine receiver extensions two notches out and wouldn't be at full extension with the A5. |
|
Quoted: This, only downside is the cost/weight/length added, which can be a benefit if you like a long length of pull, or want to balance a nose heavy gun. More overhead for tuning via buffer weight, either for legacy suppressors or to adjust cyclic rate on a FRT. Got fewer options for a stronger action spring, Griffin offers one at +15%. Think I recall some engineer from Vltor claiming the rifle length spring lasts longer than standard carbine springs, and is more consistent between manufacturers. Same benefits as the G 42 braided action spring, but also gives you the larger buffer. I run g$ 42 rifle springs in mine |
| I've studied about the A5. Unless you're using Carbine length gas, my opinion is the proprietary parts for $100+ just to use your spare rifle spring is not worth it on mid length gas. YHM has a .063 suppressor gas block (non adjustable) that can be drilled larger if needed. |
|
Yes, I use one for my 308AR with an H3 buffer. In a large frame the A5 allows you to use AR buffers, which is a nice cross compatibility bonus for me. IIRC, Armalite was the one that actually made the A5, but they didn't call it that, it was just an AR10 carbine buffer extension. Vltor took the same tube and developed a longer buffer to adapt it to 5.56 ARs and called it the A5. I use carbine extensions for all my other ARs, with tubbs flatwire springs, I use one in the 308 as well. They provide a similar effect to the A5 without the need for the whole A5 system. You could also use a tubbs in an A5 with your AR if you wanted to, but you probably wouldn't notice much, if any difference. |
|
I dont see what I would get out of the A5 system that I cannot already get out of a flatwire spring with a heavy carbine buffer. Flat wire gives you the linear compression and I wouldn't be going above h3 buffer weight regardless. If i did get a a5 tube I would probably run the same tubbs carbine spring in it... |
| I like it (not enough to replace carbine systems on well gassed rifles) especially if you have an overgassed rifle, which is most of them... you have more tuneability with the A5. Its about one click longer than the carbine tube; no downside for me since I run them longer than that anyway. |
|
If you absolutely need 100% reliability, I would choose the carbine buffer. I experienced light strikes with weak ammunition while using an A5 buffer system in a 16" midlength AR. Notably, another 16" midlength rifle with a standard carbine spring/H buffer setup did not have this issue, suggesting the A5 may have been slightly over-buffered for this load." Sure, the A5 closes the bolt with more authority, but that's only after the ammo sends the bolt backwards into the buffer tube hard enough, and some ammo may not do that as well. That's my theory. I could be wrong. It was just a couple of light strikes. The light strikes weren't continuous, and I'm guessing at the cause without any verification. |
|
Quoted: I put A5 buffers on all mine, but I am also adding FRTs to several, and the A5 is really a necessity for those. It's not a necessity at all. Carbine length H2 and H3 buffers work just fine. I won't argue that it's not nice to have, but it is categorically NOT a necessity. |
| I would say the best buffer system I have ever used was the Surefire optimized BCG that came with this buffer/spring combo that lets the BCG travel a bit more backwards and it used a counter weight to balance out the system. I had used it with a carbine gas upper and I remember thinking just how different and unique it felt. According to Jim Sullivan who designed it, he mentioned the cam pin track to keep it locked in a bit longer. Apparently back when they made the XM177 system, Jim pitched in that they should change the BCG because of the harsher gas but Colt didn't want to hear it and the shorter barrel never really took off until decades later. Even then Colt didn't want to change the BCG and instead went with a heavier buffer and spring combo. |
|
Quoted: If you absolutely need 100% reliability, I would choose the carbine buffer. I experienced light strikes with weak ammunition while using an A5 buffer system in a 16" midlength AR. Notably, another 16" midlength rifle with a standard carbine spring/H buffer setup did not have this issue, suggesting the A5 may have been slightly over-buffered for this load." Sure, the A5 closes the bolt with more authority, but that's only after the ammo sends the bolt backwards into the buffer tube hard enough, and some ammo may not do that as well. That's my theory. I could be wrong. It was just a couple of light strikes. The light strikes weren't continuous, and I'm guessing at the cause without any verification. The buffer system components or how hot the ammo is will not have anything to do with light strikes... to get any strike, the round has to be chambered with the bolt locked; once in that condition, you could have any buffer or no buffer back there; the primer will get hit the same way regardless. |
|
Quoted: The buffer system components or how hot the ammo is will not have anything to do with light strikes... to get any strike, the round has to be chambered with the bolt locked; once in that condition, you could have any buffer or no buffer back there; the primer will get hit the same way regardless. In a thread about weapon lights, he suggested putting a cloth over the light to reduce lights that are too bright, or buying a red or green weaponlight instead. Long short, don't waste your time. From the limited experience I have with A5 buffer systems, it seems to simply be a more tolerant version of the carbine system over a wider array of weights, with the added benefit of being able to tame recoil slightly. While its not necessary, moving forward I will go with the A5 system over other options. No real reason not to. |
|
Quoted: I would say the best buffer system I have ever used was the Surefire optimized BCG that came with this buffer/spring combo that lets the BCG travel a bit more backwards and it used a counter weight to balance out the system. I had used it with a carbine gas upper and I remember thinking just how different and unique it felt. According to Jim Sullivan who designed it, he mentioned the cam pin track to keep it locked in a bit longer. Apparently back when they made the XM177 system, Jim pitched in that they should change the BCG because of the harsher gas but Colt didn't want to hear it and the shorter barrel never really took off until decades later. Even then Colt didn't want to change the BCG and instead went with a heavier buffer and spring combo. Another system I'd like to try. More than one person has said this makes a substantial difference and really helps gassy suppressors. The only concern I had was how the extra travel would result in more inertia when the carrier hits the bolt hold open when empty, but I also haven't heard of this translating into an actual issue. |
|
Quoted: Probably the best overall use application of the A5 is for the rifle length gas and adj. stock. Quoted: Quoted: FWIW, I use a BCM A5 set (tube, buffer spring and buffer) in my M16A4 build. It is smooth and perfect. Probably the best overall use application of the A5 is for the rifle length gas and adj. stock. Such a great application that the USMC chose the carbine H6 over the A5 after 50K rounds of testing showed the Carbine H6 to be MORE reliable on the A4. Do you even upgrayed bro?. It costs more, it has to better. Right? |
|
Quoted: Such a great application that the USMC chose the carbine H6 over the A5 after 50K rounds of testing showed the Carbine H6 to be MORE reliable on the A4. Do you even upgrayed bro?. It costs more, it has to better. Right? huh? How much and where are you buying those H6's? We were talking about A5 applications. Was the military using a single standard carbine spring on their 50K test? |
|
Quoted: Such a great application that the USMC chose the carbine H6 over the A5 after 50K rounds of testing showed the Carbine H6 to be MORE reliable on the A4. Do you even upgrayed bro?. It costs more, it has to better. Right? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: FWIW, I use a BCM A5 set (tube, buffer spring and buffer) in my M16A4 build. It is smooth and perfect. Probably the best overall use application of the A5 is for the rifle length gas and adj. stock. Such a great application that the USMC chose the carbine H6 over the A5 after 50K rounds of testing showed the Carbine H6 to be MORE reliable on the A4. Do you even upgrayed bro?. It costs more, it has to better. Right? How many units of those A4s with H6 buffers did they field? And with what units? |
|
Quoted: If you absolutely need 100% reliability, I would choose the carbine buffer. I experienced light strikes with weak ammunition while using an A5 buffer system in a 16" midlength AR. Notably, another 16" midlength rifle with a standard carbine spring/H buffer setup did not have this issue, suggesting the A5 may have been slightly over-buffered for this load." Sure, the A5 closes the bolt with more authority, but that's only after the ammo sends the bolt backwards into the buffer tube hard enough, and some ammo may not do that as well. That's my theory. I could be wrong. It was just a couple of light strikes. The light strikes weren't continuous, and I'm guessing at the cause without any verification. I had that happen with a JP captured spring buffer system. I swapped it out with a standard buffer/spring and it ran fine again. I haven't had anything similar happen with my A5's. I'm only using them on my 5.56 rifles, everything else is using carbine buffers. |
|
Quoted: huh? How much and where are you buying those H6's? We were talking about A5 applications. Was the military using a single standard carbine spring on their 50K test? An H2 or H3 will also be more reliable than the A5. That’s what Canada uses with zero issues. The A5 is a solution in search of a problem. |
|
Quoted: An H2 or H3 will also be more reliable than the A5. That’s what Canada uses with zero issues. The A5 is a solution in search of a problem. Quoted: Quoted: huh? How much and where are you buying those H6's? We were talking about A5 applications. Was the military using a single standard carbine spring on their 50K test? An H2 or H3 will also be more reliable than the A5. That’s what Canada uses with zero issues. The A5 is a solution in search of a problem. Can you link to their test that shows h2/h3 are more reliable than the a5? |
|
Quoted: Can you link to their test that shows h2/h3 are more reliable than the a5? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: huh? How much and where are you buying those H6's? We were talking about A5 applications. Was the military using a single standard carbine spring on their 50K test? An H2 or H3 will also be more reliable than the A5. That’s what Canada uses with zero issues. The A5 is a solution in search of a problem. Can you link to their test that shows h2/h3 are more reliable than the a5? It was about 20 years ago. Short version: It causes ftrb. |
|
While I like the one A5 I have, I have not run into suppressed vs unsuppressed issues in any of my guns 10.3, 11.5, 12.5, 14.5, 16. They all run both ways with carbine system. This is across Aero, Ballstic Advantage, BCM, and Geissele. Perhaps I've just gotten lucky? The only time I had an issue was with an adjustable gas block. |
|
Quoted: It was about 20 years ago. Short version: It causes ftrb. FTRB… failure to return to battery? I don’t see the A5 as a solution in search of a problem. It allowed for collapsible stock on a rifle which helps with vehicles and LOP adjustment for body armor. IMO, it was a better solution than a carbine buffer setup because it maintained the original spring and buffer mass of the M16. Sure the carbine setup could accomplish the same thing; A5 was a more elegant solution for the rifle, IMO. Kind of a moot point though because ultimately, the M4 carbine was a far better option over the M16A4 for most operations during GWOT (urban/mounted). But Marines wanted their muskets. |
|
Quoted: It was about 20 years ago. Short version: It causes ftrb. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: huh? How much and where are you buying those H6's? We were talking about A5 applications. Was the military using a single standard carbine spring on their 50K test? An H2 or H3 will also be more reliable than the A5. That’s what Canada uses with zero issues. The A5 is a solution in search of a problem. Can you link to their test that shows h2/h3 are more reliable than the a5? It was about 20 years ago. Short version: It causes ftrb. The A5 system is only about 15 years old, and the Canadians switched to the C7A2 with the collapsing stock well before it existed. Do you have any links to any tests that they did? Also, the one USMC test that I know of showed that the A5 was slightly more reliable than an H6. Is there another one besides ESED DTR10-JXPLN-055 that showed the opposite? This is the only screenshot I can find. H6: 12 stoppages, 4 light strikes, 2 FTE, 1 FTF, and 5 magazine failures that I don't count. 7 attributable to weapon. A5: 7 stoppages, 1 light strike, 1 failure to lock back, and 5 magazine failures. 2 attributable to weapon. Attached File |
AR Sponsor