I was just gearing up to install a CAR tube on my Wulf and I just read a few posts where a few folks have experienced feed issues who have used CAR buffer tubes. I can imagine this topic has been kicked around like a soccer ball in Guatamala, but I didn't find anything else on topic - my apologies for topic regurgitation if so, but...
Is this a common problem and to what degree of frequency?
To those who have experienced it, were you running a factory mag and standard recoil spring?
Has anyone here used a CAR tube on a Wulf and not had the problem?
Any other issues (i.e increased recoil impulse)?
I did read/reply-to Tony Rumore's helpful/insightful response in another post (Beowulf Mag Issues) about the chamfer on the Wulf's chamber mouth and the fix he suggested. I just wanted to see if anyone has had a combination of components using a CAR tube that worked wiithout problems.
I am aware of the general "denture adjusting" concern of using collapsable stocks. I have a pre-ban, 6-pos Bushmaster M4 stock that I made a "beef" mod on - kinda creative one, I thought, and only cost $32 and isn't permanent. I was also going to try and run a Wulff +10 CAR spring. I haven't assembled/fired it yet, but now I'm not sure my efforts haven't already been in vain.
i bought my wulf as a complete rifle during the ban so it came with the a2 stock.
never had any problems with it using the AA muzzle brake, mgi rate reducing buffer and std buffer spring along with the rest of the rifle.
one day i decided to throw the ace socom stock on it since it was laying around. every round would fte ftf the rifle would not extract the spent casing and then forced the next round into the upper.
this is with the std buffer spring and the mgi buffer, didnt try it with a std buffer.
i have since swapped it to the ace skeleton stock which is rifle length and when funds permit im going to replace it with the a1 length vltor stock
I've been watching this set of threads with increasing interest.
I fit a large number of folding stocks to the Beowulf rifles that we produce and very rarely see any problems (mix of M4 style 6 pos, Magpul and Vltor). Very occasionally I see a problem with the feed from the magazine and have to polish the feed ramp or sometimes a burr on the inside edge of the magazine lips which has a much more dramatic effect on a single column feed than on a 5.56 set up where the case sits below the lip radius. In both cases the fix is very easy.
Concerning the radius at the chamber mouth I run a 15 thou rad from the CNC which takes the sharp edge off, in addition to the chamfer at the back.
If I had to try a diagnostic on the feeding problem that was referenced I would look at the initial feed and and note that the problem occurs with the last one or two cartridges. Given this positioning I would look for a sharp edge on the die reference hole at the top of the mag. If such is present I would then phone me and I will fix the mag. (540 639 8356)
Returning briefly to the carbine length buffer tubes, as I say I do not see any problem with these in production. The buffer I use is a carbine type and I always buy from a reputable source to ensure that it actually does contain the correct number of steel weights and urethane washers, not just a single lump of steel tubing. The same advice goes for the spring, use the mil spec carbine type 17-7 passivated stainless. With this set up in a correct length buffer tube the bolt peak speed is only 2fps faster and you should see a slight shift in the ejection patern as the cases will hit the case deflector a little harder. Finally if you use a good stock the whole stock collapsing myth is just that. Vltor make top quality equipment as do Magpul. I fit both on the less publisized guns.
And for those who want to experiment I would suggest the M4 buffer that is identical to the current carbine type but substitutes tungsten weights for the steel ones.
Thanks Bill for the response. I was just about to drop you an email to get your input on the matter when I thought I'd take a look back here to see if there was any more info. I guess I'll post here now so others can also benefit directly from you.
When you say, "correct length buffer tube", are you referring to one that is "milspec"? If so, is a milspec CAR buffer tube/collapsing stock vastly different in material/dimensions than one not sold as "milspec" (i.e. Cavalry Arms, or ACE)? At least enough so that this may contribute to both the feed and accidental collapsing problems? In my particular case, where I have an older M4 collapsing stock from a Bushmaster, I'm not sure who manufactured it or if it is milspec, but it does seem robust and the adjuster detent pin is metal. Is there an easily observable way to determine if a tube/stock is milspec?
When you refer to experimenting with the M4 buffer, would this be a performance improvement over the standard carbine buffer? Would you recommend an "H" or "H2" buffer? I think both are sometimes used in M4's. Again, is a "non-milspec" buffer the same as a milspec one as long as it's an "H" or "H2"? I would imagine that the only way to make them heavier would be with tungsten (I guess some mfr's could cheese it with lead maybe?). I'm not sure if you have to be cautious about what you recommend for configurations due to contractual non-disclosure issues...
Have you given any thought about adding the specific components you mentioned to your accessory line-up? It may help to eliminate issues people are experiencing by using non-compliant/milspec items and give them confident access to compliant assured components.
For the magazine issues... I realize you made the generous offer to re-work anyones factory mag that exhibited the rough spot on the die indexing hole. However, could someone with a little ambition, mechanical intuition and a dremel/emery cloth buff out the feed lips, die index hole and feed ramp and give themselves a level of assured performance? Personally, I would feel comfortable doing so.
Thanks again Bill.