Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/11/2017 10:44:22 PM EST
I finally got my hands on one to dissect and test. The design does seem to add to the function of slowing down the bolt velocity independent of the buffer weight. It is also very solidly put together.
https://youtu.be/y_9pHzUJwiI
Link Posted: 8/11/2017 10:48:15 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/11/2017 10:51:43 PM EST by Yarael]
Link Posted: 8/11/2017 10:59:32 PM EST
Very interesting deep dive.

Thanks.
Link Posted: 8/11/2017 11:35:42 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/11/2017 11:46:07 PM EST by Toddrick]
Good video. Looks like a nice product. Why not test an H2 buffer though? 4.7oz would probably produce even slower cycling, or surely at least about the same, and at a third the cost. So the only major benefit (besides the slight weight savings) of this new buffer is its anti-tilt design right? Not worth it to me at the moment, since I already have an anti-tilt BCG and an anti-tilt buffer and am not having problems, but hope to see more innovation like this though.

I think the main thing I learned was that I don't need an A5 or rifle stock to help smooth out my SPR build, since a heavier buffer will produce nearly the exact same result. The slowing of the cycling rate spreads out the impulse over a longer time, hence less felt recoil.

I'd be interested to see a similar video comparing carbine, mid, and rifle length has systems and how they affect the cyclic rate, but it might be harder to get an apples to apples comparison considering the varying standards of the gas hole. My particular interest is getting the smoothest shooting SPR possible, so I currently have a rifle length gas system on a 18" barrel and an H2 buffer, with the idea that both should slow the cycling about as much as possible (adding an adjustable gas block is the next logical step).
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 12:02:38 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Toddrick:
Good video. Looks like a nice product. Why not test an H2 buffer though? 4.7oz would probably produce even slower cycling, or surely at least about the same, and at a third the cost. So the only major benefit (besides the slight weight savings) of this new buffer is its anti-tilt design right? Not worth it to me at the moment, since I already have an anti-tilt BCG and an anti-tilt buffer and am not having problems, but hope to see more innovation like this though.

I think the main thing I learned was that I don't need an A5 or rifle stock to help smooth out my SPR build, since a heavier buffer will produce nearly the exact same result. The slowing of the cycling rate spreads out the impulse over a longer time, hence less felt recoil.

I'd be interested to see a similar video comparing carbine, mid, and rifle length has systems and how they affect the cyclic rate, but it might be harder to get an apples to apples comparison considering the varying standards of the gas hole. My particular interest is getting the smoothest shooting SPR possible, so I currently have a rifle length gas system on a 18" barrel and an H2 buffer, with the idea that both should slow the cycling about as much as possible (adding an adjustable gas block is the next logical step).
View Quote
I used the weight I did because the purpose of the test was to see if the design features themselves contributed to the slower rate. An adjustable gas block and lighter buffers and bolt carriers is the way to go if you really want to tune your rifle for soft shooting. A highly tuned rifle can be very soft shooting but will be sensitive to ammo changes. I agree that gas lengths would be hard to compare because of variability of gas port sizes used by different barrel makers. This is just all fun stuff to explore to give me something to do in retirement.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 1:54:53 AM EST
Nice test. It should be noted that the change in cyclic rate reflects a change in average bolt carrier velocity. It does not reflect changes to the acceleration curve in either stroke direction. Does this design delay the unlocking of the bolt more than a conventional buffer? Unknown at this point. A conventional buffer also slightly delays the counter-recoil stroke, giving the magazine more time to position the next round. This design may do the same thing with the different material and shape synthetic tip. I do wonder how the H1 buffer would have faired with the LARB's buffer tip installed.

What is the reason for the extra screw in your lower?
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 6:05:13 AM EST
Honestly I would have liked to see a standard buffer 4oz or over 4oz to see if the rate drop increased more per Oz the heavier it got. Also unless the gun was cleaned between each test a second base line done after to see if the rate was close to the same on a dirty gun.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 9:12:08 AM EST
This the correct website?

https://armamentusa.com/
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 10:55:23 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KarlSG1:
Nice test. It should be noted that the change in cyclic rate reflects a change in average bolt carrier velocity. It does not reflect changes to the acceleration curve in either stroke direction. Does this design delay the unlocking of the bolt more than a conventional buffer? Unknown at this point. A conventional buffer also slightly delays the counter-recoil stroke, giving the magazine more time to position the next round. This design may do the same thing with the different material and shape synthetic tip. I do wonder how the H1 buffer would have faired with the LARB's buffer tip installed.

What is the reason for the extra screw in your lower?
View Quote
Agree with your comment. The entire cycle is just what I could measure accurately and objectively.

The rear bumper design is probably a significant part of this design, and probably helps on the rear end of the cycle (pun intended)

Putting this bumper on the H1 is a good idea. I'll check it out. That would be a good way to evaluate the individual components of this design. Putting the standard bumper on the LARB would be a necessary part of that test.

The extra screw is for the auto sear lever for the ZM Weapons full auto upper. Allows a folding stock with full auto function while folded. The upper for this set up has an 11" barrel. Really cool set up. :o)
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 11:10:35 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By j3_:
Honestly I would have liked to see a standard buffer 4oz or over 4oz to see if the rate drop increased more per Oz the heavier it got. Also unless the gun was cleaned between each test a second base line done after to see if the rate was close to the same on a dirty gun.
View Quote
I am thinking about machining out some material on the weight to get an exact match in weight. But in this test .2 ounces doubled the slowing effect on slowing the rate of fire. Adding .8 ounces in the standard design = 5% change which was doubled with only .2 ounces more weight. I am definitely going to investigate this further. The concept that you could tune a rifle gas system down to the minimum gas needed to cycle a given buffer weight, then change the buffer design to further slow the cyclic rate with that weight buffer is intriguing if it will work with lighter weight buffers. We'll see.

30 rounds does not get this rifle dirty enough to affect the rate, especially with the BCG I used. I did let the rifle set and cool off between test because I was uncertain it the heat would affect the rate of fire. When I got back to the shop and cleaned the rifle it was barely dirty.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 11:12:14 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Christopher67:
This the correct website?

https://armamentusa.com/
View Quote
Yes, that is them. Very small company from what I understand.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 11:12:38 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/12/2017 11:13:47 AM EST by Repairman_Jack]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Christopher67:
This the correct website?

https://armamentusa.com/
View Quote


Yes.

ETA - Beat by 24 seconds.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 12:14:20 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/12/2017 2:03:02 PM EST by KarlSG1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mbell:


I am thinking about machining out some material on the weight to get an exact match in weight. Removing mass from the LARB's internal buffer will likely have a disproportionate effect on its effectiveness, due to the interaction of the weight and the spring. Boring a hole in one of the weights of an H2 buffer to match the LARB
weight would be a fairer comparison.
But in this test .2 ounces doubled the slowing effect on slowing the rate of fire. The added friction of the recoil spring under dynamic conditions against the raised ring at the end of the buffer body, plus the different tip, probably has more effect than the 0.2 ounce increase in weight. Adding .8 ounces in the standard design = 5% change which was doubled with only .2 ounces more weight. I am definitely going to investigate this further.
Snip.
View Quote
Red text is mine.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 2:30:12 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Repairman_Jack:


Yes.

ETA - Beat by 24 seconds.
View Quote
Thanks!
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 2:31:45 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mbell:


Yes, that is them. Very small company from what I understand.
View Quote
Thanks!
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 2:39:41 PM EST
I enjoyed the video. I would like to see his buffer rebuilt with an aluminum body and tungsten center buffer. 

I would also like to see high speed video of the bolt closing. That would let us see how much bolt bounce each buffer had. 
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 2:44:50 PM EST
Here is a disassembled A5H2 buffer. It has a small spring that biases the weights forward.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:01:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/12/2017 3:01:17 PM EST by strangejames]
Another great video, mbell!

Is the reduction in rate of fire due to the LARB's internal design or is it due to the bumper design/material?
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:07:23 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
I enjoyed the video. I would like to see his buffer rebuilt with an aluminum body and tungsten center buffer. 

I would also like to see high speed video of the bolt closing. That would let us see how much bolt bounce each buffer had. 
View Quote
Aluminum doesn't hold up well to the rear of the bolt opening/closing/firing. Made several. I do have a titanium version and I do have tungsten one piece weights. Bolt bounce from my videos is in par with standard mil spec buffer. And it runs in FA, which FA is notorious for not tolerating bolt bounce...
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:08:54 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Here is a disassembled A5H2 buffer. It has a small spring that biases the weights forward.
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/57761/6ad3488f__1_-278549.jpg
View Quote
Which is the major contributor in its ROF reduction. I'd like to see an A5 buffer with my end cap run!
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:09:27 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By strangejames:
Another great video, mbell!

Is the reduction in rate of fire due to the LARB's internal design or is it due to the bumper design/material?
View Quote
Both
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:13:49 PM EST
Any benefit to a DIY hydraulic buffer ?

Meaning - inject mineral oil or similar or more stable fluid into the standard buffer and seal up?
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:17:33 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 99HMC4:


Aluminum doesn't hold up well to the rear of the bolt opening/closing/firing. Made several. I do have a titanium version and I do have tungsten one piece weights. Bolt bounce from my videos is in par with standard mil spec buffer. And it runs in FA, which FA is notorious for not tolerating bolt bounce...
View Quote
Right, it seems to work well on standard profile M4 barrel. Colt uses H2 buffers with M4A1 SOCOM profile barrels and H3 buffers with even heavier IAR barrels. This is because the amount of bounce changes with increased barrel weight.  My understanding is bolt bounce will also increase with higher bolt carrier and non-reciprocating buffer weight. 

One other comparison I would like to see. Take the L.A.R.B and put it in the A5 tube with the A5 rifle spring. Then put a spacer behind it inside the spring. This will directly compare the L.A.R.B to the A5 as the springs will be the same.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:32:07 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By strangejames:
Another great video, mbell!

Is the reduction in rate of fire due to the LARB's internal design or is it due to the bumper design/material?
View Quote
I suspect both contribute. I am going to swap out bumpers in my next field test of this buffer so we can see what difference the bumper makes. I am also going to test this with a tuned gas system and 3.8 and 3.0 total weights.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:35:57 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
I enjoyed the video. I would like to see his buffer rebuilt with an aluminum body and tungsten center buffer. 

I would also like to see high speed video of the bolt closing. That would let us see how much bolt bounce each buffer had. 
View Quote
There was at least no symptomatic bolt bounce since I had 100% function with RPMs from 875-1,000. This upper is so fun in full auto.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 3:36:33 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Here is a disassembled A5H2 buffer. It has a small spring that biases the weights forward.
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/57761/6ad3488f__1_-278549.jpg
View Quote
Thanks for the pics.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 4:05:39 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/12/2017 4:09:34 PM EST by 99HMC4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
One other comparison I would like to see. Take the L.A.R.B and put it in the A5 tube with the A5 rifle spring. Then put a spacer behind it inside the spring. This will directly compare the L.A.R.B to the A5 as the springs will be the same.
View Quote
This makes zero sense. It was never designed to mix and match none carbine parts. Also the collapsed spring length of the A5/rifle WILL NOT fit inside the carbine length buffer body. SOLGW tried this and it won't work. Just not a feasible or worthwhile option.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 4:19:17 PM EST
Awesome review man. Awesome product.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 6:36:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/12/2017 6:38:03 PM EST by jaqufrost]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 99HMC4:


This makes zero sense. It was never designed to mix and match none carbine parts. Also the collapsed spring length of the A5/rifle WILL NOT fit inside the carbine length buffer body. SOLGW tried this and it won't work. Just not a feasible or worthwhile option.
View Quote
An A5 spring is a standard rifle spring. If you stick it in a carbine buffer tube it won't allow the bcg to fully cycle rearward. If you stick a standard buffer in an A5 length receiver extension, the bcg can cycle too deep and the carrier key will impact the lower.

To directly compare the A5 attributes to the L.A.R.B. you can put it in an A5 length buffer tube with an A5 spring. To prevent the carrier and buffer from cycling too deeply you put a spacer in the back of the spring. Instead of the buffer impacting the receiver extension it impacts the spacer nestled inside the spring.

I would measure the difference in length on the inside of the standard and A5 buffer tube and then cut an aluminum spacer the length of the difference. Most people who put spacers in buffer tubes use delrin, but that might affect recoil properties slightly as it will be softer than aluminum.

BTW, have you thought about making your buffer in an A5 length?
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 7:33:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
An A5 spring is a standard rifle spring. If you stick it in a carbine buffer tube it won't allow the bcg to fully cycle rearward. If you stick a standard buffer in an A5 length receiver extension, the bcg can cycle too deep and the carrier key will impact the lower.

To directly compare the A5 attributes to the L.A.R.B. you can put it in an A5 length buffer tube with an A5 spring. To prevent the carrier and buffer from cycling too deeply you put a spacer in the back of the spring. Instead of the buffer impacting the receiver extension it impacts the spacer nestled inside the spring.

I would measure the difference in length on the inside of the standard and A5 buffer tube and then cut an aluminum spacer the length of the difference. Most people who put spacers in buffer tubes use delrin, but that might affect recoil properties slightly as it will be softer than aluminum.

BTW, have you thought about making your buffer in an A5 length?
View Quote
Respectfully, we have done this already and IT DOES NOT WORK. The issue (among several) is that ANY spring longer than "carbine" coil binds under rearward compression. The carbine spring length was designed to compress itself within the dimensions of a carbine buffer. There's no room for ANYMORE coils in this dimension. You add one more coil, and under recoil, the spring bottoms out on itself, not the buffer. Again, why in earth would you want to try and make two non-compatible systems work? We have done this and I already said it doesn't work. No need to test it again. The A5 system is a good system. Keep it that way. The ONLY reason to run a spacer in an A5 tube, carbine buffer and carbine spring, is to get a little extra length of pull. There's ZERO performance gain with an A5 tube only. The A5 system was designed to be heavier (when needed) than heavy carbine buffers and to allow a longer length of pull. The spring captured weights help reduce forward only BCG speed. This is how they reduce ROF/BCG speed, is on the forward stroke as all the recoil energy was absorbed during the impact. I don't plan on any A5 lengths at this time. But you never know...
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 7:39:10 PM EST
Your completely misunderstanding the diameter of the spacer. Diameter of the spacer must be smaller than the inside diameter of the buffer spring. The spring goes around the spacer and has the full compression length of an A5 buffer tube.

The only point is to get a more complete and direct test between the A5 and L.A.R.B. Is that extra 1% performance of the A5 because of the A5 buffer itself, or the spring system?
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 7:52:26 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Your completely misunderstanding the diameter of the spacer. Diameter of the spacer must be smaller than the inside diameter of the buffer spring. The spring goes around the spacer and has the full compression length of an A5 buffer tube.

The only point is to get a more complete and direct test between the A5 and L.A.R.B. Is that extra 1% performance of the A5 because of the A5 buffer itself, or the spring system?
View Quote
I do see your point. Adding a spacer that has a step for the extra spring length would work. However, I won't endorse it. I can't as a manufacturer recommend combining two incompatible systems. But I do see what you're going for.
Link Posted: 8/12/2017 10:43:05 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Your completely misunderstanding the diameter of the spacer. Diameter of the spacer must be smaller than the inside diameter of the buffer spring. The spring goes around the spacer and has the full compression length of an A5 buffer tube.

The only point is to get a more complete and direct test between the A5 and L.A.R.B. Is that extra 1% performance of the A5 because of the A5 buffer itself, or the spring system?
View Quote
I would think because of the spring primarily.
Link Posted: 8/18/2017 7:58:14 PM EST
I modified the LARB to weigh exactly the same as an H buffer and test with piston uppers. I also swap out the rear bumpers to isolate their effect on bolt velocity. Second field test with the L.A.R.B.

https://youtu.be/zOmpH-UcZlQ
Link Posted: 8/18/2017 8:49:21 PM EST
Hey Mike, I just finished your video. I think the problems you experienced are due to bolt bounce.  The stainless buffer body is practically like adding weight to your carrier while the internal buffer weight is reduced. This is further exacerbated by cutting .2oz from the internal buffer weight.
Link Posted: 8/18/2017 8:54:04 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Hey Mike, I just finished your video. I think the problems you experienced are due to bolt bounce.  The stainless buffer body is practically like adding weight to your carrier while the internal buffer weight is reduced. This is further exacerbated by cutting .2oz from the internal buffer weight.
View Quote
The thing that is odd is there was no bolt bounce at 900 RPM with the Wolf upper. I tune down the gas and run at just over 600 RPM and had the failure.
Link Posted: 8/18/2017 8:58:05 PM EST
Yeah, it's a bit odd. I would get the manufacturer to ship a tungsten weight and re-test.
Link Posted: 8/18/2017 9:01:03 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2017 9:02:04 PM EST by jaqufrost]
How does the cam pin channel and the firing pin shielding cut compare between the superlative bcg and the wolf? There may be some dynamics their making one more susceptible to bolt bounce.

ETA: and firing pin protrusion? bcg weight?
Link Posted: 8/18/2017 9:36:40 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jaqufrost:
Yeah, it's a bit odd. I would get the manufacturer to ship a tungsten weight and re-test.
View Quote
I have tungsten weights and a "spring adapter" so I can make the weight heavier. I still don't get what is going on with the SA. The Wolf has a heavier barrel and the SA is a light profile barrel, so you would think the Wolf would be more prone to bolt bounce. There is something incompatible about the design of the SA piston kit and this buffer. I'll keep pondering this.
Link Posted: 8/18/2017 9:36:53 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2017 9:50:06 PM EST by RockNRoll_Mullet]
Black Jack Buffer Ball AR-15 Recoil Buffer
The Blackjack Buffers Ball AR-15 Recoil Buffer will reduce recoil impulse and prolong the service life of your firearm. This is accomplished by stopping the bolt from directly contacting the receiver. This abrupt transfer of energy can affect zero on scoped rifles. The AR-15 Recoil Buffer is manufactured from an advanced polyurathane that will decelerate the bolt more gradually, reducing the felt recoil and allowing for quicker set-up for the next shot. Installation is a breeze. You can feel the difference the first time you shoot it.
Model: 108 / BJB AR
Manufactured by: BlackJack Buffers


Black Jack Buffers Ball PC AR-15 $9.99
Power Custom AR RECOIL~BUFFER
- Reduces recoil and muzzle climb more than OEM buffer.
- Provides graduated deceleration
- Will fit semi & select-fire models
- No drilling or special tools required
Model: PC AR-15
Shipping Weight: 1lbs
Manufactured by: Power Custom

Q: Why do you offer different colors?
A: Mostly personal choice. I offer buffers in different grades of hardness. Softer buffers reduce more felt recoil, harder buffers tend to last longer. (Most of my buffers are now only produced in the teal color which is somewhere in between the old green and black and is of a better grade material.)
Link Posted: 8/19/2017 12:48:34 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/19/2017 1:09:55 AM EST by 99HMC4]
Thanks Mike's for the further testing! Very interesting results, even for myself. First I would like to state the obvious that an issues only arose after the factory buffer was modified. Every feature/component of the LARB was designed to work with each other as a unit. And it was designed to run very consistently in a wide range of ARs, which was also proven. And Mike did confirm this is the case. Just as I designed it. The issue with the SA piston upper could be a few things, not sure unless I had it in hand. But, like any product, the LARB is on a fine line and pushing the AR system to its modified higher performance limits. And it may not run 100% in every possible combination. I do however think the SA upper would be 100% reliable in semi auto with my LARB. I've asked Mike to confirm this. And I've seen the blackjack buffer caps. Not a bad design, mine is better I believe. And much higher quality. That I'll say. Also, I did send Mike a spring spacer from the LARB adjustable weight kit, so that he can tune and adjust the LARB weight.
Link Posted: 8/19/2017 6:11:26 AM EST
Well I have been thinking about why the issues with the Superlative Arms upper and the thing that I have overlooked is the bolt I have in that particular upper. I have a "Reliabolt" which has modified lugs. The lugs may be more prone to unlocking and bolt bounce. I will take out the reliabolt and change to mil spec. I am still racking my brain to think of other reasons.
Link Posted: 8/20/2017 7:34:54 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RockNRoll_Mullet:
Black Jack Buffer Ball AR-15 Recoil Buffer
The Blackjack Buffers Ball AR-15 Recoil Buffer will reduce recoil impulse and prolong the service life of your firearm. This is accomplished by stopping the bolt from directly contacting the receiver. This abrupt transfer of energy can affect zero on scoped rifles. The AR-15 Recoil Buffer is manufactured from an advanced polyurathane that will decelerate the bolt more gradually, reducing the felt recoil and allowing for quicker set-up for the next shot. Installation is a breeze. You can feel the difference the first time you shoot it.
Model: 108 / BJB AR
Manufactured by: BlackJack Buffers
http://www.blackjackbuffers.com/images/blueAR.jpg

Black Jack Buffers Ball PC AR-15 $9.99
Power Custom AR RECOIL~BUFFER
- Reduces recoil and muzzle climb more than OEM buffer.
- Provides graduated deceleration
- Will fit semi & select-fire models
- No drilling or special tools required
Model: PC AR-15
Shipping Weight: 1lbs
Manufactured by: Power Custom
http://powercustom.com/store/images/ARbuff.jpg
Q: Why do you offer different colors?
A: Mostly personal choice. I offer buffers in different grades of hardness. Softer buffers reduce more felt recoil, harder buffers tend to last longer. (Most of my buffers are now only produced in the teal color which is somewhere in between the old green and black and is of a better grade material.)
View Quote
This is an interesting post/add. I would love to test one of these. I went to buy one and the shipping was as much as the bumper. $10 to ship a small piece of rubber is a bit much. Reminiscent of AA shipping charges for a bolt spring. I was very surprised when I swapped out the bumpers in my test and found the larger conical LARB bumper did not slow down the cyclic rate. If anyone has one of these bumpers they want to sell with reasonable shipping PM me. As far as the LARB rear bumper that does not appear to be the part that contains the "actual tactical magic". You can see the run with H buffer and LARB bumper at 5:28, and the total results on the dry erase board at 7:42. https://youtu.be/zOmpH-UcZlQ
Link Posted: 8/20/2017 8:13:04 AM EST
I know this is slightly off topic but to not start a new thread while this one is at the top of the page. Does anyone know if I can use an ar10 buffer tube and put an A5 buffer and spring to use on an AR15. I have a Larue 308 extension that now isn't being used and I'm wondering if I can use it w the a5 system.
Link Posted: 8/20/2017 8:17:45 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rubbergun:
I know this is slightly off topic but to not start a new thread while this one is at the top of the page. Does anyone know if I can use an ar10 buffer tube and put an A5 buffer and spring to use on an AR15. I have a Larue 308 extension that now isn't being used and I'm wondering if I can use it w the a5 system.
View Quote
Yes, that will work.
Link Posted: 8/21/2017 1:34:52 AM EST
Is this the thing where in another thread some guys got on the guy who made it and told him he didn't know what he was talking about and that he was basically selling snake oil?

Those guys apologize yet?
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 7:10:05 AM EST
Have you tried using the Geissele Super 42 Braided Wire Buffer Spring combo? I'd be interested in seeing the result against the stock L.A.R.B..
Link Posted: 8/22/2017 8:30:12 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By OnlytheTip:
Have you tried using the Geissele Super 42 Braided Wire Buffer Spring combo? I'd be interested in seeing the result against the stock L.A.R.B..
View Quote
Good idea. I have the Super 42 sitting on my table of things I want to review. I'll go down to the shop right now and set it next to the Wolf upper and do a side-by-side. Thanks!
Link Posted: 8/23/2017 7:38:38 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By OnlytheTip:
Have you tried using the Geissele Super 42 Braided Wire Buffer Spring combo? I'd be interested in seeing the result against the stock L.A.R.B..
View Quote
I had a customer a while back say either it didn't work or he didn't like it. Can't remember, I don't see why it wouldn't work. I personally use a Strike Industries flatwire spring in my rifle and LARB. I love it.
Link Posted: 8/23/2017 7:44:01 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/23/2017 7:46:52 PM EST by 99HMC4]
Also keep in mind guys, while full auto testing is a good way to test the quality, craftsmanship function (to a point) and carrier speed (aside from a simple slow motion video). The LARB was never designed, nor intended to be marketed to full autos. It was designed very specifically and marketed to SEMI AUTO weapons. Don't put too much weight on a stoppage in full auto. It may work, but it wasn't designed for that. That's Amraments official stance. In a personal note, I run the absolute piss out them in full auto. But every once and a while, we find certain set ups in full auto only, don't like it. And I know that it's a frequency/harmonics thing. I've done the testing. But it's all non-issues in semi....
Link Posted: 8/24/2017 5:55:54 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 99HMC4:


I had a customer a while back say either it didn't work or he didn't like it. Can't remember, I don't see why it wouldn't work. I personally use a Strike Industries flatwire spring in my rifle and LARB. I love it.
View Quote
My 10.5" SBR's bolt cycling is noticeably softer, and much more pleasant to shoot. The noise within the buffer tube is near nonexistent. Something as simple as pulling the charging handle back results in a much smoother feel. These are all noticeable compared to the other springs I've used; SpringCo, Tubbs, Spikes Tactical, etc.. The Geissele Super 42 does work for me, but then again I run quality parts, and not just the crap some people throw on their rifles.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top