Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/2/2007 7:53:32 PM EDT
Goodday all, I just got back not too long ago with a qusetion itching at the back of my mind. When I was oversees, I was issued a 10.5 M-16 as part of the VBSS team I was with. It was probably the most bad-ass weapon I had ever held. I was happier than anything, until it came time to go to the range. The damn thing fired perfectly in semi-auto. As soon as I switched it to full-auto (rock'en roll) it would fire three or four rounds then stop. I would rack it back again pop off a couple more in semi, and as soon as I would switch it over again it would do the same damn thing. Upon inspection I noticed that it was not jamming, it was just barely tapping the primer that's why it wasn't going off in full-auto. I turned it back in finally, and I asked the armory guy what he though. He said "the bolt-carrier is just dirty". That idea didn't sell on me. So, I was wondering what you guy's thought. I mean I did a little bit of research on shorties, how they have gas problems, and all. But this rifle had one of those Noveske Krinkov flash hiders on it. So it couldn't of been that right. Well, just hoping someone can answer that for me it's been kicking my ass for some time now.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 7:56:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By loadedspecops1911:
Goodday all, I just got back not too long ago with a qusetion itching at the back of my mind. When I was oversees, I was issued a 10.5 M-16 as part of the VBSS team I was with. It was probably the most bad-ass weapon I had ever held. I was happier than anything, until it came time to go to the range. The damn thing fired perfectly in semi-auto. As soon as I switched it to full-auto (rock'en roll) it would fire three or four rounds then stop. I would rack it back again pop off a couple more in semi, and as soon as I would switch it over again it would do the same damn thing. Upon inspection I noticed that it was not jamming, it was just barely tapping the primer that's why it wasn't going off in full-auto. I turned it back in finally, and I asked the armory guy what he though. He said "the bolt-carrier is just dirty". That idea didn't sell on me. So, I was wondering what you guy's thought. I mean I did a little bit of research on shorties, how they have gas problems, and all. But this rifle had one of those Noveske Krinkov flash hiders on it. So it couldn't of been that right. Well, just hoping someone can answer that for me it's been kicking my ass for some time now.



What ship was this on?
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 7:57:07 PM EDT
might have excessive wear on the disconnector. If that was the case, the hammer might have followed the bolt carrier forward and not had good contact with the auto sear.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 7:58:02 PM EDT
Definately not a flash hider problem
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 7:58:17 PM EDT
Hammer following or not resetting probably.

When the round is loaded into the chamber the firing pin lightly strikes the primer and dimples it, it's a floating pin and normal.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:05:41 PM EDT
(FXNTIME) I don't know if it was wear these things looked pretty new...
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:06:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DuraToTheMax:
Definately not a flash hider problem


Now that I think back it might have been that the rear sight was loose. You should have asked about that.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:07:51 PM EDT
1. it was a flat top 2. the rear sight? really?
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:10:10 PM EDT
FXNTIME I have a question. If it was the hammer following how would that hinder the performance please explain. How would you remedy that?
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:16:16 PM EDT
The hammer follows the bolt carrier foward as the round is loaded = no bang.

Did you have to recharge the weapon to continue to fire? IE extract the round in the chamber and cycle another one in?
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:21:53 PM EDT
Yes I did repeatedly so..
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:25:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By loadedspecops1911:
Yes I did repeatedly so..


Hammer riding the carrier most likely, possible F/A sear issue if just in F/A. [Not a F/A guy but the F/A sear delays the hammer drop.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:38:45 PM EDT
Sounds like an auto sear timing issue to me
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:39:40 PM EDT
(F/A)? What does that mean? I'm just getting started here sorry... LOL...
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:40:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/2/2007 8:42:44 PM EDT by GunDisaster]
full-auto, you might want to post your question in the M-16 full-auto section over here M16 forum
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:42:47 PM EDT
How do you time an auto sear?
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:52:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By loadedspecops1911:
How do you time an auto sear?



You don't time an autosear.

The auto sear needed to be replaced in the weapon because it was worn out or the lower was out of spec.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:58:05 PM EDT
oh, I get it... I was tottally off. But would the company really sell something that was "out of spec" like that? Seems kind of careless...
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 8:58:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/2/2007 9:05:20 PM EDT by Ekie]
Sounds like carrier bounce to me, common in "shorties". Carbine is so over gassed that the bolt crashes into the barrel extension and bounces back far enough that it is still in a rearward position when the hammer strikes.

I would take the muzzle do dad off and try again, they increase port pressure. Or I would go up one in weight on the buffer.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 9:03:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By loadedspecops1911:
oh, I get it... I was tottally off. But would the company really sell something that was "out of spec" like that? Seems kind of careless...


If a factory original MK18 they are required to pass acceptance testing as spelled out in MIL-C-71186 (AR), less the endurance test. More then half of the MK18's are not acquired as complete weapons though.
Link Posted: 10/2/2007 9:09:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Ekie:
Sounds like carrier bounce to me, common in "shorties". Carbine is so over gassed that the bolt crashes into the barrel extension and bounces back far enough that it is still in a rearward position when the hammer strikes.

I would go up one in weight on the buffer and try again.


AAAH Ekie, here I was ready to show my great knowledge of shorties and you beat me to the punch. What he said is most likely the culprit here, as many short barrels are over-ported to avoid short-stroking, but then this causes the bolt bounce problem. There really is a very fine line when it comes to gas port sizes on shorties, but an over-port problem is fixable with a heavier buffer, while too small of a port requires redrilling the gas port.

I guess I could've just typed "+1"...
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 3:26:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Ekie:
Sounds like carrier bounce to me, common in "shorties". Carbine is so over gassed that the bolt crashes into the barrel extension and bounces back far enough that it is still in a rearward position when the hammer strikes.

I would take the muzzle do dad off and try again, they increase port pressure. Or I would go up one in weight on the buffer.


Yes, these are classic symtoms. Try the H buffer too
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 3:44:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ranchhand:

Originally Posted By Ekie:
Sounds like carrier bounce to me, common in "shorties". Carbine is so over gassed that the bolt crashes into the barrel extension and bounces back far enough that it is still in a rearward position when the hammer strikes.

I would take the muzzle do dad off and try again, they increase port pressure. Or I would go up one in weight on the buffer.


Yes, these are classic symtoms. Try the H buffer too


+++++++++++++++++++++=======!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 5:15:11 AM EDT
I will jump on the bolt bounce wagon too. I have never really had that problem personally but it does happen from what I have heard.
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 5:26:32 AM EDT
Another bolt-bounce agreement. Especially with the increased back pressure from the Noveske Krink.

Never heard of them Krinking the Mk18 Mod0 going to the VBSS guys. When did they start doing that?

Link Posted: 10/3/2007 5:58:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/3/2007 5:59:49 AM EDT by draver]
I had the same symptoms when going from a 16" to an 11.5" barrel with a DIAS. I switched to a heavy buffer and end of problem. It's an easy test to swap out buffers, and the cure is immediate. It worked 100% in my case. The original buffer was a standard carbine buffer that came with the DPMS M4gery clone. I got a DPMS "H" buffer from their website for $30 and now it's totally "Rock & Roll".

And, I shoot the evil "Wolf" ammo !!
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 5:59:01 AM EDT
There was an article in Small Arms Review I think in the late 90's how to fix such problems with short barreled 16's. If you want I copy I could probably find it.
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 7:04:41 AM EDT
Um...was it an A2 with the three shot burst selector?
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 9:52:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MrMorden:
Um...was it an A2 with the three shot burst selector?


I was thinking the same thing...
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 10:01:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MrMorden:
Um...was it an A2 with the three shot burst selector?


if it isn't this, it's most likely a bolt bounce issue.

heavier buffer should fix it right up.
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 10:46:24 AM EDT
I got the impression that this was a Navy MK18 MOD 0, in which case the lower is either a M16A1, or a M4A1. Neither of those lowers have BURST.
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 11:07:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MrMorden:
Um...was it an A2 with the three shot burst selector?


3 shot burst doesn't cause light primer strikes though, this is caused by the sear not holding the hammer correctly. It lets go prematurely and the hammer rides the firing pin. Sometimes it works as designed, sometimes it doesn't.

Link Posted: 10/3/2007 12:41:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Ekie:
I got the impression that this was a Navy MK18 MOD 0, in which case the lower is either a M16A1, or a M4A1. Neither of those lowers have BURST.


MK18s are all auto.
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 12:49:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TXGunnersM8:

Originally Posted By Ekie:
I got the impression that this was a Navy MK18 MOD 0, in which case the lower is either a M16A1, or a M4A1. Neither of those lowers have BURST.


MK18s are all auto.


DITTO
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 5:46:53 PM EDT
Hey KurtVF, let me get a link or refference to that article you were talking about....
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 8:32:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By loadedspecops1911:
Hey KurtVF, let me get a link or refference to that article you were talking about....


Not KurtVF, but the issue of Small Arms Review in question was January 1998, article titled M16 Shorty Diagnostic on page 12. The article written by Thomas T. Hoel was one of the most informative, well thought out pieces of technical gun writing I have ever read. I kid you not, Mr. Hoel knows his $hit!
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 4:10:04 AM EDT
Hey thanks!!! Thats the article.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 6:54:40 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/4/2007 6:55:58 AM EDT by rxdawg]

Originally Posted By ranchhand:

Originally Posted By MrMorden:
Um...was it an A2 with the three shot burst selector?


3 shot burst doesn't cause light primer strikes though, this is caused by the sear not holding the hammer correctly. It lets go prematurely and the hammer rides the firing pin. Sometimes it works as designed, sometimes it doesn't.



Could his 'light primer strike' just be a firing pin mark from chambering the round?

Edit: I was thinking a burst selector also.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 9:48:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By rxdawg:

Originally Posted By ranchhand:

Originally Posted By MrMorden:
Um...was it an A2 with the three shot burst selector?


3 shot burst doesn't cause light primer strikes though, this is caused by the sear not holding the hammer correctly. It lets go prematurely and the hammer rides the firing pin. Sometimes it works as designed, sometimes it doesn't.



Could his 'light primer strike' just be a firing pin mark from chambering the round?

Edit: I was thinking a burst selector also.


The gun quits cycling on its own. I'll bet that if you broke it down when it stops (do not eject shell) the hammer will be in the forward position. It happened to mine and almost everyone else's. Mine was fixed with an H buffer and that's all it took. The H buffer slows down the carrier and allows the hammer to behave as designed.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 11:09:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ranchhand:
The gun quits cycling on its own. I'll bet that if you broke it down when it stops (do not eject shell) the hammer will be in the forward position. It happened to mine and almost everyone else's. Mine was fixed with an H buffer and that's all it took. The H buffer slows down the carrier and allows the hammer to behave as designed.


Exactly. His MK18 SHOULD already have an H buffer. So the answer is going to be to go up to a H2, or ditch the "field modification" that probably induced the malfunction in the first place.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 11:59:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Ekie:

Originally Posted By ranchhand:
The gun quits cycling on its own. I'll bet that if you broke it down when it stops (do not eject shell) the hammer will be in the forward position. It happened to mine and almost everyone else's. Mine was fixed with an H buffer and that's all it took. The H buffer slows down the carrier and allows the hammer to behave as designed.


Exactly. His MK18 SHOULD already have an H buffer. So the answer is going to be to go up to a H2, or ditch the "field modification" that probably induced the malfunction in the first place.


I didn't know it already had the H buffer. I missed the "field mod" is that the flashhider?
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 12:05:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bassackwards:

Originally Posted By Ekie:

Originally Posted By ranchhand:
The gun quits cycling on its own. I'll bet that if you broke it down when it stops (do not eject shell) the hammer will be in the forward position. It happened to mine and almost everyone else's. Mine was fixed with an H buffer and that's all it took. The H buffer slows down the carrier and allows the hammer to behave as designed.


Exactly. His MK18 SHOULD already have an H buffer. So the answer is going to be to go up to a H2, or ditch the "field modification" that probably induced the malfunction in the first place.


I didn't know it already had the H buffer. I missed the "field mod" is that the flashhider?


Yup. One that directly affects the amount of gas redirected to the bolt/carrier assembly and the velocity of the bolt/carrier assembly, too.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 12:24:26 PM EDT
I don't know that this weapon has a H buffer, I just assume it is a MK18 MOD 0 and has one. Most MK18 MOD 0's are cobbled together at CRANE, so can't be sure a H buffer was put in it.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 1:29:27 PM EDT
What about the the Noveske rifles aren't they same as the MK18 MOD 0's? Wouldn't the Krink cuase problems on theirs if that was the case?
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 1:31:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By loadedspecops1911:
What about the the Noveske rifles aren't they same as the MK18 MOD 0's? Wouldn't the Krink cuase problems on theirs if that was the case?


Their gas port size is probably optimized for use with their Krink. Theirs may short cycle w/o it.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 3:37:08 PM EDT
Sounds like a 3rd burst installed in a M4A1 lower. Primer strikes are very common. We loaded and unloaded our M4s 10-20 times a day sometimes. I rotated the top round regularily as it was full of primer strikes to the point it looked unsafe.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 4:05:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By loadedspecops1911:
What about the the Noveske rifles aren't they same as the MK18 MOD 0's?


No, they are not the same.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 7:07:35 PM EDT
The correct buffer for the MK18 would be an H3!

The H and H2 buffer are for standard M4 and M4 SOCOM HBARs respectively, Commandos get the H3.

and that Armorer you spoke of needs to go drive a truck or paint the ship, if the weapon does not function, FIX IT!

RMiller
Link Posted: 10/5/2007 8:23:29 AM EDT


Originally Posted By TANGOCHASER:
Sounds like a 3rd burst installed in a M4A1 lower. Primer strikes are very common. We loaded and unloaded our M4s 10-20 times a day sometimes. I rotated the top round regularily as it was full of primer strikes to the point it looked unsafe.


Posted by TXGunnersM8
All Mk18s are auto. Ditch the krink. What ship is this?


Provided it hasn't been messed with by a previous owner or a stupid armorer. Full auto parts may have been replaced by "who knows".

Could be dirty.

Could have wrong parts installed. Burst vs FA. Compare it to another gun like the OPs that works.

Gas tube could be bent where it hits the key on the carrier causing drag.

Could have worn or broken internal FCG parts.

Might not be a MK18 but some cobled together piece of shit.


Too many variables. Start by cleaning the piss out of it to include the gas tube. Have the armorer check for damaged, missing or incorrect parts. If the armorer can't identify the problem then have him turn it into 3rd shop for repare and get a ndifferent weapon.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 5:20:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RMiller:
The correct buffer for the MK18 would be an H3!

The H and H2 buffer are for standard M4 and M4 SOCOM HBARs respectively, Commandos get the H3.

and that Armorer you spoke of needs to go drive a truck or paint the ship, if the weapon does not function, FIX IT!

RMiller


The H3 is purley a aftermarket product. The H2 is specifically for the RO921HB.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 6:31:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Ekie:

Originally Posted By RMiller:
The correct buffer for the MK18 would be an H3!

The H and H2 buffer are for standard M4 and M4 SOCOM HBARs respectively, Commandos get the H3.

and that Armorer you spoke of needs to go drive a truck or paint the ship, if the weapon does not function, FIX IT!

RMiller


The H3 is purley a aftermarket product.



But its made by Colt for SAW.


Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top