User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 4:11:03 PM EDT
[#1]
The heavier buffer slows down the cycle in ANY rifle. This makes the rifle easier to handle, reduces the "slam-bam-slam" wear caused by carbine-length gas systems, and otherwise improves functioning.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 4:13:42 PM EDT
[#2]
I'm using the standard carbine buffer in my 16" RRA.
To be honest, I didnt notice any change in felt recoil between my 20" w/A1 stock vs. my 16" w/ 6-pos stock. In fact, it almost seems easier to follow through on shots w/ the carbine than my 20". Almost like the recoil is less...or the muzzle jump is less. It cycles WWB, rem umc, and wolf just fine. Try the normal carbine buffer first. JMHO |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 5:11:42 AM EDT
[#3]
In that case I'll keep the stock buffer.
Thanks! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 5:15:04 AM EDT
[#4]
I have a 9mm buffer in my carbine - shoots fantastic and I notice a distinct difference in felt recoil. YMMV. I like it.
My other two AR's have stock buffers.... I may try a 9mm in my 16" middy and see how that fares. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 5:20:06 AM EDT
[#5]
i run the mgi rrb in all of my rifles and it was a very noticeable change
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 6:24:56 AM EDT
[#6]
I don't mind the recoil from .223, it's very weak and I can handle it all day long without any problems. After 500rd or so of 7.62x39, my neck gets sore and I have a headache. If I had to complain about .223, it's that I never have enough ammo at the range. I burn through .223 like gasoline through my Ford V8.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 11:38:23 AM EDT
[#7]
uneffeciently?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 12:03:53 PM EDT
[#8]
My carbine was ejecting quite a ways forward with the standard crbine buffer so for shits and giggles, I decided to buy a RRA 9mm buffer to see how it worked. It has slowed the cycling down enough so that it ejects at about 3 o'clock.
It is basically counteracting the higher gas pressure that is in the carbine gas system by forcing it to move more wieght when unlocking the bolt. I like it. Hell, I even put one in my mid-length, although it wasn't as needed there as it was in the carbine. WIZZO |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 12:27:20 PM EDT
[#9]
I figure if I shoot Wolf, it's going to even out in terms of recoil w/ the stock buffer.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 12:41:01 PM EDT
[#10]
There is less muzzle rise using the heavier buffer. If all you do is shoot paper stationary on a range, it won't matter. However, if you are running drills, believe that a Pact timer is both your friend and nemesis, or use it as a weapon, you will find the change to be evident an dmost likely appreciated.
If you run a carbine with a standard buffer, and then with a 9mm or one of the heavier buffers and can't tell the difference, you are very out of touch with your weapon and need to get in more trigger time. Its worth pointing out that any time you make a change, you need to ensure that your weapon still runs like a champ with your ammo. Weak ammo may not cycle as well if you make this change, then again, it may be fine for you. Either way, check it before you rely on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 1:24:58 PM EDT
[#11]
I know I should try it, but would Wolf cycle with the 9mm buffer? I used a Wolff XP action spring on my AR rifle and Wolf would not cycle. When I used the stock spring and stock rifle buffer, M855 would eject cases at the 12/1 o clock position. Wolf was ejecting at 4-5 o clock.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 2:10:55 PM EDT
[#12]
i have had zero problems with any ammo using the mgi buffer
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 2:16:01 PM EDT
[#13]
I have the RRA 9mm buffer in my carbine and my father has the standard buffer in his carbine. You can tell the difference with both recoil and muzzle rise. They are both less. As always, YMMV
Brian 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 2:31:15 PM EDT
[#14]
+1 with Enidine and 9mm buffer... even Wolf. TS 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 2:47:40 PM EDT
[#15]
So the probability of the 9mm 5.6 oz buffer working with Wolf ammo in a 16" carbine is 100% assuming everything else is working?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 3:06:12 PM EDT
[#16]
Should be... TS
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/10/2006 3:58:02 PM EDT
[#17]
Once again
 Buffer weights control the functioning of the firearm (keeping the firearm from shooting itself apart, etc) Cyclic rate is a secondary function. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
