Has anyone experimented with removing some or all of the weights in the buffer. A gunsmith friend of mine told me to try it. I left one weight in the buffer and cut a dowel rod to take up the space. AR functions flawlessly and is definitely "softer" feeling. This guy shoots his rifle with no weights in the buffer. When I tried that, I got light primer strikes. Your thoughts?

what would a buffer have to do with light primer strikes..last time i looked the hammer wasn't connected to the buffer.

Sorry Cos but your whole premise here is ass-backward.

I replaced all my CAR buffers w/ a "heavier" 9mm buffer to slow the cycling for greater reliability and a "softer" felt recoil and you are stating that "lightening" the buffer weight gets you a "softer feel" (whatever that's supposed to mean, I took to mean less felt recoil), something don't sound right here.

And as PFC has pointed out above the buffer has nothing whatosoever to do with the trigger parts contacting the firing pin, controling primer striking.

So what in the heck are ya try to say here?  'cus it appears your throughly confused.......

Mike

Mabe for 'Softer feel' you mean when the carrier returns forward?  I have sometimes noticed that the normal CAR buffers can feel kind of jerky when they return the carrier forward but lightening the buffer will only make that worse.  If you want softer recoil/overall shooting get an Endine hydraulic buffer.

I predict reliability problems.

A buffer with no weight..bolt bounce and receiver pounding here I come.There are weights for a reason..heavier makes softer less violent running system.Id like to see that lower without weights in the buffer...the only thing stopping the carrier key from damaging the lower is the plastic end on the buffer.

Quoted: Has anyone experimented with removing some or all of the weights in the buffer.

My only thought is "Why?"

What others have said is correct. The light strikes you are seeing are normal if they happen when you chamber a round. You can do that 5 times, according the  PS Magazine, before the primer is useless.  It is perfectly normal for this to happen since the firing pin is not spring loaded but floats freely in the bolt.

Taking out those weights reduces the "dead blow" effect of the buffer and may result in your rifle being slightly out of battery. Remember, the protrusion on the firing pin is only about 1/64th of an inch to begin with. If the carrier is backed out of battery by double that, you're rifle isn't going to fire. That could happen if you shoot with too light a buffer, get bolt bounce, and don't realize it.

My thought on this is possibly to have lower weight to prevent short stroking. Less mass to move would let the bolt and carrier ride back with less effort. I have had a problem with short stroking with Wolf ammo and think that my H stamped buffer might be the culprit. Any other reason than that for removing weights do not make any sense to me. If you have some more info as to why I would love to hear it.

Hi guys--at least I started an interesting topic. I believe my problem with no weight was the bolt not closing completely. The light primer strikes did not happen on the first round. I also noticed that there is movement room in the buffer. You can shake the weights backward and forward. My thought is the buffer goes forward and stops and the weights are still moving forward to provide another bump against the bolt. I may be completely wrong.
I do know the rifle feels completely different when you take the weights out. Not sure why and some may like it and some not. Just an interesting idea to try.

I would never try it.  So many things could go so terribly wrong.  I'd just buy different ammo if I was experiencing problems.  Many stores try ammo in different uppers and different makes just to test for how well it cycles.  The best solution is to use higher pressure ammo if you have short stroking problems.

What the heck are ya smoking?

Ya took a bad post and made it worse, just say NO to drugs and do us a favor, don't post anymore until ya sober up.....

Mike

And as PFC has pointed out above the buffer has nothing whatosoever to do with the trigger parts contacting the firing pin, controling primer striking.



That statement could not be more wrong.

The buffer weights absolutely do serve a purpose for controlling primer striking (or at least enabling it to happen at all). When the AR15/M16 rifle begin recoil, the buffer weights are all toward the front of the buffer. At the moment of extreme rearward bolt carrier travel, the buffer weights all shift to the rear of the buffer. Now, when the hard metal bolt carrier slams up against the hard metal barrel extension, just as they would begin to bounce apart (bolt bounce), here come all the buffer weights sliding forward all pushing toward the front of the buffer, one after another in very fast succession. This transmits force to the bolt carrier through the buffer pad and keeping the bolt forced up against the barrel extension, allowing the bolt to lock and the trigger parts and firing pin to work as designed to impart the proper pressure on the primer to ensure reliable ignition.

Ever take a ball peen hammer and hit a vice with it? Just let the the hammer head fall into contact with the vice. Without some sort of buffering it will bounce back. This is the same principle that makes the bolt carrier want to bounce back after hitting the barrel extension.

Quoted: ....I also noticed that there is movement room in the buffer. You can shake the weights backward and forward. My thought is the buffer goes forward and stops and the weights are still moving forward to provide another bump against the bolt.....

Yep, it's done that way to prevent bolt bounce.

The real question is:

-what was the effect on your split-times? How much did the sight move (or, in Tactical/Open Division) how much did the reticle/dot move?

It is all about putting the rounds on target - only you MUST also put those rounds on target FAST or you won't be around long.

How about some split-time comparisons?

Quoted: And as PFC has pointed out above the buffer has nothing whatosoever to do with the trigger parts contacting the firing pin, controling primer striking. That statement could not be more wrong. The buffer weights absolutely do serve a purpose for controlling primer striking (or at least enabling it to happen at all). When the AR15/M16 rifle begin recoil, the buffer weights are all toward the front of the buffer. At the moment of extreme rearward bolt carrier travel, the buffer weights all shift to the rear of the buffer. Now, when the hard metal bolt carrier slams up against the hard metal barrel extension, just as they would begin to bounce apart (bolt bounce), here come all the buffer weights sliding forward all pushing toward the front of the buffer, one after another in very fast succession. This transmits force to the bolt carrier through the buffer pad and keeping the bolt forced up against the barrel extension, allowing the bolt to lock and the trigger parts and firing pin to work as designed to impart the proper pressure on the primer to ensure reliable ignition. Ever take a ball peen hammer and hit a vice with it? Just let the the hammer head fall into contact with the vice. Without some sort of buffering it will bounce back. This is the same principle that makes the bolt carrier want to bounce back after hitting the barrel extension.

I think you are wrong...if you are getting light primer hits you dont start changing around your buffer or buffer spring. There is a reason why they do offer extra power hammer springs.  Besides after the bolt is in full lock position what difference does it make what buffer is in place at the moment? The buffer isnt even in the sequence until the bullet is going down the pipe and extraction begins.

I think he was trying to might not have been fully in battery when the hammer fell, but I'll let him speak to that.  If the rifle feels better to you, and doesnt mess up, then go for it Cos.  Just know that you taking the buffer the opposite way than everyone else is.

Quoted: Quoted: And as PFC has pointed out above the buffer has nothing whatosoever to do with the trigger parts contacting the firing pin, controling primer striking. That statement could not be more wrong. The buffer weights absolutely do serve a purpose for controlling primer striking (or at least enabling it to happen at all). When the AR15/M16 rifle begin recoil, the buffer weights are all toward the front of the buffer. At the moment of extreme rearward bolt carrier travel, the buffer weights all shift to the rear of the buffer. Now, when the hard metal bolt carrier slams up against the hard metal barrel extension, just as they would begin to bounce apart (bolt bounce), here come all the buffer weights sliding forward all pushing toward the front of the buffer, one after another in very fast succession. This transmits force to the bolt carrier through the buffer pad and keeping the bolt forced up against the barrel extension, allowing the bolt to lock and the trigger parts and firing pin to work as designed to impart the proper pressure on the primer to ensure reliable ignition. Ever take a ball peen hammer and hit a vice with it? Just let the the hammer head fall into contact with the vice. Without some sort of buffering it will bounce back. This is the same principle that makes the bolt carrier want to bounce back after hitting the barrel extension. I think you are wrong...if you are getting light primer hits you dont start changing around your buffer or buffer spring. There is a reason why they do offer extra power hammer springs.  Besides after the bolt is in full lock position what difference does it make what buffer is in place at the moment? The buffer isnt even in the sequence until the bullet is going down the pipe and extraction begins.

I was referring to the role the buffer weights play on keeping the bolt in contact with the receiver to allow proper lockup (which would definitely play a role in whether or not the primer even gets hit at all)

This one sure got some interesting thoughts going. I have not measured split times but I will in the near future. I was shooting 8" paper plates at 60 yards offhand and the gun felt really good. My sense of feeling was that the rifle was steadier while cycling. I certainly have no empiracal evidence to back this up.

Stance and natural POA play more into splits than your buffer and firing group do. Trust me on this one. Your ability to manage recoil and your follow through will put you on target with any rifle faster than someone who isn't properly shooting the rifle.

As many on here are, I am a Colt Armorer. I work on guns at an international training center.

The buffer is built that way to stop bolt bounce. That's the bottom line. Take the discs out and you eliminate the physical properties that allow the buffer to act like a dead blow hammer. Try that ball peen test with a dead blow followed behin it and you'll se what I mean.

The firing pin does only protrude from the bolt face 1/64th of an inch. I checked my references and my gages. If the carrier is out of battery a little bit (Keep in mind it rotates that bolt 22.5 degrees during cycle) the firing bin will not go forward far enough.

Also, remember, the round doesn't get pressed onto the bolt face until the moment immediately before battery. It's not like a pistol, feeding under the extractor. The M4 family throws the round into the chamber then slams behin it, pinning the cartridge rim under the extractor pawl.

If you want to be faster, try a muzzle break instead. It may help manage that recoil if you're having problems. From a low ready, I get two rounds in at 15 meters in .6 seconds.  It's not the gun that does it, its the driver. Our fastes shooter here does it in .54 seconds.

The sliding weights are there to provide a dead-blow effect, which acts to negate bolt carrier bounce, which is essential in full-auto fire.  If you are shooting semi-auto only, it shouldn't matter for a hill of beans.

To me, it makes sense that you could get a smoother action with a lighter buffer, as it means you have less mass cycling back and crashing into the back of the receiver extension.  Ever wonder why an HK 91 kicks so hard?  It's because of that massive bolt carrier, slamming into the back of the receiver and giving you two recoil jolts for every shot fired.

Mind you, it will likely vary somewhat with the ammo you use.  Stuff that gives a high port pressure might accelerate that lightweight recoil assembly so fast it throws it into the back of the extension much faster than it should.

Recall that the original Colt AR-15 rifles did not have buffers in them, using instead the very light Edgewater spring guide.  Until ball powder came along, with its high port pressures, it wasn't an issue.  I say if it works, and you like it, there is no reason not to run your buffer without weights in a semi-auto.