AR Sponsor
Posted: 12/3/2011 6:43:00 PM EDT
| Im currently running a psa 14.5 m4 with an aimpoint pro,and I usually shoot xm 193. I would like to upgrade to a heavier buffer. Should I get a spikes st-h2,psa h2,daniel defense etc etc? They are all about the same in price. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Why switch if your current one works? It works but I wouldnt mind easing the recoil down a smudge if possible. If you want to ease recoil you need to lighten the moving mass not add to it, simple physics. You may smooth out the action a bit, but the recoil will be greater. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just switched from an 'H' to Spikes ST-T2, haven't had it to the range yet but I don't expect any change in recoil. Try the Spikes...I would like to know how it works too. I have them in all my carbines they do not really lesson the recoil that I could tell. Mostly they slow down cyclic rate in full auto rifles by slowing the bolt down. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why switch if your current one works? It works but I wouldnt mind easing the recoil down a smudge if possible. If you want to ease recoil you need to lighten the moving mass not add to it, simple physics. You may smooth out the action a bit, but the recoil will be greater. You're right but forgetting the other half of the equation. Sure the added mass will add to momentum but velocity is the other component ( momentum = mass x velocity). In this capacity, less mass will speed up the cyclic rate (velocity) and thus have a larger impact on the bolt's momentum. It could also be too light and cause harm if the bolt is bottoming out and slamming at its extremes. ––I would rather be hit with a car at 1 mph than a bike going 20 mph. Obviously not the same but you get the point. But its working fine now, as it was designed, so i dont see why change it. I run an H on my 14.5 middy and even BCM says if it short strokes with lower power loads, switch to a carbine buffer. That's why going too heavy isn't good either....perfect median. OP.....we also need to know what current buffer you run now and most importantly, what length gas system. H will work for both carbine and middy. I know others run h2's with carbine lengths but i haven't and wouldnt. May or may not cycle with lighter loads and im pretty sure you won't feel a difference. Pros dont out weigh the cons. Plus its already working fine... |
|
Quoted:
I have them in all my carbines they do not really lesson the recoil that I could tell. Mostly they slow down cyclic rate in full auto rifles by slowing the bolt down. I've recently put together 2 more PSA kits for my better half, 16" HF M4 profile barrels, the PSA kits utilize the standard weight 2.9 ounce CAR buffer and when she took them to the range for the first time shooting LC XM193 the ejection pattern was a consistent 1 o'clock and she felt more 'perceived' recoil than she does from her Colt 6920. I shot them and they did seem a bit 'overgassed'... We tried 3.8 ounce H buffers and the ejection moved to 2 o'clock, tried 4.6 ounce H2 buffers and the pattern moved to 3-3:30, she was comfortable shooting them then and didn't feel she was getting 'popped' shooting nose to charging handle. Colt 6920's use 3.8 ounce H buffers standard but we needed to use H2's on the PSA's, I'm going to try Wolff extra power springs next time out to see if I can smooth the PSA's up further. Basically the faster the BCG opens, the more 'recoil' is perceived and the further toward 12 o'clock the cases eject. If your new PSA is a mid-length gas, consider the 3.8 ounce H buffer, if it's a carbine length look at an 4.6 ounce H2. You might also discover a Wolff action spring will be helpful. Note that if you use lower powered ammunition than the XM193 you can find that the heavier buffers cause cycling issues so whatever you chose be sure and test it to determine you've not gone too far and created a reliability situation... Edited to add: Just a thought, if you want a 'set it and forget' it arrangement, pick up a 3.8 ounce H buffer, a Wolff XP buffer spring and you should reduce felt recoil without causing reliability to suffer... |
|
I build two matching carbines last year in an attempt to test the difference in recoil by tweaking the gas systems.
Both are running all the same parts, the exception is one has a 16" M4 contour carbine gas system, and standard buffer. The other, a 16" m4 contour with midlength gas system and a spikes H buffer. Shooting them one after the other the difference between the two is negligible in terms of recoil... Yes, I've tried swapping buffers and still found no difference. A new buffer likely won't lighten recoil...just your wallet. Spend the money on a BRAKE and better ear protection. YMMV. |
|
Buy an H3 buffer, a hammer, and a set of punches. With a regular carbine buffer and an H3 buffer, you can mix and match the internal weights. Just knock the roll pin out and pull the bumper off. They're just short lengths of steel and tungsten rod.
Carbine - 3 steel weights H1 - 1 tungsten weight, 2 steel weights H2 - 2 tungsten weights, 1 steel weight H3 - 3 tungsten weights |
|
Quoted:
Buy an H3 buffer, a hammer, and a set of punches. With a regular carbine buffer and an H3 buffer, you can mix and match the internal weights. Just knock the roll pin out and pull the bumper off. They're just short lengths of steel and tungsten rod. Carbine - 3 steel weights H1 - 1 tungsten weight, 2 steel weights H2 - 2 tungsten weights, 1 steel weight H3 - 3 tungsten weights Good idea. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why switch if your current one works? It works but I wouldnt mind easing the recoil down a smudge if possible. 5.56 does not have recoil. Recoil is both subjective and objective (measurable). Ignorant statement. Yes, 5.56 does have recoil and it can be reduced through various means such as buffers and comps. |
|
How many times in these types of discussions have we read that various members have installed a 9mm buffer and reported a reduction in recoil.
Maybe its subjective, maybe not. I've never tried a 9mm buffer. ETA: I've read on numerous occasions that people who seem to know what they are talking about, say that you should use the heaviest buffer you can that still permits the rifle to cycle properly. |
|
I use a DPMS "Counterweight" buffer in several rifles including a couple 20" rifles with collapser stocks
It weighs 5.4 ounces, about 2/10ths more than a standard rifle buffer. Function has been excellent and the rifles aren't as 'bouncy'. About $40 from Brownells. HTH |
|
Quoted:
How many times in these types of discussions have we read that various members have installed a 9mm buffer and reported a reduction in recoil. Maybe its subjective, maybe not. I've never tried a 9mm buffer. ETA: I've read on numerous occasions that people who seem to know what they are talking about, say that you should use the heaviest buffer you can that still permits the rifle to cycle properly. I have a .50 Beowulf upper on an ArmaLite lower with a 4 position Colt receiver extension and M4 stock and I'm using it with a Colt H3 5.5 ounce buffer, basically the same weight as a 9mm buffer. I've also shot this setup with a standard weight 2.9 ounce buffer and those who think there's no difference in perceived recoil with a heavier buffer should try that test sometime with .50, you'll put in the H3 buffer quick. Recoil isn't reduced by adding a heavier buffer, in fact recoil should actually be increased due to the increased mass yet the perceived recoil is reduced due to the slowing of the velocity of the BCG. The recoil impulse is spread over a longer duration. My comments regarding ejection pattern were in regards to the obvious visual cue it gives you, if your brass is ejecting with such force that it ricochets off the brass deflector and bounces forward at 1 o'clock or so the chances are the BCG/buffer/spring is slamming into the extension with greater velocity than is necessary and you might want to consider slowing the rearward momentum with a heavier buffer... or not... YMMV... |
|
Replacing the buffer is a good idea is some situations. If you are having bolt bounce in a full auto gun for one. Another is if you have high pressure signs like ejector swipe a heavier buffer may help
I use a H buffer in 16" carbines and an H2 in 14.5" carbines with standard USGI Springs. |
|
Instead of changing buffers, try the Tubbs Flat Wire Buffer Spring. It compensates for the need to change buffers with different ammo loads. Also has a lot longer life so you never need to replace it.
The Tubbs Flat Wire Springs also help with bolt bounce that has been associated with the Spikes Buffers since they are packed solid and eliminate the dead blow properties that buffers are suppose to provide. |
The main goal should be to enable faster follow-up shots while controlling muzzle rise. The secondary benefit is a lessening of felt recoil. I have recently installed muzzle brakes on all 3 of my AR'S starting with my Armalite AR10 carbine with a Smith brake.That worked very well so I tried the Rainier mini comp on my Trusty old Colt SP1.It worked VERY well so , I put another another mini on my new Palmetto carbine with the same result! My next step is to experiment with buffers,9mm buffer from Rainier is 1st. up and we will see how that goes.All 3 guns have optics which make them more sensitive to muzzle flip, so I am thrilled with the results so far and will continue on until the point of diminishing returns is crossed. JB
|
|
It seems like buffer "upgrades" are the new, must-have "mod of the month" here, at least it's not BAD levers any longer...
Seriously, if you're running a 14.5" M4 - use an "H" buffer. That's it. Leave it alone. Seriously. Unless you have an advanced engineering degree and lots of money / equipment / facilities - the factory specificed configurations for gas port, dwell time, buffer / carrier / spring weight, ect. are probably far superior in terms or balancing reliability, user interface, and parts life than anything you're going to come up with by switching parts around and determining results based on your subjective "tames recoil, feels smoother" assessments. This goes double for configurations like a 14.5" M4 - arguably the most heavily tested and evaluated configuration in the history of the platform. There's no reason with that configuration to deviate from the factory standard, and you probably do so to your detriment. With more "wildcat" configurations like midlengths, anything 16" barreled, short barreled, ect. there might be something to "tweaking" things, but if you're running a simple 14.5" M4 - you seriously do not need to, and will probably just make things worse by doing weird crap to it and randomly changing out parts, especially if you're not changing out multiple parts that interact as part of a system, but only individual components. Also, using a buffer with non-reciprocating weights (i.e. like a 9MM buffer) is just inviting parts battering and bolt bounce. The H3 weighs basically the same. "Powdered" buffers do the same as reciprocating ones, just using different methods - as do hydraulic buffers. Not, IMHO, significantly better than reciprocating weight buffers at anything but lightening your wallet, but YMMV. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
It seems like buffer "upgrades" are the new, must-have "mod of the month" here, at least it's not BAD levers any longer... Seriously, if you're running a 14.5" M4 - use an "H" buffer. That's it. Leave it alone. Seriously. Unless you have an advanced engineering degree and lots of money / equipment / facilities - the factory specificed configurations for gas port, dwell time, buffer / carrier / spring weight, ect. are probably far superior in terms or balancing reliability, user interface, and parts life than anything you're going to come up with by switching parts around and determining results based on your subjective "tames recoil, feels smoother" assessments. This goes double for configurations like a 14.5" M4 - arguably the most heavily tested and evaluated configuration in the history of the platform. There's no reason with that configuration to deviate from the factory standard, and you probably do so to your detriment. With more "wildcat" configurations like midlengths, anything 16" barreled, short barreled, ect. there might be something to "tweaking" things, but if you're running a simple 14.5" M4 - you seriously do not need to, and will probably just make things worse by doing weird crap to it and randomly changing out parts, especially if you're not changing out multiple parts that interact as part of a system, but only individual components. Also, using a buffer with non-reciprocating weights (i.e. like a 9MM buffer) is just inviting parts battering and bolt bounce. The H3 weighs basically the same. "Powdered" buffers do the same as reciprocating ones, just using different methods - as do hydraulic buffers. Not, IMHO, significantly better than reciprocating weight buffers at anything but lightening your wallet, but YMMV. ~Augee Now that's funny. 
I agree on the buffer choice also, 14.5 carbines like the H buffer. Every fire arm is a little different, don't change just for the sake of changing. Some carbines like the standard buffer and well choke on low power ammo with the H buffer. |
AR Sponsor