AR Sponsor
Posted: 6/8/2005 12:07:52 PM EDT
|
A while back, in a pervious thread, I read about the Q-Buffer. It was obvious from the posted test results that it worked very well in semi-auto fire. However, there was no reference to full auto. I asked Clint Butler, (AKA Slash) about this and he replied that if I would like to help test it for him, he’d send me a one to try out. I agreed and a couple weeks later, a buffer arrived by Priority mail. My first impression was that it’s really HEAVY and the finish is excellent. In fact, the machining and parkerized finish was actually better than my factory Colt 9mm buffer. The head of the Q Buffer is stamped “Q 9” with a serial number electropenciled below that. This is a quality piece of work. There are obvious differences between the two buffers (See the picture below): Colt 9mm – 3 ¼” long, weight 5.40oz with sliding weights inside the body of the buffer. Q Buffer – 4 5/32” long, weight 9.40oz made of solid metal. That’s a full 4oz heavier than the factory buffer. If there’s a heavier buffer made, I haven’t found it. The other obvious difference is the size of the buffer head. The Colt 9mm buffer head is ¼” thick while the head on the Q Buffer is approximately 39/64” thick. The next step was live fire. The testing was conducted at an indoor range using the following setup: Lower – Colt AR15A2 Full Auto Registered Receiver with standard M16 fire control parts, KNS antirotational pins and a Colt M4, 4-position collapsible stock with standard buffer spring. Upper – Colt 9mm with 10.5” barrel and an unmodified bolt. Magazine block – Colt one piece bottom loading with last round hold open. Magazines – Colt 32 round Ammo – Winchester Q4172 115gr FMJ Six magazines (192 rounds) were fired with each buffer. One 32 round mag dump was done with each buffer to time the rate of fire while the other five mags were shot in bursts. The results were: Colt 9mm buffer: Approximate rate of fire – 835 RPM One failure to feed was experienced. This involved two rounds trying to feed at the same time. The bolt hold open functioned properly with all six mags. Q Buffer: Approximate rate of fire – 685 RPM (150 RPM reduction) Three failures to feed were experienced the same as above. The bolt hold open functioned properly with all six mags. Felt recoil was less and as a result, controllability was somewhat improved. While 192 rounds are not necessarily a definitive test of the Q-Buffer, several things did show up. On the plus side, as expected, the rate of fire and felt recoil was reduced. On the negative side, fail to feed malfunctions increased. While logic would dictate that bolt bounce should be greater with a lighter buffer, that’s not what the results of the test showed. The difference may very well be the fact that the Colt buffer has sliding anti-bounce weights while the Q-Buffer doesn’t. The Q-buffer is a very good product that works extremely well in semi-auto fire. For FA fire, I believe that anti-bounce weights need to be added. I think that Clint has that modification in the works and I’m looking forward to testing the buffer again once it’s been accomplished. 
|
Any word on if it will be a complete multi-piece buffer or just a longer replacement "head" that I can swap out from the standard 5.4 oz. multi-piece 9mm buffer I already have? |
That is an interesting thought, but I couldn't achieve the same total weight by merely retrofitting a steel 9mm buffer. The 9Q-FA will be a proprietary design, sold only as a complete buffer. I'll be using tungsten anti-bounce weights. |
I'll have to make some adjustments to the design. I may go up to 10 oz (I like round numbers  ), but I don't think going heavier than that will have any practical benefit. |
Mostly just a SWAG. I had three times the FTF with the Q buffer than I did with the standard Colt buffer. Each time the problem was two rounds apparently trying to feed at the same time. Besides the dimensions , the major difference between the buffers is that the Q doesn't have sliding weights. What does that indicate to you about the possible cause? I was using new 32 round Colt factory mags that were grabbed at random. I've looked them over closely and can't see any visual difference in the feed lips. The next time I test the Q buffer, I'll mark the mags to see if the problem occurs with certain ones but not others. |
AR Sponsor