AR buffer question.

bullseye308

Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
3,112
Location
Smyrna Tennessee
I keep seeing discussions about different weights on buffers and how they effect recoil. Some contain tungsten or other metals to vary the weight. Can you change the weight of the one you already have by adding lead or some other fillers? I’d like to give it a try if it is feasible, but will buy one if necessary.
 
My journey into AR building regarding buffer weight has to do with progression of AR15 which started out with 20" barrel with rifle length gas tube that provided mild/soft recoil impulse and reliable cycling. Then progressing to shorter 16" carbines with carbine length gas tube producing harsher recoil impulse (Especially with 5.56 NATO loads) with reliability issues, different buffer weights (And gas port sizes) were tried to soften the recoil impulse and improve cycling reliability of bolt that of rifle gas system.

As to AR9/PCC buffer weight to keep front sight more steady for faster follow up shots/match shooting, it's a different journey - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...back-recoil-impulse-9mm.924171/#post-12740825

7ece239117706b9926754d531edabdba.jpg
 
Last edited:
Buffers are very inexpensive.

Rather than having to dissect your buffer every time you want to experiment with weight-changes, just buy several buffers.

I have a "kit" that has every conceivable weight AR buffer, and every conceivable weight buffer-spring.

That said, I try to set up all my AR's to run with a standard carbine buffer (3.0 ounce) and standard carbine spring. If I use FULL POWER LOADS, I've had great success with the standard buffer and spring.

There are various hobbyist and competition reasons to play with different buffer and buffer-spring weights.
The investment to build your own kit is not much money.

The main reason I built mine is to help out some of my rifle team guys who seem to manage to get all that stuff messed up. Usually ends up they (or someone who "helped" them) did some sort of tomfoolery with their gun that "just won't act right." It always amazes them when I pull the bolt-assembly and buffer and buffer spring out of my gun, and stick it in their gun, and I have them shoot my ammo. Oh my!,.... The gun is "acting right" now.

Maybe you're getting my point by now.

All those oddball weights and springs and weirdo ammo will conspire to cause you fits more often than they will solve any actual problem.
 
The ejection angle chart should be used as a VERY loose suggestion. A lot of environment conditions will change ejection pattern. I like to run buffers on the heavier side to slow the action and increase mass for the return stroke of the BCG.

 
I keep seeing discussions about different weights on buffers and how they effect recoil. Some contain tungsten or other metals to vary the weight. Can you change the weight of the one you already have by adding lead or some other fillers? I’d like to give it a try if it is feasible, but will buy one if necessary.
You can or just get an Odin adjustable buffer (strike industries also sells them). To me the best way to control recoil is by an adjustable gas block and use less reciprocating mass by lower weight carrier and low weight buffer. I have a jp low weight rifle buffer I use in conjunction with a lite bcg and agb. Shoots great!
 
Folks act like AR-15’s are built to be riding on a tight rope, but in reality, we have a huge highway of operability.

Why do so many AR’s “run right” with carbine weight buffers and springs? Because that combination is undermassed for the commonly overgassed system, so they’ll fire and feed, but they’re running harder than they should and recoil impulse feels like garbage. Colt uses heavy buffers in their standard design for a reason - because that’s what the rifle really should be using. But commercial manufacturers have realized they get less complaints when rifles ALWAYS feed, even if they are overdriving their actions, so they use “carbine weight” buffers as standard equipment - and the rifles are overgassed. All we are doing is balancing gas and mass, so many folks observe an overGASSING problem, meaning too much flow is being redirected to the action instead of driving the bullet, but then folks throw more weight at the reciprocating mass instead of fixing the gas… Throttle the gas, you’ll get the ejection you want. Better still, use H2 weight buffers AND throttle the gas, and you’ll get a fantastic recoil impulse, no wasted powder, cleaner action, and reliable operation…
 
Sounds like if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Thanks fellas.
That's correct. The AR15 has been perfected for many years and one of the best platforms ever designed. Low recoil was built into the design. I do have 1 mid length that has the H2 buffer in it and it runs reliably.
 
Well just for something to do I bought a spare buffer and once it warms up again I’ll most likely try and see if my son and I notice and difference with the different weights we try. I’ll try and document the process, but it won’t be scientific and mostly subjective. Mainly it will be a reason to spend the day at the range and teach him more about how the platform works. We just built him one for Christmas and he is new to rifles in general.
 
If you know the gas port size to start with it's a lot easier to match the action to the gas system.

I don't use a carbine action for anything and have converted to an A5 action for anything I want to use an adjustable stock on.
I use the A5H2 buffer and a green rifle spring for all of them. Same spring and buffer weight as a Rifle action (A2)
Ran it on a carbine gas at first, then went to mid and rifle gas systems.
With a properly sized gas port they are reliable and the recoil impulse is very smooth, very little dot bounce when using a red dot and scoped reticles remain on target.

This is good info on gas systems and actions.
 
One of the side effects of Lego-like interchangeability is in "fiddling" with the specs.
But, the specs are really quite small across their differences (in an engineering sense), so, often, there's actual little perceptible change in performance for end-users.
Which does not prevent them from going online and declaring them better than sliced bread and first bicycles.

As our esteemed and experienced @Varminterror points out, it's possible to have things that "work" (e.g. press trigger, bullet goes down range) but could be more "optimal." And, optimal is in the eyes of the engineer as well as the beholder.
 
SOTAR did a couple video's that shows just what happens when the system is over gassed and under buffered.
They work and shoot.. For a little while then they just batter themselves to death.

With a BRT gas drive you can reduce the gas but I've found it cheaper in the end to research a bit and buy barrels with a properly sized gas port to start with.
Which isn't easy as quite a few don't list that specification, if they do it's listed as sized for optimum performance.
 
Buffers are cheap.
It's not worth my time taking apart something I can easily replace.
All my builds start with a medium.
Then I'll switch to a light or heavy as needed.
Rarely have I needed to switch. I DGAS about "perfect" extraction, reliable is good enough.
 
I've found it cheaper in the end to research a bit and buy barrels with a properly sized gas port to start with.
Which isn't easy as quite a few don't list that specification, if they do it's listed as sized for optimum performance.

In your experience, what is the ideal gas port size for a 6 ARC with rifle + 1 gas system 24” barrel polygonal rifling with 105grn Hybrids over Leverevolution at 28 degrees F?

In follow up, same question, but 97*F.

Same question as both, using a 6” suppressor?

Same question as the second, but using Varget?
 
I have no idea, I have no experience with 6 ARC.

I would imagine that the best way to find out is to work it up yourself.
5.56 already has known baseline for what works reliably in a variety of conditions.
 
I have no idea, I have no experience with 6 ARC.

I would imagine that the best way to find out is to work it up yourself.
5.56 already has known baseline for what works reliably in a variety of conditions.

In your experience, what is the ideal gas port size for a 223/5.56 with rifle gas system 24” barrel polygonal rifling with 77smk’s over Varget at 28 degrees F?

In follow up, same question, but 97*F.

Same question as both, using a 6” suppressor?

Same question as the second, but using Benchmark under 73ELD’s?

Same question as the second, but a 20” barrel with rifle length gas?

Same question as the prior, but 50 Vmax’s and a carbine weight buffer and ultralight BCG?
 
Haven't played with a 24"
But in talking with a guy that had one that wouldn't cycle with an A2 action he found the gas port at 0.086"
Opening it up to 0.089" brought it on line. That was unsuppressed and IIRC 77gn FGMM.
The 0.086" port would probably been about just right for suppressed use.
I don't see a reason either size in their respective role wouldn't function in that temperature range.

20" rifle gas barrels are 0.093" as a baseline.
I don't reload or have a suppressor so haven't had a chance to stray off the beaten path yet.
Mine are 14.7" and 18" using standard components.

Good chance to go cold weather shooting today but I think I'll pass.
 
Sounds like a lot of speculation, bounded by the range of specs, not so much anything definitively “optimal.”

And yeah, powder choice and temperature do influence port pressure, not to mention the influence of gas volume differential due to significant charge weight mass differences, all subsequently influencing potential gas flow.

*Hint - there is no universally “optimal” port diameter, even for a given barrel length… you should have also been asking for the barrel journal diameters, since port restriction is also dependent upon port depth. We’re balancing gas and mass, not all loads have the same port pressure nor potential gas flow, we have to tell ourselves pretty tall tales to pretend there’s an “optimal” port diameter…. Like I mentioned before - AR’s aren’t riding on a razor blade of operability. It’s a superhighway.
 
There may be no universal optimal port diameter.
But there is however an established and published baseline for what reliably works.

Start changing things and you will have to adjust and tune for what you have.
Not so much different than putting an engine together.
You have a base engine that works with what it has, start swapping things out and it's usually more than just one thing and it all has to work together.
Often times it's trial and error for what works until it does.
 
Back
Top