Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Squeaky

Is a buffer necessary?

Recommended Posts

Hey Y'all:

 

I want to ask if a recoil buffer is necessary or is it just a gimmick to make you feel better in some way. Is there a real mechanical reason for needing a recoil buffer? Does it help with longevity of your Saiga .223 rifle?

 

Just wondering. I remebered my Saiga doesn't have one yet. Shoots just fine so far. 

 

Thanks. 

Edited by Squeaky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always figure that shortening the length of the bolt carrier stroke, by adding a buffer, does more harm and is more likely to cause short-cycling than not having the buffer. Kalashnikov designed it well.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with YOT and would also add that it could actually have the potential to harm longevity.  Instead of the carrier barely glancing the rear trunnion, that trunnion is now taking the full force of the impact (although padded) every time.   It is the recoil spring's job to stop the carrier's rearward movement, but if you put the buffer in, it is being artificially stopped short, with all of that energy transferred to the rear trunnion.

 

There is also the potential for that piece of rubber to degrade over time and break apart, possibly jamming up the rifle.   Though it would probably not cause any actual problems, I wouldn't put them in my guns if you paid me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was even one builder (I think gunplumber) over on AKfiles that claimed someone sent him a rifle for repair that had used a buffer, though it may have been overgassed. Over time the impact of the carrier on the buffer had caused the buffer to "mushroom" with each impact, and had pushed the rear of the receiver outwards and deformed the rivets.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the bolt-carrier is slamming the rear trunnion hard, replace the recoil springs.

 

Had that happen on my sks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use shock buffers on all my semi autos, especially my M1911s. Many people say they are "snake oil". A few even say as above, they can do more harm than good. Tens of thousands of rounds using shock buffers, and I haven't experienced a problem one. I used to shoot M1911s competitively, that's how I can claim so many rounds. IMO, a shock buffer is a necessity. To each his own I guess? 


To add one thing. Many guys claim a shock buffer is not needed on a pistolsmith custom built M1911 such as I use because the slide to frame fit is perfectly square and battering / peening can't happen. It is hard to argue that point, but, stop and think, is the bolt to frame fit on a AK perfectly square? No way ... no how. I use shock buffs. Again, to each his own.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither did J.M.Browning, but even great designs can be made better.

The 1917A1, 191A4, M2 50BMG all were designed BY JMB with buffers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run my 223 with a heavy duty spring because all I shoot in it is nato or hot as I can reloads.

Other wise you should leave it stock and not waste your money on gimmicks.

I guess the heavier spring would soften the recoil on 223 but recoil with 223 is not really an issue in my opinion

Edited by jerry52

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been wondering if buffers would actually prevent the taill on bolt carriers from mushrooming out bad...the hammer reset specifically seems to flatten out and deform over time on many ak type guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been wondering if buffers would actually prevent the taill on bolt carriers from mushrooming out bad...the hammer reset specifically seems to flatten out and deform over time on many ak type guns.

 

No, the tail of the bolt carrier often mushrooms due to the sharp corners on the hammer of the G2 triggers.  The rear corner is the one most responsible, and you can see this by slowly pulling the charging handle back when the hammer is in the forward position.   You'll see where the tail hits that hard corner and deforms.   If you're careful, you can round out that hard corner on the hammer (not the hammer face itself) with a hand file and sandpaper to prevent this or keep it from getting worse.

 

From what I have seen, this is more of an issue on Hungarian and Yugo rifles.   I think that the Russians and Bulgarians might be using slightly harder steel because they don't seem to mushroom as severely on this edge.

 

The tail itself never touches the trunnion as in the furthest rearward position it is nested inside the rear of the recoil spring assembly.

 

Assuming you have a G2 in the rifle this is the part of the hammer that is deforming your bolt carrier. (circled in red)

 

post-47428-0-88474600-1442516034.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No SIMPLE answers. I use buffers if they work IN THAT GUN. I do have a gun that will not work without one, but that one is a bastard parts build and the bolt runns off the rails without one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×