So recently I decided to change a Giessle super 42 H1 buffer to an H2 buffer. After ordering the tungsten weight and popping off the rubber cap I discovered the weights were installed backwards from what Giessle recommended. Giessle recommend inserting the tungsten weights first followed by steel weights. The steel weights should be the ones touching the rubber bumper.
This got me curious and after popping off the rubber caps of a few more buffers from Aero, White Label Armory, and another that I don’t recall the brand I noticed every one had the weights backwards from what Giessle recommended.
Does it matter which way the weights are inserted for H buffers or am I overthinking this entirely too much. Is it possible that all these manufacturers inserted the weights backwards or that Giessle messed up the instructions they sent?
That was my impression as well but how is it possible that 4 different H buffer from 4 different manufacturers placed the weights in incorrectly?
It leads me to believe maybe it doesn’t truly matter? I know I’ve ran some guns with the weights backwards and they ran fine. Maybe I’m just overthinking this but it just kind of bugs me that all of mine were backwards including the Giessle that came with specific instructions.
Can you post a picture of this drawing? Finding any information on this online has been almost nonexistent. The only info I was able to find was a brownells video that placed them in the same way giessle recommended in the instructions.
This will be fun. Definitely not. It doesn’t matter one iota. Aside from the fact during the first nanosecond those weights are travelling forward.:jester:
The weights are only there to prevent bolt bounce. Bolt bounce is only a problem in full auto as it disrupts the timing of the hammer falling on the firing pin.
In semiautomatic fire the hammer falls when the trigger is pulled again, which is long after even the worse bolt bounce has subsided. The since the weights sliding in the buffer serve no purpose in semiautomatic fire, the order in which they are placed is immaterial.
In full auto, it makes sense to put the heavier weights in the back, as the weights hit in succession, first the forward one, then the second one, etc. You want the impact force to increase, not decrease as a function of time.
I would argue that bolt bounce can be problematic in semi auto too. Bad bolt bounce could act like a bullet pulling inertia hammer on weakly neck tensioned ammo. It’s possible that I could be totally wrong on this, but I’ve seen some slow motion video, and that was my first concern.
When you step up to the AR-10, bolt bounce with crappy buffers like HEAVYBUFFERS.com can be so awful that it’s distracting. This is aftermarket nonsense of course, and not a real buffer. But an extreme example of a semi auto buffer still being important.
Disagree with you there… being I’ve seen out of battery discharges due to that very thing you said only is a problem with full-auto.
Link related to 9mm ARs, but still occurring with semi-auto fire. Just because OOB is almost non-existent in a 5.56mm, doesn’t mean it is the same across the board. And with the push of 9mm ARs over the past few years… it is a fair argument.
That being said, putting the heavier weight forward helps prevent that. Shy of “just because,” give me an argument where you’d see weight balance shifting towards the rear as a positive. Legitimate question.
Because even if you fire quick enough to send the hammer down when the bolt isn’t locked… you still end up with click/no bang and need to cycle the action. If running buffers like that reduces that chance (bolt bounce), why not?
You’ve seen a 5.56 AR fire out of battery? Or did you mean 9mm AR? It’s physically impossible for the firing pin to touch the primer if the gun isn’t fully in battery without some other mechanical failure.