Buffer length, springs, and hammers OH MY!

[leo6223]

I paged through several pages of posts and can't seem to find this if it has already been addressed......

Is carbine or rifle buffer length better for the .300 setup? Does it matter?


What is the best way to reduce the spring tension?...but the spring....get a reduced power?


and what about low mass hammers?


I talked to the guy at M1S and he seemed to be very knowledgable about the .300 and he mentioned reducing the spring weight and possiblely hammer weight.


I get how the reduced spring tension will help the subsonics cycle better but what about the hammer?

Why would that help? and what problems does it help?


Back to the rifle vs. carbine............does one have inherently more tension then the other?


Anyone try "shaving" the bolt carrier to reduce weight and help the subsonics cycle?




LASTLY.....I PLEDGE THAT AS SOON AS I BECOME A SELF PROCLAIMED EXPERT ON ALL THINGS .300 FIREBALL I WILL POST A 'BUILD' THREAD THAT ADDRESSES THE SAME 5 OR 6 QUESTIONS THAT GET ASKED OVER AND OVER AND OVER.....

Thanks to all the guys on this sight that put up with us .300 newbs!

[sharky47]

When I ordered my M1S barrel, I had them NOT drill the gas port - then I just threw it on the lathe and moved the gas block shoulder back to the pistol postition and drilled a .090 port there. The lower is just a run of the mill Bushmaster with a six position stock and carbine spring/buffer, the rifle runs FLAWLESSLY with subs - tried out supersonic rounds yesterday and while it functions, I still want to dial down the gas a bit.

[leo6223]

I'm definately going with the carbine length gas system and a hole drilled to .125"

My last decision is the rilfe or carbine length buffer.

[sharky47]

Well, in that case - all I can tell you is that *my* rifle works fine with the regular trigger pack and carbine buffer system - *should* be fine with your configuration as well.