Question for anyone out there who is familiar with the ST-T2 Spikes tactical buffer. I recently purchased an ST-T2 buffer. Not that i was having issues with my 2 month old M&P15 OR; just that I like to tweak and make things better if possible. Haven't shot the gun yet with the new buffer. In the 2 months I've owned the gun, I've put about 800 rounds through it. About 500 rounds of Russian steel case and about 300 rounds of PMC bronze.

Now; I've heard that the M&P15's are "Over-Gassed", so I figured the ST-T2 buffer would be a good addition. Heavier than an "H" buffer, but lighter than an "H2" buffer.

My question is: Has anyone had any issues with short stroking their M&P15? Especially anyone who has used the ST-T2 buffer, and/or if you shoot Russian Steel case ammo? Thanks... Mike...

I've heard also that the M&P15OR was overgassed, and that the ejection was a little strong. I haven't seen any dents on my brass or anything and haven't really noticed any signs of being overgassed. I've not tried any other buffers, I think the standard buffer is fine.

Are you having problems with short stroking?

Is that russian steel case ammo corrosive?

No Problems with short stroking or any rim issues. Probably don't need to replace the buffer. I'm just a "Tweaker" and like to make things better. No worries.

As for corrosive ammo. You're not going to find any corrosive ammo out there. They haven't made corrosive in decades. Don't let anyone tell you differently. Even my military ammo I buy for my M1 Garand stopped making Corrosive ammo about 50 years ago. The thing about the russian ammo is that it's "Steel Case". That's not a problem. it won't hurt your gun or anything. However; it doesn't expand as much as BRASS. As such, it will allow a little blow back past the case in the chamber. Therefor, a little more powder residue/carbon will build up in the chamber. Simply means you need to clean your rifle more often. i say "More Often", because there's actually people out there that go 500+ rounds without ever cleaning their rifle. Then they complain when cases sometimes stick in the chamber. If you shoot a lot of steel case ammo, just clean it more often. I always clean mine after a couple hundred rounds, so I never have problems anyway. Steel ammo is about $4 a box of 20. excellent stuff. If anyone tells you it will hurt your gun or is trash, they simply put: Have no idea what they're talking about.

Anyway; most people who have changed the buffer on their M&P15 haven't had any problems with short stroking, so that's good. I was just wondering if anyone put in an ST-T2 and was using russian steel case ammo. An ST-T2 is heavier than an "H" buffer, but lighter than an "H2" buffer. It should be fine. Should smooth out the action a bit and be easier on the bolt. Guess we'll find out this weekend.

I knew there wasn't supposed to be any corrosive ammo out there for a while, but i'd read that the russian steel case was corrosive. I don't use the russian myself, and since you used it just thought i'd ask.

Whose "they" that say the rifle is overgassed? I'd ask you what your signs of excessive bolt carrier velocity are, but you state the rifle has no issues. I think you have a solution in search of a problem.

Which direction is your brass ejecting and how far?

who are you addressing?

I said that I had not noticed any overgassing or ejection issues.

The OP.

...

I don't have a solution in search of a problem. Actually; I don't have a problem. Is the M&P overgassed? Yes. I will look it up again, or you can, but the mil-spec gas tube port hole is i believe: .062" for a carbine. For a MID size, the port size is .073. However; the M&P is set up with a carbine gas system, but still has the .073 gas port. Now most times this is not a major issue; because 90%+ of anyone who is shooting a civilian AR style rifle, is shooting .223 ammo and not 5.56, (Which has greater pressure). As such; a little over-gassed is not a problem. Even if you shoot a lot of 5.56 ammo, it's not a major problem. Most specs give a variance for a 16" barrel to have a port diameter of between .062-.078. But the reason for the variance, is because most there is carbine length, mid length, and rifle length gas systems. Most 16" barrels, SHOULD have a "MID Gas system". But many, like the M&P don't. They have a Carbine length gas system. But the gas port is sized for the Mid Gas system.

Again; this is not a major problem. With most .223 ammo and even some weaker ammo like some of the russian, it ensures you'll never short stroke. You'll notice it a bit more with REAL 5.56 military ammo. For me, it's not because I have a problem. I simply like to tweak. As such, I got an ST-T2 buffer. It doesn't use weights that independently shift as the bolt recoils against it and into the spring. It has tungston shavings/powder, to has a smoother and more gradual shift. Also; it's about 4.2 oz compared to a standard carbine buffer that is 2.9-3.0 oz. So; the standard carbine buffer is expecting "X" amount of pressure of gas from a mid length gas system. Instead, it's receiving more gas, because the gas system is a carbine instead of mid-length, but it has the gas port diameter of the mid-length which is larger. Pretty basic math. shorter distance, larger hole, more gas. Means it's Over-Gassed. But again; for 99% of all people, it is not and will never be a problem. For a tweaker, we care. We tweak for smoother operation. I was just wondering if anyone here was using the ST-T2 buffer with any russian steel case ammo; which overall tends to be a little lower velocity than american brass ammo, and definitely less pressure than military 5.56 ammo.

Again I ask, which direction is your brass ejecting and how far?

Why does that matter? Why do you "Ask again". I think i was quite clear in saying that my rifle; currently stock; is not having any issues. AT ALL!!! I'm simply "Tweaking". I do that a lot.

But if you MUST KNOW; my empties are shooting into a nice clean pile at the 4:00 position, about 7 feet away. And just anticipating the new buffer; because I haven't shot it yet; but having a lot of experience with AR's and heavy buffers in other AR's; I would anticipate that the new buffer would have the empties going closer to 5:00 and probably closer to about 5-6 feet away.

You posted the thread, now you aren't interested in input? Your ejection pattern is giving you information you aren't heeding, but you appear to be the expert so enjoy your "tweaking".

Accually there is a gas problem with every 16" barrel. Which is why there's a large variation systems trying to compensate for the shortened gas tube. With the m16's original design it had a 20" barrel. When the shorter barrels came about it through the system off. That why ars' some times experience stuck shells or broken extractors, because pressures haven't dropped before the bolt comes back resulting in the empty literally being ripped from the chamber.

...Also, my rounds eject @ 2-3 o'clock

I use Tula, and I've shot a few thousand rounds of it with both my S&W and a home-made AR with a stainless barrel.

__________________
*Aim small, miss small...

I use a H2 buffer, a blue sprinco spring, and a full-auto BCG in my S&W. Tweak away.

__________________
*Aim small, miss small...

You are correct. I started this thread. And Dragon; while I appreciate you trying to provide input; you aren't providing the input that I am looking for. If you care; here is a nice picture of ejection patterns of an AR15/M16 rifle. Now, the only problem with this, is you have to dig a little deeper. Why? Because in many modern AR's, including new M&P15's, they have a brass deflector on them. This will alter to an extent, the ejection pattern. Most notably, it can be a bit misleading on short stroking. But then again, there's normally feed issues associated with short stroking. Normally, if short stroking is suspected, that easy enough to determine by simply loading 1 round in the magazine, and seeing if the bolt open lock engages after shooting the one shot. So currently, my pattern of 4:00 is actually a normal ejection pattern. But again, as I mentioned previously, I and most people shoot .223 ammo and not 5.56, so there's less gas pressure to begin with. And I also said that I wasn't currently experiencing any actual problems. "Unless you think a 4:00 ejection pattern isn't correct". Now; do I think I'm the "Expert" on AR's? No. Not at all. But I am very knowledgeable and experienced with them. But I do appreciate you trying to help. Here's a pic if you care.

Attached Images

ARejectionpattern.jpg (65.8 KB, 1829 views)

BOTE: Not sure what type of ammo you are shooting, but if it's pretty hot; e.g. 5.56 mil surplus; that could be the reason for the 2-3:00 pattern. And that's actually still not really bad. If it ejects there for ALL ammo, you probably could use a heavier buffer to slow the cycle down a little. It would be less stress on the bolt; eject a little later; and feel smoother. (Not like .223 really recoils/kicks much anyway).

My main concern, and the reason I started the thread, was to see if anyone using the M&P15 had a heavier than carbine buffer, and was shooting Russian ammo. See if there were any issues. Jsimmons is using an H2, which is slightly heavier than my ST-T2, and he's shooting russian Tula. (I've shot a lot of that). Curious as to what his ejection patter is.

Normally, when tweaking, I go with the theory of go with the heaviest buffer/spring that will consistently cycle your bolt, doesn't short stroke, and will lock the bolt back at the end of the magazine. I have a carbine buffer and an H3. With that, I can mix and match the weights and make an H, H2, or H3. However; I bought the Spikes Tactical ST-T2 that doesn't use traditional weights. So there's no real way of experimenting. It's simply try it and it works or it doesn't. I was just looking to see if any other M&P15 users were shooting russian (Usually weaker ammo) and using an ST-T2. But Jsimmons H2 is close enough. If he can chime back in with his ejection pattern or any issues that might seem like short stroking, (Which I doubt, because he would have said something negative), but any additional info would help.

[QUOTE=christcorp;135831292]BOTE: Not sure what type of ammo you are shooting, but if it's pretty hot; e.g. 5.56 mil surplus; that could be the reason for the 2-3:00 pattern. And that's actually still not really bad. If it ejects there for ALL ammo, you probably could use a heavier buffer to slow the cycle down a little. It would be less stress on the bolt; eject a little later; and feel smoother. (Not like .223 really recoils/kicks much anyway).


I've been using 5.56 55gr. xm193. I'll get some .223 and see what changes. The chart helps, thx.

Unfortunately that chart is not accurate.

No suggestions as to what is?

I don't want to hijack anyone's thread. However with your described ejection pattern and lack of issues, you do not need to make any changes at all to your rifle.

Dragon; how many times must we go over this??? Seriously. Give it up. I never once said that I had an issues. I never once said that I needed to make any changes. I simply said I WAS going to make some tweaking changes. if you don't like to tweak and play, good for you. I really don't care. If I want to pour concrete into my stock and turn it into a table lamp, I can do that also. Don't worry about it. I never once asked for anyone to help me with a "Problem". I don't have any problems.

But to top it off; you tell me that the chart isn't accurate. But yet, my ejection pattern is quite fine; and that's exactly where the chart shows. Obviously it's pretty difficult to eject a round to the 12:00 position. But the chart is intended to show 3 basic ejections. When it's too light, too hot, and just right. So for that; the chart is quite accurate.

Again; stop telling me what I need to do. I never asked you or anyone else to help me with a problem. I never once said I had a problem. You mentioned not wanting to hijack the thread. I actually appreciate that. But we're talking about ST-T2 buffers (Or for some, they've been close by their experiences with an H2 buffer); and or people who shoot russian ammo.

I'm truly not sure what you're trying to contribute. Are you telling me that I shouldn't be tweaking my rifle? Are you going to tell me what ammo I should/shouldn't be shooting also? Maybe which sight I must put on my rifle. Sorry if I am sound pissy; but you keep harping on something that isn't an issue; isn't a factor; and isn't even part of the conversation. In one of your earlier posts, you told me "Your ejection pattern is giving you information you aren't heeding". Well; I've been giving you a lot of information that you too seem to not want to be heeding. You'd probably hate seeing how I restore cars and the "Tweeking" I do to them. I guess the only right way to own a rifle, is the way the factory sold it to me as.

BOTE: I think you'll find that with .223 ammo, that there will be a slight change in direction. Slightly off of the perpendicular that you're doing now. Probably between the 3-4:00 on the chart. I will agree with Dragon that there's nothing you need to do with your rifle. It is ejecting just fine. Do I think 2:00 is a little hot? Maybe. But it's not drastic. But again; the 5.56 ammo is hotter than .223, which means more pressure, which mean more forward ejection. I think you'd find that if you always shot .223, it would be perfectly in the blue/purple area of that chart. If you shoot 5.56 all the time and your content with the way the rifle feels, don't worry about it. If you're using a standard M&P15 that has a standard carbine buffer in it, you could swap it out for an H or H2 that's a little heavier. It would be easier on your bolt. Wouldn't slam forward as hard. Would eject more between the 3-4:00 with the 5.56. And the recoil/action would be noticeably softer. But again; that's only if you wanted to. Same with my rifle. It's operating perfectly fine. I just can't get dragon to understand that it's still permissible to play and tweak. Even if there's no issues.

If its overgassed, your brass might show signs with dents on the ejected brass from the brass being slammed into the sharper edge of the ejection port , and maybe from hitting the deflector harder also, as the ejection is a bit more forceful on overgassed weapons. A round with a heavier bullet (for example 62 grain) might not show the signs, but a 55 grain bullet round should.

I would not rely on that chart, I can tell you for a fact that its not accurate. Its actually a little backwards I believe. A lighter buffer would cause the brass to eject more forward at about 1 to 2 o'clock'ish (maybe around 2 to 3 o'clock'ish in some cases). Normal ejection for the standard military M4 is about 4 to 5 o'clock'ish. It was around 5 o'clock'ish in the older A1 models which was normal for them thus the reason for the brass deflector added in later models. My M&P ejects about 4 oclock'ish depending on the ammo ammo and bullet weight.

You also said you were shooting steel cased ammo. Steel is harder than brass and might not show any dents on the ejected steel. Try a brass cased 55 grain round then look at the brass, if its dented then you might be overgassed. Also, with the steel cased ammo, look around the ejection port and at the deflector, because the steel is harder then brass if your overgassed you might notice some marring of the finish.

(OK, its early and not enough coffeee, I think I said that right.)

If you go with a heavier buffer you may want to think about going with a sturdier buffer tube as well. For example: Deluxe Stock Assembly Kit For Mil Spec Stocks The Daniel Defense parts are mil-spec sized but sturdier to handle heavier buffers.

As you should have seen from my quote, I was not replying to you, but to another poster. Believe me I have zero interest in what you do with your rifles. The problem is that other readers will see things like that chart, and some of the comments, and be misinformed.

Back when "Romper Room" was my favorite show (circa 1953 I think) right about here is where Miss Frances would call for a "time out".

Fox; remember, part of the reason for it being overgassed, and LEFT overgassed, is two fold. 1) A 16" barrel normally (By mil-spec) have a mid-length gas system. The 11-14" barrel would have the Carbin length gas system. The further out the gas system, the larger the gas port. (Because you have further for the gas to travel, and less pressure after distance. The M&P15 with a 16" barrel, is using a carbine length gas system, but it maintained the mid-length gas port opening size. 2) The reason it was left this way, was to reduce the chance of short stroking. Why? Because the majority of AR shooters shoot .223 ammo instead of 5.56 ammo; which has more gas pressure than the .223 ammo. MANY AR makers of carbines do this. It isn't something unique to S&W.

Remember; when they developed the carbine, they shortened the stock. which meant they couldn't really put the standard buffer weight and spring in it. And it's the COMBINATION of ammo, gas, gas port, gas tube length, bolt control group weight, buffer, and buffer spring, that when combined can be tuned for precise and proper operation. Remember; the AR15 was originally designed for a full stock, 5oz+ buffer, longer spring, and 20" barrel with a rifle length gas tube and port. If you look at the majority of 16" carbines by colt and such, you'll find that they are mid-length gas systems with an "H" buffer, and appropriate buffer spring.

So; if you only shoot .223 ammo, and once in a while 5.56, most people will never have any issues with the stock M&P15 setup. You can however tweak it to run a little smoother. especially if using 5.56 ammo. It can be any combination of buffers, springs, or even putting in an adjustable gas system. The ultimate tuning, if not changing the gas system, would be to use the HEAVIEST buffer/spring combination possible, that would still reliably lock the bolt back after the last shot; using the weakest ammo that you would normally shoot. This isn't always practical, because many people, including myself, shoot at least 5-6 different brands/sizes of ammunition.

This is all about tweaking. As I mentioned in the first post, I have no immediate or noticeable problems. And I'm not looking for advice or suggestions to solve a problem. There are some that think I need assistance in solving a problem, but that simply isn't true. I could leave everything exactly the way it is, and there'd be no problems. But If I can tweak the system to run smoother, and with less wear/tear on the BCG, then that's what i'll attempt to do. Just like I do to computers, cars, and other things that are set up to work for the masses instead of custom built for the individual. There are some that will ONLY shoot 1 brand/weight of ammo; ever. They are big into competition shooting. They have adjusted the buffer, spring, BCG, gas, etc... to work perfectly for that one and only bullet load and weight. I'm not going to that extent. Just a little tweaking.

And fortunately, a couple of responses gave me the experiences i was looking for. Oh,and by the way, weaker ammo really will eject more towards the 6:00 position than less than the 3:00 position. It has to do with how fast the shell comes off of the ejector. You can see that in most any rifle, just by shooting .223 compared to 5.56 military surplus. The higher pressure ammo (5.56) will eject more forward. I thought it was the opposite until I actually experimented with different ammo. And then researching and finding that it is correct. But like everything, I never suggest anyone taking someone else's advice or opinions if not necessary. Simply get some 5.56 mil surplus ammo, and some .223 ammo, and shoot a box of both, and see which direction it goes.

Anyway; I do appreciate all the comments and assistance. Even from Dragon. Non of this is personal. The entire thread went way off of the original post. I simply wanted to know if anyone using an M&P15, was using an ST-T2 and shooting russian ammo. Just looking to see if anyone was having any short stroking issues. I didn't need anyone to give me advice about what I'm doing. Not like I started the thread saying I had a problem. But I do appreciate the thoughtfulness. I really do. I know that any and all comments, even if disagreed upon, was meant to be constructive and beneficial. For that, I thank everyone.

There's going to be trouble

But I like this chart because in the 6:00-12:00 section it says:

"If not Stag Left Handed upper, ensure that brass is not bouncing off of a range partner."

I did enjoy that! Hope I don't offend, just trying to lighten it up a little.

BTW - christcorp - nice post right above. I understand the need to mod, to tinker, to learn.

Well; I just got back from the range. Didn't get to shoot as much as I wanted to. Only about 240 rounds. First semi-warm day in a while, so there were others wanting to do some shooting to. There's no time limit or anything, but we're just considerate to each other. It's a wyoming thing. LOL!!!

Anyway; the Spikes Tactical Buffer worked flawlessly. And I definitely felt a softer recoil. Not rationalizing it; it's only $29. Not like there's anything to rationalize. But at least my perception felt a softer recoil. One thing I noticed; even with a .223/5.56 I will normally "BLINK" after the round goes off. Pretty normal reflex. Well; just like my .22LR, I found myself able to stare down my red-dot and not blink. Not sure if I never blinked, but when I was really concentrating on the shot (Pretty windy), I noticed that I never blinked. Definitely a little softer recoil.

As for ejaculation of the cases, they all still remained at about the 4:00 position. Nice pile like they're suppose to. I shot 100 rounds of Tula Steel case .223; 100 rounds of Barnaul true 5.56; 20 rounds of PMC bronze .223; and 20 rounds of Military 5.56. (Gotta remember to take them off stripper clips before I go shooting). Anyway; every single round went off like it was suppose to. Every spent brass ejaculated at 4:00 where it was suppose to. The bolt locked back after the last round of every magazine like it was suppose to. (4 USGI 30 round Mil Surplus mags with Magpul Gen III followers, and 5 Thermold 20 round LE/Govt only magazines).

So, as I expected and hoped for, the Spikes Tactical buffer performed perfectly. Only a couple hours out there, but it was fun. Especially when with open sights/red-dot non-magnification, I was able to put an entire magazine into a 4"x4" square on the target, without the use of a sled, vise, bench rest, etc... Just me leaning across a table.

On a side note. Dragon, have a question for you. You said a couple of times that the chart showing ejection of spent cases wasn't very accurate. Yet, you never said "WHERE" spent cases SHOULD eject on a properly gassed and functioning AR. Not wanting to start anything; just curious where you think they should eject. later... mike....

2:00 to 2:30.

I appreciate the response. My only thing is that I would not quite say that 2:00-2:30 is necessarily the "Norm" for all AR's. Each rifle is different. The ejection pattern for each gun can be somewhat unique; depending on the extractor, extractor tension, ejector spring strength, gas pressure, buffer, spring,etc... Point is; while 2:00-2:30 isn't uncommon; neither is 3:00-4:00. Depending on that individual particular weapon. If the weapon fires fine, cases aren't being dented or rims cut/ripped, recoil seems normal, etc... then the weapon is firing just fine.

Another thing that has an influence over the ejection pattern is both .223 and 5.56 ammo; as well as Steel case vs Brass case. Point is; the chart as I provided, is simply a ball park. As with all charts, nothing is definitive. I hope you agree to that. If you believe that 2:00-2:30 is the "Norm" and that a 4:00 demonstrates a problem, then unfortunately, you are very wrong. For that particular rifle, 4:00 could be just perfect. Most people account for a pattern somewhere in the just shy of Perpendicular. Which is 3:00. So most are in the 3:00-4:00. But there are plenty just above the perpendicular line. More the 2:00-3:00 area. Nothing wrong with that either. I believe there should be concern when the ejection is too far forward, or too far back. The 6:00-5:00 position or the 12:00-1:00 position. Other than that, what needs to be looked at is: Are the cases being affected by the extractor/ejector? Does there appear (Subjective) to be too much recoil for a .223? Does the bolt being sent back sometimes appear too weak or the opposite and too much force. But if the rifle shoots fine and there's no noticeable damage to the cases; then for that particular rifle, it's probably ejecting just fine. And again; steel cases vs brass cases will generally eject much differently. Steel will eject a little further back than brass.

Not being critical of you, but I don't understand what the heavier buffer did for you here. From what you posted of your experiences on the range with the weapon and the buffer, it sounds like you went from a normal condition to a, well, normal condition. I know you "perceived" less recoil, but is that all?

If the heavier buffer would have been doing something "altering" to the weapon in terms of 'overgassing' and ejection the ejection pattern would have changed, but your post is saying the ejection pattern did not change and remianed at its normal 4 o'clock ejection pattern. Even according to the chart you posted (which is not correct) the ejection would have been more forward but your saying it remained the same, in the norm for the platform at 4 o'clock.

[QUOTE=christcorp;135835543]As for ejaculation of the cases,QUOTE]

lol, nice.

I hesitate to continue participating in this discussion, as it's obvious a consensus won't be reached and really we are splitting hairs. But it's interesting to hear how other people run their ARs. I shot my 16" carbine today at the range, mostly a mil spec setup with an H buffer and regular carbine spring. I was shooting a 55gr handload which is very similar to any of the common 223 plinking ammo, but a bit hotter. F-C and LC brass cases. Having this thread fresh in my mind I carefully checked direction after firing, as sometimes of course what seems like 12 o'clock is actually 11 or what have you. All of my brass was landing 6-8 feet away at the 2:00 to 2:30. Cases showed little wear or damage after firing. The carbine performed 100% with smooth operation. To me this is perfect, exactly how I want my AR operating. It is similar to how my issue M4 operates and most good AR carbines I have handled.

None of the ejection patterns mentioned in this thread indicate a problem to me. I would only be concerned about brass shooting straight forward or dribbling out of the receiver at your feet, most everything in between is okay as long as the rifle is functioning correctly. The only issue I have is when people have a normally functioning AR, and see things like that chart, and feel they need to starting changing buffers and fixing a gas system which is functioning perfectly. I have no problem with people tinkering, I do it myself. But ARs are one of those systems where a lot of people know just enough to be dangerous because of how common and easy they are. Always take advice like this with a grain of salt until you can confirm it from other sources.

Fox; don't fall into the trap that dragon did, whereby you believe that the only reason to change something, is if you have a problem. I don't have a problem with my rifle; I never HAD a problem with my rifle; and I didn't anticipate any major improvements. Sorry if I happen to be financially well off, and it doesn't bother me to spend money on tweaking. That's all this was about. And to be honest; I will definitely agree with Dragon on one thing: I'm not going to participate in this discussion any longer. The individuals who had something relevant to contribute to my original post did so. Some others; contributed information that had no bearing on my thread/post whatsoever.

Suffice it to say: The information I was looking for when I initially asked questions, I received. The buffer did what I thought it would; and I am satisfied with it. You can believe what you want on the ejection pattern. Honestly.... I don't really care. I really don't. I know what normal ejection patters are. "When you consider all the variables such as gas port, ammo, buffer, buffer spring, ejection spring, etc... I also understand the uniqueness of each individual weapon. Anyway; I won't discuss ejection pattern with you. Sorry. Dragon tried asking me that on page 1, as if there was some significance. "As if I had a problem, and was trying to fix it". Again; and for the last time, (Because I WON'T reply any longer to this thread, unless someone has a question about the ST-T2); there is not a damn thing wrong with my M&P. There never was. I'm not trying to correct anything, nor trying to fix something.

As for your question on swapping buffers, no one is saying you should. But as for the best configuration; I firmly believe you should run the heaviest buffer that you gun can reliable feed, eject, and lock back with. And that will have a lot of variables. Anyway; you are free to start a thread all about ejection patterns. I try to imagine if I had just told Dragon, "Ejection pattern is irrelevant to the question I was asking; so, I'm not going to respond". This thread would have served it's purpose by the 2nd page, and we'd be on to more interesting things. And dragon; for what it's worth, I didn't find the chart and try to fix something based on the chart. YOU'RE THE ONE WHO IMPLIED THAT!!! Remember: Go back to page 1, before I ever even linked to the chart (Because it's not something I even had readily available). YOU are the one who asked about ejection patter. I don't think I mentioned it one time. But I did mention NUMEROUS TIMES, that I didn't have 1 problem with my gun. As for you having an "Issue" with someone wanting to tweak their gun; that is definitely a problem that is purely yours. If I want to fill my AR up with epoxy and turn it into a table lamp; that's my business. So don't have issues. Not until YOU are the one spending the money.

Anyway; to those who helped with significant information, I really do appreciate it. The rest..... We'll, I'm done with this thread. You all can hijack it and do whatever you want with it. I got the information I needed. I got the results I anticipated. And I have the buffer in it that I want. So; I'm happy.

I just love a happy ending.