If you dont' mind moving to a rifle buffer and tube, that would be my first recommendation. Normally, a rifle lenght gas system is fit with a rifle length buffer tube. The first is: I have never used a carbine buffer tube with a rifle length gas system. So, a little more kick for a shorter period of time. You see, the physics of an 18" barrel give you less time for the gas to cycle through to the carrier before the bullet exists, so you get a shorter "dwell time" than with a 20" barrel. The problem and the fix is going to be with the buffer and/or the buffer tube. Most 18" barrels with rifle length system will also show early port erosion, but that is after thousands of rounds. You get more pressure in the tube for a shorter period of time. 18" barrel is a little more sensitive than 20" with rifle length gas system. With different brands, it is always hard to find the culprit. Knights uses full auto carriers as well.The problem has nothing to do with full auto or semi-auto carrier. That said, I shoot Knights rifles now for 3 gun since I don't produce ARs anymore. Thus full-auto carriers were in all OR-15s produced. In all the ARs that I have manufactured, I kept as close to the original design as possible to reduce any variables in reliability. If there is no legal issues why are not all AR's equipped with the full auto version? I don't know why other manufacturers do it. This all doesn't have much to do with using semi or auto carrier. Other carriers are not within the design performance that Stoner designed and tested after bajillions of rounds. The AR was designed to use a full auto carrier. In a nutshell from shooting 3 gun for years, the heavily modified guns seem to be the ones that fail the most and cost the shooter time. What features comparing full auto to semi auto make for better reliability? If there is no legal issues why are not all AR's equipped with the full auto version? You mentioned the advantages as "Reliability". Thanks Coctailer for answering my questions.
0 kommentar(er)
