Aftermarket recoil buffer systems, opinions?

Seraphim · June 1, 1999, 02:42 AM

Any thoughts on recoil reduction systems (sprinco, chandler arms, harts, etc.) I'm specifically looking for a system to modify a glock 21 for .45 Super. I'm specifically looking for the one that mimics the H&K setup (without infringing on the patent of course)

Tallison · June 1, 1999, 06:06 PM

I've tried Sprinco's Recoil reducers in a Glock 30, the gun missfed every other round, would not feed at all in a Beretta 96 Centurian, worked ok in a Kimber 1911 but I could tell no improvement. All three are sitting in my parts drawer.

Stephen A. Camp · June 1, 1999, 09:53 PM

I bought a sprinco via Dillon Precision and threw it away. Wouldn't fit any high power and on top of that had a variable recoil spring which could allow premature unlocking with warmer rounds. The buffering spring was so hard during the last inch or so of travel that one could hardly retract the slide to lock it open! I have no experience with the other systems mentioned. Best.

blades67 · June 2, 1999, 03:28 AM

If you must tinker with your Glock, why don't you ask the professional doing the conversion what they would recommend. You are going to have a professional do the work are you not? To do otherwise is folly.

A friend of mine tried a Chandler Arms unit in her G19. With the weapon empty, cocked and the magazine removed, the slide would move slightly out of battery as she would press the trigger to the rear. It exhibited this same tendency when loaded, with or without a magazine in place. As this is the only time I have encountered the Chandler Arms unit, and never tried this unit in another Glock, I can not say for certain that this is the rule. It
was, however, enough to prevent me from buying one when I bought my own G19.

CAVEAT EMPTOR

~Blades~

Matt K · June 4, 1999, 01:32 AM

What Blade describes above is the problem with most buffer/double spring systems. The Sprinco overcomes this and works great. Sometimes they require a bit of tuning to work right but its minor. It will not work right with puff loads as it is designed for full power stuff. If you were to have a problem with it call them, their customer service is fantastic and on par with Dillon.

matt

------------------
Matt's Custom Glock Resource - Because Stock Sucks!
home.talkcity.com/stadiumway/glockzilla/

Morgan · June 5, 1999, 04:57 PM

Matt's statement about "puff" rounds (I really like that term

) holds true for full-sized H&K USPs, too - especially the 9mm, and especially when brand new. A few guys I know have bought USP9's, largely based on my bragging about my USP40, only to have them malfunction constantly on puff (

) practice ammo the first time out. They put some hot stuff in 'em, and they work fine. They also seem to work fine with anything after a few hundred rounds.

Personally, I wouldn't put something not designed by the factory on anything I might have to trust my life to, especially for such a minimal gain. I guess if you want to do .45 Super from a Glock, it might be the only way to go, though... Sounds like a great excuse for a new USP45 or beefed-up 1911 to me!

Seraphim · June 5, 1999, 11:25 PM

Thank you for all your thoughts, not to discourage further posts. I had a REALLY hard time choosing between the USP45 and the Glock 21. In the long run I chose the Glock for its simplicity (i.e. fewer parts) and a greater support base (parts, gunsmiths, etc.). I figure that I can justify the extra cost of the barrel and spring ass'y because I paid less than an H&K initially. BUT, it was a really hard choice.

ArizonaMorgan · June 6, 1999, 01:58 PM

If you are going to use an aftermarket buffering system, do NOT use the recoil spring that comes with it, use either a factory or a wollf. No need to have a gunsmith do anything to a Glock (excepting grip reductions, forward slide serrations, etc.) That is one of the best things about Glock, there are no fitted parts. Anyone with the slightest bit of mechanical skills can change them. BTW if I were you, I would not set it up for .45 super. Only asking for trouble IMO. The whole idea of the .45 super is trouble. BTW no one has as yet succesfully converted a Glock to .45 super, not even the smiths.

mic007tfp · June 11, 1999, 12:41 PM

I bought a Sprinco Recoil system for my Beretta 92. It works great. I hear it is the closest thing to the HK system also. As Stephen noted, the graduated spring makes it hard to rack back the slide for the last inch or so. But there definitely is a difference in recoil as the sight come back to the target a lot faster.

------------------
You're gettin' ready to blow? I'm a mushroom-cloud-layin' motherf**ker, motherf**ker! Every time my fingers touch brain I'm "SUPERFLY T.N.T," I'm the "GUNS OF NAVARONE."

- Jules

June 1, 1999, 02:42 AM	#1
Seraphim Junior Member Join Date: May 31, 1999 Posts: 10	Any thoughts on recoil reduction systems (sprinco, chandler arms, harts, etc.) I'm specifically looking for a system to modify a glock 21 for .45 Super. I'm specifically looking for the one that mimics the H&K setup (without infringing on the patent of course)

June 1, 1999, 06:06 PM	#2
Tallison Member Join Date: May 11, 1999 Posts: 38	I've tried Sprinco's Recoil reducers in a Glock 30, the gun missfed every other round, would not feed at all in a Beretta 96 Centurian, worked ok in a Kimber 1911 but I could tell no improvement. All three are sitting in my parts drawer.

June 1, 1999, 09:53 PM	#3
Stephen A. Camp Staff In Memoriam Join Date: April 16, 1999 Posts: 2,570	I bought a sprinco via Dillon Precision and threw it away. Wouldn't fit any high power and on top of that had a variable recoil spring which could allow premature unlocking with warmer rounds. The buffering spring was so hard during the last inch or so of travel that one could hardly retract the slide to lock it open! I have no experience with the other systems mentioned. Best.

June 2, 1999, 03:28 AM	#4
blades67 Senior Member Join Date: April 22, 1999 Location: Chandler, Arizona, USA Posts: 6,014	If you must tinker with your Glock, why don't you ask the professional doing the conversion what they would recommend. You are going to have a professional do the work are you not? To do otherwise is folly. A friend of mine tried a Chandler Arms unit in her G19. With the weapon empty, cocked and the magazine removed, the slide would move slightly out of battery as she would press the trigger to the rear. It exhibited this same tendency when loaded, with or without a magazine in place. As this is the only time I have encountered the Chandler Arms unit, and never tried this unit in another Glock, I can not say for certain that this is the rule. It was, however, enough to prevent me from buying one when I bought my own G19. CAVEAT EMPTOR ~Blades~

June 4, 1999, 01:32 AM	#5
Matt K Member Join Date: October 9, 1998 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 41	What Blade describes above is the problem with most buffer/double spring systems. The Sprinco overcomes this and works great. Sometimes they require a bit of tuning to work right but its minor. It will not work right with puff loads as it is designed for full power stuff. If you were to have a problem with it call them, their customer service is fantastic and on par with Dillon. matt ------------------ Matt's Custom Glock Resource - Because Stock Sucks! home.talkcity.com/stadiumway/glockzilla/

June 5, 1999, 04:57 PM	#6
Morgan Senior Member Join Date: October 29, 1998 Posts: 945	Matt's statement about "puff" rounds (I really like that term ) holds true for full-sized H&K USPs, too - especially the 9mm, and especially when brand new. A few guys I know have bought USP9's, largely based on my bragging about my USP40, only to have them malfunction constantly on puff ( ) practice ammo the first time out. They put some hot stuff in 'em, and they work fine. They also seem to work fine with anything after a few hundred rounds. Personally, I wouldn't put something not designed by the factory on anything I might have to trust my life to, especially for such a minimal gain. I guess if you want to do .45 Super from a Glock, it might be the only way to go, though... Sounds like a great excuse for a new USP45 or beefed-up 1911 to me!

June 5, 1999, 11:25 PM	#7
Seraphim Junior Member Join Date: May 31, 1999 Posts: 10	Thank you for all your thoughts, not to discourage further posts. I had a REALLY hard time choosing between the USP45 and the Glock 21. In the long run I chose the Glock for its simplicity (i.e. fewer parts) and a greater support base (parts, gunsmiths, etc.). I figure that I can justify the extra cost of the barrel and spring ass'y because I paid less than an H&K initially. BUT, it was a really hard choice.

June 6, 1999, 01:58 PM	#8
ArizonaMorgan Member Join Date: May 15, 1999 Posts: 58	If you are going to use an aftermarket buffering system, do NOT use the recoil spring that comes with it, use either a factory or a wollf. No need to have a gunsmith do anything to a Glock (excepting grip reductions, forward slide serrations, etc.) That is one of the best things about Glock, there are no fitted parts. Anyone with the slightest bit of mechanical skills can change them. BTW if I were you, I would not set it up for .45 super. Only asking for trouble IMO. The whole idea of the .45 super is trouble. BTW no one has as yet succesfully converted a Glock to .45 super, not even the smiths.

June 11, 1999, 12:41 PM	#9
mic007tfp Member Join Date: May 25, 1999 Posts: 63	I bought a Sprinco Recoil system for my Beretta 92. It works great. I hear it is the closest thing to the HK system also. As Stephen noted, the graduated spring makes it hard to rack back the slide for the last inch or so. But there definitely is a difference in recoil as the sight come back to the target a lot faster. ------------------ You're gettin' ready to blow? I'm a mushroom-cloud-layin' motherfker, motherfker! Every time my fingers touch brain I'm "SUPERFLY T.N.T," I'm the "GUNS OF NAVARONE." - Jules