Yet another recoil buffer thread...

[rekladan]

A few questions:

I've noticed some 1911s with FLGRs fitted, that have the rear side of the guide rod bevelled at an angle, so that the part can make a 'fuller' contact with the barrel feet. Now, I could be wrong, but it seems to me that this modification would result in the whole FLGR being moved backwards (along the longitudinal axis of the gun) ever so slightly.

So my questions are:
a) First of all, am I understanding the above 'geometry' correctly?
b) Does this apply equally to guns with GI-spec guide rods?
c) Does it mean that the slide gets to travel backwards a little further? and,
d) Is this extra slide travel, if indeed it happens, enough, so that a recoil buffer can be installed with little or no effect on the slide's travel, with regard to the 'normal' amount of travel it should have (i.e. without a buffer and with a GI-profile, non-bevelled guide rod)?

Thanks in advance for any replies, and please consider the above aside from the buffers' well-known tendency to break at the worst possible moment...

EDIT: My question is about 5" barrel 1911s.

Here are some pictures that got me to ask the questions above, originally posted by RaymondMillbrae:

Two FLGRs one with a stock profile, the other angled. The angled one belongs to a NHC Predator.
http://x1a.xanga.com/b6af402512c35241082579/b190557798.jpg

The next pictures show how the contact between barrel and guide rod changes, and how the guiderod is placed further back in the gun.

Non-bevelled guide rod
http://xc8.xanga.com/961f0b1708130241082590/b190834586.jpg

Bevelled guide rod
http://x37.xanga.com/e32f111008031241082600/b190834595.jpg

[auto45]

The guide rod fits into/against the frame, not the barrel, so there would be no difference in slide movement.

The bevel is there so the barrel does not hit the guide rod head.

[rekladan]

OK, so the answer to all of my questions is... No.

I just had another look at the STI 1911 animation, which illustrates the whole thing quite clearly.

Well, thanks for taking the time to put me straight auto45!

[niemi24s]

The last two pix in Post #1 are misleading. When the barrel is nestled in the arched area of the guide rod flange it's linked down and farther aftward than shown in the pix. The barrel's lower lugs are farther aftward too.

Interference between the barrel lugs and guide rod occurs when the barrel's in battery, and when in battery the barrel and guide rod have more separation than shown in the pix.

Like this:http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/LinkdownBattery.jpg

Regards

[rekladan]

I got it niemi, I really should have known that all the rest of the guide rod's head was bound to be meant to touch something more solid than the barrel feet! Like I wrote above the STI animation, and now your picture, explain it pretty well.

Thanks

[log man]

LOL, this thread is false advertising, LOL, where's the buff talk, pro, con, come on I'm ready. You like 'em I hate 'em or verse vicea, as long as we can talk buffs as advertised. Geez! What happened to truth in advertising? :)

LOG

[kenhwind]

where's the buff talk, pro, con, come on I'm ready.
You causing trouble on this thread too.
:eb: :sleep: ;)
Or is it this one: :dead_hors

[log man]

Oh, I was feeling fritzy. But I'll just get myself in trouble, I guess leave well enough alone, But, hey Ed Brown buffs are really chewy! :)

LOG