Low mass or high mass BCG's?

[WillD]

Just when you think you know it all...NOT me LOL!

I was reading about JP Rifles Low Mass Operating Systems which promises but contradicts most other opinions on the matter. I mean we have vendors here who advocate heavy buffers, Tubbs sells his CWS system, and in general more mass, heavier springs, and buffers are thought useful to slow down recoil pulse.

I don't think I'd argue with either David Tubbs or the folks at JP Rifles but which is it?

I served my time and I'm too old to go play in the sandbox or other tactical applications, so which one is best for a comfortable and reliable "sporting" rifle?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Cheers, Will

[mtn_shooter]

Smaller reciprocating mass = less felt recoil, and higher rate of fire. I think that's what JP is going for. For 3gun type competitions etc.

Tubb is all about accuracy, and there appears to be a trend of heavier bolts/buffers increasing accuracy.

[z06man]

My understanding is that greater mass decreases felt recoil due to its slower movement and therefore the recoil impulse is spread over a longer period of time. Lighter mass should increase rate of fire due to quicker cycling though.

[warped]

M16 carriers, that is all I use, Templar uses them, AA uses them, Colt uses them, many others too.

It is the way it was meant to run.

[Drifter]

I would lean towards heavier BCG's, buffers, and springs if the rifle is overgassed and doesn't have an adjustable gas block.