Shok Bufs

[susan28]

started a new thread for this so all could benefit:

i've recently been asking for input on the efficacy of shok bufs in 1911's specifically, citing potential reliability concerns (still open to comments) and found this on Dane Burns' site, FWIW to anyone who might be having similar questions:

"I think the buff is a important tool in making the gun last long term, you may not, and rightly so since I have no proof of that fact. I also like the feel of the gun in recoil with metal to plastic contact instead of metal to metal without a buff. Buffs are NOT a issue to reliability if regular maintenance is being done".

[Brian Dover]

I use buffs for range time, especially when shooting heavier loads, and or firing one of my aluminum frame 1911s. (I'm referring to 4" or longer guns. Not fond of shock buffs in a 3" or 3-1/2" gun. Makes the already way short slide travel TOO short for reliable operation, in my experience at least.)

For carry I take the buff out.

[susan28]

Brian: so you think the "feel" with and without buffs is similar enough that the range time is adequate practice for carry huh?

i've never shot a buffered gun and this is my first 1911. frame wear is a concern but i just don't wanna be faced with noticeable handling differences should a life-or-death situation over occur, ya know? i'm sure the buffs are a pleasure to shoot with but if my instincts get adjusted to that then suddenly the gun kicks more in the real world might be better to forego them altogether, but all kinds of people i respect here seem to use the buffs.

Agtman, Silver, CockdnLocked, do you guys remove the buffs for carry?

[SilverState]

Since you are having a lot of work done to your Delta, and you practice with your carry ammo (DT), I would get the work done, install a Wilson buffer, and fire a couple hundred rounds through it at the range. If it works without a problem, carry it that way. If it gives you even the slightest problem, then remove the buffer.

I use one in my Wilson Combat CQB, which is what I carry when my clothing permits. I do not remove the buffer for carry. My pistol actually came with the buffer, so I left it the way it came from Wilson.

[nickE10mm]

Reliability would be my only reason for NOT using them, however I DO use them in my Kimber .45 Super due to extremely high recoil of the .45 Super. I just don't feel that a 10mm would warrant a need for a buff. The people that like buffs are generally people who SELL buffs, if you catch my drift...

That being said, I wouldn't ever argue with Dane Burns. :)

[surfinusa]

shock buffers are an unnecessary waste of money. If your 1911 needed one, John Browning would have invented it.

[SilverState]

I don't think John Browning was shooting Double Tap 10mm ammo out of his 1911.

As for the $$$$$ motivation, Bill Wilson sells them for $1 each and each one last one thousand rounds. His pistols sell for more than $2K each. So I doubt that $$$$$ is his motivation for creating, selling, and equiping his 1911s with shok buffs. JMHO

[CokdNLoded]

I use the Cominolli FLGR with buffers on both sides in my DE. Works great and it is way better than no buffer at all.

[nickE10mm]

Originally posted by SilverState
As for the $$$$$ motivation, Bill Wilson sells them for $1 each and each one last one thousand rounds. His pistols sell for move than $2K each. So I doubt that $$$$$ is his motivation for creating, selling, and equiping his 1911s with shok buffs. JMHO

I would agree, not ALL buffs are for monetary gain, but some are. For many (more and more every day...), selling accessories in general is where profit comes from. Most people sell five (5) for $6.00 or so and they are making them for $.05/ea. There is definitely money involved, at least partially.

They are purely preventative in most cases but with many of today's handgun steel, aren't necessary in most cases. Still, to each his own, right?

Cheers

[JWP]

tried buffs in 45s i have, decided they were a problem in commanders i have [though in 5" they work]

i don't use in any pistol now

i do use them in subguns which were designed for buffers and in special circumstances in subs to greatly increase the rof

mac11/9 is about 1200 normally but macjacked is 1800-2000 rof - dumping 30 rd mag @ 2k is a hoot

ymmv

[susan28]

was looking at the cominolli Frame Savers yesterday, tungsten + a tungsten plug with the double buff sounds like some sweet shooting. might have to give it a try. i presume it's ok to use that w/o the bufs yes?

[Brian Dover]

To answer your question Susan, I don't notice enough difference between using/not using buffs to matter for defensive practice, IDPA, bowling pin matches, etc. Now since one or two of my 1911s see duty only as "pin slayers", those guns always have a buff installed. My BP load in .45acp is a 230gr. lead truncated cone with about 6 grains of WW231 powder. This is a bit above max in the newer loading manuals, so I've always felt a bit of preventive caution, if you will, was a good idea.

Kudos to you for practicing with carry-equivalent loads in your 10mm.

[SilverState]

I am all about the results. I put a Wilson Combat Shok Buff on my Kimber Eclipse CLE II, a .45acp chambered 1911 with an internal extractor. I took it to the range and put 200 rounds of ammo through it without a hicup. I used Remington UMC FMJ, Speer nickel-cased Gold Dot HP, and Double Tap 185gr 1225fps HP ammo. I used Wilson Combat 47D 8rnd mags, CMC 8rnd powermags, AMT 8rnd mags (the mags that come from STI with a Trojan), and Kimber 7rnd mags. I used the stock recoil spring and the stock full length guide rod. Again, let me emphasize, not a hicup. And, accuracy was excellent.

Here is the Kimber:

http://sincitypitbulls.freeservers.com/eclipseL.jpg

http://sincitypitbulls.freeservers.com/eclipseR.jpg

Here is the Double Tap ammo:

http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/images/45ACP%20pics%20002.jpg
http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=21_34&products_id=93

Here are the Wilson Combat buffers ($1 each and they last 1,000 rounds):

http://www.wilsoncombat.com/images/product/2B.jpg
http://www.wilsoncombat.com/a_shokbuff.asp

So for everyone that says that buffers adversely affect the reliability of your 1911, I say that it hasn't with my 1911s. And this is with a Kimber, you know how "unreliable" Kimbers are...;Q

[susan28]

wow it even works on *Kimbers*? hehehe.. (never shot one myself but they're good lookers)

i think i'll just take your advice and shoot mass quantities and if it goes uneventfully then i won't worry.

[saspic]

Originally posted by surfinusa
shock buffers are an unnecessary waste of money. If your 1911 needed one, John Browning would have invented it.
Just like the beavertail grip safety, frontstrap checkering, arched mainspring housing, skeletonized trigger, forward cocking serrations, full length guide rods, lightweight hammers, 8 round magazines, night sights and bull barrels.;)
I want to keep my Delta Elite stock (except for the flat bottomed firing pin stop), but it is a range only gun, so maybe I'll them them a try.

[f4tweet]

I have used shok-buf's in several 1911's. I found they take a beating. The only problem I've had is when the pistol is loaded and the slide locked back, sometimes I cannot slingshot the slide. I have to use the slide stop. FWIW

[MXRacer101]

I have used them in FAL's, AK's, SKS's, CZ-75’s, 1911 Governments and Commanders without much tuning. The only adjustments I have ever needed done was reduce the recoil springs 1-2 lbs on the 1911’s and the close gas ports on the FAL’s

I will continue to use them.