New Griffin Enhanced BCG

[alamo5000]

Apparently Griffin introduced a new type of BCG geared at increased suppression in AR platforms.

8239

https://www.griffinarmament.com/griffin-enhanced-gas-pocket-ar-15-bcg/?utm_source=BC-PP+CONSUMER&utm_campaign=dbb0d8c87a-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_12_26_07_19_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-1b0276e6fe-201652576&mc_cid=dbb0d8c87a&mc_eid=b47d68033e

The ports are located on the opposite side of a regular carrier and it has different geometry to prevent carbon buildup.

According to the literature on an 18" AR it reduces the right ear noise by over 10DB. Essentially it does dump gas to the inside side of the BCG and acts sort of like a temporary short term baffle that helps with gas dissipation.

I just saw this online so I'm reading more about it, but it does look interesting for sure. They are saying that the effects are highly dependent on gas length so we will look into that more.

[alamo5000]

The information from a podcast says on a rifle length gas system it shows a 10.5 DB reduction for the right ear. Mid length gas systems improved by 8.2 DB reduction and for carbine length it shows around a 3 DB reduction. (All reduction numbers I listed are for the right ear only).

[alamo5000]

Pistol length gas system has zero impact.

[alamo5000]

Ok, I splurged again and got two of these. I got the carrier only, not the whole thing.

From my math using Griffin's numbers regarding my cans I got one for my 16" rifle and one for my 6 ARC. With those two I estimate the ear performance for full power 5.56 and 6 ARC to get down to the 124 to 125ish DB range.

Just for reference that's about 3 to 4 DB louder (at the right ear) than shooting subsonic suppressed 22LR out of a 10/22.

[alamo5000]

After sleeping on it, this package has numerous layers of benefits.

If you opt for the whole package with the spring and bolt and buffer, it is a rough equivalent of a roller delayed system. The carrier itself travels something like .25" farther back and the bolt itself has a longer stroke. The net result is a little bit slower bolt opening. This reduces open the bolt under peak pressure.

The cam pin and firing pin are proprietary as the inside geometry of the cam pin is beefed up. However the OD is not altered so the carrier is reverse compatible with anything else standard mil spec.

Where the primary sound reduction happens is changing the size and location of the ports, which are traditionally located on the right side of the bolt and vent straight out into the outside air.

In some of their old tests of other products over the years left them knowing that small ports can increase sound signature a lot.

In one example, many years ago they were testing a muzzle device that had some small ports on it. With a bare muzzle the rifle metered in the high 160's. Same exact setup except adding that muzzle device that had the small ports and the sound signature increased to the low 170's.

Basically put the size and location of those ports on a traditional BCG are increasing port noise just by virtue of their existence, shape, and location.

So they moved them.

[UWone77]

How's the gas though?

[alamo5000]

How's the gas though?

I will let you know as soon as I get mine. Then again none of my rifles have a serious gas face problem to start with. I bought two of them, one for a 5.56 and one for 6 ARC. The latter will be completely new territory because even Griffin has not tested it with that cartridge.

Personally I don't think it will be any different than the baseline of whatever the original is for the rifle and suppressor combo, but it does have upside potential, way more than downside.

That said I think it will depend on the configuration of this BCG. If you run it with their bolt, (theirs is a gas ring free design)but you have the option to run with or with out gas rings. But if you run it with the whole package with rings (short buffer, bolt and carrier both), I think it will help out a lot. The reason being (in my opinion) is that the sum total creates a roller delayed equivalent type of system. The bolt itself is delayed slightly so that it won't open until peak pressure is passed. At least in concept that could help mitigate the majority of gas (which originates from the bore itself, ie straight back). At least that seems like a logical assumption.

There are a few other things that could potentially improve on gas face, but as a general rule I don't think it will change anything in that regard. It will just make it quieter.

[alamo5000]

How's the gas though?

In the podcast where they discuss this product they were talking about how much this can "change the game".

For example the past several years of not more than that, the general rule for suppressor manufacturers was to try and cater to the low back pressure can market. Now everyone is making a somewhat low back pressure can, even with traditional baffled cans. They allow more flow through to get in on the suppressed AR platform craze.

With this though, they can go back to more constricted designs because now they can mitigate port noise in other ways. Basically they said it has the potential to reduce the overall sound signature in general. IE much better muzzle numbers, but without sacrificing noise by adding it to the other end at the port.

[alamo5000]

FYI if you use the code MERRY15 for 30% off.

I didn't get the full system, just the carrier. But depends on what you want to accomplish.

[alamo5000]

Here is another thought process regarding gas. Look at the picture above. The gas is not just redirected, it's given somewhere to go. It has a pocket, where at least in theory, the gas has momentum going backwards and down. It's not being trapped but rather redirected. I theory the wall of the upper and the geometry of the left side of the carrier creates a somewhat sealed pocket.

Except in this case that pocket is not static. As the gas is released in the pocket, the carrier will physically move backwards and somewhat follow the gas. This will slow down the gas while it expands, but any residual gas pressure on the tail end of the sequence will push the rest of it downward.

It's not like a system where you quickly pressurize a loosely fitting vessel and in turn it looks for the path of least resistance.

Even though there is 'new gas' in the upper that wasn't there before, it seems like it should use the gas' own momentum in a more efficient way to help change it's course.

It's not fighting the system in a head to head battle but rather "pit maneuvering" the gas using its own energy to relatively gently redirect its path.

[gatordev]

It's not fighting the system in a head to head battle but rather "pit maneuvering" the gas using its own energy to relatively gently redirect its path.

But now it's blowing crap down into the mag and the FCG, based on that picture.

The proof is in the pudding, and if it's less gassy, great, but it looks like you will still have to pay for that benefit somehow. At least the Bootleg pushes it out of the gun, though it can still come back at you.

[alamo5000]

But now it's blowing crap down into the mag and the FCG, based on that picture.

The proof is in the pudding, and if it's less gassy, great, but it looks like you will still have to pay for that benefit somehow. At least the Bootleg pushes it out of the gun, though it can still come back at you.

It's already blowing crap down in my mag and fire controls. At this point it's a matter of how much more (if any)LOL

On the podcast it says they did a constant 3000++ round test specifically testing that and other reliability concerns. They said no terrible effects and no reliability issues arose.

This product is literally less than a week old since they dropped it on the public. It's all going to be somewhat experimental.

[alamo5000]

I have not been following industry stuff that much, but after I quit social media it's even less now.

That said, apparently in a few weeks they are going to release another version of this. It will be a regular BCG without any of the extra stuff, except the geometry and ports and all that will be on the left side. They said those are going to be the most affordable ones.

I own a couple of Griffin BCG and I like them a lot. Apparently I got in on the first wave of the Gucci version. I didn't get the whole thing, just the carrier. Which with the discount I got them to the front door for $147.50 (each).

The ones coming out in a month or two should be cheaper.

[alamo5000]

Got em today. Did a quick 12 round test using 55gr ammo out of a 16" AR. 12 rounds were shot with no hearing protection at all. Zero discomfort. Zero ringing.

To me, at this point I will give it a 110% must have. An AR is still loud, but I would safely say that you could probably shoot a 30 round mag without muffs and not have a problem.

That said I'm not a doctor and I don't know much about cumulative noise and all that. I put the 30 round comment because I would probably still not do a full range day like it's a 22LR.

If anything my LEFT ear was slightly louder but not by much. Definitely two thumbs up for shooter benefit. More tests on longer barrels (and possibly shorter) coming up, probably tomorrow.

[alamo5000]

Regarding the left side ear, I just thought about it and I was standing about 3 feet from a metal barn when I was shooting. That could have made a difference. Even at that there was zero ringing right or left. I still won't shy away from taking limited shots but now those limits are more than zero. Big, big, BIG improvement.

[Aragorn]

This makes me wonder if a piston gun should be quieter than a DI suppressed.

[alamo5000]

This makes me wonder if a piston gun should be quieter than a DI suppressed.

Why would you say that? Just wondering. Can you explain what makes you think of that?

I don't think it will be quieter at all, especially with this new BCG.

The sound mitigation for this particular product vents the gas into a pocket on the left side of the carrier. It gives it space to expand and cool the gas, at least a lot longer than before.

It basically changes the dynamics to be 70% bolt gun in terms of gas.

I don't know a lot about piston systems but it would be interesting to nerd out learning about it.

[Aragorn]

I understand the design principle, venting the gas where it doesn’t exit the ejection port to quiet it down. But if just moving the vents makes that big of a difference, then it seems reasonable to me to assume something like a PWS or LMT piston gun should be quieter as there are no extra gases requiring venting in the first place.

Is anyone with an LMT or similar able to speak to this?

[alamo5000]

I understand the design principle, venting the gas where it doesn’t exit the ejection port to quiet it down. But if just moving the vents makes that big of a difference, then it seems reasonable to me to assume something like a PWS or LMT piston gun should be quieter as there are no extra gases requiring venting in the first place.

Is anyone with an LMT or similar able to speak to this?

The vents are only half of the equation. The other half is the geometry on the left side of the carrier itself. It creates a pocket, or rather, an expansion chamber as a halfway house for gas. Halfway between being fully contained and being dumped directly into the outside atmosphere is where the magic happens.

[gatordev]

This makes me wonder if a piston gun should be quieter than a DI suppressed.

Maybe, since a lot of the gas is going forward and might be quieter to the shooter's ear, but you still have the gas coming out of the throat of the chamber, so I'm not sure if it would be measurable to the human ear. You also have the additional mechanical noise of the op-rod interfacing with the piston and then the carrier.




It basically changes the dynamics to be 70% bolt gun in terms of gas.




No, it doesn't. Quit blindly folllowing GA's PR stuff. It's the same amount of gas. The laws of physics say so. It's just going to a different place.

Something else to consider is a lot of "gas in the face" is coming from the barrel/chamber, not through the gas tube, which can be helped by delaying the bolt from unlocking, but the gas is still there and it has to go somewhere eventually.

If this or any other BCG works for you, great, but at the end of the day, the "cheapest" solution is to have a properly gassed rifle from the beginning.

[UWone77]

If this or any other BCG works for you, great, but at the end of the day, the "cheapest" solution is to have a properly gassed rifle from the beginning.

Underrated comment right here.

Having said that, Surefire should bring back the OBC

[alamo5000]

No, it doesn't. Quit blindly folllowing GA's PR stuff. It's the same amount of gas. The laws of physics say so. It's just going to a different place.

The comment about 'bolt gun's was mine and mine alone. I was trying to iterate the design PURPOSE that they talked about on their podcast.



Something else to consider is a lot of "gas in the face" is coming from the barrel/chamber, not through the gas tube, which can be helped by delaying the bolt from unlocking, but the gas is still there and it has to go somewhere eventually.

If this or any other BCG works for you, great, but at the end of the day, the "cheapest" solution is to have a properly gassed rifle from the beginning.

I am not in any way whatsoever disagreeing with literally anything you said, especially the last part(s). I agree with that way more than you can imagine actually.

In general (generically speaking) the firearms community as a whole has been trained to think about certain things the same way as any previous iterations of 'the same thing'.

I imagine if we made a list we could come up with a ton of examples of various companies making bolt carrier groups with all sorts of bells and whistles. Especially when talking about 'suppression' in general I can't think of a single example where the purpose of the product was not intended to 'help rifles be more reliable'. I would probably say among these examples the biggest category by far is "gas management", as in 'to tune your rifles do you use an adjustable gas block or a whiz bang BCG? (Or some other solution?)'

I'm not an expert in industry history, but ever since I've owned ARs almost everything I can remember right now was in some form or another was a competing product to an adjustable gas block.

This one however does none of that stuff. It was not designed nor created, nor introduced to be a better mouse trap in the gas management niche. At least according to their own podcast this was introduced with the primary objective to make an AR-15 quieter (without sacrificing semi automatic functioning of the rifle).

[alamo5000]

At the end of the day does gas in the face matter? Does reliability matter? Do I prefer an adjustable gas key or do I prefer an adjustable gas block?

That stuff is important to consider and figure out but none of that is why I bought these new carriers. Those things never even once entered the discussion (for me). The sole reason why I bought them is because they make at least a couple of my rifles quieter for the shooter. It depends if 8DB to 10DB is a lot or not though.

For me I like the idea of sound mitigation wherever I can get it. Without purchasing another suppressor or NFA item, with my existing gear, in a 1:1 one time swap, I knocked off 8 to 10DB depending on which rifle.

[gatordev]

The comment about 'bolt gun's was mine and mine alone. I was trying to iterate the design PURPOSE that they talked about on their podcast.



Gotcha. You were first talking about gas, so I thought gas in the face was your primary purpose, but in your post below, you state otherwise (and apparently that was GA's purpose). Personally, I don't know how excited I'd be trading off a little bit of noise for dumping everything into the magazine, but as you said, we each have our preferences.

And just a small point of order (and I don't think you were arguing against this), but a bolt gun has the same amount of gas as an AR, it just goes fewer places.

[alamo5000]

Gotcha. You were first talking about gas, so I thought gas in the face was your primary purpose, but in your post below, you state otherwise (and apparently that was GA's purpose). Personally, I don't know how excited I'd be trading off a little bit of noise for dumping everything into the magazine, but as you said, we each have our preferences.

And just a small point of order (and I don't think you were arguing against this), but a bolt gun has the same amount of gas as an AR, it just goes fewer places.

Not at all arguing about that. What I was inferring though was at the back of a bolt gun, generally speaking, unlike an AR, there is nowhere for the gas to go.

A traditional AR, the back end and especially the ejection port is wide open. Those back pressured gasses have a lot of options on where they go. A normal Carrier even has ports that empty gas right into the open air (at the ejection port).

This new carrier though makes it sort of 'in between' those two book ends. Not only are the ports moved to a much more enclosed area, they also have an expansion chamber for those gasses milled right out of the side of the BGG.

Sound wise this is kind of trying to bridge that gap while still having a semi auto.

[alamo5000]

I finally got around to testing out my other carrier in my 6 ARC this morning.

I made a couple of observations. I figured it was worth following up on as it was mentioned before by others in the thread.

1. No gas really to speak of gets in the trigger. At least not any more than normal, actually maybe a little bit less. Magazine yes, trigger not so much.

If you look at the left side of the carrier there are relief cuts as well as a pocket for gas expansion.

Usually energy will go through the path of least resistance. On a traditional BCG the back pressure gas just goes where it goes. With this though it has a large enough channel and relief cuts on the side to direct gas in a certain direction.

I have not measured it specifically, but that initial gas gets directed down towards the magazine through generous relief cuts in the side of the carrier. After the initial gas puff it has a couple of inches of rearward travel (with the ejection port open) before it gets to the trigger.

At this point I'm tempted to say you could have a lot LESS crap in your trigger with one of these vs the traditional carrier. It really just depends on how effective you think those relief cuts (and pocket) would be at changing the direction of that gas.

2. With the longer gas system in today's test it was really nice to shoot. With no hearing protection there was zero discomfort at all. They claim a reduction of 10DB for the shooter's right ear (with that gas length), and I believe it for sure.

[alamo5000]

Aragorn, please clear your in box.

[alamo5000]

Aragorn, please clear your in box.

On second thought I can just answer some questions here just in case anyone else is reading up on it.

Absolutely ran it. Absolutely love it. It does depend on the host. For maximum sound gains the gas tube needs to be at least rifle length.

My 6 ARC is the only thing with a rifle length gas tube that I own. If I had more of them I would replace every single carrier with them.

Put it this way, when shooting suppressed my 6ARC is just as comfortable to shoot as a 300BLK or a 22LR. Obviously those are overall quieter but the comfort level is the same.

On a 16"AR it depends. If you pull the trigger out in open space not a big deal. You could probably get through a dozen shots at least before you need to slow down the dosage of sound.

If however you are shooting near anything hard like a building or something that can reflect sound you definitely want ear pro. It is still reducing the overall sound signature by a lot but it can still ring your ears in the right situation.

If you are concerned about the neighbors, pets, and the other people around you, even on a 16" is definitely worth it. 8 DB is still a lot. The total sound signature of someone shooting guns in their yard is reduced quite a bit so if that's a consideration then yes, even on a 16" it's good to go.

For anything with a mid length gas it's just going to depend on the situation on if it's worth it or not for you. Anything shorter than that gas system wise I would say it's no real gain.

The quality is great. That said I only use the carrier not the entire system so I can't say anything about those other parts but I'm sure they are great too.

For anything longer (that is being suppressed) for me it's non negotiable now. It just boils down to cost and context for everything else.

I did amend my buffer setup to take advantage of the delayed operation and I think that is worth looking into as well depending on what it is.

All that said I really like it a lot. I have two. Just know that if you are near anything like a wall that bounces sound back at you or in some shooting bays the muzzle report is still there and would require ears. The "wow I don't need ear protection" conversation is alive but only applies to certain hosts and environmental situations.

[alamo5000]

My 6 ARC is the only thing with a rifle length gas tube that I own. If I had more of them I would replace every single carrier with them.


For clarification I meant that if I had more rifle length (plus) gas systems [IE more rifles in that category] I would replace the BCGs.

For everything else it just depends on what it is.

[Former11B]

I?d really like to try one of their enhanced BCGs

KAK recently introduced a gas dumping BCG but it looks like it vents straight into the mag well which to me is a complete nonstarter. I have to disassemble and clean the mags I shoot suppressed with already because of how dirty they get, can?t imagine amplifying the gas and carbon on the ammo that?s about to get introduced to the chamber of the rifle

IIRC, griffin said there?s a gas dump or gas pocket on the left side? Might be misremembering. Any issues of extra fouling on the inside of the receiver?


I recently got a PWS long stroke piston setup that?s 11.8?. I was amazed at how much cleaner the brass is suppressed compared to my tuned DI rifles I?d love to throw one in my setup I?m using the thermal on and use it for suppressed hunting especially if the port noise is that much reduced.

Also, my 20? comp rifle has right at 5000 rounds through it and while the carrier is going strong, the bolt has seen better days. Just replaced the extractor spring and oring again. Maybe in another thousand or so I?ll swap in a Griffin carrier group

[alamo5000]

I?d really like to try one of their enhanced BCGs

KAK recently introduced a gas dumping BCG but it looks like it vents straight into the mag well which to me is a complete nonstarter. I have to disassemble and clean the mags I shoot suppressed with already because of how dirty they get, can?t imagine amplifying the gas and carbon on the ammo that?s about to get introduced to the chamber of the rifle

Honestly it's not that bad. Think about it for a minute. The gas and carbon coming from the barrel is the exact same. This is the majority of carbon getting in the mag. The amount of gas coming from the tube is the same. On a traditional system as soon as the gas key gets disengaged that gas and carbon goes in a 360 degree pattern everywhere in the receiver with some escaping from the ejection port.

With this new one the same amount of gas is there. It's just given a longer path to travel before it hits the open air. Looking from the shooter's position the gas goes about 1/4 the distance around the left side of the BCG before it's dumped. Instead of the gas going on the path of least resistance (which is every direction), it's given a longer dedicated path and through a pocket on the left side of the carrier.



IIRC, griffin said there?s a gas dump or gas pocket on the left side? Might be misremembering. Any issues of extra fouling on the inside of the receiver?

Yes there is a pocket and no there is not anything substantial in terms of 'extra' carbon. If there is anything additional it would be like 5% or less and that's just because of the different pathway.


I recently got a PWS long stroke piston setup that?s 11.8?. I was amazed at how much cleaner the brass is suppressed compared to my tuned DI rifles I?d love to throw one in my setup I?m using the thermal on and use it for suppressed hunting especially if the port noise is that much reduced.

I don't think it would work for a piston rifle. Also it works according to the length of the gas system. The longer the gas the more effective it is. For a shorty it's not really effective enough to be worth it.




Also, my 20? comp rifle has right at 5000 rounds through it and while the carrier is going strong, the bolt has seen better days. Just replaced the extractor spring and oring again. Maybe in another thousand or so I?ll swap in a Griffin carrier group

For a longer gas system it's literally amazing. If you get just the carrier you can keep all the rest of the stuff the same if you want to. They had the carriers on sale for like $117 bucks not long ago.

[alamo5000]

On a side note 11b's comment made me start thinking about why this carrier doesn't work so well on short barrels, or rather why it has diminishing returns the shorter you go barrel length wise.

I think it all boils down to pressure. The amount of PSI when the bullet leaves the barrel is vastly different on a 10.5 vs an 18" rifle. I have a chart somewhere that shows the pressure at various lengths and it's definitely a big factor. I think that the pressure (and velocity of gas in the system) overwhelms anything you do on the back end of the rifle when using short barrels.

[TheRifleman]

I picked one up for one of my 11.5's that's running an Abel Biscuit 5.56, H3 buffer, and an FCD ACF. It is eye watering unlike my other 11.5 with just an H2, same Microbest BCG that's in the previous 11.5, with a Grip n Rip DD CH. The can on that one is a B+T SC-5.56 and is a flow through. I suspect that it's the flow through design that makes it not eye stinging.

Plus I am a left handed rifleman so there's also the ejection port side that's doing it too. I do have a Surefire OBC already on order but that is for my 14.7 mid with a Rarebreed FRT three position to smooth the cyclic a bit.

[alamo5000]

I picked one up for one of my 11.5's that's running an Abel Biscuit 5.56, H3 buffer, and an FCD ACF. It is eye watering unlike my other 11.5 with just an H2, same Microbest BCG that's in the previous 11.5, with a Grip n Rip DD CH. The can on that one is a B+T SC-5.56 and is a flow through. I suspect that it's the flow through design that makes it not eye stinging.

Plus I am a left handed rifleman there's also the ejection port side that's doing it oo. I do have a Surefire OBC already on order but that is for my 14.7 mid with a Rarebreed FRT three position to smooth the cyclic a bit.

This BCG is designed to reduce sound at the shooter's ear and it works better the longer the gas system. On shorties it's negligible for the most part in regards to sound. It might reduce it some but nothing like a longer rifle with a rifle gas system.

As far as gas management goes let us know what your results are. It might help some for a lefty but that seems to be outside of the parameters of the original design concept.

Another thing that could potentially help you is the cam pin path is longer than a regular carrier. This ever so slightly delays the bolt opening giving the gas more time to go forward.

If you are getting that much gas though I would think you probably have other things that could be addressed. I am not familiar with that exact supressor but it sounds like you figured it out. A BCG can't fix a high back pressure suppressor though. Yes it might mitigate some of it but it probably won't eliminate the whole thing.

Just test it out and let us know.

[TheRifleman]

Funny you say that, nearly everyone at the FFL that I bought the Abel from, all stood by their words that the Biscuit 5.56 was perfect for an 11.5. Once free from ATF jail, I fired some shots and zeroed it on my Geissele and LMT mutt and thought that this was not going to be fun as I wiped my eyes in a wetted down handkerchief.

Maybe I should just go ahead and buy another flow through for this particular rifle and stick this Abel on the KAC and Noveske mutt. Currently awaiting a cheap YHM Turbo K to get out of jail but this is for my Zastava ZPAP85 with a KNS adjustable gas piston. Think I should put the Abel on the ZPAP and put the Turbo K on this 11.5 instead?

[alamo5000]

Funny you say that, nearly everyone at the FFL that I bought the Abel from, all stood by their words that the Biscuit 5.56 was perfect for an 11.5. Once free from ATF jail, I fired some shots and zeroed it on my Geissele and LMT mutt and thought that this was not going to be fun as I wiped my eyes in a wetted down handkerchief.

Maybe I should just go ahead and buy another flow through for this particular rifle and stick this Abel on the KAC and Noveske mutt. Currently awaiting a cheap YHM Turbo K to get out of jail but this is for my Zastava ZPAP85 with a KNS adjustable gas piston. Think I should put the Abel on the ZPAP and put the Turbo K on this 11.5 instead?

I am not that familiar with the specific suppressor so I can't speak to that, but I did read on their website that it's supposed to be less back pressure. You do have the 5.56 version correct?

It's difficult to diagnose anything just over the Internet, but if you can put up some pictures of the rifle in question.

It is possible that your rifle is still over gassed a bit. How is the ejection pattern? Who made the barrel? Long story short you should try an even heavier buffer weight and see if that helps. The reason being is if the carrier speed is fast it can force everything open before it gets a chance to evacuate 'more forward'.

That plus the increased cam pin path on the new Griffin BCG might help. If you can just delay the opening of the bolt by just a little bit it will probably help. I would say try both at the same time and see what happens.

If you can, weigh your current buffer because as far as I know none of the numbers are specific in weight, but rather a generic category. Start there and go up more than you think you should and see if that helps at all.

[TheRifleman]

I am not that familiar with the specific suppressor so I can't speak to that, but I did read on their website that it's supposed to be less back pressure. You do have the 5.56 version correct?

It's difficult to diagnose anything just over the Internet, but if you can put up some pictures of the rifle in question.

It is possible that your rifle is still over gassed a bit. How is the ejection pattern? Who made the barrel? Long story short you should try an even heavier buffer weight and see if that helps. The reason being is if the carrier speed is fast it can force everything open before it gets a chance to evacuate 'more forward'.

That plus the increased cam pin path on the new Griffin BCG might help. If you can just delay the opening of the bolt by just a little bit it will probably help. I would say try both at the same time and see what happens.

If you can, weigh your current buffer because as far as I know none of the numbers are specific in weight, but rather a generic category. Start there and go up more than you think you should and see if that helps at all.Yes, it is indeed 5.56 and I know that I mentioned that specifically prior to. Post #33, I already did mention that it's an H3 as well so the buffer weight has been upped as far as possible. Barrel is Geissele.

I wasn't looking for help but all of your questions were answered, I was contributing to the conversation sorry if it looked like I was asking for help when I wasn't. I mentioned my problem solving steps that I have done and have continued further to do. I hope this helps.

[alamo5000]

Saw you asking about swapping suppressors so I must have misunderstood. All good. Swapping cans would probably give you the same results that you are getting now.

[TheRifleman]

So how does one upload a picture to show? My advanced editor for replies, will not enable.

[alamo5000]

So how does one upload a picture to show? My advanced editor for replies, will not enable.

Honestly that's out of my wheel house. I tried to upload from a mobile device once and ultimately selecting the "full site" option helped. I don't post a lot of pictures.

[gatordev]

At this point, you're going to need to use a third-party image-hosting site. I use Flickr, but there are other free sites out there.

[TheRifleman]

So the Griffin BCG arrived yesterday. Everything looked good, everything was in spec. I was impressed how not needing any cleaning to remove factory preservatives yet I still did it just in case. Clean as a whistle. Lubed, reassembled, and took the Microbest BCG out and replaced with this one. She functioned fine until she didn't, and was getting stuck in the rear occasionally. I looked over everything, nothing came loose with the extension and my staking and TDP torquing was still perfect, nothing was broken with the catch either, so charged it all the way back and it was where it was supposed to be. I measured this BCG with the Microbest BCG that was in it and they were both the same lengths.So on a hunch, I took the upper off this rifle and put my SBR lower with the Tubbs flat wire and it functioned as it was supposed to. So I promptly ordered one for this lower and will be replacing the one in it with the Tubbs. It still works as it should but I am now not feeling it like it is super dependable for the moment. I fed it mag after mags of dummies to manually charge and eject and all was as it should be. However push it all the way as far as it can go and it stays there unless given a slap on the back of the stock. It's not a free flow can on it despite being advertised as low pressure it's has a slight noticeable back pressure that I am concerned with this getting the carrier stuck at a not so great time to be stuck during.I'll get this sorted. It's what I do.

[alamo5000]

Which version of the carrier did you get?

[alamo5000]

Also you might want to weigh the carrier next to your old one. Mine had a weight difference, and that in turn can impact buffer weight and/or spring selection. At least for me it warranted looking into it some.

[TheRifleman]

I said that I got this and that the problem was already solved right?

[BoilerUp]

I said that I got this and that the problem was already solved right?

You ended with "I am concerned with this getting the carrier stuck at a not so great time to be stuck during" which implies the problem is not yet solved. Alamo shared his experience/ideas, presumably because he's trying to be helpful. That's kind of the purpose of a forum. And Alamo is our resident over-thinker.

One thing I find interesting here is I've never ever had a carrier get "stuck". I'm inferring you mean it's stuck in the rearward position, i.e., inside the receiver extension. Do you know what (edge/surface) it's catching on? Seems weird.

[TheRifleman]

I figured it out, an out of spec extension. No more cheap purchases from no name parts. Once again I relearned that parts is not parts and that cheap is not that effective. I got it from Aim Surplus way back when and while it runs fine or so I had thought with a Microbest BCG, I did this time notice that with any BCG there was a sluggish return to battery. Hardly noticeable but we caught it in slow motion happening. Something on the Griffon's carrier design with that bulged ring on the surface of the rear of the carrier is having a more dramatic effect. When I put the same Griffon on a Geissele tube, FN tube, or a Colt tube, it works as designed. So after relearning why cheap is just a shortened name for tolerance stacking, I ordered an LMT tube for this LMT lower, and decided to try out that Vism alignment block for buffer tube installations.

[BoilerUp]

I figured it out, an out of spec extension. No more cheap purchases from no name parts. Once again I relearned that parts is not parts and that cheap is not that effective. I got it from Aim Surplus way back when and while it runs fine or so I had thought with a Microbest BCG, I did this time notice that with any BCG there was a sluggish return to battery. Hardly noticeable but we caught it in slow motion happening. Something on the Griffon's carrier design with that bulged ring on the surface of the rear of the carrier is having a more dramatic effect. When I put the same Griffon on a Geissele tube, FN tube, or a Colt tube, it works as designed. So after relearning why cheap is just a shortened name for tolerance stacking, I ordered an LMT tube for this LMT lower, and decided to try out that Vism alignment block for buffer tube installations.

Thanks for the follow-up. That makes sense that if the ID of the extension was a tad too tight it would constrict on the geometry of the Griffin carrier.

[TheRifleman]

LMT tube was installed, problem solved. Went to test the Griffon BCG out now that I had a TDP in spec tube, and I did not notice a major change but it was slightly less eye watering. I have tried a Forward Controls Design ACH, a Geissele Airborone CH, and a Daniel Defense Grip n Rip CH, and there's no difference in the amounts of gas to the face levels. Is there a superior gas busting ambidextrous CH to rule them all here or is this a lefty thing where I am overlooking the fact that the gas leaks are coming from somewhere else like the ejection port or the forward assist?I know that Geissele barrels are notorious gassy for silencer users but this one is really, really accurate which is why I am not keen on trying another barrel. Think a flow through silencer would be a better option which would solve my gas to the face issue with it?

[BoilerUp]

LMT tube was installed, problem solved. Went to test the Griffon BCG out now that I had a TDP in spec tube, and I did not notice a major change but it was slightly less eye watering. I have tried a Forward Controls Design ACH, a Geissele Airborone CH, and a Daniel Defense Grip n Rip CH, and there's no difference in the amounts of gas to the face levels. Is there a superior gas busting ambidextrous CH to rule them all here or is this a lefty thing where I am overlooking the fact that the gas leaks are coming from somewhere else like the ejection port or the forward assist?I know that Geissele barrels are notorious gassy for silencer users but this one is really, really accurate which is why I am not keen on trying another barrel. Think a flow through silencer would be a better option which would solve my gas to the face issue with it?

The Griffin SNACH might be a bit better, but I really can't imagine a CH is going to materially improve anything that overgassed.

I know my Sig SPEAR LT is super gassy but it was designed to work with a flow through can, so that is my next step. I suspect that would help you, too.

I'd probably start by getting an adjustable gas tube (Black River Tactical) or block (SLR Sentry) and try to reduce gas back to the system.

Otherwise, you're left with just adding more weight to the reciprocating mass to try to slow it down.

[TheRifleman]

I did give Riflespeed a thought of purchasing, but my Mk14 handguard is too small an inside diameter and it's 10.5 length with an 11.5 barrel doesn't give any room whatsoever unfortunately. Maybe I should list it elsewhere for sale and trade and try with something else.

[TheRifleman]

So after more fence sitting and a whole lot of deliberation, I have decided finally to wave the white flag of surrender. This week I am going to hit my local favorite class 3 shop and get a Flow through to solve the gas to my face issue. Out of curiosity I asked them by phone what was full auto rated and 11.5 safe to use for an FRT and they said Huxwrks and in stock. So that's what I shall do.

[gatordev]

A flow-through will help, but as a lefty, you're still going to get gas out of the ejection port. How much and will it matter? I don't know, that will be up to you. But it will be something more than 0.

[TheRifleman]

A flow-through will help, but as a lefty, you're still going to get gas out of the ejection port. How much and will it matter? I don't know, that will be up to you. But it will be something more than 0.I did a whole week all day everyday of a carbine course, and not been bothered with my B&T flow RH 5.56 SC. I cannot do more than several rounds in one magazine without having to stop with this non flow Abel Biscuit. And I still get gas without a silencer, which was way more with an FRT out of a 14.7 that wasn't suppressed. I'm making it safer for me with a flow through.