Shok buf or no? Pros and Cons?

[Bakerjd]

I've tried them a few times. Most recently when I got my new limited gun last year and was testing recoil spring weights. Just added it to the testing. Personally I've never really felt any difference with it. A very slight change when I tried out a #10 recoil spring. Didn't like the #10lb spring with or without it. As others stated I did have feeding issues on a PM9 when I tried it in that particular 1911. No other 1911 or 2011 has it caused any issues. 

[renegade1400]

They don't work that well with a kimber tactical custom2. slide would not drop on a empty a empty CM railed power mag even using the slide release. I removed the WC shock buff and the gun functioned flawlessly once again. also would not release on Wilson mags as well.

[beastmode_05]

atlas gunworks is some of the best in the 2011 industry and they put them in all their guns. they have a video on youtube of proper spring setup there is no short stroking involved

[outerlimits]

1 hour ago, beastmode_05 said:

atlas gunworks is some of the best in the 2011 industry and they put them in all their guns. they have a video on youtube of proper spring setup there is no short stroking involved

for every 'smith that uses them, there is one that doesn't.

 

[yigal]

8 hours ago, outerlimits said:

for every 'smith that uses them, there is one that doesn't.

 

If 1911 /2011  gun is built and tuned  correctly, there is no problem with using a buffer. I personally recommend using them and replacing them when they wear out.

[RePete]

2 hours ago, yigal said:

If 1911 /2011  gun is built and tuned  correctly, there is no problem with using a buffer. I personally recommend using them and replacing them when they wear out.

By the same logic, if the gun is built and tuned correctly, you won't need a buffer.

 

I will not use them, tried and failed.

[shred]

3 hours ago, RePete said:

By the same logic, if the gun is built and tuned correctly, you won't need a buffer.

 

Need, no.  Prefer, yes.  YMMV

 

[yigal]

4 hours ago, RePete said:

By the same logic, if the gun is built and tuned correctly, you won't need a buffer.

 

I will not use them, tried and failed.

Do what is good for you. No one is forcing you to use them

[prreed10]

Running them in both my SVs and Prodigy. Prefer the way recoil feels and no issues so far. 

[rishii]

Not all shock buffs are the same

back when I could find them, the CP buff were all I ran, never had a problem with them and would change them out maybe once a year

i tried other brands that shredded fairly quickly and I’m now in the no buff camp

[Runswithwood1]

No for me, I found a slightly heavier recoil spring negates the need for one. Initially I left mine in my shadow 2 but kept getting failure to go into battery, took the buff out and no problems in a few thousand rounds now

[hitman]

Best for you to try them and see.

But use the aluminum ones you will get a better idea if your getting battering.

[Slalom45]

If the gun runs reliably with them, why not? If you don't shoot a lot, or shoot minor, it may never matter. I want my .40 cal Atlas to last a long time. The maker recommends using them. It's reliable.

 

If it extends the life of the gun another 10k rounds then I'm good with it.

[CHA-LEE]

There are two potential negatives to using Shock Buffs....

 

1 - They reduce the rearward travel of the slide by the thickness of the Shock Buff. For most guns, this isn't an issue. But I have seen this expose other things that lead to feeding issues. Most of the time the "Other" things are Magazine related (Feed Lip width, Mag Spring, Follower, Crappy ammo, etc).

 

2 - Shock Buffs WILL wear out and when they do they usually spread out and cause the slide to slow down due to the pooched out buff rubbing on things it shouldn't. If you are going to use Shock Buff make sure that you PROACTIVELY replace them before they fail. How long they last is unique to each gun.

[CHA-LEE]

I also want to point out that a Shock Buff is not a REQUIRED part to keep a properly built 1911/2011 from producing excessive frame to slide battering. The 1911/2011 platform was designed to get "Battered" every time the slide cycles while shooting. If the Slide or Frame are getting beat up excessively, then the parts are not fit properly. Putting a Shock Buff in a poorly built gun is like adding Fix a Flat to a flat tire instead of just getting the tire patched or replaced as it should be.

[Racinready300ex]

On 2/16/2022 at 9:46 AM, Braxton1 said:

BS:  They shorten the stroke to the point where the gun is faster.  Hold up there, Hero...  You ain't THAT fast to even be able to notice that.  A 1911 strokes from hammer fall, completing the cycle, to being ready for another hammer fall in 0.05 seconds.  The gun is sitting there waiting patiently for your trigger finger to reverse direction twice (coming off the trigger and then coming back on) for at least another 0.05 seconds, in the best scenario.

 

 

You'd maybe be surprised what you can feel. I really like how shorter 4" guns shoot. Words I would use are faster, maybe snappier. I'm in no way out running the gun or waiting for the gun, but you can feel the recoil impulse is different on a commander length gun.

 

What's different? Shorter stroke and lighter slide. 

 

I currently only have 5" guns, they felt sluggish and chunky. It's hard to put into words what you're feeling but at the end of the day I didn't like the feel as much. So I removed weight from the slide then dropped from a 19 lbs hammer spring to a 17 and then to a 15. Then I played with recoil springs and added a buffer to shorten the stroke. 

 

The gun feels snappier now and closer to that 4" gun feeling I like. I'm not claiming to be a hero, or have .06 splits. I just like how the recoil feels. Totally subjective, not wrong or right just what I prefer. 

Edited May 7 by Racinready300ex

[Postal Bob]

Like stated by someone else, I have a custom built 1911 by Atlas guns that was built with a buffer. It's in 40 s&w, and uses a 10-11 lb recoil spring. It needs the buffer. But it was built to accomodate a shock buff.

I don't use one in any other guns. And when I tried one in a Kimber 1911, it would short stroke because there wasn't enough slide movement with a buffer installed.

Point is, the gun needs to be designed for it or it may not cycle properly.

[392heminut]

3 hours ago, Postal Bob said:

Point is, the gun needs to be designed for it or it may not cycle properly.

I think the full sized 1911 platform is okay with a buffer most of the time and doesn't NEED to be designed for it. Back in the 80's and 90's I ran buffers in several 1911s and I had around 15 guys on my department (I was dept. armorer) carrying 1911s and most ran buffers. The full sized guns never seemed to have a problem with them. I can't say the same about the smaller platforms, the only experience I've had with them is my Prodigy. We has quals every quarter and I would check the officers' guns and the condition of the buffers if they used them, so they generally got changed on a regular basis. Towards the late 90's the dept. decided we couldn't carry 1911s anymore (new management was freaking out about the cocked and locked thing) and that was about the time I quit running buffs in any of my guns. I've been trying out an aluminum buff in the Prodigy (never tried aluminum before) and so far I can't tell that it works any better or worse than it does without the buff but the gun functions just fine with it in there.

[shred]

Proof this topic never dies:

 

 

[Tampa-XD45]

Was a no go in my Dan Wesson.  Made it consistently short stroke.

[Stefan77]

My Dan Wesson PM-45 came with one in it and some extras.  It runs perfectly with them both with the factory recoil spring and the lighter recoil spring.  I run on in my other 1911 and my Shadow 2 Accu came with one.  All work without issue.

[chase214]

I use the plastic ones on my minor pistols and aluminum on my open pistol

[StefVanHauwe]

I use them in all my open guns, but check them regularly. As soon as I observe any type of damage to them I replace them. Too date never had issues.

[Archer]

Quote

On 5/4/2024 at 7:16 AM, rishii said:

Not all shock buffs are the same

back when I could find them, the CP buff were all I ran, never had a problem with them and would change them out maybe once a year

i tried other brands that shredded fairly quickly and I’m now in the no buff camp

 

I have a 25 year old bag of CP buffs that strike me as having a very high durometer.  They are a bit on the thick side, too.  Very tough.

 

Midrange compared to these are the Ed Browns.  

 

Softest seems to be the Wilsons.  I ran the Browns in my SA Professionals for the better part of 20 years with no issues.  The Wilson buffs seem to wear a lot faster.

 

I don’t run any, anymore.