Roshi:
Not to pick on you anymore, but....
If you use the same pistol for carry, at the end of every range session make it a routine practice to remove the buffer during cleaning.
If you do all of your shooting with a buffer and then take it out for carry, how will you ever know if your gun runs well without a shok-buff?
I have a Wilson 1996A2 that came with a buffer. Wilson's recommends using a buffer in their full sized guns and also recommends replacing them every 1,000 rounds, or when they start to show a "cut."
I had some feed related problems on my 1996A2 and decided to take the buffer out to see if the additional fraction of an inch of slide travel would take care of the problem. Basically I wanted to see if my gun was one of those that just "didn't like" a buff. Well, I took it out and started to experience a NEW malfunction -- premature slide lock. Turns out that my slide stop was getting hit by FMJ rounds as they fed up to the top of the magazine.
I never had that problem with the buff because the timing of the slide cycling with the buff got the slide stop notch back in front of the slide stop before the round hit it (due to the fractionally shorter slide travel). Without the buff, the timing was right for premature slide lock to occur almost once every magazine.
I have since had the slide stop fitted by Wilson Combat and no longer have the premature slide lock problem. I have also decided to shoot it without a buffer for a while just to make sure everything is working well. I figure the base line for reliability should be without the buff. You never know when you're going to lose one for whatever reason during a match and not have spares. Or whatever else Murphy's Law throws at me.
If I get the gun through 1,000-2,000 round without a FTF, then I might start using one again. We'll see if I make it that far first.
Bottom line is a lot of people assume that taking a shok buff out will NOT effect reliability. Well, my 1996A2 and I are living proof that this is not the case.
Ultimately I'd like to get to the point where I don't care if my gun has a buff in it. I don't think that they will get torn up (never happened to me in 2,000 plus rounds), though they do wear faster when your recoil spring is getting weak (I replace this every 2,000 rounds).
I hate to say it, but of the two issues I think the FLGR one is more important (I'm an anti). What do you think, Shane, care to join me in a thread entitled "FLGR or Shok-Buff, if you only had to pick one issue and why"?
EDITED to fix code.
[This message has been edited by JacRyan (edited 08-09-2001).]