Irony Anyone? V7 Weapons Offers Ultralight Buffer Kit with “Heavy 1” Buffer

V7 Weapons Systems, known for their awesome ultra-light weight AR and other components has released their latest ultralight kit for the AR-15. Dubbed the “Ultra-Light Buffer Kit” the kit combines V7’s best-known lightweight parts for the rear of your modern sporting rifle (which I own many on my ultra-light build).

Interestingly, the kit is offered in two forms, one with the “standard” 7075 aluminum and the offer with the 2055 lithium aluminum material. 2055 is reported to be lighter and stronger than the well-respected 7075 alloy. Fortunately, the reduction in weight is not a huge increase in price, only adding $25.

The kit includes:

  • Buffer tube (user’s choice of material
  • 7068 aluminum lightweight castle nut
  • Ultra-light quick detach endplate
  • Titanium buffer retainer with spring
  • H1 buffer
  • Carbine action spring

I have to stop and note the “H1” Buffer, which seems completely counterintuitive for the goal of creating the lightest weight AR-15. H1 adds an incredible .8 ounces to the weight of the firearm, which can be detrimental to the ultra-light aficionado’s ultra-light goals.

In all seriousness, the key to getting an ultra-light to work right is the use of an adjustable gas block. Adding weight to the buffer is unneeded for function and the tungsten weight will increase cost too.

Retail for the kit runs at $109.00 for the 7075 aluminum model and $130 for the 2055 lithium aluminum option. 


TFB’s FNG. Completely irreverent of all things marketing but a passionate lover of new ideas and old ones well executed. Enjoys musing on all things firearms, shooting 3-gun, and attempting to be both tacticool AND tactical.


  • PK

    You didn’t mention the weight of either setup, and since they weren’t the easiest numbers to find I’m not surprised. Here’s the weight of just the buffer tubes…

    7075: nearly the same as any other military diameter tube, but made from 7075 instead of 6061, 95.2 grams versus 100 grams.
    2055: 89.6 grams

    Protip for V Seven… if your selling point is weight, LIST IT PROMINENTLY!

    • Twilight sparkle

      The fact that the 7075 tube is lighter than a 6061 tube (assuming it’s mil spec in size) is pretty cool since 6061 is less dense than 7075

      • PK

        I assume it’s due to the scalloped cuts for each position for the stock. It’s a fair bit of metal to remove, and it’s not going to make it less rugged when made from 7075-T6 instead of 6061-T6.

        I’ve noticed a lot of manufacturers are switching to 7075-T6 for the tubes, thankfully. It’s a better idea overall.

    • Nolan

      130 dollars to save a whopping .35 ounces? Not something I’d go out of my way to advertise as a selling point. At least you get the nifty wavy pattern on the buffer?

      • Flounder

        Exactly what I was going to say, hideously expensive. AND! The strike industries buffer tube that TFB reported on a month or so back is hilariously cheaper AND LIGHTER!

        • Stewart

          Except its not. The strike industries is 3.8oz, the V7 is 3.16oz. Its also $130 including the lightweight castle nut, the buffer spring and a tungsten buffer, whereas the $50 from strike industries is ONLY the tube. With an equivalent spring, buffer, and castle nut you’d be at about the same price.

          • Flounder

            The buffer is an h1. No tungsten whatsoever. It has a ti buffer retaining detent. And the endplate and castlenut are aluminium. So a touch lighter than ti but much weaker. Whether that is a problem or not idk. The dissimilar metals may aid in keeping the castle nut secure. Or it might actually reinforce the tube and the reciever.

            3.8 is ridiculously heavy. Almost all buffer tubes are 3.2-3.3 oz. you should have known the second you saw that number it was wrong. It was reported as 3.1 oz first. So i am guessing that is a typo on their website and they meant to put 3.08oz. Its the only thing that makes sense. The length is constrained, the ID has to be exact, the OD has to be exact… idk how they could be so overweight with the lightening cuts

            Edit: that weight in question is for their 7position tube. Could be right but seems wrong.

    • Flounder

      V7 is just dicking around with new materials. Even they know the tiny bit of weight isn’t worth the cost.

  • Twilight sparkle

    If you’re using this stock kit then odds are you’re using a light weight bcg and it might actually be a good idea to use an H buffer to tame some of the bolt velocity, or at least have a really nice adjustable gas system.

    • Independent George

      It really only makes sense to use a lightweight BCG if you’ve also got an adjustable gas block.

    • Jimmy Lovelace

      I tend to agree. I’m no expert on the overall system, just an enthusiast and have some experience building AR’s (about a dozen at this point), but it seems to me that while it is best to try and tamp down on the gassing via an adjustable gas block, one shouldn’t count out the buffer/spring as part of the equation, to say nothing of the BCG. Gassing is probably the most effective method to reliability and recoil control, but it is still a family of parts that all work in concert to provide the desired performance.

  • steveday72

    From how I understood it – reducing the gas will slow down the speed of the bolt carrier (and increase the lock time), at the expense of affecting overall reliability and extraction issues. Increasing the buffer weight slows down the cycle rate and helps with some feeding problems.

    In other words, increasing/reducing the gas or buffer weight have two separate outcomes.

    Gas affects the speed/force of the BCG moving rearwards.
    Buffer weight/buffer springs affect the speed/force of the BCG moving forwards.

    I’m only a disabled guy who reads a lot (I love engineering and have a need to understand how things work) and shoots very little (because of my illness & a ruptured vertebrael disc), so please correct me if I’m wrong.

    • You also combine it with a light weight bolt carrier group.

      • Haulin’ Oats

        A JP LMOS and and captured buffer spring system is going to be ideal for such a set up.

        • Not if your goal is light weight. The JP SCS is pretty heavy. A spring and something like the Taccom buffer would be a better option.

          • Flounder

            They are much closer than you make them sound. The newer ones are using aluminium as well.

            the JP SCS is 6-8oz an h1 buffer+spring is 5.something an h2+spring is 6-7oz and an H3 is heavier.

            So, It gains like an oz. Not for a superlightweight build. But you could easily hit 5lbs with one.

          • The Taccom buffer is made out of polymer.

          • Flounder

            How does that not break guns completely? I saw one of those and thought it was a terrible idea. But I guess if you get an adjustable gas block you can make it work?

            Ever run one set up like that really dirty?

            Or do an mud test? I am guessing it would fail. But I would love to see it tried. If only for fun.

            I feel like that is taking something to the absolute edge of reliability for competition only. At which point 3.5lbs AR’s are easily achievable. What are your thoughts?

      • steveday72

        A lightweight BCG increases the cycle rate again though, sometimes resulting in a race between the very fast moving lightweight BCG and the magazine spring+follower (when nearly-empty). It also creates the possibility of bolt-bounce because of the lack of mass+inertia.

        The problem with fiddling with lightweight internal components is they have to be extremely fine-tuned to run, then become unreliable much faster than a milspec BCG+Spring+Buffer setup as the springs wear or gas port fouls/erodes.

        From reading various people’s problems and troubleshooting on forums, lightweight internals are okay for bench-shooting, plinking or a 3-gun competition, but the tolerance stacking becomes far too critical for use on a reliable defensive rifle.

    • Flounder

      Your understanding seems simplified… You need to account for momentum and speed.

      Momentum because there are minimium and maximium thresholds. Too much and parts bend and break. Too little and your gun barely runs or short strokes.(competitors live at the run it juuussstt barely enough. It reduces recoil but if you get it dirty to a significant degree or run it dry it just won’t work).

      Velocity it trickier. Which is why most people go here. It is also easier to see the speed at which things are moving than their momentum. Springs can only work so fast… and there is a certain amount of timing that is required in the dance of all the parts.

      You also have to include the FCG in the figuring, the hammer drags on the carrier, and sometimes if things move too quickly you can get slam fires or unintentional full auto, or just get an uncocked gun after it cycles.

    • Bradley

      I don’t have much direct experience, but adjustable gas blocks are pretty much a requirement for lightweight bolt carriers. I think the amount of time the bolt stays locked has more to do with the gas tube length than anything else. Of course most of this stuff is intended for competition use where the rifle is generally tuned to whatever ammo you’re using. The general consensus seems to be that a lot of commercial rifles are over gassed so they will work with pretty much any ammo. It’s just action/reaction. The more weight you have the more gas it takes to push it.

  • Gun Fu Guru

    Oh, the humanity!

    • Rob in Katy

      Technically, Oh the Newtoniany…sorry, had to be done.

  • Eric

    The Author doesn’t seem to understand how AR buffers or the ARs gas piston system works (the AR15 is an internal piston system with the bolt/BCG being the piston). Or the author simply forgot to mention how ARs work so the cringe worthy title gets noticed. The buffers weight reduces BCG speed ( i.e. cycling). you can’t cut weight everywhere – example if you had a shorter gas block/tube (carbine length), a light BCG, and a low weight buffer – your system might have little mass to function as resistance and will have an AR cycling too fast. So fast it might cause malfunctions. the heavier your buffer and longer your gas system gives you softer shooting ARs. Not that ARs are harsh in felt recoil but more muzzle rise – effecting follow up shots and overall smoothness. I should mention muzzle breaks can help with both recoil and muzzle rise BUT i’m focusing on internal mechanics (but its the internet so if i’m not specific people become keyboard critics [much like i’m doing about this author]). Lots of articles on firearms blog are more random opinion than facts or showing new products through “click bate” than on their merits. Some articles are great but they need better editing and clarification when joking (since this isn’t a satire site i assume your being ignorant not funny). There are gems to found on this site though – i’m not being negative for kicks.