MAX-11 vs. TASK slow-fire M11/9 - with video

Everything from training tips to firearm discussion for competitors. What have you learned that you can share and what do you want to know?
Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:37 am

MAX-11 vs. TASK slow-fire M11/9 - with video

Post by Garrett » Sat May 26, 2012 10:59 pm

Everyone is aware of the effect the MAX-11 has had on the sport of subgun competition (as well as for informal blasting). You can essentially take a stock M11/9 bullethose, swap uppers, and have a match-winning subgun. It makes an affordable alternative to buying a Sterling, Uzi, M16/9, MP5, or about any other subgun you can think of.

Of course, it wasn't the first method of slowing down the M11/9. There were a couple of different drop-in rate reducers that slowed the gun down... a little. There was the rarely-seen Urbach heavy bolt. Probably the most successful early on was the TASK slow-fire conversion. This consisted of threading an op rod to the rear of the bolt and using it to actuate a buffer and spring in an M16 stock. For this to work it was necessary to drill a hole in the rear of the receiver for the op rod to protrude through.

It was possible to alter the rate of fire by changing buffers. I remember considering getting Lage's original upper when I was setting my gun up. It used a longer upper, but did not have the added weight. It was intended to be used with the TASK-style conversion. As nice as it looked, I ended up getting an Autowerkes side-cocking upper instead. In the end, it did essentially the same thing for a couple hundred dollars less. The MAX-11 didn't come on the scene for a few more years.

I always thought the MAX-11 was an elegant solution, which made the lowly M11/9 a very competitive gun. But I had not planned on getting one, as I already had my gun set up for competition.

But recently, I found a used one at a pretty good price. So I figured, why not? In comparing the MAX-11 to the Autowerkes upper - or any stock-length upper - the MAX seems a lot bigger. While it is longer, I think this is mostly because the upper is taller as well.


As noted, it is possible to modify the rate of fire on a TASK-style gun by swapping buffers. One can also play with springs to change the ROF as well. By swapping buffers, I can go anywhere from around 630 rpm on the low end to 1250 rpm.

I timed some 10-round mag dumps a while back to get ROF data. Ammo was 115 gr. Win White Box.
Top to bottom in the picture:
Standard rifle buffer - 948 rpm.
9.7 oz. solid steel buffer - 672 rpm.
AAC rifle rate-reducing buffer - 636 rpm.

Standard CAR15 / M4 buffer - 1250 rpm.
9mm buffer - no data
AAC carbine rate-reducing buffer - no data

If that's not fast enough, use the factory spring setup and add extra buffers. With three buffers, I clocked the gun at 1776 rpm. (maybe not so good for competition - but it's a lot of fun!)


I've got my gun running just slow enough that I can pull singles on demand. There's not really any reason to go slower. I use the AAC rate-reducing buffer, and add a short section of the factory recoil spring. Without the extra spring, I would sometimes get light primer strikes, depending on the position of the weights with that particular buffer. It gives a nice, smooth ROF.

The few times I'd shot someone's MAX-11 in the past, the recoil always felt "chunky" to me. It was really similar to how an Uzi feels. I thought it may have had to do with the different geometry - where the weight was located. Now I think it was just the slower ROF.

I did some testing today, using both uppers. Ammo was some 147 gr. handloads, and 115 gr. Win White Box. I didn't really think the ROF was all that different. But you can see - and hear it in the video. I've got an extra bolt weight for the MAX-11. I'm thinking I might start drilling holes in it to drop weight until I can find the sweet spot.

The other thing I really like about the MAX-11 is that I'm not stuck using an M16 stock. I use the A1 stock so I can get a longer (heavier) buffer. But because of where the grip is located on the M11/9, this gives a slightly excessive length of pull. An M4 stock is better, but a little faster than I want.

I like the idea of getting a folding stock to go with the Lage upper. I like the more compact package for going to and from the range. I find I do the same with the Uzi. For matches or when I'm doing a lot of shooting, I use a solid stock. But for the quick trips back and forth, I put the folder on. I've got a couple of smaller soft cases where I can put in the gun with either a can and the folder, but not with a solid stock.
Last edited by Garrett on Sun May 27, 2012 7:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 294
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:11 pm
What number appears twice below: 0
Location: The Netherlands

Re: MAX-11 vs. TASK slow-fire M11/9 - with video

Post by Ulwembu » Sun May 27, 2012 2:39 am

Nice write up and congrats on the Lage upper ;)

User avatar
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:30 pm
What number appears twice below: 9
Location: Ohio

Re: MAX-11 vs. TASK slow-fire M11/9 - with video

Post by medphys » Sun May 27, 2012 8:21 am

Ulwembu wrote:Nice write up and congrats on the Lage upper ;)
Yes, congrats!

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1004
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:11 am
What number appears twice below: 0
Location: Miami Beach, Florida USA

Re: MAX-11 vs. TASK slow-fire M11/9 - with video

Post by todd » Tue May 29, 2012 7:58 pm

Outstanding article Garrett. Congrats on the Lage too.. get your ass to KCR and the MI match with it !

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest