28 or 30 in a 30 round mag - Page 3

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 28 or 30 in a 30 round mag (Page 3 of 6)

Posted: 1/7/2006 7:43:38 AM EDT

[#1]

For everyone saying you HAVE to download to get the mag to seat with the bolt closed:

TEST A BUNCH OF GUNS & MAGS

I did.

post your results.

Posted: 1/7/2006 7:44:36 AM EDT

[#2]

How is that BS? Your 30 round magazine not holding 30 rounds is broken, I mean, it's not doing what it's supposed to do. Not doing what it's supposed to do makes it broken, doesn't it? On the same note, the rifle should work with a full 30 round mag, if it's not doing what it's supposed to do, isn't it broken?

Someone's making excuses for broken gear!

Posted: 1/7/2006 7:51:54 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
From the Marine Corps Close shooting POI

"1. FILLING A MAGAZINE.

a. Magazines are filled to a maximum capacity of 28 rounds. This is to facilitate the inserting and seating of a filled magazine during dry reloads, condition one reloads, and remedial action.

b. Magazines that are filled to maximum capacity are much more difficult to seat with the bolt in the forward position. The compressed spring requires greater force to insert the magazine when the first round makes contact with the bottom of the bolt carrier. Since all loads, reloads, and remedial action are performed with the bolt in the forward position, it is imperative that this problem be eliminated. Improperly seated magazines are a primary cause of stoppages for the M16A2."

/shrugs/ not taught that way. I'm far too lazy to go look anything up on the net, and I didn't save the green monster, but 28, 29 and 30 are always loaded and always tracers.

That's right out of the POI. I know you're probably liberal so you won't let facts get in the way.

Posted: 1/7/2006 7:54:47 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

That's right out of the POI. I know you're probably liberal so you won't let facts get in the way.

Posted: 1/7/2006 7:56:37 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
How is that BS? Your 30 round magazine not holding 30 rounds is broken, I mean, it's not doing what it's supposed to do. Not doing what it's supposed to do makes it broken, doesn't it? On the same note, the rifle should work with a full 30 round mag, if it's not doing what it's supposed to do, isn't it broken?

Someone's making excuses for broken gear!

No body is saying that loading to maximum capacity will not work... We are saying that loading to maximum capacity has been known to be unreliable... Ever hear of "Id rather be safe than sorry"?

Posted: 1/7/2006 8:01:35 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
For everyone saying you HAVE to download to get the mag to seat with the bolt closed:

TEST A BUNCH OF GUNS & MAGS

I did.

post your results.

+1 This is an EMPIRICAL QUESTION, not a theoretical one.

PS: I demand credit for doing this on the first page

Posted: 1/7/2006 8:35:40 AM EDT

[#7]

I run 28 rounds. I never had a problem seating the magazine but I have had problems with the bolt not stripping the top round off with 30 rounds. That's why I changed. I need my work gun to be reliable every time I have to go to it. I need to know that when I put a mag in it will function properly everytime.

28 round makes sure this happens.

YMMV may vary with your bench shooting or with your "ranch gun" (not flaming anyone here). My life and the lives of others may rely on my weapon functioning flawlessly.

Posted: 1/7/2006 9:01:54 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

I run 28 rounds.

So why not 29? or 12? or 15?

[quote[YMMV may vary with your bench shooting or with your "ranch gun" (not flaming anyone here). My life and the lives of others may rely on my weapon functioning flawlessly.

So do mine, and they work perfectly with 30.

But I'll give you credit, you have a reason - your gun won't strip the top round with 30.

Posted: 1/7/2006 9:18:34 AM EDT

[#9]

SNAPS

Have you ever tried the load with the last 3 rounds as tracers? When I was a CO we tested it in some training and found most times every one except the shooter could see he was getting near the end.

The best use for tracers I have found was for leaders to load there battle carry mag with them and they used them to mark targets for the rest of the unit. It also works for CIFS to mark targets with tracers.

Posted: 1/7/2006 9:21:12 AM EDT

[#10]

The HK mags seat reliably with 30 loaded, and if Marines are issued them they are told to load 30, they should since the magazine is actually a little longer and you can fit 2 more rounds into them.

Posted: 1/7/2006 10:24:53 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
On another list, we've been having this debate. So a couple of us did some testing.

I did mine today - good thing too, for when I was in the basement doing it, my water main started leaking all over my supplies! Nut just got loose I guess. Who would guess a test would turn into a crisis?

I had intended to set the mag bottom on a scale, and push down on the gun to get a reading - but my scale wouldn't handle that.

i10.photobucket.com/albums/a150/fight4yourrights/Weapons/Magtest001Medium.jpg

So, I have:

1 DPMS
1 Professional Ordnance carbon 15
1 Rock River Arms
3 Bushmasters

6 mags, 20 round, fully loaded
13 mags, 30 round, fully loaded

All bolts were closed on all weapons. I selected one gun at a time, and inserted each mag and pushed on the bottom until it seated. I removed the mag, tried the next, repeated until I finished the stack.

No mags had to be slammed or hit to seat. All were just pushed.

ALL MAGAZINES SEATED IN ALL 6 WEAPONS

The RRA was a bit tougher, as was one of my Bushmasters. But we are talking degrees here. There was some variability between mags, and if the top bullet wasn't seated correctly that had an effect also.

End Results were exactly what I expected - ALL MAGAZINES SEATED IN ALL 6 WEAPONS WITH BOLTS CLOSED

So that's 6 guns x 19 magazines = 114 combinations/insertions

- Paul

Was this a traditional tac reload fashion, holding the weapon at high ready while inserting the mag with the weak hand and keeping the muzzle in the general direction of your target? That is what is at issue here and that is what needs to happen 100% of the time. I know that my new mags with 30 rounds would not seat in this fashion. Nearly all of them. Pushing up as hard as I could wouldn't seat some of them.

If you don't do this or understand this concept, arguing the point is moot.

Go to this link - link - select Stocks on the left side - watch the video clip of the guy doing a tac reload from the buttstock. This is the issue, for the most part. Downloading gives you a more reliable tac reload, for the guy who doesn't have the time or luxury to turn his AR upside down and press in a mag. It's as simple as that.

Posted: 1/7/2006 10:28:00 AM EDT

[#12]

Didn't read all 5 pages...

In another thread, I quoted Pat Rogers from the current SWAT mag regarding 28 in a 30. Let me see if I can find it.

EDIT:

It was fight's thread:
www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=17&t=261814

Here's what I typed there:

Written by Patrick A. Rogers:

A cautionary note here: While the capacity of a thirty-round magazine is in fact thirty rounds, load only twenty-eight in them. The reason is simple: some magazines, when fully loaded, will not lock into the mag well if the bolt is forward. By downloading two rounds you can be sure that you can lock in any mag (remember - Push Pull!) whether the bolt is forward or not. At any given carbine class I will see thirty to fifty instances of a shooter failing to lock the mag in the well. The mag then falls out of the carbine. The shooter gets vapor lock, spends a great amoung of time trying to force something that won't happen and fails to transitiion to his pistol. Even if he does correctly transition to his pistol, the entire line must wair while the errant shooter (hopefully) gets himself squared away.

SWAT Magazine, January 2006, Beta Company Reloaders, Patrick A. Rogers, pg 86.

Posted: 1/7/2006 10:42:40 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:

I run 28 rounds.

So why not 29? or 12? or 15?

[quote[YMMV may vary with your bench shooting or with your "ranch gun" (not flaming anyone here). My life and the lives of others may rely on my weapon functioning flawlessly.

So do mine, and they work perfectly with 30.

But I'll give you credit, you have a reason - your gun won't strip the top round with 30.

28 rounds is what I learned on active duty, a carbine class and a patrol rifle class. If my gun ran with 30 instead of 28 and I was confident in it then I would run 30. The last article from Pat Rogers in January's SWAT mag confirmed what most people have been debating for years.

If 30 works for you, or if having to perform SPORTS when the gun dosen't go into battery is no big deal then that's great. I won't employ a weapon which may not go bang when I need it to.

Posted: 1/7/2006 10:43:19 AM EDT

[#14]

In 1982, Gunny Marbry taught me 28 so I load 28.

I wonder how many rounds the Marine Corps loaded in their 30 round magazines in 1775?

Posted: 1/7/2006 10:45:23 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Written by Patrick A. Rogers:

A cautionary note here: While the capacity of a thirty-round magazine is in fact thirty rounds, load only twenty-eight in them. The reason is simple: some magazines, when fully loaded, will not lock into the mag well if the bolt is forward. By downloading two rounds you can be sure that you can lock in any mag (remember - Push Pull!) whether the bolt is forward or not. At any given carbine class I will see thirty to fifty instances of a shooter failing to lock the mag in the well. The mag then falls out of the carbine. The shooter gets vapor lock, spends a great amoung of time trying to force something that won't happen and fails to transitiion to his pistol. Even if he does correctly transition to his pistol, the entire line must wair while the errant shooter (hopefully) gets himself squared away.

SWAT Magazine, January 2006, Beta Company Reloaders, Patrick A. Rogers, pg 86.

95% of the people who load 30 and admit it here don't have a clue what "Push-Pull" is. That's why it's useless to argue with most of them.

I'll never forget it.

Pat: "Did we cover Push-Pull today?"

Mongo: "Uh...................yes, sir, we did."

Pat: [pointing to a loaded mag at my feet] "Well................what's that?"

Mongo: "Uh...................that's my magazine."

Pat: [shouting to the entire firing line] "DID WE COVER PUSH PULL TODAY????"

Entire Firing Line: [yelling at a red faced Mongo] "YES, SIR, WE DID!!!!"

Embarrassment is such a good training tool.

Adding: My mags consist of a USGI mag body, a Wolff extra power spring a Magpul follower and a Magpul ranger plate. This combo is a bitch to insert doing a tac reload. They are stiff, but feed like nobody's business.

Posted: 1/7/2006 10:55:39 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Written by Patrick A. Rogers:

A cautionary note here: While the capacity of a thirty-round magazine is in fact thirty rounds, load only twenty-eight in them. The reason is simple: some magazines, when fully loaded, will not lock into the mag well if the bolt is forward. By downloading two rounds you can be sure that you can lock in any mag (remember - Push Pull!) whether the bolt is forward or not. At any given carbine class I will see thirty to fifty instances of a shooter failing to lock the mag in the well. The mag then falls out of the carbine. The shooter gets vapor lock, spends a great amoung of time trying to force something that won't happen and fails to transitiion to his pistol. Even if he does correctly transition to his pistol, the entire line must wair while the errant shooter (hopefully) gets himself squared away.

SWAT Magazine, January 2006, Beta Company Reloaders, Patrick A. Rogers, pg 86.

95% of the people who load 30 and admit it here don't have a clue what "Push-Pull" is. That's why it's useless to argue with most of them.

I'll never forget it.

Pat: "Did we cover Push-Pull today?"

Mongo: "Uh...................yes, sir, we did."

Pat: [pointing to a loaded mag at my feet] "Well................what's that?"

Mongo: "Uh...................that's my magazine."

Pat: [shouting to the entire firing line] "DID WE COVER PUSH PULL TODAY????"

Entire Firing Line: [yelling at a red faced Mongo] "YES, SIR, WE DID!!!!"

Embarrassment is such a good training tool.

Adding: My mags consist of a USGI mag body, a Wolff extra power spring a Magpul follower and a Magpul ranger plate. This combo is a bitch to insert doing a tac reload. They are stiff, but feed like nobody's business.

HAHA!

Posted: 1/7/2006 11:39:43 AM EDT

[#17]

I run 30 in all 30 round magazines, 20 in all 20 round magazines, 7 in all 7 round magazines, 10 in all 10 round magazines, etc.

If you REALLY wanted to be sure you could load 12 in your 30 round magazine and call it safe!

Posted: 1/7/2006 11:48:06 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
I run 30 in all 30 round magazines, 20 in all 20 round magazines, 7 in all 7 round magazines, 10 in all 10 round magazines, etc.

If you REALLY wanted to be sure you could load 12 in your 30 round magazine and call it safe!

It's a risk/reward issue. You download the minumum possible to maximize your effectiveness in reloading.

No wonder why pros like Pat quit posting here. It's a useless discussion...........................................

Posted: 1/7/2006 11:52:06 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I run 30 in all 30 round magazines, 20 in all 20 round magazines, 7 in all 7 round magazines, 10 in all 10 round magazines, etc.

If you REALLY wanted to be sure you could load 12 in your 30 round magazine and call it safe!

It's a risk/reward issue. You download the minumum possible to maximize your effectiveness in reloading.

No wonder why pros like Pat quit posting here. It's a useless discussion...........................................

+1

It's a damn shame.

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:00:52 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Was this a traditional tac reload fashion, holding the weapon at high ready while inserting the mag with the weak hand and keeping the muzzle in the general direction of your target?

Not quite. This was a "holding the weapon by the pistol grip with the strong hand, and pressing the magazine into the well with the weak hand"

My intention was to show that they would seat, which I did. My intention was not to duplicate field conditions.

I've taken several carbine courses and I am very familiar with Tac loads.

I've always used fully loaded magazines and haven't had a problem.

I DID drop a mag out of the well during a class, but that's because I failed to properly push & pull. My fault, not due to a fully loaded mag.

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:24:42 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

If you don't do this or understand this concept, arguing the point is moot.

Actually, in my opinion (as much as I respect yours), the real question is whether or not there is a measurable difference in the pressure/force needed to seat a magazine with 28 rounds vs. 30 rounds.

If there is, then even a small difference could be of enormous importance in tactical reload, I completely agree.

However, if there is no difference, then downloading a mag to 28 rounds is nothing but superstition, like wearing lucky socks.

Just as you suspect that there are a bunch of people who are "overloading" magazines with 30 rounds, and will regret it if they even need to do a tac reload with bullets flying (God forbid) - I suspect that there are a similar bunch of people who are loading there magazines to 28 for no other reason that someone told them to, and don't actually KNOW whether it serves a purpose or not. And by the same token, those people could end up in a hairy situation where they might wish they had those two extra rounds (God forbid, also)

I have no doubt that there are SOME magazines (depending on springs, followers, etc.) that might indeed be harder to seat with 30 rounds than with 28, or some rifles that are a little more "tight" in the location of the magazine catch. For those particular cases, it absolutely seems to make sense to load to 28. However, I honestly cannot tell any difference between my magazines that are loaded to 28 and those that are loaded to 30 (in my ARs).

Can you? In a blind test, where you do not know which mags have 28 and which had 30 - can you tell the difference in a tac reload on a close bolt?

If you can, you should absolutely keep using 28. I cannot, therefore I might as well stick with 30.

(Not trying to argue - just clarify)

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:25:39 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
I DID drop a mag out of the well during a class, but that's because I failed to properly push & pull. My fault, not due to a fully loaded mag.

Probably not a soul here that hasn't done that at least once - regardless the number of rounds in the mag.

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:26:22 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:

If you don't do this or understand this concept, arguing the point is moot.

Actually, in my opinion (as much as I respect yours), the real question is whether or not there is a measurable difference in the pressure/force needed to seat a magazine with 28 rounds vs. 30 rounds.

If there is, then even a small difference could be of enormous importance in tactical reload, I completely agree.

However, if there is no difference, then downloading a mag to 28 rounds is nothing but superstition, like wearing lucky socks.

Just as you suspect that there are a bunch of people who are "overloading" magazines with 30 rounds, and will regret it if they even need to do a tac reload with bullets flying (God forbid) - I suspect that there are a similar bunch of people who are loading there magazines to 28 for no other reason that someone told them to, and don't actually KNOW whether it serves a purpose or not. And by the same token, those people could end up in a hairy situation where they might wish they had those two extra rounds (God forbid, also)

I have no doubt that there are SOME magazines (depending on springs, followers, etc.) that might indeed be harder to seat with 30 rounds than with 28, or some rifles that are a little more "tight" in the location of the magazine catch. For those particular cases, it absolutely seems to make sense to load to 28. However, I honestly cannot tell any difference between my magazines that are loaded to 28 and those that are loaded to 30 (in my ARs).

Can you? In a blind test, where you do not know which mags have 28 and which had 30 - can you tell the difference in a tac reload on a close bolt?

If you can, you should absolutely keep using 28. I cannot, therefore I might as well stick with 30.

(Not trying to argue - just clarify)

Flip side argument. What do you lose by downloading two?

Who here is going to see a fire fight out to 28 rounds or more - few, if any? Who here competes and needs timely and sure reloads - more than a few?

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:30:23 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Actually, in my opinion (as much as I respect yours), the real question is whether or not there is a measurable difference in the pressure/force needed to seat a magazine with 28 rounds vs. 30 rounds.

If there is, then even a small difference could be of enormous importance in tactical reload, I completely agree.

However, if there is no difference, then downloading a mag to 28 rounds is nothing but superstition, like wearing lucky socks.

Col Chuck Santose measued the difference using a trigger scale. He got 11 lbs of force to seat the mag, with 28 rounds or with 30 rounds.

He measured NO DIFFERENCE between the two.

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:32:39 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Flip side argument. What do you lose by downloading two?

You lose almost 7% of your ammunition, that's what you lose.

Why not just download one? You can easily visually inspect for a single download, you can't for a two round download.

(single = round on the 'wrong' side)

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:32:47 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Actually, in my opinion (as much as I respect yours), the real question is whether or not there is a measurable difference in the pressure/force needed to seat a magazine with 28 rounds vs. 30 rounds.

If there is, then even a small difference could be of enormous importance in tactical reload, I completely agree.

However, if there is no difference, then downloading a mag to 28 rounds is nothing but superstition, like wearing lucky socks.

Col Chuck Santose measued the difference using a trigger scale. He got 11 lbs of force to seat the mag, with 28 rounds or with 30 rounds.

He measured NO DIFFERENCE between the two.

Got a link or reference to that.

FWIW, I can physically feel a difference on some mags, not all, but some, and I'm not calibrated.

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:37:23 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

If you don't do this or understand this concept, arguing the point is moot.

Actually, in my opinion (as much as I respect yours), the real question is whether or not there is a measurable difference in the pressure/force needed to seat a magazine with 28 rounds vs. 30 rounds.

If there is, then even a small difference could be of enormous importance in tactical reload, I completely agree.

However, if there is no difference, then downloading a mag to 28 rounds is nothing but superstition, like wearing lucky socks.

Just as you suspect that there are a bunch of people who are "overloading" magazines with 30 rounds, and will regret it if they even need to do a tac reload with bullets flying (God forbid) - I suspect that there are a similar bunch of people who are loading there magazines to 28 for no other reason that someone told them to, and don't actually KNOW whether it serves a purpose or not. And by the same token, those people could end up in a hairy situation where they might wish they had those two extra rounds (God forbid, also)

I have no doubt that there are SOME magazines (depending on springs, followers, etc.) that might indeed be harder to seat with 30 rounds than with 28, or some rifles that are a little more "tight" in the location of the magazine catch. For those particular cases, it absolutely seems to make sense to load to 28. However, I honestly cannot tell any difference between my magazines that are loaded to 28 and those that are loaded to 30 (in my ARs).

Can you? In a blind test, where you do not know which mags have 28 and which had 30 - can you tell the difference in a tac reload on a close bolt?

If you can, you should absolutely keep using 28. I cannot, therefore I might as well stick with 30.

(Not trying to argue - just clarify)

Flip side argument. What do you lose by downloading two?

Who here is going to see a fire fight out to 28 rounds or more - few, if any? Who here competes and needs timely and sure reloads - more than a few?

I agree with your second point - but it is STILL an empirical question as to whether there actually is a measurable difference, or whether some people in fact are doing it for peace of mind without any real difference.

And since I'm really anal, I'd point out that in a loadout for an infantry soldier of 10 mags, you'd "lose" 20 rounds by doing it - or have to carry an extra mag, and spend more time on one extra mag change during an extended fight.

I know that few of us here are going to be in that situation, but am only mentioning it because people are saying they've learned this in the military, or been told it by people who learned it in the military.

Heh - I'm just being totally picky now.

I agree that the risk-reward is a very subtle distinction, and I'd agree with you that for most practical purposes, the risk of NOT being able to reload properly is not one I'd want to take.

But for me, it all still returns to the basic empirical question of whether there actually is a difference for most people. For me, the answer is in the data, and if the data prove me wrong, I will always admit it.

When I did the quick "blind" test I described back on page 1, I HONESTLY thought that I would easily be able to tell the magazines apart, but I could not. In fact, when I picked which one I thought was the 30-rounder, I was wrong twice, and right once

(... but that really wasn't any kind of a rigorous test, but I am curious how many here coudl reliable tell the difference in a blind test)

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:46:59 PM EDT

[#28]

I find it amazing that many here are buying into gadgets that give you the Nth degree of reliability, such as H buffers, midlength barrels, extractor springs and stuff like that, but you can't buy into a practice that, by itself, makes your system more reliable and causes you very little to no loss and costs you zero.

We had 80 mags on the ground on the first day of Pat's class. That is no BS - 80..........................ask bigbore, if you don't believe me. You can't tell me that all 80 had nothing to do with being too hard to insert.

My data and experience says a downloaded mag is easier to insert under certain conditions. That is supported by some professional trainers. It also has mixed support among some of the armed forces.

FWIW, YMMV, yata-yata

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:53:22 PM EDT

[#29]

Mongo, don't even waste any more time with this. No matter how well or how many times you explain something sometimes they just don't get it.

To the people who say load 30 because it's a 30rd mag do yourself a favor and next time you go shooting practice doing a tac reload (on a closed bolt) but try to add some stress to it by doing it against a timer or whatever you need to do to simulate stress. Load your mags to 30 and see what happens and then load them to 28 and see what happens.

Stress is the big factor in downloading to 28, of course you can load a full 30rd mag on a closed bolt when there is no pressure but when stress is involved that 28 makes a huge difference.

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:57:06 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Got a link or reference to that.

FWIW, I can physically feel a difference on some mags, not all, but some, and I'm not calibrated.

It was posted on a training mailing list. I doubt you can pull it up, but just in case - [http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/Pgh-training/message/6028]LINK

Not the actual post (can't find) but it references it:

From: <santose@...>
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:56 pm
Subject: Re: [Pgh-training] GEAR (was marketing) santose_c
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Your assumption is no truer than mine. You're assuming a full magazine is less
reliable than a short loaded magazine without any proof. My entire adult life
has been spend in the company of thousands of fully loaded 20 round magazines
without any questions about reliability. Myths die hard.

Despite the exhortations of our old football coaches there ain't no 110%. Nor
is 100% reliable less reliable than 100% reliable. Nor is 11 pounds pressure to
insert a fully loaded magazine (the only complaint I've heard) more than 11
pounds pressure to load a downloaded magazine.

I retain 100% reliability and give up no rounds. And 2/20 is 10% for us old
school 20 round types anyway. :-)

-- Chuck

Posted: 1/7/2006 12:58:50 PM EDT

[#31]

Like I said in the other thread, I find it interesting that fight found no measurable difference - that's significant to me.

Too bad we all couldn't get together and test about 150 mags.

But since that ain't gonna happen, and I'm not gonna 'test' each mag, it's 28 for me.

Posted: 1/7/2006 1:30:43 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Mongo, don't even waste any more time with this. No matter how well or how many times you explain something sometimes they just don't get it.

Not to sound pissy, but how is being curious about whether or not there is a real measurable difference a case of me not "getting it"?? I've served in the infantry, I know what a "tac reload is" -
I'm just curious how many people can actually tell the difference btw 28 and 30 if it was put to a blind test. I suspect that some people might be surprised (like I was).

For the record, I don't see any real harm in loading to 28 (and I'm not foaming at the mouth trying to "convert" people to some 30-in-30 dogma) but unless there is a verifiable difference (even a slight one) in the force/pressure required, then many people may be engaged in nothing but feelgood superstition, and not any actual benefit in a tac reload.

This really isn't a big deal to me at all. I'm geniuinely just curious about it - which is why I tried a blind test in the first place.

However, I do have to say that I am surprised at how few people are saying "I'm going to try that blind test next time I've got the rifle and my mags out" - and instead argue theory or principles, when it is nothing but an empirical question that is easily answered by every individual in this thread with an opinion.

But - I'll stop arguing about it (plus, I know better than to disagree with mongo on anything - because he geniunnely IS so much more knowledgable than me

) - but I disagree that this is just a matter of people not "getting it".

Posted: 1/7/2006 1:35:49 PM EDT

[#33]

We had 80 mags on the ground on the first day of Pat's class. That is no BS - 80

Sounds like someone needs some more training...

Posted: 1/7/2006 1:36:03 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

However, I do have to say that I am surprised at how few people are saying "I'm going to try that blind test next time I've got the rifle and my mags out" - and instead argue theory or principles, when it is nothing but an empirical question that is easily answered by every individual in this thread with an opinion.

Could it be possible that some of us have already experienced the benefits from a downloaded magazine?

Posted: 1/7/2006 1:42:11 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Mongo, don't even waste any more time with this. No matter how well or how many times you explain something sometimes they just don't get it.

Not to sound pissy, but how is being curious about whether or not there is a real measurable difference a case of me not "getting it"?? I've served in the infantry, I know what a "tac reload is" -
I'm just curious how many people can actually tell the difference btw 28 and 30 if it was put to a blind test. I suspect that some people might be surprised (like I was).

For the record, I don't see any real harm in loading to 28 (and I'm not foaming at the mouth trying to "convert" people to some 30-in-30 dogma) but unless there is a verifiable difference (even a slight one) in the force/pressure required, then many people may be engaged in nothing but feelgood superstition, and not any actual benefit in a tac reload.

This really isn't a big deal to me at all. I'm geniuinely just curious about it - which is why I tried a blind test in the first place.

However, I do have to say that I am surprised at how few people are saying "I'm going to try that blind test next time I've got the rifle and my mags out" - and instead argue theory or principles, when it is nothing but an empirical question that is easily answered by every individual in this thread with an opinion.

But - I'll stop arguing about it (plus, I know better than to disagree with mongo on anything - because he geniunnely IS so much more knowledgable than me ) - but I disagree that this is just a matter of people not "getting it".

The main reason I stated that people are "not getting it" is it seems that quite a few people seem to think that it has something to do with the magazine itself and that somehow they are defective mags when it has nothing to do with the mag being defective. Another reason is people state that it is not that hard to load a full 30rd mag on a closed bolt but they are not thinking about the stress involved.

Posted: 1/7/2006 1:45:23 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:

However, I do have to say that I am surprised at how few people are saying "I'm going to try that blind test next time I've got the rifle and my mags out" - and instead argue theory or principles, when it is nothing but an empirical question that is easily answered by every individual in this thread with an opinion.

Could it be possible that some of us had already experienced the benefits from a downloaded magazine?

Absolutely - as I said earlier, I have no doubt that there are some mags (depending on springs, etc.) and some rifles, that are tight, and there probably IS a discernable difference.

- but someone having trouble inserting a 30-round might mistakenly attribute that problem to the 30 rounds, when perhaps it was something else entirely. They might also have had trouble with a 28-round mag in those same circumstances. Without a blind test, it is impossible to know for sure.

Again - I'm just being curious, and surprised that others are not interested in performing a little test to test their own assumptions. Like I said above, BEFORE the simple test I did, I was convinced I would be able to tell the difference, and was quite surprised that I couldn't.

Plus, the people who claim that they can EASILY tell the difference - should have no problems in a blind test, right? So why not take a few minutes and try it next time at the range, or next time the rifles and mags are out of the safe?

Perhaps my mags are just a fluke, and a TON of you can either have mags that are substantially different from mine (magpul followers or whatever) or you guys can feel a difference that I cannot.

Ultimately, ALL I AM SAYING is that I personally cannot apparently tell the difference, and I wonder (and am curious) how many can in a truly blind test across mutliple mags and rifles. - acknoweldging that there undoubtedly ARE rifles and mags out there where in fact it does make a difference

If I've come across as arrogant or confrontational in the thread, I apologize to everyone invovled.

Posted: 1/7/2006 1:46:03 PM EDT

[#37]

ETA: Crap - now I posted again. Sorry

It was only in response to a question.

Okay, NOW I'll try to stop it. I promise.

Posted: 1/7/2006 1:53:37 PM EDT

[#38]

I guess I just don't get it. Given how they taught me to insert a mag in BCT I've never had an issue putting in a 30 round mag on a closed bolt, regardless of the hurry. Slam slap tug.

Posted: 1/7/2006 1:56:29 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

- but someone having trouble inserting a 30-round might mistakenly attribute that problem to the 30 rounds, when perhaps it was something else entirely. They might also have had trouble with a 28-round mag in those same circumstances. Without a blind test, it is impossible to know for sure.

But most of us have already experienced failures and have diagnosed the problem as being contributed to overloaded mags.

Again - I'm just being curious, and surprised that others are not interested in performing a little test to test their own assumptions. Like I said above, BEFORE the simple test I did, I was convinced I would be able to tell the difference, and was quite surprised that I couldn't.

What would be the sense of the blind test to someone that has already experienced the difference?

Plus, the people who claim that they can EASILY tell the difference - should have no problems in a blind test, right? So why not take a few minutes and try it next time at the range, or next time the rifles and mags are out of the safe?

Again, what would be the sense of the blind test to someone that has already experienced the difference?

Perhaps my mags are just a fluke, and a TON of you can either have mags that are substantially different from mine (magpul followers or whatever) or you guys can feel a difference that I cannot.

You could very well be 100% correct there

Ultimately, ALL I AM SAYING is that I personally cannot apparently tell the difference, and I wonder (and am curious) how many can in a truly blind test across mutliple mags and rifles. - acknoweldging that there undoubtedly ARE rifles and mags out there where in fact it does make a difference

I understand what you trying to say

If I've come across as arrogant or confrontational in the thread, I apologize to everyone invovled.
Not arrogant, bull headed is more like it... J/K

Posted: 1/7/2006 2:19:48 PM EDT

[#40]

Mongo Mongo Mongo....

After seeing all those weights in your pics from home, and you still can't slap a mag in at the range infront of a group of guys.

Posted: 1/7/2006 4:22:03 PM EDT

[#41]

After one week and 3000 rds at Blackwater, I had zero problems with 30 rds in my mags (USGI mags w/ green followers). No problems w/ tac reloads on a closed bolt, etc.
There are some that have problems w/ loading fully loaded 30 rd mags on a closed bolt and they should download their mags.

I have a theory that some of those having problems with loading fully loaded mags on a closed bolt may have those aftermarket 'extra-power' springs installed. Who knows....

Posted: 1/7/2006 4:35:05 PM EDT

[#42]

I only put 10 in it

I if I can't hit the paper with that I just quit

Posted: 1/7/2006 4:36:25 PM EDT

[#43]

Our department policy dictates 28 rounds loaded in 30 round mags. Went through a school and fired about 1200 rds in 4 1/2 days. Brand new gun with brand new mags (green followers). Actually did have several problems getting the mag to catch on reloads when loaded to full capacity. Seemed to work better with 28.

Posted: 1/7/2006 5:01:26 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

That's right out of the POI. I know you're probably liberal so you won't let facts get in the way.

actually I am letting a glaring fact get in the way of your relying on paperwork.. The simple fact that I've been through it quite a few times and never once has it even been so much as suggested to not load the mag to capacity.

Hrm... so a pieceo f paper tells you it's one way.. it's actually been taught everytime i've heard it another way... Which one am I gonna go with???? hrm, lemme think about that for a second.

Posted: 1/7/2006 5:05:28 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
SNAPS

Have you ever tried the load with the last 3 rounds as tracers? When I was a CO we tested it in some training and found most times every one except the shooter could see he was getting near the end.

The best use for tracers I have found was for leaders to load there battle carry mag with them and they used them to mark targets for the rest of the unit. It also works for CIFS to mark targets with tracers.

actually yea, everytime we did live night fire.... and no it's not exactly something you seem to notice unless you're counting down... But there's a few tracers mixed in withj the mag and the last trhee are tracers...

Posted: 1/7/2006 5:19:34 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Most of the time on my new D&H magazines the top round cannot get stripped all the way out when releasing the bolt on a fully loaded mag. 28, however, works fine.

I am considering getting a wolf extra power buffer spring, but I have read of short-stroking problems with it. We shall see I guess.

Maybe I will get the Wolf spring and keep the bolt locked back for a few weeks so the spring can take a set, making it stronger than the original but a little weaker than a fresh Wolf spring.

I use Wolf XP in both of my 20" AR's, to avoid short stroking I cut the XP's to the same lenght as the original springs (about 3 coils). Just make sure to put the cut end in the tube first and the uncut end on the buffer. It short strokes with wolf ammo but runs eveerything else with out a hitch. It definetly eliminates feeding problems even when dry and dirty.

Posted: 1/7/2006 5:24:44 PM EDT

[#47]

I use all new D&H 30rnd Teflon coated mags, both grey and black and I use the magpul brown anti-tilt followers.

With those and with others, I've never had a problem loading 30 rounds into a 30 round mag in the last 9-10 years.

- rem

Posted: 1/7/2006 5:38:07 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
If your 30 round mag doesn't reliably hold 30 rounds, it's broken.
If your rifle doesn't reliably accept full 30 round mags, it's broken.

I agree, I'd think something was afoul if I could't load up 30.

Posted: 1/7/2006 6:43:33 PM EDT

[#49]

I only have 7 30 rd mags and one AR

2 old mags w/new spring and follower
4 new mags from tapco
1 new mag (came with gun)

they all have the green followers

the test:

I had my bro take 2 rounds out of 4 of them without me in the room.
I came in and had no problems with any of mags and could not tell the difference between 30 to 28.

Edit- the bolt was closed

As far as answering the question--
30 has worked for me
I have never dropped a mag out of the gun
It has never jammed
And I have never used the forward assist

But if you insist on 28, Im not going to be the one to tell you that it is wrong

Its yalls choice so yall can do whatever the fuck yall want

Posted: 1/7/2006 6:51:38 PM EDT

[#50]

I'm absolutely amazed that some guys will argue this point till they are blue in the face. Do you guys consider the USMC POI, Blackwater Training Center, Pat Rogers, Tim Lau, Larry Vickers, David Pennington, Etc, Etc, Etc who teach the 28 round technique to be wrong? Do you honestly think you know more than the guys on this list?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 28 or 30 in a 30 round mag (Page 3 of 6)

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us