Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 9/22/2011 6:13:16 PM EST
So has anyone tried one,personaly! SureFire High-Capacity Magazines
My state has a magazine limit law. No more then 30rds.
And to play it safe, 28rds
The video sure makes it look like they work well.
At the cost of the 100rd one, you could buy 8 to15 30rd
magazine. But in a fire fight..... maybe worth while.


PITA45
Link Posted: 9/22/2011 6:28:47 PM EST
I have two problems with the surefire 100 rounder. 1. Weight. 100 rounds hanging from your gun isn't light. 2. Retention. Where ya gonna put it when you're done?

Like you said, they are also quite pricey.

But that's just my .02.
Link Posted: 9/22/2011 7:09:48 PM EST
Cheaper than a carbine class where you practice reloading a hundred times.
Link Posted: 9/22/2011 7:31:18 PM EST
I have the 60rd one. Sure is fun with the SlideFire stock
Link Posted: 9/22/2011 7:47:57 PM EST
I have a 60 rounder. The weight isn't as bad as I was expecting. It isn't like adding weight to the muzzle. On hikes, I run a 20 rounder in the rifle and pouch the 60 rounder.

I wish they had put an anti tilt follower in it though. Think the old black follower design.
Link Posted: 9/23/2011 12:47:17 AM EST
since this is the SF, the SF mags would NOT be a good idea for SHTF, cost wise you are better off with "normal" gear. Also if you get one and the feed lips get dinged your basically screwed, where as the same number of mags (cost wise) would allow for backups.

If its just for fun, sure why not
Link Posted: 9/23/2011 3:01:14 AM EST
I like the idea of having 60rnds in the gun ready to go. If I had to grab and go B.A.N.(Bare Arse Nekkid), I'd have 60rnds.
BK
Link Posted: 9/23/2011 4:28:52 PM EST
I have ran the 60 rounders several times and have been impressed. I now have two of them. One in the gun.

If you sport double m4 mag holders anywhere they will fit in the same ones. I do know that if you have a blade tech single m4 mag holder then they will fit in that upside down of course like a regular mag.

they will not fit or secure in the ITW fast mag holders though.

The ones I ran I did during fun shooting. ran a few drills with them with intermittent shooting. fast then slow then fast then slow. trying to see if I could get it to jam. But they didnt. They are also supposed to fit comfortably in a saw pouch as well. But I havent tried it.
Link Posted: 9/23/2011 4:32:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/23/2011 4:33:49 PM EST by JBlitzen]
Originally Posted By TaylorWSO:
since this is the SF, the SF mags would NOT be a good idea for SHTF

Could you elaborate on this? Seems like the 60 round mags might even weigh less than two 30 rounders, particularly since they only require one pouch.

For SHTF situations where people are talking about carrying heavy BOB's long distances, every ounce matters. And they wouldn't often have a platoon covering them while they reload.
Link Posted: 9/23/2011 9:16:33 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/23/2011 9:20:02 PM EST by TaylorWSO]

Originally Posted By JBlitzen:
Originally Posted By TaylorWSO:
since this is the SF, the SF mags would NOT be a good idea for SHTF

Could you elaborate on this? Seems like the 60 round mags might even weigh less than two 30 rounders, particularly since they only require one pouch.

For SHTF situations where people are talking about carrying heavy BOB's long distances, every ounce matters. And they wouldn't often have a platoon covering them while they reload.

1. If the complex mag gets screwed up, then you have no mag. One 30 rd gets screwed up (feed lips, bad spring) you still have a mag plus a 30 round cartridge holder. You're in the SF, 2 is 1, 1 is none. Also long term reliability has not been established (remember the jis fest over the HK mags, that are no longer allowed to be used)
2. Weight it 3 oz diff. For most people this will be overshadowed by the bolt on crap they add to their firearm. Have you seen the pics in this forum on these overweight monsters or the 12" knife people plan to take with them. If a few oz's is a concern, there are other ways to get it vice giving up a b/u feature in a mag.
3. Cost, For the extra 100 bucks you could do a lot more to enhance survival than tote a teir 1 mag
4. If you can only carry 60 rounds and have them at the ready, what do you think will happen when your get shot at? You will dump that mag blindly over a wall, where as a 30rd, you have to stop, change mags and realize its your last

What else do they buy you in a SHTF event. Remember we are in the SF? As I see it nothng

Link Posted: 9/24/2011 8:15:49 AM EST
I personally don't see any real value for these myself. They're ridiculously long and just don't seem very practical- high drag, if you ask me.
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 10:11:47 AM EST
Originally Posted By BadKarma555:
I like the idea of having 60rnds in the gun ready to go. If I had to grab and go B.A.N.(Bare Arse Nekkid), I'd have 60rnds.
BK


I bought 1 for each of mine and my wifes go to AR's for this reason. I like that they are sitting ready to go with 61 rounds in them. I still use 30 rounders everywhere else.

Link Posted: 9/24/2011 11:11:55 AM EST
The 60 rounders are really not that much longer then a 30 rounder. Maybe an inch. The 100 rounders are long though.

They would seem to be for a bunkered in location. If you were running the 100 rounder wouldnt be fun at all. But if you are hunkered down and trapped. that might change things a bit.
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 1:36:59 PM EST
Originally Posted By jamesb74:
They would seem to be for a bunkered in location. If you were running the 100 rounder wouldnt be fun at all. But if you are hunkered down and trapped. that might change things a bit.



Has anyone in this thread ever had any Infantry training?

The 60 rounds gives you the advantage of not having to pause and reload as much during an ambush or contact. This gives you time to lay down suppressive fire while assaulting towards or retreating from the opposition's position depending on the circumstances of the situation. If you go stationary in a hasty unprepared position out in the field because you're getting shot at, guess what? The shootings just going to get worse in terms of volume and accuracy. Then the bad guy(s) will maneuver around till they get a firing solution on you and Darwin's theory will be proven yet again. Bullets going towards the bad people tends to focus their attention on not soaking up any hot lead and less on other things like killing you. A steadier stream of bullets from your gun gives you more time to do whatever you decide is the best course of action.
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 2:02:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By wilezcoyote:
Originally Posted By jamesb74:
They would seem to be for a bunkered in location. If you were running the 100 rounder wouldnt be fun at all. But if you are hunkered down and trapped. that might change things a bit.



Has anyone in this thread ever had any Infantry training?

The 60 rounds gives you the advantage of not having to pause and reload as much during an ambush or contact. This gives you time to lay down suppressive fire while assaulting towards or retreating from the opposition's position depending on the circumstances of the situation. If you go stationary in a hasty unprepared position out in the field because you're getting shot at, guess what? The shootings just going to get worse in terms of volume and accuracy. Then the bad guy(s) will maneuver around till they get a firing solution on you and Darwin's theory will be proven yet again. Bullets going towards the bad people tends to focus their attention on not soaking up any hot lead and less on other things like killing you. A steadier stream of bullets from your gun gives you more time to do whatever you decide is the best course of action.
there is a reason why LMG are fed with large box mags and carbines aren't.

Link Posted: 9/24/2011 6:28:31 PM EST
To me the surefire was designed for a specific purpose. The USMC is apparently looking at replacing the M249 with an "IAR" which as I understand it is an HK magazine fed piston AR variant. The surefire mags are a good solution if you are going to do away with a belt fed machine gun and replace it with a mag fed lighter rifle.

This only works if the IAR can take the heat of sustained fire, and the mags are reliable.

How many "shtf" scenarios can you picture where you need the suppressive fire? Do you have an AR that will do sustained 100 round mag dumps? Is this how you shoot?

I myself cannot picture a civilian situation where a 60 or 100 round mag would be useful, although I could picture military situations, if the IAR is you version of a machine gun.
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 7:59:44 PM EST
Originally Posted By juslearnin:
To me the surefire was designed for a specific purpose. The USMC is apparently looking at replacing the M249 with an "IAR" which as I understand it is an HK magazine fed piston AR variant. The surefire mags are a good solution if you are going to do away with a belt fed machine gun and replace it with a mag fed lighter rifle.

This only works if the IAR can take the heat of sustained fire, and the mags are reliable.

How many "shtf" scenarios can you picture where you need the suppressive fire? Do you have an AR that will do sustained 100 round mag dumps? Is this how you shoot?

I myself cannot picture a civilian situation where a 60 or 100 round mag would be useful, although I could picture military situations, if the IAR is you version of a machine gun.

I agree, I can't even picture a civilian situation where a 30 round mag would be useful. Civilian magazines should be limited to 10 rounds at most. Anything beyond that is the purview of law enforcement or the military.
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 8:13:06 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 10:13:02 PM EST
Originally Posted By JBlitzen:
Originally Posted By juslearnin:
To me the surefire was designed for a specific purpose. The USMC is apparently looking at replacing the M249 with an "IAR" which as I understand it is an HK magazine fed piston AR variant. The surefire mags are a good solution if you are going to do away with a belt fed machine gun and replace it with a mag fed lighter rifle.

This only works if the IAR can take the heat of sustained fire, and the mags are reliable.

How many "shtf" scenarios can you picture where you need the suppressive fire? Do you have an AR that will do sustained 100 round mag dumps? Is this how you shoot?

I myself cannot picture a civilian situation where a 60 or 100 round mag would be useful, although I could picture military situations, if the IAR is you version of a machine gun.

I agree, I can't even picture a civilian situation where a 30 round mag would be useful. Civilian magazines should be limited to 10 rounds at most. Anything beyond that is the purview of law enforcement or the military.


Y'all need to get out more. Can't imagine a situation? Here's one for ya. Look up the Korean grocers during the LA Riots. I was at Camp Pendelton during the riots and got to see the destruction immediately afterwards. SHTF is just a catchy phrase till you go somewhere that looks like a scene of biblical devastation as far as you can see. Good luck with your 10 rounders when a pissed off mob numbering a couple thousand strong comes around the corner looking for some white meat and all the cops have taken the day off and the national guard left all their ammo at the armory over 100 miles away.

Speaking on a more personal level I have encountered and either apprehended or run off lots of poachers, thieves, dope smokers, weed farmers, and meth cooks from my farm in the last 16 years. Most of the time I'm outnumbered 2 or more to one. One rainy Christmas eve it was little ole me against 4 armed poachers. It took 45 minutes from the time I got all of them out of the truck and called 911 for the deputy to arrive and cart them away. Now if that situation had gotten real sporty which is more effective, a 10 rounder, 20 rounder, 30 rounder, 60, 100 rounder? Which will allow you to put forth the most constant rate of fire and act with the maximum amount of violence of action against 4 to 1 odds? Some of y'all are like most people I meet who've never been in the ground based combat arms side of the military or even a bunch of fights growing up just don't get it. When you find yourself in a fight you have to focus the most hurt on the enemy as you can for as long as you can. Anything that interrupts that gives them the opportunity to win. That's not cool in fights where taking second place involves buzzards eating your eyeballs.

Do I own an AR that will sustain 100 round mag dumps? Yup, I own a whole bunch of them. Me and my favorite class 3 dealer put three 60 rounders through a S&W M&P-15T equipped with a slide fire stock and a suppressor in a little over 5 minutes. The barrel didn't turn red, white, or translucent. Nothing melted. Nothing broke. Nothing jammed. It did get really damned hot and dirty but we've done no cleaning in the month and a half since except lube the bolt really well with some Slip-2000. He uses the gun to demo the slidefire stock and the can at least once a week. Before one of you gets all uppity about the slide fire let just say that I consider it to be a fun toy and not something I want on a rifle my life depends on. It does do a fine job of legally simulating full auto fire without all the federal paperwork crap and exorbitant cost.

Now back to the SF mag. Where did I say mag dump in my 1st post? Let me help you out, I didn't. Suppressive fire is not necessarily automatic fire. As a matter of fact it's usually a lot more effective and accurate if it isn't. It is steady though. A pause will not suppress the bad guy from thinking he can now pop up and shoot back at you. Stop watching Rambo movies for tactical training. Hell, go play paintball or airsoft with 10 or 20 round mags. I'm positive some 12 year old with a $1200 paintball/airsoft gun and a 500 round hopper will gleefully educate you on the benefits of high ammunition capacity most ricki tick.

How I shoot? Pretty well by all accounts. Have you ever walked up on a sounder of six feral hogs and shot everyone of them dead before they could cross the road into the woods? I have. The first one was point blank and the last one died about 50 meters away in the ditch. Please don't assume that they stood still at any point during the encounter. They were moving at a pretty good clip and really took off when things got loud. Did I mention that it was dark too?

Just because you can't imagine a use for something or foresee a situation doesn't mean that a shitload of other folks can and do use it for real on a daily basis. And Mr. 10 rounder, bless your little yankee heart, please stay in New York. We really don't care how y'all do it up there.
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 10:36:53 PM EST
Dude, I think you need to get your sarcasm meter calibrated...
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 10:55:06 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 11:01:57 PM EST
Originally Posted By Colt_sporter:
Dude, I think you need to get your sarcasm meter calibrated...

This, lol.
Link Posted: 9/24/2011 11:51:26 PM EST
Originally Posted By JBlitzen:
Originally Posted By juslearnin:
I agree, I can't even picture a civilian situation where a 30 round mag would be useful. Civilian magazines should be limited to 10 rounds at most. Anything beyond that is the purview of law enforcement or the military.


I didn't know Chuck Schumer had an account on arfcom.
Link Posted: 9/25/2011 12:48:37 AM EST
Originally Posted By StrangerDanger:
Originally Posted By JBlitzen:
Originally Posted By juslearnin:
I agree, I can't even picture a civilian situation where a 30 round mag would be useful. Civilian magazines should be limited to 10 rounds at most. Anything beyond that is the purview of law enforcement or the military.


I didn't know Chuck Schumer had an account on arfcom.


For real.
Link Posted: 9/25/2011 2:33:07 AM EST
Originally Posted By Colt_sporter:
Originally Posted By StrangerDanger:
Originally Posted By JBlitzen:
Originally Posted By juslearnin:
I agree, I can't even picture a civilian situation where a 30 round mag would be useful. Civilian magazines should be limited to 10 rounds at most. Anything beyond that is the purview of law enforcement or the military.


I didn't know Chuck Schumer had an account on arfcom.


For real.


Wikipedia- Sarcasm
Link Posted: 9/25/2011 3:54:21 AM EST
You guys are not very good readers. I said nothing about banning them. I said I don't see a use for them.

Would you shoot 3 gun with a beta mag? When I shoot 3 gun it is about moving quickly from target to target and I don't want any extra weight hanging off my gun.

I said that the magazine has its place, just like any other kind of equipment. If you regularly do suppressive fire, then maybe it is worth the bulk, the weight, and the complexity. If you are used to carrying around an M249 and are able to switch to a rife which weighs half as much and use the surefire magazine instead of a belt then you have significantly lightened your gear and it makes sense.

I, even in my wildest SHTF fantisies have not come up with a good reason for suppressive fire, but I guess you guys run into it all the time. Spend all you want on them, I don't care. For me a simple, lighter, and much cheaper 30 rounder is all I need. I will work on my mag changes and save my money for more magazines.
Link Posted: 9/25/2011 5:36:48 AM EST
Originally Posted By juslearnin:

I, even in my wildest SHTF fantisies have not come up with a good reason for suppressive fire, but I guess you guys run into it all the time. Spend all you want on them, I don't care. For me a simple, lighter, and much cheaper 30 rounder is all I need. I will work on my mag changes and save my money for more magazines.


Well you lack imagination if you can't come up with a good reason for supressive fire even in your wildest SHTF fantasies .

That said when theses things go on sale 5 for $100 shipped I'll buy them. Until then Surefire can keep these along with most of their other obscenely priced products.

Link Posted: 9/25/2011 8:57:49 AM EST
Competition shooting has nothing whatsoever to do with combat.

A bolt action .22 with peep sights is perfect for the winter Olympics. It is awful for a winter war.
Link Posted: 9/25/2011 10:33:50 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/25/2011 12:26:11 PM EST by juslearnin]
Read this report about what happened at COP Kahler in Afghanistan on July 13, 2008, then go back and read my original post and you will understand what I am talking about.

Here is a quote from the article linked:

According to U.S. Special Operations Command's SOPMOD (special operations peculiar modification) program office, "The current sustained rate of fire for the M4A1 Carbine is 15 rounds per minute and a maximum rate of 90 [rounds] per minute for short periods in an emergency."18 Firing the M4 carbine at cyclic rates of fire of 90 to 150 rounds per minute, "which is the rate of suppressive fire associated with machine guns" for prolonged periods leads to rapid heating of the barrel and possible failure.19

Tests conducted by both the Army and by Colt indicate that "exceeding the sustained rate of fire of 15 rounds per minute will result in the weapon 'cooking off' rounds after approximately 170 rounds have been fired." If the maximum rate of fire of 90 rounds per minute "is maintained for about 540 rounds, the barrel softens and gas starts to blow by the bullet, changing the sound and size of the muzzle blast." If the operator continues to fire the weapon, the barrel will begin to droop, and finally, at about 596 rounds, the barrel will burst.


The soldiers involved exceeded the design specs for their M4's which resulted in failure of the weapons.

This is the issue I brought up in my original post. The USMC is thinking about replacing the M249 with the IAR which is based on the AR design, but with modifications to make it usable as a SAW. The M249 is designed for more sustained fire (suppressive fire) the M4 is not, as demonstrated in the battle at COP Kahler.

The surefire magazines are designed to allow an AR platform to function in a SAW role. The question is, will the platform be up to the task. Clearly the M4 is not up to the task (and neither is your AR or my AR most likely), the question is will the IAR be up to the task. This is what I mean by not seeing a civilian role for the surefire magazines. Unless you have a significant improvement over the M4 which allows sustained fire, they do not have great value, as the limiting factor becomes the rifle, not the magazine.

Surefire makes good stuff, and I don't doubt that their mags will be reliable, but they must be significantly more complex than a simple double stack 20 or 30 rounder. I think it remains to be seen if they will ultimately be proven as reliable as simpler designs. In addition, surefire clearly targets the military and law enforcement markets where $100+ for a magazine is something that can come out of budget and our tax dollars instead of out of the individual shooter's pocket. We will see if the price comes down as the novelty wears off. I could buy 13 30 rounders for the price of the single 60 rounder posted on the first page.

Suppressive fire is a specific term. It is not a valid law enforcement or civilian strategy as the risk of bystander casualties is too high, and the shooter is responsible for the outcome of every round fired. Suppressive fire is not rapid aimed fire.

There is a lot more testosterone and fantasy than intelligence in some of these posts.
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 9:19:32 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2011 9:20:40 AM EST by wilezcoyote]
Originally Posted By juslearnin:
Read this report about what happened at COP Kahler in Afghanistan on July 13, 2008, then go back and read my original post and you will understand what I am talking about.

Here is a quote from the article linked:

According to U.S. Special Operations Command's SOPMOD (special operations peculiar modification) program office, "The current sustained rate of fire for the M4A1 Carbine is 15 rounds per minute and a maximum rate of 90 [rounds] per minute for short periods in an emergency."18 Firing the M4 carbine at cyclic rates of fire of 90 to 150 rounds per minute, "which is the rate of suppressive fire associated with machine guns" for prolonged periods leads to rapid heating of the barrel and possible failure.19

Tests conducted by both the Army and by Colt indicate that "exceeding the sustained rate of fire of 15 rounds per minute will result in the weapon 'cooking off' rounds after approximately 170 rounds have been fired." If the maximum rate of fire of 90 rounds per minute "is maintained for about 540 rounds, the barrel softens and gas starts to blow by the bullet, changing the sound and size of the muzzle blast." If the operator continues to fire the weapon, the barrel will begin to droop, and finally, at about 596 rounds, the barrel will burst.


The soldiers involved exceeded the design specs for their M4's which resulted in failure of the weapons.

This is the issue I brought up in my original post. The USMC is thinking about replacing the M249 with the IAR which is based on the AR design, but with modifications to make it usable as a SAW. The M249 is designed for more sustained fire (suppressive fire) the M4 is not, as demonstrated in the battle at COP Kahler.

The surefire magazines are designed to allow an AR platform to function in a SAW role. The question is, will the platform be up to the task. Clearly the M4 is not up to the task (and neither is your AR or my AR most likely), the question is will the IAR be up to the task. This is what I mean by not seeing a civilian role for the surefire magazines. Unless you have a significant improvement over the M4 which allows sustained fire, they do not have great value, as the limiting factor becomes the rifle, not the magazine.

Surefire makes good stuff, and I don't doubt that their mags will be reliable, but they must be significantly more complex than a simple double stack 20 or 30 rounder. I think it remains to be seen if they will ultimately be proven as reliable as simpler designs. In addition, surefire clearly targets the military and law enforcement markets where $100+ for a magazine is something that can come out of budget and our tax dollars instead of out of the individual shooter's pocket. We will see if the price comes down as the novelty wears off. I could buy 13 30 rounders for the price of the single 60 rounder posted on the first page.

Suppressive fire is a specific term. It is not a valid law enforcement or civilian strategy as the risk of bystander casualties is too high, and the shooter is responsible for the outcome of every round fired. Suppressive fire is not rapid aimed fire.

There is a lot more testosterone and fantasy than intelligence in some of these posts.


1. The cyclic rate of fire of a full auto M4 is a lot higher than 90-150 rpm. That's what you get for quoting a small arms article from a Navy journal. Duh.

2. The IAR has already been adopted and is currently being fielded by the USMC as an alternative to the SAW for certain mission requirements. The SAW is still going to be around for a pretty good while.

3. There were a lot more issues going on at Wanat that led to the outcome. Blaming the M-4 was a convenient way of absolving & overlooking certain command entities total failures in command, intelligence, and planning from blame.

4. Wikipedia is an authoritative source?! On tactics?!? ROFL The sergeant that taught me at MCT would have a stroke about the "not aimed" part. That is complete bullshit written by someone that doesn't have a clue.

Not everybody lives in the suburbs dude. I own everything within 3/4 to 1 mile of my house depending on direction. If you are not welcome there chances are very high that your fellow tweekers I catch rummaging through one of my barns aren't on a nature walk.

5. The thing is expensive because it took a lot of money to develop and tool up to manufacture. SF has to recoup that investment. I believe the mags were developed as a response to a request from the USMC to vendors to develop a reliable high capacity stick type magazine for the IAR.

Most LE agencies won't buy this thing because it costs to much for there very finite budgets. That is even after SF gives them a discounted LE agency price & volume price break. Individual officers buying them will be few and far between too. Most are not paid well and probably wouldn't be able to use it on the job without prior command approval. Couple that with the fact that a shocking percentage of them are not "Gun guys" or even particularly skilled with firearms beyond the bare minimum they are taught in order to qualify for their agency.

If price is the sole or primary determinant in your acquisition of weapons and ancillary items I think you are cheating yourself out of a capability. A lot of the posts I've seen folks talk about price 1st and then come up with other justifications why the product not worth it. I haven't seen anyone here say you should go out and replace all your mags with these. Not everybody can afford them or has a use for them. That's fine. Just don't talk trash about them or anyone that uses them because you can't have them, don't want them, and have probably never seen or used one. It's another tool that can go in the toolbox. Some people will use it a lot. Some will use it once in a great while but greatly appreciate it when they need it. Others are incapable of figuring out what it is or how it could conceivably be used.

If you have no military infantry experience or LE carbine training or any other experience or training on how to FIGHT with a carbine don't buy this magazine. You will be the human equivalent of a cat trying to use a fork and a knife. Go take some classes from a reputable trainer like Larry Vickers, Jeff Gonzales, Pat Rogers, Magpul Dynamics, etc...or at least watch some videos and them go practice what they teach to give you a base of experience to build and think upon. Even if you have some .mil/leo training it's always a good idea to continue your education of the fighting skillsets. I'll tell you right now the stuff I learned in the early 1990s about running a m-16 does not hold a candle to the training available today. A lot of equipment and actions will make a lot more sense to you then. Even then you probably won't have any instruction or experience in individual or small unit tactics and movement in an open or urban environment. Remember that you don't know what you don't know.



BTW: to the folks that mentioned it my sarcasm meter is just fine. Hows Yours?
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 9:34:09 AM EST
It's always interesting to hear a guy simultaneously criticize volume of fire while recommending the purchase of enough magazines for a combat load of nearly 400 rounds.

It's true there's a lot of fantasy in this thread...
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 9:44:59 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2011 9:50:24 AM EST by TaylorWSO]

we should the rambo fantasies from the SF, or at least have a age/IQ limit
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 9:47:16 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2011 9:51:04 AM EST by TaylorWSO]

Originally Posted By JBlitzen:

I agree, I can't even picture a civilian situation where a 30 round mag would be useful. Civilian magazines should be limited to 10 rounds at most. Anything beyond that is the purview of law enforcement or the military.
sarcasm is funny and welcome in the SF-oh wait
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 1:40:36 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 3:14:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2011 4:19:12 PM EST by juslearnin]
Well, JBlitzen and wyilezcoyote, I don't think that you understand that this is a DISCUSSION forum. That means that someone brings up something they saw, or learned, or have a question about and we DISCUSS it.

This means that I have an opinion, and you have an opinion, and we share our opinions, then we respond with facts or experiences as to why we believe what we do. Maybe I convince you of my point of view, maybe you convince me, maybe neither of us are convinced, but others can read what we post and make their own minds up.

This is not about how important you are, or how important I am, it is not about your self worth or mine. It is not about how loud you can yell, or insulting you can be. Often these things are strategies used by folks who don't have good points to make.

This thread started with pita 45 asking about the surefire magazines.

I voiced my opinion:

To me the surefire was designed for a specific purpose. The USMC is apparently looking at replacing the M249 with an "IAR" which as I understand it is an HK magazine fed piston AR variant. The surefire mags are a good solution if you are going to do away with a belt fed machine gun and replace it with a mag fed lighter rifle.

This only works if the IAR can take the heat of sustained fire, and the mags are reliable.

How many "shtf" scenarios can you picture where you need the suppressive fire? Do you have an AR that will do sustained 100 round mag dumps? Is this how you shoot?

I myself cannot picture a civilian situation where a 60 or 100 round mag would be useful, although I could picture military situations, if the IAR is you version of a machine gun.


As I explain further in my later post, I am saying that in my opinion the surefire mag is designed around the concept of using the AR platform as a SAW, which does not work well unless you have made significant changes (i.e. the IAR). For this reason, I do not see value in owning them as a civilian, as I don't have an IAR to go with them.

JBlitzen responded with:

I agree, I can't even picture a civilian situation where a 30 round mag would be useful. Civilian magazines should be limited to 10 rounds at most. Anything beyond that is the purview of law enforcement or the military.

Which completely missed the point that I was making.

Wilez then replied that he could imagine several situations where suppressive fire would be useful:


Look up the Korean grocers during the LA Riots...
...poachers, thieves, dope smokers, weed farmers, and meth cooks from my farm...
...4 armed poachers...


He then explained his evidence that the AR could be used in a SAW role for suppressive fire:


Me and my favorite class 3 dealer put three 60 rounders through a S&W M&P-15T equipped with a slide fire stock and a suppressor in a little over 5 minutes. The barrel didn't turn red, white, or translucent. Nothing melted. Nothing broke. Nothing jammed

He then explained why he was qualified to use the AR like a SAW for suppressive fire:

Have you ever walked up on a sounder of six feral hogs and shot everyone of them dead before they could cross the road into the woods? I have. The first one was point blank and the last one died about 50 meters away in the ditch. Please don't assume that they stood still at any point during the encounter. They were moving at a pretty good clip and really took off when things got loud. Did I mention that it was dark too?

I responded to this with an attempt to make my point again that the surefire is really most useful in the SAW role, which I do not see myself needing:

I said nothing about banning them. I said I don't see a use for them.

Would you shoot 3 gun with a beta mag? When I shoot 3 gun it is about moving quickly from target to target and I don't want any extra weight hanging off my gun.

I said that the magazine has its place, just like any other kind of equipment. If you regularly do suppressive fire, then maybe it is worth the bulk, the weight, and the complexity. If you are used to carrying around an M249 and are able to switch to a rife which weighs half as much and use the surefire magazine instead of a belt then you have significantly lightened your gear and it makes sense.

I, even in my wildest SHTF fantasies have not come up with a good reason for suppressive fire, but I guess you guys run into it all the time. Spend all you want on them, I don't care. For me a simple, lighter, and much cheaper 30 rounder is all I need. I will work on my mag changes and save my money for more magazines.


In my next post I quoted the following from Proceedings Magazine, from the US Naval institute in order to support the point I was making:

According to U.S. Special Operations Command's SOPMOD (special operations peculiar modification) program office, "The current sustained rate of fire for the M4A1 Carbine is 15 rounds per minute and a maximum rate of 90 [rounds] per minute for short periods in an emergency."18 Firing the M4 carbine at cyclic rates of fire of 90 to 150 rounds per minute, "which is the rate of suppressive fire associated with machine guns" for prolonged periods leads to rapid heating of the barrel and possible failure.19

Tests conducted by both the Army and by Colt indicate that "exceeding the sustained rate of fire of 15 rounds per minute will result in the weapon 'cooking off' rounds after approximately 170 rounds have been fired." If the maximum rate of fire of 90 rounds per minute "is maintained for about 540 rounds, the barrel softens and gas starts to blow by the bullet, changing the sound and size of the muzzle blast." If the operator continues to fire the weapon, the barrel will begin to droop, and finally, at about 596 rounds, the barrel will burst.


Now I realize, as you point out, that this was only in a Navy journal, and is not first had experience, such as one might have shooting "three 60 rounders through a S&W M&P 15T with a slide fire stock". I suppose that your experience may be more relevant than what the USSOCM program office, or colt might think about the M4, but I do have my doubts about this.

This is the point of having a discussion, you outline why you believe what you do, and I outline why I believe what I do, and others can consider what we say and make up their own minds.

I post that suppressive fire (taken from wikipedia, admittedly not a military or authoritative source) is:

a fire that degrades the performance of a target below the level needed to fulfill its mission. Suppression is usually only effective for the duration of the fire.[1] Suppressive fire is not always a direct form of fire towards targets; it can be an effective visual and audible distraction. It is one of three types of fire support, which is defined by NATO as “the application of fire, coordinated with the manoeuvre of forces, to destroy, neutralize or suppress the enemy.”

Before NATO defined the term, the British and Commonwealth armies generally used “neutralisation” with the same definition as suppression. NATO now defines neutralization as “fire delivered to render a target temporarily ineffective or unusable.”


And you respond with:

4. Wikipedia is an authoritative source?! On tactics?!? ROFL The sergeant that taught me at MCT would have a stroke about the "not aimed" part. That is complete bullshit written by someone that doesn't have a clue.

You see, we each have our opinion, and we each have reasons why we believe what we do. I don't think at this point that I am going to convince you that there won't be a need for "suppressive fire" if and when the "SHTF", or that the AR is not the appropriate tool for such a task, and I don't think that you will convince me that I need to gear up for such an event.

It is OK for us to disagree. I still like you as people, and I think you are entitled to your opinions, and anyone else who stumbles across this train wreck of a thread can read each of our rationale and make up their own minds.

I feel like I have expressed myself as clearly as I can at this point, so I don't think more of this will be of any value to anyone.

EDIT to address the post below: It looks to me like the weapon failure was a symptom, not the cause of the situation. I did not bring the incident up to blame it all on the M4, but as an example of what happens when you try to use an M4 as a SAW.
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 3:42:00 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/26/2011 3:43:55 PM EST by Thug_Hunter12]
I agree with what Wilez said about the battle of Wanat. There was more going on than a weapons failure.
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 3:49:03 PM EST
juslearnin, it's a common theme in small unit operations that volume of fire is a force multiplier. This is particularly noticeable in SAS and SEAL tactics, where small teams are trained to fire an extremely large number of rounds in order to buy time for them to withdraw.

Yes, aimed fire is much more effective at hitting a target.

But that's competition thinking which doesn't have anything to do with your objectives in a defensive situation, or even some offensive ones.

I hate to mention a movie, but Heat's bank robbery aftermath is regarded as a demonstration not of a normal bank robbery, but of how the SAS would rob a bank. The North Hollywood shootout demonstrated the effectiveness of the exact same technique, if not particularly cogent foresight by the robbers. In both cases, a confrontation is responded to by the firing of hundreds of rounds of ammunition, forcing the police in both situations to keep their heads down and take a reactive stance rather than a proactive stance.

This is not theory, it works in practice. Sometimes. But it definitely works better than competition techniques where paper isn't shooting back.
Link Posted: 9/26/2011 5:58:17 PM EST
I've got 2 60 rounders and they've both worked perfectly.
Link Posted: 9/27/2011 1:49:11 AM EST
I personally do not own one of these magazines. If however you have an AR loaded with the 60rd SF mags, and are not relying on using it as a bail-out gun (extra weight on the gun, but this is just my personal preference) or plan on 'bunkering' at home, I can see a reasonable purpose to it. No, I dont expect to have to dump 60 rounds of ammo in a single situation. Hell, I doubt ill ever have to dump 30. I however will not discount the possibility of doing so, and will not discount what added stress can do to a magazine swap. As said before, "just another tool for your personal toolbox". Some may feel they need it, others don't.

If it is reliable and you believe you could have a viable use for it (toy, defense, competition, deployment, etc...), go for it.
Link Posted: 9/27/2011 9:44:23 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/27/2011 10:41:31 AM EST by Metalryder]
Originally Posted By JBlitzen:
Originally Posted By juslearnin:
To me the surefire was designed for a specific purpose. The USMC is apparently looking at replacing the M249 with an "IAR" which as I understand it is an HK magazine fed piston AR variant. The surefire mags are a good solution if you are going to do away with a belt fed machine gun and replace it with a mag fed lighter rifle.

This only works if the IAR can take the heat of sustained fire, and the mags are reliable.

How many "shtf" scenarios can you picture where you need the suppressive fire? Do you have an AR that will do sustained 100 round mag dumps? Is this how you shoot?

I myself cannot picture a civilian situation where a 60 or 100 round mag would be useful, although I could picture military situations, if the IAR is you version of a machine gun.

I agree, I can't even picture a civilian situation where a 30 round mag would be useful. Civilian magazines should be limited to 10 rounds at most. Anything beyond that is the purview of law enforcement or the military.



I'm hoping this is sarcasm. EDIT: sorry, posted this before I read your second post

Also......

Why in the heck is someone ADVERTISING here in SF?!?

I know that paying up the cash lets you advertise in Hometown(which I stongly disagre on) but Crap.am I going to have to put up with it here?

You want to do this crap please start a frigin thread so I DON'T HAVE TO CLICK ON IT!!!!!


BTW I will NEVER purchase anything from you and will tell anyone who will listen to do the same as well.
Link Posted: 9/28/2011 8:44:24 PM EST
Article from Ny times showing videos of Colt M4 profile barrel vs heavier M4a1 profile.

http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/m4-and-m4a1-guns/
Link Posted: 10/2/2011 6:03:19 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2011 6:03:40 PM EST by BKC1869]
For that cost I'll pass. I assume it was intended for use with the IAR being used by the Marines, which would make sense.
Link Posted: 10/2/2011 7:15:26 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2011 7:17:41 PM EST by shooters101]
I got a 60 rounder to see hoe it works and compare to 2 30 rounders banded together. First few times I used it I only had 24 , 30 rounds. Ran this around through. Then loaded it out to 60 rouunds ran a few dills from it without a problem Then went to reload it and all I can feed in to it now is 8 rounds. So far I'm not impressed. Need to call Surefife and see what can tell me about it.
Link Posted: 10/2/2011 7:51:58 PM EST
No reason for 60rds or a 100rds Surefire magazines.
SHTF or what ever: You are the man at the bottle neck.
The first one to see what is coming. Your job, to stop
or slow down their foreword movement. Till help arrive.
Which is 5 mins or 30 mins..
Will I be buy any, to pricey. At this time.
But I sure do see a place for a few of them.


PITA45
Top Top