Expedition Exchange Bulletin Boards  

Go Back   Expedition Exchange Bulletin Boards > General
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old August 30th, 2007, 03:44 PM
JSQ JSQ is offline
Jack Quinlan
KI6CTP
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,490
HOLY SHIT.

Do you think it's still chambered in 8mm Kurz?

unbelievable.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old August 30th, 2007, 04:57 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,158
I think it is still in 7.92 kurz.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old August 30th, 2007, 05:29 PM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Very cool. I'd read that some Stg44 were used by East Germany into the '70's and they were later sold abroad.

There supposedly are some Persian Mauser 98's showing up in Iraq. Including a short versian similiar to that "Tanker Mauser" I posted.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old September 9th, 2007, 10:15 PM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old September 10th, 2007, 01:37 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,158
I've seen that KRISS before and it's not doing it for me.

Take a look at this pic of the production KRISS:




You can see that the bore axis isn't really any lower than that of a standard machine pistol. That prototype KRISS with the very low bore axis sacrificed ergonomics to get the bore lower than is natural for a weapon of this type.

Also, I think the cyclic rate on that KRISS is far too fast.




From the cases being so close together, I would guess the KRISS' cyclic rate to be around 1200.

The most interesting thing about the KRISS for me is the method of operation:







Note how the bolt is pulled down rather than moving in line with the bore. As far as I can tell from the pics, the KRISS is a simple blowback. The slotted triangular piece translates the backward movement of the bolt into a downward movement against the recoil spring.

This system is certainly interesting, but I don't see the gain. It's not as if the recoil spring were hidden within the pistol grip for compactness. In fact, the KRISS actually appears longer to me than an equivalent machine pistol that has the recoil spring concentric with the bore, like the MAC-10.

Perhaps the KRISS is too new and I don't understand its virtues. But thus far I'm not feeling it at all.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old September 14th, 2007, 10:56 AM
JSQ JSQ is offline
Jack Quinlan
KI6CTP
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,490
Here's another image of the KRISS action:


Nothing about the design makes me thing it will be any more reliable than conventional simple blow-back MPs and SMGs.

Here's the KRISS on Future Weapons:


Personally, I find it confusing that they begin the segment by representing the MP or SMG as a completely uncontrollable essentially useless firearm? They present it as if all previous designs were the pepperbox and the KRISS is the Patterson. There have been many effective and useful MP and SMG designs that have enjoyed quite a following. Or are these guys just clueless morons bumbling along?:


Additionally they refer to the "mighty .45" and "taming the .45". I can think of a few weapons that have already successfully utilized this pistol caliber.





This "knockdown" comparison is ridiculous. How is selecting .45 exclusive to the KRISS. This weapon is very old, but I'm pretty sure it would knock down the target as well.


Finally, look at the overall dimensions of this weapon with a service capacity magazine. At it's tallest point it is extremely tall and it's overall length is not especially short. The central components including the "re-vectoring" action and trigger group are quite bulky. It doesn't look like an especially handy weapon to me.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old September 14th, 2007, 11:50 AM
dannydisco dannydisco is offline
Daniel Long
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 76
Am I the only one who thinks that this thing's action might give it an odd feel, as if someone were tapping downward on the top of the weapon everytime it was fired? The barrel looks excessively short to me as well.

The firing rate seems to be a goal of the designers, in other words superfast cyclic rate with controlability. Sounds good, but the thing looks like it has a small magazine. In the AF our SF "SWAT" type team is taught to use short bursts on the MP's. My two theories are that this is because A)SF supervisors think their troops are used to 3-round bursts of the M-16 family or B)short bursts are used for controlability, especially if there are friendlies in the room that would disapprove with being ventilated. As far as I know this is kinda the industry standard as well, spray and pray doesn't lend itself to professionals.

If the MP series had excessive barrel rise then HK would probably have put compensators on them by now to combat the problem.

Just my thoughts.

If I said something stupid that's explained on the video excuse me, can't veiw video files at work.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old September 14th, 2007, 12:13 PM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Yes, the only interesting thing about that weapon to me is the unusually low bore axis. It's operation does not appear revolutionary. Perhaps I'm missing something?

I also don't understand the advantage to high cyclic rate SMG. IIRC the newest UZI's have a cyclic rate of 1200. Why? Psychological affect? I see soldiers in CQB looking like the Michelin man covered in spare magazines.

While I haven't shot any full auto SMG's, I haven't heard of either 9mm or .45 controllability issues-so it appears they are answering a question no one is asking.

As John mentioned, you can't get much smaller than the MAC-10 and some of the tiny HK MP's out there.

I'm digging the Thompson pics (Don't start with the open-bolt criticism-I'd love to own one).
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old September 14th, 2007, 05:47 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,158
Shit.

This thread went from fun talk to talking about this KRISS crap. How a machine pistol is "revolutionary" in any reasonable sense of the term is beyond me.

But one cannot unring a bell. Because we're discussing the KRISS, I'll toss in my two cents.

I watched that Future Weapons clip and the cyclic rate on this KRISS is slower than I had thought. The pics of the KRISS with the cases so close to one another probably arises from the dribbling ejection of the cases. With the bolt going back and then down, perhaps ejection isn't as smart as with the conventional designs.

That Future Weapons clip is just horrible. I have a love/hate relationship with Future Weapons. I'll watch it if I'm flipping channels and it's on. But every time I watch it I wonder why the hell I watched it. Every episode I've seen was totally lame. But I know the next time I'm surfing and it's on, I know I'll get suckered in again and watch yet again. What a chump. And that bald guy is supposed to be some Navy SEAL, but his gun-handling and technique are just horrible.

I crack up at how around the 1:50 mark of that clip the narrator says something to the effect of how the problem of using a .45 ACP machine pistol is that the weapon kicks like a mule. Then the clip shows a guy firing a Thompson on full-auto and the weapon is barely moving. The KRISS moves a lot more than the Thompson does. And this "Super V" method of operation is one of the single biggest innovations in automatic weapons design for more than a century? These chumps are kidding, right?

That "knockdown" bit on the clip is just stupid. First of all, no handheld weapon can literally knock down a human target. Even a pistol that weighs only 30 oz. barely moves at the discharge of the projectile. How is that same projectile supposed to knock down a 170 lb. man? Totally lame. And I hate the term "knockdown power". It makes me cringe to hear it. It's like hearing "clip" or " shrapnel" or "grips" or whatever. It's chump talk.

Second, am I the only one who noticed that the bald guy tagged the Pepper Popper in the chest with the MP5 and then in the head with the KRISS? These morons couldn't even make it look good by calibrating the Popper so that a 9mm Luger hit to the chest wouldn't knock it down, but a .45 ACP would. I wonder if these morons even know that a Pepper Popper can be calibrated.

And the hard-target penetration test with the dummy in the car was lame. Anyone who knows anything about terminal ballistics knows that 9mm ball penetrates hard targets better than .45 ball.

There's nothing revolutionary or innovative about this KRISS. The machine pistol was a mistake when it was invented. The only reason it was invented was because weapons designers at the time did not understand how to make rifle-caliber weapons self-loading. The machine pistol never performed as intended. And it never will, no matter what the method of operation. The KRISS is not a weapon of the future. Rather, it's a mistake from the past.

But apparently the designer and manufacturer of the KRISS still haven't realized this. Neither have a great many of people who think they interested in firearms.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old October 2nd, 2007, 11:24 AM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,158
OK, back to something interesting.

A shooting friend of mine went to Germany and visited a few museums. He was kind enough to share some pics with me.

Here's an early PSG-1:

http://www.expeditionexchange.com/johnlee/DSCN0413.JPG

Obviously, the stocks are walnut instead of plastic and the pistol grip is not the target type with palm rest. But there are other differences. Note the pinned trigger pack and paddle magazine release. The production PSG-1 features the HK91's trigger pack and push-button release. From the pic, the telescope appears to be a Carl Zeiss 1.5-6X Diavari with bikini lens covers, the same telescope on my HK91:




Production PSG-1s had the Hensoldt 6X telescope with fixed lens covers.

Here are some G11s:

http://www.expeditionexchange.com/johnlee/DSCN0467.JPG

HK purported to have perfected caseless technology and that but for the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Bundeswehr would have adopted the G11. I find this hard to believe. I don't think HK was even close to perfecting caseless technology. The cookoff problems may have been solved, but I don't see how HK was able to prevent chamber erosion and leaking around the firing pin hole. (The G11 featured conventional ignition with a spring-loaded firing pin rather than something like electronic ignition.)

Two more battle carbines from HK:

http://www.expeditionexchange.com/johnlee/DSCN0489.JPG

The top weapon is labled "HK 32 K". I think the tag is wrong. The HK32 was chambered in 7.62 x 39. From the magazine, this weapon looks to be chambered in 5.56. HK32 magazines feature the very curved magazines of the AK due to the 7.62 x 39's substantial case taper. This weapon looks to me to be an early G33K, although the barrel is longer. The barrel length here is shorter than that of a standard G33, but longer than the barrel on the production G33K.

The lower carbine is a G41, HK's attempt to produce a standardized NATO battle carbine when NATO flirted with the idea of adopting a standard battle carbine for all NATO forces. Note the hold-open device and M16 magazine.

I have saved the best for last:

http://www.expeditionexchange.com/johnlee/DSCN0493.JPG

On the left is the MKb42(W), Walther's entry into the sturmgewehr trials. This weapon featured a unique method of operation where the gas piston encapsulated the barrel.

Second is the MKb42(H), Haenel's simpler and more successful design. This is the design the Wehrmacht chose for further development.
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old October 2nd, 2007, 11:52 PM
JSQ JSQ is offline
Jack Quinlan
KI6CTP
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,490
AWESOME.


(gun talk is back!)


I'd love to see a diagram or cutaway of the MKb42(W). I've seen plenty of pictures of the weapon complete, but I don't fully understand how it works.


I can never get over how funky 7.92 kurz looks.
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old October 3rd, 2007, 01:13 PM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
John-was that at the museum in Oberndorf?
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old October 3rd, 2007, 01:26 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,158
It was some Bundeswehr Museum in Koblenz, I think.

Steve also sent a few Luger and tank pics, but I conveniently ignored them and stuck to the interesting (to me) stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old October 3rd, 2007, 01:29 PM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSQ
I'd love to see a diagram or cutaway of the MKb42(W). I've seen plenty of pictures of the weapon complete, but I don't fully understand how it works.

This guy may have that info in print. He's often at the gun shows.

http://www.germanmanuals.com/manuals.html
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old October 4th, 2007, 10:15 AM
thomaskimura thomaskimura is offline
Thomas Kimura
N6BZ
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 178
I never noticed that the G41 has the FAL-style carry handle. I assume this is a NATO requirement? I hear a lot of descriptions on sites like Wikipedia alluding to "NATO" requirements, but have never actually seen them. Is it basically things like SS109 ammunition, forward assist, carry handle, and M16 magazine acceptance? Are there additional requirements as well?
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old October 4th, 2007, 07:18 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,158
The G41 was sort of the beginning of the end for HK in my mind. After the G41, HK decided to abaondon its own methods of operation and design ideas and just make whatever sells. The G41 was a commercial failure, but its legacy lives on today in the HK416 series of weapons (blatant AR copies but with the G36's gas system). Too bad there was nothing really wrong with the Ljungman method of operation.

At the time NATO adopted the SS109 round, the M16 was the most established and proven 5.56 carbine around. It was the standard by which other 5.56 carbines were judged (and it still is). NATO forces had yet to adopt 5.56 battle carbines on a widespread basis. Most were still using G3s and FALs.

So I guess someone at HK had the brilliant idea of taking a G33 and fitting it with M16-like features to make it more marketable. Of course, the HK designers decided to copy the M16's worst features.

For example, what's with the carrying handle? Are you actually supposed to carry this weapon like a suitcase? Is that something any military force wants to encourage its soldiers to do?

What's with the forward assist? The forward assist is useless even on the M16. I can't believe the forward assist made it onto the product-improved M16A2. The forward assist is even more useless on a roller-delayed weapon like the G41. If you have ever played with a G3 or G33, you know how strong the recoil spring is. I'm surprised these weapons don't slam fire when you close the bolt on them. I have never even heard of a roller-delayed weapon fail to go into battery.

I think HK even marketed the forward assist as a "silent bolt closure device". This is a joke, as anyone familiar with the G3 and G33 knows that the bolt can be closed silently by putting the thumb on the bolt carrier and pushing the bolt carrier into battery. Many G3s and G33s even came with serrated bolt carriers to facilitate this action:




I believe all Norwegian G3s are thus fitted. Civilian HKs have differed over the years. My 1970s era HK43 has the serrated bolt carrier. My 1980s era HK91 does not. The dished serrations make this action easier, but I can push the bolt carriers into battery with or without the serrations.

And why copy the M16 magazine? The M16's magazine is the weak link in the M16 system. The magazines are thin and fragile and the most common stoppage on the M16 weapons is the bolt-over-base stoppage. The cheese M16 magazines are even whimpier and more prone to damage than the FAL magazines.

In contrast, the G33 magazine is a masterpiece. The feed lips are double-layered steel and the magazine body is heavily corrugated for strength. The front of the magazine hooks into the front of the magazine well and is tilted into place and locked by the rear locking notch. Contrast this with the M16's magazine that is held only on the port side wall. No wonder the M16 is prone to bolt-over-base stoppages. The G33 magazine baseplate is corrugated and mates very tightly with the magazine body. It's not held in place with shitty little aluminum tabs. And HK dumped this magazine for the AR magazine? Please.

Imagine an AK magazine made in Germany. That is the G33 magazine. In fact, the G3 and AK are two of the most reliable weapons ever produced. It is far from a coincidence that both weapons have very strong magazines. The exceptional reliability of both weapons is often attributed to their methods of operation. However, I believe their brilliant magazine designs and study execution have every bit as much to do with their reliability, and perhaps even more.

So HK chose to copy one of the worst magazines in history. Of course HK failed to copy the M16's very nice magazine release button. Instead, HK fitted a teeter totter to the port side of the magazine well, just where it is usable only by lefties.

The fake M16A1 forend looks lame. Too bad the Americans dumped the M16A1 forend and adopted the M16A2 forend after HK decided to copy the M16A1 forend. Oops.

The G41 also looks lame because the StG44 and StG45(M) pedigree is gone. Compare these two pics:







Clearly, the G33 is a lineal descendant of the StG44. The G33 operates on the roller-delayed blowback principle and the StG44 is gas operated, but the two weapons clearly share the same layout and exterior design. In fact, the G33 is really nothing more than a StG44 with the StG45(M)'s method of operation, or a StG45(M) with the StG44's layout. It all depends on your point of view.

The G41 moves away from this line. The buttstock cap does not encapsulate the rear of the receiver and is not held in place with a single push-pin. The trigger pack does not hinge downward when the buttstock is removed. The realist will poo-poo these lineal features, but to my way of looking at things, they are what make the HK roller-delayed weapons so special. They're basically modern-day Wehrmacht weapons. And any serious student of small arms must study Wehrmacht weapons for an understanding of modern small arms development.

The only things I like about the G41 are the hold-open device and the larger cocking handle. But otherwise the G41 is a pile.
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old October 4th, 2007, 10:12 PM
JSQ JSQ is offline
Jack Quinlan
KI6CTP
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,490
Great post.


I share John's feelings on repeater reliability and it's correlation to magazine design and construction.

My ultimate magazine is the Berreta BM59's.
By all accounts this Garand-derived box-magazine-fed semi-automatic rifle is very reliable.
It's magazine is utterly beautiful.


Unfortunately, the BM59 magazine is inserted vertically and latches at the rear whereas the M14 magazine design that followed "rocks" into place like that of the AK-47 and G33. Despite this the BM59 magazine is very secure and is not prone to bolt-over-base stoppages.

Check out these comparison pics between a M14 mag and that of the BM59:







Just awesome.

Last edited by JSQ : October 4th, 2007 at 10:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old October 4th, 2007, 10:36 PM
thomaskimura thomaskimura is offline
Thomas Kimura
N6BZ
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee
And why copy the M16 magazine? The M16's magazine is the weak link in the M16 system.

Seriously. What other magazine is worse than the M16's? I can't think of one. The Chautchaut's maybe? I don't know that I have ever handled an FAL, CETME, or an HK magazine period, but I honestly cannot think of a worse magazine. How absurd is it that soldiers must stock pile decent magazines- a practice that has persisted from A1 to M4.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old October 4th, 2007, 10:45 PM
thomaskimura thomaskimura is offline
Thomas Kimura
N6BZ
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee






lol. forget the weapons. Which one is sitting on Splinter-pattern camouflauge and which one is sitting on diamond plate? This is sweet, I really don't know much about HK arms past the G3.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old October 5th, 2007, 12:02 AM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
Informative and detailed post, John.

Regarding magazine design-nothing says Armageddon like the heavy corrugated Sturmgewehr magazine (I'll leave the AK out-look at the AK74).

Jack-What is so wonderful about the BM59 magazine? What advantage does it have over the M14/M1A magazine? Any more pics?

I seems to me that the BM59 magazine is no better (maybe more complex?) than the AR-type catch on the AR10 (which uses a modified M14).
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Mag 002.jpg (79.3 KB, 5 views)
File Type: jpg Mag 003.jpg (43.2 KB, 6 views)
File Type: jpg Mag 008.jpg (62.8 KB, 6 views)
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old October 5th, 2007, 02:34 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,158
G33 mag:




Note the sheetmetal reinforcement around the top of the magazine. Also note that the sheetmetal reinforcement is also corrugated for maximum strength. These feel lips are shit strong. The corrugations on the reinforcing layer extend over the top of the feel lips as well and are not limited only to the sides of the magazine. The sheetmetal reinforcement is also considerably thicker than the magazine body. That is, the sheetmetal used for the reinforcement and the magazine body are not the same gauge.

Note how the three main corrugations protrude outward rather than inward. I dig that. The magazines feel great in your hand.

The single huge corrugation near the front of the magazine protrudes inward and does a lot more than strengthen the magazine. The inward corrugation acts as a brace against the case shoulder of the cartridges within, which keeps the cartridge bases at the rear of the magazine and the bullet points protected against flattening.

Not only does the floorplate encapsulate the magazine walls, but the floorplate is corrugated for additional strength. You can also see a reinforcing rib right above the floorplate, just for good measure.

I am not sure if the G33's brilliant magazine is copied more from the StG45(M)'s magazine or the AK's magazine.

Here's the StG45(M)'s magazine:




Note the double-walled feed lips and the floorplate that encapsulates the magazine walls.

AK magazine:




Same thing here. The feed lips are reinfoced and the floorplate encapsulates the magazine walls.

I think the AK magazine had the greater influence on the G33's magazine design. The G33 magazine does have the the StG45(M) magazine's locking catch (albeit on the opposite side) and the tabs that prevent the magazine from being inserted too far. However, the G33 magazine features the AK magazine's large inward corrugation, the three outward corrugations, and the corrugating near the floorplate.

The only thing I don't like about the G33 magazines is that they don't "stack" as well as the AR magazines. The AR mags sit flat against one another very nicely. I especially dig the 20-shot AR mags, as they're about as compact as a pack of cigarettes, yet several jillion times more deadly.
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old October 5th, 2007, 03:07 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,158
Here is an example of the HK magazine principles in action:




This is an experimental design conceived during the days the NATO forces were pretty much split between the G3 and the FAL. The design was an attempt to accommodate both weapon systems with a single magazine. This is an interesting design, but forget that aspect for a moment. Rather, look at the feed lips of each end of the magazine.

You can see that the three reinforcing ribs running vertically along the magazine walls go the entire way up and down the magazine. That is, the inward-facing ribs exist even under the double-layering.

Then, look the reinforced end of the magazine. Here we have two layers of steel rather than one. Then, we have outward-facing ribs as well. So, in the area of the feed lips and locking areas of the magazine, we have a quasi box construction in several parts of the magazine.

I believe the double layering plus the inward- and outward-facing ribs have a synergistic effect. I believe these areas of the magazine to be several times stronger, not twice as strong.

This is the beauty of the HK magazine design.
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old October 5th, 2007, 06:11 PM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
It's my understanding that original production AK47 magazines were(heavy) flat-sided. The corrugated sides commonly associated with the AK mag was added later in order to both strengthen and lighten it (IIRC influenced by the StG44).
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old October 6th, 2007, 12:50 AM
JSQ JSQ is offline
Jack Quinlan
KI6CTP
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by greghirst
Jack-What is so wonderful about the BM59 magazine? What advantage does it have over the M14/M1A magazine? Any more pics?

I seems to me that the BM59 magazine is no better (maybe more complex?) than the AR-type catch on the AR10 (which uses a modified M14).


Are you kidding me?

Look at the pics I already posted.
There is no need for more. The superiority of the BM59 magazine over that of the M14 is obvious.

-floorplate encapsulates magazine walls for strength
-large corrugation along the length of the rear of the magazine for strength
-large corrugation along the length of the rear of the magazine acts as a guide for the follower
-larger and longer feed lips for positive loading
-thicker magazine walls for strength
-leading magazine wall edge is inletted with dual feed ramps
-machined block follower provides better fit and smoother operation
-asymetrical profile so that the magazine orientation cannot be confused

Tom Kimura has two of these magazines. I'll show you one.
You will be blown away.
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old October 6th, 2007, 11:38 AM
greghirst greghirst is offline
Greg Hirst
KI6CQL
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,290
I haven't seen the BM59, so my questions are only from seeing your pics. In the pics I cannot see a difference in steel thickness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSQ
Are you kidding me?

Look at the pics I already posted.
There is no need for more. The superiority of the BM59 magazine over that of the M14 is obvious.

-floorplate encapsulates magazine walls for strength

I see that it partially does so on two sides.

However, it does not fully encapsulate the walls nor wrap around the corners like some other designs for increased strength (and dirt resistance).

I'm unaware of any complaints of magazine floorplate collapse or strength concerns with the M14/M1A magazine that are answered in your BM59 magazine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSQ
-large corrugation along the length of the rear of the magazine for strength
-large corrugation along the length of the rear of the magazine acts as a guide for the follower

I can see this may be an advantage. However, I'm not familiar with the BM59.

I owned an M1A for a few years prior to AR10 and don't recall a problem with a lack of positive magazine insertion or follower jamming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSQ
-larger and longer feed lips for positive loading

This may be necessary for the BM59. I do not believe it is for the M14/M1A. In fact, I've seen some trimming of M14 mag feeding lips to allow for more positive stripping of rounds and bolt closure. I never needed to do more than a little "tuning" of the feeding lips, but then I always used Govt. mags and no cheap Chinese copy magazines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSQ
-thicker magazine walls for strength

I'll take your word.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSQ
-leading magazine wall edge is inletted with dual feed ramps

-machined block follower provides better fit and smoother operation

Again, this may be needed for the BM59. Don't see the need for this with M14/M1A. I DO prefer this to some of the brittle plastic followers so prevalent on cheap aftermarket M14 magazines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSQ
-asymetrical profile so that the magazine orientation cannot be confused

This is a BIG advantage. I can't tell you how many times I started to insert a mag and having to check which was front/back.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JSQ
Tom Kimura has two of these magazines. I'll show you one.
You will be blown away.

IMHO the nice stackability of the M14 mag outweighs some of your proposed advantages. However, I'd like to see it and the BM59 rifle. I admit I'm intrigued. I doubt I'll be blown away.

I've always admired the Armageddon design of the steel StG mag and some of the AK mags. John's G33 mag epitomizes that philosophy.

Despite this, it's obvious the future is in plastic (light weight/strength, lack of rust, low cost, cold weather use, shock and dirt-resistance, as well as transparency).

My 2 cents-

Last edited by greghirst : October 6th, 2007 at 11:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Omega Speedmaster hanchung General 3509 November 19th, 2017 03:36 PM
First Hand Gun willroeder General 3 April 25th, 2007 07:47 PM
FN fiveseven USG ddavis General 8 April 2nd, 2007 07:36 PM
Weapons Choice ronward General 9 June 17th, 2004 08:34 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:49 PM.




Copyright 2001-2012 Expedition Exchange Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.