View Full Version : HK 30-round mags for NSW
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=e49c76de37170b93f1571f91c44a5224&tab=core&_cview=0
Looking at the above document, it appears that the SEALs are buying a bunch of HK mags.
Not being familiar, it would seem that the P-Mag would be a decent choice for the maritime environment, since corrosion is a major concern. Is the HK mag comparable to the P-Mag in overall reliability/performance?
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=e49c76de37170b93f1571f91c44a5224&tab=core&_cview=0
Looking at the above document, it appears that the SEALs are buying a bunch of HK mags.
Not being familiar, it would seem that the P-Mag would be a decent choice for the maritime environment, since corrosion is a major concern. Is the HK mag comparable to the P-Mag in overall reliability/performance?
I think the main reason why a SEAL would rather carry PMAGs over H&K Mags would be cause of weight.
I also bet those mags from H&K were nice and cheap compared to Pmags.
Everything with an "HK" stamp on it appears to be gold-plated.
Is the HK mag comparable to the P-Mag in overall reliability/performance?
Personal experience only: I think that they're about equal in terms of overall reliability. I give the edge to the Pmag.
However, presuming equivalent performance, or near enough, you can spend $15 ea. on windowless Pmags, or spend around $45+ ea. on HK mags that weigh more and require more attention paid to keeping them corrosion free.
It's all in how you conduct your costs/benefits analysis.
I wonder why they dont get the Emags. http://ee.ar15.com/shot/090116%20-%20Day%202/IMG_0108.jpg
The_War_Wagon
05-31-09, 17:25
I wonder why they dont get the Emags. http://ee.ar15.com/shot/090116%20-%20Day%202/IMG_0108.jpg
Slippery when wet?
Cagemonkey
05-31-09, 17:26
I could be wrong, but I'm willing to guess that the reason they chose the HK mags was that HK is a vendor that their familiar with. Its just logistics. I agree that Pmags would be a better choice. 1/3 the cost, 1/2 the weight and just as reliable.
Heavy Metal
05-31-09, 17:55
If they are running 416's, PMAGs won't work.
Slippery when wet?
I'd think the steel HK mags would be as or more slippery than the E-mag.
If they are running 416's, PMAGs won't work.
Yes.
P mags are not NATO compliant. That is a factor.
telecustom
05-31-09, 20:27
Also, the HK Mags have an NSN making them easier to order through thet system.
Robb Jensen
05-31-09, 20:35
The HK416 mag is nice and all but in my experience in fast cyclic rate guns (10.5" guns suppressed) is that they only last a thousand rounds or so and then start not locking the bolt to the rear when run dry. Not much longer after that they just quit feeding. I haven't had this problem with PMAGs, USGI aluminum mags or Lancer L5 mags. With a 20" gun or a piston gun (cycles much slower) the HK416 mag would probably work with it forever.
Also, the HK Mags have an NSN making them easier to order through thet system.
O RLY? (https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=175d7bace9143cfc23613c5f02ec4496&tab=core&_cview=0)
I wonder why they dont get the Emags. http://ee.ar15.com/shot/090116%20-%20Day%202/IMG_0108.jpg
It's difficult to contribute much to these threads without going against established Magpul corporate policy of not releasing information about our customers. As I posted in another recent thread, public information about most military equipment purchases is available if anyone cares enough to dig for it. CounTeR proved that...
It's difficult to contribute much to these threads without going against established Magpul corporate policy of not releasing information about our customers. As I posted in another recent thread, public information about most military equipment purchases is available if anyone cares enough to dig for it. CounTeR proved that...
Congrats on the sale.
westcoastfrog
05-31-09, 22:37
we did not choose the hk mag. from my experience most operators don't want, like or carry them. too heavy and they have had reliability issues. pretty much everyone i know, myself included, would roll pmags if given a choice. however, since upper ranking members would rather listen to some civilian at craine tell us what we need based on the amount of money they stand to make off the deal rather than the operator...well, we gots what we gots.
we did not choose the hk mag. from my experience most operators don't want, like or carry them. too heavy and they have had reliability issues. pretty much everyone i know, myself included, would roll pmags if given a choice. however, since upper ranking members would rather listen to some civilian at craine tell us what we need based on the amount of money they stand to make off the deal rather than the operator...well, we gots what we gots.
We're working on that, trust me. If you guys need anything, feel free to shoot me an email directly: nick @ magpul.com (no spaces) or call 1.877.4MAGPUL and ask for Nick.
Were the GI spec mags really THAT bad?
Were the GI spec mags really THAT bad?
Some people never had a problem with USGI mags. I'm not one of those people.
Why so many versions of PMags?
Are they being redesigned so people just keep buying them to have the latest and greatest or whats the deal?
Doesn't the HK mag only weigh about 1.5ozs. more than the PMag? I realize that isn't the only factor but to me(a non-mil, non-LE guy) 1.5ozs. isn't that much. Once again, I don't know sh**, but I'm just trying to think through the pos/neg aspects of HK mag vs. PMag so I can make an informed decision for my own mag purchases.
H/K mags are approx. 3-4 times the amount of PMAG's. IMHO PMAG's are better than H/K mags. I have a few here that a guy turned in before he rolled out and there is distinct rusting on the follower. My mags at home consist of about 100 PMAG's, some MILSPEC aluminum mags and a few H/K mags that I kept for sentimental reasons.
Doesn't the HK mag only weigh about 1.5ozs. more than the PMag? I realize that isn't the only factor but to me(a non-mil, non-LE guy) 1.5ozs. isn't that much. Once again, I don't know sh**, but I'm just trying to think through the pos/neg aspects of HK mag vs. PMag so I can make an informed decision for my own mag purchases.
olds442tyguy
06-01-09, 23:55
Ever hear of some bearded guys giving away 416 mags in the sand box because they went to crap? I have. That guy still has the same two PMAG's those same guys gave him to try out too.
This is a serious question, because I genuinely dont know. I'm more of an AK guy than a AR guy. My experinece with the AR platform and it's mags are limited to 8 years in the military, and maybe 5K rounds since then. I only recently got a few P-mags to test, and have run the HK's as well.
I have never had a GI mag fail on me. Not even the old style followers. We did open a box of old pre loaded and boxed 20 rounders that had been sitting for a couple of decades and the springs seemed pretty weak upon unloading them, but I never saw them tried in a rifle, so I dont know if they would have worked.
I dont recall ever having a mag based failure with a AR mag that was not visibly damaged.
I was always told that if the standard GI mag showed any signs of damage or produced a failure, that it was to be removed from service. That seems like good advice for any mag regardless of price.
my question arises because of the bad blood I see on many forums about "which mag is better" I dont get it. the GI spec AR mag seems like it still performs very reliably and is easily replaced with another cheap simple mag if it gets damaged. They cost 30-50% less than a P-mag, and 80% less than an HK. They are easy to find, light and ubiquitous.
In light of these things, It leads me to wonder the following 3 things:
-Why are so many people hung up on "better than..." when the actual real world performance seems to be only fractionally better?
-Is there something about the HK, Pmag, TD or whatever that really makes the weapon perform better or significantly more reliably than with a serviceable GI mag?
-I see a lot of people getting trained to drop thier AR mags. When did magazines become something that has to last the lifetime of the rifle? dont they get lost occasionally anyway?
a comment on weight. I note that while I'm shooting with a mixed bag of mags, that an empty HK mag feels remarkably similar to a full GI mag. That weight difference could be a hindrance if running mixed mags in hairy situations. You could load an empty or partial when you think your loading a full one.
HK MAGS
I have been using HK Mags in a 16" Carbine for several months and i have not encountered any problems, so far. After, I use them I just clean them-up and wipe them down with CLP.
As for the weight (like JACK-O) , I really did not notice much of a difference myself. That said, after purchasing over a dozen HK Mags I don't plan on buying anymore. I think I'm just going to buy a case of plain old milspec (USGI) AR mags and call it a day. I have been using some of a buddies USGI mags and they worked just fine + they are very inexpensive. The Brownell's mags are nice too.
P.S. JACK-O, SMALL ARMS REVIEW cited a study completed in an article around a year or two ago were supposedly the HK magazine improved the reliability of the COLT M-4 by over 50% [If I recall correctly]. I don't remember which issue. Maybe someone else can provide more info.
SkiDevil
Jack-O,
You bring up several points that have been addressed in similar threads that degenerated into anarchy and chaos. Magazines being stored loaded means nothing, because that does not wear the springs. (discussed ad nauseum)
I have had mags fail, epsecially the old ones with the black followers that would bind. Aluminum mags are more susceptible to damage (especially feedlips) when dropped than PMAG's. If a PMAG does break then it is very visible and can be discarded though some have reported being able to use them even when cracked.
PMAG's are about 1/3 the price of an H/K mag and almost the exact price as an aluminum magazine. Not sure where you got your prices from but I can get PMAGs for around 14.50 or 12.97 from Brownells with my discount.
Yes, you can remove a damaged mag from service. When you are in the .MIL that is easy to do (though I know some guys who were given crappy mags in exchange) but not so easy when they are coming out of your pocket. Let's face it people become attached to things that they buy.
PMAG's are easier to disassemble and maintain. How many floorplates have you seen damaged from personnel taking them apart? I know I have.
This is a serious question, because I genuinely dont know. I'm more of an AK guy than a AR guy. My experinece with the AR platform and it's mags are limited to 8 years in the military, and maybe 5K rounds since then. I only recently got a few P-mags to test, and have run the HK's as well.
I have never had a GI mag fail on me. Not even the old style followers. We did open a box of old pre loaded and boxed 20 rounders that had been sitting for a couple of decades and the springs seemed pretty weak upon unloading them, but I never saw them tried in a rifle, so I dont know if they would have worked.
I dont recall ever having a mag based failure with a AR mag that was not visibly damaged.
I was always told that if the standard GI mag showed any signs of damage or produced a failure, that it was to be removed from service. That seems like good advice for any mag regardless of price.
my question arises because of the bad blood I see on many forums about "which mag is better" I dont get it. the GI spec AR mag seems like it still performs very reliably and is easily replaced with another cheap simple mag if it gets damaged. They cost 30-50% less than a P-mag, and 80% less than an HK. They are easy to find, light and ubiquitous.
In light of these things, It leads me to wonder the following 3 things:
-Why are so many people hung up on "better than..." when the actual real world performance seems to be only fractionally better?
-Is there something about the HK, Pmag, TD or whatever that really makes the weapon perform better or significantly more reliably than with a serviceable GI mag?
-I see a lot of people getting trained to drop thier AR mags. When did magazines become something that has to last the lifetime of the rifle? dont they get lost occasionally anyway?
a comment on weight. I note that while I'm shooting with a mixed bag of mags, that an empty HK mag feels remarkably similar to a full GI mag. That weight difference could be a hindrance if running mixed mags in hairy situations. You could load an empty or partial when you think your loading a full one.
John_Wayne777
06-02-09, 08:02
Why so many versions of PMags?
Are they being redesigned so people just keep buying them to have the latest and greatest or whats the deal?
You don't pour money into engineering time, manufacturing equipment changes, and testing just so you can sell new magazines to fanboys.
SWATcop556
06-02-09, 09:25
Doesn't the HK mag only weigh about 1.5ozs. more than the PMag? I realize that isn't the only factor but to me(a non-mil, non-LE guy) 1.5ozs. isn't that much. Once again, I don't know sh**, but I'm just trying to think through the pos/neg aspects of HK mag vs. PMag so I can make an informed decision for my own mag purchases.
Ounces=Pounds and Pounds=Pain
If I loaded up my kit with HK mags then loaded up my kit with Pmags I guarentee I'll be able to tell you the weight difference.
I have no love for the HK mags but that was after owning over 30 of them and running them hard so it's not just being a fanboy of magpul.
Were the GI spec mags really THAT bad?
No, a GI mag can be quite serviceable. I had excellent service from many for a long time before PMags were available.
Nonetheless, the GI mag is comparatively more suspceptible to damage than some others that are out (PMag, ARC) due to material and design features.
The GI mag is not rendered junk because of magazine genesis, but it is what it is.
You don't pour money into engineering time, manufacturing equipment changes, and testing just so you can sell new magazines to fanboys.
This is particularly true considering the strong demand for PMAGs. If sales were slow, I could understand someone drawing this conclusion, but such is not the case. Quite honestly, we chose to improve the magazine based on field feedback, specifically that which came from the military and law enforcement communities. Nothing is perfect - things can always be improved.
Were the GI spec mags really THAT bad?
Yes. They are the MAIN weak link in the platform. Why or how you ask? The GI mag was designed to be a ONE USE mag and then tossed. GI mags now are used for hundreds of thousands of rounds. The mag was made with only the cheapest materials (FYI).
The main issue with the GI mags is the follower. By installing an anti-tilt follower in the, you can bring their reliability WAY up.
The HK mags (even the newer GEN II's) have a lot of issues. The main thing we see with them is that they do not work with 10.5/11.5's. The reason is that the spring cannot push the follower up fast enough to keep up with the increased bolt speed of an SBR. Couple that with the excessive weight, cost and rust possibility and the HK is a poor choice IMHO.
C4
CarlosDJackal
06-02-09, 14:38
The HK (steel) mags can also double as boat anchors (j/k). :D
Pmags have been one of the most impressive peices of kit that I have used. Very few problems. Back when the HK mags where the shizzzel & I was shooting a lot more I started rolling through them at a pretty impressive clip.
I was going to need a bailout out from the FED to keep using them. Pmags rock.
Back when the HK mags where the shizzzel & I was shooting a lot more I started rolling through them at a pretty impressive clip.
Sigmax,
What problems did you have with the HK Mags? Did the magazines become unservicable in the course of normal use (how many rounds fired through each mag)? How were the mags used (combat deployment/ training)?
Thanks,
SkiDevil
Were the GI spec mags really THAT bad?
no... if used as designed.
they're made of aluminum not steel.... not designed to be used and abused too many times;
ETA: I'm too slow... +1 on what Grant said
Sigmax,
What problems did you have with the HK Mags? Did the magazines become unservicable in the course of normal use (how many rounds fired through each mag)? How were the mags used (combat deployment/ training)?
Thanks,
SkiDevil
Most of what I was seeing where the springs taking a set and not feeding especially in my SBR's. All most all of the use was during training excercises. It seemed once I got a couple of thousand round on a set, so say about 1k give or take on a individual mag, they stopped feeding reliably. A couple I think I left loaded too long in my locker and once I got them out to run them, it was jammomatic time and they had to go.
I never saw the rust some people talk about but I did have 2 take a fall on pavement and bent the feed lips pretty good. They weren't horrible mags but there is nothing they do that Pmags don't do better (& cheaper & lighter) if you ask me.
Most of what I was seeing where the springs taking a set and not feeding especially in my SBR's. All most all of the use was during training excercises. It seemed once I got a couple of thousand round on a set, so say about 1k give or take on a individual mag, they stopped feeding reliably. A couple I think I left loaded too long in my locker and once I got them out to run them, it was jammomatic time and they had to go.
I never saw the rust some people talk about but I did have 2 take a fall on pavement and bent the feed lips pretty good. They weren't horrible mags but there is nothing they do that Pmags don't do better (& cheaper & lighter) if you ask me.
Sixmax,
Thanks for the information. I am using 14.5" and 16" carbines, perhaps there is a difference. I purchased about 16 HK Mags because one of the agencies I previously worked for used Colt and HK ARs with USGI and HK mags interchangably with no real issues. A friend is still working there, so I will ask him if that has changed.
Someone posted commentary that SBRs will not function with the HK mags. Leaves me to wonder if the HK Mags were built for standard M-4 type rifles only (in addition to 416).
Anyhow, thanks for the feedback. I spent a lot of money on those HK mags, so I am certainly not tossing them-out. The majority are still new in wrapping. I have been using several so far with no problems in my 16" carbine. Because it is fairly new I am keeping a log of the rounds fired. I will keep track of how many rounds go through each HK mag as well and report back if I experience similar results.
I have been also using USGI and Brownell's mags. I really prefer the 20 RD mags and like the aluminum material. But, I guess I will pick-up some P-Mags and give them a try. I suppose I should get over the fact that plastic mags are better than metal ones.
Thanks,
SkiDevil:o
Someone correct me if I am misinformed. Weren't the steel H/K mags originally developed as an upgrade/ fix for the British SA-80 rifle debacle?
Which model mag made by Magpul is the newest model?
Someone correct me if I am misinformed. Weren't the steel H/K mags originally developed as an upgrade/ fix for the British SA-80 rifle debacle?
From article by Larry Vickers on development of HK416 from http://www.hkpro.com/hk416.htm:
“A key component was already done in the magazine that was taken from the SA80 program.”
Which model mag made by Magpul is the newest model?
I believe "Rev M" is the lastest
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=27686&highlight=pmag
The_War_Wagon
06-04-09, 07:07
This isn't the first thread (either here or on other boards - Homey don't do TOS, though) I've read about HK mags rusting, so it certainly makes me content with my PMags! Besides, $40+ a pop on the HK's is TOUGH to swallow - even for a DEDICATED amateur - when even CTD's overpriced :rolleyes: PMags are still $25 a piece.
I still like picking up 'sandbox returns' of Okay & BMI mags (you rarely EVER see a Colt though...) at gun shows for $7-8 a piece, cleaning them up, and making 'range mags' out of them. With Magpul followers, they still work quite well, and - for a lowly civilian - there's just a warm, fuzzy, feeling you get, knowing YOUR mag might be partly responsbile for a few less Hajj in the world... :D
Most of what I was seeing where the springs taking a set and not feeding especially in my SBR's. All most all of the use was during training excercises. It seemed once I got a couple of thousand round on a set, so say about 1k give or take on a individual mag, they stopped feeding reliably. A couple I think I left loaded too long in my locker and once I got them out to run them, it was jammomatic time and they had to go.
I never saw the rust some people talk about but I did have 2 take a fall on pavement and bent the feed lips pretty good. They weren't horrible mags but there is nothing they do that Pmags don't do better (& cheaper & lighter) if you ask me.
This is the main issue with them and what I have seen. HK is on a GEN II version of their mag because of the slow follower not being able to keep up with the bolt speed on SBR.
This newer version with a beefer spring STILL cannot do the job.
People that are running 16" guns may NEVER have an issue with the mags.
C4
I've posted elsewhere before, but I had lots of problems with the HK mags I was issued; 30% didn't work right out of the box. I haven't tried the P-Mags, yet, but am apprehensive if they won't work in my issued 416. The first deployment I had HK mags issued, I swapped out to standard GI mags shortly into it. I now use Brownell's magazines with Magpul followers...ALL aluminum mags could benefit from the Magpul follower. I seriously doubt I will ever carry a magazine into harm's way, again, without the Magpul follower, even if I have to keep buying them myself. Northern Virginia Gun Works also does a nice tweak to the aluminum feed lips that helps cycling, as well. One of these days, I'll buy a couple of these P-Mags and give them a try...especially if one comes out that's compatible with the 416.
Hell, if I'm reading this correctly they've changed the solicitation. Now they want Magpul's E-Mags:
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=1cf83c7e98eab9cf3b6b3bb522ddcd7a&_cview=0
I've posted elsewhere before, but I had lots of problems with the HK mags I was issued; 30% didn't work right out of the box. I haven't tried the P-Mags, yet, but am apprehensive if they won't work in my issued 416. The first deployment I had HK mags issued, I swapped out to standard GI mags shortly into it. I now use Brownell's magazines with Magpul followers...ALL aluminum mags could benefit from the Magpul follower. I seriously doubt I will ever carry a magazine into harm's way, again, without the Magpul follower, even if I have to keep buying them myself. Northern Virginia Gun Works also does a nice tweak to the aluminum feed lips that helps cycling, as well. One of these days, I'll buy a couple of these P-Mags and give them a try...especially if one comes out that's compatible with the 416.
Is your 416 a 10.5?
C4
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-09-09, 09:02
Re: the change in solicitation
I run a 10.5 416 upper on my M16A1. It came as a kit with one mag. I considered buying some more but decided against it since I have so many GI mags and a considerable number of PMags--all of which feed fine on full auto or otherwise. I am glad I didn't fork out the extra bucks.
Hell, if I'm reading this correctly they've changed the solicitation. Now they want Magpul's E-Mags:
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=1cf83c7e98eab9cf3b6b3bb522ddcd7a&_cview=0
I guess they had a change of heart. ;)
I guess they had a change of heart. ;)
Or somebody said: "Hey DUMBASS, those mags do not work in 10.5's!!!"
C4
thopkins22
06-09-09, 10:53
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=1cf83c7e98eab9cf3b6b3bb522ddcd7a&_cview=0
"tactical magazine replacement drills":p I will adopt SOCOM solicitation lingo from here on out.
Is your 416 a 10.5?
C4
Yes
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a312/51gunner/4162.jpg
I still own at least six HK SA80 mags.
Oddly enough my 10.5" 416 works just fine with every one of them. Of coarse, it runs just fine with P-Mags and G.I. mags also.
One of these days, I'll buy a couple of these P-Mags and give them a try...especially if one comes out that's compatible with the 416.
I said the same thing myself recently. So, I purchased a few of the P-Mags and tried them out on Sunday. I fired off about 200 rounds through my 16" carbine and they worked fine. They are very light and seem well built/ made. I am planning on buying at least a couple dozen more and will be using them in a few different rifles as well. Most of the guys I know have been using USGI, Brownells, and/ or HK Mags, so I am going to pass along a few to them and see what they think.
They aren't nearly as expensive as the HK mags, so I would just go ahead and buy them. If you don't like them I am quite sure someone will buy them from you.
SkiDevil
P.S. I was watching a training video last week and a few of the shooters were using very short barreled rifles (w/ P-Mags). I don't know if there would be a difference between the 416 (Piston) vs. and DI rifle in regards to the use of P-Mags. But at least in their SBR's the mags seemed to work.
I guess they had a change of heart. ;)
So it seems. I e-mailed drake about this over the weekend. To bad we were not set up as a dealer:( I would have liked to expand our offerings to the .mil.
Some day though.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.