View Full Version : PMAGs negate M4 feedramps
I was inspecting these new space-age fancy Pmags when I noticed how well they line up to the feed ramps. So well that they cover up M4 feedramps. In other words, the tip of a bullet being fed would never even contact an M4 feedramp. :eek:
The more I study these mags, the more I'm convinced that they're a completely superior design.
Here's some half assed pics of my Pmag vs. a Standard mag research. Note that on the exact same upper, you can't even see the M4 feedramp when the Pmag is seated.
Regular USGI mag...
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb201/trixiebud/andradepix024.jpg?t=1197346709
PMAG....
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb201/trixiebud/andradepix023.jpg?t=1197347010
Interesting point, but it looks to me like even the aluminum GI mag covers up the ramps. I'm trying to picture how a round would clear the mag and then nose down at such a abrupt angle to catch on the receiver.
Good point.
You'll have to check it out on your own weapons since the pics aren't that great. But the USGI mag does meet the very bottom of the feed ramps on this COLT.
Even so, I believe the PMags are a superior design. I have quite a few now, and prefer them over the aluminum USGI mags. No more ****ing up your mags when you step on a dropped mag by accident.
I don't track on your post. The entire point of my thread is that PMAGs are insanely superior in design. A mag that won't give a bullet the opportunity to nose dive under any rate of fire is brilliant.
The PMAG means you don't NEED M4 feedramps.
Pmag are what the mag should have always been if it weren't for the constraints of stamping metal.
Repsectfully demigod, a pic of rounds in the Pmag would of really driven your point home. I'd love to see a comparison pic with the rounds presented higher with the pmag. I have two pmags and I too am a believer. I ran them both thru my Stag upper/Mega (non M4 ramped) lower fully loaded to 30 rounds with NO problem. I LOVE how they unload by hand easily. Harold H.
Rmplstlskn
12-12-07, 21:20
The more I study these mags, the more I'm convinced that they're a completely superior design.
Welcome to the COMPOUND fellow Kool-Aid drinker... :D
I have been selling off my Wilson Thermolds and my CP Stainless mags and have been buying PMAGs to replace them... I'm sold on them!
I'm holding off on my next big buy till they make them with MAGPUL plates... I know it is in the works and I would guess 1st quarter 2008 release....
Till then I have plenty, plus many USGI mags...
Rmpl
Repsectfully demigod, a pic of rounds in the Pmag would of really driven your point home. I'd love to see a comparison pic with the rounds presented higher with the pmag. I have two pmags and I too am a believer. I ran them both thru my Stag upper/Mega (non M4 ramped) lower fully loaded to 30 rounds with NO problem. I LOVE how they unload by hand easily. Harold H.
Anyone can check this out for themselves at home. But actually, the better comparison would be emptying the standard mag to get the ammo out of the way to even better show the difference.... I just didn't feel like unloading and reloading that mag.
A round physically can't feed any lower than the front of the mag body, and the front of the pmag is higher than a standard mag.
Anyone can check this out for themselves at home. But actually, the better comparison would be emptying the standard mag to get the ammo out of the way to even better show the difference.... I just didn't feel like unloading and reloading that mag.
A round physically can't feed any lower than the front of the mag body, and the front of the pmag is higher than a standard mag.
Mark this is a good heads up and look how long you waited to get these suckers:D
I have one sitting on my desk right now. Just so I can fiddle with it during the day and keep my mind off of work. :cool:
(FDE with no window by the way!)
For informational purposes, is there any loading guide that will allow the use of stripper clips and the Pmag?
Mark
Kurt Reifert
12-13-07, 13:22
Pmags are designed so that you can use stripper guide and clips.
I load mine using stripper clips regularly.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/anotherlefty/MVC-114S.jpg
Pmags are designed so that you can use stripper guide and clips.
I load mine using stripper clips regularly.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/anotherlefty/MVC-114S.jpg
Smokin!
I did not know that either. My research has not yet covered that area! :D
Smokin!
if any company has a knack for details, its Magpul. You see it in all their products.
I was unaware of the stripper clip guides as well.
You learn something new every day.
I guess I need to pay more attention.
For informational purposes, is there any loading guide that will allow the use of stripper clips and the Pmag?
Mark
You can also use the gadget by BetaMag that loads strippers.
http://www.betaco.com/img/lcms10.jpg
http://www.betaco.com/details.asp?rid=1&weapon=M16/M4
I have a couple of these, and they load very fast. The little magnet on the pusher pulls the empty clip back out.
Pmags are designed so that you can use stripper guide and clips.
I load mine using stripper clips regularly.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/anotherlefty/MVC-114S.jpg
They also work with the Maglula Benchloader and Lula.
Did anyone stop to think why M4 feedramps were developed in the first place?
It's because during FA fire that the bullets can and will be stripped and pushed forward much lower than usual.
Supposedly there's a dynamic that exists between the rounds and the mag spring and the rounds can actually not be up where they need to be- either because the spring isn't pushing them "fast" enough or they get bounced back down during recoil- I forget which.
But, the ramps are down lower for a reason. If the Pmags won't allow a round to be stripped low enough for the tip to hit the ramp then there is something wrong with the Pmag itself.
I understand Mark that your only point was that it negates the ramps. The tone of the thread has gone towards this being a good thing.
I don't think the M4 ramps were every really all that necessary in the first place so this isn't that big of a deal.
Did anyone stop to think why M4 feedramps were developed in the first place?
It's because during FA fire that the bullets can and will be stripped and pushed forward much lower than usual.
Supposedly there's a dynamic that exists between the rounds and the mag spring and the rounds can actually not be up where they need to be- either because the spring isn't pushing them "fast" enough or they get bounced back down during recoil- I forget which.
But, the ramps are down lower for a reason. If the Pmags won't allow a round to be stripped low enough for the tip to hit the ramp then there is something wrong with the Pmag itself.
I understand Mark that your only point was that it negates the ramps. The tone of the thread has gone towards this being a good thing.
I don't think the M4 ramps were every really all that necessary in the first place so this isn't that big of a deal.
I heard M4 feed-ramps came about because M855 behaves SLIGHTLY different from M193 when feeding in full-auto fire. THe M855 is slightly nosing lower, just hearsay though.
I am planning on buying 2 black PMAG's w/window. You guys have convinced me to try them. Anything worth buying once is worth buying twice, so I shall get two.
Just for fun I tryed the P Mags in a FA M4 and they worked as well as a USGI mags.
I heard M4 feed-ramps came about because M855 behaves SLIGHTLY different from M193 when feeding in full-auto fire. THe M855 is slightly nosing lower, just hearsay though.
I am planning on buying 2 black PMAG's w/window. You guys have convinced me to try them. Anything worth buying once is worth buying twice, so I shall get two.
Well yeah, that's pretty much it.
I'm sure Pmags do work well in FA. They were probably tested in FA extensively unlike how some other companies test their mags and then don't produce ;)
This is why there's a debate over the need for M4 ramps in the first place.
My point is simply that if the mag won't allow a bullet to leave low enough to hit a ramp then they weren't designed to work well with them- whether they are needed or not.
My point is simply that if the mag won't allow a bullet to leave low enough to hit a ramp then they weren't designed to work well with them- whether they are needed or not.
This is some of the most f00ked up internut logic I've ever read.:rolleyes:
But on the upside.... I now know to ignore every post I ever see from you from NOW on! :)
The entire point of my thread is that PMAGs are insanely superior in design.
I just wanted to see it on the screen again :D
This is some of the most f00ked up internut logic I've ever read.:rolleyes:
But on the upside.... I now know to ignore every post I ever see from you from NOW on! :)
I would appreciate it if you did NOT edit what I said and put words in my mouth. Please re-read the past 3 posts above your inaccurate quotation for clarification. Thankyou.
Saying any mag, PMAG or otherwise, introducing a round closer to the bore axis is bad is...well, ridiculous. The AR design does not require a "stall" prior to feed. Hence, no benefit to a round being introduced to the chamber lower than the axis. Similar to the 1911. I digress...
I don't drink Kool-Aid, but I am all about science. Some people on these forums...:rolleyes:
6920
http://shutter03.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/14/00B/74/D7/D2/53/ogzMrellyvfQlgdMq0q+74IVU3P5LcOb0236.jpg
http://shutter09.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/21/006/37/FF/98/AF/dvrKszNTEPlB-QVnAwrl65bLWK82E9-J0204.jpg
pmag
http://shutter09.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/20/00A/78/FF/AC/52/WfQCht0X49f3ZgzY7NC5qvVNQ9xok3j901F5.jpg
standard mag
http://shutter09.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/21/004/6B/DF/2A/13/9mmI1TgocH33mKPJWsZdKIo7D7dn7Wh001E2.jpg
I don't see much difference in where the mags sit in relation to the feed ramps.
One difference I do notice is a tighter fit, there is very little forward/rearward movement with the pmag once inserted into the magwell. With a standard mag there is some play which affectes where the tip of the bullet ends up. Both feed fine though.
pmag
http://shutter08.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/18/002/3F/6B/22/14/pZkg-BTYGlspUtFRH4EnS3+dKKkY3a6v01F7.jpg
http://shutter10.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/18/006/7F/7C/2A/54/l1ePg60OsNjMBmsGkfSTnsu-i3GCANmU0280.jpg
standard mag
http://shutter04.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/13/001/3D/9F/8F/C5/3mV6OKi8RXEsviSvV3GN2+PDKa00U98J0280.jpg
http://shutter10.pictures.aol.com/data/pictures/15/005/4D/DF/53/6A/+puZf6KwyXQF7Qu45rjXtG-nn+P8y+xk0280.jpg
I don't know if it's the camera angle or not, but it looks to me like rounds presented from the left/port side of the mag are presented lower to the feedramp than rounds presents from the right side. Is this the case? It definitely looks like th extended ramps help on that side, but not on the other.
I don't know if it's the camera angle or not, but it looks to me like rounds presented from the left/port side of the mag are presented lower to the feedramp than rounds presents from the right side. Is this the case? It definitely looks like th extended ramps help on that side, but not on the other.
I think it is the camera angles. The bullet tips when pushed forward both contact the feed ramps just above the cut outs left and right and with both style mags.
I figured by looking at a mag that the presentation of each round, regardless of which side it's being presented from, should be the same. The lips are formed at the same height. But looking at those pics it definitely looks like there's a difference. The only logical explanation is the camera angle.
Saying any mag, PMAG or otherwise, introducing a round closer to the bore axis is bad is...well, ridiculous. The AR design does not require a "stall" prior to feed. Hence, no benefit to a round being introduced to the chamber lower than the axis. Similar to the 1911. I digress...
I don't drink Kool-Aid, but I am all about science. Some people on these forums...:rolleyes:
You honestly didn't get what I said? M4 feedramps were designed because longer rounds COULD have a tendency to smack into the receiver too low. The ramp is there so the bullet can be guided upwards.
In the same scenario which this would occur, whether it happens often or not, would not be able to happen with a PMAG. The bullet tip would hit the front of the PMAG.
M4 feed ramps were implemented to cure feed issues caused by worn out magazines used in carbines fired full-auto. The PMAG may negate M4 ramps but so does a brand new aluminum magazine with an anti-tilt follower and new spring.
You honestly didn't get what I said? M4 feedramps were designed because longer rounds COULD have a tendency to smack into the receiver too low. The ramp is there so the bullet can be guided upwards.
In the same scenario which this would occur, whether it happens often or not, would not be able to happen with a PMAG. The bullet tip would hit the front of the PMAG.
No, the bullet noses down AFTER it is free of the mag from what I have seen on slow-motion videos of full auto fire. The PMAG from what is being said, introduces the round higher in the breech so as to allow a straighter path into the chamber.
No, the bullet noses down AFTER it is free of the mag from what I have seen on slow-motion videos of full auto fire. The PMAG from what is being said, introduces the round higher in the breech so as to allow a straighter path into the chamber.
Right. Now I'm no engineer, but from what I can see by just looking at the design.. the top round would need to do a JFK magic bullet to even hit the bottom of an M4 feedramped upper.
Robb Jensen
12-17-07, 09:35
The various slow motion videos I've seen of M16s and M4s shows that the rounds in the mag bounce up and down within the mag body as the gun is cycling which much more pronounced in M4s due to the more violent higher cyclic rate when fired on auto. This can become a problem if the rounds aren't all the way up against the feed lips as the bolt begins to push the top cartridge forward. If not all the way up the top round could dive nose down and hit the upper receiver and jam the rifle.
Stronger mag springs helps, slowing the cyclic rate helps (heavier buffers), M4 ramps helps, and better followers like Magpul anti-tilt followers helps (an upgrade from USGI green anti-tilt followers) and now PMAGs help even more.
A side effect of the M4 ramps is that they also allow for a little more positive feeding with different projectile ogives.
Do PMAGs negate M4 feed ramps? IMO no.
Do PMAGs negate M4 feed ramps? IMO no.
But if the round can't physically even touch that part of the ramp?
Granted, there's no guarantee that you'll always have a Pmag in the weapon.... And my point certainly isn't to opt out of the M4 feed ramp design. It's just that from what I see, it looks like the round would have to go through the front of the mag body to hit the bottom of an M4 feedramp.
(none of this discussion is monumetally critical in the grand scheme, I know :p )
I thought about the magpul followers while at work today- yeah, those pretty much keep the rounds from being able to nosedive due to a nosediving follower as well...
I'm still thinking there may be a little too much material at the front of the PMAG extending too high. It wouldn't hurt to not have that little bit that will block the tip of a lower round from hitting a ramp, would it?
The PMAG from what is being said, introduces the round higher in the breech so as to allow a straighter path into the chamber.
That is not possible with the M16.
M4 ramps aren't there because bullets normally sit in USGI mags too low. The PMAG doesn't let the rounds start higher. Remember the carrier keeps them from sitting any higher no matte what mag you use! During cycling when the carrier is moving, they can become succeptible to nosedives just the same.
9mm MP5 Machinenpistole
01-02-08, 21:52
I was inspecting these new space-age fancy Pmags when I noticed how well they line up to the feed ramps. So well that they cover up M4 feedramps. In other words, the tip of a bullet being fed would never even contact an M4 feedramp. :eek:
The more I study these mags, the more I'm convinced that they're a completely superior design...
Wow! Great observation! I did not notice until you point this out. I loaded up a PMag and looked for myself, very interesting. I do not know if the PMag eliminates the need the M4 Carbine’s barrel extension feed ramps, but it sure does not hurt!
Finally, a great M4 / M16 / AR15 magazine, the PMag!!!!!
It is interesting. I'm glad you checked for yourself too.
And I agree. I'm not saying to ditch the M4 feed ramps... Just that the Pmag does a better job of "aiming the" feeding round in the first place when compared to the USGI mag.
I drank to much of the Magpul Koolaide
I bought 25 of them ( black and Darkearth ) in the past 3 weeks:D :D
I drank to much of the Magpul Koolaide
I bought 25 of them ( black and Darkearth ) in the past 3 weeks:D :D
Hope you're not asking for pitty!:rolleyes:
Hope you're not asking for pitty!:rolleyes:
I dont pity I need someone to take away my CC :p
Jay Cunningham
01-05-08, 10:27
I dont pity I need someone to take away my CC :p
My wife would be happy to take it off of you. You might not be too happy with the result.
9mm MP5 Machinenpistole
01-07-08, 22:54
I drank to much of the Magpul Koolaide
I bought 25 of them ( black and Darkearth ) in the past 3 weeks:D :D
I just ordered 20 PMags myself - just the plian black ones! :D
You think I can get rid of my KNS pis now that I have a PMAG?:D
You think I can get rid of my KNS pis now that I have a PMAG?:D
?????
Just got 50 pmags, 20 in black 30 in FDE. Love them; will be ordering more in the next couple months.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.