|
|
Post by UnforseenWeather on Nov 5, 2012 11:19:46 GMT -5
Regular Magpuls on M1A mags shouldnt be a problem. NICE! Thanks for the clarification. Whenever these are ready in a Minuteman or single pouches, I am fully onboard. Confirmed: M14 mags with Magpuls work just fine. It is a good, snug fit. Regular M14 mags work fine as do FAL mags. |
|
|
|
Post by jsbcody on Nov 5, 2012 20:01:43 GMT -5
Hawkeye:
Any update on H&K G3/91 mags fitting in the pouches?
I do not have enough cash to get a SCAR 17 but more than enough for PTR 91 GI model.
PTR 91 black GI model with optic rail: $1100
H&K G3 Mags: 30 "used" (no marks/dents/rust on mags): $100
PCS Heavy Recoil Buffer: $70
Improved trigger pack from Bill Springfield: $170
light mods to original trigger pack: free to $30
H&K sight tool: $30
H&K Deluxe Armorer Kit and Spare Parts: $100
Total: $1600
SCAR 17: $2700
Giessle trigger: $400 (if you can find one)
SCAR 17 Mags: $43 + shipping = $50 each ( $500 for 10 mags and $1500 for 30 mags)
SCAR 17 spare parts: few to none
Total: $3600 for SCAR 17 and 10 mags........$4600 for Scar 17 and 30 mags.
So you can see why I am going with PTR 91 GI......This way I have more money to buy ammo and stuff from you! ;D
|
|
4track
Junior Member
Posts: 276
|
Post by 4track on Nov 5, 2012 20:31:49 GMT -5
NICE! Thanks for the clarification. Whenever these are ready in a Minuteman or single pouches, I am fully onboard. Confirmed: M14 mags with Magpuls work just fine. It is a good, snug fit. Regular M14 mags work fine as do FAL mags. Thank you, again, Sir. I am really excited for these. |
|
|
|
Post by Hawkeye on Nov 5, 2012 20:54:27 GMT -5
Cody, I hear ya.  Nothing certain yet though on the mags. Personally....I'd go with an FAL over PTR, but thats just me. |
|
|
|
Post by jsbcody on Nov 5, 2012 21:33:14 GMT -5
Cody, I hear ya. Nothing certain yet though on the mags. Personally....I'd go with an FAL over PTR, but thats just me. I have always liked the FAL but right now, the PTR makes a little more cents ....plus I know a couple guys who know the G3 system inside and out. Just think if the US Army had gone with the FAL instead of the M14.....At a course I attended Larry Vickers posed this question to us and he believed that the Army would still be using the FAL even now. Then he said, just imagine what the evolution of the FAL would have been like if it was in anyway similar to the evolution of the original M16 into the M4. If you need any G3 mags, let me know and I will mail a few to you. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by UnforseenWeather on Nov 5, 2012 22:04:47 GMT -5
I have to agree with Vickers there- especially if the US had adopted the FAL in a caliber between 7.62x51 and 5.56... Totally rhetorical thought but the more I get to know the FAL the more I appreciate the system.
|
|
hwi
New Member
Posts: 127
|
Post by hwi on Nov 6, 2012 0:31:35 GMT -5
Then he said, just imagine what the evolution of the FAL would have been like if it was in anyway similar to the evolution of the original M16 into the M4. Oh man, this will have me day dreaming for a few days. What could have been. |
|
|
|
Post by masakari on Nov 7, 2012 23:11:22 GMT -5
I have two of your AR15 bandoleers and they are excellent, im sure that this will be too. Ill be ordering one as soon as they are available.
|
|
4track
Junior Member
Posts: 276
|
Post by 4track on Nov 29, 2012 20:42:32 GMT -5
Well, I recently learned that these will only be offered in a three magazine configuration for the chest rigs.  For a rifle that utilizes twenty round magazines, this is really disappointing, considering that it would restrict one to carrying only sixty rounds of ammunition...eighty, if another magazine is stashed in the inside pocket. For my uses, I would consider three magazines to be a good amount for the bandolier, maybe, but not in the chest rig. I hope that you guys will reconsider, or else, eventually produce stand alone pouches, so that users who would like to carry more magazines can do so using a MOLLE chest rig. |
|
|
|
Post by Hawkeye on Nov 29, 2012 23:01:10 GMT -5
Its mainly a simple matter of size/geometry. Putting 4 .308 mags on a Minuteman is going to put the molle webbing under the armpits of most folks, if not actually behind them. Also, as with any other weapon, most of your spare mags should be carrier in/on your ruck. That all said, we'll try to look into a 4 mag rig, but it wont be right away. One could always run a MM and a Bandoleer....that would give a total of 6 mags. |
|
|
|
Post by UnforseenWeather on Nov 30, 2012 8:36:52 GMT -5
I have a wide chest and someone like me ciuld probabl get 4 mags across, but again the Molle loops would be in a strange spot. I keep envisioning something where there is partial overlap of the 20rd mags, so you can have that 4th mag and still have access to your Molle pouches and the ability to prone out... But it's stuck in my head and I don't have time to mock it up... This is a learnable moment though: perhaps this should prompt a discussion on why you might or might not want to carry a rifle with an ammo capacity penalty?  (I went through the same thing with my beloved 1911s- great gun, great caliber, but 11rds max with an extended mag that hangs under the gun? I still love them, but carry and train with modified M&Ps. ) |
|
4track
Junior Member
Posts: 276
|
Post by 4track on Dec 1, 2012 0:28:09 GMT -5
...This is a learnable moment though: perhaps this should prompt a discussion on why you might or might not want to carry a rifle with an ammo capacity penalty?... Well, in my case (with the M14) I own one more for its historical significance and nostalgic appeal...more of a hobby piece, I suppose. However, I do not know of any 7.62x51mm service rifle that does have a standard magazine capacity greater than twenty rounds. Also, for some citizens, their governing authority may limit and/or restrict the magazine capacity and rifle features available to them. California and New Jersey come to mind. In those types of areas, rifles like M14s may be all they can reasonably use for defensive purposes, and a 60 round maximum load out will severely limit their options. Anyway, as I stated, I really LOVE the UW Gear pouch design, but I want to be able to carry 4+1 magazines, at least, so I will just hold out until (hopefully) single pouches or custom orders become available. |
|
|
|
Post by UnforseenWeather on Dec 1, 2012 14:02:15 GMT -5
I understand completely. My M1A is kind of a SAPR as it is. And with that purpose in mind, I will stick with a 3 mag bandoleer and run it strapped to the side as it is designed.
|
|
4track
Junior Member
Posts: 276
|
Post by 4track on Dec 2, 2012 13:26:19 GMT -5
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here.
However, I have been doing some serious thinking and reevaluating my 7.62x51 load out needs, due to this thread.
I still feel that four magazines in the chest rig would be more ideal than only three, due to the limited capacity of the twenty round magazines.
I base this upon some crude measurements of both weight and width, comparing a four magazine 7.62x51 chest rig with three and four magazine 7.62x39 and 5.56x45 chest rigs.
The weight of four 20 round 7.62x51 mags is very comparable to three/four 30 round 7.62x39 and also four/three 30 round 5.56x45 magazines.
Also, as for a four magazine 7.62x51 being too wide, according to my estimates, it should be as narrow, if not more narrow, than the four mag 5.56x45 swamp fox chest rigs.
Again, I don't mean to be irritating on this subject.
Rather, I am just wanting to keep this discussion going, to best determine what load out a 7.62x51 shooter would be best served with.
|
|
|
|
Post by UnforseenWeather on Dec 2, 2012 14:21:37 GMT -5
Curious, have you considered running a fourth spare mag on your belt? That's where my primary AR reloads go. Might be a solution for a fourth mag.
|
|
Nothing certain yet though on the mags.
(I went through the same thing with my beloved 1911s- great gun, great caliber, but 11rds max with an extended mag that hangs under the gun? I still love them, but carry and train with modified M&Ps. )