Double Stack Mags

[RecoilRob]

I believe the pic enclosed is a grease gun mag and it is double-stack, single feed. But, most (if not all) SMG's and Military weapons use the double stack-double feed format for reliability reasons.

No question, the double feed mag will be more reliable given the same test conditions. However, the WEAPON will feed better from a single feed mag.

When dealing with feeding whatever cartridge, you are faced with the problem of aligning them to the chamber either in the magazine or during the feed cycle in the weapon.

If space permits, it probably IS more reliable to do the lateral alignment after being released from the magazine..ala Thompson et al.

But, most pistols do not have room inside the slide to accomodate a dual-feed mag and the attending shuffling of cartridge to the chamber.

So, I guess it comes down to proper metallurgy, design and cleanliness to assure weapon functionality.....regardless of design.

 

[Zak Smith]

Zak is pointing out that your arguments are all logically fallacious by any standards of serious debate.

It's funny that he hasn't stated a single fallacy -- only posted links to generalized discussions of logic.

You didn't follow any of those links, because they quite clearly list the fallacies you used. The last link was a general discussion of logic because you have not formed a rational argument supporting your proposition yet.

Here they are spelled out in the order referenced:

1. The burden of proof is always on the person asserting something. Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of Argumentum ad Ignorantiam, is the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion. The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise.

2. Hasty Generalization. Definition: The size of the sample is too small to support the conclusion.

3. Fallacy of Exclusion. Definition: Important evidence which would undermine an inductive argument is excluded from consideration. The requirement that all relevant information be included is called the "principle of total evidence".

4. Anonymous Authorities. Definition: The authority in question is not named. This is a type of appeal to authority because when an authority is not named it is impossible to confirm that the authority is an expert. However the fallacy is so common it deserves special mention. A variation on this fallacy is the appeal to rumour. Because the source of a rumour is typically not known, it is not possible to determine whether to believe the rumour. Very often false and harmful rumours are deliberately started in order to discredit an opponent.

Your epistemology is not robust.

 

[chopinbloc]

If the prime manufacturer and designer of the gun cannot produce a satisfactory magazine, it's a pretty good indicator that such magazines are difficult to produce.

if i might add something - the m9 is identical to the beretta m92f except for markings. the army awarded the contract to the company, in part because the pistol was drop dead reliable but then awarded the contract for the most failure prone componenet of any weapon - the magazine - to other manufacturers. some of these off brand mags work, some do not. this happens with single stack 1911 mags as well, btw. factory beretta mags work flawlessly in any reasonable conditions and only stop up when full of enough junk to stop any other magazine, single stack 1911 included. oh, and we're talking massive quantities of crap.

my glock mags work perfectly, no matter what. the after market scherer extended mag was crap. for some reason, my ten round kimber double stack mags seem to put up with just a little more dirt than the thirteen rounders for the same gun. neither is happy with any significant amount of dirt. if i have to tell my glocks to stop making fun of the kimber one more time.....

a double stack mag MAY be slightly more prone to failure but there are so many other factors involved as to make this irrelevant. a properly designed and manufactured mag will work in adverse conditions, regardless of whether it is single or double column. also, it seems to me that the larger the caliber, the heavier the cartridge, the lower the round count that can be reliably fed. it seems that by moving to a double stack you can add a couple more rounds and maintain reliability, though. for instance - seven, MAYBE eight seems the upper limit for single column .45 mags to be reliable over long term use. ten to MAYBE thirteen seems reliable over the long term with a double stack such as the glock style. and that brings me to my final point: we all know that there are crappy single stack 1911 mags out there but has anyone ever PERSONALLY encountered a factory glock mag that didn't work properly and HADN'T been physically destroyed or filled with quick setting cement? this is not meant to rehash the 1911 v glock argument, we all know that the 1911 is superior because it won't melt while you burn to death in a house fire. good 1911 mags are perfectly reliable. i'm saying this because the reliability of glock mags should prove that there is no fundamental deficiency in the double column, single feed design.

 

[Zundfolge]

So let me get this straight, Vern here has had problems with a Beretta pistol with a double stack magazine therefore ALL double stack magazine fed pistols are less reliable than ALL single stack magazine fed pistols?


So my Steyr M40 (which has never had a feed problem in several thousand rounds) is somehow less reliable by design than a Lorcin which is a single stack.

Clearly because of the feed problems many Lorcin owners have experienced isn't because that particular model of gun is crap, its because single stack magazines are less reliable than double stack.



Vern, go write on the board a thousand times; Correlation does NOT equal Causation.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

So let me get this straight, Vern here has had problems with a Beretta pistol with a double stack magazine therefore ALL double stack magazine fed pistols are less reliable than ALL single stack magazine fed pistols?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds to me like you've got a personality issue here.

Double-stack, single-feed magazines require the cartridges to roll as they move into single feed position. As I pointed out, under severe conditions, this can impact reliability. As someone else pointed out, what you have is essentially more "moving parts" in such a magazine -- and it's an old engineering rule that more moving parts tends to affect reliability.

So my Steyr M40 (which has never had a feed problem in several thousand rounds) is somehow less reliable by design than a Lorcin which is a single stack.

Don't be silly. There are many other things that affect reliability than magazine design.

Clearly because of the feed problems many Lorcin owners have experienced isn't because that particular model of gun is crap, its because single stack magazines are less reliable than double stack.

Let me point out -- in a friendly fashion -- when you play the fool, some people may think you aren't playing.

Vern, go write on the board a thousand times; Correlation does NOT equal Causation.

Zundfolge, go write on the board a thousand times; In the future I will try to debate like a gentleman.

 

[HSMITH]

95% of my singlestack mag experience has been with the M1911 type. 75% of my doublestack mag experience has also been with the M1911 type.

I have had FAR more trouble with singlestack magazines than I have with doublestacks. Why? Quality of manufacture, plain and simple. My doublestacks came after I learned that quality is way more important than quantity in magazines. My doublestack mags have all been OEM or premium aftermarket where my singlestack mags included some cheap garbage.

Since going to OEM or quality premium aftermarket mags my magazine troubles are flat gone regardless of gun used.

Doublestack magazines are not more prone to failure than singlestack mags provided they are of equal quality. I've only got a couple hundred thousand rounds under my belt to form this opinion so take it for what it is worth to you.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

95% of my singlestack mag experience has been with the M1911 type. 75% of my doublestack mag experience has also been with the M1911 type.

I have had FAR more trouble with singlestack magazines than I have with doublestacks. Why? Quality of manufacture, plain and simple. My doublestacks came after I learned that quality is way more important than quantity in magazines. My doublestack mags have all been OEM or premium aftermarket where my singlestack mags included some cheap garbage.

Since going to OEM or quality premium aftermarket mags my magazine troubles are flat gone regardless of gun used.

Doublestack magazines are not more prone to failure than singlestack mags provided they are of equal quality. I've only got a couple hundred thousand rounds under my belt to form this opinion so take it for what it is worth to you.

Quality of manufacture is one major point in determining reliability, no doubt about it.

However, the double-stack, single-feed design does carry a penalty. It requires cartridges to roll as they move into feed position, and that is a potential failure point. All other things being equal, single stack and double-stack, double-feed magazines will tend to be more reliable under severe conditions.

And I've fired a round or two myself -- including under what I would call "severe conditions."

 

[sobrbiker883]

Please take no offense at me being a newbie to this board and chiming my $.02 in.

On the issue at hand, my stand is that some mags that feed double into a single (pistol style) are better designed than others. While the large dimple in the Beretta mags makes an attempt, I believe if you look inside a Glock mag there are rails parallel to the length of the mag to allow debris to work its way clear while the rounds are "spinning" into the tighter necked area.

That being said, I would counter myself that the good old dependable single stack 1911-style slide rounds straight up the sides all the time, therefore debunking my prior statement.........interesting.

At this point I harken back to the original posit-that its the Beretta mags causing the hooplah about unreliability. My next train of thought goes away from the magazine design to the pistol design. Beretta's have an open slide that will allow more deritus in while firing in dirty/dusty conditions. Sigs, BHP's, 1911's, Glocks have only an ejection port.

I blame the slide. (Even though I just bought a PT99 Taurus). My PT99 will not ride on my hip on my bike for thousands of miles and be expected to fire when needed, that's my 1911's job. The Taurus will see range time and plinking, not Defend My Life duty (unless its the closest gun handy when some crank fiend thinks my place would be good for a home invasion).

I hope my logic is acceptable, and its just my opinion, I could be wrong. I come to learn, not teach.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Beretta's have an open slide that will allow more deritus in while firing in dirty/dusty conditions. Sigs, BHP's, 1911's, Glocks have only an ejection port.

Some say the open slide is there to increase reliability -- certainly every "reliability package" I know of for the M1911 involves lowering the ejection port to provide a bigger window to throw the empties out of.

But you could be right -- an attempt to make it eject more reliably may have opened the gun to admit more crud.

 

[Correia]

Interestingly enough, the magazines that Vern is referencing have a different set of issues than being double stack. In conversations with unit armorers, the problem mags were the type that had the corrosion resistant coating applied to the internals of the magazines. (per .gov spec) Apparently sand likes to stick to this surface instead of dropping free. The mags that did not have the coating did not have as many reliability issues.

Outside of the US Military, the most popular new pistol in the middle east right now is the Glock. Which is also a double stack gun. They are popular amongst the contractors.

From my own experiments, I know that lots of sand introduced directly into pretty much any magazine will shut the gun down. Single or double. Strangely enough the one magazine that could take the most sand before shutting the gun down was the AK47 mag. Sand between the cartridges and sand between the follower and side walls slows the action. The AK follower allowed more to drop through. The FAL mag was the easiest rifle mag to jam with sand, followed by the AR.

On pistols, a single stack 7 round Colt mag will have problems with sand just as easily as a Glock mag. I don't think the cartridge turning to move into the single position has nearly as much to do with it, as the space between the follower and the side wall allowing sand to fall through.

Vern, no offense intended, and I respect your service, but there weren't exactly a whole lot of double stack handguns in our inventory during Vietnam.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Vern, no offense intended, and I respect your service, but there weren't exactly a whole lot of double stack handguns in our inventory during Vietnam.

I'm not basing my comments on double-stack, single feed magazines on Viet Nam experience, but on more current experience. (Although I did take a Browning hi-Power, made by Inglis of Canada, off the body of an NVA lieutenant.)