Rifle Magazine Capacity - does it matter?

>and 20 or 25 for full size cartridges
With the caveat being non rimmed cartridges anyway. If you are in Russia they still go with 10rd mags for full size cartridges thanks to the rim on x54r preventing double stack mags. They are similar in length to 20rd .308 mags though the conventional wisdom on optimal size seems to be about the same.

>Having a high-capacity magazine costs you almost nothing except an extra maybe 12 ounces when you're out and about, while limiting the amount you carry has the potential to end your life.
You seem to be assuming defensive carry only, despite the fact that I just bitched about APPLICATION.

State your application first. If you're hunting with your rifle then a big-ass 30 round banana sticking out of your rifle costs you a lot more than just a little extra weight.

>>The answer to "how many rounds should you carry" is always "as many as you'll be comfortable carrying every day"
If we're talking CCW, sure. But you didn't specify, and OP seems to be asking about something totally different.

God the gun grabbing on this board.
Look shareblue we don't care you will never change our minds

Attached: why 4chan trolling dont work lefty.png (300x262, 95K)

>Here's a clip proving my point
Most of this video is the same clip played multiple times at varying qualities and with more or less cut out. The criminals aren't ramming the door with a truck, running away, and ramming the door again.

He fires like six or seven shots, and the criminals start running as soon as they realize the store's not empty.

"Armed robbers"? This appears to be an attempted smash and grab. They're burglars who think they're going to steal from a closed, empty store. They don't return fire and are not visibly armed.

>if you have five guys breaking into your house at night, stopping to reload is a death sentence.
Is it? It only takes a couple of seconds, and you have to run out of ammo first. If you're in an open fight against five fanatically determined, prepared home invaders, you're probably fucked anyway. If you're behind cover waiting to ambush them, it's unlikely that you'll run dry with no opportunity to reload. If you're up against typical criminals, they probably change their priorities from profit to escape at the first sign of armed resistance.

>Suppressing fire is actually a thing
Suppressing fire is generally a group tactic. It's "fire and move": you fire, while your buddy moves to a position to destroy them. The trouble with using suppressing fire alone is that your target just takes cover while you run yourself out of ammo in a couple of minutes.

>the end result of this argument is should the government limit you by force
>God the gun grabbing on this board.
God, the retards on this board. This thread isn't about what the law should be.

Your concern about catching 30s on things makes me think you're a Californian with a bunch of 10s rather than 10/30s, who is worried that pulling out your souvineer 30s from Vegas when SHTF might not be the best idea. Because, otherwise, you'd be used to how 30s handle in a gun.

OP here. I'm Canadian. What we've got are 5-round magazines, 10-round "pistol" magazines (which are legal to own without a pistol license and use in rifles), and basically everything else but pinned to 5 rounds (the pin can be drilled out in seconds if you get in a situation where you have higher priorities than staying out of trouble with the law).

Pinned magazines are popular here because they're inexpensive, since 30-rounders are the standard and pinning is a cheap process. It's also an item of faith that the first thing everyone's going to do if things go seriously bad is drill out the pins.

I like compact guns, I hunt, and I prefer a conventional grip over a pistol grip. Pic related. Makes a nice bush gun and survival gun, with SHTF relevance (and yes, not restricted like the AR-15). Without the protruding pistol grip, flush-fit magazines are especially nice.

I am used to how 30s handle in a gun, and I don't like it. I don't like having them stick out of the gun, I don't like having them stick out of my pockets. I don't like them bumping the bench at the range, I don't like them bumping the ground in prone position, I don't like them hooking on things when I'm carrying them or getting them out of a vehicle.

The way I see it, 30s are basically for suppressing fire. When are you going to do suppressing fire? When you're in the military, with a reliable chain of supply, on a crew trained in fire and move tactics, with a variety of weapons including grenades to efficiently destroy a pinned-down enemy and a radio to call for backup. As a civilian in a SHTF situation, you're going to want to stick to aimed fire. Even if you somehow end up with a trained crew and you get stuff like grenades, you can't count on resupply or backup, and you don't want to be loaded down with ammo.

For aimed fire, 10 shots is a lot. "What if I need to defeat more than 3 determined, skilled, armed enemies in under 10 seconds?" is based in fantasy, not reality.

Attached: su-16.jpg (650x433, 113K)

Fuck you gayfag. If I want to buy a 2,000 round belt feed backpack to hook up to my AR-15 so I can blast paper, I will!

truth, but it's no ones business how big my mags can and can't be

A lot of that may have to do with carrying the magazine on your person. Generally the STANAG 30 rounders or FAL 20-rounder size is what best fits into webbing, while anything larger gets a bit unweildy. While larger mags do seem to make it harder to go prone, automatic rifles like the RPK or L2A1 seem to get around that pretty easily with a bipod. On the extreme end of things, the DP-28 magazine is excellent on the gun - high capacity, low profile, etc. - but a pain in the ass to carry spares for. There's also the issue of weight on a gun, but depending on the cartridge that may be less of an issue. A 75 rounder on an AK would be too heavy for me to want to use it in close engagements/home defense vice a 30-40 rounder, but I'd absolutely take the extra size and weight of a 30 round FAL mag over a 20 rounder in most situations.

>I don't like... I don't like... I don't like... The way I see it...
Your entire argument based on your personal preferences that don't necessarily line up with the rest of the population. Some people like shoving three foot horse cocks up their ass, and their business is their business but if they were start saying everyone without a silicone packed colon is wrong then we'd rightfully call them a retard.

Just because you don't see a use for 30 round mags doesn't mean they don't exist, especially from a standpoint of not legally being able to consider them. It's like a Canadian politician saying "No one hunts with AR-15s in Canada", well no shit, it's illegal but we would if we could. Boar and coyote control is much more efficient and humane with un-gimped mags. 5-10 rounds in a home defense situation may be "enough" most of the time but what about the times it hasn't been? Are those people just shit out of luck according to your standards? You don't seem to understand that a regular civilian will likely need more rounds, not less, than a cop or a soldier from the stress and adrenaline in a gunfight they're not trained for.

>"What if I need to defeat more than 3 determined, skilled, armed enemies in under 10 seconds?" is based in fantasy, not reality.
You really do talk like a gun grabber.

> the first thing everyone's going to do if things go seriously bad is drill out the pins.
And why do you think that is?

Go fuck yourself

More capacity is more fun so fuck off. Also it matters for competition shooters.

>Just because you don't see a use for 30 round mags doesn't mean they don't exist
I never said I don't see a use for them, I said that it seems more like a matter of personal preference than a clear practical advantage one way or the other. 30-rounders have more capacity, but are awkward in various ways.

It's the same as how high-capacity magazines are basically novelty items. Most people stick to 30 or less, because bigger ones are too much trouble to carry. People go to 20 (the original M-16 capacity) when they find the 30s get in the way of prone or bench fire. They go to 10 for a flush fit and to be pocket-size. They're all reasonable choices.

>>"What if I need to defeat more than 3 determined, skilled, armed enemies in under 10 seconds?" is based in fantasy, not reality.
>You really do talk like a gun grabber.
You really talk like you wear a Tapout shirt and play Call of Duty. You have to be realistic about what scenarios you can win. Situations where you need more than ten rounds, and have no opportunity to reload are probably ones where you're fucked anyway.

I started this out with a video on how little changing mags slows down sustained fire. Obviously, I don't think it's useful to restrict magazine capacity legally.

>And why do you think that is?
Because it would be idiotic to carry around magazines about three times as big as they need to be for their usable capacity? If I'm going to put up with the bulk of a 30-round magazine, I want it to hold 30 rounds. It's cheaper, too, to buy one 30-rounder than three 10-rounders. Hell, it's cheaper to buy one 30-rounder than one 10-rounder, thanks to economies of scale. 30s are the military standard.

If SHTF, I want at least five 10-rounders, maybe ten. With 30-rounders, three seems like a good number: one in the gun, two in the vest.

>it seems more like a matter of personal preference than a clear practical advantage
You contradict yourself constantly about there being no advantage. You've been stating this entire thread how there's no real need for a 30rd mag then immediately switching gears and saying how stupid it would be to not have one in any real life scenario.

>You really talk like you wear a Tapout shirt and play Call of Duty
Unfortunately they don't make Tapout apparel in 10^6XL, so I'm out of luck. I find it funny that your argument leads itself to a situation where self defense would require a tacticool rig setup just to hold the amount of mags you'd need. Yes, I agree that mag changes can be very quick and I like to use the video you posted to show why mag restrictions are bullshit (in fact that's the point of the video itself). However, for someone to get woken up by a window getting smashed, what sounds sillier:
Grab my rifle with a standard 30rd mag, shove a 2nd mag in the PJ pocket and check it out.
Grab my rifle with a 10/30 round mag, throw on my chest rig with five extra 10/30 round mags and check it out.
Grab my rifle with a 5/30 mag, throw on my chest rig with ten extra 5/30 mags, slap on the thigh holder with additional 5/30 mag and check it out.
All the same amount of ammo, sounds pretty reasonable with a normal mag, sounds cod level larping with mag capped mags. A 30rd mag gives you options and rounds right there, right now without needing to figure out where all your extra mags are going. And of course without a proper pouch system that slight reload time gets longer quickly.

This guy agrees with me:
>Because it would be idiotic to carry around magazines about three times as big as they need to be for their usable capacity?

>Obviously, I don't think it's useful to restrict magazine capacity legally
Then why limit yourself? The only negative you've presented is "it could get snagged on something". Let me tell you from experience, it doesn't.

>You contradict yourself constantly about there being no advantage.
You lack basic reading comprehension skills. I present the pros and cons as I see them.

>You've been stating this entire thread how there's no real need for a 30rd mag then immediately switching gears and saying how stupid it would be to not have one in any real life scenario.
Idiot. I only said it would be stupid to use a pinned magazine, and have the bulk of a 30-round magazine while actually only carrying 5 rounds. Obviously, a pinned magazine is strictly inferior to the same magazine unpinned, but there are purpose-built 10-round magazines that fit flush (or nearly flush) to the magwell. You are the only person here of such grossly inferior intelligence to think there should be any discussion of whether a 30-round magazine pinned to 5 is better or worse than a normal 30-round magazine.

>The only negative you've presented is "it could get snagged on something"
No it wasn't, you absolute fucking garbage.

>Let me tell you
Yeah, no. I am entirely through reading shit you type.

I was hoping for some kind of real discussion on the merits and drawbacks of different size rifle magazines. All I get is, "SHALL", "nothing matters, you pussies only use guns as toys", and "more is more betterer than less!"

Holy shit, Jow Forums. I know you can be better than this.

Have you ever hunted hogs? A 30 round magazine is extremely valuable when you're chasing down a horde of those bastards and want to kill every last one you can.
They're fast and change direction fast, especially the small ones, so you're guaranteed a few misses. Plus they're robust, and it may take 2-5 rounds to properly put one down depending on your shot angle and placement.
Ethics are not a concern when hunting hogs either so the idea of waiting to take a proper shot doesn't always apply. It's less a hunt and more a genocide.

>Have you ever hunted hogs?
Often. I live on rural land in Texas. They're everywhere, year-round. I shot three yesterday. I agree the large magazine capacity is great for them, which I pointed out in my post >>Plus they're robust, and it may take 2-5 rounds to properly
Use a bigger gun. You can kill them more efficiently if you don't have to repeatedly shoot the same one.

I'd also highly advise a suppressor if you aren't using one already. They are far less likely to bolt when the first round goes off.

I've got nothing against big mags. My point was just that it's silly to discuss magazine capacity without discussing the application we're talking about. The two go hand-in-hand. Some jobs call for big mags, some jobs call for small ones.

>I only said it would be stupid to use a pinned magazine.
Along with stating that civilians don't need that much ammo anyway, ignoring the realities of self defense, and starting off your thread with some bog standard gun control dribble along with assertions that a long magazine could totally get you killed in the same realm of possible as running out of ammo. But you're right, having a bunch of loose 5 or ten round mags shoved in your pockets is just as tactically feasible as a single mag in your gun.

>No it wasn't, you absolute fucking garbage.
Oh sorry, it could get snagged on something AND you, personally, don't like how it "feels". My apologies, we'll change the global opinion on magazine sizes to fit your preferences.

>I was hoping for some kind of real discussion on the merits and drawbacks of different size rifle magazines. All I get is...
"I got an answer that isn't the one I wanted"

Look, if you want to use a five round mag because you like how it feels when you're out hunting a single deer, that is perfectly fine and no one should fault you. But you came here and started a thread with a poor argument for the tactical carry of five or ten round mags and are whining that no one agrees with you.
I'll leave you with this question:
>you can't fit extra magazines in your normal-size jacket pockets
What kind of nancy fucking jackets are you wearing?

>Use a bigger gun.
300 HAMR is promising. They're claiming 30-30 performance out of an AR-15 with just a barrel swap. It's basically 300 BLK tweaked without consideration for subsonics. Hopefully there'll be cheap ammo for it on the shelf before long.

What's wrong with a .308?

Or if it must be in an AR-15 for some reason, supersonic 300blk works just fine too

>SHTF
>With 30-rounders, three seems like a good number: one in the gun, two in the vest.
Do you think soldiers only carry three mags?

Your idea of a proper amount of ammo seems woefully inadequate across the board.

You can't upgrade an AR-15 to 308 with a barrel swap.

>You can't upgrade an AR-15 to 308 with a barrel swap.

Who said you needed to? It is possible to own multiple firearms for different applications, right?

If an AR-15 is your hog-hunting gun, and you like it but you want more killing power than 223, there are some obvious advantages to getting there through a barrel swap.

Anyway, when you're firing rapidly, .308's a bit of a hard kicker. 223's good for hogs in the first place because it's suited to fast shooting.

I made my case against expecting to fight like a soldier when SHTF. Soldiers fight on trained teams with diverse weapons and frequent opportunities to fully resupply. They fire literally thousands of rounds per enemy casualty.

If you're not going to have thousands of rounds per enemy you have to deal with, you can't fight that way. Trying is just going to result in you starting out overloaded with ammo, and ending up empty and helpless before your enemies.