PDA

View Full Version : In Search of the 6.8mm PMAG



Army Chief
31 March 2009, 10:01
No, to the best of my knowledge, it doesn't exist -- which is more or less my point. Is anyone aware of discussion (formal or otherwise) along these lines in view of the recent E/PMAG product line expansion?

I realize Magpul is extremely reluctant to release information on products in development, but this would seem to be a no-brainer, provided the development costs could be kept to a minimum. With more and more shooters considering the addition of at least one 6.8mm-based platform to their arsenal, wouldn't a SHOT 2010 debut make a certain amount of sense?

AC

rob_s
31 March 2009, 10:29
I think there are issues with the size of the round and the thickness of the polymer not making it possible. At least that's the line I've always been fed.

Stickman
31 March 2009, 10:49
I think there are issues with the size of the round and the thickness of the polymer not making it possible. At least that's the line I've always been fed.



In addition, the market demand for 6.8 isn't anywhere near what it is for the 5.56, which would give little reason for dedicating resources to a project which would only detract from a mainstream product which can't be molded fast enough to meet demand.

zero7one
31 March 2009, 11:00
I can see how the thickness of the polymer could cause issues with a larger round. Would the possibility of a single-stack 6.8 PMAG be feasible? The length of the magazine could be lengthened to accommodate more rounds, maybe in the 20 range? While doing the POF 6.8 review, I wished that a PMAG 6.8 version existed. The POF 6.8 steel magazine only accommodates 25 rounds, so who knows how long a PMAG would have to be to get a reasonable amount of rounds.

Army Chief
31 March 2009, 11:28
In addition, the market demand for 6.8 isn't anywhere near what it is for the 5.56, which would give little reason for dedicating resources to a project which would only detract from a mainstream product which can't be molded fast enough to meet demand.

I was tracking on the first part, but wondering aloud if perhaps the development cycle wouldn't be greatly simplified, since this would merely be an adaptation of an already-successful product in 5.56. As Rob points out, that might not really be the case at all, given dimensional differences.

The "can't be molded fast enough" component to this is really the most compelling, in my view. If you're already strapped to meet demand on your most successful product, I'm not sure how logical it would be to diversify and further tax production capabilities. There is sound logic here.

AC

caporider
31 March 2009, 19:03
I'll bet Tangodown has an inside line on a 6.8 polymer mag, considering how strong the 5-sided closed box design of the ARC is, and how the top and bottom of the ARC are molded separately. This means, to me, that the bottom portion of the ARC might be made slightly bigger to acommodate the larger 6.8 rounds while maintaining the thickness of the polymer and keeping the top dimensionally correct for an AR mag well.

Army Chief
1 April 2009, 02:47
... the market demand for 6.8 isn't anywhere near what it is for the 5.56 ...

The magazine issue aside, is this something you see changing a bit with time, or have we already crested the 6.8mm hill? I'm wondering if this might become more relevant as ammunition costs rise, in much the same way that the 1994 magazine capacity ban drove so many back to larger caliber handguns.

Not a direct comparison, of course, but if/when the price of a box of 5.56mm ever nears that of a decent 6.8mm practice load, the primary argument in favor of the former would seem to boil down to availability. All else being equal, I like the Sturmgewehr-esque properties of the 6.8mm, and am seriously considering a build project in that caliber.

AC

rob_s
1 April 2009, 04:11
Top shelf 5.56 already costs the same as the identical make/model in 6.8, and in fact this is what drove me to place an order for a 6.8. Combine this with the fact that I can get better ballistics out of a 12.5" 6.8 than I can out of a 16" 5.56 and the decision became a no brainer.

What kills the 6.8 is the availability, or lack thereof, of quality blasting ammo at a good price. However, this isn't such a big deal to me as I'm more interested in having a .22, 5.56, and 6.8 uppers (all identical) for the same lower.

On the topic at hand, I don't see 6.8 taking off as a blasting round even if someone like Wolf or Barnaul were to start making it, and the demand for high-quality, high-capacity, inexpensive magazines will therefore always be very low.

FWIW, I'm having the same problem with suppressors. There are almost zero dedicated 6.8 suppressors, and certainly none at a price-point that I'd like. problem is, the group of people that want what I want (fast attach, flash hider mount, dedicated 6.8, $600 range) AND would really and truly follow through on buying one could probably be counted on my fingers and toes.

Paulo_Santos
1 April 2009, 11:57
As already been stated, the 6.8SPC round is fatter and takes up more room that the 5.56 round. Magpul has come out on several occassions and indicated that they cannot make a PMAG in 6.8. Although I like the PMAgs, I don't see it a big deal when the PRI, Barrett, and even the C-Products 25 Round mags work very well.

The PRI comes in 25, 15, 10, and 5 rounders and you can load the bullets out to 2.3", which is great if you handload. You can also get them for about $33.

The Barrett mags are 30 round magazines and are 1" longer than a standard USGI mag. The also work great, but you have to load the bullets to 2.250" and they are expensive at $40.

The C-Products 25 ROund mags are surprisingly very good. Their early ones had some issues, but they have fixed the feed angle and they are very reliable. The weakness of the C-Products mags are the cheap springs. After a while they rust and become weak. If you replace them with the ISMI or Superior Shooting Mag Springs, they are very reliable. You can also load the bullets out to 2.280", which is pretty good and they are affordable at $15-$17. C-Products also makes 17, 10, and 5 round straight mags. The 5 and 10 are pretty good, but the 17 rounders suck major a$$.

What I would really like to see is a 25round USGI Aluminum type mag with anti-tilt followers for $20. That would be ideal.

And yes, I have used and tested most of the above mags, except for the C-Products staright mags, so I'm not just talking out of my a$$.

As far as the 6.8SPC round, I am obviosly biased as hell, but it is growing in popularity, especially in the Hunting Community. Until someone comes out with a decent affordable plinking round, it won't be adopted any time soon in the LE community. Most departments see the 5.56 as "Good Enough".[:D][:D]

tac40
14 April 2009, 07:23
Good read on the 6.8 and mag issues.
I hope the 6.8 will be around.