steel s12 mags. Project completed.

[csspecs 1,987]

Testers should be getting them in today,. They are just phase one samples, and changes will be made.

[gunfun 3,931]

I was expecting a textbook. This was much more fun. You really do a nice job with the packaging. You know it's a flawed beta that's going to get torn open and probably banged around, and you pack it neatly in storage paper and airtight plastic, as though it will be in military inventory for 50 years. Nice touch.

 

I can't wait to bring it out for testing. It looks and feels great.

 

My first two impressions

 

1. a tad heavier than I expected, but I quickly got used to that.

2. it feels a lot smaller than other S12 mags. Subjective impression only, but that's how it felt. This is going to work far better with magazine pouches than other S12 mags.

 

Thanks very much.

[csspecs 1,987]

Happy to hear at least first impressions are positive.. I packed them up so I could get shipping weight and figure what boxes they would work in,

 

Please feel free to post all test data here, I'm fine with all the problems being out in the open as we will be trying to fix each before launch. I would prefer them here so I can mark them resolved once beta is done.

 

PS, I gave a couple test sheets just to help keep things orderly, you don't have to use them, and you don't have to fill the sheets. and you don't have to fire that many mag fulls.

[gunfun 3,931]

Will do. You've got my first comments by PM already.

 

One thing you might do with the 10 rounders is put a bit of a protrusion about 2.5" down from the receiver on the front edge. Just something to give a bit of traction while shoving the mag up. With it on the inside convex curve of the front, it wouldn't snag on pouches. I don't know if that would be a nuisance to stamp, but if not, I can sketch up a drawing of what I have in mind. I really like the aesthetics of what you've made already and don't want to mess them up.

 

For the other reviewers: consider going to autozone and picking up some rubberized trim strip to slip or glue over that spine fin. I am also going to put some epoxy on the lug for testing and file it to shape. Eventually, I will weld it and file for a permanent fix. (CSSpecs warned that the rear lug is the wrong angle to stay locked under recoil.)

 

Highlights to general people:

• really nice fit and finish. This does not look like a first draft.
• Snug fit with ZERO play or rattle in any direction. That alone will be a selling point for me as a bedside tool.
• Smooth operation, and less friction from steel feedlips than OEM or KOS mags,
• feedlips have a little bevel at the back edge which makes rim want to stay toward the back. Shell is retained more positively so less likely to jostle loose in pouch or if dropped.
• Correct feed angle aimed at center of bore.
• Most of the normal Rock'n'lock difficulty specific to the S12 is obviated. Basically if you watch my video, you can get away with skipping the upward shove step. However, because of the snug fit, it is harder to feel when the front lug is hooked.
• Smooth lines drop smoothly into pouches and back out. No sharp corners,
• I'll repeat that last part. NO SHARP corners. The floor plate is very well designed. Odd how such a minor thing really upgrades the overall feel of the mag, but the flats are rolled up very neatly and it just feels quality. I hate buying an expensive OEM mag and getting stabbed in the hand by the corners when I reach for it.
• Makes a comfortable and solid vertical grip.
• Feeds well hand cycling a variety of ammo I have tried. I had to use some very badly deformed reloads to induce a problem.

Downsides

• Surprise- metal is heavier than plastic.
• back edge is kinda sharp and not comfortable on insertion.
• Mag is really smooth- with the increased friction of the snug fit, my hand would slip upward while inserting the mag with even a little sweat.
• Beta version has the wrong angle on rear locking lug so that pushing forward will cause the mag release to release. (CSSPECS knows and is already on it before even sending it out)
• Makes all my other mags look ugly.
• grasping here- but the metal mag is noisier when loading up.
• Will fit Rem 3" 15 Pellet OOB, but not the same from S&B with roll crimp. I have yet to check 3" slug loads.
• Follower has more friction as you push it out the bottom during dissasembly but not during use. (Betas were shrunk or warped during heat treat and had to be corrected. This is a prototype afterall) I do wonder whether some kind of greasy feeling paint on the follower would make it feel smoother. Probably not needed for function, but I was thinking some day-glo on the follower would be a nice touch to make empty really stand out when I chamber check.
• Made me realize how weak my grip is when I jokingly did the spetznaz pushup on the mag. I was afraid of having my grip slip and busting my face on the rear sight block. (mag was plenty strong enough.)

Unknowns:

• How does it feed under fire generally?
• Is there any brand of shell it doesn't like? A review for Vepr mags hinted that some Federal tactical shells have a different rim profile. If you've got some of those, please check.
• Does it care whether you use tapered or straight hulls? i.e. do AA or STS hulls get a lower feed angle than Gold Medal for instance. I am going to check on that.
• Does it generate more friction against the gun cycling?
• Does it keep up with lifting a full mag of 3" shells. (mine seems to drag occasionally with 3" and point a little low. Probably due to prev mentioned heat shrink issue. This question is more a matter of spring rate. I can tweak the mag wider if drag is a problem.)
• Does it still work with a bit of debris in there? I've had a lot of sand and dust blow into my other mags without problems- so I require these to do as well. I'm not asking it to run when filled with gravel and cake mix but blown sand better not make jams.

Edited August 24, 2013 by GunFun

[Dunedain 44]

Sounds like a very nice magazine. I hope the followers are not painted a bright color, I hate those kids toy looking followers. Maybe have that as an option for those that want it, but leave the rest of the mags a nice deep black on the follower? =)

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

Received my beta tester yesterday afternoon. Thank you csspecs for inviting me to participate. I had company and haven't had the opportunity yet for a good thorough testing session. With dove season opening here next week though, I should be able to finally find some low brass in stock at Wallyworld so will be trying some different types very soon. Perhaps tomorrow or the next day I can give a detailed report on functionality with different ammo, in different S-12s. I will also test buck and slugs in it.

 

For now though I'll say thanks for sending some out to different people for testing, and the mags look and feel solidly built, with a good fit and finish. It fits right in and locks up tight in my 2000 model. Does not go into one 2008 I have but does in another. Will be giving a report soon which ones out of all my S-12s have the best fit, and those the mag would need to be fitted to in order to work.

Packaging looks neat and efficient but IMO needs more padding and a bigger sized box. The large flats on the sides of these mags are just asking for dings and scratches, and being steel, it is going to happen.

 

I did have a chance to put just a few mags worth through it so far, and had some FTF and FTE problems with the first round or so due to a low feeding angle, partially caused by not enough curvature in the mag body for that many rounds... and some other things I will address later after having a chance to get some more range time with various guns & ammo. Also want to try a few things to see if I can correct some issues it's having and test.

I do plan on taking some photos along the way during test firing them.

I will also be making some adjustments to the rear locking lug to keep the mag if the gun under recoil. Having to use a hand on the front of the mag to keep it retained could be contributing some to the low feeding problem causing FTFs.

 

More later...

 

 

 

[csspecs 1,987]

The ding was present before shipping, happened at heat treating. I only had a dozen otherwise it would have been rejected for the ding.

 

One idea if holding the mag makes chambering hard, chamber a round before seating the mag 8+1.

 

We may opt to change the body plates to be more curved depending on results of testing. I can have them cut in a short time, they are just expensive..

[beefcakeb99 572]

Fired a few boxes today and other than 2 3rd round fail it ran like a sewing machine. It was a snug fit and fed perfectly other than said failure. I believe the failure to be due to me losing focus onholding the mag properly allowing it to cause the rim to drop below the bolt. Like this picture .this happened consistently on the 3rd round for two full mags. But after that I held it really tight and it was perfect. Kinda forgot after the first shot then lost focus.

 

The remaining mags were held tight the whole time and were failure free.

 

Id really like to fix the rear lug as holding the mag instead of the hg sure beat me the hell up!

[gunfun 3,931]

The ding was present before shipping, happened at heat treating. I only had a dozen otherwise it would have been rejected for the ding.

 

One idea if holding the mag makes chambering hard, chamber a round before seating the mag 8+1.

 

We may opt to change the body plates to be more curved depending on results of testing. I can have them cut in a short time, they are just expensive..

 

My thinking is that the stamped piece that forms the front lug could have a little convex curved piece at its bottom edge. I've been meaning to kludge up a MS paint photoshop of what I envision. That way you wouldn't be making any more parts, or getting any extra welds. It would give just enough purchase without making a snag.

[csspecs 1,987]

Could be a fail to rise, or it could be the mag popping out.

 

Feel free do use anything to fix the lock up. Weld, epoxy, whatever. The amount of force is not actually that high, its just allowing the catch to slip due to the angle being to steep. It was a kinda stupid oversight when you look at the volume of complex parts in context, in my defense in the soft form the mags did not pop out.

[gunfun 3,931]

I've also taken measurements on the rear lug and currently have epoxy curing on it. I just started classes, and need to get a safety mod made for Megaman (who has been waiting on me), but I planned to give you a close up picture with my measurements 'shopped into it as soon as I get some spare time.

[csspecs 1,987]

I'll be looking forward to seeing that.

[gunfun 3,931]

I'm not faulting. I know this is a beta run. That's the point of a beta.

 

Quickie review notes:

 

I did some surface prep while I was cooking lunch to do the epoxy. I figured this would be a good opportunity to test the coating. So I found a crummy tanto type 440 C knife that is reserved for abuse because tanto points are an abomination. I found that using the edge I could not scratch the finish. If I applied about 30 lbs of force to the point, I could make a very light scratch through the finish into the lug. Using the square edge of a good bastard file wend through both easily. So that means that your coating is pretty durable. I would also guess that means your metal hardness on the rear lug is probably above ~50 HRC too, based on common hardness of that knife steel ~55HRC.

 

I also chamfered the top edge of the rear lug. I don't think this will hurt strength in any way, but it could help to fare the mag in, if you have it misaligned slightly to the rear. If that portion is going to be redesigned, I would suggest incorporating a bevel to that corner. The upper rear corners of the feed lips can also be a snag point that benefits from very slight radiuses...

 

Whelp. Better go make a moded safety.

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

I fixed the lug problem on mine today. Locks in tight and stays locked now. Had to put a separate step in the lug for my 2008 gun I was also using today. It either has a longer mag catch or the receiver opening is cut farther forward. Haven't measured.

Was much more easier to test fire though for sure. Still had consistent FTF on #1 and #2, with some more here and there throughout the mag. Today I tested with Fed Multi Purp. . (the 100 packs finally back in stock for birds) and had no FTE's like plagued with on the BS Win loads.

To get the mag to go in the 2008 I took just a little off the back edge of the rear lug and rounded / polished it. Seated mag and scribed the bottom of the catch contact point then filed a step there to retain the mag solidly. Worked well. My main gun the 2000 was a little loose fitting at that lockup point so I cut a second step just under the first and deeper. Will come back and edit or post pics of the mod.

 

I still firmly believe this thing needs to be curved more csspecs. I don't know how these other guys are not getting FTF's on the top round or two. I'll test it again with some different guns tomorrow. I have a bunch. It's real obvious though seeing the top two rounds at least, squeezed down tight against the shell underneath at the front edge. I did have slightly better luck with the later model gun but that could be due to the placement of the magwell opening being a slight bit farther forward which would also explain the lockup without mods. In that gun like I shared in my PM, it would lock in on a closed bolt and stay put even if you tried to push it forward and out. Just wasn't enough to stay under recoil until I modded the lug.

 

There are three more things that could be (are) also causing issues.

 

1. The added length of the feed lips does not allow the shell rims to clear the ends and pop up to feed into chamber, like they might do if the lips were shorter and the exact same length as the 8 rd mag (or 5 rd). Back a few years ago when Phil first sent me the proto 10 rd mags for the 410 to check out, they had the same problem and were not able to feed the 3" shells, but worked great with the shorter ones. After testing I found the 3" shells were getting bound against the feed ramp and could not make the 'bend' to clear it and make their way into the breech. I could see obvious dents and scars in the steel hulled 3" Russian ammo I was using. I shortened the lips to match my factory 10 rd .410 mags... shells were able to clear just in time to pop up and be shoved center chamber... problem solved. The 12 rd mags SGM then came out with had zero issues with the new shorter lips and feed everything. I want to try shortening the lips on this mag to see if that fixes my jamming prob but if I do that the further testing with other guns and high brass will not be an accurate representation of stock mags (as is).

 

2. Another thing that's missing from these mags vs. the factory 8rdrs (and the 5) is what I refer to as the 'push ramp'. If you look at the inside top of spine on all factory Saiga mags there is a sort of wedge shaped ramp there that pushes the top shell of the column forward about 1/8 - 1/4 inch and sets it there ready for the bolt foot to grab it and shove it home. This part is crucial to the Russian style LRBHO as it moves the shell rim out of the way so the claw or feeler on the forward lever can fit behind it and hit the back of the follower. It also plays a role in placing the shell rim where it's supposed to be when contacted by the bolt, and may even have enough to do with timing of release per the end of feed lips that it makes the split second difference needed to help counter the curvature problem.

 

Which brings me to #3.

I spent lots of hours, days, weeks and lots of different ammo experimenting with adjustments to the follower angle, length vs. curvature, and spring lengths & pressures and everything back in 2004-5 when I was working with a guy to make a +2-3 rd extension (or "pad" as they call em in Finland) to turn 5 rd mags into 7 or 8, and 8rdrs into 10's. Back then there were no other S-12 mags. I still have the prototype I managed to get working great after some work, and had the first working 10rd S-12 mag in the US. Still works. He decided to drop the project after all that because it sounded like too much expense to tool up for. The biggest challenge though was making it work with the added forward tilt angle it causes on the top couple or rounds once you stack em up past the point where the mag body isn't curved enough to keep up and present the shell right. Pretty obvious that every shell rim thickness adds up to the pie shape effect after awhile, and eventually becomes a binding problem. Look how curved the SGM 12 rd mags are. The AGP 10 rdrs.... The factory 8rd mags. What do they all have in common? It's a no brainer.

 

The reason the Russians stopped where they did at 8 rds WAS because it gets less reliable after that without continuing the curve and the thing ends up looking like a big arced donkey dick whether people want that or not.

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

Forgot to add...

After trying to hand feed the Fed ammo today and having the same jams on the top rounds, even after fixing the mag latch problem, I decided to go ahead and address the feed angle problem some by adding a wedge to it (the same ones I still have from back when I got the 20 gauge mags to feed 2 3/4" ammo from the 3" only mags) to the top of the follower.... lifting the front of the column as high as possible without it binding in the rim channel. That did work to feed the top shells better but still wasn't 100% in both guns. My older gun was still having issues, and there were some failures to feed lower in the column, likely due to added friction slowing down the popup.

 

Pics coming...

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

The rear lug mod I did (before polishing)... Still waiting for follower angle pics to upload. Will edit.

 

 

 

 

 

[csspecs 1,987]

I was just playing with a couple poly mags and one of the samples and noticed that if I was to try to lift the front of a round on a fully loaded magazine that it can't come up, but on the other mags it lifts with a little force.. On the one sample its .008 tighter on the sample then a keepshooting or factory.

 

I'll check it a little more in the morning to see if that could be causing the problem and what side effects it has.. It could be that the spring back was removed in heat treat and that we will need to compensate for it.

 

 

Edit: I had started to write this at 11:05, had not hit refresh.

 

Cobra, I'm seeing the feed lips being longer in relation to the actual locations of the ammo .. I have a couple extra samples that got messed up during building, let me see what cutting the feed lips does. I'll also check the design notes to see why we made them that way..

 

I'm aware that the curve is off a little, ideally it would be a little steeper. But a couple of current production poly mags are actually off farther in the opposite direction. So it should be possible to compensate for it. The follower is currently running a 1/4" shim as produced (factory 8rd followers are built shimmed), which is why adding to it is giving you trouble.

 

Its very possible that the feed lip constriction and length are creating the low feeds as its driving the round down rather then allowing it to rise.

 

The push ramp as you call it exists in the form of the angle change at the top of the magazine. It contacts center (a little more then designed hence the removed metal) of the round rather then the sides of the rim as the magazines metal will not be worn by the metal rim of the hull in any sort of measurable time. It may interfere with a LRBHO but generating the shape of the factory magazine in a metal form would be really really complex. How big an area must be absent for the LRBHO to pass through? I could add another layer over the rear feed lip and cut out the actual feed lip to generate the same shape, have to draw it out to see exactly what that does to everything else.

 

 

 

I'm going to saw a couple russian 8s in half to see whats going on in there..

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

Yes I noticed the same thing when first trying to lift to see how much I could put on it. It gets easier as you press down the follower. Here are the pics of the wedge I added that helped. Drawn on the box lid the mag came in are the outlines of the steel mag superimposed with a IZZY 8rdr, with follower angles topped out, and also with an AGP follower installed. They fit but don't have enough upward tilt at the top flat to work. The do come up higher though... something I forgot to mention will probably help. I know you said the steel followers have a little more drag but....

 

Something else I forgot to mention is the way the lack of having a push ramp in the back allows the feed lips to grab and hold back the shell rims. This is not necessarily a good thing Gunfun.

 

 

 

Note the AGP follower outline is almost identical to the superimposed factory Izzy mag & follower.

 

Having your follower be able to come as far up as possible (at the very rear)

is crucial in getting this mag to work with the LRBHO. (Both the Russian and mine...)

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

If you still don't have a Russian 5 rd and 8 rd mag to get your figures from let me know. I can loan them to you.

[csspecs 1,987]

I have a number of mags, just never did what I should have done from the start. Sawing the magazine open is the simplest way to measure every angle and size.. If we opt to make a new set of plates it would be wise to have more exacting information on hand.

 

Edit: Cobra, I'm seeing the drawing showing my follower sitting lower (as designed) but at a steeper angle. Am I understanding that the follower should rise more to engage the LRBHO? I was under the impression that it felt for the absences of a shell not the presents of the follower.

 

 

 

Changing the magazine curvature without understanding the totality of the issue could be an huge waste of money and time.. I've had a working sample that fired over 1000 rounds without a misfeed of any kind, so they can work perfectly. I want to chase this down to a root cause and then create another batch of corrected samples before pursing a new set of plates.

 

The plates for these are cut from around 200 lbs of high end tool steel cut with high end cutters, and hand polished to an almost mirror finish. Not something I wanted to go through again for a while.

 

Edit2: I'm seeing another reason wedging the follower is causing trouble, the transition from tracks to the feedlips is not spaced to allow the shells to be tipped anymore then they are. So adding anything to the follower will only make the rounds fail to rise.

 

I'm thinking feed lips are overly tight and probably a little overly long, I'll pursue that in the morning. I had no small amount of shells through the first one without a hitch so logically something is wrong with at least a couple of the prototypes.

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

On the LRBHO it actually senses the follower itself, but only once there are no shells left to keep it from rising to the top. The factory LRBHO magwell mags come ALL the way to the feed lips.

 

I sent Kevin the 8 round Izzy mag he cut in half to design the AGP mags. You can prolly get away with just taking an AGP apart to use or I can send you a half shell from what I have.

I agree though you really need that as a starting point for a curved mag. Lots of things just aren't evident without a good look inside with measurements.

 

On the drawing your follower is sitting exactly as it would in the mag. There are two mag bodies outlined and yours is more faint and straighter.

 

Edit > I also forgot to mention earlier, when talking about that part I call the push ramp at the back, I was going to make one in there this afternoon to see if it would help but the way your rim channel is designed and stamped, it has a 90 degree turn at the top instead of a 45 like the factory mags, so it wouldn't work unless I modified that, so I didn't try it.

 

Another pic of drawing.

[gunfun 3,931]

Cobra said in #138 "Something else I forgot to mention is the way the lack of having a push ramp in the back allows the feed lips to grab and hold back the shell rims. This is not necessarily a good thing Gunfun."

 

I am assuming this was in reference to my point about the bevel at the back of feedlips holding the shells securely. I listed that as an advantage. I didn't say that couldn't also be a drawback. In fact, I suspected that it would create increased friction. I will list it as such, and possibly in both categories if it proves to cause a problem. I just haven't taken it out to feed while firing yet to see whether or not it causes a problem. As it happens, I think the mainspring is getting worn on this gun, and have been meaning to replace it as soon as I can figure out what spring weight to get. That makes it borderline lately about stripping some shells off an MD20. (I can tell it goes into battery a bit sluggishly, and want to replace the spring before I start getting failures to do so.)

 

As I understand your talk about a "pushramp" I think you are referring to the angled cuts in the body of the factory and other mags which move the rim of the top shell forward it moves the last half an inch or so upward. I too noted that the follower has more of a slope than the factory and that the rear of the shell sits a bit lower. However, at least hand feeding, the front of the shell is held closer to center of the bore than any of the other magazines I have. This might be a problem for people whose guns are prone to barrel hood extension type jams on feeding, but if anything both of mine * always kinda point about 1/4" low of center of bore.

 

*I'm probably only going to test this in the one gun of mine because I don't want to pull the magwell off, but I will see my cousin over labor day, and if convenient will try to check it out in his rig. I also have a friend in town with a couple S12s, so that gives more points of comparison.

 

 

Cobra- Were the federal shells you were feeding the common bulk pack or hunting loads or were they the LE marked buckshot? I don't have any of that latter, and a youtube review of SGM Vepr mag said that a tight mag was picky with only that ammo of several types tested, and that the rim had a bit different profile from other shells. If you've got some of that, it would be worth a check.

 

I plan to test mostly handloads in the following hulls: Federal bulk, Federal Gold Medal, REM Premier STS, Win AA, Rem gunclub, a few Rem factory 15 pellet OOB.

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

I was using the Federal bulk pack stuff (Multi Purpose Loads) #7.5 3 dram 1200 fps...

 

Not trying to discount anyone's opinions or the mag design, this isn't a contest. Just relaying all the things that come to mind after all the years of tinkering with about every aspect there can be about these mags.

 

In all actuality another reason I didn't get involved in this before now is because I was about halfway through designing a steel S-12 mag myself many moons ago when this one first started being talked about. It was to be curved and fully ribbed and duplicate a Norinco 5.56x45 rifle mag almost exactly, only inflated or enlarged all over. Had an investor with full backing to run with it. We were going to build a LRBHO specific mag that would also work in any S-12, and have it compatible with the magwell Saigas and Vepr 12. Then about the time we were ready to go to CAD with it, all that stupid shit happened (or didn't happen...) in Sandy Hoax, nobammy went on his whole gun grabbing agenda full steam, csspecs had been working on his steel mag, Cameron was still talking about doing one too, and my investor got cold feet.

[gunfun 3,931]

Well, I'ma go to bed in a minute or two, but I fiddled with it a while and finished my epoxy fitting on the rear lug. Of course then I had to play with it a bit. I'm sorry to say that I am getting similar results to you as far as feeding. When it is full sometimes it has the right feed angle and sometimes not. Previously I attributed this to a bit of drag the follower gets while bottomed out, but now I think it is mostly the curvature issue, becaue the angle is always solidly perfect when I have 3 or less shells. This might be true for 4 or five or... I just haven't spent the time.

 

I think the feed lip arrangement is fine, because it works well when the mag is half full or less. I think if it had more curve the feed angle would stay the same no matter how many shells, but I will have to fiddle with it more before I come to conclusions. I think the way to be sure of this is fill up a mag and hold a ruler against the front edge of the mag and measure to the top of the shell. then see if that changes as the mag empties.

[beefcakeb99 572]

If anyone could pm or post instructions on how to get a lock id love you forever. Im going back today and would really like to hold the hg

 

I figured a little off the bottom would work but am not the best with a file.

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

Just put the shotgun in a support with magwell facing up. Set the front lug and rock the mag down into place (empty with bolt locked back) until the stops are against the receiver. You mag catch should at least be starting to move forward on the underside of the lug you can see at this point. Push it hard with you finger to lock it as much as it will go. Then use something hard and pointed like an exacto knife or a sharp scratch awl to cut a mark along the leading edge of the mag catch on the lug. Then remove mag, place in a padded vice (carefully of course not to squeeze it too tight) and use a small triangular file to cut a step into the lug along that scribe mark but not any past it. Cut in below it and test fit until it starts to lock in. If you remove too much the mag will get loose fitting so be careful. Look at the pics I posted above.

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

If anyone could pm or post instructions on how to get a lock id love you forever. Im going back today and would really like to hold the hg

 

I figured a little off the bottom would work but am not the best with a file.

 

Here ya go beefcake. This is what I did and mine fits tight as can be now. Just take it slow and be careful not to do the final adjustment til most of the material is already removed. Leave some then slowly file & fit til it's right. The catch has a lot more room for movement inward so don't worry about going too far in toward the mag body. You can take it all the way to the base of the reinforcement. It's taking too much off toward the top of the lug that will make the mag fit loose.

 

Other pics in post #136

 

 

[csspecs 1,987]

Did a lot of checking.. Seems I get to blame the heat treat shop a little more.

Magazine body on several of the samples are spread in the middle allowing the fronts of the rounds to semi stagger and thus lowering the fronts by almost 1/8" by round 8.

 

I'm seeing that several of the poly magazines spread by almost this amount when loaded which is why they are made with a steeper curve.. Our mags don't spread when loaded, but they are spread due to thermal shock (or whatever the correct term is). That should be correctable.

[gunfun 3,931]

 

If anyone could pm or post instructions on how to get a lock id love you forever. Im going back today and would really like to hold the hg

 

I figured a little off the bottom would work but am not the best with a file.

 

Here ya go beefcake. This is what I did and mine fits tight as can be now. Just take it slow and be careful not to do the final adjustment til most of the material is already removed. Leave some then slowly file & fit til it's right. The catch has a lot more room for movement inward so don't worry about going too far in toward the mag body. You can take it all the way to the base of the reinforcement. It's taking too much off toward the top of the lug that will make the mag fit loose.

 

Other pics in post #136

 

csspecs mag lug mod.JPG

 

Step mods.jpg

 

 

That would not have helped with mine. The lug just touched with the latch at full stroke. I wonder if your mag body is longer front to back or the lug is located differently on the vertical axis than mine or whether that is a gun variance.

I'll put up pics this p.m.

[beefcakeb99 572]

I figured that was it but nervous about the angle looking at it the catch doesn't return any.. Prob need a few mm off the bottom of the lug