Mosin Bubba
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,935
They can't get a 100 round magazine to function very well, and that's pushing half the weight of ammo.
Someone beat you to it:
A 200 round "magazine"*:
I did.Nice thought Coop45 but who is going to carry those 800 rounds???
The weight savings from PMAG compared to a USGI mag is pretty slim. I carried a few PMAGs because they were more durable and fed rounds better. The weight savings was not a big of a concern for me.
Jesse H said:I haven't weighed them, but handling them back to back the aluminum mags feel slightly lighter than Pmags. Not enough to be a reason to choose one over the other.
steveracer said:In my experience, mag weight means nothing.
During dismounted patrols, carrying 450 rounds each was the norm, all of it in mags, rather than have to load mags in the field.
Somebody always had an extra barrel for the 240, and several other guys would carry a belt of 7.62 for the 240.
Out of 12 guys, one or two would have an M203 and a handful of 40mm.
Nobody EVER mentioned how much mags weighed, but we all sure complained about the 240 ammo and barrels, and when it was my turn, I hated carrying them.
The whole mortar: sight, tube, bipod, and base-plate weighs 50 pounds, at least the M224, 60mm mortar. Although, I think the base-plate is the heaviest single component.Not to mention carrying indirect fire weapons. A 60mm mortar base plate weighs 50 pounds if I remember correctly.
lysanderxiii said:The whole mortar: sight, tube, bipod, and base-plate weighs 50 pounds, at least the M224, 60mm mortar. Although, I think the base-plate is the heaviest single component.