Sure Fire Quad-Stack 60 Round AR Magazine In The Wild! (Pic Heavy)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Justin

Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
19,565
Location
THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
Ok, so I've had it on back order since March, but last week, my SureFire 60 round magazine came in!

The packaging is fairly unassuming. No pomp or circumstance. Just a plain clear plastic bag and a minimal instruction sheet.

IMG_6727.jpg

From a size and weight perspective, the empty magazine is surprisingly light (as is the loaded one, more on that in a minute), and it doesn't feel large or awkward in the hand.

IMG_6728.jpg

Size-wise, the quad-stack isn't much taller than a standard 30 round USGI magazine, and it compares favorably to other magazines in size as well.

IMG_6730.jpg

IMG_6758.jpg
Pictured left-right: USGI 20 round magazine, 30 round windowed PMAG, 30 round USGI magazine, 42 round Tripp Research Cobramag, 52 round Tripp Research Cobramag, and the SureFire Quadstack mag.

It's worth noting that the SureFire magazine is shorter than both of the Tripp magazines and holds, respectively 18 and 8 more rounds. It's also much lighter, being made entirely from aluminum and lacking the heavy metallic base of the Tripp magazines.

The SureFire magazine doesn't seem nearly as obtrusive as you would think when inserted into a rifle, nor does it seem to add much weight, even when fully loaded.

IMG_6731.jpg

IMG_6732.jpg

Last Sunday, me and another shooter tested the magazine out in a pair of rifles, doing some basic bench shooting, offhand shooting, and running some drills on a VTAC wall.

IMG_6754.jpg

About the only disadvantage the magazine caused was on one of the lower ports where it was possible to go prone (but just barely) and monopod off of a 30 round magazine. Using the SureFire magazine resulted in having to cant the gun to engage the target.

IMG_6755.jpg

Granted, I don't have many rounds through this thing, in all I fired maybe 150 rounds through it all told. However, I've left with having a positive impression. The magazine functioned 100 percent when using it. There were no malfunctions of any sort, despite shooting from a number of positions, including prone and monopodding off of the magazine, or from improvised field positions necessary to hit the target when shooting through the ports on the VTAC wall.

Even when fully loaded, the magazine does not hinder moving the gun to engage multiple targets. Fully loaded, it feels like it is lighter than the Tripp Research 52 round magazine, though I'd have to weight both of them on a scale to find out if that is indeed true. Monopodding off of the SureFire magazine feels more steady, and is more comfortable than with the other large magazines because it is lower to the ground.

My initial impression is that this is a well-constructed product that functions well, but only time and repeated use will tell if it will hold up. If the magazine is built anything like their flashlights, I would expect it to work well under adverse conditions and after a lot of use.

The Good:
  • Well constructed
  • Reliable (at least given the limited testing.)
  • Much less awkward to use than some of the other large magazines on the market.

The Bad:
  • Expensive when compared to the cost of standard 30 round magazines on the market.
  • No anti-tilt follower. This did cause some rounds to bind up in the magazine when manually unloading, but did not affect function when actually using the magazine.

Whether or not you want to spend the money on one of these things is, of course, up to you. Some people will see the cost of these magazines and opt to stick with reloading after 30 rounds rather than 60. Others, who might need that extra advantage, will be willing to spend the money for the upgrade. For the cost, you do get a fairly cool piece of kit that could offer some advantages under certain circumstances, for instance, on a high round-count 3 Gun stage.
 
Interesting. I too want to see long term but it's compelling for sure.

Do you guys who compete often foresee a rule change to neutralize any benefit of something like this or do you think it will remain allowed?
 
What's your sense of the strength and durability? I wouldn't spend $65 on a 30rd USGI aluminum magazine, so I'm leery of spending $130 on a 60rd magazine that appears to be made out of similar stamped aluminum, despite the other obvious benefits. I'm particularly wondering how the feedlips will hold up with use - that tends to be the first area to go on GI mags.
 
I just found one in shop today didn't know the back orders were out. 109.00 for a 60. Oh well spent more on other things before. But I did like the matte stainless cz 75 with night sights in case coming home soon. But new sarsilamaz 45 sig combo in friday. the 45 looks like one of the prototype sig 221 45 high cap was bought when sig emptyed the museum. An was put into production uses pt 14 mags by mecgar. ah 15 rds of 45 serious social work. lol Grip is 1.34 wide. 40 oz but all steel.
 
I just found one in shop today didn't know the back orders were out. 109.00 for a 60.

Relevant to this thread.

Oh well spent more on other things before. But I did like the matte stainless cz 75 with night sights in case coming home soon. But new sarsilamaz 45 sig combo in friday. the 45 looks like one of the prototype sig 221 45 high cap was bought when sig emptyed the museum. An was put into production uses pt 14 mags by mecgar. ah 15 rds of 45 serious social work. lol Grip is 1.34 wide. 40 oz but all steel.

Completely irrelevant to this thread.
 
Thanks. Give us an update in a few thousand rounds.

Ultimately, time and round count are the main factors in figuring out how reliable this thing is. If anyone wants to toss some ammo my way, I'd be more than happy to conduct further testing! :D

Ok, I keed, I keed, but only sort of. Since the initial test went well, I'll be running this magazine at our local Tactical Rifle matches until the end of the season, which, unfortunately, will only be two or three more matches.

What's your sense of the strength and durability? I wouldn't spend $65 on a 30rd USGI aluminum magazine, so I'm leery of spending $130 on a 60rd magazine that appears to be made out of similar stamped aluminum, despite the other obvious benefits. I'm particularly wondering how the feedlips will hold up with use - that tends to be the first area to go on GI mags.

I'm hesitant to comment on this, because it's hard to give a definitive answer with such a low round count. Visually, the feed lips don't appear to be much different than those on the USGI or Tripp Research magazines.

Do you guys who compete often foresee a rule change to neutralize any benefit of something like this or do you think it will remain allowed?

Last I'd heard, shooters who compete in anything other than Open Division won't be allowed to use them at Rocky Mountain 3 Gun, and I think a couple of other big matches may take that approach as well. Since there's no overall governing body for 3 Gun, this will vary from match to match, and you'll have to check with the match director to find out what is or isn't allowed.

Go urban prone and you won't have trouble with the bottom window.

If Urban Prone = Rollover Prone, that's what I did. :)

I'd sure hate to step on one of those mags. $$$ How strong do they seem?

At the very least, they're on par with the USGI and Tripp magazines. The magazine body is comprised of three main parts: two halves that are spot-welded together, and then a front "cap" that is spot-welded to that. I would assume that such a setup would lend some extra rigidity to the design, but I'm not an engineer.

What I'm mostly concerned with is how well this magazine will hold up at my local range, which more or less a high-altitude desert environment where the wind may or may not be blowing to an insane degree.

I don't know how well they would handle some of the idiot tests that are seen online: e.g. running it over with a truck or the like, but for use where the magazine will be used as a monopod, under field conditions, or ejected onto the ground during a reload, I *think* it should hold up fine. Again, only time and round-count will tell. Despite the light weight, the magazine doesn't feel cheap or flimsy, with the exception of the follower.

Give you $20 for the 42 round Tripp

Keep dreamin'. That 42 round Tripp magazine is one of the best magazines I've ever bought. :p
 
Oh, one interesting note about loading; it's extremely easy to load the first twenty rounds. After that, the next two or three rounds are extremely difficult to load, and then after that the remaining rounds are pretty easy to shove into the magazine.

I assume that this has to do with the transfer to the second, and larger, magazine spring.
 
Ok, so I've just returned from our monthly tactical rifle match, and it turns out that in addition to myself, two other shooters were running these magazines, and one other shooter has one, but opted not to run it at this match.

I've got some photos, but here are some general observations:

• Mine ran flawlessly across two stages. No issues whatsoever.
• Another competitor, who was running his in an ACR, had a couple of double feeds.
• No info yet on the third competitor, but he might chime in here.

I spoke with the guy who opted not to run his at the match. It turns out that he runs a lightened bolt carrier group in his rifle, and he was having issues with the gun failing to pick up rounds out of the magazine.

When it comes to using higher-capacity magazines in rifles with lightened bolt carriers, this isn't an unheard of issue. I had a similar issue running the Tripp Research 52 round Cobramag in a JP with a lightened bolt carrier. In that case, I spoke with a shooter who is sponsored by Tripp, and he suggested putting the ammunition in a ziploc bag with graphite lubricant and rolling it around until the graphite was distributed on the ammunition, and that if you did this two or three times a year, that would solve the problem.

I would be curious to find out if a similar treatment with graphite lubricant would alleviate this issue when using one of the Surefire magazines in a gun with a lightened bolt carrier.
 
Justin, I wouldn't put graphite in an AR (even ammo introduced). Graphite will easily scratch aluminum, and that's why the DOD won't allow it as a dry lube for M16s, nor on any aircraft. I think a standard weight carrier is the better solution.
 
Got to handle one of these at the local store yesterday. It seems fairly well built but at $109, it certainly isn't the choice for the average shooter. At that price a bunch of 30 rounders makes more sense for general use. Certainly though for a gamer it has it's advantages and is probably worth the money.
 
Ugaarguy, I didn't know that graphite could cause issues with aluminum. That's probably a good thing to know, though would it cause as much of an issue in a magazine? For instance, I know that Beta includes a tube of graphite lubricant wit their 100 round drums, and I can't imagine that they would do that if there was a decent chance that it would result in damage to the equipment or rifle.

Benzy, I'd agree. For a magazine, the Surefires are extremely expensive for only a couple of advantages. These magazines are not a requirement for most people, who'd be better off spending that money on a sling, spare 30-round magazines, or ammunition.
 
Here are a few pictures from this weekend's match featuring the Surefire magazines.

IMG_6786.jpg

IMG_6788.jpg

IMG_6793.jpg

IMG_6832.jpg

IMG_6839.jpg

IMG_6845.jpg

IMG_6847.jpg
Interesting note: I've seen a lot of different brands of magazines choke when monopodding off of a slanted surface like this. This wasn't an issue with the SureFire magazine.

IMG_6852.jpg

IMG_6854.jpg
Again, monopodding, either on soft or hard surfaces, didn't cause any issues or induce any jams.

IMG_6864.jpg
 
Graphite on aluminum may lead to galvanic corrosion. Not sure in the AR environment how it will react, but a few googl-fu articles have kept me away from the stuff (even common anti-seize compound on the barrel nut).

Nice write-up.
 
I ran this magazine again at this month's match. I was intending to run two rifles, which would have probably resulted in a round count of about 300-400 rounds through the magazine with both guns.

Unfortunately, the castle nut came loose on my secondary rifle*, which caused the recoil spring and buffer to puke out of the buffer tube, so I didn't get to shoot as much as I was hoping too.

That said, the Surefire magazine performed solidly.



*Yes, for all the haters, I finally had an AR15 fail on me. A gun that's seven years old, had thousands of rounds through it, and the problem could have been completely avoided had I not been lazy, and applied some locktite.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top