6.8 SPC Forums banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Greetings again.
I've got a few different 6.8 SPC magazines on hand for an un-biased review. The mags being reviewed are the Bushmaster 25rd 6.8 SPC magazine, Barrett 30rd 6.8 SPC magazine, PRi 25-rd 6.8 SPC magazine, and C-Products 25rd 6.8 SPC magazine.



Out of these four magazines, the hardest finish is a toss-up between the Barrett magazine and the C-Products magazine. The PRi is the runner-up with the Bushmaster trailing behind. The Bushmaster magazine finish is comparable to the USGI anodizing which can be scratched with a finger nail. After a few reloads the finish starts to wear through and look shiny. As far as glare goes, the Barrett and C-Prod reflect the most light. Between the PRi and the Bushmaster I feel that the Bushmaster has more 'sheen' since the PRi has a somewhat metallic finish and the waffle shape breaks up the glare. Between the Barrett and C-Prod, the C-Prod has more of a satin finish so it has less 'sheen' than the Barrett. Notice the difference of the mag catch cut-outs in the various magazines pictured. The C-Products mag catch cut-out is ramped on both sides, this makes for a very positive mag catch engagement with an audible click as the catch finds the recess.



As for the welds and feed mouths, its easy to see PRi is the clear winner. There are no visible welds or seams at this junction, and the PRi has the lowest feed mouth of any mags pictured. The Bushmaster is the worst with the highest feed mouth, and it occasionally got caught up on case mouths while feeding.



The welds on the back show that the C-Products magazine appears to be the most sloppily constructed. Some of the spot welds are raised up, the steel seams show wrinkling, and the mag has noticable flex when squeezed with your fingers. The C-Products magazine also exhibits the greatest distance between the feed lips, though I'm uncertain of what effect it has on function.



As for the followers, you can see that the Bushmaster and C-Products followers and mag bodies are essentially identical. If you look at the feed lips they both show a 3-steps down shape in their side profile picture. Both mag bodies are marked 'SS' for stainless steel. Their floorplates are identical which you will see in the next picture. However, if you look at the seams inside the magazine, the RED ARROW shows that the C-Products magazine seam is not pinched flat like the others. This is what prevented this magazine from seating the 2.3" OAL cartridges. I am uncertain if this occured while shipping or if the mags left C-Products in this condition. Both magazines I received showed this issue. If their mag bodies are in fact identical to the Bushmaster mag body, then a properly constructed C-Products magazine should feed the 2.3" OAL cartridges with no issue.
The advantage to the PRi magazine body is in its construction--this juncture has no welded seams so using a thicker metal still achieves a greater I.D. over the welded seam construction of the other magazines.



These are the floorplates. You can see the similarity between Bushmaster and C-Products floorplates. To remove these plates for mag cleaning/maintenance, you need to bend the tab at the bottom up enough and use a flat-tip screwdriver to pry the floorplate away from the magazine. The Barrett floorplate tab all the way on the left is different in that the tab is bent into the magazine body--I'm unsure of how this one is disassembled. The PRi magazine is the easiest to disassemble, it uses a locking plate underneath the floorplate which can be depressed with a bullet tip, then the floorplate slides right out.

The overall feel of the magazines gave favor to the Barrett magazine followed by the PRi magazine. They do not rattle when empty or loaded, and feel solid. The Bushmaster and C-Products magazines felt the flimsiest and rattled when empty or loaded. The Barrett's steel follower felt the slickest out of all the magazines I tested. The Bushmaster magazine with the brown follower was the runner up, followed by the C-Products magazine and the PRi magazine was the worst. The PRi mag was the most difficult to load in that I encountered some binding when I did my capacity tests.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For my testing I used 2 magazines of each type. My first test was to see what the maximum capacity of the magazines were and at what capacity they could be seated under a closed bolt carrier with ease. Here are the results:

Bushmaster: Holds 26 rounds. Could not easily insert mag on closed bolt carrier until 23 round capacity.
Barrett: Holds 30 rounds. Could not easily insert mag on closed bolt carrier until 25 round capacity.
PRi: Holds 26 rounds. Could not easily insert mag on closed bolt carrier until 23 round capacity.
C-Products: Holds 26 rounds. Could not easily insert mag on closed bolt carrier until 25 round capacity--which is what its advertised as holding.

C-Products is the only mag that passes the capacity test in that it can be loaded on a closed bolt with its advertised capacity.

My second test was to see which magazines could tolerate ammunition with a maximum OAL of 2.3".



Bushmaster passes the test, in this picture it is holding 10 rounds of 130gr SBPT @ 2.3" OAL.



PRi passes the test, in this picture it is holding the same 10 rounds of 130gr SBPT @ 2.3" OAL.



C-Products mags would not hold the rounds, in the picture you can see the meplat of the 1st round is hung up on the seam in the front of the mag body.



Barrett mags would not hold the rounds either, you can see the meplats hung up in the same fashion as the C-Products magazines.

As far as feeding goes, all mags fed fine with the exception of the Bushmaster. The Bushmaster magazine had a tendency to catch case mouths so its probability for jams was higher than the rest. The Barrett magazine undoubtedly fed the best followed by the C-Products magazine. The PRi mags have the most follower friction inside the mags than any other tested.

As far as loading goes, the Barrett was by far the easiest to load, followed by the C-Products, Bushmaster, then PRi.

Thats all for now,
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
22,645 Posts
Thanks for that. much appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,050 Posts
Per your comment "PRi: Holds 26 rounds. Could not easily insert mag on closed bolt carrier until 23 round capacity."

I have PRI magazines and the one you show is advertised by PRI as a 25 round magazine. I believe your discontent with its ability to hold 26 rounds and then be fully seated may be a result of the 26th round inserted. This last round would seem to consume the available space PRI designed into their magazine as space for compression while inserted into the magazine well.

Cheers.

Daniel
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
22,645 Posts
Per your comment "PRi: Holds 26 rounds. Could not easily insert mag on closed bolt carrier until 23 round capacity."

I have PRI magazines and the one you show is advertised by PRI as a 25 round magazine. I believe your discontent with its ability to hold 26 rounds and then be fully seated may be a result of the 26th round inserted. This last round would seem to consume the available space PRI designed into their magazine as space for compression while inserted into the magazine well.

Cheers.

Daniel
Me thinks the spirit of his testing/commenting was...

1. How many rounds would fit in the magazine.
2. How many rounds in the magazine would allow it to seat with the bolt closed

Two different tests, fair tests when the same was tried with all magazines, just to see how each performed according to their claims.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,544 Posts
Thanks for the review. Very good read. I think that C-products and Bushmaster magazine is the one in the same but not too sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
Thanks for the review. After reading through this I've come to believe that not only do we need "cheaper" ammo but better quality mags. Ones that can be loaded long for reloaders. Why isn't this possible?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
22,645 Posts
Thanks for the review. After reading through this I've come to believe that not only do we need "cheaper" ammo but better quality mags. Ones that can be loaded long for reloaders. Why isn't this possible?
The lower receiver mag well is designed for the .223. Between the larger round and a need to fit it (and the mag) into the mag well... ya gotta compromise somewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
The lower receiver mag well is designed for the .223. Between the larger round and a need to fit it (and the mag) into the mag well... ya gotta compromise somewhere.
Sure, I understand that. I guess I'm thinking that if a manufacturer would commit to building a quality mag, I'd be willing to pay a quality price. They have shown that they can be made now just tweak them until they're made well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
The C-Products modified mag catch is interesting. If it is has merit, I wonder why other manufacturers haven't done it (yet).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
Nice review. Quick question though. When you say that the Barrett could not be easily inserted on a closed bolt until down from its 30 round capacity to 25, what did you mean by easily? My Barrett mags filled to capacity insert to the bolt and click into place with additional light pressure. While they don't "slap" in like they do on an open bolt, it doesn't take aggressive measures to lock in. My rifle is a LWRC M6A3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Trouble with SSA ammo and CPI mags

I'm having a devil of a time getting my brand new Very Expensive PRI 10-round mags to feed SSA ammo through my POF 6.8. When dropping the bolt, it frequently jams almost immediately, or fails to go completely to battery. Am I the only one with this issue?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,373 Posts
what type of ammo? some of the PRI's help with the feed lips tweaked slightly a search on this site will find the document for you... does the POF have M4 feed ramps?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,460 Posts
Per your comment "PRi: Holds 26 rounds. Could not easily insert mag on closed bolt carrier until 23 round capacity."

I have PRI magazines and the one you show is advertised by PRI as a 25 round magazine. I believe your discontent with its ability to hold 26 rounds and then be fully seated may be a result of the 26th round inserted. This last round would seem to consume the available space PRI designed into their magazine as space for compression while inserted into the magazine well.

Cheers.

Daniel
Would it have been better if he said it held 25 and he only had to remove 2 for it to seat on a closed bolt?

RD called it. The test was maximum capacity and minus how many removed to seat the mag on a closed bolt. Then you can compare to advertised capacity.

Very interesting that C-prod was the only mag that could pass this. Though I am sure others may have had more positive experience with their mags in their rifles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,422 Posts
I just opened the box on several mags
will check and report back
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top