Battledyne 10/22 Mag Issue

sqwat

sqwat

Member
Rating - 100%
0   0   1
Location
Vancouver
Ok so I pre-ordered two Battledyne Mags for my SR-22. First off I like them they look great and fit well. (see pic)



But....The mags seem to have an edge at the tip of the bullet, most likely from manufacturing. I tried the mags at the range quite a few rounds caught the edge then proceeded to not feed and get stuck half way out and smushed against the gun. ( see pics ) just wanted to give everyone a heads up, I will probably remove the edge and try again.



 
Have you looked on the rimfire central forum for info?
I've heard alot of feed issues with these mags.
Hope you find a fix.
Just wondering what the cost was in total for the mags shipping/taxes?
Thanks
 
@little_airwolf: heres the break down of what i got

Description Unit price Qty Amount
BDM
Item #: 1158050_4398005_6388158
Option: BDM $39.00 CAD 2 $78.00 CAD

10/22 target hammer kit
Item #: 1158050_2367010_3155873
Option: Default $49.00 CAD 1 $49.00 CAD

Promag 10/22 extended bolt hold open, with auto release
Item #: 1158050_2812164_3806386
Option: Bolt lock $19.00 CAD 1 $19.00 CAD

Rubber Rail Covers
Item #: 1158050_3162143_4372363
Option: single cover $2.50 CAD 2 $5.00 CAD

10/22 Titanium extractor
Item #: 1158050_2367002_3155866
Option: Default $18.00 CAD 1 $18.00 CAD

Subtotal: $169.00 CAD
Tax: $9.15 CAD
Shipping and handling: $14.00 CAD
Total: $192.15 CAD
 
@ shooter_01: There a great mag, I will update this when i get a chance to clear up the lip and test them again. Another note, the spring is really stiff in them and needs breaking in, roughly 18/25 rounds go in really easy, by the time you get to 21/25 your fingers want to fall off lol
 
We have had some issues with these mags on the original batch last year, but this new batch have the same steel feed lips design as the factory Ruger mags, they seem to work very well! We gave a price discount to the preorders as they have been very patient waiting for these. We put the extra mags left over from our preorders on the webstore, HERE.
 
Thanks, $78 for 2-30 round mags is great!
My bx25x2 cost $65 each including exchange/tax/shipping.

HiCal was selling for $109 + shipping/taxes.
 
Hey I have a quick question, has anyone has mags fitting tight? Mine are so tight that pulling the bolt back on my one gun is hard and it doesn't cycle, almost like the lips are too wide. Doesn't happen with stock mags. I just switched bolts around on my 2 10/22's and it worked with the other one. Weird.
 
sqwat said:
@ shooter_01: There a great mag, I will update this when i get a chance to clear up the lip and test them again. Another note, the spring is really stiff in them and needs breaking in, roughly 18/25 rounds go in really easy, by the time you get to 21/25 your fingers want to fall off lol
Click to expand...

Thanks, sqwat.

I'm looking forward to its arrival.
 
Mine stays in the rifle no problem. But the top/side of the feed lips and the bottom of the bolt are touching. So when I #### it back it is riding back hard and doesn't not slam forward. It has to be pushed.
 
I've had both the original batch as well as the ones with the new feed lips. I've found the "new lips version" still has a tendency of the bullet catching the bottom edge of the chamber. I've tried these on 3 different 10/22s, same issue. The bullet will either outright jam on that bottom edge (FTF) or feed with a little sliver off the lead (every round).

I'm still doing testing on the new ones (breaking in) before deciding what to keep and return, but only because I want to probably keep a couple for esthetic purposes IF I can break those in to be relatively reliable with a little "tinkering". The rest are going to be returned soon.

I'd summarize my experience like this (for both old and new batch):

- Very esthetically pleasing magazine
- Will NOT feed reliably with target barrels (40% FTF rate)
- Will NOT feed reliably with waxed ammo (15-25% FTF rate on sporter barrel)
- Best ammo to use is Federal Auto-Match. (average 1-3 FTF per 25 round loading depending on the mag) Every other ammo gave me noticeably more problems. I think this has to do with no wax and bullet shape.
- Newer feed-lip design is only somewhat more reliable for feeding. Still slivers every round going into the chamber
- Downloading the mags to 20 rounds may help with newer batch
- While the newer lips are very much close to the Ruger factory lips, the round doesn't quite feed into the chamber the same way. The Ruger mag pops the round up slightly before feeding, lining the round up with the chamber and not skimming the edge of the chamber. The Battledyne rubs the bullet of the round against the bottom edge of of the chamber for a short while. Every so often that lead catches and jams the feed, and either way slivers the lead.
- Some of the mags become more reliable if forward pressure is applied to the bottom of the mag (effectively rotating the feed lips up slightly)
- Some of the mags occasionally jam on the top edge of the chamber if forward pressure is applied to the bottom of the mag

Sorry to say my experience with both the older and newer batch have not been great. A lot of effort and rounds trying to make them work. In the end though these will have to be show mags and I'll have to stick with my butler creeks for reliability.

All that being said I am but one data point and I certainly feel the new version is an improvement on the older.While they don't solve the problems they will mean less people having them.

My 5 cents.
 
Why cant the developers test and make sure these feed reliably before putting them on the market. WTF
 
I think people have to realize theses magazines just do not work on a consistent basis. It does not matter if it is Battledyne or ProMag Archangel, they just don't work compared to the stock rotary mag. The ammo that I have found works on both mag brand with some consistency is 40 grain round nose, forget hollow points period. You can try and modify this and that but in my opinion just a waste of time. Both mags sure look good in the different stocks but that's about it.
 
ozzy said:
Why cant the developers test and make sure these feed reliably before putting them on the market. WTF
Click to expand...

I've got 7 mags, 4 older and 3 newer. All exhibit the same problem. I've done testing across across 4 different rifles with 3 different styles of barrel. A Green Mountain target barrel, 1 older 18" factory barrel and 2 new 16" factory compact barrels. All exhibit the same problem (though to varying degrees).

I can only conclude:

a. That I've put these through enough rifles of different style and eras that I feel I can safely eliminate the "the rifle is the problem" argument.
b. I've put enough of these mags of different generations through testing to eliminate the "you've got a defective mag" argument.
c. That because of the 2 points above, there is something in the design of these mags that makes them prone to problems.

What I don't get is how so many customers are not reporting problems, with the assumption being that their mags are working fine with so many of their rifles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom