Battledyne 10-22 mags coming to Canada

KNO3- said:
:( sadly im having issues with my new ones as well...I actually bought more of the new ones assuming the company would have it right this time, took three of the six I have out and had non stop issues with all three. Im going to try them one more time in a different rifle but so far its not looking good.
Click to expand...

Well I have tried these a few more times, with two different rifles (both the ruger sr-22). Im convinced it is not a "break in" issue as I have run about 300 rounds through one and still having issues. Different types of ammo do make a difference but even with the best CCI round nose they still are constantly jamming. Its been about 4 months now, hopefully Hi-Cal will still return them for me the next time im in mission.
 
i bought 2 of these for my SR22 and both dont feed, will try and playing around with them, but as is stock, it doesn't work. the sidewall of the metal piece sits to high and bolt does not close!
 
It's a shame they don't seem to function. I waited for a long time on the pre-order for these suckers. I will be returning them. I can't believe Battledyne would manufacture and sell a product that so clearly does not function correctly. Does anyone have one of their mags that functions without being modified?
 
I finally got around to testing the 3 i ordered. I fired the high velocity from cci, mini mag cci, and federal bulk, 2 of 3 fired flawlessly in my sr22. the one that doesnt just has to be filed down a little but. these mags work great with an extended mag release
 
MkivSupra said:
I finally got around to testing the 3 i ordered. I fired the high velocity from cci, mini mag cci, and federal bulk, 2 of 3 fired flawlessly in my sr22. the one that doesnt just has to be filed down a little but. these mags work great with an extended mag release
Click to expand...

hmm, luck of the draw I guess...all three of the ones I tried don't work and I used cci, cci mini mag, federal, etc. etc...what did you have to file?
 
dont hold me accountable for any damages done to your mags, im sure taking a file to the mag may void any kind of return. this is just what i did to mine. first off take apart the mag and make sure everything moves freely, spring isnt stuck etc.
next compare the top lips of the mag thats giving you trouble to the top lips of one that works (ruger 10 round or BC steel lips) mine had a very visible ridge at the front where the tip of the top bullet sits. this wasnt allowing it to go to that 30 degree feeding angle. After comparing, the working mag had a slightly rounded corner where mine was a sharper ridge. I took a little fine round hobby file and filed the smallest fraction away trying to mimic the rugers shape as best as possible, then tried to shoot, then file, then shoot. trial and error until it fed reliably. Just a slight variation in the casting for mine to get it to work but im sure if you file to much away it will obviously not work very well. They fire just as good as the butler creek mags now, only ftf are from defective cheap ammo
 
I bought 3 of these back months ago and haven't tried them until 2 weeks ago. The problem I had was the spent casing was getting stuck on it's way out of the chamber, like a FTE. The last time I fired my gun was about 8-9 months ago and I hadn't cleaned it since then, but I only put about 100 rounds through it back then. Anyone know what might be the problem?
 
I purchsed two on pre-order. I was really looking forward to using them, especially after i had heard how Battledyne had significantly improved them. They fit my Ruger nicely and look great. Beyond that, they are complete rubbish. Consistent fail to feed, fail to eject, all the time from both magazines while the factory mag from Ruger runs flawlessly. The quality control from the manufacturing process for the steel lips is shoddy and an approximation of what a Ruger mag is. These should not be on the market. They don't work as claimed. Avoid them. I've spent hours on them gently filing the ridges and seams away and polishing them smooth. Wasted effort. Save your money.
 
TacticalFlash said:
Consistent fail to feed, fail to eject, all the time from both magazines while the factory mag from Ruger runs flawlessly.
Click to expand...

Same experience here. I emailed Battledyne but they did not respond. Hi Cal accepted a return but I paid shipping both ways amounting to about half the cost of the magazine. Lots of complaints out there about these mags. Some people seem to have ones that work fine, but there are an alarming number of bad apples. Pretty clear there is a consistency problem with the product. Hi Cal, have you been in touch with the manufacturer about these issues? Anyone buying one of these is rolling the dice on whether it will function properly, not a good situation.
 
BadRonald said:
Same experience here. I emailed Battledyne but they did not respond. Hi Cal accepted a return but I paid shipping both ways amounting to about half the cost of the magazine. Lots of complaints out there about these mags. Some people seem to have ones that work fine, but there are an alarming number of bad apples. Pretty clear there is a consistency problem with the product. Hi Cal, have you been in touch with the manufacturer about these issues? Anyone buying one of these is rolling the dice on whether it will function properly, not a good situation.
Click to expand...

This...

I purchased three awhile back and have only managed to get out once with them so far. I had multiple FTF on each of the mags, and I tried CCI mini mags, CCI Blazer, Winchester 22M, and some older CIL. The CIL was brutal... fair enough - it's older than me. The mini mags were the best, then the Winchester, and Blazers were the worst. ALL ammo fed fine through my butler creek and 10 rnd Ruger box mag.

The quicker I fired rounds the more likely I was to experience FTF. I would have a couple of FTF with the mini mags, double that with the Winchester, and the Blazer was almost continuous. Considering the mags original issues I find it ridiculous that they released problematic mags a second time.

If I ship the mags back it'll cost me another $20, and then I will spend another $20 to get something else in lieu of. So that will mean that half of my original purchase will be gone in shipping costs. I haven't contacted Hi-Cal yet to see if I can return them, but assuming I can, do I do it? Or should I try my luck and break out the file? It's a $60 question.
 
They are junk. Bought three not one worked properly. Failed to feed over and over. Tried them in the Sr 22 and a 10 22. Made no difference. Very frustrating.
 
Hi all... can someone tell me what the latest info is on these? When I go back thru the thread, I see post after post of complaints. (I went as far back as last summer and pre-order talk) I see these mags are still available on the hical site. Have they been improved? Has hical or BD made a statement about all the problems?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom