That's part of my criticism. Everyone knows Promag is the worst mag anywhere. Mec-Gar is Italian, like Chiappa, and yet along the way we get one Promag, not two Italian mags. First round FTF common. I found best results with lighter bullets. Plus, load with closed bolt and agggresssly rack the bolt. Don't ride it forward. You would have noticed that once loaded the rest of the rounds fed. It might be worth loading chamber with single round and then inserting mag. 10+1. Shoot ten, change mags, and bypass charging bolt manually.
Chiappa 9mm M1 Carbine Review
- Thread starter beltfed
- Start date
Hey FDC, Northern Republic Magazines has the Mec Gar on for 39.99. Think free shipping if over 150.00 check out their site. Ordered twice never had a issue. Measured my Pro Mag and it was .331 at front and back of feed lips. Mec Gar was .351 at rear and .354 at front of feed lips, second Mec Gar was only off from the other (Mec Gar) by a thou or two. Gonna take the drive this am and try out the Mec Gar 92's.
Range was closed for centre fire as they have a black powder event going on for the week. Had to brave the dreaded horsefly infested Tower road. My god what a mess out there. Especially in the areas that have been used for shooting. Ok so sights of course way off. Had to set at 3 to get it in the centre of the target for 25 and 50 meters. Sights not too far off centre horizontally though. So loaded up the Pro Mag and Mec Gar with the 147 gr American Eagle failure too feed right off the bat. As the mag was emptied the FTF eased up. So I'm figuring Mag spring pressure. With five rounds no problem, but then I used some 124gr Geco ammunition. No problem in any of the magazines.
Horseflies were taking huge chunks (or so it felt) out of me so it was time to leave. Arrived home and measured the oal of the rds. American eagle was 1.122 and the Geco was 1.148, don't know if that correlates to failure to feed or not but the length was the only difference externally that I could see. Oh and the FTF was the case had started in the chamber but the bolt did not close. That leads me to think mag spring pressure but then why did the 124 fmj feed fine. Hmmm questions, questions. And the quest begins.
Horseflies were taking huge chunks (or so it felt) out of me so it was time to leave. Arrived home and measured the oal of the rds. American eagle was 1.122 and the Geco was 1.148, don't know if that correlates to failure to feed or not but the length was the only difference externally that I could see. Oh and the FTF was the case had started in the chamber but the bolt did not close. That leads me to think mag spring pressure but then why did the 124 fmj feed fine. Hmmm questions, questions. And the quest begins.
Northman999
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Yukon
Thanks for the thread and all the info.
I very nearly ordered two from a dealer here they day they came out for $369, but gave myself an evening to think it over.
The next day when I pulled out my credit card to make the order, the price had jumped $80 per rifle overnight. I was so pissed off I packed up the Visa and didn't order anything. Seems the price jumped up again since then too...
Now I'm glad I thought it over for an evening and saved myself $800 or more....
I very nearly ordered two from a dealer here they day they came out for $369, but gave myself an evening to think it over.
The next day when I pulled out my credit card to make the order, the price had jumped $80 per rifle overnight. I was so pissed off I packed up the Visa and didn't order anything. Seems the price jumped up again since then too...
Now I'm glad I thought it over for an evening and saved myself $800 or more....
I wanted to see if there was a quick way to mount a red dot. I found a TuffForce mount and thought that I could mount a red dot AND still use the iron sights. I was correct. The front blades appears shrouded in a triangle. It's a perfect fit, really. So one of those mini red dots will be mounted as I find one. Purists will hate it, but it's light and cheap and is quick to mount. The stock is plastic already. How pure can that be? In fact, the machining on the bottom of this mount nearly mirrors the profile of the 'bayonet' mount. You line the two up and tighten the Allen key bolts. This might be the first mod for this piece for all I know.
As an alternative, what do you guys think about the Ultimak M6-B?......a very popular mount for the original .30 carbine.
Will this be a good fit on the Chiappa or will it have issues due to the varying tolerances?
The Ultamak is probably the best. I just used what I could. Marstar sells a scope mount too. Maybe someone can tell us if you have to remove the rear sight to use it. As for me, I like having irons and an optic as goofy as my arrangement looks. I will probably end up using one of these and a quick detach mount: http://www.zahal.org/products/dubel-picattiny-polymer-rail-for-m16-m4?path_parent=218285
I too was ready to buy the carbine at a certain price and saw it jump as I was ordering. There are some people who sell (or at least did sell) at $385. They didn't jack up the price when people started showing interest. For this price, the carbine is recommended. Also, remember that a non-restricted 10 shot semi-auto is sure to torque our haters. That's worth it.
I too was ready to buy the carbine at a certain price and saw it jump as I was ordering. There are some people who sell (or at least did sell) at $385. They didn't jack up the price when people started showing interest. For this price, the carbine is recommended. Also, remember that a non-restricted 10 shot semi-auto is sure to torque our haters. That's worth it.
Ultamak wont work. Period. Barrel diameter is smaller on the Chiappa. Sure you could try and shim but the Action lever is
1 3/4 inch longer and thats right where the clamps would go, plus the action lever bushing is also right there. Just went and tried the ultamak I have for a Plainfield project. So I definitely know. So that's out.
Also tried swapping trigger parts over from a Rock ola carbine. No go all except for hammer pin. Dimensions are all abit off. But a really big BUT I was able to swap over a complete stamped USGI trigger guard from a Universal carbine project that I had done and it was a bit tight but tapped in place fine. Put in the front pin to secure it to the Chiappa and put a primed casing in the barrel. It fired fine, action cocked fine by hand no extra drag etc when ejecting the casing. The only thing I didn't do was try and swap over the magazine components. I didn't want to drill a hole thru my USGI trigger guards. Also tried the cast Rock Ola trigger guard assembly and it was a bit tighter but tapped into place as well. Sure had a nice trigger pull then. Maybe one day I'll find a USGI extra trigger guard cheap and try the complete swap.
So these are my findings so far in my travels. Oh don't forget to check all your Chiappa set screws before you get carried away. They are metric. I found one loose on my rear sight and one on the action lever. Also forgot, metal handguard from Plainfield and Universal would not fit do don't waste your cash. Later all
1 3/4 inch longer and thats right where the clamps would go, plus the action lever bushing is also right there. Just went and tried the ultamak I have for a Plainfield project. So I definitely know. So that's out.
Also tried swapping trigger parts over from a Rock ola carbine. No go all except for hammer pin. Dimensions are all abit off. But a really big BUT I was able to swap over a complete stamped USGI trigger guard from a Universal carbine project that I had done and it was a bit tight but tapped in place fine. Put in the front pin to secure it to the Chiappa and put a primed casing in the barrel. It fired fine, action cocked fine by hand no extra drag etc when ejecting the casing. The only thing I didn't do was try and swap over the magazine components. I didn't want to drill a hole thru my USGI trigger guards. Also tried the cast Rock Ola trigger guard assembly and it was a bit tighter but tapped into place as well. Sure had a nice trigger pull then. Maybe one day I'll find a USGI extra trigger guard cheap and try the complete swap.
So these are my findings so far in my travels. Oh don't forget to check all your Chiappa set screws before you get carried away. They are metric. I found one loose on my rear sight and one on the action lever. Also forgot, metal handguard from Plainfield and Universal would not fit do don't waste your cash. Later all
Mine was set at 300 to put it in the centre of the target at 25 and 50 paces. Sourced a original M1 carbine sight and am going to replace the factory one. The rear sight would continuously move under recoil (the actual peep portion). Set at 3 it would end up at 2 or so.
Another range day, and (mostly) excellent results. I no longer feel it's a boondoogle.
I bought a Mec-Gar 92FS mag to try out, and was not disappointed at all. It fed fine - as good as the modified Beretta* 92 mags I have. Several tests with the full mag worked without a glitch. Based on that, I will likely order more.
The Promag... I want to throw away, or more likely mark/paint as 5 rd only. It's become useless for 10 rds, always** glitching at the 5-6 round mark. It seems to have that one spot - maybe the mag was intended to be a 5 rounder that someone realized didn't need to be restricted, I don't know. If I get a chance to compare the innards with the Mec-Gar, maybe I can see where (if) there is something causing the glitch.
The issue with the rear sight moving was solved with a drift punch. No more movement.
I couldn't find the post before putting this up, but someone (apologies to whomever it was) had mentioned one of the mods he did was to trim down the orange rubber(?) internal buffer. I disassembled my carbine, and did the same. I feel it helped with clearance between the bolt-face and the ready round, but I neglected to do any before and after pics to note any differences.
My personal conclusion, to this point, is that the carbine is "not bad", certainly at the price I paid. It's got the looks, it's 9mm, uses existing magazines, and it's inexpensive (cheap even?). The stock Promag is garbage, but anyone already with, or willing to buy, Mec-Gar mags should be ok. I've found the accuracy to be pretty decent at closer ranges, with pretty tight groups if I do my part. I haven't yet shot it at 50m+, and as I have no intention of putting optics on it, that will affect the results at those longer ranges.
* these were in official Beretta marked packing, not an aftermarket item tagged for Beretta.
** as in the few times I've tested the mag. I don't have enough ammo, or money, to exhaustively test it a hundred times or so.
I bought a Mec-Gar 92FS mag to try out, and was not disappointed at all. It fed fine - as good as the modified Beretta* 92 mags I have. Several tests with the full mag worked without a glitch. Based on that, I will likely order more.
The Promag... I want to throw away, or more likely mark/paint as 5 rd only. It's become useless for 10 rds, always** glitching at the 5-6 round mark. It seems to have that one spot - maybe the mag was intended to be a 5 rounder that someone realized didn't need to be restricted, I don't know. If I get a chance to compare the innards with the Mec-Gar, maybe I can see where (if) there is something causing the glitch.
The issue with the rear sight moving was solved with a drift punch. No more movement.
I couldn't find the post before putting this up, but someone (apologies to whomever it was) had mentioned one of the mods he did was to trim down the orange rubber(?) internal buffer. I disassembled my carbine, and did the same. I feel it helped with clearance between the bolt-face and the ready round, but I neglected to do any before and after pics to note any differences.
My personal conclusion, to this point, is that the carbine is "not bad", certainly at the price I paid. It's got the looks, it's 9mm, uses existing magazines, and it's inexpensive (cheap even?). The stock Promag is garbage, but anyone already with, or willing to buy, Mec-Gar mags should be ok. I've found the accuracy to be pretty decent at closer ranges, with pretty tight groups if I do my part. I haven't yet shot it at 50m+, and as I have no intention of putting optics on it, that will affect the results at those longer ranges.
* these were in official Beretta marked packing, not an aftermarket item tagged for Beretta.
** as in the few times I've tested the mag. I don't have enough ammo, or money, to exhaustively test it a hundred times or so.
Aside from the .40 mag another chap at the range let me borrow for a quick test, I haven't tried any others.
It worked flawlessly for the one full mag test, but I don't even know if it was a Mec-Gar, or another brand. I'm not (yet) quite so willing to buy one for my personal use/testing, and will be sticking with 9mm Mec-Gars for now.
It worked flawlessly for the one full mag test, but I don't even know if it was a Mec-Gar, or another brand. I'm not (yet) quite so willing to buy one for my personal use/testing, and will be sticking with 9mm Mec-Gars for now.
Just an update on my previous post. I took the M1-9 back to the range and put about 200 rounds thru it (original mag). The first time out I was using "Blazer" 115 grain and the gun failed to feed about once or twice per mag. Yesterday I was using Remington 124 grain to start and no failures to feed for about 50 rounds. It was quite fun to shoot! I switched to "American Eagle" 115 grain and then it started getting fussy on me, FTF 2 0r 3 times per mag. I tried 124 grain Winchester and still failed once or twice per mag.
The m1-9 seemed to prefer the Remington loads. Anyways....aside from the fuss w/ the ammo, it was a lot of fun to shoot!! Like I mentioned previously, I got it for $389 and at that price, it was well worth it. I see some selling it for nearly $500, i'd put that money to something else more reliable.
The m1-9 seemed to prefer the Remington loads. Anyways....aside from the fuss w/ the ammo, it was a lot of fun to shoot!! Like I mentioned previously, I got it for $389 and at that price, it was well worth it. I see some selling it for nearly $500, i'd put that money to something else more reliable.
