Cutting M4 Feedramps good idea?

OZZ said:
Okay, then your upper reciever does not have the feed ramps. You can touch up the upper and make your own feed ramps, its best to take the barrel out so you dont mar up the barrel extension feedramps with your dremel.

Mark the profile and dremel away, sure it will not be anodized but will probablly feed your JHP ammo better and if you do mess it up, uppers arent that expensive.
Click to expand...

That is what I said in the first place it doesn't have them and I wanted to add them. I would probably just use a proper file and take my time as even though uppers aren't expensive. The gun has only seen 20 rounds and ruining it would be like running a brand new car out of oil and seizing it. I don't like to waste money.

So if I decide to put these in are there any downside to it? Its a Nork so its resale isn't going to be hurt I just mean any reason why I shouldn't do it? I may just leave it and only shoot FMJs out of it however all of the rounds hitting that area have taken the anodizing off it and it almost looks like it is doing the work for me and smoothing it out.
 
OZZ said:
Emags are not recomended for AR15s at all.
Click to expand...

Pmags are optimized for the M16 FOW, they are not a STANAG magazine.

Emags were designed as a STANAG magazine for weapons that have different magazine wells than M16s (think SA80 and FN2000). These different magazine wells prevent the non STANAG Pmag from fitting (or coming back out).

So Emags fit in rifles designed to use STANAG magazines.
The M16 uses STANAG magazines.
The Emag is a STANAG magazine.

So...........................
 
Gunnerlove said:
Pmags are optimized for the M16 FOW, they are not a STANAG magazine.

Emags were designed as a STANAG magazine for weapons that have different magazine wells than M16s (think SA80 and FN2000). These different magazine wells prevent the non STANAG Pmag from fitting (or coming back out).

So Emags fit in rifles designed to use STANAG magazines.
The M16 uses STANAG magazines.
The Emag is a STANAG magazine.

So...........................
Click to expand...

Straight from the Magpul guy.........

[youtube]RnI-meEsuCQ&feature=channel[/youtube]
 
Keep in mind that Chris Costa said this almost two years ago at a trades show while talking about a just introduced product. Now that they are selling them to England by the container ship they may have changed their sales pitch.

Emags work in ARs and damn near everything else that takes an M16 mag. They seem to be working fine in British C7s (or so I am told).
Pmags are the better choice if all you run is ARs.
 
Gunnerlove said:
Keep in mind that Chris Costa said this almost two years ago at a trades show while talking about a just introduced product. Now that they are selling them to England by the container ship they may have changed their sales pitch.

Emags work in ARs and damn near everything else that takes an M16 mag. They seem to be working fine in British C7s (or so I am told).
Pmags are the better choice if all you run is ARs.
Click to expand...

Again you prove the point the are exactly exactly exactly the same but different......:)

From my understanding Emags were made because of tighter magwells in some ARs and most of the Euro rifles and all the Bullpup style rifles out there now that take the mags all the way in the magwell.

Pmags are stronger because of the ribs, removing the ribs makes the Emag slimmer and weaker. Compare them side by side and the sloppy fit in the AR15magwell and the difference is clear.

If there was no difference magpul would have dropped the Pmag and just made Emags.
 
OZZ said:
Okay, then your upper reciever does not have the feed ramps. You can touch up the upper and make your own feed ramps, its best to take the barrel out so you dont mar up the barrel extension feedramps with your dremel.

Mark the profile and dremel away, sure it will not be anodized but will probablly feed your JHP ammo better and if you do mess it up, uppers arent that expensive.
Click to expand...

Not going to do you any good to cut ramps into your receiver with "rifle" extension feedramps there now.

Also, the feedramps cut into that Norc extension shown in the photo above are poorly profiled. The bottom of the extension ramps don't even match up to the edge of the receiver.

Looks like the Norkians cut those ramps more for similarity than functionality.
 
Gunnerlove said:
Right, scrap a product that is selling very well and start pushing a new product that you already can't make fast enough to meet military demand.
Click to expand...

Call Magpul and ask them yourself or at the very least take a Emag in one hand and a Pmag in the other and use your eyes, then a micrometer and caliper. let me know what you find.

The Pmag is built stronger than the Emag and works perfectly in ARs so why take a step back and use Emags which are a compromise to work in all platforms.
 
G37 said:
non-m4.jpg


As you can see the copper marks on the Non-M4 ramps are quite high.

Now I haven't tried hollow points, but, I can't imagine them from what I am seeing causing a problem. Hmmmm now I want to try.

62gr American Eagle FMJ ammunition. Aeroprecision lower. ArmsEast N8CQB barrel/upper. Magpul EMAG. Never had an issue.

:)
Click to expand...

easy said:
Not going to do you any good to cut ramps into your receiver with "rifle" extension feedramps there now.

Also, the feedramps cut into that Norc extension shown in the photo above are poorly profiled. The bottom of the extension ramps don't even match up to the edge of the receiver.

Looks like the Norkians cut those ramps more for similarity than functionality.
Click to expand...

That's not a Norc...that's a "Westerner" made AR...:rolleyes:
 
OZZ said:
Call Magpul and ask them yourself or at the very least take a Emag in one hand and a Pmag in the other and use your eyes, then a micrometer and caliper. let me know what you find.

The Pmag is built stronger than the Emag and works perfectly in ARs so why take a step back and use Emags which are a compromise to work in all platforms.
Click to expand...


Next time I am at the Artists Club I will sort out those stupid SBS guys and make sure they stop using the wrong mags in their C7s.
 
Gunnerlove said:
Next time I am at the Artists Club I will sort out those stupid SBS guys and make sure they stop using the wrong mags in their C7s.
Click to expand...

Again, sure they work in AR platforms BUT not optimized for it like the Pmag was and still is. Pmag is stiffer,stronger,better grip and fit tighter in AR magwells, so whats the downside?

Your taking a step back using Emags in AR platforms for the sake of compatabillity in Euro guns. If you think that is not a compromise then so be it and enjoy your Emags.

I guess you never heard of the millitary making compromises because of money? :D
 
Since we're talking about Pmag dimensions, my Pmags wouldn't fit into my friend's Dlask lower...Like they weren't even a little tight, they literally would not fit. All other metal mags fit no problem...
 
If we're talking 40 grain Winchester hollowpoints, don't shoot them. They aren't properly crimped for use in ANY semi-auto. The profile and overall length of the 40 grain round is not correct to feed in an AR (any AR). As a result the bullet can set back when it rams into the feed ramp nose first(because it's too short), causing the pressure to increase unpredictably. That round is potentially dangerous in semi-auto rifles. (IMHO)

Incidently, most of the time (again in my experience) when people say no FMJ, what they really mean is "no steel case 7.62x39" the steel core of that round can be hard on the backstops and/or cause bushfires when it hits rock. Get them to clarify what they mean, and why.
 
wherermykeys said:
Since we're talking about Pmag dimensions, my Pmags wouldn't fit into my friend's Dlask lower...Like they weren't even a little tight, they literally would not fit. All other metal mags fit no problem...
Click to expand...

Try the revision M Pmag as its thinner than the first gen and the Emags are even thinner/weaker.

Also you can make them fit, you can sand the ribs down for a perfect fit.
The first Pmags are thicker/stronger than the revision M Pmags and Emag. All Magpul did was make them thinner/weaker each time and took the strengthing ribs right out of the Emags making them the weakest of all to fit in more guns.
 
Straight from Magpul

NEWSFEED: Magpul EMAG™ 30
The Magpul EMAG™ (Export Magazine) features a number of aesthetic and functional changes from the original PMAG™
to enhance compatability with foreign weapons such as the HK416, FN SCAR, Beretta ARX-160, and others while still
maintaining full compatability with AR15/M16 pattern weapons.
Click to expand...

Hey check that out, full compatability.

h ttp://cdn.magpul.com/downloads/emagnewsfeed.pdf
 
The original EMAG's could sometimes be overinserted, that was fixed.

M4 Feedramps are not required in a semi-auto gun, they really dont hurt - but not needed.

The Whole reason for adding them was when the weapon was fired on auto a oscilation of the mag and recevier could sometimes cause the round to nose into the upper and cause a stoppage, the M4 feedramp was created to stop that 1 in 1,000,000 occurance.
 
The feedramp is a nice feature if magazine spring is tired and you happen to feed it with 52HP or other short varmint bullets against all advises.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom