has anyone tried instaling one of the Magwedge quick rails on a VZ58?

MagWedge Industries said:
The "scalloping" as you put it, is exactly where it needs to be .... given the testing I have done with various prototypes.

More protection for the tip however, is definitely recommended.

I would cut the velcro at a bit of an angle and bring it down to cover the tip. The current fix I am working on involves placing a steel screw at that exact point, in order to protect the aluminum better. I am not sure how the shells will react to it yet as I was not able to get to the range today and its closed for the next two days.
Click to expand...

Right on. You'd know a heck of a lot more about it than I would. It wasn't meant as a criticism.
I tried putting Velcro back further but the sharp angle made it stick off and not adhere. Maybe a cut would help! It only took the one hit there.
 
I mounted my hi-lux cmr 1-4x where I would like it to be. Not sure if it'll be able to stay there because of the exposed turrets. I wish it had the capped turrets. I'll give it a try and see what happens if not I'll have to try moving it or getting a different optic. I'd like to try a vortex spitfire 3x on it.
Sorry for the crappy lighting


 
Here is a pic of the change I made to my CZ rail to solve the "battering" issue.

I had an area milled to accept a steel screw and thereby strengthen the area which seems to take the most hits by shell casings.

I took the opportunity to test this change out at the range today, and overall it worked well. I shot 100 rounds and did get 2 stovepipes, so make of that what you will. It appears that this design will get the occasional stovepipe so if your shooting demands zero issues, this particular rail may not be for you. I am working on another model but it hasn't been thoroughly tested.

For those of you who have the gen.1 CZ rail, let us know how they are working for you.


20150309_161517-1-e1425960595736.jpg
 
Magwedge,

Would milling that part of the rail even more so back closer to the rear dustcover work??

What about angling the underside of the rail over the ejection port even more??
 
Waste of time anything held on with a pin will not hold zero. It's about as useful as a gas tube rail. They move. You need to mout to the rear sights with a mount to properly hold zero and bolt on a shell deflector. That's just my opinion don't sue me I have no money anyway. Ok let it fly how awesome the mount is and even if you unpinned it, it holds zero.
 
larrysmith said:
Waste of time anything held on with a pin will not hold zero. It's about as useful as a gas tube rail. They move. You need to mout to the rear sights with a mount to properly hold zero and bolt on a shell deflector. That's just my opinion don't sue me I have no money anyway. Ok let it fly how awesome the mount is and even if you unpinned it, it holds zero.
Click to expand...

LOL ... there's always one.
 
bfiles said:
Magwedge,

Would milling that part of the rail even more so back closer to the rear dustcover work??

What about angling the underside of the rail over the ejection port even more??
Click to expand...

I think we have taken this particular approach as far as we can. The CZ is an open receiver design for a reason.

I do have a gen2 design ready for testing, but my own results on a Full Length Rail show a 2% FTE.

Have you had yours out shooting yet?
 
And here comes larrysmith, the voice of reality LOL!!!!!!!


@ Magwedge,
Not yet but this weekend I will do testing if wife and weather permits me too. I'll report back with how it works out.
 
Sushix it looks great .... have you tested it out yet?

I ran TacRifle for nearly 10 years and the one thing I know is that you must test your equipment prior to using it ... email me if you like and we can chat about it.
 
Looks great Sushix,

Magwedge, Im curious if making the bottom of the rail convex angled instead of concave, rounded out instead of angle in, would help guide the casings on their way out? Does that make sense? If you havent already proto typed one like this I would be interested to see if a more rounded deflector would help the casing out more then the angle there which seems to "catch" the shell. Im sure you guys have done alot of engineering on this, just throwing out my 2 cents.

Ill be out to do some more testing and take some more pics soon.
cheers
 
Take a look at the change I just made on the rail ... the screw is convex as you describe.

Something to bear in mind is that my rail is functioning 49 out of 50 times, not perfect but not bad for recreational use.

After having tried a number of variations and trying to figure out shell path I have come to the conclusion that this is probably is good as it gets with this particular design.

As people try out their rails and we get more feedback we will find out more.
 
MagWedge Industries said:
Take a look at the change I just made on the rail ... the screw is convex as you describe.

Something to bear in mind is that my rail is functioning 49 out of 50 times, not perfect but not bad for recreational use.

After having tried a number of variations and trying to figure out shell path I have come to the conclusion that this is probably is good as it gets with this particular design.

As people try out their rails and we get more feedback we will find out more.
Click to expand...

That screw seems to make quite a bit of difference the the amount of bashing the rail itself takes.

Cant beat the cosmetic appeal, and having a couple markings on the rail just adds character :)

I'll be keeping posted to see how others testing goes.

Keep up the solid work

cheers
 
Back from the range today, really wet out with some drizzling and a bit cold.

Tested the one rail on my 7.5" compact 7.62x39. Ran about 100 or so rounds thru it. Had roughly 4-5 malfunctions.





A had few others that were similar to the above pics but just by habit cleared them ans kept firing.
Rail held zero perfect for me and i dont notice any "scalloping" or wear to the rail in anyway.
Just wish we can figure out a way to get these stoppages fixed Magwedge. I really do like this rail ALOT.
 
bfiles said:
This didn't seem to be a problem for me. As you can notice there is little to no wear at the back of the deflector on the rail
Click to expand...

In this case I am wondering if the velcro may be inhibiting the exit of the shells.

All I know at this point is that my rail worked better on my rifle and I am trying to eliminate all the differences I can think of.
I had fired the first 100 to 150 rounds with no velcro, then added the velcro near the back of the rail.

The number of stovepipes I had with this rail was between 0 and 2 per hundred aside from the time I had the Mepro mounted in the path of the shells. I see people have had different experiences and am trying to nail down where the issue is.

Skidcone was going to try and take some slow motion pics for us , maybe that will help.
 
MagWedge Industries said:
In this case I am wondering if the velcro may be inhibiting the exit of the shells.

All I know at this point is that my rail worked better on my rifle and I am trying to eliminate all the differences I can think of.
I had fired the first 100 to 150 rounds with no velcro, then added the velcro near the back of the rail.

The number of stovepipes I had with this rail was between 0 and 2 per hundred aside from the time I had the Mepro mounted in the path of the shells. I see people have had different experiences and am trying to nail down where the issue is.

Skidcone was going to try and take some slow motion pics for us , maybe that will help.
Click to expand...

You bet, it's still in the works. I've been down and out for the last week with a terrible flu. Managed to get out shooting for an hour or so today, but I only brought my .22. Also, the only camera I can find will only do 120fps.. hopefully with enough rounds I can still get some decent footage. If all goes well, I'll be out tomorrow with about 300 rounds and I'll play with some different configurations.
 
I know I've mentioned it once before but I sincerely believe there should be no flat area on the underside of the rail along side the extraction/ejection zone. I really think it would improve deflection to have the cut straight across and would lessen the chances of shells being caught by the bolt carrier. At least worth the experiment.

The height of the rail over the port might also be a factor.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom