XCR-L 7.62x39 Pistol Mags: 13x 5.56mm

I'd have no problem upgrading the follower, as long as it still only held 10 7.62x39, and didn't have a different calibre stamped on the follower contradicting it being a legit "7.72x39" mag. 5.56. on the follower, 7.62x39 on the side of the body, "which is it?" will be your sticky legal debate. Not worth it for me.
 
Flip the coupler around and it will look normal.
XCR-L_c_zps1ff857fb.jpg
 
Waynetheman said:
I thought they only went on one way cause of the little lip on the front.
Click to expand...

You may need to "Macgyver" the wedge a bit. That's what I did. The picture above has the wedge in backwards. I "jimmy-rigged" it to fit. Options include trying the couplers from RRA on the RA mags & RA couplers on the RRA mags. It's a bit of fiddling but as you see, the results are awesome. Here is my rig as posted on the Wolverine site, compare to the picture above - same equipment...
http://www.wolverinesupplies.com/details/1775/Special-Package-with-2-x-XCR-Pistol-AR-Style-762x39-10-Round-Magazines-and-Coupler.aspx
 
Shadow167 said:
Does the 223 mag follower fit into the 7.62x39 mag? Would that alleviate the double feed potential?
Click to expand...

Yes and yes.

fenceline said:
I think putting a 223 follower in would be changing it enough to cause legal issues. A 7.62x39 mag with a 5.56 stamped follower would have to be pinned to ten as a pistol mag which defeats the purpose. Would be the same as any other modification which would take away from the original intended use. I'd be more likely to experiment with different 7.62x39 follower designs to avoid that issue. With different "hump" designs.
Click to expand...

The 7.62x39 followers aren't marked as such, and if you disassemble a 7.62x39 magazine you'll notice that the black followers have been modified (the front posts have actually been cut as per the photos above). I similarly modified a Magpul follower to see if it would function as a suitable replacement, and initial (very preliminary, mind you) tests seemed to indicate that it would still feed 6.8SPC properly (since I didn't have any 7.62x39 to test).

At the end of the day I'm debating whether it's worth the +3 (+2 if you want to load on a closed bolt) capacity to introduce an element of unreliability when feeding. Ultimately I got my XCR-L magazines for 6.8SPC, and the LAR15's still work fine for 5.56mm.

AWOL said:
You may need to "Macgyver" the wedge a bit. That's what I did. The picture above has the wedge in backwards. I "jimmy-rigged" it to fit. Options include trying the couplers from RRA on the RA mags & RA couplers on the RRA mags. It's a bit of fiddling but as you see, the results are awesome.
Click to expand...

This is only possible using the polymer couplers, since "Macgyver'ing" the aluminium ones that I'm using would entail substantially more work. I prefer the aluminium ones because they're not prone to the same breakage problems as the polymer ones, they provide more rigidity and add a little bit more weight. Admittedly, yours look far better, though.
 
Last edited:
Below is a quick vector drawing to show the angle of coupled mags once you reverse the wedge.

coupler.jpg
 

Attachments

  • coupler.jpg
    coupler.jpg
    20.2 KB · Views: 13
Correct. The x39 followers are not calibre marked. I was referencing the remark about installing a LAR or 223 follower, which are marked "5.56". The stock LAR followers are marked, but there are several that aren't and would still keep the mag a functioning 10 round when loaded with 7.62x39 and just by happenstance continue to work with 223 rounds.

I don't look at it as +2, more like + 7 or 8 over a rifle built mag.
 
blaxsun said:
With the aluminium couplers you have a screw on the opposing end to prevent the couplers from slipping off. When one is "Macgyver'ed", what holds the polymer ones in-place?
Click to expand...

I thought you would never ask. That screw is very useful to add the last piece of the puzzle. I will post a picture when I get home but essentially, you need to cut a very small, thin metal strip and put a whole in the center for the screw. That strip gets slipped in behind the edge of the mag and then put the screw back in. This stops the mags from sliding off the coupler.
 
fenceline said:
Correct. The x39 followers are not calibre marked. I was referencing the remark about installing a LAR or 223 follower, which are marked "5.56". The stock LAR followers are marked, but there are several that aren't and would still keep the mag a functioning 10 round when loaded with 7.62x39 and just by happenstance continue to work with 223 rounds.

I don't look at it as +2, more like + 7 or 8 over a rifle built mag.
Click to expand...

Yes, I was thinking the same thing about some of the generic LAR15 followers. What would really make me happy is just to see the magazine restrictions eliminated altogether.
 
Are the magpul no tilt followers labelled? I thought about using the followers out of some older mags too with the more "torpedo" looking bump on the follower.

All stop gaps until we can get the magazine limits repealed. They do nothing for public safety. Aluminum rivets don't thwart evil doers, only the lawful.
 
AWOL said:
I thought you would never ask. That screw is very useful to add the last piece of the puzzle. I will post a picture when I get home but essentially, you need to cut a very small, thin metal strip and put a whole in the center for the screw. That strip gets slipped in behind the edge of the mag and then put the screw back in. This stops the mags from sliding off the coupler.
Click to expand...

Ah, that makes sense. I gather the "Magyver'ing" aspect involves trimming the wedges somewhat off the one end? I kind of like the 30° angular setup, actually. Gives it a nice futuristic look. ;)

fenceline said:
Are the magpul no tilt followers labelled? I thought about using the followers out of some older mags too with the more "torpedo" looking bump on the follower.
Click to expand...

Magpul, yes. Some of the earlier LAR15's, no (I just had a spare Magpul follower kicking around, so I decided to experiment with it a bit).
 
Really have to be careful with any 5.56 marked followers in a 7.62 x 39, it is in the modifying mag to a prohibited item territory, even with a un-marked follower if you have to go to court and they pop open the mag and compare your follower to a OEM follower with the distinctive long and short leg extensions, more than likely you will not be a happy camper.

The convenience of a pistol mag we enjoy only applies to a OEM pistol mag, as soon as you start changing it, doesn't matter what the label on the outside says, you are treading on very slippery grounds.
 
^^^ Yup. That's the issue with changing the follower. But then again installing an after market 223 follower in a 223 mag isn't OEM either but as long as is was still limited to the original number of rounds it was initially designed to cay then that would be ok in that case. So if a 7.62x39 mag had an updated follower installed and still only carried ten 7.62x39 rounds and it functioned properly it would still be legal too. But it would have to be a 7.62x39 type follower to be above board. The trick would be to find a series of different 7.62x39 follower designs and see how those work.

Using a 5.56/.223 stamped follower is a bad idea and more trouble than its worth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom