Why is a 30 round magazine the 'standard' capacity rifle magazine? Why not 50 or 100 rounds mags? More importantly, why aren't there larger mags - I'd totally be down with a 500 or 1000 round magazine for my AR.
Because you touch yourself at night.
>>28088875
Just think how large and ungainly/unwieldy a mag that high in capacity would be, let alone the feeding mechanism. Before you even get to the low hundreds you would need a belt fed weapon to even remotely call it feasible.
>>28088875
Don't some special forces have ammo backpack things?
You have obviously never seen, let alone carried, 1000 rounds of 5.56.
>>28088875
>swinging around a gun with a 1000 round mag
I bet that would work wonders
>>28088875
This reminds me, why not have a rifle that chambers but won't fire the last shot of the mag? I'm sure it's possible somehow. The reasoning is that when you reload, you wont need to chamber a round.
>>28089450
>>28089494
Is this magic
>>28088875
Does anyone have the "you know what I don't even care anymore" bait pic?
>>28088875
because it holds the most amount of rounds without impeding prone. the reason its the standard is because everyone copied the idea and it just became the baseline for design.
Assault rifles should be obsolete for modern combat. They were a really cool idea in the 1940s and 50s though.
>>28089808
Gotcha
>>28088942
Yeah, if you get your military knowledge from the Predators movie with that fat nosed kike
>>28089522
Not really.
>Automatic ejection, a la Garand
>Bolt hold-open, a la AR-15
>In a bullpup configuration
>>28089450
Most soldiers put the last few rounds in the mag as tracers so they know when they're almost out and can reload before firing the last shot
![s2bDKg1.jpg[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Erfuy94.jpg "s2bDKg1.jpg[1].jpg")
>>28088942
>>28089920
Some do. I think I've seen a video of it being used by Special Forces or MARSOC in Afghanistan but I can't find it right now. Settle for this promo pic for the Navy Seals
>>28089450
Go back to playing call of duty
>>28088875
Because higher than 30 rounds and magazines start getting finicky and like to jam if you don't take immaculate care of them and sacrifice a virgin every day to bathe the magazine in her blood.
Also, 500 rounds would be heavy as fuck to carry in your arms. And 1000 would be like humping the Pig (ask any old marine about that wonderful life).
>>28089931
Does it really matter though? You need to change mag anyway, dinking the bolt release when you're done isn't a significant time loss especially when weighed against the downsides of using tracers in a firefight
>>28088942
yeah, in vietnam they had one made by china lake that fed into a "razorback" m60
>>28089894
>Assault rifles should be obsolete for modern combat.
What should we be using instead, oh wise one?
>>28088875
Because it's that perfect balance between weight, capacity, and how much that shit gets in the way. Same reason most battle rifles use 20 round magazines as standard.
40 round Pmag is kinda ungainly... 30 is about the sweet spot. I do like the 20s for range time because they fit one box of ammo...
>>28090857
shotguns
>>28090857
Spartan lasers
>>28090857
nuclear cocks
>>28090953
seconded.
>>28090857
>What should we be using instead, oh wise one?
30mm mini rockets and chain guns for close quarters
>>28089450
The mechanism would be more complicated, more likely to fail, and increase the cost of each unit. It wouldn't be worth the trouble just to save the couple of seconds it takes to chamber a round, especially when there are already methods of ensuring you don't run completely empty, like what >>28089931 mentioned.
Because 30 rounds is the sweet spot between capacity, reliability, bulkiness, and weight savings.
Larger mags exist, but are much more cumbersome, heavy, and (in the case of casket, rotary, drum, and other more complex designs) far less reliable.
30 rounds makes the gun INCREDIBLY more dangerous. You can kill like 200 people in a minute with those kinds of magazines.
The TV told me so.
>>28088875
Because 30 is good enough if you are actually aiming and putting quality shots on target
>>28088875
Availability weight and cost mainly. I have used great 60 round mags and passable 100 but cost is 70 and 130 while there are more reliable $20 30 rounders all over the place
>>28091341
>$20 30 rounders
either you're buying like translucent lancer L5s or you're over paying for something man
>>28091388
Believe it or not USGI magazines and pmags don't fit in every rifle.
>>28090780
Typically never an issue except for that one time when someone who knew someone who had a weird issue.......
>>28091412
Fucking this
>>28091388
Last time I bought anything was late 2012 for deployment and insanity related scarcity may have been involved
>>28089931
Yeah, you're full of shit. Tracers are rarely used in infantry rifles.
>>28088875
30 rounds is hi cap silly,10 is standard
>>28092043
God damnit NY
>>28092089
You mean CA, NY would be
30 rounds is hi cap silly, 7 is standard
