So, why hasn't anyone tried to set a "universal" standard for pistol mags, sort of like STANAG, so that every fucking pistol, even ones from the same manufacturer, doesn't need its own unique magazines?
Is it just greed, or is there a mechanical reason *?
*I'm obviously talking about stuff that use conventional mechanisms, not things like that pistol that pulls the bullets out of the mag from the rear.
cause every pistol has different grip angles for ergonomics
Because then they couldn't charge you $30-$50 per mag
You don't put an entire STANAG inside a rifle.
It only has to mesh up with the top couple inches.
Pistols come in all sorts of different grip widths, angles and lengths.
>>28420361
Not entirely accurate, many bullpups, the FS2000 for instance almost the entire mag is in the magwell. But that's because the gun is designed around the mag, not the other way around.
If there was indeed a standard pistol mag, new pistols would just be designed around it and it wouldn't be a big deal.
>>28420399
>FS2000
Ah yeah I forgot about that one, I thought about STANAG bullpups but only remembered the Tavor and that British one and they both only grab the top bit.
Steyr AUG isn't STANAG is it? I thought I remember reading they had proprietary mags.
>>28420459
There's a STANAG adapter.
The RDB, MDR, and MSBS bullpup are all STANAG too.
>>28420399
let say someone decides the standard pistol mag is an uzi mag
company b will say no fuck you i want my gun to have a X degree angle instead of 90
company c will say they want an angle of y
it would be a big deal because it directly effects ergonomics unless the magwell was out of the grip like a tec9 or broomhandle and those have their own issues regarding ergonomics
>>28420361
STANAG tolerances throughout the entire magazine are helpful. Kel Tecs SU-16C has a stock that can fold over a 30 round STANAG magazine, but if it's a magpull or something it won't work.
Pistols are a lot more magazine-focused than rifles. There's little room for extra mag release pieces so you'd probably be stuck with 1 type of mag release. The magazine will have influence on the grip angle. All the guns that want flush mags would have the same length grip. You'd need standards for compact and sub-compact. Aftermarket base plates and extensions would probably be really common since not everybody will like the standard. Inevitably, some company will make improved mags and then the standard isn't so standardized,
Really the only reason AR mags are standard is because the US market is the biggest fucking firearm market in the world. It's AR popularity, not a decided-upon standard, that got those mags common
>>28420499
I think the problem is jackasses want to charge others money for using their standard, so the company obviously creates their own standard.
>>28420763
It's actually the other way around more often than not. "Why should I conform to that standard when they could just buy a competitor's _____ and I don't get any money from it? If I make my own standard, they have to buy parts from me!"
>>28420342
This
>>28420330
1) Pistols are not a huge priority for modern armies.
It is relatively easy to build around a STANAG magazine.
When it comes to a pistol, you would inevitably have the same grip angle and magazine release for every pistol unless everyone went to the VP9/P30 interchangeable grips.
>>28420763
It's called Capitalism. Welcome to the United States.
isn't the most commonly "universal" mag the various weapons that accept the AR 5.56 mag?
AR rifles
FS2000
Tavor
Converted Ak's
Some of the Keltec rifles.
>>28420330
Iron Man 3 was shit.
>>28422298
STANAG bro, we've been talking about it this whole thread.
>>28420342
/thread
>>28422298
>Doesn't know what STANAG means...
>>28422298
those are stanag mags
Also, you're better off trying to list the 5.56 guns that dont use stanag. Such as Mini-14, L85, AUG(although there are stanag AUGs now)
Even the so-called "STANAG" mags aren't even actually standardized. They got as far as drafting a standard but NATO never actually passed it. AR-15 mags are a de-facto standard, with the closest thing to it in the pistol world probably being the Glock 17 magazine.
>>28420330
that pistol company that pulls rounds from the back of the mag is called Boberg and that design is pretty damn close to what you want in a universal magazine design.
>>28420340
>>28420491
these are the biggest factors, but they would go away if a company figured out a simple reliable extractor design similar to the boberg, OR much more likely a 'magwell' of sorts below the breech that would effectively extend the magazine upwards, but there would be a problem with the mag follower not pushing all the rounds up through the magwell.
anyone see what i'm saying?
>>28422424
>the closest thing to it in the pistol world probably being the Glock 17 magazine.
Excpet glock wont let another pistol company use their mags. There's plenty of PCC that use glock mags with glocks approval. But there's no pistols that I know of that use them.
>>28422423
L85 didnt into STANAG? huh
>>28422527
this exists though pistol is kinda a stretch
>>28422557
L85 uses STANAG mags.
>>28422298
Let's make AR mags the new standard pistol mags. It may require some modifications to your carry system
>>28422557
>>28422590
I have failed. FAMAS was what I was thinking of.
>>28422587
Yeah, I thought of that right after I posted. But yeah, I wouldnt consider that a true pistol. Just legally a pistol. Its more of a neutered smg
>>28422424
Beretta 92 mags are surprisingly widespread. A bunch of 9mm handguns use the same hull with a different mag catch hole. You could conceivably make a universal magazine for all of those patterns by simply cutting a bunch of holes in one of those mags so it could work in either/or.
>>28420330
The closest thing to a universal mag you can get now (outside of popular brands being the basis for pistol caliber carbines) would be "double diamond" mags for double stack 9mms.
It sounds like bullshit, but a lot of these pistols use the same basic design for magazines, just with different catch locations. If you could could drill a hole where the catch was/enlargen the original hole to reach it, you would have say a ruger p series mag that fits a beretta 92, or vice versa.
>>28422904
>>28423960
And I need to look before I post. Shamefur dispray on my part.
>>28420330
glock mags are kind of like that when you account for kel tec. most of their PCCs can be bought with glock mags.
what is stopping someone from making magwell inserts for say beretta 92's or CX4 carbines to make them use glock 19 mags, ergo being able to use glock 19 30 round extendo clpz? Feed lip angles?
>>28423960
>would be "double diamond" mags for double stack 9mms.
This. I have beretta and p226 mags and they look nearly identical
>>28420499
That's why you don't create a new standard, you take the most popular one and get everyone to adopt it.
>>28424000
its possible to make a Beretta 92 mag fit a sig 226 or taurus pt 92 dont think you could do all 3 on the same mag cause the catches overlap
used to be somewhat common conversion when 92 mags were cheap
H&K would never allow it, they depend on charging $80-$200 per magazine as their main source of revenue
isn't a STANAG magazine simply an M16 magazine? I thought the US tried to standardize their rifle's mag (M16 mags) as the standard for NATO assault rifles.
>>28423982
Pretty sure that Glock mags are fatter because of the plastic body
>>28424110
Yes. It never got officially standardized but it's the de facto standard.
>>28424102
P30, p30sk, VP9 and USPc all take the same mags
>>28420330
Capitalism you fuck.
Glock Magazines are coming pretty close
has anyone just tried shoving wrong magazines in other weapons of the same caliber and just figuring out a cheat sheet of what works?
