"Taping assault rifle magazines" Topic

When it comes to handling magazines for assault rifles, I have read in some sources that a mark of an amateur is taping two magazines (one facing upwards and one facing downwards) since dirt can get stuck in the bottom mag and cause a jam. However, other sources say that this is a good trick because it makes reloading faster because there is less fumbling for a new mag in a ammo pouch.

I've seen movies reflect both sides of this argument, so is it a case of personal preference clouding judgment or is one better than the other?

Depends I'd guess. My uncle said it was better to take a quick hide and reload than to try to do the flip in a firefight with the taped together magazines. Too much dirt, etc. to get in the workings. Worked fine for the AK's most of the time but the M16 wouldn't stand for it.

I was told by my first company commander who spent his 18th birthday as a PFC in a hole at Khe Sanh, dont tape one up and one down.

The high speed, low drag guys I have seen pics of are using one mag at a time or using mag clamps.

Example of mag clamp. link

I don't really care for the mag clamps, either though – the extra mag sticks out to the side and gets in the way of the left arm (when the right mag is in use). Then again, I don't have that much experience with removable mags – most of the things in my armory get fed by chargers.

Doug

I've always wondered, couldn't you just make a cover for the end of the magazine that faced down? Wouldn't have to be much, just something to keep dirt out and quickly removable. A matchbox or cartridge box or other box of the right size cut down to make a lid, even some duct tape with the end overfolded to make a flap.

The mag coupler / mag clamp does look like it does a better job.

I put two small penciles in between two mags then taped them together that way both were facing up. After I fired them both off I didn't have a ammo pouch to put them in so I stuck them in my cargo pocket. I learned my lesson and didn't do that again I'd rather take cover and change mags and also slow my rate of fire.

I'm not quite sure what real good linking the two mags serves. Does it really increase your ROF? How many seconds does it actually save you? Also, if you're boosting your ROF by having two mags together then are you actually bothering to aim your rifle (have fun there with the ammo weight hanging off-center on your rifle!) ? Or are you just 'rocking and rolling' and going for supression/weight of fire? And with that said, how many of these things are you really going to have? And how on earth are you going to fit these linked mags into your ammo pouches?

When I was in, the Army stressed well aimed and controlled firing. They seriously frowned on using the three round burst firing and focused on speedy, but aimed fire. A M-16 can lay down a withering fire but it just isn't into the whole sustained firing thing. That's what the SAW is for. Heck, well paced and aimed fire keeps your rifle from over-heating!

If I'm going to trick out my rife then I'm going to want something that makes my firing more accurate, save the ROF parlor tricks for the arm chair commandos!

Don't do it you will get dirt in your weapon and its jammed or fouled instantly. For the M16 that probably means the duration of the firefight.

But it looks cool!!!!

You just don't get this depth of personal experience on, say, the Ancients Board!
Excellent

not down, cross them at a steep angle (V shaped) with the fronts to each other,(just needs a twist to reload) this does not add height to the weapon and its not pointing into the ground, also this is not a trick to speed up reloading the weapon but to make reloading possible for SMGs while your still in the air during a jump :) and to add one more mag of ammo to your load out.

Turbo Pig wrote:

But it looks cool!!!!

Well, yes, although if you wanted to be really cool you'd say "ally".

Also, you can cut a strip off your face veil and wrap it round your head as a sweat-band instead of wearing your steel helmet, or drape yourself with 7.62mm disintegrating link for that "Mexican bandit" look.

People who are at least half-serious about their soldiering, on the other hand, try not so much to look cool as to look like a bush, and to make sure that their personal weapon fires when needed instead of getting gummed up with crud from the scenery.

All the best,

John.

I have read in some sources that a mark of an amateur is taping two magazines

I've always wondered who the thought that foolishness up whenever I see it on a movie. Apart from the dirt, my worry would be a sudden jarring would result in bullets popping out, at least it would on the SMG and FN mags I used to use. Stupid.
--
Tim

All I can say, is that Pops said it never happened. He always said that when he saw it in the movies he would laugh as the dirt clogs up the rounds and make the gun useless.

Brian

Another issue is the tape can come loose and you lose one magazine. Repeat jarring impacts from diving into cover can damage the bottom magazine and make it impossible to load.

My knowledge comes from debunking Hollywood classes we would receive periodically when I was in the military.

I understood the idea to be: 1) release magazine – it falls to ground and is out of the way, 2) slap new magazine in and release bolt, 3) fire at will.

With mags taped or clamped together, you would have to catch the mag on release turn it around and snap it in place. I would think that would be far easier said than done. Nonetheless, that kind of thing was discouraged when I was in the military and on the PD as being too time-consuming or otherwise less than bright.

Never seen anyone use two mags taped together. Much quicker to hit the mag release and attach a new mag from pouch than faff about turning one around to find it doesn't fed properly.

just a hollywood invention.

I have a feeling, and it's just a feeling, that if any of my course NCMs at CFB Gagetown would have seen so much as a piece of tape on a mag….well lets just say they'd kick you so hard in the gluteus maximus you'd be tasting the polish for weeks!

I think I remember taped magazines being mentioned in Robin Moore's The Green Berets. I recall being puzzled by why the tape was on the magazines when I read my dad's copy at 10 or 11 or whenever. I still have it; I'll have a look through it.

I don´t know what armies you have served in but I have never degraded my so much as to change magazines in my rifle. That is what my trusty aide de camp is for. Same with carrying extra magazines and making sure my flask of Cognac is always full.

But I usually did not fire my rifle. My troops would be horrified and fall to pieces if the situation was so dire that I needed to join the fighting and not only act as an inspiration to my trusty soldiers by just being there.

I found the reference to taped magazines in The Green Berets, published 1965.

Author Robin Moore researched the book by accompanying Special Forces units on their deployments in Vietnam in the first half of 1964. According to the introduction, to prepare, the US Army made him attend airborne training and afterwards, guerilla training at the Special Warfare School. This includes weapons training, not only in modern weapons but also "the crossbow, the longbow, and the garotte".

Joining his first Special Forces group he requests a personal armament of "a folding-stock carbine and a few banana clips". He also calls it an "automatic rifle" and others who carry carbines are said to fire "bursts" or "long bursts". It's not an M-16 or variant -- some Special Forces in the book carry that new weapon and refer to it as the "AR-15". So I assume from this it is the M2 Carbine described here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Carbine … and a "banana clip" is the larger, 30-round detachable box magazine for it.

Anyway, on a patrol before a firefight, he describes "My carbine, sixty rounds belted to the folding stock and two banana clips taped butt to butt in the lock".

That's the only reference to taped magazines that I can find though. Here's an alternate reference, when a Lieutenant Colonel has elected to stay at a base expecting an attack: "the weapons sergeant brought … a pistol belt and harness hung solidly with ammunition pouched. 'There's four hundred rounds of AR-15 ammo on on the belt, sir' …" So a regular combatant gets a harness, ammo pouches, and nothing about tape.

So … my conclusion is that at one time it was probably considered an acceptable practice in US special warfare circles for weapons-trained non-combatants, who don't carry another kind of ammo harness, to tape magazines. Was it not only acceptable but also an official, recommended practice? I'd argue it probably was -- Moore was a real oddity at the time, a writer going out on combat patrols, officially approved by upper echelons but still subject to the unit commander's discretion. If he was carrying an inadvisable weapons kit, he'd have been made to change it.

Here's another thought -- perhaps the practice is weapon-specific. Several people posted above that since the M-16 series of weapons will jam if a little dirt gets in the action, no one is taught to do it. But I believe I've read elsewhere that the M1 / M2 Carbine -- and for that matter the AK-47 -- are more robust and jam less easily. So perhaps for those weapons, it was taught as a worthwhile practice since it wasn't likely to cause weapons failure.

Check out pictures of the fighting in Grozny during the First Chechen War (1994-1995), available on many photo agency websites. There are a lot of AK-74 magazines taped together, both by the Chechens and the Russians. So this practice is, or has been, used on the battlefield – plus the Chechens seemed to be quite practical fighters, so there must have been some merit to doing this.

"release magazine – it falls to ground and is out of the way"

Depends on the mag release mechanism, some/many weapons you have to release the mag and actually take it out.

"so there must have been some merit to doing this."

The main merit is that it looks cool, just look at the way the Russian soldiers have decked themselves out like extras from 'Apocalypse Now' recently.

I've seen plenty of stills and film of African militias with taped mags as well, including one who has managed to so damage the bottom mag that the spring has popped out.

Martin, good point. I was thinking M-16, though I know the AK-47 actually has to be removed so that wouldn't be such a big deal, though you still have to make sure you grab it right to turn it around and reinsert with one hand.

Sure, the M16 mag just drops out.

Hmmm, maybe taped mags work better on an AK because you do actually have to remove the mag? Not thought of that.

I was told not to do it because the cheap plastic clips the Canadian military used at the time (early 90's) could slip out due to the extra weight from 2 clips taped together.

Hi

The SF WW2 guys commonly taped THREE stick mags together for their thompsons, M3s and BARs. ditto korea.

The way they were taped didn't work as well with the 16. Partly the issue was reliability, and the early 16s jam if you look at them funny(for me always round 18!)

So, yes, it varies with "when" and "weapon".

R

Another consideration is that a full magazine is heavy. I'd rather have an extra mag in my load bearing harness then on the weapon. Makes it extra work to acquire a target picture when both magazines are fresh.

Forget being "tacticool" and stick to SOP. Just my 2 cents.

I tried in during a field problem once while in Ranger school and had nothing but issues. We actually put a peice of tape over the other Mag to keep out dirt and such. That pulled out a round, then when I fliped it the tape residue caused the mag to stick both going in and out.

So for me it was a total waste. I was really glad real rounds were not flying.

BTW I washed out of Ranger School twice, so I'm not nearly as high speed as I wanted to be.

Michael

"BTW I washed out of Ranger School twice, so I'm not nearly as high speed as I wanted to be."

The fact that you tried twice makes you light years higher speed than me mate.

Fatman

Yeah, I've seen the three taped mags for the Thompson. As for other instances (the AK with russies/chechs), you've got me. However I go back to my main point:

Does it really speed anything up? How much extra time do you really get by taping up your mags? Is that speed worth the potential loss of accuracy because you've off centered your rifle?

Now I'll say this too. The US/Western (ie NATO) model of small arms use is VERY DIFFERENT from the Russian/Soviet model. Western forces are very professional formations that value marksmanship and disciplined fire. The Russians… not so much! They (still?) rely heavily on large numbers of conscripts who have only the most basic training. That means that they want simple weapons that can lay down heavy fire for supression (hence the old SMG units of WWII and the modern AKs). The Russians just make hoards of automatic weapons (with mountains of ammo) and hand them off to the conscripts and teach them the old "point toward the bad guys, squeeze trigger, reload when necessary!" riot act. That's not marksmanship, it's sheer weight of fire.

It's very impressive to see but it brings me back to the GI comment of the current war: "They were really laying down the fire!!! However they couldn't hit a d@#$ thing!"

So if you don't care about accuracy and want just weight of fire then maybe there is something to this. To me, it's like the old saying: arm chair types talk tactics, real commanders talk logistics!

CorpsCommander makes a great point too! I always told my friends that firing the M16 was like shooting a BB gun. It's not that heavy, not a whole lot of recoil, and just plain fun to plink rounds with. However I wouldn't want to spend all day shooting from just the regular standing stance. 5-6 pounds does start to add up after a while! I can see two mags taped together as something that would really start to mess with you after a while. The off centered weight would really bother me! To me, marksmanship is about comfort and familarity. Anything that messes with that screws up my marksmanship. Give me a nice fighting hole with a good, firm sand bag and I'll hit with the first round every time. Toss in something 'different' and my accuracy suffers. It's pretty amazing how that kind of stuff can mess you up.

Now I'll say this too. The US/Western (ie NATO) model of small arms use is VERY DIFFERENT from the Russian/Soviet model. Western forces are very professional formations that value marksmanship and disciplined fire. The Russians… not so much! They (still?) rely heavily on large numbers of conscripts who have only the most basic training. That means that they want simple weapons that can lay down heavy fire for supression (hence the old SMG units of WWII and the modern AKs). The Russians just make hoards of automatic weapons (with mountains of ammo) and hand them off to the conscripts and teach them the old "point toward the bad guys, squeeze trigger, reload when necessary!" riot act. That's not marksmanship, it's sheer weight of fire.

It's very impressive to see but it brings me back to the GI comment of the current war: "They were really laying down the fire!!! However they couldn't hit a d@#$ thing!"

I remember reading in a book somewhere, the enemy were blazing away with lots of automatic fire and the SAS guys were plinking away with single shots. Guess who won.

In "realistic" shooting games like Insurgency, I find that – unless you have excellent cover – blazing away trying to suppress people usually draws somebody's attention and you die from a few well-placed shots. Some players can suppress really well but I have no idea how they manage it.

LOOKING cool will not help you stay alive in a firefight!

wayback when, some of my buddies tried the mag up/mag down thing with MATTY MATTEL, and it was an abysmal failure. dirt, mud, vegetation, water would get into the bottom mag and if you were lucky you got off three-five rounds before having a mother of a malfunction that reduced you to having a light, short, plastic club or a single shot "muzzle loader" for the rest of the fire fight.

much better to duck back, eject, and reload a fresh mag; also much better to fire on semi than full auto.

AKs could be used with the mag taped up/mag taped down rig, but sometimes they malfunctioned when this was done.

i understand that now days there is a very large capacity ammo cassette available for the M16 that provides a lot of rounds down range before it is time to reload. if there is such a thing and it works, this would be a GOD send for joe/jolene squaddie,

taping M3 SMG mags together was a very common thing (one, two, or three mags taped together) but this was only done for the mags actually loaded into the M3 for that extra bit of initial fire-power. after that, the M3 was reloaded from individual mags (8 minimum) carried in ammo pouches that held 4 magazines each.

the M3 was a much more rugged, shorter ranged weapon that MATTY MATTEL.

DAWGIE

The Germans seem to do it: picture

The Germans seem to do it: picture
>>
That looks like a kind of mag clamp.Also note,the mags are side by side,the extra one isn't upside down.

Bob

Sure it looks cool but taping is not very practical.

I ask this weekend 4 sargents in the armor unti here at Fort Bliss if they had seen anyone tape magazines over in Iraqi during the combat of the last few years

all stated that they saw Americans with tape together mags but that is was uncommon but not unusal, one out of one hundred amy be and no one stated to do it or not to do it.

Lord Ghee

Well the jamming issue is still around and I have read several articles about the new M-4's jamming at the wrong time during the recent battle in Afgan.

But I could see some individuals taping mag's together or using mag clamps so that they could carry more ammo in their pouches.

Plus in an urban environment you want to stay mobile and probably would not hit the dirt unless you really had to.

No what you would do is kneel/squat down behind something since this save you time when you got to move again.

DAWGIE, what does "MATTY MATTEL" refer to? Is that a nickname for the M16 because of its plastic parts?

Mattel logo came first stamped on the M!^ in th efirst few hundred made they quickly relized that this did not inspire confidence.

I had a toy M-16 in 1965 that the offical US mattel stamp on it LOL

Lord Ghee

Well, it looks like there is at least one example of this being done in WWII. Not taped but stacked for "fast reload".

Marlin UD M42

world.guns.ru/smg/smg67-e.htm

Ask my wargaming buds who are retired Vietnam vets, the mortar sgt who had to patrol stated he taped always when going on ambush, some on partol and he did some threes. The retierd major stated it depended on the season (rainy no). but his units taped if could.

ask more sargents here a bliss

transport never saw any taped

inf saw a few

pathfinder always and all of the palatoon. also they wrapped them in para cord to silence them.

Lord Ghee

I've done it before with an M-4 and M-16--but never operationally (real-world, that is). I will say it worked though, even with blanks, and I never had a stoppage with a taped magazine (both end-to-end and side-by-side). However, it could make it tricky to fire from the prone, that is the truth.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I have the feeling a few of the "dirt will get in it" and similar comments lack the experience of people moving tactically with weapons. Personally, I was trained to let my own body take the majority of the punishment when taking cover after a rush, not my weapon. A good infantryman quickly learns to protect his weapon, just as any craftsman does the tools on which he depends.

Additionally, modern weapons are rarely streamlined or weight-centered considering all the toys that get stuck on them. An extra magazine won't make any difference, and little enough when it comes to making the weapon unwieldly. Most of them already are.

It's training that counts when the chips are down…And you fight as you train. You get used to your equipment and find what works for you, and what doesn't. Military units--particularly combat ones--have SOPs, but they are stringent on some things, and lax on others.

The idea behind a taped/multiple mag set-up isn't pure weight of fire, nor the ability to shoot every round in your magazine off in mere seconds because you have another close at hand. It's because during the initial stages of a contact, weight of fire *does* matter, as does the ability to keep up that rate of fire longer than the enemy.

Having said all that, the allure of taped/multiple magazines waned as I gained experience and position (and the weight that came with it, heh). I can sympathize with soem of the sentiments espoused here about soem of the pitfalls, but it is a practice that some follow, and there are valid reasonings behind the concept.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I have the feeling a few of the "dirt will get in it" and similar comments lack the experience of people moving tactically with weapons.

82nd Airborne 1984-1988 infantry, I think I am qualified to comment on the subject Failure 16. That bottom magazine sticks out to far when going prone and all you need to do is get dirt in it once to cure any desire for taping!

"Having said all that, the allure of taped/multiple magazines waned as I gained experience"

If you derived some benefit from it why did you quit taping your magazines? What did you learn from your experience?

" but it is a practice that some follow, and there are valid reasonings behind the concept."

If there are strong valid reasons why hasn't it become a common practice?

Well, DG, if the shoe fits, wear it. I didn't specifically mention you, right? I typically don't besmirch other infantryman's experiences (even if you *were* in the 82nd, heh).

To answer your first question: as I gained experience, I gained proficiency and responsibilities that precluded the need for such an arrangement. Taped magazines are a pain to store when not in the weapon, and a difficulty in firing from the prone (which I already mentioned in my initial post, you'll note) are two of the technical issues I found, though.

As for your second question: I never said "strong valid reasons", did I? Nice try, though. I could easily say, however, that there are many things some people/units/militaries do that are valid--but not everyone does them.

Are taped/multiple magazines required? Certainly not. Does it have some advantages? Yes. Does it have some disadvantages? Yes.

Just because you couldn't keep dirt out of your weapon, or your weapon in action after you did get dirt in it, isn't strictly my concern. I never had a single stoppage in a weapon I was using other than an M-60 with a BFA when I needed it, no matter how hot, wet, cold, or dirty I was.

The original post asked if it was a valid technique or a 'Hollywoodism'. I can say that it is, with certain caveats in place. Others took the opposite approach and naysayed it out of the gate--and by some of the comments, I viewed them with some trepidation.

Indeed, Hodie Non Cras said that if any of his instructors saw tape on a mag of his, he'd be in for it. I can say for a fact that 3/PPCLI taped the bottom of their magazines at one point, just like eery US Army light infantry outfit I'd seen--it silences the spring to some extent and allows a pull tab at the bottom if required (though that itself doesn't require tape). See? Different people, different experiences.