>>512579044>dont these jam a lot?Anything jams if you do not care for it.
>>512579731>Just clean your gun and it wonโt jam so much.It's not a cleanliness issue. It is a failure to feed issue. Which can be an issue with this kind of magazine.
I have an early BETA-C mag, which is much higher quality than... whatever these are.
Testing by various militaries resulted in mixed reviews.
>>512579758>they bind up if you don't use a silicone based lubricant.The lubricant is not silicone based. It is dry black graphite.
> they're way too heavy for any shooting and scootingAgreed. These should be used like the Rangers used the 100rd giant C drum magazines for the Thompson SMG at Pointe du Hoc: Go into the assault with that inserted and when it is empty or jams beyond recovery, then discard it. Do not expect to see it again. Which is why the 100 round C drum for the Thompson is so rare.
>>512580334No magazines are "high capacity".
Magazines are designed for the number of rounds they hold.
It is a box with a spring in it - which means any magazine can be made to hold any number of rounds you want. Calling a magazine "high capacity" is nothing more than a pejorative meant to scare normies.
It is neither good nor bad. It simply is.
Personally, my view on it is it's a toolbox. You use the correct tool for the job - what is appropriate for what you are doing.