An In Depth Comparison of Airsoft M4 MidCap Magazines



Full Results Spreadsheet:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-Zjl4p93KpMJIiN0TZxa71NzdJUgZofGGn5AcLvzP0U/edit?usp=sharing

Full Testing Footage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzmqM_nf5aA&feature=youtu.be

Important Time Stamps:

Testing Procedure Discussion: 1:50

Special Thanks: 4:48

Loser’s corner: 6:13

Top 5 Winners: 20:12

Runners Up: 25:42

Outro: 37:27

LIMITATIONS OF TESTING:

I forgot to put this in at first, but I want to take a second to discuss the limitations of this testing. I think it’s important in any endeavor that seeks to be objective that the person carrying out testing can demonstrate an understanding of the limitations of their testing, and can discuss how that may impact the interpretation of the results.

To start, I was not able to test the HPA high ROF or .4g high ROF feeding of a few of the magazines, as seen on the spreadsheet, because those magazines were not able to fit in the 416 body of the HPA setup I had access to. I also was not able to test fitment and feeding of the magazines in several prominent airsoft receiver brands such as G&P, JG, Valken, Classic Army, and many others.

My counting method was also not the most precise method possible, just in the interest of time and convenience. As a result, I allowed each magazine a margin of error of 3 or 4 BBs over or under capacity, and only took points off for major deviations from stated capacity.

I did not lubricate, clean, or modify any of these magazines, with one exception that I forgot to mention. The Modify XTC midcap comes with a nub on the rear for snugly fitting magwells. I sanded that entirely off, because it was stupid and worthless and just made the magazine not fit well at all in my VFC and Krytac receivers. Other than that though, none of these magazines were modified in any way, and some people seem to think that a magazine requiring fitting is normal. I disagree, but I’m putting it under these limitations so people can decide for themselves.

All of these magazines were purchased brand new, with the exception of the PTS EMAG which I had laying around and threw into the test because people wanted to know how the old Magpul PTS mags would do. Obviously it did quite well, but it is arguable that it may have done even better had the magazine been brand new. Who knows?

So there’s my test, look at all the data and the procedure and feel free to come to your own conclusions!

source

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *