US PALM annouces new Quad Stack 7.62x39 AK Mag

US PALM Facebook post

US PALM posted on their Facebook page this week that they will be unveiling a new quad stack AK magazine made from polymer for the 7.62x39 cartridge.  The quad stack magazine is 1/8th of an inch shorter than the US PALM AK 30 magazine.  US PALM is pricing the new magazine at $99.95 which falls in line with the pricing of the new Surefire MAG-60 quad stack magazine for the AR15/M16.  The new magazine will be shown at SHOT Show 2012.

Russian 60 round 5.45x39 mag

A polymer extended capacity magazine for the AK isn't a new concept, the Russians have a similar magazine available for the AK-74.  The Russian magazine is designed to work with 5.45x39 rounds and holds 60 rounds.  US PALM is rocking the boat a bit by putting their twist on the Russian concept and designing it to work with the 7.62x39 cartridge.  The US PALM magazine will hold 45 rounds.

I hope these work well and sell well so that perhaps US PALM considers making a polymer 60 round 5.45x39 quad stack mag.  The Russian magazines are nearly impossible to get, only a few exist in the US and I suspect these came in through gray market channels.

I will be visiting the US PALM booth at SHOT Show and hopefully getting some pictures and video of this new product.

Stay tuned for our SHOT Show 2012 coverage starting next week!

SHOT Show 2012 - Sin City here we come!

The MAC crew is headed out to Las Vegas in two weeks to attend the 2012 SHOT Show.  

You didn't just ask, "what is SHOT Show?"  Did you? 

For those that might not know what SHOT Show is, it's the largest firearms industry event in the country.  Manufacturers, importers and dealers of all types get together in Sin City to checkout new products, make deals and to meet each other face to face.  It's more fun than should be legal, or so I'm told.

This will be my first year going to SHOT Show.  Yes, it's true.  I've never gone before.  I've tried once, but that's another story from a past life... back when yours truly was dating a United Airlines flight attendant and she gave us a couple "companion passes" to fly down to the show.  The only problem was, there weren't any available flights!

Here we are in 2012 and we're doing things differently.  The tickets are purchased.  The hotel is booked.  The requests for interviews are collected.  We are going!  Kilgore and I will be there all week meeting many of the folks we've worked with over the past year and meeting plenty of new people as well.

What does this mean for the MAC Corps?  It means we'll be on the floor with cameras talking to leaders in the industry about stuff I know you're going to want to see and hear about.

Is there something you would like us to check into?  Swing by our online discussion board and post your request in our SHOT Show 2012 thread.

The journey begins on January 16th.  Stay tuned!

The Bumpfire Stock Wars

For the last year I've been following the development of two bumpfire stocks made by Slide Fire Solutions.  In 2011 they introduced the SSAR15 stock for the AR15 rifle, and I reviewed the stock on the Military Arms Channel soon after the introduction.

I found that the SSAR15 stock worked as advertised and I have actually been quite impressed with its performance.  I eagerly awaited the then rumored AK version to be released.  Just before Christmas on 2011, Slide Fire Solutions released their SSAK-47 XRS stock for the AK rifle.

I completed my review of the new SSAK-47 stock immediately after its announced release and once again found the device to work exactly as advertised.

 

Imagine my surprise when I learned just after New Years 2012 that another company named Fostech announced their own bumpfire stock.  The new stock is called the Bumpski and Fostech published a video on YouTube demonstrating the new device.

Of course this piqued my interest, so I started to dig around to find more information about this new stock.  There is one key difference between the two stocks, the Bumpski is made from aluminum vs. the plastic used in the construction of the Slide Fire Solutions devices.

Not much is known about the Bumpski just yet.  The stock isn't currently shipping but I've been told the first shipment should be heading out the doors at Fostech to dealers and customers by the end of January.

I was able to speak with Judd from Fostech who gave me a few details over the phone about the stock.  The body is in fact made from aluminum that is anodized black.  It is a drop in replacement for your existing fixed stock on your AK rifle.  It works using the same principals employed by the SSAR15 and SSAK-47 stocks.  The rifle is free to move forwards and back on the stock while the shooter keeps their firing finger fixed on a rest.  The recoil coupled with the forward pressure of your non-shooting hand causes the rifle to bumpfire controllably.  This process is demonstrated in the SSAK-47 review video above.

The SSAK-47 stock retails for $289.95 and the new Bumpski stock retails for $449.

Then I noticed that Bill Akins, the inventor of the Akins Accelerator, was posting on the Firing Line Forums about the new Bumpski stock.  Further investigation uncovered that Mr. Akins actually holds a patent on the key principals of the bump fire stock being used by both companies.  Mr. Akins has since transferred his patent to Fostech, the creators of the Bumpski stock.

Here is a post made by Mr. Akins on the YouTube video posted by Fostech of their new Bumpski stock.

kkibler1, Look up U.S. patent 6,101,918 that I invented and was granted a U.S. patent for on Aug 15, 2000. Pay particular attention to the claims in my patent most especially claim #19 regarding the finger stabilization stops. My patent is now an asset of FosTech Outdoors while Slide Fire Solutions does NOT have a patent of any kind. So you might want to rethink your above statement. It pays to research & know what you are talking about before posting.

BillAkinsProduction 11 hours ago

A quick search of the US Patent database does in fact return a hit on Bill's patent which was granted on Aug 15th, 2000. 

What does this mean?  In the short term it means we have two products to choose from.  In the long term does this mean Slide Fire Solutions and Fostech will become embroiled in an ugly legal dispute over the patent?  I certainly hope not.  I hope that both companies can enjoy success in the marketplace with their products.

I plan to do a complete review of the new Bumpski stock at the end of January.  Stay tuned!

Saying good-bye to the M9

The Army has announced that it will be replacing the 25 year old M9 pistol.  This announcement came on Aug 28th, 2011.

M9 Service Pistol

The M9 has had a long and some what sordid history with the U.S. Armed Forces.  Starting early in its life cycle a now infamous slide failure injured a Naval Special Warfare member.  Other slide failures were observed during this time period which resulted in several design changes.  One of these changes was the inclusion of a device to capture the slide should it fail thereby preventing it from striking the shooter.

During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan other problems were discovered with the pistol, among those were problems with the contract magazines that often failed in the sandy conditions.  This was remedied with a new contract being put out and a new vendor selected for manufacturing the magazines.

Unfortunately the problems didn't stop there with the M9.

The open top design of the M9 has also been criticized as it tends to allow debris into the action of the pistol relatively easily thereby causing malfunctions.

The locking block of the pistol was known for failures.  After 5,000 rounds were fired, it was recommended this piece be replaced.  It took several years, but Beretta finally fixed this problem and now the locking blocks are said to be quite durable.  The Army still claims that the M9 has a service life of 5,000 rounds, however Beretta contests this claim and says that the service life of the M9 is more along the lines of 35,000 rounds.  A test carried out under Army supervision fired 168,000 rounds through 12 M9's without a malfunction.

The slide mounted safety has also been a problem.  When Soldiers or Marines have used immediate action to clear a malfunction, they've inadvertently engaged the safety of the pistol.  Immediate action generally requires the operator to grab the slide firmly with their non-shooting hand and rack it rearward very quickly and positively.  Where the operator grabs the slide is where the slide mounted safety is located.

Walther P-38

But the M9 has also had its fans and supporters.  It is an elegant pistol that shares many of its innovations with the WWII era P38 Walter pistol.  The dropping block system of lock-up was borrowed directly from the P38.  The slide mounted hammer drop safety was also borrowed from the design, as was the open top design of the slide.

One thing of interest is that the Army has said that the M9 lacks lethality.  One of the requirements for a new pistol will be "an increase in permanent wound channel" which seems to suggest a caliber change might also be on the horizon.  I would imagine this will be a tough battle given our NATO allies use 9mm and if the US once again goes off the reservation with a non-standard caliber, our allies might protest.  That, or perhaps NATO is considering a caliber change too.  My guess is that the .40 S&W will be a strong contender.

USMC M9A1

It's also worth noting that back in 2008 the USMC adopted the M9A1 (4,000 delivered that year) which had several improvements including a beveled magazine well, 1913 type rail,  re-contoured trigger guard and a new buffer system.

I look forward to the new pistol trials to be carried out in 2012.  The field should be awash in competing designs including the Glock, M&P, Px4, Sig, HK P30 or HK45, XD, etc.

When Tactical Goes Wrong

It seems that the rush to make a new "tactical" accessory or firearm continues.  We've seen this trend for several years by many manufacturers, but occasionally you'll stumble into a product that makes you think, "what the heck?".  I recently stumbled into two such products and interestingly, they're both from the same manufacturer.

Mossberg.

Mossberg seems to be suffering from a bit of an identity crisis lately.  Mossberg made a name for itself early in the 20th century by designing and manufacturing classics like the Brownie pistol and eventually traditional rifles, shotguns and optics.  In the last couple of decades the Mossberg Model 500 shotgun has become something of an icon and is used by the U.S. military.  Mossberg is also one of the oldest firearms makers in the U.S. and is the oldest family owned firearms manufacturer in the U.S.

Despite being a seasoned firearms manufacturer, they've made some real head scratchers lately.

702 Plinkster

Take the 702 Pinkster .22LR autoloader as an example.  Here we have what almost seems to be a traditional semi-automatic .22LR rifle with a detachable magazine and polymer stock.  Where things get really strange is at the muzzle.  That's right, they've added what appears to be a .50 BMG muzzle brake to a .22LR, similar to the brakes found on rifles such as the Barrett M82 sniper rifle.  The massive Barrett brake is designed to tame the vicious recoil of the .50 BMG rifle cartridge.  I don't know why anyone would see a need to use such a device on a rifle that is generally accepted to have no recoil.  I would pay to be a fly on the wall during the conversations between the engineers and the marketing folks at Mossberg when this concept was being pitched.

But apparently the 702 Plinkster wasn't tacticool enough to stand on its own, Mossberg stepped up with yet another head scratcher, perhaps eclipsing the 702 Plinkster.

Model 500 "Chainsaw"

Enter the Model 500 "Chainsaw" 12ga shotgun.  This little gem looks like it's right out of The Evil Dead movie.  Take a pistol grip 12ga shotgun, add a tacticool muzzle device and a chainsaw grip to the front pump handguard and you have what's possibly the craziest looking shotgun ever created and sold by a major firearms manufacturer.  The image to the left is not photoshopped in any way, this is a real product.

I wish Mossberg well in their pursuit of profits, but honestly, I'm a bit dumbfounded with these two products.  When I first saw images of them I honestly thought it was a joke, that someone had photoshopped a couple of images for a gag.  But it's no joke, these are real products.

Mossberg Modern Rifle (MMR)

Mossberg has also stepped into the ring with another new product that's a little more conventional, the MMR or "Mossberg Modern Rifle".  The MMR is basically another AR15 clone which I would argue isn't "modern" in the slightest.  To me calling another AR15 clone based on a design that's 48+ years old "modern" is like producing another 1911 clone and calling it the MMH (Mossberg Modern Handgun).  About the only thing I can see that's unique about the MMR is the unconventional looking pistol grip they've added.

I honestly wish Mossberg the best of luck with these products.  It will be interesting to see how these products fare in the marketplace.  Perhaps they'll sell like hotcakes and I'll be forced to eat a hearty serving of crow.

*** Update 2/17/2012***

It looks like Mossberg out did themselves.  Words escape me when looking at their latest tacticool offering.  This one is called the 464 SPX and it's something to behold, for sure:

Modernizing the AK

It's no secret, I'm a fan of the AK rifle.  There are several reasons for my interest in the AK rifle, but I can sum up that interest by describing the rifle as "stupid simple".  A fighting rifle needs to be simple.  Simple controls.  Simple sights.  Big parts that facilitate easy maintenance, and it needs to be reliable.  The AK is the epitome of simplicity and reliability.  That's why I prefer the AK, it's a no frills tool designed to be brutally effective, which it is.

U.S. M4 Rifle

Here in the U.S. we're in love with our AR15's and M16's.  I'm also a fan of the AR15 and M16, but stupid simple it is not.  It has tiny parts that are easily lost in the field, things like the firing pin retaining pin.  It gets dirty more quickly than other rifles that don't rely on direct impingement to operate the action.  But if kept clean and the troops are properly trained, it's a world class military small arm.  But the feature that has set the AR15/M16 apart from the AK in the last couple of decades is the ability of the AR15/M16 to mount a dizzying array of aftermarket accessories.  Some are more useful than others, but accessories such as modern optical sighting systems are critical updates for a modern fighting rifle.

Russian Kobra Red Dot Sight

The countries that field the AK have developed sighting systems for the rifle, but in my opinion most of these systems are far behind Western technologies in terms of quality, durability, and usefulness.  As an example, the Russian Kobra red dot sight is a popular optic used on AK's.  It mounts to the rifle via a proprietary rail system that resides on the left side of the AK's receiver.  The red dot sight (RDS) sits high above the rifle thereby not allowing a co-witness of the iron sights.  In my experience the Kobra sights are somewhat frail as well.  They certainly aren't in the same league as the Aimpoint Comp M4, as an example.

Aimpoint w/RS Products Mount

As the popularity of the AK grows in the United States, more companies have focused on developing high quality, well engineered solutions for mounting modern sighting systems to the rifle.  A number of things have driven the popularity of the AK in recent times, but mostly the relatively low cost of both the rifles and ammunition have been the primary contributors to this popularity.  Whatever the reason, it's a definite win for those of us who own AK's as we're now seeing some great accessories that rival those offered on the AR15/M16.

Midwest Ind. Rail w/RMR RDS

One of the more useful developments for the AR15/M16 have been the forward mounted rail systems used to mount various accessories.  Until recently, these weren't available for the AK rifle.  One of the pioneers was the Ultimak rail for the AK, but it left much to be desired.  It replaced the gas tube with one that included a 1913 style rail for mounting optics.  The downside is that the gas tube gets extremely hot during extended firing and it then passes this heat along to the optic mounted to the rail.  You also had to cut up the lower hand guard or remove the heat shield to get it to mount properly.  But companies like Midwest Industries came along with a more integrated solution that not only runs cooler but allows you to mount modern RDS systems low enough to allow a co-witness of the iron sights.

TWS Rail with CMR 1-4x Scope

The AR15/M16 also evolved to include a flat top 1913 rail along the receiver that compliment after market railed hand guards.  This allowed the user to mount more traditional optics like scopes closer to the shooter for proper eye relief.  While the Russians did develop scopes based on the receiver rail mounting system, these are of modest quality and set off center, to the left, making it difficult for left handed shooters.  This system has mostly been unpalatable to many Western shooters.  That left the door open for Texas Weapon Systems to develop a reliable method for mounting a 1913 rail to the receiver of the AK, which they did.  This system allows the shooter to mount conventional optics in the proper location while not interfering with the normal operation of the AK, including the ability to easily field strip it for cleaning.

I've only touched upon a few of the new and exciting systems available for AK owners.  There are many new products out there that one should consider when modernizing their AK rifle.  At the Military Arms Channel we review many of the new systems as they are released.  Check our channel frequently to see what's new and exciting for the AK rifle.

It's time to say goodbye.

Marine with his M16

We, as Americans, tend to cling to things.  We are a nostalgic bunch.  We love our 1911's, our M1 Garands and our 1960's hotrods.  There's nothing wrong with that really, it defines us.  But we also tend to cling to things for the wrong reasons.  We get comfortable with something and we are reluctant to let go.  Take the M1 Garand and the M14 as an example.  We loved the M1 Garand so much that we refused to let it go.  When the rest of the world was moving towards more modern rifles, we revamped the M1 Garand and came up with the M14, one of the shortest serving rifles in U.S. military history.
 
The M16 has been with us since the 1960's.  When the M16 came on the scene, it was one of the most revolutionary rifle designs, ever.  Why?  Because it made use of aluminum forgings for major parts, plastics/polymers for the stocks, was super light weight and fired the newly developed 5.56mm cartridge.  The M16, and all of its subsequent variants, became the catalyst for change in small arms thinking around the world, including being the primary impetus behind the Russians dropping the 7.62x39 in favor of the 5.45x39.

I served with the M16A2 in the Marine Corps in the late 80's and early 90's.  My first center fire rifle was a Colt AR15 A2 Sporter II, which I still have in my safe.  I love the AR15/M16.  It's as American as baseball and apple pie.  It's served as our nations primary combat rifle for 46 years, the longest serving rifle in U.S. military history.

Adcor Defense B.E.A.R.

The Army has started trials to find a replacement for the M4 Carbine.  These trials will include rifles ranging from the FN SCAR, Remington ACR, Robarms XCR to updated versions of the M4 Carbine.  Companies such as Remington are fielding revised versions of the M4 Carbine for these new trials as well as new comers such as Adcor Defense and their highly modified M4 style Carbine called the B.E.A.R.

Companies have been modifying the AR15/M16 for many years now trying to resolve "issues" with the direct impingement (DI) gas system.  It seems the most popular modification is to replace the DI gas system with a gas piston arrangement similar to that found on the AR18/180.  The only problem I have with these modifications is that it assumes there is something wrong with the DI system of operation.  I don't believe there is, nor do many who have studied the performance of the M16 in combat.

As a matter of fact, many of these "fixes" to the DI system actually cause more problems than they resolve.  The introduction of gas piston systems into the AR family of rifles has caused things like "carrier tilt", a problem that causes malfunctions and accelerated wear in many modified AR's.  That's where companies like Adcor and the new B.E.A.R. rifle come in, they claim to correct all the problems introduced by other changes made to the AR's original system of operation.  It's a vicious circle, we're now fixing the fixes on a rifle that had no real problems to begin with. 

Why am I telling you all of this?  Because I firmly believe that if we're going to test and adopt a new rifle the AR/M16 needs to be retired and replaced with a more modern rifle system.  I say "system" because the modern warrior needs more than a rifle with iron sights on the modern battlefield.  The M16 has adapted nicely to these ever evolving high-tech roles with various modifications, but it's time we adopt a rifle built from the ground up, using modern materials and engineering, for America's warriors.  If we're going to replace the M16/M4 in service, let's do it right and not adopt a warmed over, "fixed up" AR15/M16.  We owe it to ourselves and to our war fighters to give them the best we can make.  I propose we stop with the endless modifications to the AR/M16 and build a new rifle that capitalizes on the lessons we've learned over the last 46 years with the M16 and come up with the next revolutionary rifle design.

We can do it.