[Chairforce26]

They really do. Glock mags look atrocious, they just look so stupid they way they point strights backwards. CZ Scorpion mags look like mags for a proper SMG. The black gen 2 mags that look like P-Mags are the way to go.

Besides being ugly as sin, I don't care that a 9mm AR takes the same mags as my G17. Why would I ever want to use a 17 round Glock mag in a 9mm AR? And why would I ever want to use a 33 round Glock mag in my G17? I really don't get the appeal. Maybe because the Glock mags are cheaper than the Colt pattern? But CZ Scorpion mags are just as cheap and they're a proper SMG mag.

 

[collim1]

Well the short answer is that Glock magazines have been around for thirty years.

They are cheap and available and there are a lot in circulation so naturally there is a market for carbines that use them.

CZ Scorprion has been around only a couple of years.

If the Scropion takes off in popularity it may very well lead to some AR’s being offered with magazine interchangeability.

But honestly I’ve only seen a scorpion once in person. Also, out of the couple hundred gun club members I know, not a single one owns a Scorpion.

Just because it’s all the rage with the YouTube community doesn’t mean there is a legit sizable market for it.

 

[bac1023]

Yeah I’m sure they’ll get right on that.

:whistling:

 

[ede]

The CZ mags look way more stupid the way they don't point straight back.

 

[OXMYX]

Reinventing the wheel

Colt and Uzi mags for the AR-15

 

[ronin.45]

If only there was a PCC that used Scorpion mags. Dang, why is life so hard?

 

[DrewBone]

OP you're on to something. Outside of the cheap cost of Glock mags, the most noteworthy difference between Glock magazines, which are of the "single feed" design, vs. the Scorpion/Colt MG style magazines, which are of the "double feed" design, is the ease and quickness of which the latter can be loaded by hand (examples of the two types shown below for reference only, double feed on the left):

To load the single feed mags, you have to start loading each round from the front of the magazine where the dimension between the feed lips is wider than the rear, pushing the round down to compress the mag spring, then rearward against the friction created between the cartridge case, the inside surfaces of the feed lips, and the follower, and finally into place -OR- you use a loader, then; lather, rinse, repeat. By contrast, to load double feed magazines, all that's required to do is place each round on the magazine's follower and simply push down, then; lather, rinse, repeat until the magazine is loaded to capacity...exactly like an AR15 magazine.

The BIG difference between the two really becomes apparent when you've got a couple or your friends over, and one's shooting your H&K SP89 @-around 800 rpm with your registered sear pack installed, and your other bud is chugging away at @around 500 rpm with your STEN gun...and there you are feverishly filling mags trying to keep up with them both. Those 32 round STEN mags will be tiring and will seemingly take forever to load (without a loader), wearing your fingertips out in short order, but those H&K mags, admittedly being of 2 less round capacity, can be filled in 1/4 the time that the STEN mags take, with much, much less effort required on your part, which then equates to more fun shooting and less time loading mags.

 

[Chairforce26]

OP you're on to something. Outside of the cheap cost of Glock mags, the most noteworthy difference between Glock magazines, which are of the "single feed" design, vs. the Scorpion/Colt MG style magazines, which are of the "double feed" design, is the ease and quickness of which the latter can be loaded by hand (examples of the two types shown below for reference only, double feed on the left):

To load the single feed mags, you have to start loading each round from the front of the magazine where the dimension between the feed lips is wider than the rear, pushing the round down to compress the mag spring, then rearward against the friction created between the cartridge case, the inside surfaces of the feed lips, and the follower, and finally into place -OR- you use a loader, then; lather, rinse, repeat. By contrast, to load double feed magazines, all that's required to do is place each round on the magazine's follower and simply push down, then; lather, rinse, repeat until the magazine is loaded to capacity...exactly like an AR15 magazine.

The BIG difference between the two really becomes apparent when you've got a couple or your friends over, and one's shooting your H&K SP89 @-around 800 rpm with your registered sear pack installed, and your other bud is chugging away at @around 500 rpm with your STEN gun...and there you are feverishly filling mags trying to keep up with them both. Those 32 round STEN mags will be tiring and will seemingly take forever to load (without a loader), wearing your fingertips out in short order, but those H&K mags, admittedly being of 2 less round capacity, can be filled in 1/4 the time that the STEN mags take, with much, much less effort required on your part, which then equates to more fun shooting and less time loading mags.

Thanks for this post. Glock mags don't belong in anything but Glocks. I thought the only reason why the 33 round Glock mags even exist was because of the G18 which was basically a sub machine gun, with an incredibly high rate of fire.

 

[OXMYX]

OP you're on to something. Outside of the cheap cost of Glock mags, the most noteworthy difference between Glock magazines, which are of the "single feed" design, vs. the Scorpion/Colt MG style magazines, which are of the "double feed" design, is the ease and quickness of which the latter can be loaded by hand (examples of the two types shown below for reference only, double feed on the left):

To load the single feed mags, you have to start loading each round from the front of the magazine where the dimension between the feed lips is wider than the rear, pushing the round down to compress the mag spring, then rearward against the friction created between the cartridge case, the inside surfaces of the feed lips, and the follower, and finally into place -OR- you use a loader, then; lather, rinse, repeat. By contrast, to load double feed magazines, all that's required to do is place each round on the magazine's follower and simply push down, then; lather, rinse, repeat until the magazine is loaded to capacity...exactly like an AR15 magazine.

The BIG difference between the two really becomes apparent when you've got a couple or your friends over, and one's shooting your H&K SP89 @-around 800 rpm with your registered sear pack installed, and your other bud is chugging away at @around 500 rpm with your STEN gun...and there you are feverishly filling mags trying to keep up with them both. Those 32 round STEN mags will be tiring and will seemingly take forever to load (without a loader), wearing your fingertips out in short order, but those H&K mags, admittedly being of 2 less round capacity, can be filled in 1/4 the time that the STEN mags take, with much, much less effort required on your part, which then equates to more fun shooting and less time loading mags.

I challenge anyone to easily load a Colt mag. They are without a doubt the most onerous mags in the world. One way is to bump load it, which I did for many years. Now I just Mag LULA.

 

[nipperwolf]

Yeah I’m sure they’ll get right on that.

:whistling:

:animlol: :animlol: :animlol:

 

[nipperwolf]

they point strights backwards. .

:animlol::animlol:

 

[syntaxerrorsix]

If only there was a PCC that used Scorpion mags. Dang, why is life so hard?

Right?

 

[CMG]

There is another (said the dark overlord)

 

[arndog123]

I agree and I'm not too fond of how my Cmmg Banshee looks with a Glock stick mag. It looks so much better with the upper mounted to a standard AR lower with a Endomag 9mm converted PMag.

 

[Featherweight]

Just by the CZ and be done with it.

Do the Glock mags not work? Of course they do.

 

[Chairforce26]

Just by the CZ and be done with it.

Do the Glock mags not work? Of course they do.

This isn't directed at you specifically when I say this but:

Some people aren't very perceptive. I have a CZ Scorpion already and it's awesome. I love shooting relatively cheap 9mm PCCs and I would love to get an AKV (it's on my short list). It would be cool to do a 9mm AR build but I'd rather not have to invest in new magazines. For me Mag compatibility is important since I'mnot made of money. It's part of why I got an X95 that takes AR mags instead of an AUG (which is an awesome gun in it's own right).

 

[ede]

I'd like to see CZ make a rifle that takes AR mags.

 

[ScarFace88]

I'd like to see CZ make a rifle that takes AR mags.

I swear I had something for this...

 

[jmohme]

Well the short answer is that Glock magazines have been around for thirty years.

They are cheap and available and there are a lot in circulation so naturally there is a market for carbines that use them.

CZ Scorprion has been around only a couple of years.

If the Scropion takes off in popularity it may very well lead to some AR’s being offered with magazine interchangeability.

But honestly I’ve only seen a scorpion once in person. Also, out of the couple hundred gun club members I know, not a single one owns a Scorpion.

Just because it’s all the rage with the YouTube community doesn’t mean there is a legit sizable market for it.

Yup, you pretty much nailed it.
I bet almost everyone on this site has a few or a lot of Glock magazines. I don't have even one CZ magazine, and I bet I am not alone.

 

[dkf]

I'm fine with consolidating mags, I actually try to plan it that way. When you have many guns and actually shoot them you want to keep plenty of mags on hand. Then I can stock up on the mags and I can use them in many different guns. I can throw a few extra Glock mags in the truck or where ever I think they are needed and have them work in my Glocks and in other guns. How it works is more important than how it looks. I have loaded enough SMG mags for actual machine guns to know I like loading Glock mags a lot better.