Personally, I much prefer them. I have rifles with DM (Sako, CZ, Rock River) and floorplate (Howa). I simply see no advantage to a floorplate. The detachable magazine is just as easy to load and far easier to unload.
And what's with the hoary excuse of losing the magazine? If millions of pistol, AR-15, M1A, Mini fourteen, etc, etc, etc. owners don't seem to have that problem, why would you?
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
I had a rifle with a detachable, I believe it was a Savage. I didn't care for the slow reloading, not having a spare, and the fact it couldn't conveniently be single loaded from the open bolt. Also, the magazine well was close fitting, and you had to look at what you were doing, and have things lined up EXACTLY, rather than concentrating on your target or other things around you. Just wasn't my cup of tea.
Magazines for bolt actions lack the rugged dependability found on military autoloaders. Hunting mags tend to be made of plastic and use poorly designed latches. Many push the cartridges into an unreliable single stack, and some reduce the capacity of the rifle by at least one.
Basically, bolt actions were not designed for detachable mags, and most folks don't like messing with something that already works fine.
Orion, I'm with you, I've been using them for 40 years. I'll go out on a limb and be politically incorrect (like I haven't done that before), as far as I'm concerned personally the floor plate is the most useless thing on a rifle. If I couldn't have a detachable magazine I'd rather have a blind magazine (and I have 2 of them). And as Orion has stated before, all auto pistols have them, most military rifles have them, they are more reliable and are much faster to reload. Now having said all that and before everybody with a floorplate decides to bombard me, bear in mind these are personal preferences and opinions. There was a valid remark in one of the above posts about not fitting properly. Seeing as how DMs are fairly new to sporting rifles I will grant you that there are a couple of designs that are awkward. I think that is going to change as they gain more acceptance with hunters. A good design is slick and reliable. Savage is a good example, that's why I own all Savages. They're ugly but they work. There, I've said my piece.
Posts: 2092 | Location: Canada | Registered: 25 April 2003
I hear how easy it is to lose a detachable magazine all the time as well. What I don't here about much is people actually losing them. I sometimes wonder if the people that say this duct tape their wallet, knife, binoculars and the keys to their trucks to their rifles as well. Wouldn't want to loose them either.
Four A-Bolts in the family, over nearly two decades of hunting. We still have all four magazines....
Their system is light, not ugly (because you can't see it) and can conviently be loaded in your hand, attached to the floorplate or in the rifle the same as a blind magazine. You don't ever have to push that button, you know. It acts in every way exactly the same as a blind magazine if you don't.
Posts: 920 | Location: Mukilteo, WA | Registered: 29 November 2001
The one I have used most was years ago and that was the 303 SMLEs.
On sporting rifles Kricos were very good, super smooth and super reliable feeder with in line cartridge stacking.
It is funny how you start out with certain perceptions. Up until about the 1960s the 303, 303/270 and 303/25 ruled the roost in Australia. Then we started buying 243s and 270s that were M70, Sako, Parker Hale and most of us thought their magazine system was a low number of shots piece of shit
Mike
Posts: 7206 | Location: Sydney, Australia | Registered: 22 May 2002
Mike, that brings back some memories. When I first got out of the military and money was tight I bought a .303 with the ten shot magazine from my brother-in-law for $30.00 and used it for 4 years and sold it for $30.00. From there I bought a used Savage 99 with the rotary magazine and thought I was a bigshot.
Posts: 2092 | Location: Canada | Registered: 25 April 2003
I am about to have a Tikka hitting my doors in a few weeks, that would be my first bolt gun with a DM. What's the reputation for their magazine system? I know they are 3 round single stack mags...
Posts: 638 | Location: O Canada! | Registered: 21 December 2001
Here is my only experience. I borrowed an HS Precision rifle with a detachable magazine for my first and only cape buffalo hunt. The first buffalo I killed with one shot, but I noticed the magazine was loose after the first shot. So, I used duct tape to secure it. It seems the magazine release was inside the trigger guard, and the recoil from the 416 Rigby forced my trigger finger into the release, and loosened the magazine.
The next buffalo I used duct tape to hold the magazine in place. Great idea until this buff was not a one-shot kill, and I had to reload while running after him. I had to remove the duct tape, pull out the magazine, and then reload it. I don't know the proper terminology, but the magazine wouldn't let me simply force in the new rounds, but required me to look down, put the round in, and then slide it back to secure it into the magazine like you do on a Glock Mdl 22. Then after reloading, re-install the magazine and re-secure the duct tape. That ain't the way to hunt dangerous game!
Posts: 4781 | Location: Story, WY / San Carlos, Sonora, MX | Registered: 29 May 2002
The Tikka magazine is a dream to use it feeds so well,you only have to get used to loading it,it loades like a rimfire magazine,I have a five round one on my tikka continental & its a dream to use.
After many years of using internal magazines on a number of rifles I finally got one with a detachable magazine about 12 years ago,now i'll only buy a rifle with a detachable magazine,I think they are easier to reload,convienient,have less feeding problems & would be a vital safety factor for hunting dangerous game with the second magazine slipping easily in in case its needed,i'de not hunt dangerous game without atleast one loaded backup magazine & have to fumble around trying to load more rounds while being charged.
I,ve never lost a magazine from a hunting rifle nor from any of the military rifles i've carted around but I always ensure my rifles are serviced & everything is in tip top condition(including the magazine retention systen)before venturing out.
Posts: 318 | Location: Australia | Registered: 24 November 2002
The only advantage of a detachable magazine is for combat type applications where fast reloading in a high volume of fire enviroment is needed and where a large quantity of ammo needs to be carried. I have never seen a hunting situation that fits that description. There is no advantage in having a detachable magazine for a hunting rifle and there is the disadvantage that you can lose or misplace or forget the magazine. I understgand that if you are paying attention that won't happen but Murphy lives and I prefer to reduce all possible chances for him to tag along. JMHO.
Jeff
[ 05-14-2003, 16:50: Message edited by: Skibum ]
Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000
There is indeed a good thing about having detachable mags. One can load fast and silently. I had a Sako Forester which had a floorplate and loading it was a series of "click-click-click-click..." every time I put a round in the mag.
Not to mention that while there is a possibility of losing the mag, there is also the possibility of accidentally releasing the floorplate. The Sako had a little button in frnt of the trigger guard, not very well protected. Well, one will notice when it happpens but so will every deer in the vincinity.
/HerrBerg
Posts: 1723 | Location: Stockholm, Sweden | Registered: 18 March 2002
I have a detachable magazine on a Browning A-bolt II, and just received a second magazine by order this week.
In my gun, the magazine does not stick down below the profile of the gun, there is a floorplate and you can load from the top with the bolt open, if you wish.
One advantage is during our deer season we hunt by driving deer in front of hounds. When you move from one site to another you have to unload, so the DM comes out of the gun and into the pocket. Safe and fast.
Obviously, I can load one magazine with 250 gr. loads and another with 180s if I like, or I have a spare in case one were to become lost, which I think is unlikely.
In my case, the caliber is .338 Win. Mag., which is a belted magnum, and I don't see any disadvantage at all. I can even take it apart and clean it in front of the TV, if I like, without having to have the gun there.
I have rifles with and without, and though I must agree with the "Mickey Mouse" arguments against them, they are a great convenience.
Drop the mag, pull the bolt, and you are unloaded -- a requirement in many jurisdiction if driving from stand to stand, as in coyote hunting. Drop in a round, slap in the mag, and you are good to go. Of course, we all unload when climbing tree stands?
On my truck gun, I have the mag in the door pocket. Once a skunk rears it's ugly head, it's a simple matter to slap in the magazine, rack the bolt, and presto, firepower. No one here leaves their truck guns loaded, right? JMO, Dutch.
Posts: 4564 | Location: Idaho Falls, ID, USA | Registered: 21 September 2000
Don't hate them. Just that they are really not needed unless, you have to shoot more than 3 or 4 times to take your game. And if they are not needed, then its useless. And useless things while hunting, are not with me.
Can someone explain why you need them? Maybe I am wrong. I have heard the explaination that when unloading, its easier, and you have to unload a gun before getting into a car, so detaching the mag is easier. Then the mag is ready when getting back out. But its a very small amount of time for me to load that gun back up.
Where I hunt we usually do a lot of moving around with cars betwin the drives.
It means a lot of loading and unloading. I'm using a ADL magasine so it's a bitch to unload. Much better to get you ammo out in a handy package that are easy to load and unload.
Any DM must ofcourse be of a sound construction.
Johan
Posts: 1082 | Location: Middle-Norway (Veterinary student in Budapest) | Registered: 20 March 2002
i hated my remington setup. noisy and can easily be popped loose. sold it. on the other hand, my blr in 358 has a wonderful setup. snugs up quietly and cannot be accidentally popped loose. most of my guns are now adl. the browning rides with me to maine. it stays in the truck. this is where the clip shines. you must ride unloaded and for those of us who might spend a little more time in the truck on the 4th or 5th day of seeing nothing they are wonderful just hop out slam in a clip full and enjoy. you dont even have to look at the rifle to load it. woofer
Posts: 741 | Location: vermont. thanks for coming, now go home! | Registered: 05 February 2002
quote:Originally posted by waksupi: I had a rifle with a detachable, I believe it was a Savage. I didn't care for the slow reloading, not having a spare, and the fact it couldn't conveniently be single loaded from the open bolt. Also, the magazine well was close fitting, and you had to look at what you were doing, and have things lined up EXACTLY, rather than concentrating on your target or other things around you. Just wasn't my cup of tea.
Those problems are a function of the rifle being designed and made by Savage, not of having a detachable magazine per se.
My Sako 75 suffers none of those problems. Slow reloading? Are you referring to changing mags? I can do a Sako mag change in seconds. Not having a spare? Order one. Can't conveniently load from an open bolt? Again, a function of being a Savage. My Sako can be loaded from the top and you would not ever know it was a detachable magazine. The rounds click in just as they do in any other rifle. Also, a Sako magazine goes in almost effortlessly.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
quote:Originally posted by KurtC: Magazines for bolt actions lack the rugged dependability found on military autoloaders. Hunting mags tend to be made of plastic and use poorly designed latches. Many push the cartridges into an unreliable single stack, and some reduce the capacity of the rifle by at least one.
Basically, bolt actions were not designed for detachable mags, and most folks don't like messing with something that already works fine.
My only experience is with CZ and Sako hutning rifles with detachable magazines. I can find none of the faults you attribute to them. The CZ is a .22 LR so it is obviously a single stack. The Sako is a double stack and fits FOUR 300 Winchester Magnum rounds. One more than almost all floorplated rifles.
BTW, almost all handgun magazines terminate into a single stack. Don't see too many failures to feed unless one is using a bullet inappropriate to an autoloader.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
quote:Originally posted by Brad: They're heavy, make noise, can get lost and look, well... ugly! Apart from all that they're terrrific!
I can't tell my Sako has a DM unless you look at it from the bottom. Even then, all you notice is the little latch lever at the front. 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
quote:Originally posted by KurtC: Detachable mags seem to work best in small and standard size cartridges. I don't think they are at all reliable for large bore and belted magnums.
Some designs are decent, some are not. They have to judged individually.
If a rifle is sold with a detachable magazine, it should come with a spare. Some are very hard to come by and are often quite expensive.
The Sako detachable mag is quite reliable with belted magnums (mine's a 300 Win Mag). I have no experience with other magnum rifles with DMs.
I agree that some DMs are quite expensive. European brands in particular.
[ 05-15-2003, 01:53: Message edited by: Orion 1 ]
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
quote: Those problems are a function of the rifle being designed and made by Savage, not of having a detachable magazine per se.
Hey, I'm on your side. Quit pickin on Savage!
Seriously, I suspect the gentleman that had difficulties with the Savage may have been unfamiliar with the rifle but I can assure you they have never been anything but flawless for me. That's why I'm still buying them.
Posts: 2092 | Location: Canada | Registered: 25 April 2003
Well, I have a couple of requirements from a DGR, or any rifle, for that matter. First, I demand a striker-block safety. Either an M70 or a Buehler will do, but it must block the striker and not just the trigger. That eliminates most rifles with detachable magazines. Also, I personally prefer (perhaps because of oldfartism, perhaps because of caution, perhaps because too many others with much more experience than I have agree) CRF. Put these two primary requirements together and you eliminate the Savage, the Sako, the Remington, etc., etc. Additionally, I know what I'm like! I put things down and then can't find them. Some of you must have eidetic memories or total attention order and never mislay stuff but if I had a DM, I'd lose it, somewhere. So I am happy that y'all are happy but I will stick with the old way of loading, thank-you very much.
Posts: 2690 | Location: Lakewood, CA. USA | Registered: 07 January 2001
Sarge, some non-cocking piece safeties do block the striker. Howa rifles physically block the sear from moving down when the safety is engaged, keeping the striker blocked from moving.
BTW, I'm not trying to convince anyone. If you say you don't like detachable magazines because you like floorplates, that's cool. I have, however, seen some lame reasons like "they are not sturdy", "they hold fewer rounds", "they don't load well from the top", "they look ugly", etc., and I provide examples from my rifles that counter them.
To each his own.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
I think much of the prejudice against detachables has originated from gunsmiths and others who enjoy the complexies of having a properly working staggered feed.
In general, detachables tend to be either in line feed or if double row they feed the ammo up through a single row opening. There is no better illustration of the reliability and ease of getting single stack to work in the fact that single stack was used to solve the feeding problem of the very rebated rim of the 500 Jeffery.
Mike
Posts: 7206 | Location: Sydney, Australia | Registered: 22 May 2002
I think much of the prejudice against detachables has originated from gunsmiths and others who enjoy the complexies of having a properly working staggered feed.
In general, detachables tend to be either in line feed or if double row they feed the ammo up through a single row opening. There is no better illustration of the reliability and ease of getting single stack to work in the fact that single stack was used to solve the feeding problem of the very rebated rim of the 500 Jeffery.
Mike
I think I agree with you, however, the Sako DM feeds double colum all the way up flawlessy with even belted magnums.
If Sako can do it, anyone can. All the more reason for buying a quality rifle in the first place.
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
quote:Originally posted by Oldsarge: First, I demand a striker-block safety. Either an M70 or a Buehler will do, but it must block the striker and not just the trigger. That eliminates most rifles with detachable magazines.
The A-Bolt safety blocks the striker.
Posts: 920 | Location: Mukilteo, WA | Registered: 29 November 2001
There is no certainly no problem achieving double stack upto and including the opening. When all isa sid and done the magazine in the smaller Wbys is independent of the feed rails.
However, in my opinion and if all else is equal, a single feed (including double that narrows to single) must be ultimately superior since the cartridges do not have to come out at an angle.
I know this is an extreme test but sometime ago a couple of us compared my 416 Wby and the other persons Model 70 375. 400 Round Nose and 300 Round Nose respectively. With the bolt open and the muzzle resting down, we belted the bolt closed with a rubber mallet. Sure enough, the 375 "bounced" across and the blunt Hornady caught the edge of the chamber. No so the in line feeding 416. Sometimes "cheap" works better
Mike
Posts: 7206 | Location: Sydney, Australia | Registered: 22 May 2002
Orion1, IMHO, the detatchable magazine has a few thing against it. Losing a mag is always a concern, especially in areas where the rifle is used. The magazines, when not in use, is normally carried in a pocket where the magazine gets full of dirt and lint. When attempting to change mags in a hurry, it's just too slow. A rifle stock for a detatchable mag doesn't have the rigidity of a normal stock, and may not lend itself to as high a level of accuracy. On top of that, I just don't like 'em. Have a good one.
quote:Originally posted by BigBob: Orion1, IMHO, the detatchable magazine has a few thing against it. Losing a mag is always a concern, especially in areas where the rifle is used. The magazines, when not in use, is normally carried in a pocket where the magazine gets full of dirt and lint. When attempting to change mags in a hurry, it's just too slow. A rifle stock for a detatchable mag doesn't have the rigidity of a normal stock, and may not lend itself to as high a level of accuracy. On top of that, I just don't like 'em. Have a good one.
Are you serious?
Let's go through that point by point.
"Losing a mag is always a concern".
So is losing your car keys, wallet, bullets, lucky charm, etc.
"The magazines, when not in use, is normally carried in a pocket where the magazine gets full of dirt and lint."
Me? I keep the pocket flaps closed. I don't wallow around in the dirt. And I wash my clothes after use.
"When attempting to change mags in a hurry, it's just too slow."
You must not practice enough. I can change mags in both my Sako 75 and AR-15 in seconds. Then again, shooting HP rifle matches almost every weekend keeps me sharp. Besides, we're talking about hunting rifles. I like DMs for their convenience in unloading/loading, not for doing combat reloads while fighting off hordes of deer.
"A rifle stock for a detatchable mag doesn't have the rigidity of a normal stock, and may not lend itself to as high a level of accuracy."
Pleeeeeease. Have you looked at the BIG hole where the cartridges go in a floorplate rifle? That hole goes all the way through from top to bottom, whether you have a floorplate or a DM. You saved the best for last.
It's cool if you don't like DMs because you just like the "classic" floorplate. But don't cobble up lame reasons to tell me a DM is inferior.
[ 05-15-2003, 17:57: Message edited by: Orion 1 ]
Posts: 2206 | Location: USA | Registered: 31 August 2002
I like DMs for their convenience in unloading/loading, not for doing combat reloads while fighting off hordes of deer.
Be assured that if you come to Australia the detachable works best when chasing hordes of roos. It is about 110 times easier to stick a magazine in an SMLE than load a magazine while in the back of a 4 wheel drive that is chasing.
In my experience the worse gun when chasing roos and pigs in a car is the 30/30. Far too hard to reload when bouncing about.
Mike
Posts: 7206 | Location: Sydney, Australia | Registered: 22 May 2002
My only experience with a drop box is on a Browning A-Bolt. I like the convenience of coming out of the woods and popping the mag out and slipping it in my pocket. The problem was I would constantly forget the mag when I went hunting. On more than several occasions I hunted with an A-Bolt single shot rifle. I know, A little fore thought would have prevented this from happening, but a lot of my hunting trips are spur of the moment affairs. For a person that keeps his stuff together and well organized, it's a neat concept. For others (me) it's a bad thing. I need a rifle that all the parts stay attached.
Posts: 6315 | Location: Mississippi | Registered: 18 May 2002
Orion1, You asked for opinions. That's what I gave you. If you want to fight about it go someplace else. You may not agree with my opinion, but for me, my opinion is right. If you don't want opinions, don't ask for them.
![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon}
![[Eek!]](images/icons/shocked.gif){kind=icon}
![[Cool]](images/icons/cool.gif){kind=icon}
![[Wink]](images/icons/wink.gif){kind=icon}
