Originally posted by Lohman446
I've also used a 48/3k on a Retro Micromag & minimag. I got on average 500 shots per fill. Overall I prefer adjustables if I'm using a mag of any kind so that way I can control the output and save a few "extra" shots here and there.
Now to the original post. The mag gets flack because compared to some "better" guns the areas it lacks is a major problem. It used to be too heavy, a blender or just plain looking and not customizable. Now for the most parts those areas are fixed. BUT... the negative aspects are still there, i.e. shots per tank. Only way to get people to stop the complaints... is too... FIX those problem areas. (goes for all markers not just mags)
To a person who is comparing between say a Emag and a Viking. What is a big difference between the two? Efficency and or possibly rof (depending on software etc). Is it bad to say that mags should improve of their supposed inefficency? Not at all. Compared to those two the mag is inefficent. Which gives the Viking an advantage in that area. Does that mean the Viking is the better marker? NOPE.
Drink a cold one and relax... it's nothing to raise your blood pressure over.


my mags a gas hog
Comment