GBBR M4/M16 Magazines question

[grantmac]

We need to clear the air a little here.

The reason to go GBBR is for added realism in operation. This realism will never be duplicated by an AEG. The recoil is minimal, well under 50% of the recoil generated by any gas-cycled centerfire weapon. The recoil is secondary to the operation and should never be confused with the primary reason to use a GBBR.

Anyone that claims to have a GBBR that develops even 50% of the recoil of an actual weapon is either fooling themselves or has no actual experience firing centerfire weapons.

As for the TM recoil engine; it develops perhaps half of the recoil of the GBBR and offers no increase in functional realism while increasing the complexity of an already complex system (the AEG).

As for the original intent of the thread:
I believe that we will eventually see HPA powered GBBR mags. They will most likely only hold enough air for 1 magazine, but it will be very consistent and unaffected by atmospheric changes.
I also believe that there will shortly be conversions in place for existing regulated CO2 magazines to be bulk-filled like many CO2 airguns. This would depend on whether the existing mags use the CO2 cartridge as the pressure vessel (unlikely) or if the chamber that the cartridge is screwed-into is also pressurized.

-Grant

[Styrak]

Originally Posted by grantmac

Anyone that claims to have a GBBR that develops even 50% of the recoil of an actual weapon is either fooling themselves or has no actual experience firing centerfire weapons.

A WE GBBR does have the recoil of a .22, so yes it does have the recoil of a real firearm.

Centerfire? Definitely not.