Question for the Vietnam vets

First off thank you for your service!!!!!

I was looking at some old photos and saw some of these pictures and I noticed they were M16s with AK mags!! So I did some digging and research and came across an article stating that veterans would take Chinese flat back AK 47 magazines and retrofit them to fit in M16S. They would file off the mag catch and file the feed lips down until the rounds would chamber and then they would file a mag catch in for the M-16. Have any of you ever seen this in real life and what was the functionality? The article went into more depth about it about how the Chinese mags head thinner followers and how the European mags had the rib on the back so they specifically mentioned the Chinese magazines.

Attachment 303375 Attachment 303376Attachment 303377

They mentioned in the article that they did this before the 30 round mags made it to the war, and even when the 30s came into the war they never had enough supplies for everyone to get them

Not AK mags. They are very early (as in, experimental) M16 30-round mags. The design was changed to what we're generally familiar with pretty quickly, because the design pictured didn't perform terribly well. I think that the source that you were reading is either just highly inaccurate, or was making things up.

I never saw those I was over there from Dec 1969 until Feb 1971.

I did several tours from 1963 to 1972 and never saw anything like that.I did see M14's with 40 round magazines made from two 20 rounders.They were used as back up door guns on UH-i gunships.
The M16 was initially used in Vietnam by the Vietnamese Airborne as a suitability test.They were recalled and issued to Army helicopter units.

The AK mag is about an inch wider and 1/4 thicker, roughly, than an m16 mag so I don't think some filing is going to do it.

The use of AK mags in M16s has been a myth ever since those first 30 round magazines made for the M16 were first used in the late '60s. Same myth as "commies can use our 7.62 ammo in their rifles but we can't use theirs"......

IMHO this is the best reference for M16 info...

http://retroblackrifle.com/index.html

Judging from the ribs, they sure look like AK mags. I'm guessing locally made


https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/In...s-/123-758367/


https://i.imgur.com/F9i1JRQ.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/lTMgYlI.jpg

Those are Philippine solders, probably in the Philippines, who had magazines altered as shown. They were generally unreliable and the few that were reliable were few and far between. It was not a common modification and not "issue" by any stretch. Note the ammo pouches are probably filled with 20 round mags as they are too small for 30s.

all we had were 20 mags for the .223 m-16, never saw any altered ak mags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicholst55

Not AK mags. They are very early (as in, experimental) M16 30-round mags. The design was changed to what we're generally familiar with pretty quickly, because the design pictured didn't perform terribly well. I think that the source that you were reading is either just highly inaccurate, or was making things up.

---

You mean people just make stuff up on the internet???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pworley1

You mean people just make stuff up on the internet???

---

What!!! People making stuff up on the internet??!!! I was hoping it would be real I have a nice vintage colt id love to make one for

In the early days, there was a lot of trial and error going on with M16 mags.

The first ones were throwaways, and not designed to be reloaded in the field.
There was a 25 round one that didn't feed right and the govt. didn't buy it.
There was problems with them being so thin, they'd crush easily and jam the follower.
There was a generation of springs that instantly corroded in the jungle.

It all got resolved pretty quickly, and the govt. ended up with the 20 round one we've come to know and love.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by derek45

https://i.imgur.com/lTMgYlI.jpg

---

Thanks for that pic - it pretty well illustrates what I was wanting to say.

The rifle was designed for the 20 round mag, which was basically a down-sized M14 mag, and those things RUN.

But we had folks grumbling that the V.C. had 30 round mags and WE needed 30 round mags. . .thus began the quest to figure out how to make a 30 round mag that needs to curve (because of the total round count) work in a rifle designed for a straight 20 round mag. It was NOT an easily accomplished bit of engineering, and I don't think the final tweaks on the metal mags were really completed until well into the GWOT.

The right nerd could probably make a pretty good living in Hollywood JUST on making sure the director has the RIGHT AR-15 accessories for the period his picture is set in.

In mid 67, the 1st Cav issued 5 CAR-15s per company. As you might expect, officers only got them. A few 30 rd. AR mags showed up but did not work well with more than 20-22 rounds loaded in them. There was a lot of "cool" factor associated with having a CAR-15/XM-177, but an M-16A1 was a superior weapon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaysouth

In mid 67, the 1st Cav issued 5 CAR-15s per company. As you might expect, officers only got them. A few 30 rd. AR mags showed up but did not work well with more than 20-22 rounds loaded in them. There was a lot of "cool" factor associated with having a CAR-15/XM-177, but an M-16A1 was a superior weapon.

---

Got to play with one of those for a while. An Ass't Div. Commander's aircraft went down in April or May or '67 (a Brigadeer General but don't remember his name) and his Aide had a Car-15. We did the recovery on the crash site and my door gunner snagged onto the CAR. Took it to our test-fire range before turning it in. Don't recall being terribly impressed...muzzle blast was awesome, and, as mentioned, couldn't load the more than 24-25 rounds in the 30-round mags. Also, probably due to short sight radius, accuracy wasn't all that great either.

Bill

11 Avn Gp, 1st Cav Div(Airmobile) 1966-67-68

Was NOT a fan of the CAR or the M16 or M16A1...gimme my M-14 or " pig" M-60 any day ! The new crowd in certain " volunteer " outfits in each state love their " space guns " ( all the bells & whistles attached to ne ), but my Mauser with a pig sticker on the end of it really surprises them, especially on night ops. My answer to them about throwing masses of boolits down range is " Ya can't throw em if ya get tagged 700 meters out "...they chew on that for a few.

I was born three years after 'Nam ended and I've never been in the military, but I have to say the M16A1 with 20 round mag just looks perfect to my eyes. I use 20 rounders in my M16A4 clone.

1
I went in the Army in 1977 we used 20 round magazines at first. Later in the yrs. When I was in recon plt. We where issued 30 round magazines I don’t remember that yr.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Larry Gibson

The use of AK mags in M16s has been a myth ever since those first 30 round magazines made for the M16 were first used in the late '60s. Same myth as "commies can use our 7.62 ammo in their rifles but we can't use theirs"......

---

I had a work supervisor years ago that was a Vietnam vet. He had heard that story about the ammo too. He said he didn't know how it would ever work. I told him there was no way the VietCong could use our ammo in AK's. He said maybe they used 7.62 Nato in a Mosin somehow. Since then, I heard of taking tape or wire and building diameter of case up to fit better in a Mosin chamber.

Reliable feeding with such would be almost impossible as would extraction. I tried modifying bolt heads and numerous other methods to get 7.62 NATO blanks to feed and extract for a training company I contracted to. Never proved successful.

Besides, having recovered numerous MNs, both rifle and M44 types from Viet Cong I never found them short of 7.62x54R ammunition. Also recovered or destroyed tons of that ammo in their cashes. I doubt there ever was a need to shoot 7.62 NATO in their MNs. They would have used the captured 7.62 NATO in the captured guns, mostly M60s.

reading that bit Larry...the answer pops to mind where the fallacy of swichable rounds MAY have come from... someone saw a win 307 round and thought it was the mosin garant round...you can I believe fire a normal 308 round in a .307 rifle but cant do it the other way around as rim will get in the way.

I went in 1971 Wet trough basic with the M16A1. Excellent accuracy ! But I was a long time rifle hunter. Knew sight alignment and trigger control. Was high firer in the training cycle for the regiment...... If I could see it it was hit..
But I had hunted fox for years with Fred. He was a point man in the Nam. He was a superior shot on foot at moving targets. He carried an M14 at first until they gave him a 16 in 67. After that first patrol he refused to walk point any longer if he had to carry a 16...
Happily I was on tanks. Hit something with a caliber .30 and it stays hit and down. Only thing better is a 105 HE or Beehive.

“ the soviets canuse our ammo, but we can’t use there’s “ is a BS urban legend propagated by NCO’s

I heard it with 7.62NATO & AKM ammo,…..and I heard it with 5.56NATO 5.45 AK-74

even as an 18year old E-1, I knew it was nonsense
.
.
.
….same goes for the floor buffer suicide story

LOL

Agree with derek45, it's an urban or barracks legend. I suspect it stems from those who associate the caliber designation as being the cartridge, i.e., "7.62" as in 7.62 NATO, 7.62x54R and even 7.62x39. I even heard a well known anti-war protester at a college anti-war rally say the commies were smarter than us because he'd seen "AK magazines" used in M16s [probably the early 30 round M16 magazines as discussed here] ergo the commies could use our ammunition. I shouted he was blowing smoke and explained the facts to the crowd which effectively ended the demonstration. He then left the soap box and came to talk to me. Appears he was, in fact, a Marine who had served in Viet Nam. However, it became obvious he was in the Danang underground mess kit and P38 repair section...... the problem is, when so called "experts" say such it is often willingly believed and repeated by the unknowing. Same with recruits/boots in basic training or other training when some impressive NCO or officer says something.

I spent 42 years in the Army [22 1/2 years active, the rest USAR and NG] of which 33 years was in combat arms, mostly Special Forces. I was there when the Army got the "green guns"/XM15s and EM16s, the Car 15s, through the development and deployment of the M16A1s, M16A2s, 'A4s and M4s. I have been on both ends of MNs, SKSs, AKs, RPDs, RPKs and AK74s along with numerous captured US and other foreign weapons. Not claiming to be an expert but after many years as an SF Weapons NCO I've a pretty good idea what can be used in what.......

I have managed to get M80 7.62 NATO to fire in 7,62x54R chambered MNs. Took some juggling to get the primer lined up with the firing pin. Lots of miss fires before any bangs. Yes, I even wrapped tape around the cartridges. The M80 cartridges ruptured most often near the case head because of the larger chamber. Extraction was seldom positive via the extractor but required the use of the cleaning rod. Basically, a useless exercise and possibly dangerous [we had the rifles strapped to a tire and used a long piece of parachute cord to pull the trigger]. You can't chamber a 7.62x39 in a 5.56 NATO chamber but you can, sometimes, chamber a 5.56 NATO in some 7.62x39 chambers. If you fire the 5.56 NATO the cartridge case with rupture, will probably jam or not extract and beyond point blank range you will not hit anything. The weapon with not function either.

Ponder this; The 7.62x54R cartridge was developed in the late 1880s and adopted with the MN rifle in 1991. They were Czarist Imperialists back then, not commies. Thus if the Russians back then could foresee in 1890 developing a cartridge that would be interchangeable with a not yet known enemy (the US) cartridge developed in the 1950s then perhaps the Russians are/were smarter than we thought....however, I doubt that......

yes….“ barracks legend “ …is a better term

thanks

:drinks:

Golf 2/4, 3rd Mar Div in the northern I corp 1969, we only had 20-round mags. I saw some Army guys with 30-round mags but we never had them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by derek45

“ the soviets canuse our ammo, but we can’t use there’s “ is a BS urban legend propagated by NCO’s

I heard it with 7.62NATO & AKM ammo,…..and I heard it with 5.56NATO 5.45 AK-74

even as an 18year old E-1, I knew it was nonsense
.
.
.
….same goes for the floor buffer suicide story

LOL

---

Once I had a neighbor who worked for the Defense Intelligence agency who told me that story. In a week or so, I put a .308 case and a 7.62x39 case in a plastic bag and taped it to his front door. I never heard that story again. Were any adults ever in charge?

Besides an AK47 magazine not fitting in an M16 there is the small technical problem that M193 5.56 is too long to fit in most AK47 magazines......[smilie=1:

Attachment 305174

Thank you Larry ! Good to read experienced based facts.

Only "story" I was orientated to was that caliber .50 M2 could be fired in the Rusky caliber .51 MG. My thought was was at the time was if they had that bad of supply issues they were already whooped ! Logistics is everything !
I was in Armor so had little exposure to the M16A1 after basic. What bliss !
I had already figured out were I could appropriate a "trench gun" and leave an M3A1 (grease gun) in it's place. All the cooks were grease orientated.

the M3A1 is what I used. Unlike the M16 it never failed, and it did have a 30 round magazine

It's interesting to think about them hammering, . . filing, . . spot welding, . . trying to get something reliable,. . . . . . . . when all I have to do, is stop by my local sporting goods store and buy all the PMAGS I want.
.
.

I was so happy to see Klintons AWB expire in 2004.

I called Brownells and ordered a bunch of new mags, took these pics when I was out testing them.


https://i.imgur.com/Z4fc2tM.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/czw3LCg.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaysouth

In mid 67, the 1st Cav issued 5 CAR-15s per company. As you might expect, officers only got them. A few 30 rd. AR mags showed up but did not work well with more than 20-22 rounds loaded in them. There was a lot of "cool" factor associated with having a CAR-15/XM-177, but an M-16A1 was a superior weapon.

---

A friend of mine who was an artillery man, said they never loaded a magazine to full capacity.

Since there is this thread.
I’d like to ask the Vets a question.
Without having the need to rehash the past.
I have read up on hush puppies and some stories of such things used in the day with 22lr and all.

My question is.

How many of these guard geese did you all end up eating?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barrabruce

Since there is this thread.
I’d like to ask the Vets a question.
Without having the need to rehash the past.
I have read up on hush puppies and some stories of such things used in the day with 22lr and all.

My question is.

How many of these guard geese did you all end up eating?

---

None, had more important objectives to deal with than to mess around with the dispatched guard geese. However, there was ample opportunity in some locations to supplement rations with locally "procured" meat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waksupi

A friend of mine who was an artillery man, said they never loaded a magazine to full capacity.

---

That was a practice that was unnecessary. The 20 round magazines were quite reliable when loaded with 20 rounds. The problem arose when troops loaded them until no more rounds could be put in, that was 20 rounds right? Not really, the problem was many of the early ones would hold 21 rounds. A magazine with 21 rounds will not easily seat into the M16 if the bolt is forward. Pounding on the bottom of the of the mag to seat it caused the top round to be crushed out of shape. If the magazine gets seated and the crushed round chambered it would jam and the bolt would not go into battery. The rounds in the magazine need to compress into the magazine when the bolt is closed. With 20 rounds in the magazine the rounds will compress and the magazine will seat easily and correctly, with 21 rounds they won't. If the mag with 21 rounds in it was seated in the M16 with the bolt locked open many times the bolt couldn't strip the top round out. Double stroking and/or jacking the bolt would many times exacerbate the jam.

The solution was simply to only put 20 rounds in the 20 round magazines. The same applies to issue 30 round magazines, count the rounds put in and only put 30 rounds in. In all my service I never had a magazine fail that was loaded to its intended capacity of 20 or 30 rounds. What i always found ridiculous was if the Soldier/Marine would count rounds to only put 18 rounds in a 20 rounds magazine then they could have counted to 20 and put the correct number in instead of shortchanging themselves on fire power capability.

With both 20 and 30 round magazines the top round when loaded with 20 or 30 rounds will be feeding from the right side. If the top round is on the left side the magazine is either not fully loaded or has 1 too many rounds in it. Also, with full magazines you should be able to push the rounds down into the magazine a bit.

I might add that a lot of magazines got/get damaged by smacking them on the helmet just before loading. I've never, ever in over 40 years of service using M16s (I used them a lot) had to bang a magazine on my helmet for any reason. If the weapon is empty and you're reloading wasting the time to do that seemed a useless waste of time....load the rifle quickly to get back into the fight was the drill. Mostly saw Marines do/did that but then, Marines are prone to do weird stuff anyway......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Larry Gibson

None, had more important objectives to deal with than to mess around with the dispatched guard geese. However, there was ample opportunity in some locations to supplement rations with locally "procured" meat.

---

Thank-you.
I’ve got it back all in perspective now