Home Gear Review Military Arms Channel on the SGM Tactial 50 rnd 9mm Glock Drum... Gear ReviewHandguns Military Arms Channel on the SGM Tactial 50 rnd 9mm Glock Drum Mag By Dan Zimmerman - December 9, 2012 24 Facebook Twitter Pinterest WhatsApp Email ◀Previous Post Next Post▶ Tim Harmsen gets his hands on the first one of these babies to be spotted in the wild. ◀Previous Post Next Post▶ RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Things That Don’t Suck: TiTech Arms 1022 Chassis Rail For Ruger 10/22 Rifles Mossberg’s New MC2sc 11+1 Miro Compact 9mm Pistol Springfield Brings Back Browning’s Hi-Power With the New SA-35 9mm Pistol 24 COMMENTS Another solution looking for a problem. Reply 70 bucks for the mag. Since it’s got about 8 bucks worth of material in it they still make a profit for what is essentially a range toy. I really see no practicle use for a 50 round drum for a pistol except for shits and giggles at the range. And just knowing it’s out there and available to the masses would put a knot in the grabbers panties. Reply Range toy, shits and giggles? Sounds like enough of a reason to me. 🙂 Not to mention, all that weight has to have a recoil mitigation effect. The grabbers having their panties in a wad, well that’s just icing on the cake. Reply Truly. Every time I see something that will give a grabber the vapors I get a little tingle of joy. I doubt I would ever buy a drum mag but I like knowing that at least parts of the country are free enough to create a market for them. Reply I’d say interesting when you apply it towards some of the carbines out there that take glock mags… Reply Perfect use with the Keltec Sub2000 Reply Does it come in .45 ACP? Reply SGM tells me that the .45 ACP will hit sometime late next year. The .40 S&W is due out in the new few weeks. Reply That would be really nice if you had a Keltec Sub 2000. Reply Something else that would be really nice, being able to find a Sub 2000… Reply Agreed that it might be useful for the Kel tec P2000. Other than that, it appears to be a candidate for TTAGs “darkest depths of uselessness” post. Reply I think the loading mechanism is a sharp idea. For those of you poopooing this magazine, I want you to go to your vehicle. If it has alloys wheels, take those off. Not necessary. Stripes or trim? Remove those also. If you have an Hawaiian shirts in your closet, throw those out…. unless you live in Hawaii. Reply Oh hell no. I think it ought to be mandatory that OFWG’s own at least 1 Hawaiin shirt and at least 1 Fonzie jacket. Reply I go through steel wheels the way I drive. No touchy the alloy. Reply Might be useful in carbines that take glock mags. Otherwise way too much weight on a handgun. Reply …or in a Glock 17 that’s been SBR’ed that’s sitting in a Mako Group KPOS stock with an AAC can attached, and of course this drum conspicuously sticking out from the grip. Oh yes, I’m just waiting on the BATF to send that Form 1 back. Reply To all those complaining: Usefulness? No. Freedom? Yes. Reply Agreed. That was the exact message of my comment above. We could argue (I would not) that scopes should not be allowed. Iron sights are plenty for whitetail deer. But that is the same argument on a different mechanism. The 2nd Amendment is a not about sproting goods. It is a limitation on the government. Now, I know some are saying the magazine is not practical. But practical has nothing to do with it. It is not practical to limit magazines to 10 rounds, but CA does it. When we in the gun community get caught arguing over practical, we divide our base. Reply I don’t know what you all are complaining about, it looks rather fun to me. Now if only I was allowed to buy a Glock 18 to put it on. Reply Gotta have a reason that your AR was not within 10 meters and you just “Happened To Have” that monster in your pants! Reply I’ll stick to my 33 rd stick magazines, thank you! Much easier to transport and manipulate. Reply Just keep one of the drums in your trunk in case your car breaks down in the ghetto. Reply Keep two for if you break down on MLK. Reply When it comes to capacity, ‘need’ is irrelevant to the pro-gun enthusiast. ‘Need’ is what anti-gunners and gun-grabbers expect us to justify, as if we owed them any explanation as to our intended use. Screw ‘need’. Like the ‘Nuge’ said, “anyone that brings out the word need, is a danger to our liberties.” So, do not struggle to answer the ‘need’ question, just respond with, “Is that a rhetorical question?” Then get the hell away from that self-righteous A-hole. The more capacity I have, the better. It sucks to reload! << Hey there's another comeback to the 'need' question. So there. Now you know how to respond to the indignant punk that asks such a stupid question. Reply LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply Please enter your comment! Please enter your name here You have entered an incorrect email address! Please enter your email address here Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.