Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • Dev

    Reloading these mags would be a bitch.

  • jdun1911

    Those are very expensive magazine. I believe Magpul will beat them price point.

    The main problem as always with these kind of magazine is their life cycle. How many cycle does it take before the spring can’t keep up with rifle rate of fire. Is it durable enough that a fully loaded magazine can withstand being drop to the ground at a reasonable height and still be 100% functional.

  • Stefan F

    The 60 rd one looks promising. 100 rds? You’ll be loading it for a week! LOL.

  • Surefire may have beat Magpul to show off a production version that’s not on paper, but I don’t see these on the shelves available for sale anywhere yet.

  • mike

    Does this fit in the IAR, the 416 lower protrudes down further than the AR. It looks like it would be close.

  • charles222

    I’ll wait for Magpul; the polymer they make P-mags out of strikes me as a hell of a lot more beating-resistant than anything Surefire produces. Not to mention that the vast majority of Surefire products are priced way beyond the individual range.

  • Mr Maigo

    $180!!!!! As cool as that is… NO!

  • Victor

    Well, that 100rd magazine looks ridiculous, clumsy and HUGE ass f*ck. The 60 rds magazine looks tactically viable though.

  • hojo

    If these magazines get any bigger, we’re going to have to swap out the forefrip for a pintle and spade handles.

  • Andrew

    Awesome! I had been working on this as well so seeing a company make it is better.

    BTW I’ll repeat what I said months ago; these quad magazines were patented years ago so I’m curious how the companies will stop knock offs.

  • Dakota

    Looks good, can’t wait to see these in action.

  • Matt

    For one thing the whole “loaded from the factory” idea is horrible. I’m not gonna trust some loading machine to weed out the common dented lake city rounds with my life.

    And the price is a joke. Just like most everything else surefire sells.

    I’ll wait for magpuls version which will be cheaper better and less ugly.

  • Lance

    I smell USMC contract soon,. high price or not. Looks like were going the of the RPK.

  • John C

    The 60 rounder looks like the same length as a standard 30 rounder, albeit about twice as wide. I think it could really be useful in the IAR. The 100 rounder is kind of ridiculous.

  • mike

    a. The 60 is as tall as a 40 rd STRAIGHT magazine.
    b. If it doesn’t fit in the M27 how is it going to be used by the USMC

    • mike, if it does not fit right now, I am sure that SureFire could make a M27 compatible model.

  • Andy from CT

    Yeah, that 100 round mag is…well. Silly. What if you have to drop prone? Firing from prone would be a female dog in the extreme.

    The 60 round mag? I like it. But I would like to see a shorter 40 round mag. I’m hoping Magpul makes a 40 and 60 round and leaves the 100 round silliness to Surefire.

    I hear mixed things about C-mags but if it came down to it, I’d take a C-mag over a 100 round Surefire mag.

  • Alan

    How many 30 round mags can you get for the price of that 60?

  • Martin (M)

    As others have said, the 60 looks manageable, while the 100 just looks unwieldy.

    I’m concerned about their article, where it states that with their product, the shooter can fire up 240rds in 30 seconds with their 60rd mags, and even higher with the 100s. Talk about trying to make your weapon fail! They have reliability problems with soldiers frying their guns using 30rd mags! Of course, this is all due to an absence of true support weapons.

    Ultimately, though, I’m glad because I want to get my hands on some of these big mags.

  • Alaskan

    Someone get me a FlipHD,mini tripod,a buttload of M855 rounds,a H und K 416,a couple of these SureFire Mags and about a week to load the 100 rounder..and 5 minutes to load the 60 rounder..and I’ll get back to you with video results. 😉

  • Eric

    It does not fit the IAR and due to the low numbers of M27s the Marines would buy SureFire is not going to “fix it”.

  • DaveR

    i like the concept and appreciate the innovation.

    i DO question the practicality however. i’d speculate that a soldier would still be limited (by weight) to the same number of rounds whether they were in 30-round magazines or half-as many 60-rounders. therefor, with half as as many mags on his person, any sort of malfunction that resulted in the abandonment of a non-empty magazine (e.g., mag failure, emergency malfunction clearance, accidently-dropping, etc) would mean that that soldier could be deprived of up to 100% of the ammunition he would have lost had he only abandoned a loaded 30-round magazine.

    i guess i believe that for a magazine fed weapon, there actually is a *balance* that needs to be struck between magazine capacity and total-rounds carried. and for the record i do NOT know what that balance is.

    just putting this out there.

  • Pete Sheppard

    The 60-rounder looks useful to an AR-man, not so much for regular riflemen, for reasons stated above.

    Will there be 10rd CA-legal versions?

    • Pete, HAHAHHAA, very funny.

  • charles222

    Eric: Yes, they would. Even assuming a low basic load of 7 mags per IAR rifleman, that’s still about 56,000 magazines…for an initial buy. Then there’s replacement parts (floorplates, springs, followers, etc) for the Marines to buy, since these magazines probably have about zilch compatability with the current 30-round magazines the Marines issue. Not to mention that there’d be replacement buys in the future as people damage/lose/steal these…

    Surefire’d gladly adapt these to the M27, although I’m betting they’re anticipating the coming Army-wide M4A1 adoption with this.

  • Mountainbear

    I’d rather take a drum, really.

    Looks bulky, might get in the way. BTW, how do you shoot from prone position with that?

  • Allen

    According to the reveiw, Jim Sullivan is a co designer of this particular magazine design. I thought it a tad bit irritating (for no better word) that the author compared Sullivan to John Browning. Sullivan I’m sure is brilliant and far more inventive than myself and the majority of the masses, but he is no John Browning.

  • Eric

    No, SureFire isn’t going to redesign and retool to accommodate the M27. They have told me as much. The USMC is only looking at a couple of thousand IARs. Building an affordable magazine for that small number of guns does not make business sense. SF is a successful business.

    • Eric, thanks for the info.

  • Matt

    I’ve been thinking about it and I doubt the average rifleman doesn’t go prone very often at all.

    The only common reasons to go prone I can think of are to stabilize your shooting platform, which is only common for designated marksmen with longer rifles i would think. And to provide a smaller target while acquiring targets at longer range, once again, only common for marksmen with DMRs or sniper support rifles. Which wouldn’t be using this type of mag obviously.

    But for the average rifleman. Who is spending all day standing up, crouching, or urban prone, while patrolling areas of interest or out on a specific mission. In that case I would rather have the bogged magazine available. Reloading is when you get shot. So I’d want to do it as little as possible. So, if you could carry them without limited mobility caused by your spares in the mag pouch, then I’d probly go with the 100 rounders.

    But these kind of high capacity magazines, and these are the only kind of mag I believe merit that designation, are just asking for a magpie style window so you can see how many are left. Easy to loose count with that many.

    I’d be willing to bet money that HK designed the 416 with that longer mag well specifically so that you couldn’t use these types of magazines in them. To keep from pointing out the fact that the 416 is just a fancy AR and not a real machine gun if they start failing under extended firing SAW type use.

  • Dev


    Not true. I can assure you that bread-and-butter fighting and “closing with the enemy” still involves a lot of prone / crawling, unless you want to be a nice man-sized silhouette 10-15 metres away from the enemy.

  • jdun1911

    Non standard type of Magwell is the kind of shit that we all love to hate HK. The Marine should have went with Colt.

  • jdun1911


    There has never been a drum magazine design that worked well in the field.

  • Dev

    Also Matt, H&K making the magwell incompatible has nothing to do with preventing it from becoming a “real machine gun”. Rather, it’s the fixed barrel.

    It was fixed barrels that prevent similar weapons (RPD, RPK) from becoming fully-fledged light machineguns rather than magazine capacity.

  • Rohan Wilson

    “I’ve been thinking about it and I doubt the average rifleman doesn’t go prone very often at all”.

    Have you ever been under mortar or just plan small arms fire? You don’t get shot when firing, only when reloading. You must have a special force field the rest of us soldiers don’t have.

    The Israeli’s had 50 round magazines for there Galils. I am yet to see a picture of anyone there using them in combat.

    During WW2 the guys with MP44 had to dig little pits for their long magazines so they could shoulder their weapons when prone.

    And finally, where the hell do you store these in your tac’ gear. Each 100 mag will be about 12″ long (30 mags are 7″). Your chest rig will finish under your chin.

  • So these are made by the Surefire company that makes flashlights, NOT Surefire Gun Magazines (SGM)? Weird. Okay. In that case, I expect the actual price will be much much higher, considering that C-Mag drums have a lot of plastic and sell for double the projected price of the Surefire metal mags.

    The 100-round magazine looks about the same size as the 13-round Saiga 12 gauge box magazines. They may be fun to use at the range now and then, but don’t really have a practical use, ’cause they’re frickin’ huge!!

    Firing prone isn’t that big of a deal, really. Just turn the rifle sideways. Kyle Lamb calls this SBU Prone. But I still think they’re just too damn long, and at least 98% of AR-15/M-16 pattern rifles weren’t designed for that volume of fire, even what they’re talking about for the 60-round magazines.

  • Brad


    Doubt the average rifleman goes prone very often? Are you kidding me? As a combat infantryman, I have been trained to fight in terrain ranging from mountains to wide open fields to urban environments. Unless you’re actively clearing buildings or have very high cover, you’d be an idiot not to go prone. Not only does it stabilize your shooting platform (which believe it or not is important to even an “average” rifleman firing an M4 with just an ACOG or even a CCO), it also provides a very small silhouette, which is ideal for, I don’t know, staying alive. Even in an urban environment, if speed is not a factor, going prone is preferable to standing or even kneeling.