FAB Defense Magazine Couplers Now Shipping

FAB Defense PMC

At the 2014 SHOT Show, The Mako Group/FAB Defense was showing a pair of new magazine coupling devices called the Pentagon Magazine Coupler and the Opposite Magazine Coupler.  The concept driving these products is to give shooters faster reloads when they are limited to low capacity magazines.

FAB Defense PMC

These new magazine couplers are now shipping, though the wait time is listed as “2 to 4 weeks” on the company’s website.

The Pentagon Magazine Coupler (PMC) is in the shape of a five pointed star.  It is designed so a shooter can attach up to five 10-round FAB Defense Ultimag AR-15 magazines.  With five fully-loaded mags, the shooter has access to 50-rounds of ammunition.

FAB Defense PMC

While the PMC does seem to allow the shooter fast access to more ammunition, I wonder how much faster (if any) this would be than a single magazine change.  These units sell for $115.50 and include the five Ultimag magazines.  They can be had in either black, OD green or flat dark earth colors.  The coupler alone (bring your own Ultimag magazines) runs $22.10.

FAB Defense OMC

The Opposite Magazine Coupler (OMC) connects two 10-round Ultimag magazines end-to-end.  In theory, this would give the shooter access to 20 rounds by removing, inverting and re-inserting the unit.

FAB Defense OMC

The OMC is also available in black, OD green and flat dark earth.  With two Ultimag magazines, the OMC is selling for $54.50.  Without magazines, the OMC sells for only $15.30.  However, the OMC will only work with the FAB Defense Ultimag magazines.


Richard Johnson

An advocate of gun proliferation zones, Richard is a long time shooter, former cop and internet entrepreneur. Among the many places he calls home is http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/.


Advertisement

  • Geoff a well known Skeptic

    Back in the day when the M-16A1 was hot stuff, the US Army discouraged folks from taping magazines together bottom to bottom. When you go prone this puts the vulnerable parts of the magazine into the dirt. The device in question would put two in the dirt. The Swiss came up with magazines which locked together side by side, the Army came up with a metal clip that held three magazines side by side and put additional support into the magazine catch. This was intended for Auto-riflemen (outdated concept, until the USMC brought it back). The poor man’s method would be to tape the magazines together side by side with a wedge between.
    Geoff
    Who has been around some.

  • noob

    what happens if you mount five 30 round magazines to it?

    has that ever been done before?

    • M.M.D.C.

      It’s only a matter of time.

      • gunslinger

        but what…about the surfire 60’s!!!!! (need different floorplate adapter, but still)

        300 rounds in one package! more reliable than 3 BetaMags!

        • Hunter57dor

          pretty sure a ham sandwich jammed in the rifle is more reliable than the beta mag.

        • DiverEngrSL17K

          Facetiousness aside, has anyone considered what effect on handling the sheer bulk and weight of 300 rounds hanging from your rifle would imply for handling and tactical movement? :)

          • tincankilla

            you won’t even need to move tactically, you can just spray like rambo…

          • gunslinger

            yeah…..
            i mean, the drum mags for the Thompson were pretty wild. can the mag catch/mag actually hold the weight of the other 240 bullets? (obviously it’ll go down as you fire)

            and what about a mag change? i’d love to see a tactical mag change with that.

  • wetcorps

    Okay, but does it come with its own Tactic Skin? :D

  • AD

    Is the OMC something for places with a 10-round limit? Like, hey, you can kinda sorta come close to the look and performance of a thirty round mag using two 10-rounders attached together? Because I could see buying them in that kind of situation.

    I’m assuming the pentagon version must be joke, a flashy bit of advertising, perhaps a silly range toy at best – they can’t possibly actually expect it to sell well. Basically, set that up in your booth in a show, and people will walk over to ask what the hell it is, getting people through the door.

    • kipy

      I agree with you, being in NY I could see myself getting one of the OMC units to play around with, but the star coupler thing is just ridiculous.

    • http://RenderRanch.com/ Zermoid

      Well, in a location that limits you to 10 rnd mags I can see usefulness of the PMC, you can have 50 rnds on the gun in a grab and go middle of the night break-in situation. (think just got out of bed in your shorts, or less) Instead of trying to carry extra mags in your hands or stuck under your arm you have 4 extra mags on the gun.

      Reminds me of the M1 Carbine trick of taping 3 15 rnd mags together, 2 up and 1 down in the middle for fast reloads.

  • Nate

    What’s the point of this? why not get a drum magazine and not have two pairs of feed lips in the dirt?

    • CrazyKg

      Um…Because this was designed for people who are restricted to low capacity mags.

  • Pete Sheppard

    Watching someone work through the 5, 10rd mags should be interesting…as bulky as the rig is, the anti’s will still squawk.

  • ColaBox

    Wow such tacticool!

  • kipy

    I feel like if you hold a fully loaded pentagon mag over your head and chant the magic words a bolt of lightning would come down and your AR would magically appear.

  • DiverEngrSL17K

    Not a bad idea for working around certain state restrictions on magazine capacity where they apply, but not that great either. However, even in such cases I think it is a lot better to use single magazines and practice hard at quick, efficient magazine change-outs — not only because reloads can be just as fast, but, more importantly, you will be able to maintain a slim, short profile for your rifle with all the handling advantages this implies, not to mention less bulk and weight ( especially in the case of the pentagonal magazine adaptor ). I can see that the OMC adaptor is a lot better in this respect but, as others have pointed out, a side-by-side configuration would have been more compact and efficient while preventing the ingestion of debris into the bottom magazine.