The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > NFA Guns and Gear

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 20, 2005, 10:55 AM   #1
RickB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2000
Location: Western WA
Posts: 5,699
What's wrong with MAC-10?

I've recently become a huge fan of the writings of Peter Kokalis, since subscribing to Shotgun News. Whenever he's discussing machineguns, subguns in particular, he never misses an opportunity to condemn the MAC-10. Anyone know why he doesn't like it?
RickB is offline  
Old May 20, 2005, 01:34 PM   #2
tanstaafl4y
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 136
I can't speak for that writer. I have a fair amount of training with a MP-5, have "fired for familiarzation" a carbine length uzi, Mac-10 and Sten.

For me the size and weight (and mostly lack of training) with the Mac-10 made it difficult to control. I feel that one area where the 9mm round excells is the sub-gun. Mind you this is based on gut rather than science and research.
__________________
"There ain't no such thing as a free lunch"
-popularized by Sci-Fi author Robert A Heinlein
tanstaafl4y is offline  
Old May 20, 2005, 01:53 PM   #3
Casp_A
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2004
Posts: 495
I haven't used the MAC-10, which is .45 acp, but I have used the M-11/9 in 9x19mm. I thought it was fantastic, supprizingly accurate. I only used it on semi-auto though. Supposedly the rate of fire is 1600 rpm for the M-11/9 and 1100 or 1200 for the M-10. That is a pretty high rate of fire and pretty hard to control for a weapon of that size.
__________________
Johnny was a chemist's son, but Johnny is no more. What Johnny thought was H2O was H2SO4.
Casp_A is offline  
Old May 21, 2005, 01:27 AM   #4
MGRacer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 13, 2005
Posts: 120
Peter's opinion aside, there is nothing wrong with a Mac 10. There may be a little bit of snobbery in some folks opinion of the Mac since they are the most economical FA these days. They are a fun gun, spare parts are easy to find and cheap (except for 9mm mags for the M10/9) and there are a lot of parts that you can change to customize the gun to your taste. The Mac's folding stock leaves a lot to be desired -- that is one downside. They also fire fast and some have refered to them as a bullet hose. I have a couple of Mac's and they run and run and run. Here is one with an original style two stage suppressor:
MGRacer is offline  
Old May 21, 2005, 10:42 AM   #5
mete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2004
Location: NY State
Posts: 5,363
The original MAC was designed as a throw away gun.IIRC that meant about 500 rounds then throw it away !!
mete is offline  
Old May 21, 2005, 02:33 PM   #6
Ozzieman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 14, 2004
Location: Northern Indiana
Posts: 4,964
I think one reasion you hear bad things is

That most of the people that say bad things ether havent shot one or if they have shot it, shot it hollywood stupid fasion.
Which means you point in the general direction and pull the trigger until flame and noise stops and you have just knock 4 bad guys through the wall at 100 yards.
And yes that way with out a flash surpressor and really strong hands there a piece of crap.
But you have to remember what they were desiged to do, Open a door pull the trigger and sweep the room, all the bad guys are dead, that simple.
They will never be compaired to an MP5, never but for what they were designed to do and when they were designed, there hard to beat.
Lets face it even a Uzzi is crappy compaired to an MP5, that still dosent keep it from being a good gun.
And if these idddiddiouts keep saying what a piece of crap they are.
I wounder what they would do if some one walked up to them and said
"Here, have a free Mac-10 with all the legal paper work."
Suppose any of these critics would turn it down. :barf:
Ozzieman is offline  
Old May 21, 2005, 03:59 PM   #7
Hkmp5sd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
MAC TRIVIA:

Back in 1970, when Military Armament Corporation took over the MAC ownership, they hyped the MAC-10 as the replacement for the government's Colt M1911A1 .45 ACP pistol.

As for Peter Kokalis and the MAC, it was hate at first sight. In a 1986 "Weapon Test & Evaluation" of the MAC for Soldier of Fortune, his overall rating was:

Quote:
If you like to throw lead all over the scenery and listen to sounds akin to Hitler's Zipper (the MG42 GPMG), then be my guest. Class 3 dealers can purchase an M11/9mm for $218 complete with one magazine, loader, hand strap and cleaning rod. As for me, these ghastly little guns hold no allure. In my opinion, they have already done far too much to blacken the image of full-auto weapons collecting to ever receive any praise from me.
Hkmp5sd is offline  
Old May 21, 2005, 10:36 PM   #8
Dave Haven
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 1, 2000
Location: near Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 790
With the shoulder stock extended (and used) and a suppressor attached and used as a foregrip and using controlled bursts, the MAC-10 is an absolute kick in the <posterior> to shoot. It also works quite well on semi-auto.
The sights leave a bit to be desired.
__________________
NRA Endowment Member
FCSA Life Member
Subs are cool, but belt-feds RULE!
Dave Haven is offline  
Old May 22, 2005, 12:21 PM   #9
MGRacer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 13, 2005
Posts: 120
Quote:
The sights leave a bit to be desired.
Very true. I have been thinking about mounting a reddot sight on mine and using a M16 type stock. That would really improve the gun. I shot one last weekend that was setup that way and it was a lot easier to use.
MGRacer is offline  
Old May 22, 2005, 01:05 PM   #10
Hkmp5sd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
Go for it!!

Hk sights, red dot sights, AR stock, Hk side-folder, muzzle brakes, vertical foregrips, snail drums...




Hkmp5sd is offline  
Old May 22, 2005, 08:12 PM   #11
MeekAndMild
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 2, 2001
Posts: 4,988
From the perspective of my own abysmal ignorance I would think the M-10 is a minimal MG.

When this type gun came out I thought of buying a semiauto pistol version, but saw its steel is thin, the welds make thinner spots. The gun is light and short, making it a possibly decent pistol, but the spot welds threw me off and I passed up the buy.
MeekAndMild is offline  
Old May 22, 2005, 09:59 PM   #12
boofus
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: JesusLand,TX
Posts: 371
What MAC did you see that was thin skinned? My Texas/SWD M10/9 was built like a brick. That sucker weighed more than my FNC does, maybe 8.5-9 lbs. The steel must have been 2-3mm thick all around.
boofus is offline  
Old May 26, 2005, 01:10 PM   #13
RickB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2000
Location: Western WA
Posts: 5,699
Thanks for the responses. When I took the free machine gun class at Front Sight, I was expecting to shoot a M11/9, but our class shot Uzis. I was very impressed with the latter; as I'm primarily a pistol shooter, I liked the pistol-style configuration and controls. My only exposure to the M10 is/was repeated viewings of John Wayne's "McQ", Robert Redford's "Three Days of the Condor", and some Chuck Norris movie where he has two of them in a dual shoulder rig; movie makers seem to love it. It appears, from the single quote, that Kokalis doesn't like the gun precisely because its public image is that of the big screen bullet-sprayer, and without any corresponding benefit to the collecting community? He specifically mentions collecting, and maybe that's his perspective.
PS I love the pictured gun with the side-folder and dot sight.
RickB is offline  
Old May 26, 2005, 02:40 PM   #14
Hkmp5sd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2001
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 4,303
Quote:
and some Chuck Norris movie where he has two of them in a dual shoulder rig;
Invasion USA

I have a DeSantis shoulder rig for my M11/9. Looks cool. Totally useless.
Hkmp5sd is offline  
Old May 26, 2005, 03:23 PM   #15
Ultima-Ratio
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: Anchorage Alaska
Posts: 227
Good Grief!

Hello, first off the MAC-10 is a totally different gun than the M-11 (BTW the real MAC-11 is a FA .380)
The MAC-10 is either 9mm or .45acp also.
IME in daily use the only failures came from worn buffers and every uptenth thounds of rounds the foring pin wore down to a nub which was easily replaced with a bit of silver solder and drill rod
Ultima-Ratio is offline  
Old May 26, 2005, 04:05 PM   #16
jefnvk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2004
Location: MI Tech
Posts: 1,791
I shot the MAC10 and MP5 side by side one day. No doubt in my mind, I much prefer the MAC over the MP5. Just seemed more my style or something, and the .45 didn't hurt its case either.
jefnvk is offline  
Old May 28, 2005, 12:11 PM   #17
smince
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2004
Location: Northeast Alabama
Posts: 2,580
Not 100%, but I think Chuck had a pair of F/A Uzi pistols (Micro-Uzi?) in "Invasion USA".

Paladin Press has a book of weapons tests by Kokalis. Pretty good read.
smince is offline  
Old May 30, 2005, 01:35 PM   #18
MeekAndMild
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 2, 2001
Posts: 4,988
Quote:
What MAC did you see that was thin skinned?
Got no idea. that was 15-20 years ago.
MeekAndMild is offline  
Old June 7, 2005, 10:45 AM   #19
T WARD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 26, 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 117
Of the select-fire stuff I've shot, I hit pretty well with the M16, not quite as well with the ak and mp5. I shot poorly with the uzi, and couldn't hit jack with the mac 10. Had someone tell me the mac would be great for cleaning out a elevator.
T WARD is offline  
Old June 7, 2005, 09:21 PM   #20
CastleBravo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 11, 1999
Posts: 2,137
I've shot a 9mm MAC-10 a couple times. It was reliable. It also got so hot after a couple mags that it was no longer stabilizing the bullets as they left the barrel; instead of seeing "*" holes in the target, you saw "-" as the bullets went through the target SIDEWAYS. Quite freakish to see.

Obviously, accuracy was nowhere near what an MP-5 could deliver. But there is probably something to be said for hitting somebody with "satan's minus signs" at close range.
CastleBravo is offline  
Old June 11, 2005, 09:43 AM   #21
Randy in Arizona
Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2005
Location: East of The Democratic People's Repuplic of Tucson.
Posts: 58
Having once had the privilege of seeing some of Peter Kokalis' Toys, (and still having swollen salivary glands from the experience) I'd guess that Peter tends toward traditional, high quality machineguns.

It is his money, and his choice!

PS, Sorry about the puddles of drool on the floor, Peter! And I promise not to eat Mexican food beforehand if I ever get invited back.
Randy in Arizona is offline  
Old July 14, 2005, 10:28 PM   #22
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 1,691
I shot a full auto MAC 10 a lot in the 80's. As was previously posted, stock extended, using the suppressor it was a hoot to shoot. Accurate and controllable in bursts. I dont know what the cyclic rate was but it was a hoser..
Nanuk is offline  
Old July 14, 2005, 10:46 PM   #23
Crosshair
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2004
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 5,320
Probably like Hi-Points, some people think cheap = bad. Where it really should be cheap = better than nothing. Some cheap guns are trash and some are a good value. Hi-Points are good and reliable, taking them apart can be a chore the first time you do it. Probably the same thing with the MAC.
Crosshair is offline  
Old July 16, 2005, 03:40 AM   #24
Zsnark
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 16, 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11
MAC10...echhh!

I shot the MAC10 (in 9mm), the Uzi (standard size), and the MP5. I did these all at the same sitting in the late 80s.

The MP5 is a dream. It handles well, is accurate, and ergonomic.

The Uzi was really good but not up to the MP5...a little clumsy.

The MAC10...it's like something you banged together in your garage from leftover sheet metal, etc.

I suppose one can be trained to overcome it's inherent lacks but why?

You know why?, because it's cheap. I wouldn't want to depend on something as clumsy and cumbersome if I could lay my hands on an Uzi and preferably an MP5.

AAW
Zsnark is offline  
Old July 16, 2005, 11:01 AM   #25
rwilson452
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,361
mac 10

A long time ago uncle let me shoot the mac in .45ACP. without the suppressor it was a bear all over the place with a short burst. with the suppressor it was nice. IMNSHO opinion the supressor is a must for full auto use
rwilson452 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12501 seconds with 7 queries