how many spare magazines is enough??

[KSFreeman]

Now, Tamara, when you say "box" you mean "boxcar", right?

[Aikibiker]

So far I have 4 magazines for my carry gun, an H&K USP45c, with one more on order. I hope to eventually have at least six, but am limited by my budget.

When I am out and about I only carry one spare magazine. I may end up throwing a loaded magazine or two in the glove compartment once I have enough hanging around.

[fastbolt]

Magazines are the heart of a semiauto pistol ... unless it uses an internal magazine and/or stripper clips.

Because of that, I like to make sure I have at least 5 or 6 functional magazines for each of my defensive pistols. I've been known to have many, many more.

What I think is interesting is how the major manufacturers have mostly started to supply 2 magazines for "civilian" pistols and 3 magazines for "L/E" pistols. Perhaps they're noticing a trend among their customer base ... finally. Remember when only 1 magazine came with a pistol, and spare magazines were often something that your local gunstore had to order for you?

When I recently bought my G26 it came with 2 magazines (promotional sale, not an L/E order), and I bought a third ... and a week later I bought 2 more. That way I can have at least 1 magazine dedicated for the Range, if not 2 ... and 3 for carry use. There are times I only carry a single spare, however.

When I own at least 6 magazines I usually keep 2 dedicated for Range use ... after ALL of them have been function tested for the first several hundred rounds.

I can't speak to the subject of diminutive pocket guns in .22, .25, .32 & .380, because I haven't carried 3 of those calibers in years (never owned a .32), and when I did I only had 1 spare. That was because I didn't shoot them nearly as much as I did the "larger" defensive pistols, and generally carried a larger caliber weapon, anway.

I often see folks attend a CCW class with only a single magazine (it's been previously decided that we won't "require" folks bring at least 2 magazines). If for no other reason, I think at least 1 spare magazine should be owned & carried for the purpose of resolving magazine related functioning issues.

Magazines should be inspected frequently, properly cleaned & maintained (including magazine spring replacement as needed), and replaced if they become the least bit unreliable/unserviceable.

Personal risk assessment and equipment selection is something that only you can determine, and the more access you have to proper instruction & training, the more informed you'll probably be when you make your decision.

[Grayfox]

Years ago I got in the habit of always carrying two reloads for whatever gun I was carrying. Didn't matter if it was a 5 shot snubbie or a hi-cap auto. Why? No particular reason at all. Its just what I'm comfortable with. Do I really need all that ammo? Good Lord, I hope not!
If there's one thing I have learned its that Mr. Murphy made a name for himself by always showing up at the worst possable moment. I've had a top quality, reliable magazine suddenly come unglued on me. Its somewhat disconcerting to have a spring, mag parts and ammo spilling out of your gun. If you carry an auto you need at least one spare mag for no other reason that the possability of mechanical failure.
As to how many total to own for each firearm, that's entirely up to you and your budget.

[Archer1440]

You probably can't have "enough" magazines. Magazines are a consumable item.

I have sixteen magazines which are rotated among two identical 1911's. Ten of these magazines are the only ones which hit the ground during training, matches and the like. I bought them from Metalform a few years ago.

Each pistol also has six carry magazines (each, total of 12) three of which are rotated and tested monthly. These magazines came with the pistols (Springfield Professionals) and are identical to the training magazines, but are kept in pristine condition.

On any given day, I carry three magazines, one in the 1911, two on the belt, total of 22 rounds, 7 in each magazine and one in the chamber. On occasions when I must carry something smaller due to dress requirements, such as my P7M8, I still have three mags.

Why so many? Because magazines can and do fail ! They do not last forever if you use them. I have had the bottom blow out of four magazines in two years during speed relaods in training.

If you want to carry 10 rounds, you don't need an extra magazine.

I disagree.
"Two is one, one is none..."

[Jeff Gonzales]

It seems there are two trains of thought here. The first is how many magazines to actually have and the second is how many magazines to actually carry. Simple enough to answer.

On count one, it is good to have two sets of magazines. One set for training and one set for deployment. The training magazines are just that, used for training only. The deployment magazines are used for actual duty or carry.

On count two, how many magazines to carry. This is better answered by understanding the mission of the weapon system. If it is for concealed carry and depending on the depth of carry you may not have the luxury to carry spare magazines. If it is for deployment then you might be able to carry more and it not be a concern due to the overt nature of the mission.

It is nice to say carry as many as you can, but that train of thought is not practical for most. You need to take a hard look at what you want to accomplish by carrying a weapon. Based off that, you can better decide what to carry.

Later,

[warhammer357]

Considering that most gunfights take place at ten feet or less and with 2.5 rounds expended, I would say two. Even with Clinton clips (10 rounders).
Only because 99 percent of the time when a semi auto malfs, its because of magazine problems.

[mt troy militia]

I just bought a Charles Daly hi power. It came with 1 10 round magazine. I purchased 1 13 round magazine, and 3 20 round magazines. I feel that this will buy me enough time to get to a better gun.

[45 Fu]

Shooting is over and you're alive = enough magazines.

Shooting is over and you're dead = not enough magazines.

I carry a 1911 (Kimber Custom II). I have been shooting pistols since I was six (almost 30 years). I am not saying I am the best of anything, but by means of much practice I know that I can that at which I shoot, especially under stress. I'm not saying I'll deliver 1.5" groups under fire, but I can get them where they need to go. Therefore, being limited to 8 rounds per magazine doesn't bother me.

Having said that, I will say that I carry two spare magazines. One is for a reload, if needed, and the other is in case of malfunction. My total magazine count is ten. I have five eight round magazines for carry and five ten round magazines (which have been thoroughly tested for reliability) for home defense. The ten rounders usually only see daylight in extreme cases such as natural disaster when we go extended periods without power where prowlers and looters may become a problem.

I think the number of magazines you carry should be in direct proportion to your situational awareness - the more aware you are, the less likely you are to put yourself in a situation where you will need your weapon. If you have poor situational awareness, though, your other skills are likely poor and no amount of ammo will help you. For home defense I like to have what I think will be enough to help me get to my rifle and/or shotgun, which is better suited for that purpose.

In reality, there is no one correct answer to your question. Just practice and be prepared.

[ConfinedbytheCurtain]

Nicely put Tamara.

[User Name]

If it is for concealed carry and depending on the depth of carry you may not have the luxury to carry spare magazines.

Thats nicely put Jeff. Someone actualy said they carry 6 minimum mags for their main and 3 for their back up...I for one don't carry a breif case on a day to day basis and have no idea where I'd put all that fire power. I'm glad I'm not the only one to say this either but, I carry the 16+1 in my pistol (I check my mag for reliability once a week)...if 17 shots won't get me out of a situation (because that is my main goal...not hanging around playing OK corral) then it'll have to be in the good Lords hands. Just for the simple reason that I can't think of a scenerio where you'd need 17 rounds, and surely not 11 mags of ammo like stated above..(6+3+one in each) unless you were spraying bullets like some cheap B rated action movie. (that being the case you shouldn't be carrying to begin with) Of course this is where the training everyone spoke of comes in to play...You need to be able to use your surroundings as cover and make your shots count, while trying to figure out your best course out of the situation...My thinking may be wrong, but thats just my .02..(and I'm prolly due back change )

[pwrtool45]

Just like wearing a big rebel flag T-shirt to court will impact the decision-making process of the judge and jury, carrying an overly large amount of firepower will almost certainly have an impact on the DA's decisions. While it may not be part of the official reason charges were pressed (for the exact same reasons a judge wouldn't say, "I gave him the maximum sentence because of his shirt"), it's foolish to think that it doesn't affect the decision.

Of course, the flip side is trying to guess what pushes your DA's buttons and what doesn't. He might not bat an eye at a 15-shot Glock 19 (thinking of it as simply "a pistol") but he might raise an eyebrow at someone carrying a "Dirty Harry special" Model 29 S&W.

That said, I think carrying 6 magazines will pretty much get a DA's attention across the board. I don't think it would escape notice even here in good ol' Bama. In other, more unfriendly, places the DA may try to use it to help establish intent. ("Why would you need *that* much firepower if you didn't expect trouble?")

Remember, this is the guy/gal who basically makes a single, unilateral decision as to wheather or not your life, post-shooting, can be put back together or not. It would pay to check into his/her record regarding self-defense cases and not do things that would piss him/her off too badly. I wouldn't necessarily choose my weapon based on said record, but I would definitely pay attention to things that seem to end up in cort more than others (e.g., the aforementioned 6 reloads, etc.)

YMMV, obviously.

[pbass]

It depends on the gun design.

It depends on the individual gun.

It depends on the mag design.

It depends on the individual mag.

It depends on the ammo design.

It depends on the consistency of ammo.

And it depends on carry habits.

I have one pocket dedicated to the gun and its holster. Not even a piece of lint gets to share that pocket. My cell phone, three keychains, wallet, hard pack of smokes, Zippo, change, memos, and pen or pens go in the other three pockets. Needless to say, there is no way I am putting a mag in one of those other pockets and pulling it out by mistake instead of my cell phone, or trying to fish around it while trying to get something else out of my pocket, or trying to find it in all that mess.

So for me, carrying this way, with this gun and this ammo and this mag, it's no spares. The hardest part is feeding the top round of a fully-loaded mag after shooting the one in the chamber. This is easy to test for. Put one up the spout, slap home a full mag, shoot once. Drop the mag, top it off, shoot once. After I feed that top round 100 times without fail, I'm satisfied.

[JerryM]

I have at least 4 magazines for all my SA, except the P32. For most I like to have at least 5 or 6.

As for carry, I only carry one extra mag. I cannot imagine a scenario in which a CHL holder is going to get into a gunfight and need more. I am fully persuaded that if I ever have to use one in self-defense it will be at close range, fast and over in a few seconds. Remember the BG doesn't want the police there.

As for training, you will get some in a good CCW course. I do not think one needs the expensive "Thunder Ranch" type courses. If you want one then go to it. But if you get a good CHL class and have a friend who is proficient who will work with you that is all you need.

Don't worry about getting in a fight in a building and having to clear rooms, or a parking lot and shooting and running and needing three guns and 4 magazines. It is not going to happen for a CHL. You are using the gun in self defense, and it is not necessary to try to apprehend robbers and muggers. That is what the police do. Your fight, if ever, will be at feet and for a few seconds. When the threat is over, then the fight is over for you.

I have no quarrel with those who take the good courses, and I am sure they get some good and helpful information, but it is not needed.

Jerry

[pbass]

I have a friend who carries 6 spares with his 1911. That's about right for a 1911 (maybe not these days, but bad basic mag design is what made me quit fooling with the 1911 years ago).

[FrankDrebin]

Just like wearing a big rebel flag T-shirt to court will impact the decision-making process of the judge and jury, carrying an overly large amount of firepower will almost certainly have an impact on the DA's decisions. While it may not be part of the official reason charges were pressed (for the exact same reasons a judge wouldn't say, "I gave him the maximum sentence because of his shirt"), it's foolish to think that it doesn't affect the decision.

Name one example where this was the case.

[Quartus]

Oh, don't start, Frank. Don't you know, "It's a well known fact!"

Considering that most gunfights take place at ten feet or less and with 2.5 rounds expended

Averages, averages, what are they good for? Well, not much, unless you understand what averages are and how a particular average was derived. Consider:

There is a factory in town that is hiring. You need a better job, so you look into it. You find that the average annual income there is $59,541!! Wow! You are only making $32,000 now, and that's after working at your present factory job for 3 years. This looks like a good deal!

Is it?

Well, here's what people earn at this factory:

700 line workers making $30,000
30 first level supervisors making $60,000
8 mid level managers making $90,000
1 vice president making $200,000
1 president making $400,000
1 owner making $20,000,000


Yep, the average is $59k, but you aren't going to make anything close to that.

The more relevant fact you should have asked about is the MODE, which is what MOST people are making. In this case, that's $30k.


So what does 2.5 rounds in a gunfight mean? Unless you know what went into that figure, the only correct answer is, "I don't know."

57 rounds is the right amount of ammo, if that's what it takes to get you out of a gunfight alive. 1 round is enough, if that's what it takes. An unloaded weapon is enough, if just the sight of your weapon stops the fight.

The problem is, you never know til it's over. That leaves us trying to balance some competing needs.

1. The need for enough ammunition. How much? See above. You don't know.
2. The need to be able to walk around normally. Carrying 1000 rounds and an M-60 is not practical.
3. In some cases, the need for concealability.

Since we are doing a balancing act, different people are going to come up with different answers. But the point is, we can never know how much will be enough for the gun fight WE will be in, and averages are not useful in making that decision.

[45 Fu]

Hey pbass, care to enlighten us on exactly how exactly what "bad basic mag design" is, and how it applies to the 1911 magazine? I would sure like to know as I carry a 1911 and have never had a problem. Maybe you can tell me what I'm doing wrong?

[pwrtool45]

Name one example where this was the case.

You must've missed the part where I said:

while it may not be part of the official reason

...even though you quoted it. In fact, pretty much the whole point of the post was that some things will influence decisions without being explicitly enumerated. Name everything that influenced your decision on what to have for breakfast this morning. The factors are too numerous to mention when one includes subconscious influences and "unmentionable" influences. I mean, if a racist da/leo/meter maid/lawyer specifically picks on an indian/black/white/latino guy/gal do you honestly think they're going to put it in the accompanying paperwork?

The DA has an extraordinary amount of latitude with regard to the outcome of a self-defense case. If the DA is an anti inside a city that's full of antis, he's still probably not going to put "used the wrong gun" on the paperwork for every case where the victim didn't use a $10,000 O/U trap gun, even if that's how he feels. Simultaneously, the DA inside a small, conservative 1960s Alabama town isn't going to explicitly put "action performed because person was indian/asian/black" on the paperwork, even if that's how he feels.

As a result, expecting to find cold, hard documentation on why some cases were carried forward and some weren't is spotty at best. This is exacerbated if you're talking about a technical subject such as weapon features or weapon handling (e.g., carrying a boatload of spare mags). For an example, google for details on US vs. Kevin D. Mitnick. Shimomura hated Mitnick. You think you'll find *that* in any legal documents? I can guarantee it had an enormous impact on his apprehension. Same with Ed Cummings and Det. John K. Morris. You won't find any signs of intense hatred in his USSS reports, but any research at all on the case will bear it out. Things affect people's decisions. Not all things are explicitly documented, especially when "things" are inclusive of personal vendettas, racism or bigotry. If you do any research on the two cases mentioned, remember these people weren't rapists, child molestors or murderers. One man intruded into SCO and DEC's networks, embarrasing them quite fiercely. The other man made a little beige box that echos the same sounds a touch-tone phone makes. Every time you hear about a case where the punishment is in asinine proportion to the crime, remember there's a reason for it, and that reason isn't going to be in the transcript.

I'm not parroting what I've heard. I'm making observations about possibilities based on how the legal system works. If you disagree, then I suggest you spend some time either in the machine or with members of "the other side" who have discretionary authority. You may surprise yourself.


Quartus:

While the "average" number of rounds fired in a fight may not be useful on its face, it isn't useless either. There are spikes, yes, but some of those spikes can be discarded. What about the gunfights that require 1000 rounds? That really bumped up the average, but there's no way you're going to survive a 1000 round gunfight, so its presence in the tabulated statistics is useless. A normalized average can be very useful.

Preparing for the extremes isn't always feasible; something to do with them being "extremes." If we were to prepare for extremes, we wouldn't leave our bunkers except to shoot IPSC matches or to purchase supplies. We all select a "reasonable" level of preparation and go with it. What is "reasonable" has some variance from person to person. So long as it's somewhat in line which reality, everything else is semantics. Since everyone I know carriest at least 5 rounds, I dont' see why this is a problem; that's a 100% fudge factor on top of the average.

[Quartus]

A normalized average can be very useful.

Never by itself. For example, if say, 30% of the fights went to 8 rounds, then it's not unreasonable to prepare for a scenario where you need 8 rounds. If that were the case, relying on the average to tell you that a 5 shot revolver with no reloads is adequate would leave you unprepared for 30% of gunfights.

[pwrtool45]

30% is a big chunk; much bigger than in the fictional average I was working with. I would agree that if that were the case (and it doesn't seem unreasonable), one would do well to either pack a reload for the J-frame/Officer's ACP or otherwise be able to perform at the 8 round mark. I also strongly agree that one shouldn't just look at the average and discard all the contextual data. I pretty much only disagree that a (normalized) average is completely useless. After re-reading your post, I don't think you're implying this. If that's the case, please disregard.

As an additional plain English clarification: My point was just that some say a 2.5 round average is useless because you might need a lot more than that. This is misleading because "a lot more than that" might reference cases that either used more ammo than you can carry or more than you can reasonably expect to fire before you're killed. If someone burns through three magazines in a Ruger AC-556 that doesn't carry over to carry 90 rounds worth of Glock pistol magazines. As a result, these cases can be discarded because you can't derive anything useful from them.

I didn't address the instances where "a lot more than that" is a reasonable number (e.g, 8 instead of 5). As you pointed out, that omission may have left the jist of my post slightly ambiguous. I didn't mean to imply that one should completely discard the context in favor of the average, normalized or not.

[Quartus]

I pretty much only disagree that a (normalized) average is completely useless.

Unless we know what went into it, an average (normalized or not) is useless. It's probably the most abused statistic in existence. With no context it has no meaning. For example, does that average include confrontations where a gun was drawn but no shots were fired? Obviously, that would skew the average way down. If you don't know those are included, you'll be misled by the average. IF we understand the context, an average can be useful for some things. I don't think it's useful for this kind of thing, though. I don't want to be prepared for the "average" gunfight, I want to be prepared for the realistic worst case scenario.

My point was just that some say a 2.5 round average is useless because you might need a lot more than that. This is misleading because "a lot more than that" might reference cases that either used more ammo than you can carry or more than you can reasonably expect to fire before you're killed.

Agreed. "A lot more than that" could be a ridiculous figure. The Hollywood bank shootout is a good example of an aberration that could really skew an average, but doesn't really tell us much about how much ammo is reasonable to carry on a routine basis.

What we're trying to do is to find a good balance between portability and survivability. Portability is pretty easy to figure out - we can all gauge that for ourselves, and it will vary depending on build, clothing, weather, etc.

Survivability is where it gets tricky. If a significant number of gunfights require 10 rounds, then it's reasonable to carry 10 or more, even if the AVERAGE is 2.5. Now, what would a "significant" number be? That will probably vary for each individual. It's a judgment call. But without knowing what the distribution is, you can't make that call. The average simply provides no useful information to that decision making process.


BTW, buried somewhere in John Farnam's Quips & Quotes is a commentary on gunfight findings for NYPD. The usual number (the mode) of shots fired had been 6 for many years. When they went to autos, they expected the number to increase considerably, probably to the new capacity, which was 14 rounds, IIRC. The theory was that officers shot their weapon dry and only THEN would stop shooting, even if fewer rounds were actually needed. In reality, it went to 8 and pretty much stayed there, regardless of magazine capacity.

[fastbolt]

Well, I just picked up a very slightly used G27 w/night sights to go along with my G26 ...

It came with the standard 2 mags, and I picked up a third mag ...

All 3 mags seem to function normally, after only having fired a bit over 200 roudns through them ...

I have enough mags for my normal carry requirements ... for now ... and I want to run more rounds through all 3 to establish their functionality ...

But I also want to buy another 2-3 mags in the next few weeks to bring me up to my preferred 5-6 mags, so I can have a couple of dedicated "range" mags for frequent training. I tend to allow my training mags to be "abused" a bit, to see how they hold up when they aren't treated as nicely as my dedicated carry mags.

[pwrtool45]

Unless we know what went into it, an average (normalized or not) is useless

Eh, I guess I assumed that goes without saying. The average number of kerdoobles per widget usage is 109327.

...I want to be prepared for the realistic worst case scenario. ...

Yes, exactly. Key word, realistic. My intent wasn't to fixate on an average value. My intent was to note how easily a couple of (spike) cases could affect the average, that they should be viewed as anomalous and removed from consideration. I fully agree that the 2.5 round average value is useless if there are a substantial amount of cases where 8-10 rounds are fired. 8-10 rounds is realistic. 90 rounds, however, is not; and it's not so much the affect on the average value as the anecdotal value. Just because someone happened to have half a dozen loaded mags for their AR-15 in their pickup on trip back from the range and used that ammo down to the last cartridge doesn't mean we should all keep ARs and loaded mags with us at all times.

[pbass]

Hi 45 fu, this was in the 70s and it was hard to find a mag that fed every time. Mags had the standard bent tin follower. I remember someone trying with a design that had a bearing surface up front, but the sample I had wasn't too great, either. I've been away from 1911s for a while (1979), have the mags changed?