Did you even read your own source? Probably only searching for tidbits that confirm your previously held opinions instead of doing an unbiased analysis of the facts as presented.

All springs suffer this same fatigue problem, its basic spring science. I have owned springs long enough to have to replace them, including mag springs that wouldnt feed reliably due to wear, including "bullet proof" glock mag springs.

Your source agrees. The author admits he only has anecdotal knowledge, so sought out the sage advice of one article published years ago by an aerospace engineer (probably sounds like a science wizard if you didnt go to engineering school with a bunch of AE's who couldnt keep their cars running and didnt know shit about guns) "In the article, he went into detail as to the material aspects of the springs and how their ability to do work degraded ((minimally=positively)) under compression and over time ... with the end result being that with all the variables factored in—it would be hard to find a definitive answer". Sage.

Here's a clue - compare mag springs that occasionally get wet, spend most their life in a humid, salty marine environment and see extreme environmental changes by travelling to various climates in unpressurized aircraft to magazines on a desk in front of an irrelevantly experienced engineer in a climate controlled building. Everything degrades over-time. Compression accelerates degradation. Will your springs become unusable in your lifetime? Has anyone had a lifetime to test enough of your magazines design in your specific environment? No. If your life depends on it, I'd follow the ammo/magazine manufacturers suggestions, based on the fact compression causes loss of spring force, based on the simple principle of equilibrium, and unload your magazines every now and then because your life may depend upon it, and its better to practice shooting than pretend like you did everything you could to avoid a bad situation.

I'm actually favoring the Garand style clips over the stripper clips. I don't really like the SKS design for that reason, but it's one of the only 2 auto rifles I can think of with clip fed internal magazines.

• Loading internal mags with clips is clearly faster, as there's no secondary loading (of the magazine) once the clip is fed into the internal magazine. This is especially true for Garand style clips.

• Internal mags can fail, but a major point of the pro-magazine argument is that magazine springs are super reliable, which is also true for internal magazines. The issue of internal magazine reliability is miniscule compared to the issue of external magazine reliability, and by a wide margin.

• Magazines for mobility is a very strong argument, and vs. 8 or 10 round clip-fed rifles it's likely a winning one. The counter is that magazines are heavier than clips, and that high-capacity clip-fed rifles could be developed, rendering the advantages of magazines nearly irrelevant, while clips will always be lighter. 30 round clip-fed rifles could be somewhat awkward, at least they wouldn't have the option of a smaller magazine. Clip fed rifles are particularly well suited for static defense rather than mobile combat.

• External magazines can be reloaded, while clips NEVER need to be reloaded. Advantage clips for all eternity. Pre-loaded magazines are the answer, but beyond ~ 600 pre-loaded rounds, it's a dubious strategy. At what point do you spend more money on the magazines than the rifle itself? Remember that cheap magazines jam.

• An internal magazine failure is fatal flaw, but I doubt it's any more likely than some other internal failure on a magzine-fed rifle, the spring being one of the most reliable parts. External magazines are far more likely to jam, and need to be independently tested beforehand, driving the cost of external mags through the roof. Given the cost of external magazines, it could plausibly be more affordable to have a 2nd (clip fed) rifle on hand than 30 or more loaded magazines, so that's at least one possible solution to the busted internal mag dilemma. It's quite a bit like the argument about revolver failure vs automatic pistols.

• 24 magazines costs?
• How about for magazines that never jam, how much do those cost?
• Is each magazine independently tested fully loaded?
• How much extra does it cost to test?

By the time you test enough of them, the magazines cost more than another gun would.

I can agree about obsolete rifles. There's no reason a modern 20 or 30 round clip-fed rifle couldn't be developed, except it would be such a huge strategic advantage over mag-fed rifles the powers-that-be wouldn't want it.

The bigger the stockpile, the more sense the clip fed rifles make, albeit none of relevant calibers or designs are available. I hope you can see the value of clips beyond just the available guns on the market. A 20-30 round internal magazine would make external mags obsolete for all but dedicated police or military use.

The internal magazine is not inferior for an armed citizen, particularly one with more than 500 rounds to shoot. The external mag is fine when you know where the fight will be, such as per military or police requirements. A 20-30 round internal mag on a modern combat rifle would end the debate, but those don't exist, so folks will keep comparing M16s to Garands.

You're right, I'd want an M4gery and a 9mm too. I'm arguing for the "idea" of clip fed rifles, not their current relevancy, as the SKS & Garand are the only two example I even know of.

I actually think one reason such rifles aren't developed is because they'd be too effective for civilian use vs. box magazines, particularly a high(ish) capacity Garand-style-clip fed design.

Box magazines mean the user's maximum downrange output is pre-determined by pre-loaded magazines, or having the means to reload amidst shooting. By definition, cips are both pre-loaded and always lighter than box magazines.

A box full of loaded clips is just how they're sold, while finding a dozen loaded 30 round box magazines could be a DA's wet dream. There are so many reasons I'm right, except the actual modern guns to prove it.

Just wait 'til I post my take on revolvers.

The "mini Garand" is the idea that springs into my head. Imagine a Mini-14 sized rifle but with top-fed Garand style clips. Since .223 is small, the clips could hold more than 8 rounds. A 10-round clip would circumvent BS capacity laws, but there's no reason an extended magazine couldn't be attached if the rifle was designed for it, so long as bigger clips were available.

One design issue for a high-capacity internal magazine would be that a curved internal magazine and hence curved clip doesn't seem feasible, although perhaps it would work.

I'm actually fine with smaller clips. Anyone who thinks higher capacity alone is their big strategic advantage is likely to get themselves killed pretty quickly. An M1 is still superior to an M16 in an open area such as the desert or open planes, and no amount of magazine capacity can change that.