When storing mass ammo, magazines don't cost more than clips, they cost more than the rifle.
You can get 24 AR-15 magazines for less than $300. My Del-Ton AR was $400 on sale. You don't need to have your entire ammo supply in clips or mags, there's no point.
You can get a whole M4 clone for less than $500 afaik, but I haven't checked recent prices. You're saying the empty magazines cost nearly as much as the rifle itself? You're also not suggesting testing the magazines beforehand, which isn't cheap either. Fully loaded & pre-tested, the ammo storage winds up costing more than the rifle in some cases. Surely there's a better way, and there is, but it's not "cool" in the gun community. It's not something promoted by known "experts", so I can expect the sort of response I get. Like I said in one of my comments, if Rambo had used a clip-fed, 50-round machine gun, there would be no debate unless I switched my argument and advocated for box magazines instead.
Clips are cool. Cooler than box mags, in my opinion. Revolvers are cool, too. Revolvers even have advantages over semi-auto pistols. But those advantages aren't enough to justify using a revolver instead of a semi-auto, just like the advantages of clips aren't enough to justify using them.
(post is archived)