25rnd vs 32rnd reliability?

[tonelar]

In regards to straight 9mm magazines, wasn’t there a study done by the IDF where they found the lesser capacity to be more reliable? I tried finding it in the reference section but was unable.

 

[9mmsubgun-m11]

25rd more reliable.I believe the 32s were made for other countries/export. I could be wrong though.

 

[ole442]

I’ve had great luck with both since I bought my first UZI in the mid 1980’s!

 

[Fairbanksan]

Both have always been reliable for me. The 40 rounders- not so much.

 

[tonelar]

people forget that 9mm has a slight taper

 

[slimshady]

IIRC, the UZI book sez the prototypes were tested with modified Beretta M38 SMG magazines. Insertion stops were lowered and a mag catch slot added. When IMI started to build their own magazines they discovered their 30 was not as reliable as their 25 so they only made 25s. The IDF requested larger mags so they eventually developed the 32 rd one. The only reliability difference I can recall being mentioned was the 25s with their folded seam positioned hollowpoints farther forward and was more reliable with them.

 

[K2]

Hi All,

FWIW, my 32's all run 100%. Even if I punch them out to 48 rounds.

OTOH, I don't play in sand either!

K2

 

[Gumbochen]

I’m not sure about the Israeli study, but they (25s and 32s) all seem to run fine. The 25s are nice because you get two fully loaded mags with one standard box of ammo.

 

[Samuel_Hoggson]

I liked 25s cuz they reduced my son's ammo consumption at shoots. Slightly. Forgetting to bring the Lulas might have been more effective.

Never saw any difference in reliability between 32s and 25s.

 

[pmf]

I’m not sure about the Israeli study, but they (25s and 32s) all seem to run fine. The 25s are nice because you get two fully loaded mags with one standard box of ammo.

That's my biggest like of the 25-rounders. I believe the gun was originally fielded with 25-round mags. Both the 25 and 32 rounders are equally reliable. The 40-rounders are converted mags and they don't catch as well in the mag well.

 

[roscoeturner]

Performance wise I have found no difference in the two. I prefer the 25 round magazines for no other reason than I assembled a couple of these years ago using 50 cal ammunition cans and I like using that size.

http://www.uzitalk.com/reference/pages/magazine storage.htm

 

[SecondAmend]

I've understood that the WWII subguns across the pond (e.g., MP40, Sten) used 32 round mags because the common UK and European box of 9mm ammo was an 8 x 8, 64 round pack, unlike the U.S.'s 5 x 10, 50 round pack.
My experience has been that the Uzi mags of 25 and 32 rounds both work well. I have a few 20 round, off brand sticks that seem to be okay. IIRC, I've got two of the 40 round sticks (haven't dug them out in years) that worked okay. And I've got a Vector drum that came with a very slight dent on an outer edge that appears to have been in the drum when it was converted for Uzi use, and the drum mag also works without issues.
MHO, YMMV, etc. Be well.