What is the difference between magazine and clip?

Are you using the word, "Spring," as a verb or a noun? Spring steel maybe?
Click to expand...

A noun. An enbloc clip for a M1 is like a binder clip for paper. The binder clip is a leaf spring shaped in a way to effectively clamp things together.

A M1 enbloc is a specially shaped leaf spring that clamps 8 rounds together until it's locked into the magazine of the rifle. If it wasn't a spring it wouldn't work. You can't make one out of lead because it would simply deform when loaded or glass because the brittleness would make it break. It has to have enough "spring" to clamp the rounds in place after opening to accept them.

But then, just about anything that is used by flexing within its elastic limit is really a spring. It's the "spring" property of bolts that hold things together. Torque on the threads only provides the stretch.
 
Often used interchangeably, there is a technical difference. Engine and motor are used interchangeably in common conversation too, but again, there is a technical difference.

Both have springs, both hold ammunition, but that is the only commonality. There is a bit of overlap in terminology due to the many varied designs of firearms. AND, firearms makers themselves have added to the confusion by sometimes referring to their magazines as "clips".

Generally, clips are used to insert rounds into the firearm and magazines are used to feed ammunition into the chamber, but there are exceptions.

There are a few designs where the loaded clip is inserted into the firearm, and rounds are fed from it into the chamber. The "en bloc" clip of the M1 Garand is the most famous. The entire loaded clip is inserted into the M1, and rounds are fed from it into the chamber. When the last round is fired, the empty clip is automatically ejected. AS already mentioned, some old bolt actions also feed from a clip inserted into the gun, which is ejected (drops out) when empty. These are exceptions to the general use of clips, which is to allow rounds to be convieniently fed into the magazine.

This is the most common use of clips, and the clips are commonly called "stripper clips" because the rounds are stripped out of the clip, into the magazine, not into the firing chamber. The majority of arms using "clips" use this method, with rounds being "stripped" (by hand) from the clip into the magazine, either internal or detatchable.

There is also the 1/3, half, and full "moon" clips used by some revolvers. Moon clips retain their grip on the cases at all times, remaining in the gun during the firing cycle, until manually ejected, holding the fired brass.

As a baseline, I would say that clips use their spring tension to retain rounds in the clip, while magazines use their spring tension to position rounds for feeding into the chamber.
 
Magazine
SWAT_2012_07_cover.jpg


Clip
chip_clip.jpg


:D
 
On an internet forum, if you refer to a magazine as a clip, your thread stands a fair chance of being entirely ruined by people trying to correct you, and the people trying to argue with them about it.

If you refer to a clip as a magazine, you are likely to get a well illustrated history lesson, and likely on the M1 Garand even if you were talking about a different gun. Your thread will probably still be ruined, but you might get something out of it.

It's also similar to "tire vs wheel". There is a difference, but we usually know what you mean and it isn't usually worth arguing about.

The argument about spring tension is weird. I've never seen that before in one of these threads.
 
The definition I prefer:
A clip is a device that holds a given number of rounds together, and is inserted into a magazine, or allows quick loading of a magazine. Magazines are devices that may be internal, or external to a firearm; can be detachable, or fixed; contain a spring and follower; and allow cartridges to be fed into the chamber of a firearm. Most magazines do not use clips.
Click to expand...

If you look at an individual firearm that might be considered an exception, you can almost always identify parts that fit the definition.

For example, the Japanese Type 11, Mike Irwin mentioned:
Another example is the Japanese Type 11 light machine gun, which was fed by Mauser-style stripper clips that were dropped into a hopper-style magazine.
Click to expand...
The Type 11 had a spring and follower attached to the lid of the hopper, to push the clips toward the bottom of the magazine (hopper). In the bottom of the hopper, was a cartridge feed system that pushed the cartridges out of the clips and positioned them to be fed into the chamber.
The magazine feeds the firearm. The clips feed the magazine.

The Hotchkiss machine gun is arguable, to some people. But, the guide rails for the "clips" (properly called "strips") can easily be likened to a magazine. And they allow the "follower" (cam-operated wheels with teeth) to feed the clips so the next cartridge is ready to be fed into the chamber. And, the parts serve to hold the 'clip' in place, even when not in operation. In this case, there is no spring, but there is a type of follower. So, you still have clips being inserted into a magazine.

The Revelli M1914 is a crazy Italian invention that many people often classify as using "gang clips" or "box clips". But... if you look closely at the "clips", they're magazines. Spring. Follower. Self-contained. Feeds cartridges into the chamber. ...Magazine. The only difference between this and any other magazine, is that it has ten springs and ten followers; and is advanced sideways, for each 'stack' to be fed in order. It's just 10 five-round magazines attached to each other, with an auto-advance feature.

Getting into some of the other gravity-fed machine guns, you run into the same concepts. It's just that gravity replaces the spring and/or follower.
 
Last edited:
I really didn't know there were any submachine gun magazines that have no springs and in fact, I can only think of one that has the magazine on top. That would mean it couldn't be used in the stylish horizontal firing position. Possibly the first Gatlings and other crank-operated guns had magazines with no springs and the later Accles drum for a Gatling is described as gravity fed. A couple of the early rapid fire guns had no magazine at all. Ammunition was simply placed in a hopper or on a feeding ramp. The 40mm Bofors, which has been used by just about everybody at one time or another, worked rather similiarly, except the rounds were in fact in clips. None of the "un-sprung" and hopper style feed mechanisms lasted very long in service, apparently.

In my brief research for this reply, I see that one early design had the most unusual feature of using a tray for the ammunition, which was placed in a box on the left-hand side of the gun (this was a medium machine gun). Each tray fed through the gun as it was fired and the spent cases were replaced in the tray. It is described as promising but it appeared at the wrong time for anything to be done with it, basically.

The British called their clips "chargers," which they also used to describe certain horses. But a clip is also a word to describe a fast march. Then there's "peck."
 
Clip is used by Hollywood for everything that holds bullets that is inserted into a semiautomatic firearm. It sounds cooler and more street than saying magazine.

For example - Yo, I banged dat clip my nine and capped dat fool.

Sounds cooler than - Yo, I banged dat magazine inta my nine and capped that fool.

Hollywood also likes to follow said dialogue with action consisting of someone turning a semiautomatic pistol sideways to shoot.

:)
 
"But, the guide rails for the "clips" (properly called "strips") can easily be likened to a magazine."

They're even more easily likened to clips, as I noted. Are they clips? Technically, yes. Are they magazines? Again, technically yes. They fit parts of the definitions for both.

The mechanical feed mechanism found on virtually all automatic weapons firing Hotchkiss style strips or belted ammunition really have no relation to the follower in a magazine-fed gun and shouldn't be confused with such.

As you note, the Revelli Model 1914 uses a box magazine composed of separate magazines. I'm not 100% sure, but I think there was a magazine loading tool that allowed the individual magazine cells (for lack of a better term) to be quickly loaded from Mauser-style clips. Obviously, given that the Italians used a rifle with a Mannlicher packet clip system, this could have been unique to the machine gun unlike the original intention for the Japanese Type 11.

"Gravity-fed submachine guns"

You're going to have to name them. I know of NO gravity feed submachine guns. Given the nature of the submachine gun, I can't imagine how such a design could be successful.

The only truly successful submachine gun I can think of with a top-mounted magazine was the Australian Owen, and it most definitely was a standard magazine with a follower and feed spring, only mounted on the top of the gun.

Two Italian models, the OVP and the Beretta Model 1918 used top mounted magazines, but again, they were standard magazines, not gravity feed. In subsequent designs Beretta moved back to the underslung magazine seen in virtually all other successful models.


"In my brief research for this reply, I see that one early design had the most unusual feature of using a tray for the ammunition, which was placed in a box on the left-hand side of the gun (this was a medium machine gun). Each tray fed through the gun as it was fired and the spent cases were replaced in the tray."

That sounds like you're describing the the Breda Modelo 1937, an Italian design.

It wasn't promising at all. It was largely considered to be a farce. The only possible advantage that the action replacing the spent cases in the strip might have is keeping a smaller opening to reduce dirt contamination. It also contributed to a neat firing position, but it was a nightmare shucking the empties out of the strips and reloading them.

Breda rather quickly altered the design to take a standard top-mounted magazine.


We're starting to get pretty far afield from handguns, so I'm going to move this to General Discussion.
 
Last edited:
My dad always told me the difference was in moving parts a clip has no moving *parts* not sure if that was the proper definition of it but that is how he explained it. For me if you mention clip I am thinking Garand right away and as Mike quoted earlier
After the Garand, probably the most notable is the Italian Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, which used a 6-round packet clip.
Click to expand...
 
It never ceases to amaze me, the amount of powder that's burned over the difference between "clip" and "magazine" and the quickness at which the grammar nazis will jump on anyone who dares to use the "wrong" term.

Originally, magazines were often referred to as clips, even by gun manufacturers. The term "clip magazine" was often used in the early to mid-20th Century advertising literature to refer to a detachable magazine.

While it is now the custom to refer to "clip" as a device which holds cartridges to be loaded into a magazine (stripper clip), or while in the magazine (Garand) we should make a real effort not to be so anal about correcting those not among the firearms cognoscenti.

I've also seen gun enthusiasts go apoplexic over someone calling a revolver a "pistol," even though Colt's original patent was for a "revolving pistol."

In the immortal words of Sgt Hulka, "Lighten Up, Francis!" :rolleyes:
 
" the grammar nazis"

It's not a grammar issue. It's a usage and definition issue. :p


But, can you tell us exactly why you're apparently going off the deep end here when no one in this thread has taken anyone to task over what they consider to be a non-standard or incorrect usage?

Everyone has done a very good job at discussing the OPs question and staying away from such acrimony. Until your post.
 
How about a "clip" that remains in the gun during firing?

Does anyone know of one? A Swedish Bofors 40mm Cannon does, but I don't know of a sidearm that does. I am not the historian some of you are.
 
The unusual machine gun I referred to earlier that used ammo trays fed in from a box on the left side of the gun was a Perino, a tripod mounted machine gun. It was invented in 1901.

This might be a good place to mention that many firearms, particularly military weapons, are designed, apparently, simply to be different. Although there may be good reasons for doing that for commercial purposes, there is the assumption that it will be better but unfortunately, it doesn't always work out that way. The chief reason of course is to produce a competing product, hopefully at a time where there is a high demand for the particular type of weapon and when it would sell no matter what, wartime generally being a desperate time. Many weapon and military equipment designs, procurement and usage come with interesting stories of how armies end up with what they get.
 
How about a "clip" that remains in the gun during firing?
Click to expand...

Examples of such would includ the Garand En-Bloc clip and the Mannclicher clips used by rifles such as the Carcano, Berthier, and Mauser Gew 88. In all of these designs, the clip remains inside the magazine until the last cartridge is fired or chambered or the clip and any remaining ammunition is manually extracted by the shooter.

In a handgun, probably the most notable example would be moonclips used in revolvers like the S&W and Colt M1917 as those clips are not removed from the gun until the shooter manually extracts them along with the spent casings.

As far as the whole clip vs. magazine thing, it is my understanding that there are at least three different terms to be used if one wants to be a precise as possible. A true clip is a device which holds the ammunition and is inserted, along with the ammunition, into the magazine or cylinder of the gun. Cartridges are not removed from the clip when the gun is loaded and the clip either has the cartridges stripped out of it by the action of the gun or, in the case of a revolver, retain the spent casings and/or unfired cartridges and is ejected manually from the gun along with them.

A charger is a device that holds the cartridges and aids the shooter in inserting them into the gun's magazine. Chargers are often referred to as "stripper clips" but they differ from true clips in that they are not actually inserted into the gun along with the ammunition but rather the ammunition is manually stripped off of the clip and into the gun's magazine by the shooter. Chargers are most often encountered in bolt-action rifles such as the Model 98 Mauser, '03 Springfield, Mosin-Nagant, or Lee-Enfield but they can also be found in semi-automatic rifles such as the SKS, FN-49, and MAS 49/56 and semi-automatic pistols such as the Mauser C96 "Broomhandle" and Steyr-Hahn M1912.

A magazine is the device which feeds the ammunition into the chamber of the gun. At the very least, a magazine consists of a magazine body, spring, and follower. Magazines may be either detatchable of fixed and come in several different configurations such as box, drum, tubular, rotary, pan, and helical. Most semi-automatic, bolt-action, pump-action, and lever-action firearms have magazines of some sort. The only firearms which do not have some type of magazine are revolvers, single-shot or multi-barrel weapons, and belt-fed weapons. An easy way to differentiate a magazine from a clip or charger is that, with the exception of a revolver, a magazine may or may not be used in conjuction with a clip/charger but a clip/charger is always used in conjuction with a magazine (revolvers are the exception as their cylinder replaces the magazine and can be used in conjuction with a clip).
 
OP here.

Boy this thread really took off, I was half expecting people to yell at me and tell me to go back to gun school and learn the basics lol.:D I guess I understand now that the terms are not so basic after all.

I really appreciate everyone's input, and I want to thank the staff for moving this tread so more people will be able to chime in. I have learned a great deal so far, so please keep it up.

Thanks again everyone.
 
"The Perino"

Interesting. I'd forgotten all about that one.

Here's a picture of one (in assault configuration, and apparently modified to take belts) http://thedonovan.com/archives/2009/04/the_whatziss_an_3.html

It's also interesting that you say the mechanism would put the empty cases back in the feed strip, and that that little nuance was apparently adopted only on the Breda 1937, another Italian design.


" An easy way to differentiate a magazine from a clip or charger is that, with the exception of a revolver, a magazine may or may not be used in conjuction with a clip/charger but a clip/charger is always used in conjuction with a magazine (revolvers are the exception as their cylinder replaces the magazine and can be used in conjuction with a clip)."

I'm just not at all sure that I agree with that when you bring the Hotchkiss-style strip fed guns into the equation.

George Chinn, author of "The Machine Gun," (written for the US Navy's Bureau of Ordnance) refers to the Hotchkiss-style strips as "clips," and no where does he mention the word magazine in reference to the Hotchkiss.

From Chinn's section on the Hotchkiss (as found on the web):

"Instead of feeding ammunition in fabric belts, the Hotchkiss uses metal strips. The cartridges are packed in these clips, each containing 30 rounds, and having a length of about 15 inches. Each loaded strip is in an ordinary pasteboard box, from which, when opened, it may be fed directly to the gun. The feed mechanism consists of a spur wheel, which engages in cams cut in the piston, and in openings formed in the clip. It is so arranged that the feed strip may be engaged, with breech either open or closed. The strips being so constructed as to lock one with another, a series may be fired without the necessity of cocking the gun each time by hand."

Also, later in the section:

"The lower part of the breechblock face strikes the base of the cartridge, stripping it from the feed clip and driving it forward into the chamber."


Chinn also talks about the Perino 1901, and again refers to the strips as "clips."

If an authority on automatic weapons as eminent as George Chinn describes it as such, I'm sorry, but I've got to go with it. Chinn's work is still the seminal work on the subject.
 
Last edited:
I am on the side that says it doesn't matter for two reasons. One, some manufacturers use the term and, two, there are so many exceptions. I wonder what the words are in other languages?

Well, here's another question. Do drum magazines as used on Lewis guns (and Japanese copies), Soviet DP and DT machine guns and one or two others, have any springs inside? I do know that Thompson-style submachine guns have springs but the other kind are entirely different, as you know. I just never saw the inside of one, at least not within living memory.
 
You're going to have to name them. I know of NO gravity feed submachine guns. Given the nature of the submachine gun, I can't imagine how such a design could be successful.
Click to expand...
I don't know of any, either.

They say tired driving is as bad, or worse than drunk driving.
Tired posting is, apparently, in the same boat. :o
 
I dont know if the Lewis or Soviet guns had springs in the pans, but they are definitely magazines even if they dont have springs.

If no springs then they are gravity fed not unlike the box magazines on the Gatling gun.
 
A magazine can also be a storage area or warehouse for ammunition, explosives, or just about anything else. Consider powder magazines on warships.

Ammunition can be moved from a magazine on base to clips and then to magazines for loading into firearms for use.

One reason the rest of the world recognizes English as such a hard language is we have many cases of using the same word to mean different things or using many words for the same thing. :)

It's all good....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top