LooseRounds.com
5.56 Timeline
Weaponsman.com

Blackhawk 6 round 40mm Pouch

I’m sure you guys are sick of me talking about 40mm accessories, but too bad, I’m still excited about it.


Back in 2006 prior to deploying to Iraq my peers and I (but mostly me) spent lots of time in the various tactical stores in Oceanside California spending money on all sorts of stuff that was mostly useful.

One of the new guys was assigned to carry a M203. Well many of them were, for some odd reason the platoon I was in was very M203 heavy. About two of them per team vs the normal one per four man fireteam. Our guys were not issues any pouches for holding 40mm rounds, so they were often dumped in a cargo pocket or saw drum pouch. But one of the guys in my platoon found and purchased a Blackhawk 40mm pouch and I always thought it was a pretty neat piece of kit.

There are similar pouches out there, and some of the other ones look quite nice. But the ones I’ve seen also appear bigger and bulkier than this one. I wanted to get a pouch to hold 40mm rounds, so I started looking for one of these Blackhawk pouches. Many places labeled it as discontinued, or had new old stock at very high prices. I did end up finding a seller that had these new for cheap. I paid less than $15 shipped. I’m very happy with that price. Part number is 37CL59

This pouch is pretty big. The back has MOLLE/PALS/Strike/ETC webbing. Blackhawk includes their “speed clips” for mounting it. There is also a thicker webbing section so you can use ALICE clips. The pouch is fairly deep so you can put longer illumination/flare rounds. Velcro on the flap allows you to velcro the flap open. There is also a snap for additional retention along with a sizeable amount of velcro hook and loop. The fine sand in Iraq could gum up hook and loop material so having a snap gives you another option in inclement conditions.

I don’t think I have seen the Blackhawk Speed Clips before. They are much faster to attach and remove than MALICE or TacTies, etc. I question if they are as durable or good a choice for long term/permanent mounting. I found a good video showing their use on Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DdEGCxxcgw

Elastic straps in the pouch allow you to secure 6 rounds in side the pouch. It isn’t hard to stuff an additional 2 between the two rows. If you were not using the straps you might be able to stuff in even more rounds, but I haven’t tried yet.

The pouch is pretty big if you stuff in 8 rounds, but the cover handles it just fine. With the recommended 6 rounds the pouch is about 6 by 6 by 3 inches.

One last major note is that the bottom of the pouch is mesh. This lets water and debris fall the out the bottom. It also lets all that water and debris in the pouch to begin with. Eh, IMHO it isn’t a good or bad feature.

Now you might be asking, why not just use a bandolier?

Back in 2006, I don’t think any of us had seen a modern 40mm bandolier. There were the fabric 6 shot ones that 40mm rounds came in, but I didn’t see a modern bandolier until we saw the Army guys rocking them. We would see Army and National Guardsmen carrying around 20-30+ 40mm rounds. Hell, our guys were lucky if they had 6 HEDP at any given time. For us, a bandolier would have been overkill. I’ve read grenadiers complain that the 40mm bandolier would flop around, be slow to reload from, allowed rounds to get dirty and damaged, and that the bright gold nose cones of HEDP would draw attention and be a target indicator for the enemy.

I think it partially comes down to what you need. If you need to carry a bunch of 40mm round, a bandolier would be handier than several pouches. Or if you are handing off the launcher from one person to another a bandolier could also be transferred easier. But for a few rounds for my own launcher, I’d rather have them in an enclosed pouch.

6 thoughts on “Blackhawk 6 round 40mm Pouch”

  1. Here’s a question from someone who’s never fired one:

    How useful is the 40mm under-barrel launcher? What’s the usefulness of the 40mm ammo?

    Reply
    • As a civilian, with out HEDP, it is a novelty.
      For combat, with the full assortment of ammunition, it is a very useful tool.
      Aside from less than lethal options, signaling, firing flares for illumination, or other utility purposes, 40mm gives an indirect fire capability that lets you hit targets outside of line of sight.
      Is that enemy in a room (but not standing in view), you can lob a round into a window. You can put a round into the ditch or valley the enemy is using for cover. Put a round over a wall to kill the enemy behind that wall.
      It is a weapon where you don’t have to hit the enemy directly. With a 5m kill and 15m causality radius impacts near the enemy will have effect on target. HEDP (Dual Purpose) can penetrate thin armor and can kill targets in some bunkers, hardened targets, thinly armored vehicles, etc.
      Having a grenade launcher in each team gives a vital set of additional capabilities.

      Reply
    • It’d be a much more useful tool if the idiots hadn’t deliberately “de-emphasized” the development on the 40mm, lest they do damage to their case for procuring the XM-25.

      We were complaining about the issues inherent to the 40mm HEDP round as far back as the 1980s; they never did anything about it because of that whole “We’re spending money on something even better…” syndrome, and because they didn’t want to take a chance that the XM-25 might not actually work that well. The whole thing was flatly criminal–There were better rounds for the 40mm out there, from multiple vendors. The whole thing is a lot like the friggin’ .50 cal–We had Manroy, FN, and SACO-Maremont all offering fixed-headspace kits for that damn thing as far back as the late 1960s, but it took until after around 2007 before the dumbf**ks in our procurement system came to the conclusion that they should actually buy the f**king things, now that we’ve “broken the code” on manufacturing precision consistent ammo. Which, if I recall the studies, was something we actually accomplished back in the 1930s, which was why adjustable headspace and timing were not things we demanded on machineguns past about WWII…

      The whole thing is a travesty. With the money spent on the XM-25, we could have had airburst 40mm and God alone knows what, things the actual soldiers were requesting and needed. As it is, here we are, and the friggin’ HEDP is still the most commonly issued round, despite its manifest issues.

      Good Christ, I think I saw initial reports on that thing from right after they adopted it, describing the same problems we had with it in the 1980s. Really makes you wonder, sometimes…

      It is of a piece with it all, though. You look at things we’ve done, and you really have to wonder. I mean, OK… The Claymore mine. That’s basically a factory-produced fougasse, something we’ve used since the invention of gunpowder. Can anyone explain to me why the hell something like the Claymore wasn’t produced and on general issue since about the dawn of modern war? Seriously–It’s so damn obvious. If I’d been around during the age of cavalry charging infantry squares, little old depraved me would have been hauling around dog-carts filled with lead balls and black powder, sitting them out in front of my infantry squares, and then blasting the crap out of those flashy bastards on the horses with their cute little swords and lances…

      How in the f**k did it take until after Korea before someone came up with the Claymore? I just don’t get it… I’ve gone back and looked, and nobody that I can find was doing prepared fougasse charges in front of defensive positions anywhere in either the Pacific or Europe during WWII, and you’d think that some German facing the charging hordes of Soviet conscripts would have come up with the idea, or some American dealing with Japanese banzai charges.

      Yet… They didn’t. What. The. Actual. F**k?

      Reply
      • 40mm definitely needs some modernization. One of the last things I seem to recall before getting out so many years back was an initiative to increase the range of the 40mm to 600m. That alone would be a welcome upgrade.
        If that ever happened I don’t know but doubt it. If for no other reason the range fans/SDZs at most every impact range wouldn’t support it.

        Reply
        • I don’t know if I agree that it does. It is a solution to a problem that works well enough. 40mm ammunition that is. The 320 is probably a good improvement over the 203.
          There is a 600m range round fielded. I’ve read of an 800m version, but I don’t know if it is fielded. I don’t know if the accuracy of the platform really allows for taking advantage of that distance.

          Reply
  2. Vis-a-vis Blackhawk… Based on my experience with their products, those trick pouches will blow out seams at some point, probably on the bottom or on the MOLLE tape edges. Blackhawk earned the nickname it had where I was in the Army, and that nickname was “Craphawk”.

    Eagle Industries, London Bridge Trading, Tactical Tailor, or any of the other more esoteric brands of web gear out there are likely to be a better choice than Blackhawk. In my experience, I wouldn’t even recommend them to kids playing Airsoft.

    The most maddening thing from them was a ruck whose straps pulled out on me late one night, and I had to carry that damn ruck in my arms like a baby for six miles back to the pickup point. Went to warranty the damn thing with them, and they sent it back saying I’d abused it. That was the last Blackhawk product I ever bought, and I made damn sure that my unit never bought from them if I had anything to say about it. It’s been over 20 years, and I still carry a grudge the way I had to carry that POS f**king ruck of theirs–Which, I might add, was brand-new the day that exercise started.

    Basically, f**k Blackhawk.

    Reply

Leave a Comment