User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
VA, USA
|
Posted: 5/12/2013 12:15:07 PM EDT
[#1]
Awesome test! You're never going to please everyone no matter what you try. This test was better than no test at all.
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/12/2013 1:35:14 PM EDT
[#2]
Outstanding. Thanks for the great info.
Keep it up there Sarge... 
|
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2013 11:16:55 AM EDT
[#3]
...very impressed with your findings.
I feel the Gen2's are the real deal also. I will scour the 'net for possible purchases in the coming days. Thank you for your testing and findings. Blessings : hANNAbONE |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2013 12:08:42 PM EDT
[#4]
To me, it's amazing that the USGI magazine which has remained pretty much the same for 40 years is even competitive. Yes, I know they have new spring materials and the follower has been changed but that doesn't mean much when a truck runs over it.......Frankly, I expect MORE out of more modern magazines.....not that they failed badly etc..... but several were not demonstrably better.
|
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 2:07:49 AM EDT
[#5]
Originally Posted By olds442tyguy:
Nice. I'm amazed the USGI mag held up to the running over when I've seen them turn to tin scrap ftom an F150 that probably weighs a third of that. Understandable. Look at it from a PSI ( pounds per square inch ) standpoint. The Hummer has at least three times the contact patch ( surface area where the tire flattens on the road surface ) to dissipate its weight. Im betting that the F-150 has a higher PSI pressure than the Hummer. Also consider the lower pressure in the Hummer tire to conform the shape around the mag. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 6:09:56 AM EDT
[#6]
Thanks for posting the test. In my opinion, any well documented test is worth reading and can be learned from. I do have a question as I could not find it written specifically: Did you leave the troy pull tab sticking out the whole time? From the pictures it looks like you did but I wanted to know for sure. In my own tests of the Troy, it performs badly when that tab is there, but runs fine when it is swapped out with the flat baseplate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 7:34:27 AM EDT
[#7]
Originally Posted By gunquester:
Thanks for posting the test. In my opinion, any well documented test is worth reading and can be learned from. I do have a question as I could not find it written specifically: Did you leave the troy pull tab sticking out the whole time? From the pictures it looks like you did but I wanted to know for sure. In my own tests of the Troy, it performs badly when that tab is there, but runs fine when it is swapped out with the flat baseplate. Tab was connected the whole time, we could not remove it. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/16/2013 1:10:30 AM EDT
[#8]
Thanks.
I think Troy made a huge mistake putting that thing on it. Any force on it from any angle can tweak the spring and give feeding issues. |
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 5/25/2013 2:36:28 AM EDT
[#9]
See awesomeness! I will still trust everything on the e lander. I for one dont plan on linning up my e landers perfectly straight and fully loaded and watch the enemy errrmm zombies run over every single one. Dont get me wrong I have a nice collection of each one but for some reason I love those damn Isreali built e landers. Originally Posted By MakoDefense:
By the way, IM sent on replacing your E-Lander mag. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/26/2013 10:38:21 AM EDT
[#10]
What seems to make the GEN2s appear more reliable than the GEN3? Is it the follower, angle of mag body? Why do you think the GEN2 did better?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2013 11:33:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: HeavyMetal]
[#11]
Originally Posted By Patriot15:
What seems to make the GEN2s appear more reliable than the GEN3? Is it the follower, angle of mag body? Why do you think the GEN2 did better? Considering a sample of one, you cannot draw the conclusion one is better than the other. The gen 3 may have gotten a pebble in it where the gen 2 didn't, simple as that, luck of the draw. That is why when you are doing it for keeps, you test something like 20 of each and stuff like that will average out over the large sample. Statistically speaking, you should be wary of making blanket assumptions from such a limited test. This was a fun, anecdotal test but it was still anecdotal. It can point out gross flaws but that is about it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2013 3:52:24 PM EDT
[#12]
Interesting test OP, thanks! I work in the same building you did this test at BTW...
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2013 11:13:17 AM EDT
[#13]
Very well done. A mod in here should set this to not archive so it stays active.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/27/2013 12:22:39 PM EDT
[#14]
Originally Posted By Lancelot: Very well done. A mod in here should set this to not archive so it stays active. you can't see it? |
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 12/2/2013 7:23:57 AM EDT
[#15]
Great test!
My only complaints are this. The loaded mag drop test is kind of meaningless using blanks. You need to use loaded ammo too see what damage is caused by the additional weight of the projectiles. Previous loaded drop tests have not been kind to polymer mags, IIRC. They tend to split along the spine. Also WRT the loaded drop test, unless you can duplicate the angle that the mag hits the ground for all the mags in the test, it's not really fair. What if one mag strikes squarely on the feed lips and another hits the corner of the feed lips first? What if the floorplate is hit first, and not the feedlips at all? It's not really fair to say one mag did this and another that unless the tests are identical in all ways. Otherwise, very good. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/2/2013 8:47:52 AM EDT
[#16]
Bravo, jolly good job and thanks!
|
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 1/20/2014 8:30:32 PM EDT
[#17]
Blanks are a poor indicator of performance with actual ammunition.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2014 8:55:57 AM EDT
[#18]
Well done. Thanks for taking the time to do it.
|
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 1/21/2014 12:38:51 PM EDT
[#19]
First, thank you for your service.
Second, thank you for taking the time and spending your own money to do these tests and post the results for guys like me sitting around in their boxers. Frankly, if you'd done the tests with 20 of each magazine that you'd paid for I'd have called BS. Sure it would've been a larger sample and could've eliminated some outliers but even at $10 each that's $1200 worth of magazines. That's a lot of $$ to potentially destroy. No way I'm trashing $1200 worth of MY magazines just because I'm curious so I'd assume they were provided to you which would make me questions your results. |
|
|
MD, USA
|
Posted: 1/21/2014 2:28:53 PM EDT
[#20]
Great job, thanks for posting! Makes me wonder if in the quest to make M3's more compatible, they lost a little of the original's charm.
|
|
|
IA, USA
|
Posted: 1/21/2014 8:46:24 PM EDT
[#21]
Looks like Camp Dodge. I used to work right across the street from you guys. I used to listen to you having all the fun at the range.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2014 9:16:58 PM EDT
[#22]
|
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 1/30/2016 9:07:24 PM EDT
[#23]
I use the USGI 30 round mags all the time and love them. Extreme cold temps are hard on plastic mags and that is when you will see the USGI mag hold up very well and function great. Iceing inside the mags is a big problem but if shaken once wet they work ok....Thanks for the test results....
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 2/3/2016 7:39:33 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By iasc300ia:
Thats a good queston and I can see why you asked that after I reread what I typed under the muddy water test. I added in that comment what I typed in the Final Evaluation comments. So it is easier to understand. Thank you for pointing that out. The (1) FTF was Failure to Feed, and the Gen3 had to be washed out multiple times so we could continue the testing because the follower would not load the rounds. It was too gritty and a tiny rock was stopping the follower from raising. The Gen2 was choosen over the Gen 3 because the Gen2 not once had a Failure to feed or jam in any way, we made the determination that we would rather lose 2-3 rounds if dropped to having to strip the mag and lose 30 rounds doing a magazine change. Thats basicly the reason why. Like the post above said, it would of been awesome to have more that one of each magazine to do the tests. I am sure the ELander would of been fine and the Gen3. But from the tests conducted, with the magazines we had on hand, thats how our decisions were made. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By iasc300ia:
Originally Posted By Norinco982lover:
I'm kinda confused. This is the only negative thing I could find about the gen3 pmag during the entire test Gen3- (1) One FTF and yet it was rated lower than the gen2 by 2 or 3 spots at the end when the gen2 released live rounds everytime it was dropped? Is there something I am missing? Thats a good queston and I can see why you asked that after I reread what I typed under the muddy water test. I added in that comment what I typed in the Final Evaluation comments. So it is easier to understand. Thank you for pointing that out. The (1) FTF was Failure to Feed, and the Gen3 had to be washed out multiple times so we could continue the testing because the follower would not load the rounds. It was too gritty and a tiny rock was stopping the follower from raising. The Gen2 was choosen over the Gen 3 because the Gen2 not once had a Failure to feed or jam in any way, we made the determination that we would rather lose 2-3 rounds if dropped to having to strip the mag and lose 30 rounds doing a magazine change. Thats basicly the reason why. Like the post above said, it would of been awesome to have more that one of each magazine to do the tests. I am sure the ELander would of been fine and the Gen3. But from the tests conducted, with the magazines we had on hand, thats how our decisions were made. My question to this is that it's hard to tell the magazines in the puddle- some look like they are buried in mud , while others appear to just be in water. If the gen 3 was one buried in mud, of course it would have to be washed out- along with any other mag in the test to function. It seems that all should have been placed in the same area for testing -either dirty water area or mud pile |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/3/2016 10:49:26 AM EDT
[#25]
That could have been a lucky instance for Gen 3 PMAG to bind up like that on the muddy water test.
I once had a Glock 19 stop hard on a tiny rock (large grain of sand) that got between the trigger bar and frame. I had to detail strip the frame to clear it. Not the norm, but it happened.... |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 12:07:11 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By samuse:
That could have been a lucky instance for Gen 3 PMAG to bind up like that on the muddy water test. I once had a Glock 19 stop hard on a tiny rock (large grain of sand) that got between the trigger bar and frame. I had to detail strip the frame to clear it. Not the norm, but it happened.... My point exactly - given the right ( and very rare circumstances) anything can fail. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
