Good morning America!  So I have an interesting review for you guys.  My set up is as follows: Adams Armes 7.5" piston upper with a Mag Tactical lower, DPMS parts kit, Tuned spring, Hydraulic buffer, Eotech and a Magpul slanted front grip.  I was sighting in my Eotech using HPR 55g FMJ's.  I got through most of my 30 round Mag when my weapon exploded!  I had a friend standing to the left of me for most of the mag then moved to the right of me just in the nick of time.  This ammunition is dangerous to ANYONE that has it. DON'T SHOOT IT!!  A round exploded in the chamber causing hell on the rest of the rifle. First thing i noticed was the huge hole in the side of my lower.  I am thinking WTF I thought everything was supposed to go out the magwell not the side of the lower. If my friend had been standing in the same spot he would have been hit hard. If my hand were on the magwell (like a lot of us shoot) then half of my hand would have been missing. If I were to be arm extended like your supposed to shoot a pistol my arm would have had an awful big ouchy.  I am so lucky to have been sighting this weapon in. I was in the crouch position with my elbow on my knee so the explosion went right on by thank God! Now enough with the if's. The facts are Mag Tactical lowers are NOT strong enough to handle the pressure.  If you have one, quit shooting it NOW.  I have ten of these and will be demanding my money to be returned.  I understand Mag Tactical is making uppers out of the same materials......NO THANK YOU.
Could you imagine what my face would look like if their upper blew up?  Mag Tactical Please stop putting these in the hands of my fellow Americans!! On to the Adams Arms upper which by the way I have two of these and absolutely love them.  The upper swelled outwards at least .25" and then split in half in the back.  The swell I could see but the split not so much.  Some experience on these uppers would be helpful.  The bottom of the bolt carrier blew off and cleared what used to be my magazine.  I will be contacting all 3 manufactures to see who is going to pay for my weapon.  I will be posting their responses here.  Please let me know if I did not cover something.  The round separated at the rear and that part of the shell is still in my ejector. The rest of the round is in the chamber. I am going to leave these this way for the manufactures to look at just in case someone steps up to the plate and wants to make things right.  I saw that Colt had taken care of someone with a similar problem.  We will see who shines and who don't. I have a lot of excellent pictures if someone could tell me how to upload them.

Email sent. Photos from the OP Below:










 

Well make a free account at photobucket and post pics already!

Pictures are coming.

I have seen it as well just not a lower come apart like this.  Thanks for the warm welcome. I have read for years just never posted.

It's the ammo. Keep that ammo- and contact the ammo manufacturer. They should carry liability insurance to cover your loss.

I have seen heavy revolvers split wide open from a bad round of ammunition. The ammo maker paid for the gun and injuries. That lower looks like it held up pretty well.

Guns don't kill people - people kill people. Rifles don't explode - ammo explodes.

I'm not seeing an issue with how the lower reacted to the kaboom.  I have seen an aluminum lower crack and bulge worse than that due to an overcharged round.  The upper also seemed to hold up well.  I would take it up with the ammo company for sure.  Glad you're alright!

Doesn't look like a lower problem to me. Bad ammo.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

It's sad to lose a lower in these cases. I'd advise not using that barrel again either.

I don't think the OP was blaming the KB on the lower, I think he was commenting on how the lower handled the KB, and is planning to request his money back on the ten undamaged lowers he has from the manufacturer, not restitution for the rifle that the ammunition blew up because he's uncomfortable continuing to use the style/design of the lower in question.

Having not been there and seeing the force of the KB, I will say that this is probably the first that I can think of where a chunk of the lower actually broke off during the KB.  I've seen uppers split and broken, and I've seen magwells crack and bulge, but I can't think of one off the top of my head where an aluminum lower actually lost a chunk of shrapnel, which would, as he points out, have an altogether different affect on any body part in the way when the rifle KBed than a bulging or cracking receiver might.  

I believe what he is trying to get across is not that the KB was the lower's fault - but that the lower design is structurally unsound and potentially dangerous to the shooter in the event of a KB.  Do I agree?  I couldn't really say at the moment - but then again, I have never really seriously considered an "alternate material" receiver design, as I see very little reason not to simply use standard aluminum uppers and lowers.  The only times I've seen similar damage from a KB, it has been a polymer lower - aluminum lower designs tend to split the upper and blow out the magazine and bulge at the magwell.  

My question - did you recover the chunk of magwell?  How far away was it?  

~Augee

We at MAG Tactical Systems stand behind our products 100%.  He will receive a brand new lower, if he wants, because of our Lifetime warranty even though the ammo was the issue.  We have tested these receivers for over a year now and have ran high pressure ammo through them, but you cannot control bad ammo or re-loads.  Its too bad we get the brunt of the blame, but that goes with thinking outside the box.  Im sure the bolt carrier group that is manufactured from harden steel is not going to get a bad comment nor the fact that the Al upper cracked at the take down area and our lower held that.  Its hard to contain a piece of harden metal when it explodes. A piston rod will penetrate a cast iron and or an Al block when it comes apart and it has thicker walls and less pressure.

I guess what we are getting at is that we are the new guys on the block and when things go wrong you look at what has changed.  We have seen complete billet Al uppers and harden steel bolt carriers come clean apart with bad ammo.  Imagine what would have happened to a plastic receiver.  We are glad this gentleman was not hurt, but we won't let our product be the blame for this issue.  We would love to speak to the gentleman that had this issue as we have not been contacted about this.  Only a Facebook comment was posted.  he can contact us at 812-490-8770.  Again we are glad he was not injured!

God Bless and Shoot Straight.

MAG Tactical Systems

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS!

After many years of lurking here and biting my tongue and fingers ... This is an Ammo issue, not a lower issue.  Look at the BCG.

Google came up with a few hits regarding this issue.

I did not recover the missing piece, Last seen headed north. The spring to the mag is also MIA.

Something caused a cartridge to explode before it was fully chambered.  It is not fault of the lower.  Possibly a primer not fully seated or an extra sensitive prime which detonated the cartridge as it was stripped from the magazine.  The forward part of a broke cartridge remaining in the chamber can make this happen, although probably not in this case.

You guys were never to blame for the explosion.  Just stating the facts.  I would like to be refunded in whole for my unused and used lowers. My dealer was at the scene to inspect the damage.  He contacted you guys immediately. Your product in my opinion needs more testing for the saftey of others. I will work through my dealer for now and we will see where it goes.

I'm going with overcharged case.  Lower shouldn't bear any blame here.

I'm going back into lurk mode.   Bad ammo will make any firearm destroy itself.  Blaming the lower is like asking Honda to take all my vehicles back because I was hit by a drunk driver.  

Edit: quoted wrong post.

Let me say one more time THE LOWER WAS NEVER TO BE BLAMED FOR THE EXPLOSION. The design of the lower is what is in question.

You may want to spend some time reading this thread.  

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_282/171075_.html

Spikes Tactical Bandsaw thread

Ya that guy was off of his rocker. What does that have to do with this? Surely I am able to state my opinions. I don't feel comfortable using this type of material to contain an explosion.

::sigh::

I am not agreeing with the OP's conclusions here, but the reading comprehension amazes me...

At no point does the OP blame the KB on the lower.  

The OP is stating that he feels that the lower does not have the structural integrity to be used for full powered ammunition in case of a KB, and that the margin of safety is insufficient, should a KB occur for a reason not related to the lower.  

To use the car analogy - if you were ejected from the vehicle because the seat belt broke or released when you were struck by the drunk driver, you would have a claim against Honda - for installing faulty safety equipment, the assumption being, though the car was not at fault for the accident, had the safety equipment been functioning properly, it would have prevented more grievous injury.  

The issue the OP is asking about is not whether or not the lower responsible for what's clearly an ammunition issue (the OP is equally alarmist about the faultiness of the ammunition, telling everyone to stop using it immediately because it's dangerous), but whether or not the lower has sufficient strength to prevent injury the same way an aluminum lower would if the exact same ammunition issue were to occur.  

~Augee

Google your ammo, there is a picture out there with a Daniel Defense with a split barrel.  In this forum IIRC.  

Can't contain an explosion, can only redirect it, if the powder charge was higher, it will be worse.

We're you lucky?  Hell yeah!   Did you get hurt?  You did say you did not.  

Would this have happened with any other brand lower?  Who knows ... explosions can and will be chaotic.  

Will Mag take a closer look at their design?  Looks that way ... and they are trying to work with you from his response.  

Is all HPR ammo bad ... Nope.  

Does their quality control suck ... It looks that way .... My opinion only as guaranteed by 1A.

Have I shot HPR?   Yes.   Will I continue?   Yes, with some reservation.  

Your beef is with HPR, they will work with you if you give them a chance.  If they don't, then there are lawyers for that.  Most ethical companies don't want lawyers to get involved.  

Did you headspace your unit?

 Do you have preceded fired brass?

Does the brass look OK?  

Any anomalies such as bulging?  

Is the barrel clear?

DID YOU PUBLISH THE AMMO LOT NUMBER?

Point the finger at Mag and there are three more fingers pointing right back at you.  

Take a deep breath, back away and think.  

There is much more to this than what is on the surface.  

The issue is why should Mag take back a number of receivers because of the chaotic nature of a KB caused by faulty ammo?  If it was that?  It looks that way, however my questions still stand.   Was it headspaced?  Was there a squib load?   Too many questions, not enough documentation.  

I have had a defective 30 '06 Rem700 that was never acknowledged by Remington ... Even after all the reports over the years of similar occurrences.  I sold and told the new owner it was not to be trusted and why so.  

Currently, I don't think you understand the point being made.

The piece of the lower that broke out was caused by the magazine expansion. While Mag Tactical could look at strengthening that part of the design they certainly don't have to. Gases and pressure would've vented here but it doesn't seem like the off-hand was at risk of severe injury. Not to downplay the ammo failure and I'm glad the OP wasn't hurt, but he's going a bit over board with regard to the lower.

Once again, I am not making a judgment call on whether the OP is right or wrong or whether the manufacturer should take back all the lowers and/or refund the OP.

I am simply pointing out what the OP's assertion is - and it is not to place blame on the lower, nor was it a question asking what caused the problem.  

The questions you asked, while valid for trying to diagnose why there was a KB does not have any bearing on what the OP is asserting - that the lower is of insufficient strength compared to an aluminum lower to prevent injury to the shooter in the unfortunate event of a KB.  

Talking about ammunition and why the KB occurred is irrelevant to the point the OP is trying to make, correct or incorrect, but you're arguing North/South while the OP is talking about East/West.

Regardless of the reason, the KB happened, as sometimes does, even with perfectly functioning rifles.  The question is, is the lower a safety hazard compared to a lower of standard construction, and does that, in and of itself, warrant the manufacturer refunding the buyer and possibly re-designing the whole lower.  

Continuing to tell the OP that it's not the lower's fault that he had a KB tells no one anything and continues to waste bandwidth answering a question that was never asked.  

~Augee

Point taken.  

Bottom line it is between OP and Mag.   OP and BCG/barrel and OP and HPR.  

I have yet to see a manufacturer warranty their product will "explode" safely with bad ammo.  

I am curious to see any deviation with their design versus mil-spec which should be a minimum standard.  

Failure of any kind carries the probability of being quite epic.  There are no guarantees in life except one.

So was the lower weaker, or was the blast different?   Unless you blow up some more there is no way to know.

OP is an idiot. His hand would not have been "taken off" Kabooms happen all the time, sometimes with polymer receivers. In this case he may have received lacerations or bruising but no need to be a drama queen.

Mag Tactical is not at fault. I wish they wouldn't replace his receiver. Helping out whiners only drives costs up.

The only time I've seen ammo blow down and out of the magwell was when someone had a squib. I'd venture to say that is much more likely than a kaboom. Shit only went kaboom when he pulled the trigger the next time. Any pics of the inside of the barrel? And since WHEN is the lower part of the receiver ever supposed to contain any explosion or substantial pressure. OP you are not making much sense. How much more structurally sound should the lower be? NEMO arms makes a Ti AR maybe that would be better suited. Oh and saw this happen to a guy shooting a glock. He wound up with something stuck in his leg when he had a squib and pulled the trigger again. It blew out the bottom of the gun. Now would you argue that Glock has a weak, inferior design?

edited for poor grammar

You used bad ammo and now you want the lower manufacturer to replace your other lowers?  You can't predict what damage an explosion is going to cause.  Drama

1) Bravo to MAG for replacing the lower even though the KB wasnt their fault
2) are folks saying it is MAG's design specifically that was not within safety margins or the design of the AR-15 lower receiver in general that is not sufficiently strong to withstand or redirect KBs of this type?

Lets see-

Guy with one AR15.com post assembles his own gun from parts.

Guy uses 'custom' ammo with a possible past history of problems:

       HPR Ammo caused a KB

Guy expects us to believe he assembled the rifle to spec and checked headspace etc.

And wants the world, or at least fellow Americans, to stop using Mag lowers.

Now- back to reality…

BTW, I'll buy those 9 Mag lowers from the OP.

[red] if i may in here for a moment but are you/op contradicting you're selves?  

isn't that why anyone is/would be asking to be compensated.. weaker material so the blame IS the manufacturer..


seems the op chose the lowers(material) full well knowing they were not aluminum..  just as any aluminum lower could kb under the right circumstances, so why should he be refunded for the others just because he feels unsafe?..


reading wrong i could be..

Mag Tactical is NOT to blame! As was pointed out, you can't predict how an explosion is going to vent or what is going to fail.

I am still planning on obtaining one of their lowers and I can't wait for them to release their lightweight uppers!

Hopefully without the useless forward assist.

::sigh::

First of all, I am not agreeing with the OP's conclusions, I am simply trying to clarify them as people keep responding to a question that has not been asked.  

The OP is not blaming the lower for the KB, and did not ask for troubleshooting or diagnosis of the reason for it.

The OP is stating that the lower is of insufficient strength to contain the blast of a KB that happens for reasons unrelated to the lower.

As such, he has posted a "PSA" to stop using these lowers, and is in the process of trying to get his money back on ten (not sure if the lower in question is included in this sum) lowers from the same manufacturer.  

There are two distinct issues being talked about here:

1. What caused this explosion to occur, whether squib, overcharged round, freak accident, whatever.  

2. Whether the lower is too dangerous to be used by a reasonable person because of the type of damage that could occur during a KB.  

The OP asserts #2, while way too many people have been busy talking about #1.  

~Augee

Not "folks," and certainly not I.  Just the OP.  

But yes, that is his assertion as well as that he should be refunded not just for the damaged lower, but the other nine or ten undamaged lowers he currently has in his possession.  

~Augee

i know it's not about anyones defending of it or not on any of this, but this is what/how it crossed/es my mind..

and with out knowing what any kind of spec's these are up too..  is why i'm tossed on the returns part.  if he feels unsafe then the lowers must not be made up to spec > problem > lower's fault..

also if that 1rnd was way over charged.(which brings up #1) = it's making me wonder what the talk of the town would be if it was an aluminum one that was lit up..

and atleast nobody was hurt..

This is a crock of shit.. You are blaming the lower for somehow "...needing more testing for the safety of others."  So, you are blaming the lower in your own way, especially wanting money back for a bunch of lowers that you have presented no evidence of being faulty.  

Plenty of HPR explosions documented, but how many MagTech lower problems have you come up with?  All evidence clearly points to the ammo.

+1 Needed to be quoted!

Again, I don't think you understand what he's saying. He's not blaming the KB on MAG. He's worried about the safety of the lower to contain a KB. Since the alloy is different then 7075, it IS entirely possible that they are not as strong. The pictures show more dramatic damage then most 7075 lowers exhibit and it's perfectly reasonable that the lowers have sacrificed some absolute tensile strength for weight.

Also, you guys keep saying that explosions are "chaotic" and "unpredictable". That's erronious. UNCONTROLLED explosions are chaotic, but in the case of firearms KB, there just arent that many variables (comparitively) when you want to compare two. They essentially have the same "container" (IE: the gun) and the same explosive (IE: powder). Add in that there are a finite number of ways to KB them (Squib, double charge etc) and that the cartridge has a finite charge weight - they aren't as "chaotic" as the layman would assume. If you gave someone 100 lowers to KB - you would see definate trends and predictable results emerge rather quickly.

That said, were I more concerned about a KB then the weight savings then I wouldn't buy a MAG lower. Also, I think his concerns are reasonable - It didn't shatter, but the degree of damage is higher then a 7075 reciever typically sees.  

I give up, I'm out.

I simply don't feel strongly enough about this topic to explain once more the difference between: "the lower caused the round to KB" and "the lower is not strong enough to withstand a KB."  

~Augee

1) There is no such thing as "absolute tensile strength", it's called ultimate tensile strength.

2) Shit breaks when you have a kaboom. Magnesium does a better job of containing the KB than polymer. Even polymer won't result in "half of my hand would have been missing". OP is being a drama queen because he wants others to pay  for his stupidity. If you want zero risk, don't play with guns.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/img00129_20101226_1008-tfb.jpg

Gas key is not staked. You might want to check that before you use that bcg again.

Again, I don't think you understand what he's saying. He's not blaming the KB on MAG. He's worried about the safety of the lower to contain a KB. Since the alloy is different then 7075, it IS entirely possible that they are not as strong. The pictures show more dramatic damage then most 7075 lowers exhibit and it's perfectly reasonable that the lowers have sacrificed some absolute tensile strength for weight.

Also, you guys keep saying that explosions are "chaotic" and "unpredictable". That's erronious. UNCONTROLLED explosions are chaotic, but in the case of firearms KB, there just arent that many variables (comparitively) when you want to compare two. They essentially have the same "container" (IE: the gun) and the same explosive (IE: powder). Add in that there are a finite number of ways to KB them (Squib, double charge etc) and that the cartridge has a finite charge weight - they aren't as "chaotic" as the layman would assume. If you gave someone 100 lowers to KB - you would see definate trends and predictable results emerge rather quickly.

That said, were I more concerned about a KB then the weight savings then I wouldn't buy a MAG lower. Also, I think his concerns are reasonable - It didn't shatter, but the degree of damage is higher then a 7075 reciever typically sees.  
[/quote]

Thanks for all the great stuff guys!!  IN MY OPINION Mag Tactical lowers DO NOT stand up to the same strength as 7075. For that reason and that reason ALONE I would like to see a refund of ALL of my money back.  I will NOT sell these to someone else to get hurt.  Nor will I sell this ammo to someone to get hurt!  My bad for looking out for others.  Not gonna be on my conscious. Thanks for my GREAT experience on this forum.

No shit, it's 35% lighter, made from Mg alloy. MT never claimed differently. I hope you never buy a Cavarms lower, you might shit yourself if you have another KB.

Your opinion is just that, why should the company have to issue you a refund based on your opinion?  Are you a metallurgical expert? Are you a manufacturing expert?  What makes you qualified beside blowing up your gun with bad ammo?   You bought reloaded ammo from a company which was known for having issues you then failed to check a few pieces of brass after firing for pressure signs.  On this site most of us aren't sheep we won't just agree with whatever opinion you think might be fact if you don't like it well the logout button is on the top left portion of the screen.  Maybe you should go complain at M4C.