User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/10/2012 4:34:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: WI57]
I decided to do an assorted magazine "shoot off".
I ordered an assortment of different mags from MidwayUSA, I only ordered solid black to be fair across the board. Different mfg's had offered to send me mags to test, but I figured I'd just buy my own so there was no favoritism. The test specimens. 
Unboxing them. 
The Troy Battle Mag, first thing I did was pop the tab thing out and put the flat one in. 
The TangoDown ARC MK2 mag. 
The Pmag, since magpul hasn't released their newest mag I can't test it, so this is what I used. I am not using the dust cover for any of these tests. 
The Lancer L5 AWM. 
The Tapco Intrafuse mag. 
The Tan Follower GI mag. 
And the Green Follower GI mag. 
So Left to Right, Troy, TangoDown, Pmag, Lancer, Tapco, Tan GI, and Green GI. 
I used my SR-15 as the host gun for the mag well fitting, all dropped free empty.. Troy 
TangoDown 
Pmag 
Lancer 
Tapco 
Tan GI 
Green GI 
I plan on testing them all with a wide variety of ammunition. I will be using IMI 5.56 M855 for the first function test. 
Troy 
TangoDown 
Pmag 
Lancer 
Tapco 
Tan GI 
Green GI 
Off to the range we go... 
eta- 56k warning. eta- phone user warning. eta- video eta- part 2 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 1:40:15 AM EDT
[#1]
Sorry for the wait but I had no idea how hard it was to edit videos...
Took two days and the help of the best IT guy on the planet, but here they are. Video quality isn't as good as before, but it was a lot of work to convert the files and splice them. I might do some high-definition slow-motion videos in the future if I can figure out how. Right away I started out too close to the gun, learned after a sliver of the TangoDown mag bounced off the lid. The Troy mag. Comes completely apart. 
The TangoDown Mag. Top part intact, lower part all over.
The Pmag. Half almost lands on the gun, other parts up on the barn.
The Lancer Mag. Listen for the parts landing around the camera.
The Tapco mag. I was protected by the groin protector for this one.
The GI mag. Pretty sure this made it onto someones radar screen. It tried to go into orbit.
So there you have it, the end of the UN-scientific Plastic Magazine Test. 
I started this test to see what each mag could do, and I am honestly surprised. I didn't think the polymer mags would do as well as they did, my favorite mag has been the GI mag. But this test really opened my eyes to how durable these plastic mags can be. To prevent a shit storm I am going to let each reader draw their own conclusions as to what mag they thought was the best. And feel free to buy one just to trash it and see how far it goes, thats how this test started. I'm glad you all enjoyed reading and following this, it was fun for me. For those of you who didn't enjoy the pictures or videos please ignore me so you do not have to suffer through any future tests. 
Again, Thank You to Elliott for working with me, without his Barrett the ending wouldn't have been as exciting.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 1:50:38 AM EDT
[#2]
Bravo OP *golf clap*
Seriously good work
If anyone wants to do an extreme cold weather test, I'd be willing to volunteer to do the work at -65f this winter. Then again, I'm pretty sure that any cold soaked magazine would explode on hitting the ground. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 9:54:12 AM EDT
[#3]
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By DonaldJ3637:
I'll bet Lancer sells A LOT of mags after this. Great thread OP. Unless there is a group buy or sale I doubt it. Lancer needs to lower their price to become competitive. I have always preferred lancers but you never see them for an OK or decent price. I've got far more pmags because of all the sales on them. I recently got windowed current Gen pmags for $5 less then the standard solid color lancers Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 9:58:31 AM EDT
[#4]
This thread has (had?) it all...
A beginning that pulls you in, great content, and ended with a bang (literally). Your thread is officially dubbed CLASSIC. Well done and congrats. +100 internets for you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 10:56:28 AM EDT
[#5]
Originally Posted By Suburban:
Originally Posted By all4bao:
Why is it everyone have a hard-on for aluminum mags with tan follower when they 2 aluminum mags was taken out of commission before all of the "cheap" plastic mags. Revisit top of page 3. Aluminum mags are cheaper than even the Tapco mag aren't they? You can get 3 aluminum mags for the price of 2 black Lancer AWM with change left over. The PMAGs were pretty much impervious besides the crack and they only cost $12. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 11:26:21 AM EDT
[#6]
Awesome thread.
The GI mags might have taken less abuse, but it is not that they suddenly became terrible because another product is available. I recently took some GI mags off the shelf that have been left loaded with Lot 1 XM193 for over 10 years, and they functioned flawlessly. I would not trust a polymer mag for long term durability and storage, with the exception of the Lancer because it mimics some what the Glock design where there is steel where you need steel, allowing the polymer to be flexible and crack resistant. The best of both worlds. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 12:51:34 PM EDT
[#7]
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By DonaldJ3637:
I'll bet Lancer sells A LOT of mags after this. Great thread OP. Unless there is a group buy or sale I doubt it. Lancer needs to lower their price to become competitive. I have always preferred lancers but you never see them for an OK or decent price. I've got far more pmags because of all the sales on them. I recently got windowed current Gen pmags for $5 less then the standard solid color lancers Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" My point is, is that pmags obviously work and are incredibly reliable. People are not going to be off loading them because of this test. Honestly this test just proved what was already known. That lancers have a much stronger feed lip area. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 2:55:47 PM EDT
[#8]
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By DonaldJ3637:
I'll bet Lancer sells A LOT of mags after this. Great thread OP. Unless there is a group buy or sale I doubt it. Lancer needs to lower their price to become competitive. I have always preferred lancers but you never see them for an OK or decent price. I've got far more pmags because of all the sales on them. I recently got windowed current Gen pmags for $5 less then the standard solid color lancers Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" My point is, is that pmags obviously work and are incredibly reliable. People are not going to be off loading them because of this test. Honestly this test just proved what was already known. That lancers have a much stronger feed lip area. A did a little more than that for me.  .
I like the troys more now, and it's good to know what will rub your mags the wrong way. This way some can willing avoid things that will rust or degrade each mag. Plus it was very entertaining. The pmag was the first to technically be unusable. And I learned that the muzzle flash off of a .50 is no joke. And I learned that magpul is a little caty. And they have a huge fan base. I guess I already knew that though. This was by far the best testing since molon on this site. It's nice to see stuff other than "tell me which part do I want to buy" and "look at all the ammo I painted or rifles I have threads" that are so prevalant these days. Great job WI57 and I can't wait for the next installment. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 4:19:10 PM EDT
[#9]
Caty, is nice way to put it...
This has been a real fun journey.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 5:45:26 PM EDT
[#10]
Well done!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 5:57:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Originally Posted By AMUshooter10:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By DonaldJ3637:
I'll bet Lancer sells A LOT of mags after this. Great thread OP. Unless there is a group buy or sale I doubt it. Lancer needs to lower their price to become competitive. I have always preferred lancers but you never see them for an OK or decent price. I've got far more pmags because of all the sales on them. I recently got windowed current Gen pmags for $5 less then the standard solid color lancers Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" My point is, is that pmags obviously work and are incredibly reliable. People are not going to be off loading them because of this test. Honestly this test just proved what was already known. That lancers have a much stronger feed lip area. A did a little more than that for me. .
I like the troys more now, and it's good to know what will rub your mags the wrong way. This way some can willing avoid things that will rust or degrade each mag. Plus it was very entertaining. The pmag was the first to technically be unusable. And I learned that the muzzle flash off of a .50 is no joke. And I learned that magpul is a little caty. And they have a huge fan base. I guess I already knew that though. This was by far the best testing since molon on this site. It's nice to see stuff other than "tell me which part do I want to buy" and "look at all the ammo I painted or rifles I have threads" that are so prevalant these days. Great job WI57 and I can't wait for the next installment.
I was SPECIFICALLY discussing PMAG v Lancer, which is what the post I quoted was directed towards. What is with people looking for posts to act butt hurt about? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 7:04:58 PM EDT
[#12]
Originally Posted By WI57:
Originally Posted By easttexas:
Enjoyed the thread! Since this was the "Unscientific Plastic Mag Test" how about the "Unscientific Metal Mag Test"? I can help you out with some mags or a donation whatever you would like. I was thinking along the lines of H&K Maritime, PRI Waffle, ASC, Brownells, etc. Sorry if it was already mentioned I quit reading at the end of the test. I am thinking about doing a metal mag test in the future, and possibly a cold weather plastic test too. But I have to refine my mag testing devices so that test doesn't go over like a bad fart in the wind. We will just have to see what happens... Please do ... I think that would be equally interesting, if not more so. Regardless, this round of testing was fantastic. Thanks for investing the time, effort and money to make it happen. 
P.S. Was it ever mentioned which brands of metal mags were being used? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 7:24:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Justin-Beard]
[#13]
Originally Posted By AMUshooter10:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By DonaldJ3637:
I'll bet Lancer sells A LOT of mags after this. Great thread OP. Unless there is a group buy or sale I doubt it. Lancer needs to lower their price to become competitive. I have always preferred lancers but you never see them for an OK or decent price. I've got far more pmags because of all the sales on them. I recently got windowed current Gen pmags for $5 less then the standard solid color lancers Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" My point is, is that pmags obviously work and are incredibly reliable. People are not going to be off loading them because of this test. Honestly this test just proved what was already known. That lancers have a much stronger feed lip area. A did a little more than that for me. .
I like the troys more now, and it's good to know what will rub your mags the wrong way. This way some can willing avoid things that will rust or degrade each mag. Plus it was very entertaining. The pmag was the first to technically be unusable. And I learned that the muzzle flash off of a .50 is no joke. And I learned that magpul is a little caty. And they have a huge fan base. I guess I already knew that though. This was by far the best testing since molon on this site. It's nice to see stuff other than "tell me which part do I want to buy" and "look at all the ammo I painted or rifles I have threads" that are so prevalant these days. Great job WI57 and I can't wait for the next installment.
Catty? We were not trying to be malicious in any way and I apologize if we appeared as such. We make appearances in these forums only with the goal of presenting sound and factual information as well as to correct inaccuracies. I'd like to reiterate again that WI57 did a great job within his limits and this was a very entertaining thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 8:35:12 PM EDT
[#14]
Well I don't want another IM from a mod so I won't say anything about Magpul. Just wanted to say thanks for an epic ending to an epic thread. If you're ever in TX and you want to send some mags into orbit, I'll let you use my M82 CQ
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 8:51:23 PM EDT
[#15]
Originally Posted By tfod:
Awesome thread. The GI mags might have taken less abuse, but it is not that they suddenly became terrible because another product is available. I recently took some GI mags off the shelf that have been left loaded with Lot 1 XM193 for over 10 years, and they functioned flawlessly. I would not trust a polymer mag for long term durability and storage, with the exception of the Lancer because it mimics some what the Glock design where there is steel where you need steel, allowing the polymer to be flexible and crack resistant. The best of both worlds. I seem to recall the GI mag (at least the new tan one) taking some abuse that cracked some of the polymer mags..... They also seemed to be able to withstand being run over by a truck which we were all lead to believe several years ago they wouldn't..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 9:53:59 PM EDT
[#16]
Originally Posted By 35mm_Shooter: Well I don't want another IM from a mod so I won't say anything about Magpul. Just wanted to say thanks for an epic ending to an epic thread. If you're ever in TX and you want to send some mags into orbit, I'll let you use my M82 CQ Just to be fair, I would have sent you or anyone else the same IM if it was directed towards any other Site Sponser, Industry Partner, Dealer or Member on this site. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 9:54:49 PM EDT
[#17]
Great post, thanks for taking the time to do this
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 10:09:23 PM EDT
[#18]
Originally Posted By dpmmn:
Originally Posted By 35mm_Shooter:
Well I don't want another IM from a mod so I won't say anything about Magpul. Just wanted to say thanks for an epic ending to an epic thread. If you're ever in TX and you want to send some mags into orbit, I'll let you use my M82 CQ Just to be fair, I would have sent you or anyone else the same IM if it was directed towards any other Site Sponser, Industry Partner, Dealer or Member on this site.
Wait... What? Is it against AR15.com regulations to make any negative comments about any Site Sponser, Industry Partner, Dealer or Member on this site? If this is the case, then we all should also disregard any positive comments about any AR15.com Site Sponser, Industry Partner, Dealer or Member on this site. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 10:28:48 PM EDT
[#19]
Originally Posted By dpmmn:
Originally Posted By 35mm_Shooter:
Well I don't want another IM from a mod so I won't say anything about Magpul. Just wanted to say thanks for an epic ending to an epic thread. If you're ever in TX and you want to send some mags into orbit, I'll let you use my M82 CQ Just to be fair, I would have sent you or anyone else the same IM if it was directed towards any other Site Sponser, Industry Partner, Dealer or Member on this site.
Since its not out in public, what type of comment would result in such a response? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 10:31:13 PM EDT
[#20]
Originally Posted By babj615: Originally Posted By dpmmn: Originally Posted By 35mm_Shooter: Well I don't want another IM from a mod so I won't say anything about Magpul. Just wanted to say thanks for an epic ending to an epic thread. If you're ever in TX and you want to send some mags into orbit, I'll let you use my M82 CQ Just to be fair, I would have sent you or anyone else the same IM if it was directed towards any other Site Sponser, Industry Partner, Dealer or Member on this site. Wait... What? Is it against AR15.com regulations to make any negative comments about any Site Sponser, Industry Partner, Dealer or Member on this site? If this is the case, then we all should also disregard any positive comments about any AR15.com Site Sponser, Industry Partner, Dealer or Member on this site. Continually attacking/harassing anyone on the site is a no-no. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 10:44:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: InfiniteGrim]
[#21]
.....
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 11:05:11 PM EDT
[#22]
Originally Posted By Winn:
P.S. Was it ever mentioned which brands of metal mags were being used? Both GI mags were Center Industries, marked 6P199 on the bags and their bodies. The Tan GI was made 04/10. The Green GI was made 05/05. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2012 11:06:09 PM EDT
[#23]
Originally Posted By 35mm_Shooter:
Well I don't want another IM from a mod so I won't say anything about Magpul. Just wanted to say thanks for an epic ending to an epic thread. If you're ever in TX and you want to send some mags into orbit, I'll let you use my M82 CQ CQ you say... Maybe I need a bigger trash can lid for that one.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2012 1:27:08 AM EDT
[#24]
Originally Posted By Justin-Beard:
Originally Posted By AMUshooter10:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By DonaldJ3637:
I'll bet Lancer sells A LOT of mags after this. Great thread OP. Unless there is a group buy or sale I doubt it. Lancer needs to lower their price to become competitive. I have always preferred lancers but you never see them for an OK or decent price. I've got far more pmags because of all the sales on them. I recently got windowed current Gen pmags for $5 less then the standard solid color lancers Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" My point is, is that pmags obviously work and are incredibly reliable. People are not going to be off loading them because of this test. Honestly this test just proved what was already known. That lancers have a much stronger feed lip area. A did a little more than that for me. .
I like the troys more now, and it's good to know what will rub your mags the wrong way. This way some can willing avoid things that will rust or degrade each mag. Plus it was very entertaining. The pmag was the first to technically be unusable. And I learned that the muzzle flash off of a .50 is no joke. And I learned that magpul is a little caty. And they have a huge fan base. I guess I already knew that though. This was by far the best testing since molon on this site. It's nice to see stuff other than "tell me which part do I want to buy" and "look at all the ammo I painted or rifles I have threads" that are so prevalant these days. Great job WI57 and I can't wait for the next installment.
Catty? We were not trying to be malicious in any way and I apologize if we appeared as such. We make appearances in these forums only with the goal of presenting sound and factual information as well as to correct inaccuracies. I'd like to reiterate again that WI57 did a great job within his limits and this was a very entertaining thread.
Well the PMAG certainly proved to be most aerodynamic. That was a long flight to the barn.
|
|
|
|
NV, USA
|
Posted: 8/28/2012 8:40:55 PM EDT
[#25]
I am sad that it's over
 This was some worthy entertainment! Now I feel as if I just finished a great movie, or the ending of a fine novel. Thanks!
|
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2012 1:02:55 AM EDT
[#26]
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" A few years ago during the Bush administration before the democrats started campaigning? Whenever some nutter shoots someone and a "33-bullet clip" is found at the scene, the douchers are featured on network TV news shows calling for "assault weapon" and magazine bans again. Quantity as well as quality are important. Sometimes the best is the enemy of good enough, particularly when good enough is on sale. But I guess I can't speak for everyone. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/29/2012 9:01:30 AM EDT
[#27]
Originally Posted By Suburban:
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" A few years ago during the Bush administration before the democrats started campaigning? Whenever some nutter shoots someone and a "33-bullet clip" is found at the scene, the douchers are featured on network TV news shows calling for "assault weapon" and magazine bans again. Quantity as well as quality are important. Sometimes the best is the enemy of good enough, particularly when good enough is on sale. But I guess I can't speak for everyone. I couldn't agree more. Just pointing out what was the conventional wisdom at the time. |
|
|
DEU
|
Posted: 8/29/2012 3:45:17 PM EDT
[#28]
Whenever some nutter shoots someone and a "33-bullet clip" is found at the scene, the douchers are featured on network TV news shows calling for "assault weapon" and magazine bans again. Quantity as well as quality are important. Sometimes the best is the enemy of good enough, particularly when good enough is on sale. But I guess I can't speak for everyone.
You even speak for a lot of germans...
|
|
|
DE, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2012 9:22:23 AM EDT
[#29]
Originally Posted By AMUshooter10:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Originally Posted By DonaldJ3637:
I'll bet Lancer sells A LOT of mags after this. Great thread OP. Unless there is a group buy or sale I doubt it. Lancer needs to lower their price to become competitive. I have always preferred lancers but you never see them for an OK or decent price. I've got far more pmags because of all the sales on them. I recently got windowed current Gen pmags for $5 less then the standard solid color lancers Times sure have changed....A few years ago the mantra was "What's a few dollars if my life is on the line" "Why skimp if the magazine is the weak point of the AR platform" "What is a few dollars per magazine if the rifle cost $2000" ""The magazine might fail at a crucial time and I will be killed" My point is, is that pmags obviously work and are incredibly reliable. People are not going to be off loading them because of this test. Honestly this test just proved what was already known. That lancers have a much stronger feed lip area. A did a little more than that for me. .
I like the troys more now, and it's good to know what will rub your mags the wrong way. This way some can willing avoid things that will rust or degrade each mag. Plus it was very entertaining. The pmag was the first to technically be unusable. And I learned that the muzzle flash off of a .50 is no joke. And I learned that magpul is a little caty. And they have a huge fan base. I guess I already knew that though. This was by far the best testing since molon on this site. It's nice to see stuff other than "tell me which part do I want to buy" and "look at all the ammo I painted or rifles I have threads" that are so prevalant these days. Great job WI57 and I can't wait for the next installment.
I think Magpul was simply stating that this was a sample of 1. Each mag was a sample of 1. It's hard to tell overall durability with a sample of 1. Who's to say that the 1 Pmag that was tested simply had a bad fiber in the compound, causing the crack - and that a sample of 20 would have the other 19 performing well with no crack. Same thing with the Lancer - who's to say the OP just didn't get some kryptonite infused 1-off sample that proved to be the cat's ass? (not trashing either one - I own both) Not taking anything away from the OP - great thread, and I don't think anybody would expect him to do the test with a sample lot of 20 of each mag. It's sort of like the joke about cro-magnon man - how do you know all his friends are not somewhere in the afterlife saying "did you see who they dug up? Fred - yea, the guy with the sloped forehead, bad teeth and crooked nose. Why did it have to be him, he looked like hell to begin with...." |
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2012 3:38:06 PM EDT
[#30]
Clay I would tend to agree with you if not for the other three tests I have seen that had pretty much the same results for both the Lancers and th Pmags. The only thing I saw different in the results between the tests was the rust problem with the Lancer (maybe just a bad metal finish job not seen on any other Lancer out their).
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2012 8:16:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: lazyengineer]
[#31]
Originally Posted By k80clay:
I think Magpul was simply stating that this was a sample of 1. Each mag was a sample of 1. It's hard to tell overall durability with a sample of 1. Who's to say that the 1 Pmag that was tested simply had a bad fiber in the compound, causing the crack - and that a sample of 20 would have the other 19 performing well with no crack. Same thing with the Lancer - who's to say the OP just didn't get some kryptonite infused 1-off sample that proved to be the cat's ass? (not trashing either one - I own both) Not taking anything away from the OP - great thread, and I don't think anybody would expect him to do the test with a sample lot of 20 of each mag. It's sort of like the joke about cro-magnon man - how do you know all his friends are not somewhere in the afterlife saying "did you see who they dug up? Fred - yea, the guy with the sloped forehead, bad teeth and crooked nose. Why did it have to be him, he looked like hell to begin with...." You know what - NO. You don't watch a new bridge crack in half because a car drives across it, and say no-no, that's not a conclusive test of that design and manufacturing technique, because it was only an n of 1. You say "holy crap, we need to fix that." Bottom line (in my opinion), is that the PMag is an excellent magazine that is significantly superior to GI magazines. And they tend to crack when you drop a loaded one right onto it's feed lips. Let's move on past the sugar coating - there's a weak spot in the PMag design there. And if you are at the range, you will go "Aw", put it in your rifle, and shoot with high confidence that the magazine will continue to function at 100% to complete your range trip. And if you are in combat - exact same thing. And when you get home, you throw it away. Now - with a GI mag, you get your mag lip bent, and it's not immediately obvious, and you might jam. As it turns out, some of these other magazines don't appear to have that weak spot. Some do. Magpul is already aware of the weak point, and apparently are addressing that in a redesign. I look forward to seeing it. But enough of the "it's not representation, because he only had one magazine". It failed. Expect yours to fail too under similar conditions. |
|
|
MT, USA
|
Posted: 8/30/2012 9:54:38 PM EDT
[#32]
Originally Posted By lazyengineer:
Originally Posted By k80clay:
I think Magpul was simply stating that this was a sample of 1. Each mag was a sample of 1. It's hard to tell overall durability with a sample of 1. Who's to say that the 1 Pmag that was tested simply had a bad fiber in the compound, causing the crack - and that a sample of 20 would have the other 19 performing well with no crack. Same thing with the Lancer - who's to say the OP just didn't get some kryptonite infused 1-off sample that proved to be the cat's ass? (not trashing either one - I own both) Not taking anything away from the OP - great thread, and I don't think anybody would expect him to do the test with a sample lot of 20 of each mag. It's sort of like the joke about cro-magnon man - how do you know all his friends are not somewhere in the afterlife saying "did you see who they dug up? Fred - yea, the guy with the sloped forehead, bad teeth and crooked nose. Why did it have to be him, he looked like hell to begin with...." You know what - NO. You don't watch a new bridge crack in half because a car drives across it, and say no-no, that's not a conclusive test of that design and manufacturing technique, because it was only an n of 1. You say "holy crap, we need to fix that." Bottom line (in my opinion), is that the PMag is an excellent magazine that is significantly superior to GI magazines. And they tend to crack when you drop a loaded one right onto it's feed lips. Let's move on past the sugar coating - there's a weak spot in the PMag design there. And if you are at the range, you will go "Aw", put it in your rifle, and shoot with high confidence that the magazine will continue to function at 100% to complete your range trip. And if you are in combat - exact same thing. And when you get home, you throw it away. Now - with a GI mag, you get your mag lip bent, and it's not immediately obvious, and you might jam. As it turns out, some of these other magazines don't appear to have that weak spot. Some do. Magpul is already aware of the weak point, and apparently are addressing that in a redesign. I look forward to seeing it. But enough of the "it's not representation, because he only had one magazine". It failed. Expect yours to fail too under similar conditions. This experiment is what would be referred to as a "pilot study". Small numbers that SUGGEST a particular outcome. However, statistically these numbers are too low to draw any statistically significant conclusions from. You wouldn't want the FDA approving a drug based on one person taking a pill and having no problems would you? Neither would you want the FDA banning a medicine based on one (or three) person's allergic reaction. A bridge is a one-off item and is a poor comparison. |
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 12:26:46 AM EDT
[#33]
hahaha i almost pissed my self seeing this whole torture test...... i mean good god man you are a funny guy.. so unpractical yet hilarious, i now know plastic mags can literally hold up to anything! thanks for posting this you made my day,week and possibly my month
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 11:09:37 AM EDT
[#34]
Originally Posted By FAB-10_Guy:
You wouldn't want the FDA approving a drug based on one person taking a pill and having no problems would you? Neither would you want the FDA banning a medicine based on one (or three) person's allergic reaction. A bridge is a one-off item and is a poor comparison. Your anology is a worse comparison. Human beings are slightly more variable than m16 magazines. Drugs typically produce fairly small changes so large numbers are needed. You wouldnt need a large sample size to prove for example that a chainsaw will cut your arm off. M16 magazines are made on production lines and are fairly consistant. If one breaks by being dropped a certain way, I suspect the others will as well. Funny how this criticism never comes up when someone comes on the board and says "I have 5 x brand magazines and they work great" |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 1:01:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: chopinbloc]
[#35]
The issue with the small sample size is that small variations in test procedure can produce results that appear to favor one test article. That is to say the Troy mag might have failed in a similar way if it hit the ground exactly the same as the Tapco. Even with a test rig, there will be small variations in angle and velocity. The results of the test shouldn't be used to indicate that one mag is better than another but the whole test does indicate that all of the mags tested are reasonably durable.
Remember that magazines in the military are an expendable item and at home they are nearly so. They are cheap enough that you should have buckets of them and if one eventually fails, you chuck it. You should also keep brand new mags in your fighting gear. ETA: re-reading this I notice that I ought to include the disclaimer that the test is still interesting and I'm grateful that WI57 was willing to conduct it and share it with us. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 2:48:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: justmatt]
[#36]
As someone who has followed this thread since the beginning, I feel like the last page of this thread has taken something beautiful and special and dumped a bucket a mud over its head? Anybody else get that?
You guys are killing me. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 3:48:31 PM EDT
[#37]
Originally Posted By justmatt:
As someone who has followed this thread since the beginning, I feel like the last page of this thread has taken something beautiful and special and dumped a bucket a mud over its head? Anybody else get that? You guys are killing me. Not really. Seems to me it was being picked apart from about the very beginning. Howerver this is supposed to be a "technical discussion forum" so I assume some discussion would follow this experiment. Have you ever really had a bucket of mud poured over your head??? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 4:00:05 PM EDT
[#38]
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By justmatt:
As someone who has followed this thread since the beginning, I feel like the last page of this thread has taken something beautiful and special and dumped a bucket a mud over its head? Anybody else get that? You guys are killing me. Not really. Seems to me it was being picked apart from about the very beginning. Howerver this is supposed to be a "technical discussion forum" so I assume some discussion would follow this experiment. Have you ever really had a bucket of mud poured over your head??? Sorry I dont have the correct testing equipment to do so! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 7:39:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By justmatt:
As someone who has followed this thread since the beginning, I feel like the last page of this thread has taken something beautiful and special and dumped a bucket a mud over its head? Anybody else get that? You guys are killing me. Not really. Seems to me it was being picked apart from about the very beginning. Howerver this is supposed to be a "technical discussion forum" so I assume some discussion would follow this experiment. Have you ever really had a bucket of mud poured over your head??? I suppose that's a fair statement. Re: your question... Of course I have. I grew up here. Although I suppose those occasions were at the beach, or in the woods next to a hub deep Jeep, so getting dirty was part of the fun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 8:31:16 PM EDT
[#40]
Originally Posted By justmatt:
As someone who has followed this thread since the beginning, I feel like the last page of this thread has taken something beautiful and special and dumped a bucket a mud over its head? Anybody else get that? You guys are killing me. I am actually surprised this has stayed clean, I was really afraid this entire thread would be trashed if things got out of control. A huge Thank You to the moderators/staff for keeping an eye on this and correcting anything that went off course. People are discussing what I expected, I was challenged with what I was expected, but I was not expecting to be accused of starting with a broken mag right off the bat though. Originally Posted By KurtVF:
Originally Posted By justmatt:
As someone who has followed this thread since the beginning, I feel like the last page of this thread has taken something beautiful and special and dumped a bucket a mud over its head? Anybody else get that? You guys are killing me. Not really. Seems to me it was being picked apart from about the very beginning. Howerver this is supposed to be a "technical discussion forum" so I assume some discussion would follow this experiment. Have you ever really had a bucket of mud poured over your head??? KurtVF is correct, this is a discussion forum. I did this for my own knowledge, but decided to document it, and since I was doing it why not post it for all to enjoy. No matter what, people do not like to see their favorite brands fail, or brands they personally own, so they become defensive (even I am guilt of that  ).
I tried to be as fair and consistent as I could when I tested, knowing that no matter what I did it would be "wrong" to somebody. Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
Sorry I dont have the correct testing equipment to do so! I could probably rig something up, but it wouldn't be an approved bucket dumping method.....
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 9:20:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: WI57]
[#41]
Well now that Part 1 of the test is done I can continue to Part 2.
The first part was to see how far I could push the magazines before the failed, overall I was VERY impressed with the various plastic mags. Now for Part 2 of the Un-scientific Plastic Magazine Test. As I'm sure you all remember, I trashed the first magazines I used. 
They were exposed to various chemicals, impacts, compressions, test firings, and the brake of a Barrett. Not a single magazine survived. But I bought two of each magazine so I would be able to do a Part 2 test. 
In the initial test I was asked why I removed the rubber pull thingy from the Troy, the reason is the mag will not stand with that device. 
So I removed it. Doing so also removed the unfair advantage of the Troy having a "stand off" to impacts, but mainly just allowed it to stand up. 
Troy 
TangoDown 
Lancer 
And to be fair I started with the Pmag in its packaging, it survived the truck ride from MidwayUSA to my house intact. 
I removed the dust cover. 
Bottom is still sealed. 
Top is still sealed. 
Back is still sealed. 
And there is no crack in the rear of the Pmag. 
So, here is the Pmag. 
Tapco 
Tan GI 
Green GI 
Its kinda like deja vu...
Part 2 of the Test. This will be done with different common types of ammunition used in the standard AR15 lower. 
The test will compose of 5.56 NATO, 6.8 SPC, 300 AAC BlackOut, and 458 Socom. 
First off, the 5.56. 
(Which we all know works just fine so I wont be shooting any more of) Then the 300 AAC BlackOut 
Troy, 1 round. 
Troy, 2 rounds. 
Troy, fully loaded no problems. 
TangoDown, 1 round. 
TangoDown, 2 rounds. 
TangoDown, fully loaded no problems. 
Pmag, 1 round. 
Pmag, 2 rounds. 
Pmag, fully loaded no problems. 
Lancer, 1 round. 
Lancer, 2 rounds. 
Lancer, fully loaded no problems. 
Tapco, 1 round. 
Tapco, 2 rounds. 
Tapco, fully loaded no problems. 
Tan GI, 1 round. 
Tan GI, 2 rounds. 
Tan GI, fully loaded no problems. 
Green GI, 1 round. 
Green GI, 2 rounds. 
Green GI, fully loaded no problems. 
So all the magazines held 300 AAC no problem. Next is the 6.8 SPC. 
Troy, 1 round. 
Troy, 2 rounds. 
Troy was only able to hold 11 rounds of 6.8 SPC before jamming up. 
TangoDown, 1 round. 
TangoDown, 2 rounds. 
TangoDown was only able to hold 7 rounds of 6.8 SPC before jamming up. 
Pmag, 1 round. 
Pmag, 2 rounds. 
Pmag only able to hold 9 rounds of 6.8 SPC before jamming up. 
Lancer, 1 round. 
Lancer, 2 rounds. 
Lancer was only able to hold 12 rounds of 6.8 SPC before jamming up. 
Tapco, 1 round. 
Tapco, 2 rounds. 
Tapco was able to hold 10 rounds of 6.8 SPC before jamming up. 
Tan GI, 1 round. 
Tan GI, 2 rounds. 
Tan GI was able to hold 5 rounds of 6.8 SPC before jamming up. 
Green GI, 1 round. 
Green GI, 2 rounds. 
Green GI was only able to hold 9 rounds of 6.8 SPC before jamming up. 
And now the 458 SOCOM.
Troy, right away I noticed a problem. 
Some of the plastic mags have a guide or a "nub" on the front of them. 
This nub prevents the longer 458 rounds from going down into the magazine. 
Troy, held 1 round of 458. 
TangoDown 
The TangoDown also has the nub but has enough wiggle room inside to move the bullet to the side a little. 
But the only issue was some of the time on the way up the bullet tip caught on the nub. 
The TangoDown was able to hold 10 rounds of 458. 
Pmag 
Pmag doesn't have the wiggle room to make the 458 fit. 
The rounds all jammed up inside. 
Pmag held 3 rounds of 458. 
Lancer 
Lancer does NOT have that nub on the front. 
Lancer holds 11 rounds of 458. 
Tapco 
Tapco loaded fine. 
Tapco holds 11 rounds of 458. 
Tan GI 
Tan GI, no GI mag has the nub. 
Tan GI holds 11 rounds of 458. 
Green GI 
Green GI loaded, no nub. 
Green GI holds 11 rounds of 458. 
I'll try to get to the range tomorrow and test fire these through my 300 BlackOut, 6.8 SPC, and 458 Socom.
eta- bolding |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 9:47:05 PM EDT
[#42]
You tricky bastard, glad the test is continuing!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 9:48:37 PM EDT
[#43]
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
You tricky bastard, glad the test is continuing!
|
|
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 10:01:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: dpmmn]
[#44]
When I saw that second row of brand new mags...I nearly pissed myself with excitement. But when I saw those different caliber rounds...and you have uppers for all of them?!
<image removed..........save it for GD...dpmmn> |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 10:09:57 PM EDT
[#45]
Originally Posted By WI57:
Originally Posted By InfiniteGrim:
You tricky bastard, glad the test is continuing! I wish I was home so I could send you a cproducts mag to see it fail
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2012 10:20:28 PM EDT
[#46]
Originally Posted By oogabooga289:
When I saw that second row of brand new mags...I nearly pissed myself with excitement. But when I saw those different caliber rounds...and you have uppers for all of them?! http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/howimetyourmothergifs/mindblown.gif As a matter of fact I do...
Knights SR15, my 5.56 test rifle. 
Rock River Arms, 458 Socom. 
Rock River Arms, 6.8 SPC 
Sun Devil build, 300 AAC BlackOut. 
Should be a fun range day.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2012 1:47:18 AM EDT
[#47]
I giggled when I saw the row of new magazines.
I lol'd, right out loud, at your "precautions" with the PMAG. I'm new to this black rifle thing, so excuse my ignorance. The 6.8 and .458 aren't supposed to feed through 5.56 mags, right? You would ordinarily have mags specifically for those calibers? Sorry if that's a really obvious question. |
|
|
|
MT, USA
|
Posted: 9/1/2012 1:52:20 AM EDT
[#48]
I'm wondering if the 458 SOCOM would be better or the same with the Barnes 300gr TTSX bullet designed for the 458S. These are the Hornady offering, right?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2012 4:29:05 AM EDT
[#49]
Originally Posted By justmatt:
I giggled when I saw the row of new magazines. I lol'd, right out loud, at your "precautions" with the PMAG. I'm new to this black rifle thing, so excuse my ignorance. The 6.8 and .458 aren't supposed to feed through 5.56 mags, right? You would ordinarily have mags specifically for those calibers? Sorry if that's a really obvious question. The 5.56 and 300 AAC are basically the same inside the mag, and 458 is supposed to work in some AR15 magazines. The 6.8 requires a special magazine/follower to correctly feed and function in a magazine. But the question gets asked a lot of which ammo works with what mags, so I figured I'd see what each is capable of. The magazines with the nubs at the front may possibly be made more functional if the nub is removed. But that may prevent the mags from functioning properly with 5.56, I don't know. These mags are all marked and sold as 5.56 magazines, if they function with anything else it's a bonus. Originally Posted By FAB-10_Guy:
I'm wondering if the 458 SOCOM would be better or the same with the Barnes 300gr TTSX bullet designed for the 458S. These are the Hornady offering, right? The load data for the Barnes TTSX is the same 2.250" OAL that these Hornady's are loaded too. I would guess that if these bullets have problems, then the Barnes TTSX would as well. Plus there is no way I could afford to dump Barnes bullets into the sand. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2012 2:26:11 PM EDT
[#50]
Just wanted to say THANK YOU for this awesome thread op!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
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.
