User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/9/2018 8:47:40 PM EDT
[#1]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/9/2018 11:01:08 PM EDT
[#2]
All of 'em. Whatever tooling they have to form the feedlips puts a crease right below the curve on the back of the magazine.
Dropping partially loaded mags and bolt open reloads kills 'em in short order. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/9/2018 11:21:27 PM EDT
[#3]
Granted, no hard use, but I'm digging all my Brownells with the tan followers. Zero issues thus far.
I have ~ 30 in cycle currently. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/10/2018 9:01:22 AM EDT
[#4]
They feed fine. The crease is in the inside of the mag at the top, at the back of the feedlips. You can push the follower down with your pinky and see it.
If you feel scientific, grap a feedlip with a pair of pliers and peel it off. Then do the same with a different mag. The difference will be apparent. I ran a set of (5) Brownells tan follower mags in 2015-16 through about 7K rounds and they were fine when I gave 'em away. Which is better than the mags I'm using now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/10/2018 9:45:16 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They feed fine. The crease is in the inside of the mag at the top, at the back of the feedlips. You can push the follower down with your pinky and see it. If you feel scientific, grap a feedlip with a pair of pliers and peel it off. Then do the same with a different mag. The difference will be apparent. I ran a set of (5) Brownells tan follower mags in 2015-16 through about 7K rounds and they were fine when I gave 'em away. Which is better than the mags I'm using now. I check them often, as it has half assed "concerned" me since. Not sure why they would introduce a relief point in a high stress location (feed lips)? Not my goto mag choice, but still great mags for everything that I run them through, IMO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 12:19:57 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All of 'em. Whatever tooling they have to form the feedlips puts a crease right below the curve on the back of the magazine. Dropping partially loaded mags and bolt open reloads kills 'em in short order. This brownells tan follower magazine had survived MULTIPLE 5 foot drops fully loaded onto a ROCK and survived and is still servicable. Magpul's M3 Pmag did not survive. It had the crease. Pictures below are after the multiple drops, FYI. 
Here is a link to the original test I conducted https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-ARCHIVED-THREAD-Magpul-s-New-Polymer-Formula-is-Sub-par-Worse-than-the-old-Gen-/17-610837/?page=1 People are so quick to panic and wildly rush to speculations / judgements without reason or verification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 1:54:08 PM EDT
[#7]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 2:17:44 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is just a blatant fabrication with no truth to it. You're a chicken little alarmist. This brownells tan follower magazine had survived MULTIPLE 5 foot drops fully loaded onto a ROCK and survived and is still servicable. Magpul's M3 Pmag did not survive. It had the crease. Pictures below are after the multiple drops, FYI. https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-LMljeO0r51k/UXSVDttH4sI/AAAAAAAAAs8/mAidy54nn5w/s800/2013-04-21_16-49-36_776.jpg https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-0LEC92pJRSs/UXSVIhRsAoI/AAAAAAAAAtE/VB6ZWTsKuA8/s512/2013-04-21_18-31-30_562.jpg Here is a link to the original test I conducted https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-ARCHIVED-THREAD-Magpul-s-New-Polymer-Formula-is-Sub-par-Worse-than-the-old-Gen-/17-610837/?page=1 People are so quick to panic and wildly rush to speculations / judgements without reason or verification. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
All of 'em. Whatever tooling they have to form the feedlips puts a crease right below the curve on the back of the magazine. Dropping partially loaded mags and bolt open reloads kills 'em in short order. This brownells tan follower magazine had survived MULTIPLE 5 foot drops fully loaded onto a ROCK and survived and is still servicable. Magpul's M3 Pmag did not survive. It had the crease. Pictures below are after the multiple drops, FYI. https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-LMljeO0r51k/UXSVDttH4sI/AAAAAAAAAs8/mAidy54nn5w/s800/2013-04-21_16-49-36_776.jpg https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-0LEC92pJRSs/UXSVIhRsAoI/AAAAAAAAAtE/VB6ZWTsKuA8/s512/2013-04-21_18-31-30_562.jpg Here is a link to the original test I conducted https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-ARCHIVED-THREAD-Magpul-s-New-Polymer-Formula-is-Sub-par-Worse-than-the-old-Gen-/17-610837/?page=1 People are so quick to panic and wildly rush to speculations / judgements without reason or verification.  I've actually used g.i. mags and Pmags to the point of unreliability, I don't just go out and tear my shit up to post pics.The few cases of Brownells tan follower mags I looked at also had feelips at the wide end of the spec and would allow top round transposition and loss of control of the top round easier than the Okays and Rev M Pmags we had at the same time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 2:45:15 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is just a blatant fabrication with no truth to it. You're a chicken little alarmist. This brownells tan follower magazine had survived MULTIPLE 5 foot drops fully loaded onto a ROCK and survived and is still servicable. Magpul's M3 Pmag did not survive. It had the crease. Pictures below are after the multiple drops, FYI. https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-LMljeO0r51k/UXSVDttH4sI/AAAAAAAAAs8/mAidy54nn5w/s800/2013-04-21_16-49-36_776.jpg https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-0LEC92pJRSs/UXSVIhRsAoI/AAAAAAAAAtE/VB6ZWTsKuA8/s512/2013-04-21_18-31-30_562.jpg Here is a link to the original test I conducted https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/-ARCHIVED-THREAD-Magpul-s-New-Polymer-Formula-is-Sub-par-Worse-than-the-old-Gen-/17-610837/?page=1 People are so quick to panic and wildly rush to speculations / judgements without reason or verification. Seriously. I would stop repeating that. Sample size and lack of parameters/measurements render it fuckey. I like Brownells mags just fine, but come on man. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 3:54:49 PM EDT
[#10]
I approve of individuals conducting their own testing and it tells you what it tells you. A lot more than some random stranger rambling on the net.
Let's see your testing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 4:12:18 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I approve of individuals conducting their own testing and it tells you what it tells you. A lot more than some random stranger rambling on the net. Let's see your testing. Individual "testing " without measured parameters is bunk and proves zero. Guesswork and circumstance at best. Period. All mags have their weaknesses, all are disposable at some point in time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 5:22:53 PM EDT
[#12]
The mags work fine. If you're rough on 'em, you'll likely spread the creases on a few mags. I did, as did a buddy who was using them. This is after about 6K rounds on 10 mags with a lot of reload practice. Basically a year of shooting, which is fine.
Original pattern 20 round mags don't even have metal there, but they only handle 2/3 the load stack. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 5:26:37 PM EDT
[#13]
@Blain
You would need, at minimum, the following: •Mags produced in the same lot •Controlled drop limitations. I.E. Quantitative measures ensuring that each drop was exactly the same. Both in force/weight and in angle/degree of impact. Also, was it -30 degrees? 105 degrees? Temp is a huge factor, especially with polymers. You threw mags at a rock and formed an assumption. FWIW, I just took a Pmag M3 30 rd, loaded, and dropped it from a height of 6 ft. 12 times, onto the feed lips. Uncontrolled, freehand. Onto my cement garage floor. It is 79 degrees Fahrenheit here currently. Sample size of 1. Drops 1-4: top round ejection/reinsertion of that round Drops 5-6: no ejection of top round Drops 7-8: ejection of top round/reinsertion Drops 9-10: no ejection of top round Drops:11-12: top round ejection/reinsertion No visual damage to magazine. Wiped it with a wet towel and unloaded/inspected with a white light. Looks new. Scientific? Hell no. Does it prove that Pmags are indestructible? Hardly. Not trying to be a dick here, just logical . This proves zero. Eta: if it were -30 right now, I am speculating that I would be minus a Pmag. 
Eta 2: Almost forgot, top rounds ejected varied from 1-4. I did not record, but in the majority of drops, ejection was 2 rds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 5:40:45 PM EDT
[#14]
Here is an issue that will not plague a Pmag. Mag on right.
Spinal dent that prevented the follower movement. They all have their weakness man. Notice the brand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 5:45:45 PM EDT
[#15]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 7:07:51 PM EDT
[#16]
Ok "scientists". I just gave you one example, and you assumed that was the totality of my tests. But fine, discount my tests and experiences. Please explain to me why @Hendersondefense said that the brownells tan follower USGI mags have held up the best and lasted the longest by far of all other magazine types?
They do more shooting than ANYBODY. **drops mic** |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 7:20:03 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok "scientists". I just gave you one example, and you assumed that was the totality of my tests. But fine, discount my tests and experiences. Please explain to me why @Hendersondefense said that the brownells tan follower USGI mags have held up the best and lasted the longest by far of all other magazine types? They do more shooting than ANYBODY. **drops mic** Seriously. I have already stated that my findings are about as benign as yours. I do not claim to be an expert. You peddle your findings repeatedly as if they are the 10 Commandments. They are not and they prove nothing past your experience. Just like my playtime today after work with the garage floor. As for the Henderson posting? They DO shoot a fuck ton more. They Do use Brownells/tan follower, with good reason. THEY ARE GREAT MAGS.AND THEY WORK. I like them alot. DOES THAT MEAN THEY ARE SUPREME ? Hardly. Stop letting others opinions chap your ass, and attempting to prove supremecy of your choice. There are MORE THAN ONE GREAT MAG MANUFACTURER OUT THERE. But not many. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2018 10:24:22 PM EDT
[#18]
Henderson Defense is not doing a lot of reloads, hitting the deck prone, stepping on/kicking mags. That's what kills 'em.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 12:03:14 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Henderson Defense is not doing a lot of reloads, |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 12:28:23 AM EDT
[#20]
Dropping partially loaded mags and slamming a fresh one home ain't exactly the same thing as having a safety guy load your gun at a bench.
You don't do much other than static flat range shooting. What's your obsession with these cut rate government mags anyway?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 6:05:56 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not doing a lot of reloads? That's what they do all day long!! I'm sure along the way PLENTY get dropped by customers, staff, etc. The floors are concrete, btw. RSOs handle the mags, not customers. And the only mag drops are from loading stations to 5 gal buckets sometimes , or by RSOs into buckets when supervising large groups. Are there instances that mags get dropped? I'm sure. No count/record to measure in regards to "testing" though. Read the thread again. This time, only what's printed. Brownells mags have held up best for them. BTW, they shoot Wolf Gold exclusively. Or at least they did last I checked, does that make it the best ammo on earth? Hardly. It's same as the mags, damn good kit and works great for them. That's all man. Eta: Henderson post: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 12:12:12 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Negative. No mag drops onto a concrete floor by customers at Battle Field Vegas. At least not intentional. ... That's all man. Eta: Henderson post: https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/416992/Screenshot_20180911-200250-669006.png Quote HistoryQuoted:
Negative. No mag drops onto a concrete floor by customers at Battle Field Vegas. At least not intentional. ... That's all man. Eta: Henderson post: https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/416992/Screenshot_20180911-200250-669006.png Quoted:
Decent ammo. Stripper clips suck balls though. Unintentional drops are STILL DROPS! Like I said, my abuse tests have shown the brownells tan follower mags to be tougher than all but the lancers. Reliability tests have shown them to be neck and neck, and Hendersondefense' long term reliability tests have shown the tan follower's spring type to last many more cycles endurance wise than the traditional type mag springs that are used by the rest of the AR15 magazine types out there. Companies just re-engineer the mag body and follower and pay no attention to improving the spring, which is arguable the most important part of the mag. These high rankings in durability, longevity, and reliability coupled with the fact that they are the lowest profile and smallest overall outside dimensions compared to non USGI mags (for pouch fitting, bulk, etc) makes them the best mag IMHO. Now you can disagree with my analysis, but at least my findings are backed with facts and my own personal experiences and not arbitrary. That's my opinion, take it or leave it. Use whatever you like, I don't care. However, when someone spreads lies about a non existent problem, I step in to put a stop to it. BTW, I've also had tan follower USGI brownells fully loaded for over 8 years with no issues whatsoever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 12:45:07 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
> IMHO. "my own personal experiences" "That's my opinion." The issue with the broken Brownells feed lips was fabricated? Nah. SEVERAL had issues. So long as you are pleased with your "testing", good on you. But repeating it on the web as if you've proven a fact is derp. And not sure what my quoted post from an ammo discussion has to do with this thread? But yeah, the stripper clips that the Federal ammo comes on do suck balls. My opinion/personal experience. Maybe I'll post my findings as fact. You came here high pitched and squealing as of somebody needed you to defend Brownells magazines, the OP simply wanted info on the date codes of the bad batches. Not everything is a contest. And your random testing proves zero real measured data. You should lose the emotional curtain. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 1:33:03 PM EDT
[#24]
The USMC just did a little mag testing. Did they go with Brownells mags?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 3:31:35 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can't dispute your analysis with logical points so I'll resort to ad hominem attacks. Cosmetic issues do not effect function. As for the marine corps tests. If you read the detailed results, the tan follower GI mags actually were neck in neck in reliability with the Pmags. And in fact EVEN BEAT THEM IN ONE RELIABILITY TEST. Also, since you like GI tests so much, the P320 beat the glock in the military tests so it is obviously the superior handgun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 3:45:55 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No problem, I got it. Cosmetic issues do not effect function. As for the marine corps tests. If you read the detailed results, the tan follower GI mags actually were neck in neck in reliability with the Pmags. And in fact EVEN BEAT THEM IN ONE RELIABILITY TEST. Also, since you like GI tests so much, the P320 beat the glock in the military tests so it is obviously the superior handgun. And how is a broken feed lip on a Brownells mag a "cosmetic issue "? Please, DO explain. >Don't give 2 shits about the P320. >Didn't introduce the topic of the GI testing here. Your reading comprehension is right there with your "individual testing". Lacking. And you do not "got it", you skirt the issue at hand all while playing that broken record. BROWNELLS, BROWNELLS, BROWNELLS.... Please, tell us about all the cosmetically challenged mags with broken feed lips. Eta: Forget it. Some walls cannot be breached. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2018 10:23:13 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No problem, I got it. Cosmetic issues do not effect function. As for the marine corps tests. If you read the detailed results, the tan follower GI mags actually were neck in neck in reliability with the Pmags. And in fact EVEN BEAT THEM IN ONE RELIABILITY TEST. Also, since you like GI tests so much, the P320 beat the glock in the military tests so it is obviously the superior handgun. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I can't dispute your analysis with logical points so I'll resort to ad hominem attacks. Cosmetic issues do not effect function. As for the marine corps tests. If you read the detailed results, the tan follower GI mags actually were neck in neck in reliability with the Pmags. And in fact EVEN BEAT THEM IN ONE RELIABILITY TEST. Also, since you like GI tests so much, the P320 beat the glock in the military tests so it is obviously the superior handgun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2018 10:53:58 PM EDT
[#28]
 it's amazing how heated a discussion over mags can get.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2018 11:44:43 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
it's amazing how PROFOUNDLY RETARDED a discussion over mags can get. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2018 9:59:45 AM EDT
[#30]
Especially when it's one brand of magazine that's really not appreciably different than the several other brands of the same exact mag, made to the same spec, for the same customer.
G.I. mags are basically G.I. mags. There's minuscule differences between the manufacturers, but in the grand scheme of things, they all perform the same. Magpul's comparison testing has shown that over and over. It's settled science at this point. I still enjoy the discussion, why, I have no idea. 
|
|
|
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.
