Posted: 1/2/2021 4:20:24 PM EDT
| Weren't these releases like a year ago? I haven't seen any at any of the usual vendors at all since then |
|
They're in stock at AU https://www.armsunlimited.com/Magpul-PMAG-20-Round-GEN-M3-308-762-Magazine-p/mag291.htm |
|
Originally Posted By Spacejunk: They're in stock at AU https://www.armsunlimited.com/Magpul-PMAG-20-Round-GEN-M3-308-762-Magazine-p/mag291.htm Edit: I'm dumb |
| On a good note, the NGSW is moving forward and Lancer has a contract with Sig. So FDE and FDE transparent Lancers are likely going to get much cheaper soon. If it ends up going through Lancer will be the new USGI magazine and Magpul is going to lose a ton of sales. |
|
Originally Posted By olds442tyguy: On a good note, the NGSW is moving forward and Lancer has a contract with Sig. So FDE and FDE transparent Lancers are likely going to get much cheaper soon. If it ends up going through Lancer will be the new USGI magazine and Magpul is going to lose a ton of sales. The 5.56 Lancer mags came in dead last at the USMC trials. I hope the .308 ones perform better. 
|
|
Originally Posted By patriot_man: The 5.56 Lancer mags came in dead last at the USMC trials. I hope the .308 ones perform better. Despite Magpul making comments that painted Lancers as an abysmal failure, the truth is they performed almost dead equal to the Pmag except for with Mk318 ammunition and only out of direct impingement weapons. Contrary to what Magpul claimed, they were not dead last. To make things even more suspicious, they counted ALL weapon failures against the magazines. This was why there were rumors of corruption surrounding it, as things like light strikes, stuck casings, and ammunition failures would not normally be attributed as a magazine fault in most testing. 
|
|
Unfortunately, since the colorant package that goes into making MCT is proprietary to avoid the issues with traditional tan colorants, we've been plagued with some supply chain issues. There is a global shortage of some of the precursor chemicals that go into it, and so our supply of MCT colorant is still a source of constant pain for us. Coupled with a requirement to continue meeting military and international demand, that has slowed availability of non-programmatic magazines, as well as preventing our intent to move MCT across the entire magazine line and furniture. Things are looking better, though, and finally getting back to normal, so expect to see availability improve. The "Last Place" characterization was not ours, but that of the USMC. Each of the USGI entrants performed well will one ammunition type, the PMAG performed flawlessly with everything. The Lancer had failures with both ammunition types, and the failures that are not normally charged to the magazine, although compiled in the chart can be removed and still have a similar result. The most common failure with Vendor B was a bolt over base failure, which, all other things being equal in an acceptably gassed rifle with proper bolt carrier speed, is a magazine issue. This was also the failure that was exhibited in the M855A1 Commercial Magazine conformance test, data which also figured into this equation, where once again, the PMAG was flawless. High speed video pretty easily shows any presentation instability and issues that contribute to the numbers, so there's a qualitative component to the results, also. Finally, this data also doesn't account for feed ramp and chamber face deformation with A1, which is indeed covered in the M855A1 Commercial Magazine Conformance Test, and in which, Vendor B exhibited significant damage at the higher round count of that test, while the PMAG showed virtually none. To my understanding, this pattern was showing itself again in the USMC test, but the round counts were significantly lower, and thus the damage did not become as much of a factor. If there were any biases going into the test at Aberdeen, I can assure you they were probably AGAINST the PMAG based on the thorn that we've been in the side of the institution for a decade and a half. On NGSW, the program will now go into a phase of post-award EC to make sure that the system fielded will be as reliable as possible. The US Govt, and the folks in charge of that program certainly do not want to field a program that isn't performing as well as it could. You will likely see some changes in the overall system prior to fielding. |
|
Just to be certain I wasn’t misunderstanding, this is what you guys said back in 2019 HERE. “In the USMC tests, the Lancer L5AWM finished dead last, with multiple ammunition types in the test, not just M855A1.” Not trying to be the internet judge or anything, but I’m just tired of seeing people argue over it as the entire internet has ran with that claim ever since. The actual results were conflicting from what you/they/whoever said. |