User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/13/2008 1:36:30 PM EDT
[#1]
If those are mostly preban mags, someone in the people's republiks might be interested. The PMAG is a great mag.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2008 2:27:10 PM EDT
[#2]
The P's..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2008 2:33:14 PM EDT
[#3]
PMAGS...just go to youtube and watch the durability tests. Go to the main PMAG thread in the new AR section.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2008 6:31:55 PM EDT
[#4]
Lancer mags seem pretty good from what I have seen. but yeah Pmags! :D thats what I'd have in a free state a collections of Cp SS mags, Pmags, Lancer Mags, and USGI! :D
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2008 8:23:41 PM EDT
[#5]
It all depens on what you want
Do you want a Stainless Steel magazine? Or do you want a Polymer magazine? Both are very good magazines and the Companies that make both of them are great so you can't go wrong by either |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2008 8:33:13 PM EDT
[#6]
get both.
/discussion 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2008 8:37:48 PM EDT
[#7]
I have to vote for PMAGS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2008 8:37:49 PM EDT
[#8]
I have to vote for PMAGS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2008 1:52:30 PM EDT
[#9]
I own both and am satisfied with either or. I guess I just like mags so I own several of each.
I am confident that whatever I need to use my rifle for either the P-mag or C-Pro will get the job done! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2008 3:54:35 PM EDT
[#10]
PMAGS!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2008 4:12:29 PM EDT
[#11]
Get both.
PMAG's and C-Prod Stainless Steel are my favorite mags. I like both the same but for different reasons. PMAG's are by far the smoothest and most solid feeling mags I've ever used. BUT they are polymer, and a new product. Maybe Magpul's special polymer will last only a decade before it gets weak and brittle... or maybe they will last a century. Only time will tell. Meanwhile, they're the first mags I go to. C-Prod's Stainless Steel mags function great and being made of stainless steel, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they can outlast your AR before they get too worn out. Because of C Products and Magpul, I have relegated all my aluminum mags to the ol' steel ammo boxes for use as spares, just in case the aliens or zombies get out of control. Either one you pick is a good choice. But getting both is IMO better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2008 4:32:33 PM EDT
[#12]
I really buy my mags in three ways. 2 mags a month no matter what. Sometimes 2 PMags, sometimes 2 SS CProducts, when bobby has a deal on elcheapo used GI mags I get five of them, refurbish with Magpul followers and new springs and Sandstrom finish and put them away.
My M-4 kit has 4 P Mags loaded and ready. My Arms Tech has 6 20 round C Products Stainless loaded with Federal 62 grain ready to go. I have a bag with 6 SS Cproducts Stainless with CMMG springs and stainless followers ready for any of my rifles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2008 10:21:29 AM EDT
[#13]
Pmags are the way to go
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2008 11:31:54 AM EDT
[#14]
Pmags...they take the abuse that a metal mag cannot.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2008 11:48:46 AM EDT
[#15]
What is wrong with aluminum GI mags ? For 30-rounders, I use only GI mags with MagPul followers, and they all run 100% in all my rifles... this is, after all, the final arbiter of performance (not whether they look good or "feel smooth"). The whole "driving over a mag with a truck" thing is a gimmick IMHO. For me, the downside of the PMags is the potential for feed lip failures over time... I'm a MAC owner who suffered the pain of Zytel mags, so I am naturally cynical about plastic mags. I also shoot a lot of 3-gun, so a drop-free mag is important (I've seen more than a few PMags failr to drop free in matches).
As for the stainless mags, again, what is the value ? Extra weight ? How many people here have had corrosion problems with their GI mags ? Sorry I'm not drinking the KoolAid... I just don't see what is broke with GI mags. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2008 12:18:30 PM EDT
[#16]
Enough is wrong with USGI mags that the US Gov has spent millions in tax dollars investigating improvements and replacements. During the recent dust test the USGI mag alone accounted for more failures than the TOTAL number of failures on all the other tested systems. Drop a USGI mag compared to PMag (loaded or unloaded, feed lips up or down) and the PMag survives better. Try doing this with a USGI mags and you will have different results... Youtube PMag M249 video Saying you do not trust PMag material because of your Zytel experience is like not trusting a 2008 Toyota because of problems with your mom's 1977 Datsun. And finally, anyone who shoots a match with mags they have not tested to see if they drop free deserves everything they get. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2008 7:55:20 PM EDT
[#17]
I absolutely love my 70+ C products mags. Mine are 100% reliable. If I buy more USGI mags, they will all be C Products. Most have Magpul followers except a few tight mags that I have green followers in.
I now have 31 P mags and I will be definitely buying nothing but P mags from now on. They are extremely smooth, tougher than hell, and (so far) perfectly reliable. I really like the feel of the mag. It feels great and that inspires confidence, that and several thousand rounds of perfect reliability. Both are damn fine companies. Really it just comes down to cost and what you prefer. I think, in true arfcom fashion, you should get both!!!!!!!!!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2008 8:54:43 AM EDT
[#18]
Well I think just to keep true with Arfcom fashion I'll get ten of both
I really don't think i can go wrong with either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2008 4:26:07 PM EDT
[#19]
Just don't get hit by a truck while shooting with the C products mags! Your mag might get bent up and not work. Never mind that you might get bent up and not work.   I know if I was getting run over by a truck, I would be totally pissed that I didn't have my P mag in my rifle!  
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 1:58:45 PM EDT
[#20]
I understand your point about magazines and dirt... the magazine is the weak link in any mag fed weapon system, and for sure the combination of magazine, ammo and rifle on the M16 family is not perfect from a reliability perspective - thats why I use MagPul followers in all my GI mags. What I am struggling with is that I can't find any really good, hard data showing the PMag or stainless C Products mag is a statistically significant improvement over the GI mag. I'd be grateful if someone could point me to a source of such data - not video, or "it feels solid", or "it looks cool", but actual real statistically significant test DATA from the military or other reputable testing organization. It may exist, but I haven't seen any. If the PMag or stainless mags were to offer a significant improvement in soldier efficiency or survivability, I would like to think the US Military would be buying them by the millions by now (or am I hopelessly naive). Being a 3-gunner, I am very open to new ideas and better moustraps if they really are better... make me a believer.
I have been dropping my partially and fully loaded GI magazines in 3-gun matches for years. I don't recall one ever even losing a round, let alone breaking/splitting as some seem to think is routine. I don't drop them from helicopters, but often they drop off towers etc. I am shocked to hear that GI magazines are as flimsy as some claim, because this is markedly at variance with my experience.
Sorry, I missed the part where the OP said he wanted mags to run in his M249. As I don't own an M249 either, I'm not seeing the relevance of this video.
Forgive my slightly tongue-in-cheek comment. I acknowledge that modern polymer technology has moved on since the early 80s, and that Zytels and Thermelts are not representative of PMag. I am a polymer chemist by education, and work in the polymer product field, so I am aware of the cool things plastics can do these days. However, some aspects of a plastic mag still concern me, notably feed lip flow/wear over time. I'm just not seeing enough upside with PMags to justify the downsides... yet.
Now that is a little uncharitable. When I have seen PMags fail to drop free, it has been with shooters who I trust to check out their gear before a big match. My guess is that, like with many aspects of 3-gun gear, their PMags worked flawlessly in their hundreds of practice reloads, but on match day they got just a little more sticky. I am not saying Magpul or C-Products have bad products, just that for most applications (certainly for mine) I remain to be convinced they bring enough upside to justify the hype and hero worship. But, hey, if people feel better about themselves with a PMag in their gun, more power to them. |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 2:00:32 PM EDT
[#21]
Pmags are the shit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 2:15:36 PM EDT
[#22]
Well, there you go then... this is all the statistical evidence I need. If 10 more guys here can post the same comment, then our confidence level will soar towards 99.9% .
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 2:24:33 PM EDT
[#23]
LOL!  One thing I have witnessed, was a carbine that lacked m4 ramps not feed a certain type of hollow point round with a standard USGI mag (standard follower too). The tip would hit right below the ramps and it would stick. With a Pmag it fed. Granted one case but, eh, it still happened. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 4:09:25 PM EDT
[#24]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 6:07:32 PM EDT
[#25]
Yes. Get both and see what you like. It's not like your gonna have too many now is it?
ETA: I have a quantity of each. I like em both, but neither one really does anything so special I'd have a preference. I originaly was leery of the Pmags being plastic/poly...Glad to say my concerns were unwarranted. They look great and have functioned flawlessly. The extra $$$ keeps me from buying them by the gross, but for the 1/2 dozen I have, it's good for now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 6:38:05 PM EDT
[#26]
I've got 10 of each. I've only run 10 to 15 full mags of each. Zero problems with either. The next batch of mags I get will be P-Mags.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 6:39:19 PM EDT
[#27]
My 8 month old lab can't destroy a PMAG.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 7:10:43 PM EDT
[#28]
No Hype No Hero worship...  Originally Posted by tpe187 in another thread... Magpul PMAG Military feedback My experience with the PMAG started when I purchased several in May, 2007. I was very impressed with the construction and strength of the magazine, compared to the USGI aluminum magazine. I was also looking for a cheaper solution to the HK magazine, that was as reliable and kept the weight closer to the USGI. I continued to be impressed when Magpul issued a recall for previous versions of the magazine, based on some feeding problems in certain lots of the magazine. To me, this indicated a quality company that would stand behind their product. I decided to approach them about conducting durability/functioning tests on their magazines. I am currently stationed at the Joint Readiness Training Center, in Fort Polk Louisiana. I work in the Live Fire Division. We run 21-24 platoons of up to 40 personnel each through Attacks, Raids, and/or Convoy security each month. We fire a combination of ball,tracer, blank, SRTA (Short Range Training Ammunition) and UTM (Basically like Simunition man marker rounds) We normally expend about 25-30K rounds a month. Thats not a huge number compared to some of the training classes guys go through, but it would give good exposure to many different Soldiers/Marines and a good indicator of long term durability. I spoke to Drake Clark at Magpul and asked if was interested in some more military exposure and what feedback he was interested in getting. He initially sent out 300 PMAGS in OD and FDE in windowed versions and non-windowed versions in August, 2007. We immediately began issuing these mags to the Marines who were here at that time. We also conducted several tests for durability at the same time. We currently have over 600 PMAGs in the field with manufacture dates of 08/07 and 10/07. Tests: M249 SAW test. As most who use them know, the SAW has a provision to take 30rd magazines in the event belted ammo is not available. This system is extremely unreliable and not preferred. It is to be used only in the event of an emergency. I was still interested to see if the PMAG would increase reliability. The SAW fired 11 magazines worth of ammo before having a case head separation and ending the test. While certainly not definitive, I have never witnessed that kind of functioning with magazines through a SAW. Marine 7-Ton test. Having seen the youtube.com test with the truck running over the mag, I was interested in seeing how far we could go. We took a fully loaded magazine in OD with window, placed it under the front wheel of the 7ton and put the wheel on top of the magazine and then turned the wheel back and forth several times. This was on gravel and resulted in severe road rash, but the magazine then fired all 30 rounds without a problem. One note, the rounds will become deformed inside the magazine, but it did function just fine. We did note that subsequent tests with 20rds or less in the magazine resulted in the failure of the magazine. All in all, this is a pretty tough test for a plastic magazine. The Marine 7 ton is rated at 7 tons off road capacity and 15 tons on road. I’m not sure how much weight is over those front wheels, but its got to be significant. Oh, and for those wondering, the USGI mag flattened, broke at the welds and shot its guts all over. The take away from this is that the plastic used in the mag is extremely resilient. It will damage the rounds inside, but the mag will be useable. If you accidently get your gear run over, I recommend changing out the rounds in you mag at the first chance. Sand Test. The Marines were anxious to make the mags fail, so in typical fashion, proceeded to throw them on the ground, pour handfuls of sand into them and one even used it as a shovel in the sand. I completely expected the magazine to fail at this point, but to my great surprise, it functioned flawlessly, multiple times. Not sure if the tolerance on the side have anything to do with this, but it was pretty remarkable. General Observations Good: Resists damage better than aluminum magazines, and even HK magazines magazines, specifically in urban operations Better reliability over USGI magazines – 3FTF’s reported so far, with soldiers who had accidently loaded 31rounds and did not ensure the mag was seated. Smoother feeding/loading than USGI magazines Not as heavy as HK Magazines Easier to seat magazine into rifle Similar cost to USGI Easier to disassemble for cleaning – This is a big one. Soldiers don’t do this and its is just as important as maintaining your rifle. The Magpul system is easy to diassemble and unlie the USGI mags, won’t get damaged in the process Easier to grasp due to reinforcement ridges Windowed magazines were preferred over solid ( I think, just because of the novelty more than anything else) Bad: Ability to load 31 rounds results in difficulty seating for soldiers who did not know it held 31 rounds, but was only meant to be loaded with 30. This extra room is what lets you get easy seating in the rifle. This is really only an issue when loading loose rounds. For those using 10rd stripper clips, no big deal. No witness marks on windowed PMAGS for 10/20/30 rounds. Hard to determine actually rounds. My personal opinion is that the windowed version isn’t really worth it. Those who shoot for a living will change mags after any contact and can tell by weight if they are almost out. The dust cover/feed lip protector isn’t practical for military application. It is easily lost and only would be used when not on patrol, when you don’t really need to worry about dust. As Drake has mentioned, there hasn’t been any feed lip expansion in fully loaded magazines, loaded for over 10 months. No Ranger Floor plated currently available. Original Magpul’s can be slipped over the body though with some effort. For those that liked to put 550 cord pulls on the USGI magazines though the hole in the bottom, there is a way. I drilled a ¼” hole directly over the Magpul symbol in the floorplate, through the disassembly plate (sorry, don’t know what to call that) and used 550 cord run up through it to accomplish this in minimal time. Very strong and secure and did not affect functioning of the magazine. Takes a little more time to disassemble and reassemble, but that is an option to use for those that prefer this method of retention. Overall, very positive feedback so far. As with all magazines, test in your rifle before you trust your life to them. I’ll update periodically, based on our observations. Tom Other Military after action reports all indicate the following consistently... Drop tests loaded and unloaded (feed lips up and down) -PMag out performs USGI Impact and crush tests -PMag out performs USGI Function test dust - PMag out performs USGI Function Test cold and hot climates- PMag out performs USGI M249 Function Tests- PMag out performs USGI Corrosion Tests - PMag out performs USGI We have several PMag with round counts beyond 100,000 rounds with no feedlip wear. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2008 10:42:42 PM EDT
[#29]
Well let me relate my experience I just had...I own 2 PMags and 1 CProducts...I loaded the 20rd CMag and pulled back the charging handle and locked it back...the top round in the mag popped half out of the mag...upon releasing the bolt, it did not fully enter battery...I pulled the handle back, and it did not eject the round, yet still fed a 2nd the same way...
That happened twice before I gave up on it and loaded the PMAG, which did not feed a round until the bolt began travelling forward, and easily ejected every time... |
|
|
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.
