AR Sponsor
Posted: 4/10/2011 4:56:45 PM EDT
| I like the look of the see through mags.I was thinking of getting a few.Are the older design mags gtg(any problems?),or should i hold out for the newer version? |
|
The L5's and L5A's are great mags.
The L5's were discontinued, so for awhile you could get them cheaper for $10-$12 each before they were all gone The L5A's are not going to be discontinued, so they will likely remain the same price. The new AWM's aren't that much more expensive, and the opaque ones might even be cheaper. I would be happy with any Lancer mag, but I haven't had any of the new ones yet. |
|
The original Lancer L5's are good to go, and I assume the new ones are great also.
I probably wouldn't pay much more than the $12-14 I can snag a non-windowed P-Mag for though. The full transparency of the Lancers sure look cool though. I dig both types of polymer mags though and own about equal amounts of both. |
|
Quoted:
The L5's and L5A's are great mags. The L5's were discontinued, so for awhile you could get them cheaper for $10-$12 each before they were all gone The L5A's are not going to be discontinued, so they will likely remain the same price. The new AWM's aren't that much more expensive, and the opaque ones might even be cheaper. I would be happy with any Lancer mag, but I haven't had any of the new ones yet. You are correct. The opaque AWM mags are cheaper than the translucent mags. It will be interesting to see how the Lancer mags compare against the PMAG's. Both are very high quality I think it will come down to price. I'm guessing plenty of people will be purchasing the new Lancers because they are the new thing. Once the newness wears off we'll see which is the more popular. |
|
I believe the new L5AWM set the bar as far as 30 round AR magazines.
Someone on TOS had a fit because the originals were found to have issues when exposed to sprayed with DEET. When is the last time you sprayed a magazine with DEET? I'd rather have feed lips and a spine that doesn't break. |
|
Quoted:
I believe the new L5AWM set the bar as far as 30 round AR magazines. Someone on TOS had a fit because the originals were found to have issues when exposed to sprayed with DEET. When is the last time you sprayed a magazine with DEET? I'd rather have feed lips and a spine that doesn't break. I'll remember not to try to make my mags insect-repelling with Cutter or Off 
So the AWM's can be sprayed with insect repellant? I'd hate for them to get west nile. 
|
|
Quoted:
I believe the new L5AWM set the bar as far as 30 round AR magazines. Someone on TOS had a fit because the originals were found to have issues when exposed to sprayed with DEET. When is the last time you sprayed a magazine with DEET? I'd rather have feed lips and a spine that doesn't break. so you don't use a deet based bug repellant? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I believe the new L5AWM set the bar as far as 30 round AR magazines. Someone on TOS had a fit because the originals were found to have issues when exposed to sprayed with DEET. When is the last time you sprayed a magazine with DEET? I'd rather have feed lips and a spine that doesn't break. so you don't use a deet based bug repellant? I put it on my arms and neck- not my rifle magazines. |
| There are threads about this already, but I have 13 of the 'old' 30s, and 6 of the 'old' 20s, and have never had a single issue with any of them. I have used them in conditions ranging from freezing rain and mud to triple digit Louisiana hell summer, and they're always GTG. |
|
Quoted:
There are threads about this already, but I have 13 of the 'old' 30s, and 6 of the 'old' 20s, and have never had a single issue with any of them. I have used them in conditions ranging from freezing rain and mud to triple digit Louisiana hell summer, and they're always GTG. +20 |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Took six of the new mags to the range today and they worked flawlessly. Will be buying more. How do they seat for you? Mine feel like I'm denting the ammo, thats how hard I have to push to get them seated. Sorry about the delay in answering. Actually, I took a new AR15 to zero Wednesday and this is the first time I tried the new Lancers. Only took 50 rounds of ammo. Most of the mags were loaded 3 rounds at a time. The mags all functioned properly. After reading your reply I tried to load 30 rounds and lock the magazine in a weapon. As you have stated it is hard to lock the magazine in the weapon loaded with 30,rounds. Loaded to 29 rounds was a lot easier. I won't be loading these to 30 rounds. I will check the functionnext time out with 29 rounds loaded. I must admit that it is somewhat disappointing although I usually load my magazines to a max of 28 rounds. |
|
^^This^^ I was disappointed the first time I tried to lock-in a fully loaded 30, so they only get loaded to 29. Unless of course, I am just shooting at paper, in that case I just start with a PMAG and insert the Lancers on an open bolt, no problem there.
Other than that, I love them. |
|
The magazine was designed to hold 30 rounds max to comply with the US military standard, in some rifles it may be difficult to seat the magaizne with 30 rounds, but they should seat similar to a fully loaded USGI magazine.
If you want to modify your own magazines to hold 31 rounds, simply remove .188" from the follower stop (large part that sticks up) on the floor plate lock. The part is plastic and can easily be sanded, filed or cut. |
| Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, |
|
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. Are you guy's gonna try a clear mag again??? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. Are you guy's gonna try a clear mag again??? Maybe, maybe not. In my opinion translucent mags will not provide increased functionality for us since we already have our MagLevels- the MagLevel system will show you from pretty much 30-0 what you have in the mag while a translucent body will only show you 30-15 (as half the cartridge stack is hidden inside the magwell). I gotta admit, translucent mags do look good though. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. While I have no doubt that broken PMAGs are extremely rare, return rate does not equal breakage rate. That is very much correct. The actual defective rate will be impossible to determine since there are end users who will simply not contact us when they have an issue. Even if only one in ten does bother to call, our true defective rate would still be quite low at one quarter of one percent.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. I haven't seen any spread & I've got some of the 1st production run that was released for sale. I need to go measure the spread though I left two in the safe loaded without the cap that have been there for years. My initial comment about them spreading is based on statements from magpul's own when the things were released re the cap that goes over the feed lips. I figure if you guys make it and tell people it's to keep the lips from spreading while the things loaded then it can happen. Otherwise why'd y'all spend the extra time, money and effort to design the cap and tell everyone that's why it's there? BTW, I never have used those damn caps. As far as the lips cracking I have managed to kill two PMAGS. They were from the same ordered batch and they lasted about a year in service & I'll freely admit I treated them a hell of a lot rougher than I'd ever treat an aluminum or steel mag. They both broke when I dropped them on concrete and rocks. I didn't send them in because I broke them. Magazines are a wear item and they wear out. I'm not going to bitch and whine to get free shit when I got good use from a product and it died as a result of being abused. I like PMAGS. I like Magpul. I own a lot of stuff with y'alls logo on it. That said ain't nothing in this world perfect but you guys try really hard to get there.  I'm still going to buy pmags and lancers and metal mags just to keep all my eggs in several baskets. I know and compensate for the weaknesses of each.
|
|
"The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag."
That flange is only on the mil magazines, and NOT the commercial mags. You would have to go waaaay out of the way to find a mil magazine. As to buying commercial ARC mags, they are readily available. Re the reliability of PMAG's. We see a lot of these mags, and they are the most common magazine we see- over several thousand in a year. We may see 10 a year that has a problem. Of course we will see several hundred aluminum magazines go down in that same time period. We stopped using metal magazines a few years ago. We rock only PMAG's and ARC mags, and are completely satisfied with both. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. I haven't seen any spread & I've got some of the 1st production run that was released for sale. I need to go measure the spread though I left two in the safe loaded without the cap that have been there for years. My initial comment about them spreading is based on statements from Magpul's own when the things were released re the cap that goes over the feed lips. I figure if you guys make it and tell people it's to keep the lips from spreading while the things loaded then it can happen. Otherwise why'd y'all spend the extra time, money and effort to design the cap and tell everyone that's why it's there? BTW, I never have used those damn caps. As far as the lips cracking I have managed to kill two PMAGS. They were from the same ordered batch and they lasted about a year in service & I'll freely admit I treated them a hell of a lot rougher than I'd ever treat an aluminum or steel mag. They both broke when I dropped them on concrete and rocks. I didn't send them in because I broke them. Magazines are a wear item and they wear out. I'm not going to bitch and whine to get free shit when I got good use from a product and it died as a result of being abused. I like PMAGS. I like Magpul. I own a lot of stuff with y'alls logo on it. That said ain't nothing in this world perfect but you guys try really hard to get there. I'm still going to buy pmags and lancers and metal mags just to keep all my eggs in several baskets. I know and compensate for the weaknesses of each.Ah yes, we did make a statement in our original newsfeed back in early 2007, "Fitted into place, the Impact Cover provides impact protection for the feed lips, prevents dirt/dust intrusion, and eliminates distortion of the feed lips caused by long-term loaded storage." We based that statement knowing the history of other polymer mags on the market, some of which were prone to feedlip spreading. However, with millions of PMAGs fielded successfully over the last four years we now consider the use of the Impact/Dust Cover as optional. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. I haven't seen any spread & I've got some of the 1st production run that was released for sale. I need to go measure the spread though I left two in the safe loaded without the cap that have been there for years. My initial comment about them spreading is based on statements from Magpul's own when the things were released re the cap that goes over the feed lips. I figure if you guys make it and tell people it's to keep the lips from spreading while the things loaded then it can happen. Otherwise why'd y'all spend the extra time, money and effort to design the cap and tell everyone that's why it's there? BTW, I never have used those damn caps. As far as the lips cracking I have managed to kill two PMAGS. They were from the same ordered batch and they lasted about a year in service & I'll freely admit I treated them a hell of a lot rougher than I'd ever treat an aluminum or steel mag. They both broke when I dropped them on concrete and rocks. I didn't send them in because I broke them. Magazines are a wear item and they wear out. I'm not going to bitch and whine to get free shit when I got good use from a product and it died as a result of being abused. I like PMAGS. I like Magpul. I own a lot of stuff with y'alls logo on it. That said ain't nothing in this world perfect but you guys try really hard to get there. I'm still going to buy pmags and lancers and metal mags just to keep all my eggs in several baskets. I know and compensate for the weaknesses of each.Ah yes, we did make a statement in our original newsfeed back in early 2007, "Fitted into place, the Impact Cover provides impact protection for the feed lips, prevents dirt/dust intrusion, and eliminates distortion of the feed lips caused by long-term loaded storage." We based that statement knowing the history of other polymer mags on the market, some of which were prone to feedlip spreading. However, with millions of PMAGs fielded successfully over the last four years we now consider the use of the Impact/Dust Cover as optional. ETU -  Lancer thread?
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. I haven't seen any spread & I've got some of the 1st production run that was released for sale. I need to go measure the spread though I left two in the safe loaded without the cap that have been there for years. My initial comment about them spreading is based on statements from Magpul's own when the things were released re the cap that goes over the feed lips. I figure if you guys make it and tell people it's to keep the lips from spreading while the things loaded then it can happen. Otherwise why'd y'all spend the extra time, money and effort to design the cap and tell everyone that's why it's there? BTW, I never have used those damn caps. As far as the lips cracking I have managed to kill two PMAGS. They were from the same ordered batch and they lasted about a year in service & I'll freely admit I treated them a hell of a lot rougher than I'd ever treat an aluminum or steel mag. They both broke when I dropped them on concrete and rocks. I didn't send them in because I broke them. Magazines are a wear item and they wear out. I'm not going to bitch and whine to get free shit when I got good use from a product and it died as a result of being abused. I like PMAGS. I like Magpul. I own a lot of stuff with y'alls logo on it. That said ain't nothing in this world perfect but you guys try really hard to get there. I'm still going to buy pmags and lancers and metal mags just to keep all my eggs in several baskets. I know and compensate for the weaknesses of each.Ah yes, we did make a statement in our original newsfeed back in early 2007, "Fitted into place, the Impact Cover provides impact protection for the feed lips, prevents dirt/dust intrusion, and eliminates distortion of the feed lips caused by long-term loaded storage." We based that statement knowing the history of other polymer mags on the market, some of which were prone to feedlip spreading. However, with millions of PMAGs fielded successfully over the last four years we now consider the use of the Impact/Dust Cover as optional. ETU - Lancer thread?That's OK,the choice is clear
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. I haven't seen any spread & I've got some of the 1st production run that was released for sale. I need to go measure the spread though I left two in the safe loaded without the cap that have been there for years. My initial comment about them spreading is based on statements from Magpul's own when the things were released re the cap that goes over the feed lips. I figure if you guys make it and tell people it's to keep the lips from spreading while the things loaded then it can happen. Otherwise why'd y'all spend the extra time, money and effort to design the cap and tell everyone that's why it's there? BTW, I never have used those damn caps. As far as the lips cracking I have managed to kill two PMAGS. They were from the same ordered batch and they lasted about a year in service & I'll freely admit I treated them a hell of a lot rougher than I'd ever treat an aluminum or steel mag. They both broke when I dropped them on concrete and rocks. I didn't send them in because I broke them. Magazines are a wear item and they wear out. I'm not going to bitch and whine to get free shit when I got good use from a product and it died as a result of being abused. I like PMAGS. I like Magpul. I own a lot of stuff with y'alls logo on it. That said ain't nothing in this world perfect but you guys try really hard to get there. I'm still going to buy pmags and lancers and metal mags just to keep all my eggs in several baskets. I know and compensate for the weaknesses of each.Ah yes, we did make a statement in our original newsfeed back in early 2007, "Fitted into place, the Impact Cover provides impact protection for the feed lips, prevents dirt/dust intrusion, and eliminates distortion of the feed lips caused by long-term loaded storage." We based that statement knowing the history of other polymer mags on the market, some of which were prone to feedlip spreading. However, with millions of PMAGs fielded successfully over the last four years we now consider the use of the Impact/Dust Cover as optional. ETU - Lancer thread?Yes it is. However, I am obligated to respond to misinformation regarding any of our products... |
|
I personally don't count rounds while shooting, usually focused on other things. If I have time to be looking down there then I have time and cover to bring the weapon back to capacity anyways. I do look at the mags in pouches, packs, cans, etc. to see what's loaded and what's not....translucent mags lend themselves to that function better, but there aren't many good ones out there due to function shortcomings. Lancer does a pretty good job looking good and performing well, so I have many. I could easily live without them were they to disappear...but I wouldn't get rid of them or sell them. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. What the hell do you mean: ".. I am obligated to respond to misinformation regarding any of our products..."? Is it a minimum wage job? He said he suffered cracked mags and you responded with "Oh it only happens 3 times out of 10,000 (based on user return)"... That isn't false information. That's him pointing out a flaw in your product and you replying with the percentage of customers who report a similar happening. Lol he's allowed to point out the luck he's had with different brands of mags. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Have a lot of P-mags and Lancers. The new L5awf mag is the best ive tried, out of any mag period. My SCAR likes some P-mags but not others. The older Lancers work well in all AR platforms with exception to SCAR. However the newer Lancer AWF mag is redesigned and works flawlessly in every rifle I own including the SCAR. They are really great mags, Yup the AWM mag is the ONLY polymer mag that I've tried that works correctly with a SCAR. The wrap around steel insert feed lips is a lot more robust than the plastic PMAG feed lips that can spread or in some cases crack easily. The Tango Down ARC mags may but they cost more and are harder to find. They are also a pain in the ass to put in most MOLLE mag pouches because of the lip around the mid section of the mag. Any evidence to support this? In fact, I don't think I've ever seen even one PMAG that had spread feedlips. BTW broken PMAGs are also extremely rare with a return rate of only 0.025% (2-3 per 10,000) on average. What the hell do you mean: ".. I am obligated to respond to misinformation regarding any of our products..."? Is it a minimum wage job? He said he suffered cracked mags and you responded with "Oh it only happens 3 times out of 10,000 (based on user return)"... That isn't false information. That's him pointing out a flaw in your product and you replying with the percentage of customers who report a similar happening. Lol he's allowed to point out the luck he's had with different brands of mags. He was responding to the "feedlip spreading" comment. He's allowed to do that. "Flaw in your product"?
|
AR Sponsor