Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 10/5/2004 5:40:25 PM EST
I know there has been a lot of interest and excitement over low priced LEO magazines that are being sold ( mostly backordered ) to the general public. I recently inspected a large number of the NIW Center Industries Corportation LEO magazines dated 05/2003 and purchased one at $11 for closer inspection. The magazine was in a sealed wrapper with all of the appropriate markings on the wrapper and magazine body. It appeared to be representative of the magazines on display.

Like many of you, I tend to grade magazines disproportinely based on appearance and quality/remainder of finish. I can state without reservation or qualification that the finish and metal forming of these magazines is the poorest that I have ever observed. The manufacturing quality of these magazines has reached an all time low for appearance and finish quality. For those of you accustomed to preban USGI magazines, you will be greatly disappointed.

The magazine is coated with a thin dry film of unknown "paintlike" substance that has many scratches and marks due to handling during the manufacturing and packaging process. It comes off easily when the magazine is handled. It is unlike any previously observed coating on preban USGI magazines. At several locations on the magazine body, this top coating has runs and is puddled. Underneath this top coat is a thin film of anodizing that has an almost transparent appearance.

The metal surface of the magazine has numerous dings and "distress marks" from the fabrication process with the most pronounced at or near the bend lines. These distress marks are typical of those observed when metal is cold worked. I have no means for testing to determine the hardness or brittleness of the metal. Some may even be the result of the rolling process associated with the flat, raw plate used to fabricate the magazine.

There are three distinct welds on the front of the magazine and 5 very light indentations that may be spot welds lacking full penatration. A strong reminder of some of the Cooper mags in past years that were of marginal quality. I find no fault the the dimensions or test function of the magzine. It drops freely from my rifles and I feel that it will function reliabily when tested at the ranged next week.

I provide this information for those considering the purchase of such Center magazines. Was this group representative? I don't know, but I would not purchase any more as there are other brands of recently manufactured LEO currently offered at similar prices. In my opinion, your money would be better spent on the many high quality preban USGI magazines currently available.


Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:14:36 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 6:15:09 PM EST by repub18]
Center Industries so far does not have a good reputation on this board with their post ban mags


www.ar15.com/forums/forum.html?b=3&f=17

this is a link with people who are claiming the mags dont even fit in the mag well
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 8:55:55 PM EST
Yep . I will agree with that . Out of the five I have they all look like crap and one does stick in the mag well . I haven't had a chance to range test them yet . I am thinking even though they are new that I might just refinish them myself just to make me feel better .
I have five more on the way that I HOPE are better as I am tradeing out some pre 94 Labells for them
.
Link Posted: 10/6/2004 2:32:55 AM EST
I bought 5, all had bad finsh and metal forming and weld problems described above. Two will not drop free (they must be YANKED OUT, HARD) and probably can not be corrected. Waste of money, in my opinion.
Link Posted: 10/6/2004 3:51:36 AM EST
And THISwhy It's worth the wait for TAPCO mags !!!
These mags are the SHIT .....
Link Posted: 10/6/2004 6:09:29 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/6/2004 6:09:46 AM EST by I-M-A-WMD]
Thanks for the report and clear pics Tman.

I have 6 Center mags. 3 are from during the ban and 3 are pre-ban. I'll check em out again after I get home. IIRC, they seemed good and basically identical even though there was 8+/- years difference in the date of manufacture. I still consider them second rate to my Circle Kay mags. Both brands function perfect, but the finish and QC seems much higher on the Circle Kay.

Sly
Link Posted: 10/6/2004 10:17:21 AM EST
I-M-A-WMD,
I have a number of preban Center magazines and they do not show any of the defects noted in my post above. I would rate them on a par with the other several preban USGI manufacturers.
Link Posted: 10/6/2004 10:27:54 AM EST
I recently bought 10 of the LEO Center Industries mags. Agree the finish looks like crap, but should look normal after some useage. I've only tested 4 of mine so far and they function fine. Teflon LaBelle's are the way to go, but these aren't THAT bad (at least mine aren't, so far).
Link Posted: 10/7/2004 7:12:23 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/7/2004 7:13:31 AM EST by 2whiskeyP]

Originally Posted By repub18:

this is a link with people who are claiming the mags dont even fit in the mag well




I'm one of those guys! Actually, I purchased 10, tried 6 (I wanted to keep some NIW) and out of those 6, one will not fit the mag well of my Mega lower. It does fit in the Colt. NONE of them will load correctly using a LULA. You have to push every other round back against some tension. All the ones one the right side of the mag. This is the same for all 6 that I tried. I haven't used any at the range yet.

There are scratches on all of them but the finish is not too bad IMO. No complaints here about that but I would really rather not have mags that don't fit ALL my ARs!
Link Posted: 10/7/2004 10:19:00 AM EST
For what it is worth I have had no problems with the Lula with these . Even the one that is sticking in the reciever lula's right up .
Link Posted: 10/7/2004 1:28:27 PM EST
I would SO never even waste a second of my life inspecting MAG FINISH. If Straight feed lips and drop free check out, then I'll load it up and try it out.
Link Posted: 10/7/2004 2:00:46 PM EST
markm,
I think I get your point.
That would leave you more time to make 7,861 posts on AR15.com.

Link Posted: 10/7/2004 2:12:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/7/2004 2:12:50 PM EST by I-M-A-WMD]

Originally Posted By Tman:
markm,
I think I get your point.
That would leave you more time to make 7,861 posts on AR15.com.




Perhaps you should have posted about, "While checking the mag's physical dimensions, feed lips, floor plates, and welds... I noticed the finish on my mags didn't look good. What say you fellow ARFcomers".

Some folks seem to miss the idea that this is a discussion board. Key word, discussion. Apparently more than a few folks figured Tman's post was worthy of discussion. So let's just leave it with a hardy "YMMV".

Sly
Link Posted: 10/7/2004 2:19:39 PM EST
Hmm, I have a couple of PRE-ban Center mags and they look great. I guess their QC doesn't give a crap anymore.
Link Posted: 10/7/2004 5:53:48 PM EST
Thanks for the heads up Tman.

556man
Link Posted: 10/7/2004 6:13:05 PM EST

Originally Posted By Tman:
markm,
I think I get your point.
That would leave you more time to make 7,861 posts on AR15.com.




LOL!!!

Link Posted: 10/8/2004 11:00:42 AM EST
I bought 3 of them NIW. they all fit in my Colts but one will not drop freely.

I put the Magpul follower in all 3 and fired them all day long. no performance issues to report.

My mags have the same looks as those pictures.
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 4:56:51 PM EST
i recently ordered 16 mags from green mountain gear and i received them a couple of days ago. And I must say that they are in excellant shape, they are made by D&H industries and have the green follower. These are infact NEW mags, marked "Restricted Military GOV'T/Law Enforcment, Export Use Only" on both the body and floor plate, plus the date "code" is stamped on the mag body. I just used them today and I experienced only one malfunction, in which the follower did infact "tilt". If i had more money I'd buy 16more !!
Top Top