Hi,

I have seen people who consider Imperial Defense mags to be junk, and other who consider Royal Ordnance to be junk.  It is usually depend on which ones they are selling.

Just wonder anybody who have tried them both would give an unbiased verdict.  Someone who are not selling either.

Thank you,

Paven

I have no idea which is which, but the ones I have work. They have the blue/black follower and the gray finish. The followers have the third leg and I can load 30rds into them w/o any problems.

I'd bought one yesterday at the local gun shop, it just had a sticker on it, England.
It has the black follower and has a gray like finish, no markings.
I posted a picture of the mag at other boards, they said these where good mags.
I only bought one, wanted to try it out before buying more of them.

TG

The Royal Ordnance magazines are defective from the way they were stored (stacked too high for too long). I'm not calling them junk just because I'm selling them. These are the ones you commonly have to file magazine catches on for them to lock in your magwell. Many of them do not drop free.


Imperial Defense magazines are just as good as USGI (after you switch the follower).

Paven
I have several of both types.
I have not experienced any of the problems with the mags not seating that others have discussed in any of my 3 rifles (2 bushies and a RRA)
I have maybe 20 of the "Imperial" mags and 5 of the grey or "parked" mags
I like the "black" (Imperial) finished mags the best.
They seem to me to be "slicker" ie the finish is slipery compared to the "parked" mags.
I have changed all the followers in mine to the green or(my fav) orange followers.
For me, the Imperial mags are just as good, maybe better than USGI.
I have allways felt that the aluminum mags where easily damaged.
Just my 2cents

I have several of the grey phosphated ones and have had no problems with the fit or function, but the finish is kind of rough though