Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/13/2003 4:44:04 PM EDT
I understand that the 30rnd aluminum mags that are teflon coated are not mil-spec despite some places advertizing them as such. My question is--Is there anything phisically wrong/inferior about them verses "true" mil-spec? What is bad/unreliable/etc about teflon coatings? Other than potential false advertising, what makes them so bad? they seem to work much better for me than my steel & orlite mags.
Link Posted: 9/13/2003 5:13:58 PM EDT
Teflon is BETTER than milspec. The only question was why are the Teflon mags in milspec type bags.
Link Posted: 9/13/2003 11:32:54 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/14/2003 6:48:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/14/2003 6:55:24 AM EDT by Garand_Shooter]
I have seen a couple different revisions of the drawing numbre (the specs), both were from several years ago. Both ones specified the moly film finish, no others were specified. This was when I was working for a company that did a lot of government contracts, so they always got a lot of ducumentation with solicitations for bid. If you want to see them all, every revison, just file a FOIA request. All I can tell you is that I have never seen a spec that allowed the manufacturer to choose much of anything, it is always very well laid out and very specific. Every varied version of CLP I have seen had a different revison to the mil-spec number, for example the 2 I have in fromt of me appear to be a slightly different formula, but one is MIL-63460 while the other is MIL-63460C.
Top Top