AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cheating on Magpul... (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 10/26/2015 6:54:35 AM EDT
|
Does anyone feel like they are cheating on Magpul when they think about buying a Lancer magazine?
I've had a few 20 round smoke Lancers sitting in my cart for a few weeks, but I just can't seem to pull the trigger. I'm a faithful MagPul believer, and it just seems wrong to buy another polymer mag. To keep this technical: any positives or negatives to getting some Lancer mags over getting some Gen3 20 round mags? |
|
Quoted:
Does anyone feel like they are cheating on Magpul when they think about buying a Lancer magazine? I've had a few 20 round smoke Lancers sitting in my cart for a few weeks, but I just can't seem to pull the trigger. I'm a faithful MagPul believer, and it just seems wrong to buy another polymer mag. To keep this technical: any positives or negatives to getting some Lancer mags over getting some Gen3 20 round mags? Our view on this has not changed from the original magpul manual (1999) shown here (i.e. use everything as you would in real life and keep what works for your mission)... 
|
|
Quoted:
After all the trouble I've had with Magpul 20s and Gen3 30s.... No. I'll probably never buy another Pmag. Quoted:
After all the trouble I've had with Magpul 20s and Gen3 30s.... No. I'll probably never buy another Pmag. You just posted yesterday about how you have never personally cracked a PMag and ran several M3s for a long period in matches with relatively few issues... Quoted:
I'm not all that hot for Pmags but I ran a set of 12 RevMs to the point of being unreliable. It took over 15K rounds in a training and match environment to do it and I only had a few malfunctions with those, but retired the entire set due to mileage and the desire to keep things consistent. I have a set of 6 Gen M2 30s that I use now if I'm going to be working over cement or other hard surfaces. I have never personally cracked a Pmag, but I've dropped 'em partially loaded on hard surfaces and slammed 'em in many many times. I also don't clean my plastic stuff with anything stronger than diluted hand dish washing soap and water. |
|
Quoted:
You just posted yesterday about how you have never personally cracked a PMag and ran several M3s for a long period in matches with relatively few issues... Quoted:
Quoted:
After all the trouble I've had with Magpul 20s and Gen3 30s.... No. I'll probably never buy another Pmag. You just posted yesterday about how you have never personally cracked a PMag and ran several M3s for a long period in matches with relatively few issues... Quoted:
I'm not all that hot for Pmags but I ran a set of 12 RevMs to the point of being unreliable. It took over 15K rounds in a training and match environment to do it and I only had a few malfunctions with those, but retired the entire set due to mileage and the desire to keep things consistent. I have a set of 6 Gen M2 30s that I use now if I'm going to be working over cement or other hard surfaces. I have never personally cracked a Pmag, but I've dropped 'em partially loaded on hard surfaces and slammed 'em in many many times. I also don't clean my plastic stuff with anything stronger than diluted hand dish washing soap and water. RevMs are not M3s. You are correct, I have never cracked a Pmag, hope I never do. I have a bunch of Gen M2 Pmags. The Gen M3s didn't work out for me. I'm good with my Gen M2s and don't see myself buying any more after my experience with early Gen M3 20s and 30s. |
|
Quoted: You just posted yesterday about how you have never personally cracked a PMag and ran several M3s for a long period in matches with relatively few issues... Quoted: Quoted: After all the trouble I've had with Magpul 20s and Gen3 30s.... No. I'll probably never buy another Pmag. You just posted yesterday about how you have never personally cracked a PMag and ran several M3s for a long period in matches with relatively few issues... Quoted: I'm not all that hot for Pmags but I ran a set of 12 RevMs to the point of being unreliable. It took over 15K rounds in a training and match environment to do it and I only had a few malfunctions with those, but retired the entire set due to mileage and the desire to keep things consistent. I have a set of 6 Gen M2 30s that I use now if I'm going to be working over cement or other hard surfaces. I have never personally cracked a Pmag, but I've dropped 'em partially loaded on hard surfaces and slammed 'em in many many times. I also don't clean my plastic stuff with anything stronger than diluted hand dish washing soap and water.  <GD type Image removed from Tech Forum.........dpmmn> |
|
Reading comprehension. You need it. |
|
I am a huge Magpul fan, I only have Magpul AR magazines and USGI AR magazines.
However, I recently purchased two Magpul AK magazines for my SLR95 and neither of them feed correctly. A little disappointed. On the other hand, I recently built 25 Remington 870 less lethal shotguns with the orange Magpul furniture, and they turned out most excellent. |
|
Quoted:
I am a huge Magpul fan, I only have Magpul AR magazines and USGI AR magazines. However, I recently purchased two Magpul AK magazines for my SLR95 and neither of them feed correctly. A little disappointed. On the other hand, I recently built 25 Remington 870 less lethal shotguns with the orange Magpul furniture, and they turned out most excellent. The AK mags have been running really well in the field from our feedback. I would contact customer service and have them do a little troubleshooting on the issue and see if we can supply a remedy. |
|
Quoted:
Does anyone feel like they are cheating on Magpul when they think about buying a Lancer magazine? No Quoted:...I'm a faithful MagPul believer... I patronize the products of magpul (and lancer, and nhmtg, etc). I believe in Jesus and my responsibility to my family. |
|
Quoted:
No I patronize the products of magpul (and lancer, and nhmtg, etc). I believe in Jesus and my responsibility to my family. Quoted:
Quoted:
Does anyone feel like they are cheating on Magpul when they think about buying a Lancer magazine? No Quoted:...I'm a faithful MagPul believer... I patronize the products of magpul (and lancer, and nhmtg, etc). I believe in Jesus and my responsibility to my family. Okay. I think we are taking this a bit too far. When I said faithful, I wasn't drawing any parallels between molded polymers and the love of God and family. |
|
Quoted:
No I patronize the products of magpul (and lancer, and nhmtg, etc). I believe in Jesus and my responsibility to my family. Quoted:
Quoted:
Does anyone feel like they are cheating on Magpul when they think about buying a Lancer magazine? No Quoted:...I'm a faithful MagPul believer... I patronize the products of magpul (and lancer, and nhmtg, etc). I believe in Jesus and my responsibility to my family. Good for you. In my experience Lancers are tougher than PMags, but PMags are more reliable. Not that Lancers are unreliable, they work fine in 98% of rifles. But rifles that won't run on any other mag tend to run with PMags. |
I own one Lancer smoke 30 rounder and it is sweet. I hope to acquire more one of these days. For now, I keep a dozen windowed foliage green Pmags for shooting. They work well enough once you get the first few rounds out of them.
I have a shitload of Pmags still in the wrappers as well. Like the other poster said, it's hard not to grab a few when you see them on sale. |
|
Quoted:Okay. I think we are taking this a bit too far.
When I said faithful, I wasn't drawing any parallels between molded polymers and the love of God and family. Fair enough.  I don't think it would be cheating on them, anymore than a trip to Burger King equates to cheating on McDonald's. Their job is to earn my patronage (ie, my dollars); my job is to do whatever I want with those dollars, while myself trying to earn the patronage of others. I have a hundred pmags, give or take; not knocking them by any means. I just leave it up to magpul (and nhmtg, and lancer, etc) to make their product the one that earns my dollars over anyone else's product. Magpul has some very good products and some great products; their magazines aren't the only products of theirs that I use.
The Gen2's are great AR magazines. The Gen3's are very good AR magazines with the added benefit of also fitting some non-AR guns. I have both generations. Now, if magpul were to actually release the full slate of products they "introduced" at SHOT nine months ago, they'd earn some more of my dollars. Fact is, I'll probably buy one or two of the D-60's when they come out regardless, which won't be cheating on NHMTG (my absolute 'first love' of AR mags...  ) Yes, I know the story of "we want to make sure they're right", and that sounds all well and good. But that's supposed to be done before a new-product roll-out, not after. When they are finally released, I would absolutely LOVE to be able to write a glowing review of them on this and other boards. Maybe make other manufacturers step up their game in the process. But can't do it if they don't exist. 
|
|
Quoted:
Magpul = Hooker  Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You really cant cheat on a consumable product, of which there are millions of versions exactly like yours. Its like cheating on a hooker. Fair point and quote worthy. Well, i wouldn't say magpul is the hooker, rather, ar15 magazines in general. Cheap, available, do their job, and if it gets broken, get a new one
|
|
Quoted:
Does anyone feel like they are cheating on Magpul when they think about buying a Lancer magazine? I've had a few 20 round smoke Lancers sitting in my cart for a few weeks, but I just can't seem to pull the trigger. I'm a faithful MagPul believer, and it just seems wrong to buy another polymer mag. To keep this technical: any positives or negatives to getting some Lancer mags over getting some Gen3 20 round mags? It was difficult for me, to be honest. I think the world of MagPul, and have tremendous respect for them. As a product development professional myself - these guys set the bar, no other company in our industry has my respect like MagPul has. Probably a little over-statement, but I consider them the Steve Jobs/Apple of our industry. You can't deny these guys come out with amazing products and are game changers. The industry is what it is, because of MagPul, and they are continuing to come out with excellent products. However, there is an appearance that their material science has now been surpassed. Frankly, Lancer is making what I need and what I want. MagPul is still just making what I need. So, sadly, I'm now buying Lancer clear magazines. If MagPul ever figures out clear polymer chemistry as well as ETS apparently has, then I will be very interested. I know they claim such chemistry doesn't meet their standards. Sadly, I'm not seeing a lot of data supporting that claim - and a lot of postings and abuse commentary indicating the clear ETS mag is actually stronger than a non-clear PMag. Ball is in MagPul's court to publish a comparison showing that's not so (as in breaking ETS Mags while PMags Survive) - as no one is more open minded than me to see it. To address your specific question - the reason you should buy Lancer 20's is because if you ever shoot service rifle competition (and they make curved legal), you will be expected to load 2 rounds in one magazine, and 8 rounds in another. You are expected to load the 2 round magazine first, than reload with the 8 while under time constraint. If you have a clear magazine construction, you will visually be able to confirm the correct round count. You will also visually be assured you are grabbing the correct magazine in preparation and during the firing. You can obviously successfully compete with non-clear magazines - every shooter currently does so, as do I. But if given the choice, I would prefer to have clear - because more than once I've had that "well.. I think I loaded 8.." moment, and had to strip them out and reload again just to be sure. Just like every other competitor has had to do at least once. |
|
You summed up my feelings when I first posted quite well. Thanks.
Quoted:
It was difficult for me, to be honest. I think the world of MagPul, and have tremendous respect for them. As a product development professional myself - these guys set the bar, no other company in our industry has my respect like MagPul has. Probably a little over-statement, but I consider them the Steve Jobs/Apple of our industry. You can't deny these guys come out with amazing products and are game changers. The industry is what it is, because of MagPul, and they are continuing to come out with excellent products. However, there is an appearance that their material science has now been surpassed. Frankly, Lancer is making what I need and what I want. MagPul is still just making what I need. So, sadly, I'm now buying Lancer clear magazines. If MagPul ever figures out clear polymer chemistry as well as ETS apparently has, then I will be very interested. I know they claim such chemistry doesn't meet their standards. Sadly, I'm seeing a lot of data supporting that claim - and a lot of postings and abuse commentary indicating the clear ETS mag is actually stronger than a non-clear PMag. Ball is in MagPul's court to publish a comparison showing that's not so (as in breaking ETS Mags while PMags Survive) - as no one is more open minded than me to see it. To address your specific question - the reason you should buy Lancer 20's is because if you ever shoot service rifle competition, you will be expected to load 2 rounds in one magazine, and 8 rounds in another. You are expected to load the 2 round magazine first, than reload with the 8 while under time constraint. If you have a clear magazine construction, you will visually be able to confirm the correct round count. You will also visually be assured you are grabbing the correct magazine in preparation and during the firing. You can obviously successfully compete with non-clear magazines - every shooter currently does so, as do I. But if given the choice, I would prefer to have clear - because more than once I've had that "well.. I think I loaded 8.." moment, and had to strip them out and reload again just to be sure. Just like every other competitor has had to do at least once. Quoted:
Quoted:
Does anyone feel like they are cheating on Magpul when they think about buying a Lancer magazine? I've had a few 20 round smoke Lancers sitting in my cart for a few weeks, but I just can't seem to pull the trigger. I'm a faithful MagPul believer, and it just seems wrong to buy another polymer mag. To keep this technical: any positives or negatives to getting some Lancer mags over getting some Gen3 20 round mags? It was difficult for me, to be honest. I think the world of MagPul, and have tremendous respect for them. As a product development professional myself - these guys set the bar, no other company in our industry has my respect like MagPul has. Probably a little over-statement, but I consider them the Steve Jobs/Apple of our industry. You can't deny these guys come out with amazing products and are game changers. The industry is what it is, because of MagPul, and they are continuing to come out with excellent products. However, there is an appearance that their material science has now been surpassed. Frankly, Lancer is making what I need and what I want. MagPul is still just making what I need. So, sadly, I'm now buying Lancer clear magazines. If MagPul ever figures out clear polymer chemistry as well as ETS apparently has, then I will be very interested. I know they claim such chemistry doesn't meet their standards. Sadly, I'm seeing a lot of data supporting that claim - and a lot of postings and abuse commentary indicating the clear ETS mag is actually stronger than a non-clear PMag. Ball is in MagPul's court to publish a comparison showing that's not so (as in breaking ETS Mags while PMags Survive) - as no one is more open minded than me to see it. To address your specific question - the reason you should buy Lancer 20's is because if you ever shoot service rifle competition, you will be expected to load 2 rounds in one magazine, and 8 rounds in another. You are expected to load the 2 round magazine first, than reload with the 8 while under time constraint. If you have a clear magazine construction, you will visually be able to confirm the correct round count. You will also visually be assured you are grabbing the correct magazine in preparation and during the firing. You can obviously successfully compete with non-clear magazines - every shooter currently does so, as do I. But if given the choice, I would prefer to have clear - because more than once I've had that "well.. I think I loaded 8.." moment, and had to strip them out and reload again just to be sure. Just like every other competitor has had to do at least once. |
| You should cheat on Magpul. Pretty soon they'll be coming out with another generation of Pmags, making your gen 2 and 3 obsolete. If they leave room for improvement, then why settle for less? They are still tweaking the magic polymer formula and they haven't perfected it yet, which makes me believe a new generation will come out. I say this because every generation has had its problems. I like Magpul but I'm done buying their mags. They have excellent customer service so I'm not worried if they break. |
|
Quoted:
It was difficult for me, to be honest. I think the world of MagPul, and have tremendous respect for them. As a product development professional myself - these guys set the bar, no other company in our industry has my respect like MagPul has. Probably a little over-statement, but I consider them the Steve Jobs/Apple of our industry. You can't deny these guys come out with amazing products and are game changers. The industry is what it is, because of MagPul, and they are continuing to come out with excellent products. However, there is an appearance that their material science has now been surpassed. Frankly, Lancer is making what I need and what I want. MagPul is still just making what I need. So, sadly, I'm now buying Lancer clear magazines. If MagPul ever figures out clear polymer chemistry as well as ETS apparently has, then I will be very interested. I know they claim such chemistry doesn't meet their standards. Sadly, I'm not seeing a lot of data supporting that claim - and a lot of postings and abuse commentary indicating the clear ETS mag is actually stronger than a non-clear PMag. Ball is in MagPul's court to publish a comparison showing that's not so (as in breaking ETS Mags while PMags Survive) - as no one is more open minded than me to see it. To address your specific question - the reason you should buy Lancer 20's is because if you ever shoot service rifle competition (and they make curved legal), you will be expected to load 2 rounds in one magazine, and 8 rounds in another. You are expected to load the 2 round magazine first, than reload with the 8 while under time constraint. If you have a clear magazine construction, you will visually be able to confirm the correct round count. You will also visually be assured you are grabbing the correct magazine in preparation and during the firing. You can obviously successfully compete with non-clear magazines - every shooter currently does so, as do I. But if given the choice, I would prefer to have clear - because more than once I've had that "well.. I think I loaded 8.." moment, and had to strip them out and reload again just to be sure. Just like every other competitor has had to do at least once. Quoted:
Quoted:
Does anyone feel like they are cheating on Magpul when they think about buying a Lancer magazine? I've had a few 20 round smoke Lancers sitting in my cart for a few weeks, but I just can't seem to pull the trigger. I'm a faithful MagPul believer, and it just seems wrong to buy another polymer mag. To keep this technical: any positives or negatives to getting some Lancer mags over getting some Gen3 20 round mags? It was difficult for me, to be honest. I think the world of MagPul, and have tremendous respect for them. As a product development professional myself - these guys set the bar, no other company in our industry has my respect like MagPul has. Probably a little over-statement, but I consider them the Steve Jobs/Apple of our industry. You can't deny these guys come out with amazing products and are game changers. The industry is what it is, because of MagPul, and they are continuing to come out with excellent products. However, there is an appearance that their material science has now been surpassed. Frankly, Lancer is making what I need and what I want. MagPul is still just making what I need. So, sadly, I'm now buying Lancer clear magazines. If MagPul ever figures out clear polymer chemistry as well as ETS apparently has, then I will be very interested. I know they claim such chemistry doesn't meet their standards. Sadly, I'm not seeing a lot of data supporting that claim - and a lot of postings and abuse commentary indicating the clear ETS mag is actually stronger than a non-clear PMag. Ball is in MagPul's court to publish a comparison showing that's not so (as in breaking ETS Mags while PMags Survive) - as no one is more open minded than me to see it. To address your specific question - the reason you should buy Lancer 20's is because if you ever shoot service rifle competition (and they make curved legal), you will be expected to load 2 rounds in one magazine, and 8 rounds in another. You are expected to load the 2 round magazine first, than reload with the 8 while under time constraint. If you have a clear magazine construction, you will visually be able to confirm the correct round count. You will also visually be assured you are grabbing the correct magazine in preparation and during the firing. You can obviously successfully compete with non-clear magazines - every shooter currently does so, as do I. But if given the choice, I would prefer to have clear - because more than once I've had that "well.. I think I loaded 8.." moment, and had to strip them out and reload again just to be sure. Just like every other competitor has had to do at least once. Thanks for the kind words -I addressed this in another thread but I will repost here in summary. To make a magazine more resilient to impact damage is relatively easy. You just use a softer material, or in technical terms you lose tensile strength (stiffer/ridged) to have the material bend and absorb more of the impact energy while still maintaining round rentention. Another way is to use softer material with a secondary support structure in the feed lip area. Many like this type of design and my advice is try everything and keep what suits your mission best. Other manufactures have different standards in terms of mission requirements that determine what level of product they are comfortable releasing. It is our view that PMag reliability comes from specific geometry that is consistently maintained by high "tensile" strength (rigid) material. This concept is explained in detail in the Magpul Magazine Design Philosophies, as such we choose not reduce high tensile strength to make the body softer to absorb impacts better. We have good reason for this. The concept has been combat proven in 8 years of the GWOT, being voluntary fielded more than all other non USGI magazines combined and while the PMag will constantly increase in impact strength (through advancement in polymers) the high tensile strength will be maintained as the core fundamental the design. Durability is important but there comes a point of diminishing returns. The PMag M3 vs USGI testing (high speed video with live fire full auto testing) show real world durability examples. The key is the PMag IS far more durable than the USGI but more importantly it is FAR more reliable under all conditions. We only focus on durability as it affects real world reliability. Scientific reliability testing is both boring and expensive (we do a lot of it) and it is without a doubt the most important thing to look for in a magazine. But then again what do we know. |
|
Quoted:
You should cheat on Magpul. Pretty soon they'll be coming out with another generation of Pmags, making your gen 2 and 3 obsolete. If they leave room for improvement, then why settle for less? They are still tweaking the magic polymer formula and they haven't perfected it yet, which makes me believe a new generation will come out. I say this because every generation has had its problems. I like Magpul but I'm done buying their mags. They have excellent customer service so I'm not worried if they break. I'm waiting for the Gen5 . |
|
Quoted:
You should cheat on Magpul. Pretty soon they'll be coming out with another generation of Pmags, making your gen 2 and 3 obsolete. If they leave room for improvement, then why settle for less? They are still tweaking the magic polymer formula and they haven't perfected it yet, which makes me believe a new generation will come out. I say this because every generation has had its problems. I like Magpul but I'm done buying their mags. They have excellent customer service so I'm not worried if they break. I'd rather buy from a company that constantly improves their product. If they waited until it was perfect to release it, they'd never release anything. So, release the best available product now and continue to make improvements as new technologies and materials become available. Or be like so many other firearms companies that stagnate because they refuse to improve their product. Dammit it was good enough in 1980, it's good enough now. |
|
Quoted:
I'd rather buy from a company that constantly improves their product. If they waited until it was perfect to release it, they'd never release anything. So, release the best available product now and continue to make improvements as new technologies and materials become available. Or be like so many other firearms companies that stagnate because they refuse to improve their product. Dammit it was good enough in 1980, it's good enough now. Quoted:
Quoted:
You should cheat on Magpul. Pretty soon they'll be coming out with another generation of Pmags, making your gen 2 and 3 obsolete. If they leave room for improvement, then why settle for less? They are still tweaking the magic polymer formula and they haven't perfected it yet, which makes me believe a new generation will come out. I say this because every generation has had its problems. I like Magpul but I'm done buying their mags. They have excellent customer service so I'm not worried if they break. I'd rather buy from a company that constantly improves their product. If they waited until it was perfect to release it, they'd never release anything. So, release the best available product now and continue to make improvements as new technologies and materials become available. Or be like so many other firearms companies that stagnate because they refuse to improve their product. Dammit it was good enough in 1980, it's good enough now. Yea that was just a non-nonsensical statement. All of them improve their products and switch over to updates, including Lancer. As well they should. |
|
Quoted:
Yea that was just a non-nonsensical statement. All of them improve their products and switch over to updates, including Lancer. As well they should. That's true to a point, but when someone introduces a new generation of magazines, claiming they're better than all previous gens, proven by years of pre-production testing and evalution, then immediately start having ongoing revisions to correct 'statistically insignificant' numbers of issues, that only occurs with certain ammo, that are 'not detrimental to the function of the magazine'... Just rubs me the wrong way. Especially when I'm one of the statistically insignificant that had problems that were detrimental to the function of the magazine. |
|
Quoted:
That's true to a point, but when someone introduces a new generation of magazines, claiming they're better than all previous gens, proven by years of pre-production testing and evalution, then immediately start having ongoing revisions to correct 'statistically insignificant' numbers of issues, that only occurs with certain ammo, that are 'not detrimental to the function of the magazine'... Just rubs me the wrong way. Especially when I'm one of the statistically insignificant that had problems that were detrimental to the function of the magazine. Quoted:
Quoted:
Yea that was just a non-nonsensical statement. All of them improve their products and switch over to updates, including Lancer. As well they should. That's true to a point, but when someone introduces a new generation of magazines, claiming they're better than all previous gens, proven by years of pre-production testing and evalution, then immediately start having ongoing revisions to correct 'statistically insignificant' numbers of issues, that only occurs with certain ammo, that are 'not detrimental to the function of the magazine'... Just rubs me the wrong way. Especially when I'm one of the statistically insignificant that had problems that were detrimental to the function of the magazine. It happens. End user testing will always reveal things that no amount of company testing could possibly foresee. |
|
Quoted:
It happens. End user testing will always reveal things that no amount of company testing could possibly foresee. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yea that was just a non-nonsensical statement. All of them improve their products and switch over to updates, including Lancer. As well they should. That's true to a point, but when someone introduces a new generation of magazines, claiming they're better than all previous gens, proven by years of pre-production testing and evalution, then immediately start having ongoing revisions to correct 'statistically insignificant' numbers of issues, that only occurs with certain ammo, that are 'not detrimental to the function of the magazine'... Just rubs me the wrong way. Especially when I'm one of the statistically insignificant that had problems that were detrimental to the function of the magazine. It happens. End user testing will always reveal things that no amount of company testing could possibly foresee. This is part of the Japanese manufacturing concept of CI (Constant Improvement) or how I was taught, CANI (Constant And Neverending Improvement). The flip side of this is never releasing a product because it is never ready or never changing a product once released despite new information to improve it. So far over 8 years of the PMag release we have had just 3 major revisions (Gen1, MRev and M3) all other changes we small to medium tweaks based upon primarily GWOT feedback and advances in material and processing technology. |
|
Quoted:
That's true to a point, but when someone introduces a new generation of magazines, claiming they're better than all previous gens, proven by years of pre-production testing and evalution, then immediately start having ongoing revisions to correct 'statistically insignificant' numbers of issues, that only occurs with certain ammo, that are 'not detrimental to the function of the magazine'... Just rubs me the wrong way. Especially when I'm one of the statistically insignificant that had problems that were detrimental to the function of the magazine. Quoted:
Quoted:
Yea that was just a non-nonsensical statement. All of them improve their products and switch over to updates, including Lancer. As well they should. That's true to a point, but when someone introduces a new generation of magazines, claiming they're better than all previous gens, proven by years of pre-production testing and evalution, then immediately start having ongoing revisions to correct 'statistically insignificant' numbers of issues, that only occurs with certain ammo, that are 'not detrimental to the function of the magazine'... Just rubs me the wrong way. Especially when I'm one of the statistically insignificant that had problems that were detrimental to the function of the magazine. Samuse, I'm a newb, need to start buying mags - would you please elaborate on the kinds of issues you've had with the Gen 3 Magpuls? |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cheating on Magpul... (Page 1 of 2)
AR Sponsor