Spare us your Call of Duty “expertise.”

Leave magazines on the ground and guess what? You don’t have any magazines at the end of the day. Just getting enough in the first place is an ongoing problem for soldiers. Abandoning magazines as you advocate would get you brought up on charges in any competently led Army unit.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

First of all, the body and floorplate is exactly the same that Brownell’s has always used on their mil-spec magazines.
But more importantly is that it’s not just the follower that’s different in the “new” magazines but the magazine spring as well. The tan follower will ONLY work with the new spring and the old style spring will NOT work with the new follower.

Up until now the magazine spring was fifteen coils of approximately 1.675″ x 0.675″.
The new spring is fourteen coils of approximately 1.955″ x 0.500″.

The old springs were contained in the rear of the mag body and the large rib (groove?) in the side kept the coils from moving forward.
But new spring is narrower and longer so its coils are free to float anywhere inside the entire body.
The new spring is attached to the follower in the middle as opposed to closer towards the rear as before. The decreases the propensity for the nose of the follower to tip downwards as compared to the green GI follower.

The biggest differences in the follower are:
the first round (when fully loaded) now feeds from the left.
the shape of the “cartridge” molded in the follower
the sides are reshaped to increase stability at the tip of the follower while making it muck easier to remove/replace for cleaning.
the front and rear skirts are now full width like the Magpul followers but they have zero taper so there is no side-to-side tipping.

So the new follower seems to offer all of the benefits of the Magpul design with the added benefit of better distribution of spring force.

However I have noticed one flaw that keeps it from being the best.
Both the black and green USGI followers as well as the black/gray British and all versions of the Magpul followers have a narrowed vertical channel in the front skirt. The channel creates two bearing edges at the front corners that reduce the contact surface.
The new tan follower has a full width, completely flat front skirt. If the magazine gets dirty either from outside dirt or from powder/gas fouling friction will therefore increase.

So far I’ve experienced zero malfunctions with any of the five I own.
When new they felt smoother than both GI green and Magpul followers both when loading and when just pushing the follower down with my fingers. The tan followers depressed easily and there was zero feeling of any tipping in any direction. In fact I took a long 0.25″ dowel and pushed down from the very front of the follower and could easily push it to the bottom and then back up with no binding whatsoever anywhere.
However, after about 20 loadings and firings each they no longer feel any smoother than any of my well used Magpul replacement followers. And you can see rub marks on the front skirt caused by friction inside the magazine body.

So while I really do like the new spring (especially its new attachment point) and the ease of follower removal/replacement is great I don’t see all the greatness previously bantered about by PM Soldier Weapons.

If Magpul would incorporate the new spring (and attachment point) in it’s replacement followers it would be the hands down best available.

Just my observations and opinions. YMMV

Please rate this comment: 1  0

I could care less how many rounds you have put down range. Unless those rounds have been put down range “in combat” then they don’t mean nothin.

Yeah, Pmags are great. But, keep them at the range. They don’t belong in the field. USGI mags are the only thing that should be used in the field. Besides, when in combat, you drop your mag on the ground and leave it, and keep moving. You don’t go around policing up empties in combat. They are expendable. The whole purpose of a USGI mag is to load and use once, drop the empty on the ground. If you can possibly recover and reuse a mag, that’s nice. But, not neccessary.

There is no place in combat for a dust cover on a magazine. If there was, it would have been used a long long time ago. Keep your pmags, and pmag dust covers at home where they belong. They don’t belong in combat.

Mutt

Please rate this comment: 0  2

Because they probably convinced themselves that it would be better to just steal the design and switch the molded bullet from the right to the left. Seriously, think about it. That molded bullet has been on the right side for how many years? And when they make their “own” anti-tilt follower, they switch it to the other side? Pretty obvious that they are trying to avoid patent violation issues.

Please rate this comment: 2  0

That a COTS item was already available, but your staff decided to develop its own as a copy so that pats on the back, bonuses, and patents could be awarded is inexcusable. Perhaps the civilian crew needs to be reminded that we are a military at war, and the time saved may have meant lives saved.

Please rate this comment: 1  0

Regards & God bless our troops,
Hotgun

Please rate this comment: 0  2

Really? What do you consider accurate enough? Is accurate down to ten-thousandths of an inch (.0001″) accurate enough? That’s the measurement precision (and arguably accuracy) of tools I own, and my machine tools are far from high quality enough to be considered for use in a commercial shop, although they can be made as accurate with correct set-up.

Please rate this comment: 1  0

Hotgun, you are on target! Our Improved Magazine has been thoroughly tested in every environmental condition for the last several years. We have fired 40,000+ rounds through them, filmed their performance with high speed cameras, and did things to them to try and make them fail. Bottom line, these Improved Magazines offer a 50% reduction in the risk of a magazine related weapon stoppage over our previous Green follower magazines. P-mag, H+K, and others may have “tested” their magazines, but no one has the resources to test the way we do. When an Improved Magazine is fielded from my office (along with all the other kit we provide) there is a commitment and promise to our Soldiers that it will serve them extremely well in combat. The other manufactures of magazines (commercial magazines) usually will not or can not make this promise because of all the unknowns their magazines will face in battle.

As a side note, our Improved Magazines (with the tan, anti-tilt, follower) were developed a few years before similar magazines hit the market. The reason our magazines are only now available is due to the extensive testing regime we must put all of our equipment through. And it is a good thing we do, because there are many commercial magazines that our soldiers bought “off the shelf” that are starting to give them problems. More on this in the future.

For all Soldiers in OIF or OEF, be sure to keep your eyes open for the Armed Forces Network (AFN) Infomercial due out at the end of this month. You will actually learn valuable information on your Improved Magazine and where they are being issued in theater. Also you can log onto the PEO Soldier Web site to learn more about the magazine, new weapons, night vision devices, and body armor that we are fielding. Thank you for your time and keep up the fight!

Chris Lehner
LTC, SF
PM Individual Weapons

Please rate this comment: 1  1

Storing the “cover” on the base sounds good…except, it needs to be removed and stored prior to use. How does the soldier know it will soon be needed, then remove/store the cover.

More magazine choices are good for a commercial consumer….let them choose it if they want.

BUT, our military should only be using fully tested and approved products. I know they’ve been down this road before.

Regards,
Hotgun

Please rate this comment: 0  1

On the new Rev-M P-Mags they are able to rest comfortably on the bottom of the magazine.

When discussing the effects of long term storage one cannot compare a double stack rifle caliber magazine against a single stack pistol caliber magazine. The stresses on the double stack rifle magazines greatly exceed the stresses incurred by a single stack pistol magazine.

The most common damage to magazines in a combat environment seems to occur when they are dropped while fully loaded. Which is why there have been so many torture-test articles written recently that focus on dropping loaded mags from realistic heights (such as from the back of a truck).

In actual use as well as these torture tests the latest generation of polymer magazines all seem to perform as well or slightly better than USGI aluminium magazines.

There is nowadays ample photographic proof that some US Troops ARE using P-Mags and if first person reports on several forums can be believed they seem to be performing admirably.

The best feature of any polymag is its ability to be constructed with a continuous curve in its inner dimensions. It’s a well known fact that the 5.56 round feeds much better from a curved magazine than it does from a straight one and the curved-to-straight transition has always been a problem area for all of the Stoner designed rifles. Heck-fire it was a problem way back with the M2/M1 Carbine. What the hell were they thinking? Didn’t history teach them anything? Anyway, the smoother feed geometry available from a molded magazine is something that is nearly impossible to achieve with any metal magazine that will fit inside of an AR-15 magazine well.

The truth is that there are good polymags and bad (read poorly designed/produced) polymags. Just as there some really bad aluminium and steel mags out there too. (And just how some of these companies stay in business simply amazes me.)

“mags made of steell would make some differnce…?”

Yes steel mags may be stronger but they also weigh considerably more.
That’s why polymer mags are gaining such popularity even though there seems to be a surge in black coated stainless steel magazines from several reputable companies. If weight doesn’t matter, then quality steel mags can be a very good choice. I especially like the PRI “waffle” mags and, so far, the Korean Mariners (HK clones) seem to be great.

The biggest problem I see from the latest high quality polymags is their size. Most of them are longer than USGI (a trait shared by the HK Mariner and Cammenga Easy Mags) and as a result those mag pouches with flaps just might not close over them. For instance the USGI MOLLE-II three pocket, six mag bandoleer won’t even begin to fasten over ANY mags that are the least bit larger than USGI 30 rounders. Of course folks using Ranger floorplates on their USGI 30s have that length problem as well.
I think this is why so many of those who carry polymags (and ranger’plates) into harms way are carrying them in open top shingle pouches. With their open top and shock-cord retention, the added mag length doesn’t really matter.

Alas, several of the new mags, such as the Tapco and the Microtech E-4 have a much larger width that precludes their use is just about anything except a single shingle pouch. They are just too wide to fit two deep and still allow withdrawal without using a backhoe. I say just about anything because the lowly ALICE triple 30 belt pouch seems to hold three of any 30 round AR magazine available. At least the half dozen or so that I have, will easily hold (as well as close and latch) a trio of every brand of 30 round magazine I have. Including the Microtech E4s and Tapcos.
Users of the original stretch-to-fit type mag-pulls on their USGI mags know all to well about the width problems of certain pouches.

Personally I have, and use, polymags (from over a half dozen companies), aluminium mags and steel mags. I also have quite a few 20 round mags too. I feel they all have their place in the grand scheme of things. It’s up to each and everyone of us to determine which type is best suited for our own personal use.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

Yes, orlite magazines are terrible. PMAGs are a significant improvement over Orlite and thermold magazines and the two shouldnt be even categorized in the same universe. I favor Lancer magazines too, though i have only six polymer magazines (3 pmags, 2 lancers, and 1 tango down) and eighteen aluminum ones (all retrofitted with magpul GEN II & III followers of course).
I love the H&K magazines but they are sure expensive. Everybody take into consideration that magazines are disposable items to be replaced rather systematically.

Please rate this comment: 0  0