Lantac’s New Keyed Accessory Mount System

Lantac has released a promotional video for its new Keyed Accessory Mount System (KAM). This system competes directly with Magpul’s M-LOK and Vltor’s Keymod systems. Like M-LOK, and unlike Keymod, KAM is a direct-insert system:

As with rail systems over a decade ago, it’s likely that these rail attachment systems will be whittled down to one standard or de-facto standard system. I suspect the two systems designed with polymer parts in mind will have an advantage over Vltor’s Keymod, but Keymod is so far the best established of the three.

Thanks to Dale for the tip.

Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He is also the author of the original web serial Heartblood, which is being updated and edited regularly. He can be reached via email at


  • allannon

    To paraphrase the XKCD I posted last time: if you create a standard to overcome the weaknesses of two existing competing standards, you just end up with three competing standards.

    • Ethan

      Yo dawg, I heard you like standards…

    • MR

      Will these accessories fit an M-Lok base? (Handguard, etc.) If it’s “backwards compatible”, that may not be too bad. But if every system requires its own slot, tab, etc. measurement, that’s going to get annoying, fast.

      • Cymond

        At least the good news is that Impact Weapon Components has created a mount that can quickly adapt to attach to Keymod or M-Lok rails. I think they’re calling it ‘KML’.

        Hopefully other companies will create other convertible accessories.

  • An Interested Person

    Looks cool, but just a more complicated MLOK system. Not seeing what this does that MLOK does not.

    • TW

      The MLOK system relies on the cam nut stopping against the inside surface of the MLOK “slot” on the handguard. This allows for the possibility to damage the plastic or aluminum handguard (its easier on plastic, of course). This systems hardware turns and stops against the attached accessory rather than the handguard. The handguard is merely sandwiched in this system, instead of also providing anti rotation for the nuts, like MLOK. I guess it means you risk damaging the accessory instead of the handguard.
      Its cool, they’re all pretty cool in my opinion, for different reasons.

  • Vitsaus

    Oh look, another proprietary attachment system. I’m sure THIS one will totally take off.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      But it’s got none of the potential/money behind it that MLOK has, and none of the existing support that Keymod has! Skip right to Step 3 and profit!!!

  • JumpIf NotZero

    Lol, go home Lantac. You’re drunk.

  • Hrachya H.

    M-Lok seems to be simpler …

  • Dracon1201

    MLOK is moar bettar

  • ProdigalSon

    You know, it’s times like these when I think the firearms industry has stagnated. Very little has been made that is truly innovative. Things like this aren’t really new, or creative. They’re just rebranded and repackaged same-old-deal.

    The KRISS Vector is innovative. Bullpups were, when they first started coming out, innovative. 1913 rails were a massive forward step, giving real weight to the concept of modularity. But this? Not really innovative. Interesting, perhaps even useful (time will tell), but nothing really groundbreaking.

    • Vitsaus

      100% Agree. I will say that bullpups WERE innovative but now have been around so long that they should be the standard (and nearly are). Any non bullpup assault rifle is more or less a dinosaur.

      • I think the devil is in the details with bullpups. At the end of the day, how many proverbial paper cuts are you willing to endure to get that extra 150 ft/s velocity or 6″ shorter overall length?

        I used to be in your camp; bullpups are clearly better, I thought. I sort of came around to the idea that they’ve got a lot of baggage and pretty modest benefits, after everything shakes out.

        • lucusloc

          Two big issues that have not really been solved well in one package: truly ambidextrous shooting (i.e. being able to switch hands on the fly) and easy malfunction clearing. Both have been solved individually to greater or lesser degrees, but not together so far as I can tell.

          • The big picture is important to keep in mind: Choosing a bullpup design is more restricting to the designer. There’s less freedom to optimize for things like cost and weight. You can make a light, cheap bullpup, and the end user will hate it. You can make a light bullpup that the end user doesn’t hate, and it’ll cost more than a conventional. You can make a cheap bullpup the end user doesn’t hate, but it’ll be heavier than a conventional.

            I’m oversimplifying it, but the bullpup is so attractive because it’s one big fat raspberry on a bush with a bunch of tiny thorns.

          • lucusloc

            Lol, sounds like the old maxim: Fast, cheap, good. Pick any two. Seems like bullpup design has a few of those trifectas.

            Though to be fair, so do conventional designs, they are just seen as “default” and so we do not consider the tradeoffs as such.

          • There’s always tradeoffs; it’s like picking between two compact sedan’s: Both are gonna have you hunched over with your knees against your chest, but it’s a matter of degree.

            Bullpups are very confining in a lot of respects to the designer.

          • lucusloc

            To stick with this analogy I think consumers as a whole will not be happy with the compact until it has all the features and price of a full size, just in the smaller package. That is theoretically possible to do, but it is going to take a lot more time to get there.

          • And better materials science and manufacturing technology, too.

          • lucusloc

            Well yeah, I assumed that came with “time” 😉

        • Blake

          Depends on the bullpup…

          I’d much rather have a standard rifle than a run-of-the-mill old-school bullpup.

          But my brother’s Tavor handles really nicely & feels quite comfortable. The controls all seem to be in the right place, & the trigger feels just fine (pretty sure he’s put a mod kit in it).

          He’s also got a KSG, & that thing just rocks &ltgrin&gt.

    • I’m increasingly of the opinion that when they closed Springfield Armory they replaced a broken and ailing military small arms R&D and procurement structure with a ramshackle lashup that relies too heavily on the commercial market taking the initiative.

      • noguncontrol

        Which is a good thing.

        • I think the old structure couldn’t possibly continue. Sooner or later, a disaster (they thought of it that way then) like the M14 would come along and a major overhaul would have happened.

          What it got replaced with was clearly better, but I don’t think the conversion was complete. I think a lot of institutional knowledge in both testing and design was lost.

    • RealitiCzech

      There haven’t been many firearms innovations since the 1920s. The biggest ones in the last 50 years have been in optics (like red dots and absurdly rugged ACOGs) and improved ergonomics.
      Some current ‘innovations’ are minor incremental changes, others are simply old technology marketed as cutting-edge.

      • Don

        The biggest innovation came from Glock, they introduced the world to the plastic framed firearm. Now the AR platform is starting to follow in it’s footsteps.

        Next up would have to be the smart weapon formats like the TrackingPoint Precision-Guided Firearm which is now available in civilian rifles. Or firearms with electronic safety devices on them. You can also add laser aiming devices and red dot scopes / sights.
        But majority of the firearm innovations have come in the form of new metals and alloys used in producing firearms, just look at how much lighter and stronger they are now. Don’t forget the carbon fiber barrels that are starting to become more common place. That and the manufacturing processes have improved ten fold. Manufacturers are producing firearms which have tighter tolerances helping create more accurate firearms.
        And then finally we have ammo… Ballistics are constantly improving due to both bullet design and powders being used. Then look at all the new calibers that keep popping up…

    • xhln

      The Russians have been very creative since the beginning and never stopped innovating. Look at all their fancy recoil mitigation systems and self-contained suppressed cartridges, then look at America with their AR-15, AR-15 accessory, another AR-15 and then a brand new AR-15 (but with a piston this time!).

  • Don Ward

    I’m leery of buying any firearm accessory from a prescription drug company.

    Oh it’s, LANtac. Not ZANtac…


  • micmac80

    Altough Vltor Keymod has head start its the most limited of them all close spacing and reverse chamfer inside key holes kills utility in non metal aplications .M-Lock might be the best of the three .

    • Don

      What do you mean limited? I have been using Keymod on my AR’s since it has come out and it does everything every other platform does. Any metal and or non-metal accessory that you can get for the M-Lok platform I can get for the Keymod platform. Using a good GD&T system in the manufacturing process of each platform and all their accessories means the cost to produce each is virtually identical across the platforms. Next…

      • micmac80

        Limited as in technologically ,close spacing and reverse chamfer keyholes have much more limited options in plastic and carbon fiber handguard aplications

  • Bill

    Somebody remind me – why do we need another type of mounting system?

  • Treiz

    LOL! Even the screws are threaded wrong in the video. look at 1:39

    So, no, sticking with Mlok for now. Looks simpler, lighter, and stronger.

    • patrickiv

      I’m glad someone else caught that.

  • Blake
  • greasyjohn

    Either they aren’t joking or I’m just not laughin’

  • noguncontrol

    2 is 1 and 1 is none. so three is better. it means the market is healthy.

  • Leo Atrox

    This is great. The best of the various platforms, in my opinion. However, I’m just going to stick with the MIL-STD-1913 rail system until everyone else gets on the same page about what the new standard. I’m not about to put a bunch of money into a mounting system that stands a good chance of no longer be supported in a few years.