Why pmags

Not clean, not dirty, not with multiple types of currently issued ammo. Maybe extreme long term longevity in protected environments without rough handling, like non-maneuvering range use.

It's fine if someone "prefers" USGI, or any other mag, for form factor, fit in pouches, familiarity, or whatever. There's just not much of an argument that can be made based on feeding performance to support any choice other than PMAG GEN M3, especially with currently issued ammunition types. You guys would really swap out a whole batch of mags? Just like that? Honestly I haven't done it because I didn't think y'all would replace that many mags that aren't technically broke.

Do I need to mention you in a email or anything? Because I will definitely take you up on that offer. My sand Pmags have no issues seating on a closed bolt but all my Black M3s cannot be seated on a closed bolt all from the same batch, ordered at the same time.

It's also a issue I do not have on my M2 Pmags. Glad to. You're welcome to use my name and can tell CS to contact me if there are any questions, but shouldn't be a problem. There was a transition period as we modified all the molds, so you may have been in that timeframe. Yes, the slight difference in round stack between M2 and M3 that makes the M3 have a bit of an advantage in reliablility also allowed more freedom of the top rounds.

The little rib addition kept the reliability difference and made the mags act correctly regardless of ammunition specification. All mags have had the change for quite a while now, and third party testing had occurred both pre and post change with zero affect on reliability.

Is there a code on the wrapper that would indicate the affected batch? Feel free to respond via PM. I am wondering the same thing. I have a few boxes of M3 mags that I bought god knows when and would rather not cut them all open to check. That's excellent. I will be sending ya'll an email today about that.

Outstanding customer service. Also curious. Thanks Duane for the info. Thank you in advance, Duane. This is why I just keep coming back to Magpul over and over again. Just never fail CS. Your mags were worn out as they are a wear item.

The Military in general doesn't throw anything away. Had you have new mags, you wouldn't have had those issues. To the OP, which mag is "best" in your weapon depends on said weapon. Others work just fine. They work in every lower I own. C4 That is one variable that improves the function of GI mags.

A large portion of my metal GI mags have MagPul followers, so that further muddies the water as far as "which is best. Grant: you can probably clarify this since I think it was you who originally gave the explanation for it. No matter what mag you choose it is upon you to vet it before trusting it with your life. In my thread on USGI mags being the best, the empirical claim was based on a high-volume gun rental range, and his claim was based on use during firing, not on abuse and handling.

These were not factors because the range operators load the mags in the weapons for the customer to fire and retrieve them from the weapons when empty. It may very well be that PMags are more durable in an environment of abuse, and GI mags last longer from the standpoint of feeding wear if otherwise taken care of.

I agree with the member who posted that years down the road snuffies will be lamenting how unreliable PMags are just because the military refuses to throw anything out and their "bad" mags are actually "worn out" mags. I stick with GI mags for "serious" use since I know they will work in any lower, and I properly vet the ones that are intended for self-defense.

I'm also not afraid to throw out a worn or damaged mag. When some mags I own cost six to ten dollars apiece, I'm not afraid to trash them when they go bad.

Personally, and this no dig against MagPul, I won't trust PMags until there is proof of decades-old examples still being in service without cracks or degradation of the polymer, etc. I'm just old school enough to not put my trust in anything plastic not having long-term issues. So, bottom line: use the mags you want to use and take claims of which is the "best" with a grain of salt.

That's not every BCM lower. My BCM lower has no problem with any Pmags. That is one variable that improves the function of GI mags. Oh yeah I forgot. They worked great. As a point of clarification, the focus is military issue weapons with military issue ammunition.

The latest generations of aluminum magazines do not work well with MA1 in the M4. There are various companies that make similar USGI looking mags, but they can make whatever standard they want for springs, bodies, finishes, etc and don't necessarily meet the acceptance standard of true USGI contract mags. A bit of thread drift The bullet The bullet nose would hit the degree chamfer of the backside of the barrel. The chamfer would guide the nose into the chamber.

When the MA1 was adopted two problems came up due the the exposed steel tip of the bullet: 1 the aluminum portion of the feed ramp on the M4 and the upper receiver just below the ramps on the M16 were subjected to damage, 2 the degree chamfer was subjected to damage. See the images below. Also note that the M27 still see more impact on the rear face of the barrel than the M4 or M The problem s with the EPM is that even though they have copied our presentation angle after the test with A1, they left the body the same Now the stack doesn't sit right and binds worse around the dogleg, plus you lose nose pressure, etc.

Not so much in others for feeding, and forget legacy or specialty ammunition types. And, although it does less damage than the tan follower with A Plus, the aluminum actually has more problems than polymer with internal damage from the penetrator tips with respect to function.

USGIs also performed worse dirty As in the M3 had half the stoppages with high suppressed round counts. To think, if the just bit the bullet back in the s and relieved a tad from the front-bottom of the mag-well, they could have had a constant curve 30 round aluminum magazine Duane, don't think I was hating on your mags.

I still think y'all have the best mags on the market. Especially with the fix to the whole not seating on a closed bolt. The problem s with the EPM Great information. Thanks for the schooling. It is perfectly sized so that it cannot be inadvertently depressed. It allows the user to wipe down the components of the magazine and run a rag through the body.

The aluminum magazine is much harder to disassemble and often results in damage to the magazine on one or more of the four small aluminum tabs, which keep the magazine together. If any of the tabs are damaged, the magazine will come apart, normally at the most inopportune time. This is impossible with aluminum magazines and requires removing the magazine from the weapon and judging by weight to determine remaining ammunition available. The aluminum magazine design does not allow much compression when fully loaded and will often result in a magazine not being fully seated in the weapon and the magazine falling out while moving or after firing the first round.

The PMAG allows compression when fully loaded with 30 rounds and easy seating of the magazine with the bolt carrier forward, reducing the likelihood of the magazine not being fully seated.

The M SAW has a provision to take magazines instead of belts in an emergency, allowing members of the squad to supply ammunition for suppressive fire. Aluminum magazines are notorious for causing malfunctions when used in the M With aluminum magazines and the greater potential for misalignment of the cartridge to the chamber, this practice often leads to a malfunction.

It was nice to see Ruger provide a real magazine, and they definitely deserves a […]. You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. Thomas Ehrhart. Author of the white paper "Increasing small arms lethality in Afghanistan: Taking back the Infantry half-kilometer" Deployments to Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kosovo. This is the biggest reason why the PMags are so beloved. They work, and they work so dang well. They can be abused and used for years without issue. Drop em, kick, and occasionally clean them, and you are good to go. They feed reliable regardless of the condition, and it takes a lot of abuse to knock a PMag out.

PMags are heavy hitters and are designed inside and out to reliably feed thousands and thousands of rounds. The constant curve internal geometry ensures the ammo travels smoothly throughout the magazine. The follower is the portion that touches the ammunition and guides it upward. When the United States was just using the M4 and M16 series of rifles, things were easy. The problem is these other platforms have their quirks, especially in the magazine department. The Pmag Gen M3 has been designed and tested to work with all of these new platforms.

Beyond that, they even work with some foreign platforms like the British SA The internal design ensures smooth and reliable feeding. The exterior design is all about ergonomics and ensuring that reloads are easy and intuitive. The Pmag Gen M3 is heavily textured on the outside with a ribbed spine and curve.