Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

AR-15 Magazine Reliability Poll

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Precision, Jun 8, 2011.

?

Which magazine functions the most flawlessly?

  1. U.S.G.I.

    30 vote(s)
    23.8%
  2. Lancer Systems L5 AWM ([url]http://lancer-systems.com/NEW_2011.html[/url])

    7 vote(s)
    5.6%
  3. Troy Industries BattleMag ([url]http://troyind.com/%20/troy-weapon-u...troy-battlemag[/url])

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. Magpul PMAG MagLevel ([url]http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG210/3[/url])

    83 vote(s)
    65.9%
  5. Other (sorry)

    6 vote(s)
    4.8%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Precision

    Precision member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2011
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    San Mateo, California
    This is purely a reliability poll, so try to put all logistics/economics aside; which magazine works the best? I know they're all great mags, but does one of them truly stand out?
     
  2. Davek1977

    Davek1977 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    2,538
    Pmags all the way if you want 100% reliability.... at least they get my vote
     
  3. Sport45

    Sport45 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    Messages:
    2,783
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    I have Stoner mags from Midway and Brownell's mags from ,well, Brownell's and they all seem to work fine with my White Oak uppers and Rock River lowers.
     
  4. lmccrock

    lmccrock Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    341
    Location:
    Red Rock, TX
    Both Pmags and USGI work equally well for me. No way to vote that, not enough experience with Lancer, but a sample size of 1 Lancer (20 rd) has been fine so far.
     
  5. kwelz

    kwelz Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,835
    Location:
    Henryville, IN
    I had been using PMAGs exclusively for training up till a month ago. I have now mixed about a dozen of the new lancers into my rotation. They really are an improved PMAG.

    The only weakness to the PMAG was really the feed lips. I had three break on me over the winter. While Magpul replaced them with no questions asked it did underline the problem. The lancers fix this by adding Steel reinforcement to the feed lips. So far I only have about 500 rounds through them but there have been no issues as off yet.

    I have heard people complain that the steel Will scratch up the inside of the magwell. But I am sure you can all guess my response to that.
     
  6. Zach S

    Zach S Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    5,533
    Location:
    Western NC
    I didn't vote, as I don't have experience with all of the mags listed.

    I've had no problems with USGI mags. I have a few PMags, but only to easily tell the difference in defense mags and range mags.
     
  7. Z-Michigan

    Z-Michigan Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,047
    Location:
    Michigan
    I have found total reliability with these mags:
    Magpul Pmag 30rd
    Lancer L5 (original type) 30rd
    TangoDown ARC 30rd

    I have some of the first Troy Battlemags to be sold retail, which I received middle of last week, and I really don't think ANYONE has enough time testing them to provide any meaningful comments on their reliability.

    The Lancer L5 AWM is probably an improved mag, but again, who has really tested them enough to say something meaningful?
     
  8. kwelz

    kwelz Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,835
    Location:
    Henryville, IN
    My main instructor has been running them pretty hard. I have ran mine a bit. So far they have held up VERY well. I have a 2 day class coming up in July that I hope will really put them through the wringer. I will let you know how they do!
     
  9. M1key

    M1key Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,537
    Location:
    SW
    I have some old, worn-out original Colt 20 and 30-rounders that still work fine. Of the scores of AR mags I currently own, only one (new 20 round GI) fails to function if loaded with more than 10-12 rounds. I would be willing to try the newer generation mags, but I have plenty invested in new GI contract ones and will wait until they wear out (if they ever do) before I buy any more. I did upgrade to Magpul followers..

    M
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jun 8, 2011
  10. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,269
    Location:
    28078
    Lancer L-5s have been the most rugged and reliable magazine that I have tried (and they come in 20s, which is a nice bonus). The steel feed lips makes the magazine far more durable than the competition, and does so at little extra cost.

    Others that have been 100% (until damaged, usually occurring at the feedlips) include PMags and USGI (to include Brownell's and NHMTG, amongst others, with the best being made by LaBelle and Adventureline). OTOH C-Products, Thermold, and H&K have proven to be mediocre at best; avoid anything ProMag at all cost!

    I haven't tried the Troy BattleMag, and doubt I will unless they pull their head out of their hindquarters and put out a 20rnd copy.

    WRT followers, I strongly prefer the CMMG stainless ones, as they feed "slicker" IME. They cannot be used in PMags, but work in USGI and Lancer L-5s (with a little modification to the follower) fine. Magpul followers are a decent alternative on applications that precludes the use of CMMGs, or if you don't want to make minor modifications for use in L-5s.

    :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2011
  11. Z-Michigan

    Z-Michigan Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,047
    Location:
    Michigan
    Look forward to it. As I said I've found the original L5 100% reliable, so they would have had to really screw things up to make the AWM version unreliable, but it is a fairly new item on the market. Not as new as my week-old (at best) Troy mags though.
     
  12. JAV8000

    JAV8000 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Messages:
    199
    Location:
    Ft. Riley, Kansas
    If you're in a sandy environment and expecting your mags to work under field conditions, USGI mags suck.....I know, I'm currently deployed in such an environment. We were recently issued PMAGs because of the issues regarding USGI mags and functionality in this particular fine-sand environment. The PMAGs work much better, zero tilt follower and the capacity to operate even when contaminated with talcum powder consistency sand. Now, the reality is that you're probably not in said environment, in which case USGI mags should work just fine. In the end, I've personally found that the PMAGs are best and more time tested than the newer entries.
     
  13. blackops

    blackops Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,238
    pmags...easy .
     
  14. Heretic

    Heretic Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    310
    Location:
    Iowa
    I'm sorry, I know it's just me, but I just can't do plastic mags. Or plastic frames for that matter. I use GI spec mags with Magpul anti-tilt followers and I haven't had a problem ever. Four of these mags are worn to the point they have very little finish on them, but they still work great!
     
  15. kwelz

    kwelz Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,835
    Location:
    Henryville, IN
    Heretic, nothing wrong with that at all. USGI mags work well enough for most.

    the biggest issue with magazines in the AR is that the platform was originally made for a 20 round mag. Hence the strait magwell. The 30 round mag necessitated a curved design. However it had to eventually go strait so it would fit into the magwell. Hence the problems.

    Newer plastic mags try to keep the bullets channeled better and it does help. But USGI mags have worked pretty well over the years too :)
     
  16. Carter

    Carter Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,434
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I love my pmags and standard mags I got from bravocompany (don't remember the manufacturer). The metal ones tend to pop out a lot faster though. They also are easier to double up on in mag pouches, but unless you're a soldier I don't really see that being much of an issue.

    The pmags are by far the easiest on the fingers when it comes to loading though.
     
  17. Z-Michigan

    Z-Michigan Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,047
    Location:
    Michigan
    And the other biggest issue is that the magazine was originally intended to be disposable, rather like M1 Garand clips. Mags would be made and loaded in the factory, shipped to troops as loaded mags, and tossed after use. Things have changed a little.

    This might help to explain why a platform that is so well engineered in most other ways has been struggling with the magazine forever. Notice that there are essentially no complaints about magazines for the AK47, FAL, M14, or G3, all of which went years on their original mag design, and the latter three of which are still using the original designs from +/- 50 years ago. (The AK100 series has gone to plastic magazines, still 100% compatible with the original design.)
     
  18. kwelz

    kwelz Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,835
    Location:
    Henryville, IN
    I actually completely forgot about that Z. But you are correct.
     
  19. LeonCarr

    LeonCarr Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Messages:
    3,819
    Location:
    At The Range
    Pmags all the way. IMO Pmags are to ARs what Wilsons are to 1911s. They flat out increase reliability of the platform.

    Just my .02,
    LeonCarr
     
  20. mr.trooper

    mr.trooper Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,829
    Location:
    Midwest
    I did a test a while back, where I soaked a bunch of mags in an ash/sand slurry, and then loaded and fired them

    I Tested P-mags, Lancers, CMMG 'Immortals', C-products USGI mags, and Brownells USGI mags. Springs, followers, and feed lips were all coated...NONE of them failed - and they were absolutely caked with nasty gritty crap, consisting of a wide range of particle sizes, inside and out.

    The moral, and truth, of the story is - Any high end mag is a good mag. Some people may occasionally find a brand of mag that their individual rifle doesn't like, but as long as you avoid "bargain brand" mags, it is simply not an issue.
     
  21. FlyinBryan

    FlyinBryan Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Messages:
    2,795
    Location:
    TEXAS
    i voted usgi mags. im sure the others are good too.

    i have 10(ish) 30rd usgi with no need to change.
     
  22. Zach S

    Zach S Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    5,533
    Location:
    Western NC
    I like having a few crap magazines around, for real practice clearing malfunctions.

    I have a couple of USA magazines for this purpose. I keep them separate from defense and range mags, until I go to the range, in which case they just get tossed in the bag.
     
  23. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,269
    Location:
    28078
    Well...in that case look no further than Pro-Mag. :D
     
  24. Dr.Rob

    Dr.Rob Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    14,852
    Location:
    Centennial, CO
    Zero issues with Colt Mags or P-Mags in 2 years of use. I can see the 'long term' issue of aluminum mags bending etc, where a plastic mag would just break.

    In some ways I see this as an advantage for plastic, ie if it's going to fail, you'll know it.
     
  25. Chris Rhines

    Chris Rhines Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,773
    Location:
    Potomac, Maryland - Behind enemy lines!!
    PMags work fine. I also have some USGI 30-rounders with Magpul followers, and some C-Products steel 30s with knockoff Magpul followers. They work fine, too.

    The 1st Gen Lancer magazines gave me some trouble with my 77grn. match loads, which are a little long (2.255" OAL, still just within spec.) The Lancer AWMs don't seem to have this problem, although I don't have any live-fire time with them. Yet.

    -C
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page