OilyPablo
Member
Nothing magical about them. Just common and standard. Easy to clean and service.
Glock Mags and Non-Glock Pistols
- Thread starter Onward Allusion
- Start date
- Status
For what it's worth, I will offer the following observation from RO'ing a couple thousand stage runs in USPSA at an indoor range over the past few years. This means watching people eject mags directly onto concrete floors, often with quite a few rounds inside the magazine, sometimes kicking the magazine by accident as they run, and slamming fresh mags in literally as fast as they can manage. IOW, fairly rough treatment.
Glock magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
S&W M&P magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
CZ magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
Tanfoglio/EAA Witness magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
Springfield XD magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
1911 single-stack magazines are somewhat tough, mostly can deal with rough treatment, and are only occasionally a source of malfunctions.
2011 (double-stack 1911-ish) magazines are temperamental.
Expressed alternatively, Glock magazines are good. So are the standard magazines for a bunch of guns.
Glock magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
S&W M&P magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
CZ magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
Tanfoglio/EAA Witness magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
Springfield XD magazines are fairly tough, take a pounding with ease, and are rarely a source of malfunctions.
1911 single-stack magazines are somewhat tough, mostly can deal with rough treatment, and are only occasionally a source of malfunctions.
2011 (double-stack 1911-ish) magazines are temperamental.
Expressed alternatively, Glock magazines are good. So are the standard magazines for a bunch of guns.
TruthTellers
member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 1,075
Own other guns that use Glock mags.tipoc said:
most other industries HAVE to use outside components.....otherwise your $15,000 fiesta would be a $200,000 fiesta....and there are multiple sources for automotive components, should a company decide their current vendor is turning out crap product.....you cannot compare the firearms and automotive industry.
the only other people making reliable glock mags, other than glock, is magpul (and even they are iffy right now)......so if glock starts selling crap mags, you are out of luck.
also a mag is not that taxing of a part to design and produce, that you need to outsource it........if you can design a firearm, you can design a Mag.....
There is nothing iffy about the Magpul Glock magazine.
And there are a metric crap load of Glock mags out there already.
the fact that the magpul mags have a polymer feedlips make them iffy in my book.....im sur they work fine for range use, but i wouldnt trust my life to them...
This seems... ironic when discussing a magazine to be used in a polymer-framed pistol.
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Most manufacturers do design their own mags. Without a working magazine the gun is useless.
Many, likely most, also contract out the production of those mags to companies that produce magazines, like Mec-Gar.
Also, I took a quick look at my Glock mags. The feed lips are not polymer, they are steel. I doubt they are polymer in Magpuls either.
tipoc
Last edited:
Well, standard AR magazines have metal bodies and feed lips. Magpul makes their AR magazines with polymer feed lips. Why would they approach pistol magazines differently? Especially for a magazine going into a gun made significantly out of polymer?
The AR15 magpul PMAGs seem to be pretty well proven, don't they?
Just what in the heck can we have against polymer magazines in 2016, exactly?
TruthTellers
member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2015
- Messages
- 1,075
There's a guy on youtube, scootch00, who did a pretty in depth review of the magpul mags and he thinks very highly of them.
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
If someone has a Mag-pul mag for Glocks maybe they can look at the "feed lips". Are they metal like Glock mags, or plastic?
No reason to speculate.
These "feed lips" are not like those of many other mags. I'm not saure that calling them lips is accurate. They are not lips per se. More guides. On Glock mags it is these metal guides which seem to do the work. On most metal mags the lips retain the round and hold it in position for the slide to feed them. Seems Glock does it a bit different. As I said earlier I'm no expert of course.
tipoc
No reason to speculate.
These "feed lips" are not like those of many other mags. I'm not saure that calling them lips is accurate. They are not lips per se. More guides. On Glock mags it is these metal guides which seem to do the work. On most metal mags the lips retain the round and hold it in position for the slide to feed them. Seems Glock does it a bit different. As I said earlier I'm no expert of course.
tipoc
Last edited:
I didn't realize we were speculating. They are polymer. Glock brand are polymer with a metal lining, PMAG are just polymer
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
I don't know...I haven't been paying attention to them. Not having one on hand I looked at pics. That's why I ask. It seems they are doing something different from the Glock mags though. A different geometry. The follower is of a different shape. So it seems that if they are not using metal in the mags they are doing something different than Glock. They are using a different method of retaining and presenting the round.
They aren't using a "lip" in the standard sense. A polymer standard lip would not work over time. But they have rethought the problem and are doing something differently. It is not simply a Glock mag in all plastic, it is a redesign, a different design. Better? I don't know.
tipoc
Magpul AR mags seem to stand up pretty well and they have polymer lips. Why is that different for a pistol magazine? I know one is 2-position feed and one is single-position feed, but I don't see why/how that would matter. What am I missing?
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Well, what I'm looking at is how the lips of a mag for the 1911, bhp, cz75 and others hold the round. A Glock mag acts similarly it appears. A thin (about .030" thick piece of hardened metal (I say hardened because the thin lips of original Colt mags were hardened as the softer steel spread outward too easily over time) holds the round in place with the strength of the lips against which the round is pressed. This holds the round down. While feeding the round glides along these metal lips. The pressure against the steel lips if upward and outward. I don't have a Magpul on hand to examine but from the pics it looks like it has no traditional lips but rather what looks like two thick rails that the round is contained by. A .030" thick piece of polymer would flex and wear too rapidly. So something else is being done.
At least it looks like that to my eye and I'm no expert here.
tipoc
At least it looks like that to my eye and I'm no expert here.
tipoc
ROAshooter
member
"There's a guy on youtube, scootch00, who did a pretty in depth review of the magpul mags and he thinks very highly of them."
well that settles it...if its on utube...it must be true.......
well that settles it...if its on utube...it must be true.......
Well, I don't think he's faking the things he shows on video. If you want to see the durability of the magazines and are unwilling or unable to spend $13-$15 to get one and test it, just watch somebody else put some through the paces on video.
It's also not hard to find people IRL and on forums or boards or blogs or YouTube who have put a decent number of rounds through the mags with great results.
I myself am only in the several hundred rounds area through one Glock PMAG, but it's perfect through those and I have no reason whatsoever to believe it won't continue in this manner
Onward Allusion
Member
THAT is one sweet pistol!
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Like I said I have paid no attention to pistol caliber ARs. It seems they are a growing sector of the market. Which makes sense as the market for pistol caliber carbines as a whole has been growing. Ken Hackathorn commented on this recently...
Apparently they bring inexpensive fun to the table. Lower cost means more practice, or at least more shooting. Something Hackathorn says in the next paragraph.
tipoc
Apparently they bring inexpensive fun to the table. Lower cost means more practice, or at least more shooting. Something Hackathorn says in the next paragraph.
tipoc
Sapper771
Member
I have 2 of the G17 Magpul mags and 3 of the G19 mags for evaluation purposes. I carry a G19 so they have gotten the most traffic. I have close to 1,000 rounds through the three Magpul Glock 19 mags. About 400 through the 2 G17 mags. Even when they are not in use, they have been left fully loaded, to see if the feed lips will crack.
I am still running them on the range, but I have had zero problems from them so far. There are a few good reviews on youtube.
ETS (Elite Tactical Systems, IIRC) are making Glock mags as well. They are made of a transparent polymer, you can visually see the rounds in the magazine. I have seen them priced a bit higher than Magpul but less than Factory. Waiting for a few to try out.
Last edited:
If they are anything like their AR mags they wont crack, they will just spread enough to no longer hold the round in place.
Not worth the 5 dollar savings in my book. Sure I would probably sing a different tune if there was a huge price savings.
I picked up a Kriss Vector specifically because it took Glock mags.
What??
- Status
