Plastic AR-15 Magazines

[mljdeckard]

Especially in training units, using blanks. They all suck.

 

[Al LaVodka]

The metal throw away design of aluminum M16 magazines has been a problem area since it's introduction. And since most stoppages are directly related to bad feeding, in tactical competition, few depend on them. In combat, even more so, since the introduction of the Pmags.

It didn't help to expand the capacity to thirty rounds as the straight mag well design can't accomodate the curve required to stack them. 30 rounders are not optimally designed and have that problem added as a potential malfunction. The mags use a spiral wound spring with the feed pressures at marginally acceptable levels that really do cause excessive friction when loaded fully.

Many shooters work through a pile of metal magazines sorting out the bad ones and marking them. They often go straight to the next gun show for disposal. Army surplus is the same, why sell a good serviceable magazine? What leaves the inventory are regarded as junkers not fit for combat.

Many new shooters buy these and then load them up to full capacity, which binds the older followers because of inefficient design and high spring pressures. Leaving them loaded spreads the feed lips, and the mag simply won't work correctly. The uneducated naked eye can't tell one from the other. The weapon gets the blame, tho, the stupid thing really is a jammomatic like Uncle Fred said.

It's pretty easy to see how the public is taken advantage of, distorts their misunderstanding, and perpetuates a falsehood.

Since unscrupulous people can and will dump their bad magazines for profit, the best attitude in buying them is that they are all damaged and won't work unless refit and repair is planned first. Those that do that and competently repair and service them have few problems. Some even crush the ones that won't work right at all, collectible, pre-ban, AWB, or not.

Maybe we should all start treating magazines as our life depended on them, then maybe they'll work when we need them.

Pmags don't dent, have low friction internal surfaces, anti tilt followers that don't bind, won't corrode internally, and are designed to be stored with no pressure on the feed lips. They have earned their rep as a superior magazine.

Stop it -- you're scaring me!

:_(

Al

 

[RyanM]

I've said this before, but if you ask me, 99% of the reason why there's such a difference in reliability reputation between the AK-47 and AR-15 is the magazines. AK-47s use steel magazines with ridiculously thick feed lips, that practically require deliberate sabotage to damage. The inside of the magazine has a continuous curve, and the followers of every AK mag I've ever had would not tilt one single degree. That allows them to use thumb-bustingly heavy springs without any binding whatsoever.

Aluminum mags for the AR have feed lips of the same gauge as the body, so they're about half as thick as an AK mag's feed lips, in addition to being much weaker material to start. Add to that the fact that even "anti-tilt" followers tilt somewhat, and ARs definitely have more of a propensity to bind. The mag spring is considerably weaker (AK mags are seriously torture to load), yet the design also makes it bind more. Tapered rounds in a straight magazine is probably a mistake. Tapered rounds in a partially-straight, partially-curved magazine is definitely a mistake.

Pmags, on the other hand, are stronger, way easier to tell when they're damaged or out of spec (the cover doubles as a feed lip gauge), can be stored without stress on the feed lips, and if you open one up and look inside, they've got a continuous internal curve, allowing the use of a practically tilt-free follower. It took a long time for AR magazines to catch up, but as other people have pointed out, adoption of Pmags in the military and in competition, have reduced the occurence of jams dramatically.

Neither the AR-15 design nor the direct impingement system are particularly finicky or dirt-sensitive. The AR-15 design likes to be run wet, which isn't the same as clean. Most failures can be traced to the magazine, and it's pretty plain why aluminum AR-15 mags are, on average, much lower quality than AK mags.

 

[greyling22]

speaking of pmags, anybody know of a great place to buy them? and by great place I mean way cheap including the shipping price.

 

[basicblur]

Have done a lot of searching as I made a couple of orders for 'em over the last few months. Can't help you on anything but the 30-rd standard black mags-cheapest price I found was Shooters Connection 10-pack. Everywhere else I checked wanted MSRP for PMAGs.
I wasn't interested in the window version-Shooters Connection has the 10-pack for $119.99 and he's reasonable on his shipping. Never hurts to find at least one friend to split your shipping costs!
I also specified in the comments box that they make sure ALL are "M" version (the latest).

BTW-he also seemed to have some nice/reasonably priced? target pasters-got a box roll of black, white, and tan pasters and an Ed Brown plastic 1911 bushing wrench from 'em also.

 

[Boba Fett]

speaking of pmags, anybody know of a great place to buy them? and by great place I mean way cheap including the shipping price.

http://dsgarms.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=1668 $11.21 - never used them, but really low price.

http://www.calssportingarmory.com/Magpul_MAG211_PMAG_30Rd_Magazine_Black_p/mgmpi211blk.htm $12.31 - I'm pretty sure I've ordered from them in the past


Other than that, hunt for them at the gun shows. You can find them right around $12 with ease.

And as with any internet buying, check that they have them in stock before you buy. Also, compare your shipping charges. One place might be $11 + 8 S&H while the other place is $14 and $2 S&H.

 

[Welding Rod]

http://www.44mag.com/

I have had really good experiences here.

 

[Ben86]

I've heard people mentioning feed lips being spread out with magazine storage. Is that long term storage? I cycle my HD magazine once a week with another, it's a 30 round mag that I only load to 20. Is this going to mess up the feed lips?

 

[Tirod]

RyanM did a good job comparing to the AK mags. The difference between them is night and day. AR aluminum mags were originally intended to be shipped loaded and discarded when empty, with truckloads handed out on the battle line. AK mags were made to be issued three to a soldier and used for their entire enlistment, that's all they would likely see.

Fast forward to today, extended storage is noted by Magpul to cause spread feed lips. If this is marketing or knowledge of their product, I don't know. As for drop free, some users simply sand them down to size. I suspect Magpul makes them as thick as specs allow because the material does swell and isn't as stiff as desired. Glock has metal inserts in their mags precisely to make them drop free.

Apparently the Army didn't accept the idea of storing loaded magazines for immediate issue. I never saw that line number come up in Ammo Supply training, and suspect it doesn't work real well. Instead, bandoliers come with stripper clips and mag loaders. As RyanM pointed out, the feed lips are thin, and mag spring pressures are high with the spiral wound coil. Lots of us never put in the last two rounds precisely because they are so hard to do.

 

[RyanM]

I've heard people mentioning feed lips being spread out with magazine storage. Is that long term storage? I cycle my HD magazine once a week with another, it's a 30 round mag that I only load to 20. Is this going to mess up the feed lips?

I know for sure that happened a lot, early on in Vietnam with the 20-rounders. The modern aluminum 30 rounders are supposed to use a "reinforced" feed lip design, but they're still aluminum, and can still spread over a long period of time.

With Pmags, I wouldn't worry about it. Feed lip creep has yet to actually happen, as far as I know. If you're using aluminum mags, keep the mag loaded with 28 rounds inserted in the gun, and feed lip spreading won't be an issue (the bolt carrier pushes the rounds down a little).

If you're using Pmags, keep them loaded with 30 and keep the impact covers on, and practice removing them. If you're using a carry handle, you can use that to pop them off really fast.

-----

Fast forward to today, extended storage is noted by Magpul to cause spread feed lips.

I think someone lied to you. I've heard that sort of thing a lot from the aluminum junkies, who claim the impact cover indicates a "design failure" or something. I guess you've talked to them, too.

Here's what Magpul and their representatives have had to say on the subject:

"Final answer, straight from the horse's mouth: the impact/dust cover is just a precaution. The PMAG polymers are very new, so we didn't have the luxury of 50+ years of material T&E like aluminum and steel magazine manufacturers. Are they necessary? I suppose that depends - if you're going to use your magazines as paperweights for the next 20 years, there really isn't any reason not to use the impact cover. If you're actually going to use your PMAGs as intended, the cover is probably overkill.

Personally, I have snap covers on my stockpiled mags, and no covers on the mags I shoot. Like I said before - we have some of the first prototypes sitting at the office, loaded with 30 rounds, no snap cover, and it's been almost 18 months. If your PMAG feedlips creep, send them back - I want to see it, because you'll be the first to report such a problem."

"Testing shows feed lip strength and creep resistance (deformation over time) are superior to those of other plastic magazines and USGI magazines. Various testing has shown minimal wear after firing tens of thousands of rounds."

"The PMAG™ was designed for long-term loaded storage with the impact cover in place. First, the impact cover prevents feed lip creep (when stored over 1 year). Second, the high-quality, heat-treated, stainless steel spring resists spring relaxation (weakening over time). Note: Spring relaxation occurs in all springs under prolonged loading. Spring design, material, quality of manufacture, magnitude of compression, temperature and many other variables can affect spring relaxation rates. Testing has shown the spring used in the PMAG™ does not experience detrimental levels of relaxation from prolonged compression."

"The impact cover locks into geometry on the front and back of the magazine exterior and presses down on the top round of the loaded stack. This redirects the pressure from the rounds that would normally deform plastic feed lips over time and cause magazine-related failures-to-feed."

People like to misinterpret that very last one, ignoring the earlier part that says Pmags are more resistant to feed lip creep than aluminum ones. Anything can bend if you apply enough force, and the impact cover really doesn't seem to be necessary. It's just a paranoid precaution.

 

[jobu07]

Part of the clue as to why M16 service magazines are so crummy after a long life - they are disposable end items in the supply system. That's also why you see so many on the market (i.e. some supply NCO grabs 10 or 20 boxes of these from the warehouse and sells them to a distributer). In any event, they are a disposable end item with no accountability on them at all. Once they wear out you throw them out.

 

[Welding Rod]

they are a disposable end item with no accountability on them at all.

Not in the US Army I served in. The only items I can readily think of that didn't have accountability were ball point pens and copy paper. We had to account for every mile driven on our vehicles, rolls of tape, screwdrivers...... it seemed more time was spent accounting for equipment than using it.

On topic, nothing wrong with aluminum mags as long as you toss them when they need to be tossed... same goes for PMAGs though.

 

[Al Thompson]

W. Rod, yeah, magazines are Class 9 items. Few people know that though...