Page 12 of 24 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 237

Thread: HK translucent polymer magazines

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,188
    Feedback Score
    0
    I would like 3 or 4, but I’ll let you early adopters wring them out first. To be fair you have to compare the price to an $18 gen3 windowed pmag, which isn’t that much less.

  2. #112
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,095
    Feedback Score
    7 (89%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pi3 View Post
    I would like 3 or 4, but I’ll let you early adopters wring them out first. To be fair you have to compare the price to an $18 gen3 windowed pmag, which isn’t that much less.
    I compare price wise to my Lancers which the opaque cost me $13 and translucent cost me $15 each.

    I just do not see these being $5-$7 better than my Lancers.
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant View Post
    Colt builds War Horses, not show ponies.
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    This is 2012. The world is going to end this December and people are still trying to debate the merits of piece of shit, cost cutting crap AR's. Really?

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    1,069
    Feedback Score
    0
    I received my 3 today, here are some pics in comparison to a Lancer AWM, and a Gen 2 M3 PMag


    It is a little taller than the PMag and AWM. A bit wider too.




    The spring is a little longer than the PMag or AWM. All three mags are pretty much brand new. The PMag has seen light use, so the spring might be slightly shorter. Spring tension is similar in all three mags.


    Nothing holds the spring to the follower.


    The feed lips are longer than the PMag or AWM


    If you look closely, the molding is complex




    The feed lips slightly taper towards the front. The rear is about the same thickness as a PMag.


    The mag body feels stiffer than the PMag. The texture of the plastic is identical to the AWM. It was harder to disassemble than either mag, but still reasonable.
    Last edited by P2000; 08-01-13 at 02:11.

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    987
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I have never had the above issues with my Lancer mags. I must have the new ones.

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    The Range
    Posts
    917
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Here's some more photos... I'll get some rounds through them this weekend....






  6. #116
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,762
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Mine arrived. I am not much impressed. When you fully load them, they "bow out" at the feed-lips, and if you pinch inward on the feed lips gently (no, no he-man crushing required to see this) they move quite a bit with a full stack pressing on them. Considering that there exists a tool for measuring the distance between feed-lips, this bothered me. So, I got my calipers out.

    Empty distance between feed lips:0.437" (measured at the very front)
    Loaded distance between feed lips: 0.455" (same measurement point)

    0.018" difference

    Placing the calipers down over the top of the magazine mid-mag, the loaded magazine measured 0.897" wide. After un-loading it, it measured wide. 0.879".

    0.018" difference

    Doing the same with the Gen 3 PMAG:

    Fed lip spread loaded:0.46"
    Fed lip spread unloaded:0.453"

    0.007" diference

    Width at mid-mag (top) loaded:0.893"
    Width at mid-mag (top) unloaded:0.889"

    0.004" difference

    *The rounds also "loaded easier" seemed more to "snap into the mag" much more authoritatively in the PMAG Gen 3 than the HK mag.

    Lancer L5 AWM:

    Fed lip spread loaded:0.898"
    Fed lip spread unloaded:0.886"

    0.012" difference

    Width at mid-mag loaded:0.904"
    Width at mid-mag unloaded:0.895"

    0.009" difference

    *The rounds also "loaded easier" seemed more to "snap into the mag" much more authoritatively in the L5 AWM than the HK mag.

    How does this translate in the real world? I don't know, but there are gauges that measure feed-lip gap for a reason, and the less "dynamic movement" of the feed-lips as the stack de-compresses, the better, I would think. I much preferred loading the AWM and Magpul's, as well. The rounds snapped into place a lot nicer/more solidly, and they were quicker for me to load.
    Last edited by WS6; 08-01-13 at 18:12.

  7. #117
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,688
    Feedback Score
    0
    HK marketing line for this mags is "Load and Use". No mention of using calipers on them.

    Either they will work or they will not. If they work, who cares about how they flex, if they don't... they don't.

    But since you already did that, lets prey on you time and effort put into it. Unloaded magazine measurements are actually irrelevant. Only loaded mag is interesting, because it is how it should be used. Lets compare to "top dog" - P-Mag Gen3:

    Feed lips HK: 0.455"
    Feed lips P-mag: 0.460"

    That means HK keeps "tighter" grip in rounds while loaded, while in fact 0.005" difference is in real life negligible.

    Loaded mag HK: 0.897"
    Loaded mag P-mag: 0.893"

    So HK mag is whole 0.004" beefier than P-Mag Gen3. Again, no real life importance.

    As to feed lips gauges, those are intended to use on mags that are designed not to have significant feed lip flex. Basically for mags with alu or steel feed lips (UGSI, HK HRM, etc.). Fully polymer mags, like P-Mag or HK mag are designed to have feed lips spread. It actually gives good credit to level of engineering both at Magpul and HK, that two mags, that use different geometry, different polymer, different spring load, both fully loaded flex to practically same feed lips distance and external dimensions.

    As to loading rounds in by hand, I do not have P-Mag Gen3 to compare, but my HK mags load as easily as E-Mag and much easier than Lancer L5AWM (funny thing is, HK seem to be easiest to unload by hand - does it meant easiest feeding? I do not know). For closed bolt seating, loaded to 30rd, those are much easier to seat in my HK than Lancer and close to E-mag (but E-mag is easiest, but my E-mags have well used springs and HKs are brand new)
    Last edited by montrala; 08-02-13 at 03:55.
    Montrala

    I'm sponsored competition shooter representing Heckler&Koch, Kahles, Hornady and Typhoon Defence brands in Poland, so I can be biased

    http://montrala.blogspot.com

  8. #118
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,762
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by montrala View Post
    HK marketing line for this mags is "Load and Use". No mention of using calipers on them.

    Either they will work or they will not. If they work, who cares about how they flex, if they don't... they don't.

    But since you already did that, lets prey on you time and effort put into it. Unloaded magazine measurements are actually irrelevant. Only loaded mag is interesting, because it is how it should be used. Lets compare to "top dog" - P-Mag Gen3:

    Feed lips HK: 0.455"
    Feed lips P-mag: 0.460"

    That means HK keeps "tighter" grip in rounds while loaded, while in fact 0.005" difference is in real life negligible.

    Loaded mag HK: 0.897"
    Loaded mag P-mag: 0.893"

    So HK mag is whole 0.004" beefier than P-Mag Gen3. Again, no real life importance.

    As to feed lips gauges, those are intended to use on mags that are designed not to have significant feed lip flex. Basically for mags with alu or steel feed lips (UGSI, HK HRM, etc.). Fully polymer mags, like P-Mag or HK mag are designed to have feed lips spread. It actually gives good credit to level of engineering both at Magpul and HK, that two mags, that use different geometry, different polymer, different spring load, both fully loaded flex to practically same feed lips distance and external dimensions.

    As to loading rounds in by hand, I do not have P-Mag Gen3 to compare, but my HK mags load as easily as E-Mag and much easier than Lancer L5AWM (funny thing is, HK seem to be easiest to unload by hand - does it meant easiest feeding? I do not know). For closed bolt seating, loaded to 30rd, those are much easier to seat in my HK than Lancer and close to E-mag (but E-mag is easiest, but my E-mags have well used springs and HKs are brand new)
    -Yes, HK was easiest to unload.
    -By pinching the feed lips a little I can shift the stack around and jumble it. Don't really like that, but meh, I just won't do it, lol.
    -The added flex MIGHT increase durability. Instead of cracking, it might flex.
    -I never bought the overpriced mags, does the spring in these look to be a different material? I heard the $80 HK "high reliability" mag springs sucked and were proprietary.

  9. #119
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,728
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by P2000 View Post
    I received my 3 today, here are some pics in comparison to a Lancer AWM, and a Gen 2 M3 PMag

    It is a little taller than the PMag and AWM. A bit wider too.



    The mag body feels stiffer than the PMag. The texture of the plastic is identical to the AWM. It was harder to disassemble than either mag, but still reasonable.
    i can't quite tell from your picture, but is this mag scar bolt catch friendly?
    Last edited by trinydex; 08-02-13 at 12:48.

  10. #120
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    185
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by trinydex View Post
    i can't quite tell from your picture, but is this mag scar bolt catch friendly?
    When I inserted it into my SCAR and pulled the bolt back, it did lock back. I released the bolt with the bolt release on the empty mag and pulled the bolt back again, it would not reliably engage the bolt lock back.

    I did it again, and then it did engage. I tried this a few times and it was a bit hit or miss with the bolt locking back.

    I don't shoot my SCAR, so I'm not sure why the SCAR mag system is so different from the AR system.

Page 12 of 24 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •