Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 185

Thread: BCM Lower not compatible with PMAG Gen3

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    20
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    dang glad my gen3 work. Is it possible that some g3 pmags work and others do not? should I be cautious going forward?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    893
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ebone View Post
    dang glad my gen3 work. Is it possible that some g3 pmags work and others do not? should I be cautious going forward?
    Yes. And probably not.
    I’m sure the specs on the pmags have more tolerance than the lower. Out of all the lowers BCM puts out I’ve only heard of this a handful of times so it’s a small percentage. But what gets me is BCM won’t do anything about it. They should machine the back of the magwell to properly length on the forged lowers that are a little off.
    I’m glad all my BCM lowers work with gen3 mags or I would be pissed. And the OP should be rightly so. I think BCM is held to a high standard here and they fall short on this one.
    Quote Originally Posted by Outlander Systems View Post
    In 2014, a RDS and a WML are pretty much mandatory for a defensive long-gun.

    Lights are way easier to fire up than NODs when rolling out of bed.

    Quote Originally Posted by SJC3081 View Post
    You should have your balls removed for posting such stupidity. This is not the other site...

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,688
    Feedback Score
    40 (100%)
    I have a KAC like that that I refuse to build out and no one will buy off me for far less than I paid. I have plenty of high end lowers that have no issue with gen 3 pmags. It's tolerance stacking and in my opinion is BS.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,415
    Feedback Score
    125 (100%)
    My rifles have to accept P-Mags.
    Last edited by Biggy; 03-16-18 at 18:18.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    64
    Feedback Score
    0
    I don't think there is an issue of tolerance stacking. As previously stated the Army and USMC approved the M3 PMAGs for combat use after thorough testing. I don't want to talk out of my ass, but I'm sure that potential tolerance stacking issues would be identified. There's no way they would approve a mag that would fail to function in a percentage of their weapons.

    I tried 7-8 M3 PMAGs in the lower in question. They all failed. This lower is clearly off. On all my other rifles the magwell is even with the trigger guard. On the BCM lower the magwell extends below the trigger guard. I don't want to be a crybaby, but I am dissapointed. Something either meets the standard or it doesn't. This item clearly doesn't meet the standard.

    I'll probably either sell this lower or put it on my beater gun.

    See the picture below. I should add both trigger guards are the same design. The only difference is the logo on them.

    BCM Lower.jpg
    Last edited by Bolverk93; 03-15-18 at 23:51.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SeattHELL, Soviet Socialist S***hole of Washington
    Posts
    8,404
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Hell, M3s rack in my cheap crappy plastic 80%s... you know there's something SERIOUSLY wrong when my $25 Bubbafied homebrew EP Armory plasticrap works and your expensive BCM doesn't.

    Not to diss BCM, the parts I've bought from them I've been impressed with and I'm thinking about asking them if they can do an unassembled "kit" version of their C8 URG for the GF... but there's just something head-scratchingly "WTF?!" with them on this one.
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    Ye best start believin' in Orwellian Dystopias, mateys... yer LIVIN' in one!--after Capt. Hector Barbossa
    Psalms 109:8, 43:1
    LIFE MEMBER - NRA & SAF; FPC MEMBER Not employed or sponsored by any manufacturer, distributor or retailer.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Posts
    8,713
    Feedback Score
    88 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Biggy View Post
    We live in a P-Mag world, so my lowers, whatever the brand, have to accept unmodified P-Mags.
    Agreed. I love BCM, but was somewhat disappointed by their response to the issue a while ago.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Sic semper tyrannis.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    220
    Feedback Score
    0
    This is the first I've heard of this, and I have quite a few BCM lowers (and quite a few gen 3 PMAGS). I'll have to grab an empty PMAG and try all my lowers.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,821
    Feedback Score
    50 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by themonk View Post
    I have a KAC like that that I refuse to build out and no one will buy off me for far less than I paid. I have plenty of high end lowers that have no issue with gen 3 pmags. It's tolerance stacking and in my opinion is BS.
    I’ll give you $100 for it.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    16
    Feedback Score
    0
    My BCM lower accepts gen 3 pmags just fine. Also bought it a while back, maybe its the new stuff?

Page 2 of 19 FirstFirst 123412 ... 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
  •