View Full Version : Lancer L5AWM
Forgive me in failing to do enough research before I spent the money last year. The 15 Lancer L5AWM 556 magazines that have been fully loaded for a year were finally utilized last week. After my experience during that range outing, a few searches on this forum and other web based sources, yes, the Lancer L5AWM 556 will fail on multiple attempts and with multiple magazines to feed from either an open or closed bolt. Multiple rounds were steeply lodged into the top of the chamber and damaged. Once the magazines were downloaded to 25, the failure to feed situation stopped.
I'll chime in....I have a few Lancer mags from 2016 to present.. I had a 2016 production Lancer mag in one of my guns loaded to 28 rounds on a closed bolt that failed to feed when pulling the charging handle and releasing. I tried Pmags, Okay, DH and a brand new Lancer mag all were fully loaded to 30 rounds so it was not the gun. The gun now has a Pmag Gen3 in it.
Needless to say that defective mag was destroyed with a sledge hammer. I did notice that the follower was tilted to the right when the rounds were unloaded, and the spring seemed bent to the right when the mag was taken apart.
Hammer_Man
01-02-24, 19:04
I haven’t had any problems with mine, but I don’t store mine loaded either. I use Okay or Magpul Gen M3 for that.
Defaultmp3
01-02-24, 21:28
I haven’t had any problems with mine, but I don’t store mine loaded either.Same, never had any issues with the L5AWMs outside of some of the tabs breaking off near the feed lips, which Lancer has told me has no functional impact. That being said, these days I only use them for FoF, as the translucent ones are easier to verify that I'm loaded with Sims, and Lancer has slightly better customer CS for broken mags compared to Magpul IME (Lancer paid shipping for my replacement mags, Magpul had me pay out of pocket for shipping). A friend of mine did mention that the L5AWMs he'd seen in the field before had some feed issues due to the steel feed lips developing rust and thus causing additional drag when feeding, this was when he went through a rotation at JRTC.
jackblack73
01-02-24, 21:37
I keep mags loaded in ammo boxes because I don't like to waste time loading mags at the range. I also have been shooting very rarely lately. That means I have mags that sit loaded 2 or more years. I have never had a problem with Lancer mags.
Is there a particular date code that I should look for? In the haze of my memory, I thought I read somewhere that Lancer was aware of the issue. It had something to do with the steel feed lips and burrs. Lancer made a change. But I can't remember when this change occurred....
I think I have in the neighborhood of 50 Lancer AWM mags, most of which are the translucent smoke. I keep my mags loaded to 30, and though I haven't actually fired all 50ish mags, I've never had any issues at all.
When it comes to magazines I let the USMC do the testing because they have the resources to do so. Only magazine USMC approved to go to war with is the PMAG gen 3 so that's good enough for me.
bamashooter
01-03-24, 08:21
Have and use multiple brands in assorted guns. One of which is the Lancer L5 AAM. Have perhaps 10-12 and have shot them plenty with no issues.
I've got maybe 2 dozen Lancer Mags and never have had any issues with them, and that includes multiple classes. I've got a few loaded for years next to my defensive rifle and no issues at all from them.
For the guys that report no issues, what date code are the "good" magazines?
For the guys that report no issues, what date code are the "good" magazines?
I'm not available to check mine currently, but I've got magazines dating back to '13 or '14 when Lancer used to sell the 3 packs in stores, at the time Lancers and Troy's were some of the only magazines I could find after the 2012 buying scare
For the guys that report no issues, what date code are the "good" magazines?
Just checked a few, and I have mags from 2012-2019. No issues in the dozen or so that I've actually used. Mostly the older ones.
ETA: Found one from 2011. It's a clear 20 rounder. This was the mag I kept in my truck gun and has been constantly fully loaded for the about 12 years. Have also used it for occasional bench shooting. No issues.
the AR-15 Junkie
01-03-24, 19:27
Same, never had any issues with the L5AWMs outside of some of the tabs breaking off near the feed lips, which Lancer has told me has no functional impact. That being said, these days I only use them for FoF, as the translucent ones are easier to verify that I'm loaded with Sims, and Lancer has slightly better customer CS for broken mags compared to Magpul IME (Lancer paid shipping for my replacement mags, Magpul had me pay out of pocket for shipping). A friend of mine did mention that the L5AWMs he'd seen in the field before had some feed issues due to the steel feed lips developing rust and thus causing additional drag when feeding, this was when he went through a rotation at JRTC.
Any idea what these non functional tabs breaking off are actually for? I have never liked the looks of those tabs as some have it, some have it more and some dont have it at all.
Yeah, another voice here for the "never had a problem with them" camp. Ran them pretty extensively for a while about a decade ago, and only switched back to PMags once the MCT Gen 3s came out.
There's a footnote on Lancer's website: "NSN: 1005-01-657-7839 (L5AWM 30 – Translucent Smoke)". Are these a training use item or some such?
I was wrong. I had 30 not 15 Lancer magazines. Sold them all yesterday. Magpul gen3 magazines are on their way. I don't have the patience nor time to troubleshoot magazines. The Lancer product did not work for me.
BufordTJustice
01-11-24, 15:16
I have had over a dozen AWM's in rotation (mostly translucent and black 30's) for the last ten years or so. Along with D&H + MP follower, & PMAG Gen M3.
Though PMAG's are certainly my favorites, I have not had any issues with my AWM's.
This doesn't negate your issues. Just adding another data point.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Is there a particular date code that I should look for? In the haze of my memory, I thought I read somewhere that Lancer was aware of the issue. It had something to do with the steel feed lips and burrs. Lancer made a change. But I can't remember when this change occurred....
I guess it's too late for the OP, but hopefully this will be helpful for others.
My understanding is that followers with the 3/15 manufacturing date code (March 2015) are problematic. My understanding is that these followers are only in mags that also have the 3/15 manufacturing date code, and Lancer was aware of the issue.
I have used 30 rd Lancer L5AWM mags quite a bit for years (none had the 3/15 date code followers). They have worked fine for me, and are probably my go to mags.
Joe Mamma
My new Lancer mags seem to be fine with 30 rounds loaded and have no issues on a closed bolt...they function just like the M3 Pmags I have.
Need to bring them to range to test....
I guess it's too late for the OP, but hopefully this will be helpful for others.
My understanding is that followers with the 3/15 manufacturing date code (March 2015) are problematic. My understanding is that these followers are only in mags that also have the 3/15 manufacturing date code, and Lancer was aware of the issue.
I have used 30 rd Lancer L5AWM mags quite a bit for years (none had the 3/15 date code followers). They have worked fine for me, and are probably my go to mags.
Joe MammaThanks for that. When I'm bored, I think I'm going to go through mine and see if I have any with the 3/15 date code.
bamashooter
01-12-24, 07:09
For the guys that report no issues, what date code are the "good" magazines?
01/2016
BufordTJustice
01-12-24, 17:57
Just checked a few, and I have mags from 2012-2019. No issues in the dozen or so that I've actually used. Mostly the older ones.
ETA: Found one from 2011. It's a clear 20 rounder. This was the mag I kept in my truck gun and has been constantly fully loaded for the about 12 years. Have also used it for occasional bench shooting. No issues.
Yeah my range AWM 30 smoke is a 7/2011 date code. Been using it about that long. Agency training, quals, personal training, etc. Just used it on Wed nite. Never an issue.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
For long term storage it's hard to beat steel bodied AR mags.
I run at least eight or nine different brands of AR mags, steel, aluminum, poly, hybrid.
I keep em all stored loaded, some of em are close to 20 years old, no failures.
I do use the snap on 'dust covers' on my PMAGs. I don't care what Magpul says, it's a stress reliever and a good one.
I'd rather have a dozen different brands of mags and figure out what works on my own than go all in on one brand.
And if that one brand has to last forever, it's not gonna be polymer.
Some steel bodied mags I've had good luck with are E-landers, SHK, and some oddball slabside AR mags made in Bulgaria that use an AK style follower. A few of those have stainless steel CMMG followers.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.