I posted this on TOS in a thread asking about translucent magazine durability:
I started shooting competition in 2008, semi-sponsored by an OEM manufacturer (I was given some parts and accessories to use, and some range fees paid). I was first using PMAGS that I was given for free. After a number of cycles loading the magazines on a closed bolt, the feedlips and spines began to crack. Magpul replaced the magazines for free, but I lost faith in them. The only PMAGS I currently own have never been used and came with rifles I purchased as OEM magazines. I never had a PMAG crack catastrophically, and cause a malfunction that I can remember, it was a gradual crack that would get bigger with use. I was able to replace them before they broke totally. I do remember dropping some cracking spine PMAGS that were partially loaded during speed reloads, and the rounds ejected from the top of the mag when the mag hit the deck. I had another fellow shooter experience the same cracking issues with PMAGS.
To be completely fair, Magpul customer service was great (can't remember the name of the guy that always helped us), and sent out replacement mags quickly. I have a suspicion that the over-insertion tabs on the Gen3 PMAGS were at least partially implemented to reduce the splitting spines and cracked feedlips. However, the over-insertion tabs now interfere with many lowers and trigger guards, causing an under-insertion problem. However, this opinion about the over-insertion tab can not be substantiated since I have no direct knowledge of the design process and I don't believe Magpul would ever admit this publicly, as it would be an admission of a problem that wasn't part of their "philosophy."
I found the Lancer L5 as a possible solution and liked the steel insert for the feedlips. I purchased 5 of them at first with my own money at a slight discount (I think it was 25% off MSRP). The translucency was a novelty at first, but:
The translucency allowed me to get the visual information I needed instantly, which was, is the mag FULL or NOT FULL. I didn't care about exact or even approx round count. If the mag was full, it was ready for use. If it was not full, it was not ready for use.
If it had been outside of competition, and in a real emergency situation like combat, I would think the same way about the ability to view capacity. If I see a mag on the ground 15 feet away I want to know RIGHT NOW if there are rounds in the mag or not. I think that a totally translucent mag body allows this much better than a skinny window with a blob of paint on the spring. What if the angle I view the mag from doesn't allow me to see in the window? What if the window is partially obscured with dirt, dust, or blood? What if I am too far away to see the paint blob, or my eyewear is partially obscured? Having a completely translucent magazine body reduces these problems greatly, and extends the effective range this visual information can be useful. In my opinion, the windowed PMAGS are a complete waste with no appreciable advantage over a completely opaque magazine. If you have time to pick up the magazine and examine the window, looking for the small paint blob, you have time to press down on the rounds to see how full or empty the mag is.
Here are some photos of 2 of my original 5 Smoke translucent Lancer magazines. These are L5 with Gen 1 green followers purchased in summer 2008. They are date stamped 3/08. I used 5 of these magazines (the other three are in storage currently so no pics of them) in competition. I would make sure all five were loaded the night before the competition. RR1 and RR2 would then go onto my belt.
I estimate 8k rounds between the 5 magazines based on ammo purchases. 8000/5=1600 rds per magazine. 1600/30=53+ cycles. RR1 and RR2 probably had half or more of the total rounds, and RR1 probably had 75% of that half, but since I didn't keep a record, we'll just assume at least 53 fully loaded cycles (most likely closer to 100+ cycles for RR1 though).
These two pictured mags were the primary mags I used in competition and practice, RR1 and RR2, so they have more rounds through them than the other mags (RR3, RR4, RR5 not pictured), but we'll just use these numbers above as approximate. RR1 magazine most likely has the most use out of all the original five since it was first into a rifle, then RR2 was loaded during moving to the next shooting position. I did buy other ammo in person, but in smaller quantities. The 8k figure comes from online purchases that I could easily track.
Lowers used were primarily Noveske and Colt, with various upper ranging from Noveske, Colt, CMMG, Sabre Defense, White Oak Armory, and various others assembled by me with parts from numerous manufacturers.
I use CLP almost exclusively for cleaning and lube, which often seeps into the magazines. I believe these gen 1 L5 magazines had a warning on them to keep away from DEET, but the newer revisions have remedied their sensitivity to chemicals like DEET
They have been dropped while empty, while loaded, and while partially loaded dozens of times. Almost always loaded on a closed bolt, into a rifle. They were subjected to temperatures ranging from 50F to over 150F inside my vehicle, numerous times.
The only blemishes I could find are a slight deformation of the magazine release tab, a minute amount of material missing from the front of the interior of the magazine from the cartridge contacting the magazine on occasion, and a very small dent in the front of one of the feedlips.
The finish on the steel feedlips is still intact except on the very high spots and edges. There are no cracks in the feedlips or on the spine of the magazine body. The feedlips are not spread apart, and remain solidly attached to the polymer portion of the magazine with no movement between the two. . There are no cracks in the magazine body, or signs of degradation of the plastic. The plastic body has not discolored or yellowed in any way.
I've never had a magazine induced malfunction while using a Lancer L5 or AWM magazine. All of the malfunctions I experienced were ammo related or dirty chamber related (extraction or ejection). Ammo used was Fed XM193, PMC Bronze, Wolf Black box, and some other small quantities of ZQI, Tula, etc.
I've never disassembled or cleaned any of the magazines apart from wiping the outsides, and all were dropped many times into dusty sand.
All parts including springs are factory original and have never been replaced.
After use they are stored loaded at the capacity they were left in after shooting, then before using again I will top them off.
TLDR; PMAGS cracked so I bought Lancers, which have lasted thousands of rounds with zero problems.
20151031_094803 by azoutdoorsman, on Flickr
20151031_094819 by azoutdoorsman, on Flickr
20151031_094837 by azoutdoorsman, on Flickr
20151031_094856 by azoutdoorsman, on Flickr
20151031_094920 by azoutdoorsman, on Flickr
20151031_094936 by azoutdoorsman, on Flickr
20151031_094957 by azoutdoorsman, on Flickr
I don't know what Lancer's philosophy is, nor do I care. They make a durable, reliable magazine that has not cracked or broken after rough treatment, which is what I care about. That is more than I can say for other opaque polymer magazines that I have used.
Originally Posted by samuse
Bookmarks