
Originally Posted by
DocMinster
No... I did quote the correct person ... they said
"PMAG's have proven themselves to be MUCH more reliable than just about any other mag out there"
If one has to keep a dust cover thing because there is a possibility of the feed lip deforming ....that is a reliability issue in my eyes and prior to this post I was under the impression that is why they come with that ...dust cover.
I like my single PMAG and would consider getting more IF this was not an issue as i have long lost that dust cover for my PMAG and do not keep it loaded and use it only for the range.
ALL my USGI are loaded and have the updated Magpul followers to address the feed issues I had when I was AD.
The last thing I would want would to load a pmag into my weapon that had been sitting loaded for several months with out their proprietary dust cover and ...BOING...all the rounds spring out.
again nice mag I own ...I just would like to know if this issue has been addressed
I had 5 D&H, 5 DSA, and 20 Pmags fully loaded for over 3 years. 3 Pmags didn't have the dust covers. At the 2 year mark or there abouts, I test fired 2 of each, 2 of which were the uncovered Pmags... all functioned as advertised. A few months ago at the 3 year mark, I test fired 2 of each again, with different mags with the same outcome. No deformities in the feed lips or cracks of either mags were found.
I am worried about the springs taking a set, being stored so long. I will slowly cycle through them and comparing the spring lengths to new, unused mags in the next few weeks. I'm curious to see if I need to replace them, if they prove to be too worn to cycle reliably.
For God and the soldier we adore, In time of danger, not before! The danger passed, and all things righted, God is forgotten and the soldier slighted." - Rudyard Kipling
Bookmarks