TexasCHLforum.com

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:
$14.20 a pop PMAG. That's because Magpul respects us and wants our business. Will handle whatever the steel mag will handle, and combat proven for many years now. http://www.midwayusa.com/product/231937 ... nd-polymer.

It's a no-brainer.

TAM, you're paying too much for your PMAGs.

george wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:This is just dumb. I'd be willing to bet that in a really gritty/sandy/windy enviroment, a well-built polymer magazine is a better functioning piece of kit than even a well-made steel magazine—simply because of the characteristics of polymers. If any of these new contract steel magazines fail, putting a soldier's life in peril, I would sincerely hope that there would be a congressional investigation into why this order was issued. If it an't broke, don't fix it. I don't think that soldiers in the field would be preferring PMAGs to GI issued mags if there were no real advantage. After all, they have to pay for their PMAGs, which is a disincentive to acquisition unless it really is a better magazine.

I will say that the steel DPMS brand magazines that came with my AR10 are very well built and I like them just fine. But I have yet to see a metal AR15 magazine that I liked. They all seemed kind of flimsy to me. The steel magazines that came with my Bushmaster eventually broke at the spot-welds, and that was without that much usage. That's when I started using PMAGS and I've never looked back. I suppose that there are good quality "unbreakable" metal magazines for the AR15. I just haven't seen one yet. And since PMAGs are reasonably priced and easy to get, I've just always bought them instead.

http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/MAG067-36.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; This is what you want, Steel Ar mags. Best there is.

MadMonkey wrote:Looks like someone got paid off

The decision has left combat troops puzzled, since the PMAG has an Army-approved national stock number, which allows units to order them through the Army supply system.

“This just follows a long line of the Army, and military in general, not listening to the troops about equipment and weaponry,” said one Army infantryman serving in Southwest Afghanistan, who asked not to be identified.

“The PMAG is a great product … lightweight and durable. I have seen numerous special ops teams from all services pass through here, and they all use PMAGs. Also, a large amount of Marine infantry here use PMAGS, including their Force Recon elements.”

TACOM officials said the message was issued because of “numerous reports that Army units are using unauthorized magazines,” TACOM spokesman Eric Emerton said in a written response to questions from Military.com. Emerton added that only “authorized NSNs have ever been included in the technical manuals.  Just because an item has an NSN, does not mean the Army is an authorized user.”

This seems to be a complete policy reversal, since PMAGs are standard issue with the Army’s 75th Ranger Regiment and they have been routinely issued to infantry units before war-zone deployments.