Army bans unauthorized Magazines

[scoutfsu]

That makes them, often, a creature to be avoided in garrison.

Aaaand for the most part (with a few notable exceptions), anywhere else too.

[gunrunner32]

I've got a full issue of PMags (15) and about 2 dozen H&K magazines that I've acquired over the last few years, but I still use my old school mags with the old green follower. I've got about 20 or so that have always been reliable and until those start to fail me I won't be switching. So far they have lasted through 6 trips to 5 countries and countless training events. Nothing wrong with the Circle Kay or old Colt mags.

[Oh Shoot]

I'm pert new to AR, but have five or 6 very well used USGI mags with maybe as many different vendor names on them. All have proven 100% so far. I have Pmags too, but have to admit I like the feel of the aluminum ones more.

I just happen to like 20 rounders better than 30s, so have some of those on Pmag and Thermold.

- OS

[TMF]

In my experience the Pmags are tougher. I've trashed around a dozen or more aluminum mags over the course of several deployments, as I wore my mags exposed across the front of my kit. Climbing over walls and such managed to dent/crush some of them to the point of being unusable. Also, I took a few epic spills which damaged them. I have a box full of at least 20 jacked up/unusable GI mags that i just use for springs and followers.

I was issued Pmags before a particularly busy deployment that involved a lot of building climbing/urban movement. I still have those Pmags and they look like a chew toy for a rabid badger, but they function fine still.

Does this matter in the states? No. If its a matter of going to the range and putting a few rounds through your rifle it doesn't matter what kind of mag you got. But if you have them strapped to the front of you getting beat up everyday, I'm gonna go with the Pmag.

[Guest Victor9er]

I'd say they're pretty durable...

[media=]

[/media]

Edited June 2, 2012 by Victor9er

[Defender]

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/06/07/army-now-says-no-ban-on-rifle-magazines.html?ESRC=eb.nl

Apparently they are ok again.

[mikegideon]

http://www.military....html?ESRC=eb.nl

Apparently they are ok again.

Recon somebody bitched?

[scoutfsu]

http://www.military....html?ESRC=eb.nl

Apparently they are ok again.

“At best, the message is incomplete; at worst the message allows soldiers to jump to the wrong conclusions,†Bourke said. “Maintenance Information Messages [from TACOM] are permissive. They are not an order. They are not a directive. All content and direction in those messages are optional for the recipient.â€

“The main message we want to get out is – although the Army does support and is confident in the improved, tan-follower magazine – we don’t want soldiers to fear punishment for using PMAGs,†Bourke said.

Here is the problem with TACOM and their BS messages. They send them out knowing full well how senior leaders are going to interpret it. They don't see it as "advice" - they see it as the Army banning "a" or "b" and follow suit. Nevermind that TACOM doesn't give orders and is generally far behind the power curve regarding most anything it touches. They disingenuously couch their "advice" as an order and they always have.

F*ck TACOM - they're always creating stupid drama.

[TMF]

F*ck TACOM - they're always creating stupid drama.

But their PM cartoons always motivate me to do a proper PMCS on all my eqioupment!

[Defender]

But their PM cartoons always motivate me to do a proper PMCS on all my eqioupment!

Are they the ones that put out that comic book that used to come with the M-16s way back when?

[scoutfsu]

But their PM cartoons always motivate me to do a proper PMCS on all my eqioupment!

I always wondered how much they paid to push those things out. I felt they could've put the information out in a more cost effective/efficient manner. It wasn't all bad gouge.