Big Army says no more polymer mags

**R0N** · 05-08-12, 04:55

Originally Posted by GrumpyM4

Some some of the SME's here are FAGs?

Chillax, folks....it's all in good fun. FAG= Former Action Guy, for those who don't know.

It is also "Fighter Attack Guys on Wing Side of the house

**Suwannee Tim** · 05-08-12, 05:23

Originally Posted by Todd00000

..... LMT piston upper break on him in a fire fight.

Do you know any details of the failure?

**M4Guru** · 05-08-12, 09:01

I had a buddy take a piston upper over, same time frame, and his broke in contact. I won't MF the company in question because of the totally awesome efforts of one guy there to make it right. The company fortunately had one guy who went out of his way, stepped up and got him squared away (thank you JD), but the nature of the failure would have been impossible had he been using his issued MK18 because the failure was specific to the piston system. It wasn't an LMT though.

In line with the original topic, these policies are meant to include and address the lowest common denominator...IE not the people who post here. LCD means the guy using his CAA round-counter magazine, the guy using TAPCO mags, the guy who bought the Chinese AR drum, the guy with the NCSTAR laser on his rifle and a bungee cord sling through the rear loop of his A2 stock. So yeah, it's stupid to all of us. It's not for all of us. It's for EVERYONE. And "everyone" is only as smart as the dumbest/most ill-informed guy in the crowd.

**Todd00000** · 05-08-12, 09:18

Originally Posted by Suwannee Tim

Do you know any details of the failure?

No, I didn't care at the time, had other things to worry about.

**Todd00000** · 05-08-12, 09:30

Originally Posted by M4Guru

I had a buddy take a piston upper over, same time frame, and his broke in contact. I won't MF the company in question because of the totally awesome efforts of one guy there to make it right. The company fortunately had one guy who went out of his way, stepped up and got him squared away (thank you JD), but the nature of the failure would have been impossible had he been using his issued MK18 because the failure was specific to the piston system. It wasn't an LMT though.

In line with the original topic, these policies are meant to include and address the lowest common denominator...IE not the people who post here. LCD means the guy using his CAA round-counter magazine, the guy using TAPCO mags, the guy who bought the Chinese AR drum, the guy with the NCSTAR laser on his rifle and a bungee cord sling through the rear loop of his A2 stock. So yeah, it's stupid to all of us. It's not for all of us. It's for EVERYONE. And "everyone" is only as smart as the dumbest/most ill-informed guy in the crowd.

I don’t like that these companies, directly and indirectly, are advertising to Soldiers that they have something that is better, something that they know hasn’t been tested they way they would be tested if the Army was buying it. I don’t care how the company stepped up to the Soldiers whose lives they risked in combat, they should be called out so others will not make the same mistake.

**windellmc** · 05-08-12, 21:46

Originally Posted by M4Guru

I had a buddy take a piston upper over, same time frame, and his broke in contact. I won't MF the company in question because of the totally awesome efforts of one guy there to make it right. The company fortunately had one guy who went out of his way, stepped up and got him squared away (thank you JD), but the nature of the failure would have been impossible had he been using his issued MK18 because the failure was specific to the piston system. It wasn't an LMT though.

In line with the original topic, these policies are meant to include and address the lowest common denominator...IE not the people who post here. LCD means the guy using his CAA round-counter magazine, the guy using TAPCO mags, the guy who bought the Chinese AR drum, the guy with the NCSTAR laser on his rifle and a bungee cord sling through the rear loop of his A2 stock. So yeah, it's stupid to all of us. It's not for all of us. It's for EVERYONE. And "everyone" is only as smart as the dumbest/most ill-informed guy in the crowd.

The decision makes sense considering this. However couldn't the Army just have an approved mag list?

**trlcavscout** · 05-08-12, 22:31

I agree with this decision. The last thing i would have wanted would have been something i bought to go down in a fight costing someone their life mine or a buddys. My A2 had issues but the M4 ran good on GI mags, but when stuff quit working it got fixed i didnt have to try to replace. I have been running GI mags for years in service and personally and yes they are disposable just like Pmags, but i had no problems with non-wornout mags.

**5pins** · 05-09-12, 08:40

Originally Posted by windellmc

The decision makes sense considering this. However couldn't the Army just have an approved mag list?

That would require them to test every magazine on the market to see if it meets the minimum standard. Why spend the money when they already have one.

From what I have read in the past few days the Army isn’t impressed with the performance of the polymer magazines that have been used in testing.