Results 16 to 30 of 75
Thread: New PMAG vs old PMAG
-
11 February 2009, 11:12 #16Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
- Republic of Texas
- Posts
- 332
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I had one trickle in yesterday. It's a standard Maglevel with an Mmag type follower. It isn't stamped with 5.56 or M, it's blank.
TS
-
12 February 2009, 04:50 #17
I've noticed that several of my backordered PMAGs seem to be shipping lately; perhaps all of those election-driven purchases have finally reached some semblance of equilibirum with the ramped-up production effort.
One thing that I am exceedingly grateful for is the fact that, even if a ban is forthcoming, we've been given a fairly broad window of opportunity in which to invest in those things which might ultimately move back into the unobtainable category. I remember back in early 1986 when the Firearm Owner's Protection Act (aka the McClure-Volkmer Act) caught us relatively flat-footed, and there was almost no time to register receivers or arrange short-notice machinegun transfers. We were, in many ways, blindsided by legislation that was widely-billed as pro-2A.
Those who find themselves shopping for $125 PMAGs a decade from now will likely have no one to blame but themselves, as most of us have long since learned from the past. My wife isn't crazy about the diversion of funds to such things right now, but she is also intelligent enough to realize that we're but a pen stroke away from vindication.
Time to invest in some new PMAG-Ms, I suppose ... :)
AC
-
17 February 2009, 08:24 #18New Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
- Location
- TX
- Posts
- 7
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I wonder if the post-election surge in sales coupled with the change over in molds created the big back log in mag sales. I hope that the new molds are in place and production will soon meet demand. I also hope that MagPul is making pretty good money and with the extra capital can bring more great products to the market and increase production on their hard to find items!
Spooky
-
17 February 2009, 14:12 #19
-
21 February 2009, 18:15 #20Brock Samson Guest
Interestingly, I just got some PMAG's that have a newer date stamp than the M's shown above by Stick, but aren't M's. They are somewhere in-between old and M.
The mouth of the mag and feedlips look like an M, and the catch up top for the dustcover is two cuts instead of one, but the rest of the body is like the old. The follower seems somewhere in-between but shows no marking. The dustcover on mine does not snap on the bottom.
Date stamp is 2/09 so not sure what to think. I guess Magpul is still making non-M
-
21 February 2009, 19:33 #21
I've seen someone else post similar finding with the 09's as well.
-
21 February 2009, 20:02 #22
Looks like mags that were being mad while the new variants were tooling up.
-
21 February 2009, 23:27 #23
There are definite date codes issues out there with the latest PMAGs (Magpul has acknowledged as much), and in some cases, they are reflecting dates that are still some 9-10 months away. Actually, I just received a dozen (6x black, 6x FDE) that were made in November 2009. I guess we can add warping the time/space continuum to the growing list of incredible things that Magpul continues to pull off.
If so, I'm ready for my Massoud now. :)
AC
-
22 February 2009, 01:10 #24
New PMAG, real date....
-
22 February 2009, 04:27 #25
For clarity, I should have indicated that I was talking about new production windowed (original version) PMAGs.
I've not ordered any new pattern mags yet, but plan to as soon as I can be sure that is what I'll actually receive.
AC
-
23 February 2009, 09:27 #26
-
23 February 2009, 10:38 #27
Affirmative -- I brought it up simply because that variant was the one that seemed to be affected by the errant date code(s). As far as I know, all of the new production mags are coded correctly.
AC
-
25 February 2009, 12:56 #28Linnear Guest
Hi, i just picked up 10 of these new M Pmags, has anyone had any issues with the fit in the mag well and when releasing them as opposed to the older versions? mine are alot tighter and dont like to fall out when released, i talked to Magpul and they suggested "wearing them in" repeated insertions and releases because of the newer molds. im not convinced cos all my other Pmags never had this prob even fresh out of the bag. i have a CD M4 and a LWRC M6A2 same issue with either rifle.
i'd appreciate any input
thanks
nice pic as always Stick. are u a professional photographer?
-
25 February 2009, 14:16 #29
I'm prior military, and have been a full time city cop for quite awhile. I do photography work for a lot of the manufacturers in the weapon community, and have made some great friends along the way.
I tend to spend as much time or more doing photography work than I do inside my cruiser. To some people you aren't a professional photographer unless you travel the globe shooting on assignment. To others, you are a pro if you are paid and published on a regular basis, I would qualify for the later, but not the former.
-
25 February 2009, 14:19 #30
I would mark them with a perm marker by coloring along the edges. Insert and remove them 5 or 10 times, and look to see where the marker has worn off. If its only in a few places, I would hit those areas with a bit of sandpaper, but thats just me. A couple swipes should have them going in no time.