Army bans polymer mags...

[HAVOK]

This just doesn't make sense to me. They just decreased the soldiers combat effectiveness IMO.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/05/25/in-reversal-army-bans-high-performance-rifle-mags.html?ESRC=army-a.nl

[A1000YrdStare03]

I agree, the polly mags are the shit. I bet the real reason is cost!!!

[HAVOK]

Yea but most guys I know BUY THEIR OWN MAGS! It doesn't make sense....

[iamthesgt]

Yea but most guys I know BUY THEIR OWN MAGS! It doesn't make sense....

And it says in the article they have millions of dollars' worth of PMAGs in stock now...However improved (and I'm sure it is improved) the new mags are, I am sure they don't hold up to the abuse polymer mags can withstand. This is a stupid decision and could only be made by someone so far removed from combat they're just making decisions for the hell of it (sounds like a politician's decision, to be honest). Hopefully it won't cause a soldier to lose his life.

[KopfeJager]

Typical military reasoning.....something works....so let's change it. Marines use these too, but I haven't seen anything about them being unauthorized...but usually, if it's not issued, it's not authorized.....I would typically "give" my Marines items...so as far as they knew...it was "issued."

I used to carry 24-36 mags, many mostly in bandoliers or my ruck, because those metals ones where so unreliable....and I wasn't going to disengage to fix a mag...dumped it and moved on....once I found some of those PMAGs adrift....I was able to drop down to about 12 total mags, with only 1 in the weapon and 4 in the bandolier...the rest in my ruck. Eff those metal mags...utter garbage

[obtainedpilot]

Yeah let's ban stuff just for the hell of it sounds a lot like what goes on with law makers in my state I love pmags

Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2

[Twizted875]

Ya I'm a big fan of pmags I've got a handful for my carbine we also used then on my tactical team at work

[sirjohnathon]

Who wants to bet there is campaign reasons afoot? Perhaps Magpul wasn't supporting the right politicians' campaigns?


Never mind....I didn't say that......totally not an "on the record" thought....just a bit of fictional story line. :peep:

[SAPPER USMG]

Who wants to bet there is campaign reasons afoot? Perhaps Magpul wasn't supporting the right politicians' campaigns?


Never mind....I didn't say that......totally not an "on the record" thought....just a bit of fictional story line. :peep:

I am with you on this...side note, wish they had pmags in my day. I sure love em now.

[Mekanikol]

Does this mean we'll be able to buy Poly mags at the DRMO?! lol Wouldn't that be something. One can always dream...

[sirjohnathon]

Does this mean we'll be able to buy Poly mags at the DRMO?! lol Wouldn't that be something. One can always dream...

Yes, but you will have to bring a certified destructive demilitarizing contractor with you, all mags will be required to have 2 full cuts made at precise locations, all springs must be melted prior to removal from the facility, and you must sign the "End Use Certificate" stating you will not take the parts out of the US nor sell them to anyone for 10 years. :p

[River_Rat_459]

Who wants to bet there is campaign reasons afoot? Perhaps Magpul wasn't supporting the right politicians' campaigns?

Winner winner, chicken dinner. That's exactly what I was suspecting. I'd say that it's a safe assumption that similar things have happened in the past. I believe there was an issue not all that long ago regarding body armor.

[jxspyder]

Winner winner, chicken dinner. That's exactly what I was suspecting. I'd say that it's a safe assumption that similar things have happened in the past. I believe there was an issue not all that long ago regarding body armor.

And vehicle armor.

Sent from the muddy banks of the Wishkah

[Rickety Rob]

Yea but most guys I know BUY THEIR OWN MAGS! It doesn't make sense....

You are absolutely correct. This is probably the dumbest thing they could do. Just another reason to add to the many on saving money

[SSGMansourOmar]

they never ask the SOLDIER whats best for the soldier...smh:decision:

[twmiller77]

^^ this

[KopfeJager]

Luckily the Marines have a program that allows use to give feed back and suggest gear. As long as you and or your squad leader.....and Plt Sgt can back your reasoning, they'll left you "field test" it within reason....but many command still break balls over dew rags....

[River_Rat_459]

Looks like someone pulled their head out of their ass. Finally.


Army Now Says No Ban on Rifle Magazines
Jun 07, 2012
Military.com| by Matthew Cox

The Pentagon has clarified the Army’s stance on a recent safety message that effectively banned a certain high-performance, commercial M4 magazine, which means soldiers can keep using their PMAGs.
The confusion began when
Army officials from the TACOM Life Cycle Management Command issued a message in April, declaring that the only government-issued aluminum magazines were authorized for use in the M4 and M16 rifles.

TACOM officials released the message to address reports of Army units using “unauthorized” commercial, polymer magazines such as the popular PMAG, introduced by Magpul Industries Corp., in 2007. The decision left combat troops puzzled, since the PMAG has demonstrated its extreme reliability in combat and has an Army-approved national stock number, which allows units to order them through the Army supply system.

Army officials acknowledged June 6 that TACOM’s message was poorly written and not intended as a directive on the use of PMAGs. Matthew Bourke, an Army spokesman at the Pentagon responding to questions from Mililtary.com, said the message should have included guidance that the final decision rests with commanders in the field.

“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.”

It’s still unclear why TACOM issued the message at this time, but sources say it might have something to do with the $10.7 million contract TACOM Rock Island awarded to Brownells Inc. in 2009 to produce 1.4 million improved magazines by January 2010.

Program Executive Office Soldier set out to develop the improved magazine after the M4 finished last against three other carbines in a 2007 reliability test. The “dust test” revealed that 27 percent of the M4’s stoppages were magazine related.

The improved magazine uses a redesigned “follower,” the part that sits on the magazine’s internal spring and feeds the rounds into the M4’s upper receiver. The new tan-colored follower features an extended rear leg and modified bullet protrusion for improved round stacking and orientation. The self-leveling/anti-tilt follower reduces the risk of magazine-related stoppages by more than 50 percent compared to the older magazine variants, PEO Soldier officials maintain.
In late May, Military.com asked PEO Soldier if weapons officials had tested to see how the improved magazine performs against the PMAG. The command responded through Army public affairs that weapons officials had conducted “limited side-by-side testing and found that no commercial magazine was superior to the improved magazine,” Bourke said.

By contrast, PMAGs have developed a word-of-mouth reputation for being extremely reliable as well as durable. Special operations units such as Army’s 75th Ranger Regiment issue PMAGs as do many infantry units before war-zone deployments.

Soldiers from B Troop, 3rd Squadron, 61st Cavalry Regiment, had been issued PMAGs before deploying to Afghanistan in 2009. On Oct. 3 of that year, they fought off a bold enemy attack on Combat Outpost Keating that lasted for more than six hours and left eight Americans dead. Some soldiers fired up to 40 PMAGs from their M4s without a single stoppage.

Army officials maintain that TACOM’s message was intended to make soldiers aware that not all commercial magazines have gone through the same testing as the improved magazine, but concede that there are exceptions.

“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.

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

[sirjohnathon]

Looks like someone pulled their head out of their ass. Finally.



They had to remove it quickly because it's hard for a head and boot to fit in the same place.....and I have a feeling some General figured out this was stupid and was preparing to place said boot in said place.

[iamthesgt]

They had to remove it quickly because it's hard for a head and boot to fit in the same place.....and I have a feeling some General figured out this was stupid and was preparing to place said boot in said place.

Lol! I would have rather them put a boot in their ass first