Pmag follower vs. Pmag follower.

[dahermit]

Having done some research on AR .223/5.56 magazines lately, there seems to be some contradiction as to Aluminum magazines with Pmag followers and Polymer Pmag magazines with Pmag followers.

What I have garnered from internet searches into the subject, it seems that there are some people who have had failures to lock back on an empty mag with Polymer Pmag magazines that they have attributed to the Pmag follower in them being "too short" to allow a good purchase on the bolt catch. Their apparent remedy is to replace the .223/5.56 bolt catch with a bolt catch intended for a 9mm AR.

However, there does not seem to be a problem with Aluminum magazines that have been fitted with Pmag followers.

What gives? Are not all Pmag followers the same? Why should the followers be a problem in Polymer magazines but not the Aluminum magazines. Enlighten me here.

[riffraff]

I don't know what all this is about but across a variety of rifles and pmags I don't see any problem with locking back.

There are a few variations of pmags designed to fix problems with oddball ARs, if you read magpulls fitment script you see them mentioning little issues- my guess is the rifle is the problem if anything.

[DubC-Hicks]

They aren't putting PMAG followers in aluminum magazines, they're putting Magpul enhanced followers in them. They are not the same shape or design as the followers in actual PMAGS, as they're designed specifically for USGI aluminum mags.

As far as actual PMAGs having failure to lock back issues, I've never experienced this, and I've used hundreds of PMAGs over the span of the last decade.

[brasscollector]

I personally prefer an aluminum 20rnd mag with the magpul follower over any pmag. I can't say I've used hundreds of pmags myself but plenty of them between me and friends and I've never seen or even heard of an issue like that. Also, putting in the wrong bolt catch seems like a slapdash solution to me.

[FrankenMauser]

What gives?

Cheap people buying cheap parts, and then blaming the issue on the only part that they didn't screw with.
PMags are cheap. Cheap people buy them to go along with the bargain bin pile of AR parts.

When things don't work well, they cannot fathom that their cheapness, choice of garbage parts, and lack of attention to detail during assembly could possibly be the cause. Or, you know, that pen spring that was shoved under the bolt latch, because they lost the proper spring and plunger while trying to squeeze the pin in with 'roadside assistance kit' slip-jaw pliers and an adjustable hammer wrench.

Instead, blame the magazine.


All truth, sarcasm, and whatever else that was, aside...
I only use PMags in one of my ARs, the 7.5" pistol. All of the others need more COAL than the PMags allow, need feed lip modification for PMags to work (which I won't do), or they just refuse to run with PMags. (I don't recall bolt hold open being an issue, though.)

Aluminum mags work fine in all of them.
Ironically, the few Magpul 'enhanced' followers that I tried in D&H aluminum bodies actually caused nose-dive type failures to feed. The original followers were better.

I don't think the Magpul products are bad. They just didn't work out for me, aside from the one pistol. And their magazine price point leads to being paired with garbage ARs more often than not.

[dahermit]

Cheap people buying cheap parts, and then blaming the issue on the only part that they didn't screw with.
PMags are cheap. Cheap people buy them to go along with the bargain bin pile of AR parts.

When things don't work well, they cannot fathom that their cheapness, choice of garbage parts, and lack of attention to detail during assembly could possibly be the cause. Or, you know, that pen spring that was shoved under the bolt latch, because they lost the proper spring and plunger while trying to squeeze the pin in with 'roadside assistance kit' slip-jaw pliers and an adjustable hammer wrench.

Instead, blame the magazine.


All truth, sarcasm, and whatever else that was, aside...
I only use PMags in one of my ARs, the 7.5" pistol. All of the others need more COAL than the PMags allow, need feed lip modification for PMags to work (which I won't do), or they just refuse to run with PMags. (I don't recall bolt hold open being an issue, though.)

Aluminum mags work fine in all of them.
Ironically, the few Magpul 'enhanced' followers that I tried in D&H aluminum bodies actually caused nose-dive type failures to feed. The original followers were better.

I don't think the Magpul products are bad. They just didn't work out for me, aside from the one pistol. And their magazine price point leads to being paired with garbage ARs more often than not.

Did you mean to preface your post with "...in my opinion..."? Or, do you have links to studies that show what you say is factual (that the problem is that pmags are poor quality coupled with bad builds).
It would seem that the Marines do not agree with your assessment of Pmag quality.
https://www.foxnews.com/tech/marines...rifle-magazine

[FrankenMauser]

It would seem that the Marines do not agree with your assessment of Pmag quality.

Read the room.
And re-read the post.
Your response makes no sense with my post as the context.

[Nathan]

Nah, sorry....not buying the line....

PMags work. Well, I’ve never seen one not work, but then again, all my AR’s work.

I don’t use crap parts is something that helps, but I do use PMags and D&H mags. Probably considered crap by many here.

[kymasabe]

I've used damn near 100 gen2 mags and a few gen3's and never had a problem with any of them. I've tried other brands and ended up giving those mags away. Ive tried some metal ones, and my preferred brand in metal is Okay Surefeeds, 20 rounders.