View Full Version : Army Bans High-Performance Rifle Mags
Lucy,, Pls splain this?? :confused:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/05/25/in-reversal-army-bans-high-performance-rifle-mags.html?ESRC=eb.nl
Does anyone want to get rid of their Pmags?? :confused:
Who has the market lock on tin mags?? :confused:
:munchin
Destrier
05-25-2012, 07:05
So, let me get this straight. Bad magazines being about 95% of all weapons malfunctions. Lets ban an item that reduces risk?
I imagine we need to look to 'what' Senator has an aluminum magazine factory in their district.
um, if we do not import them from some third world nation.
-cough- either that or PMAG forgot to donate to the Obama campaign
-cough- either that or PMAG forgot to donate to the Obama campaign
BINGO.. :munchin
BINGO.. :munchin
Or god forbid, they donated to the "other" guy.
Surgicalcric
05-25-2012, 08:45
Or its NATICKS way of getting rid of the competition...
Brownells advertises that they supply magazines to the military. They are located in Iowa. Iowa has Harking - D, and Grassley - R for senators. In congress they have three Dems (Braley, Loebsack, Boswell) and two repubs (Latham and King). Loebsack is on the Armed Service Committee.
MVP
greenberetTFS
05-25-2012, 09:08
BINGO.. :munchin
Exactly my thoughts also.......... :( :mad:
Big Teddy :munchin
Well I guess people best start redoing the DSOR list.. We have 3 x basic loads per man of PMAGs. One set on level one (body) one set in Go Bags and one empty back at A-Camp.
You do the math, Army best start shipping boxes out to every unit going to the box. There are a shit ton of Conventional units using PMAGs.
I'm going to find this safety message and then request three boxes of new style M4 5.56 mm come Tuesday. That is 300 mags to cover of ODA. My unit will be WTF are you thinking.. Hey we have these PMAG and going to war, so we need someone to back stop us if "something should happen".
I know the great “Units are only authorized to use the Army-authorized magazines listed in the technical manuals.” Well rewrite the TMs!!! You can do that dummies.
This is politics at the highest example!! Remember.. free trade. Just not in my Army.
I think PMAG should donate to Mitts campaign then!!
Well I guess people best start redoing the DSOR list.. We have 3 x basic loads per man of PMAGs. One set on level one (body) one set in Go Bags and one empty back at A-Camp.
You do the math, Army best start shipping boxes out to every unit going to the box. There are a shit ton of Conventional units using PMAGs.
I'm going to find this safety message and then request three boxes of new style M4 5.56 mm come Tuesday. That is 300 mags to cover of ODA. My unit will be WTF are you thinking.. Hey we have these PMAG and going to war, so we need someone to back stop us if "something should happen".
I know the great “Units are only authorized to use the Army-authorized magazines listed in the technical manuals.” Well rewrite the TMs!!! You can do that dummies.
This is politics at the highest example!! Remember.. free trade. Just not in my Army.
I think PMAG should donate to Mitts campaign then!!
Bingo.... same thing with us... except slower supply lines overseas...
Badger52
05-25-2012, 10:16
This is politics at the highest example!! Remember.. free trade. Just not in my Army.Someone whispered to someone else they were worried their company wouldn't get the Option-Year executed in the delivery order due to lack of need.
greenberetTFS
05-25-2012, 10:19
So, let me get this straight. Bad magazines being about 95% of all weapons malfunctions. Lets ban an item that reduces risk?
I imagine we need to look to 'what' Senator has an aluminum magazine factory in their district.
um, if we do not import them from some third world nation.
-cough- either that or PMAG forgot to donate to the Obama campaign
You've got that right..........:rolleyes: :(
Big Teddy :munchin
Badger52
05-25-2012, 10:41
Brownells advertises that they supply magazines to the military. They are located in Iowa.MVPYup, the little town of Montezuma. Believe they had a contract from July 2009 for 1.4 million; ostensibly with some redesigned follower also that replaced the green one.
LINK (http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/u-s-army-to-get-new-5-56-mm-magazines/)
Recent contract award announcements indicate that U.S. Army warfighters will soon begin receiving new “improved” 30 round magazines for their M4/M16 series weapons.
According to the July 20 [2010] announcement by the U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) contracting office in Rock Island, Ill., the government intends to issue a sole source award to Brownells Inc., of Montezuma, Iowa, for 550,000 of that company’s 30 Round Improved Magazines (assigned National Stock Number: 1005-01-561-7200). The award will be made as a modification to that company’s existing contract W52H09-09-C-0072.
Doing the math indeed.
We recently got a bunch of Brownells' magazines. The first day we used them was on a qual range. In my very limited experience, I have never seen so many magazine related failures. These were all brand new magazines with the improved follower. I took about 10 guys who had all had feeding problems, and had them use our older GI magazines with green followers, no issues.
Airbornelawyer
05-25-2012, 14:51
Brownells advertises that they supply magazines to the military. They are located in Iowa. Iowa has Harking - D, and Grassley - R for senators. In congress they have three Dems (Braley, Loebsack, Boswell) and two repubs (Latham and King). Loebsack is on the Armed Service Committee.
MVP
Harkin, not Harking. He was the guy who claimed to have flown aircraft in Vietnam, and attacked others like G.W. Bush as chickenhawks, but then it was later discovered that Harkin was stationed in Japan, and only made some flights to Vietnam to deliver aircraft, and never flew operationally in the war.
Brownells is in Montezuma, Iowa, as Badger52's link notes. Montezuma was in Iowa's 3rd Congressional District, represented by Democrat Leonard Boswell. Boswell is a moderate Democrat, retired Army LTC and decorated Vietnam veteran. Boswell does not appear among Brownells' donees in opensecret.org's databases.
Because of redistricting, Iowa is losing a congressional seat, and Montezuma will be in the Iowa 1st Congressional District, represented by Democrat Bruce Braley. Braley also does not appear among Brownells' donees in opensecret.org's databases.
Instead, Brownells executives have made their political contributions to Republicans Steve King and Tom Latham. Iowa redistricting forced King and Latham into the same district, so Latham moved and is challenging Boswell in his redrawn district.
Brownells is tied for 12th among King's top 20 contributors, but actually only accounts for 0.75% of his campaign contributions. Most of King's money comes from conservative PACs like the Club for Growth and Citizens United and from small donors.
Brownells accounted for 0.77% of Latham's campaign contributions and ranked 72nd among Latham donors. Latham's major donors are from corporations in a wide range of industries, but no single source accounts for more than 5%.
So it's not clear that corrupt congresscritters are at fault here.
Doing the math indeed.Doing the math, that 2009 contract for which Brownells was to provide 1.41 million mags was a fixed-price contract for $10,730,100, or $7.61 per magazine. Anyone know how much Magpul charges military customers? Their cheapest commercial price for PMAGs is $14.95 for the basic, $17.95 for the MagLevel™ version.
It might just be a matter of bureaucratic number-crunching ignoring the soldiers in the field, unfortunately not a new story.
We recently got a bunch of Brownells' magazines. The first day we used them was on a qual range. In my very limited experience, I have never seen so many magazine related failures. These were all brand new magazines with the improved follower. I took about 10 guys who had all had feeding problems, and had them use our older GI magazines with green followers, no issues.
No study will ever be done on how much better one brand is to the next. Love to see IR done. We use PMAGs primarily, just got a box of Brownells, HK Steel, Sig Sauer and surefire magazines.
Never used the new Brownells, we well this next trip.
It might just be a matter of bureaucratic number-crunching ignoring the soldiers in the field, unfortunately not a new story.
I understand that number-crunching is going on now within our Governments halls. But I, like many other military members, have purchased my own magazines and many other items for my kit, weapons, etc. I have issues with politics and policy that hurt our military. Policies telling us/we can't use items because they want us to use a given companies item(s).
http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/u-s-army-to-get-new-5-56-mm-magazines/
The Reaper
05-25-2012, 16:41
Not all of the banned mags are PMAGs.
There are a lot of shitty plastic mags out there.
IIRC, the current manufacturers of military issue M16/M4 mags is Colt's, FN, and LaBelle. Government cost on the aluminum mags is probably in the $8 range and the PMAGs wholesale around $12.
And yes, there is also a problem with PEO and the NIH syndrome.
TR
Destrier
05-25-2012, 17:38
What are they going to do shave your head and yelll at you? Shoot at you? Not to degrade disiplan but what are they really going to do to you if they catch you with pmags in combat?
Breaking the rules just because you can or because you just do not give a flying F@#@ is a sign of immaturity and has caused woe to many a soldier.
Breaking the rules because it reduces risk through proven weapon malfunction reduction however,
I could sell that.
Peregrino
05-25-2012, 18:44
Brought to you by the people sitting next to the people who gave you the ACUs. Not sure much more needs to be said.
What are they going to do shave your head and yelll at you? Shoot at you? Not to degrade disiplan but what are they really going to do to you if they catch you with pmags in combat?
"They" have to find me first....... :lifter highly doubtful these clowns will leave a large FOB to find us.
If the sh*t hits the fan, we'll use every mag we have regardless of composition.
Breaking the rules just because you can or because you just do not give a flying F@#@ is a sign of immaturity and has caused woe to many a soldier.
Breaking the rules because it reduces risk through proven weapon malfunction reduction however,
I could sell that.
This will be fun to see how long the supply chains take to catch up to the new requirement. especially for those of us out in the boonies..
One can't adhere to the new rules, if one isn't issued the "authorized" equipment.
Update: No ban on rifle magazines.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/06/07/army-now-says-no-ban-on-rifle-magazines.html?comp=1198882887570&rank=1
Bingo.... same thing with us... except slower supply lines overseas...
No wonder I was able to score 400 or so of these a few months back. Murphy was watching me as I "found" them.
Sorry guys....
:D
Must be my fault....
However, I am just going to pretend I didn't get the word on this one..................