New Magpul TMAG30

[littlejerry]

My experience with ETS was more ... nuanced.

My ETS magazines for Glock 42 always gave me an outstanding service. They are impact-resistant, durable, and reliable. I clean them once in a while, by wiping the inside with a chunk of an old bedsheet. Note that I only have 9- and 12-round varieties. The 7-round version seems like an attempt to cram an extra round where it does not belong, but I don't know about it first hand.

The ETS magazines for SIG P320 were a disappointment. I only have two, and I had to replace one of them. The issues were related to bad sculpture of their followers, rather than to the formulation of the plastic in their magazine bodies. They were just a rush job, needed a few tweaks - a deeper LRBHO pawl indentation, anti-tilt legs, maybe some re-profiling to the inside of the magazine. I think they took their Glock magazine and adapted it hastily to P320, with a predicable result.

I tried a G43 7 Rd mag because it was so cheap. First time loading it the 7th Rd ripped right through the feed lips. The rim left a nice cut/gouge in the top of the feed lips.

The full size Glock mags choke on the least bit of dirt, sand, or fowling. Drop it loaded and it'll explode(the 21 or 33s)

[Default.mp3]

I remember flipping through a gun mag 30 years ago and seeing pics of the Sig 550 that came with proprietary see-through mags. I don’t know how tough or reliable they were but they were military issue for the Swiss military. Fast forward to today and we finally have clear AR mags.

The difference is that the SG 550 was almost certainly designed with having a translucent magazine as part of the requirements; for the AR, the translucent magazine was not a design consideration, so the magazine dimensions were not conducive for the use of translucent polymer. Tough, reliable translucent magazines isn't inherently hard, it's the need to have them also fit the design the parameters of the AR magazine that was originally a metal part that makes it difficult to pull off. No different than the fact that modern rifles with polymer receivers are fairly common (G36, BREN 2, ACR, etc.), but polymer receivers for ARs have been pretty consistently problematic for the most part.

[MandoWookie]

The difference is that the SG 550 was almost certainly designed with having a translucent magazine as part of the requirements; for the AR, the translucent magazine was not a design consideration, so the magazine dimensions were not conducive for the use of translucent polymer. Tough, reliable translucent magazines isn't inherently hard, it's the need to have them also fit the design the parameters of the AR magazine that was originally a metal part that makes it difficult to pull off. No different than the fact that modern rifles with polymer receivers are fairly common (G36, BREN 2, ACR, etc.), but polymer receivers for ARs have been pretty consistently problematic for the most part.

Yeah, has anyone actually compared Sig 550, AUG or G36 mags to Pmags? They are comparatively huge, especially around the feed lip areas. The challenge was always getting polymer mags to work in magwell dimensions designed around thin aluminum mags.