They stick out like a sore thumb with the high polish stainless exterior, lol. Does that count as a feature?Originally Posted by Super77
Seriously I cannot fathom using this finish on the body of the mag when it is going to be both highly visible and reflective with the magazine in the pistol and on a belt mag pouch. Seems to run counter to the whole design of the pistol being full FDE for the military, maybe for a competition shooter it's perfect and perhaps that is the market niche.
In addition to Mecgar, SIG has used two U.S. manufacturers for P320 mags a prior, unidentified one whose mags were marked with a “J” , and Checkmate marked with a “C.”
At a SIG LE armorers course in 2019 we were advised to ensure only “made in Italy” mags were used for duty.
Around the time I stopped seeing “J” marked mags I also stopped seeing issues with “made in USA” 320 mags.
However, I subsequently obtained 6 Checkmate made Legion 320 mags which have been my primary training mags. One grew legs but the 5 remaining checkmate mags have been 100% through about 20k rounds.
Checkmate has been making the 365 mags but SIG also started making 365 mags in house after they tooled up to make their own mags for the new 6.8 service rifle.
I just bought two from Scheel's today as a test, but I'm not picking up any more until I've range-tested them with a few hundred rounds. It wouldn't surprise me if down the line they don't start selling a five-round extension or a 21- or 30-rounder to compete with Sig "OEM" directly. I still feel goddamned silly running 30-rounders on even my full-size P320 but I've got two of them in the Plano box under my bed.
If they're good, I'll wait until Lanbo's gets them in for way cheaper than MSRP since they're my go-to for anything with Magpul on the box.
My big question about Magpul making metal mags is if they are going to make a metal G43x/G48 mag to compete with Shield Arms.
A shooting buddy bought 2 to try as well.
TLDR all existing 320 extensions and base plates appear to be compatible. At least his from Springer Precision and Henning do.
PSA already seems to be beating Shield at their own game.
P365 variants are the next likely target based on the number of 365 series in circulation.
Outside actual military use this is not a real concern. Even then you could always hit them with some NuBlack.
For most people corrosion resistance > the 5 S’s of effective camo.
Well, they certainly replicated one thing from the OEM mags - it's still a royal bitch to get that last round seated on a new mag/spring.
One was more stubborn about it than the other.
Jump to about 2:50 for AMAG info
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
Last edited by Tokarev; 01-25-2024 at 12:58 PM.
I have an AMAG in hand and now I am a little mad.
Did you guys watch the interview of AR15.COM with the Magpul rep at SHOT 2024 (linked in the previous post)? He said that they reduced bias. Yes, they reduced it all right - by making the magazine extra fat. Thanks a lot, guys!
(J) 21.6 mm .. 21.8 mm
Mec-Gar 17rd 21.6 .. 21.7 mm
Mec-Gar 30 rd 21.6 .. 21.8 mm -- that is pretty bad magazine otherwise BTW, uncharacteristic of Mec-Gar
Mec-Gar 20 rd 21.6 mm
ACT-MAG 21.6 mm
ETS 22.04 (top) 21.94 (down column)
AMAG 21.78 (top) 21.87 (down column)
Welp. I suffer from the damn bias in Ruger and it's a problem, so I was going to slim the adapter magwells back down, and ban users from using ETS. I guess it's a good thing that I procrastinated, because AMAGs would not fit otherwise.
The notch of AMAG is not extra wide, only 4.65. Thanks for that. But they could not resist to make it insufficiently extend to the rear. Do these people know how to use calipers?
The follower works okay and that's at least something good about AMAG.
BTW, unrelated to dimensions, they clearly tried to make stamping with as large radii as possible. The ribs are weakly defined and the rear corners are heavily rounded. Not like it matters, but a curiously independent thinking. All of other makers, including ACT, follow the exact same sculpture.
Reply With Quote