Comments on: The Ultimate M16/M4 Mag

By: yyvyuh

yyvyuh — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:13:40 +0000

xgjkrthghfjghfghtjb v f nv fbvc fbcjf dv c cub fvdv

By: Eric Von Teufel

Eric Von Teufel — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 05:01:16 +0000

Plastic magazines are a joke. They cannot take the cold. I see people drive over the magazine and act like that’s a test. Plastic magazines split at the back and the front gets chewed up. It’s the pressures from within and not without that cracks the backs. I haven’t see any of them go past 5,000 rounds.
Stick with steel M-16 magazines and quit the buying the fashion designer crap.

By: Gary

Gary — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:55:44 +0000

I believe that we should purchase what is all around more practical for our military, I see we are heading for a time where spending will be cut and budgets will be closely scrutinized. Not fully being able to evaluate this magazine myself leaves me at a disadvantage to fairly comment. Practical experience in the field is where it counts and testing in the field is difficult. Although I do enjoy a good day at the range, nothing can beat how something will perform like having real live situations.
Also I see the lower part of the body of this mag appears plastic or maybe some sort of polymer. I am sure they have looked at cold weather performance and durability as well.

By: JRS

JRS — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:30:24 +0000

Soldier Systems,
You’re correct in that we may not be fair in assuming that the ARC magazine is not as good as the Pmag. Truthfully, none of us have used the magazine on the range and it could turn out that the magazine is every bit as reliable as a Pmag.
What we ARE criticizing, is the fact that the magazine, has the capabilities of a Pmag (save that gasket) at nearly TWICE the price AND requires new magazine pouches.
It just seems to boggle the mind, that anyone would pay for an ARC mag which require a new carrying system, when a cheaper design is readily available which require no changes, save the magazine itself.

By: Drift Monster

Drift Monster — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:08:35 +0000

I still say the Magpul P-mag is better

By: flash

flash — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:35:51 +0000

I have a couple of these on the shelf at my shop. I’ll give them a try during my next tactical rifle class and let you know.

By: Soldier Systems

Soldier Systems — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 02:42:36 +0000

Amazing how quickly folks are throwing this magazine under the bus without ever having even seen one in person yet let alone used one.
The deal with the different versions (GI and commercial) has to do with out of spec mag wells. Even Pmags are having problems with this issue.

By: coolhand77

coolhand77 — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 21:49:48 +0000

Yah, the non window version was running around 15.95 and the windowed version 17 or 18.95 pre election
Since Obama got elected the prices have gone up at the dealers due to increased demand for full capacity magazines and lack of magazines in stock.
28? Yah, not worth it. I’ll stick with P-mags, thanks

By: JRS

JRS — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 20:39:28 +0000

Coolhand,
The pre-order prices I saw for the mag were in the $28 dollar range. If I’m not mistaken, Pmags are about half that.

By: Wes

Wes — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 15:55:28 +0000

The ARC Magazine is irrelevant.
The Magpul P-mag is the ultimate AR magazine, period.