Greg (ARFcom handle 60driver) was very helpful in sending me this magazine to review.  I received my T&E magazine last Saturday, February 9th.

I have only had the magazine for 9 days, and honestly, have not done any freezer testing, heating it up with a heat gun, microwaving the magazine body, or crazy sh*t like that.

Its length is roughly 1/6" shorter then my GI mags w/ L-Plates.  Note that there is also less curve with the Lancer System Magazine.



Empty weight: 114 grams.

I stood on the magazine, with one foot, with both feet, and jumped up and down on it with and not only did the magazine did not crack, none of the rounds, that were loaded in the magazine, spilled out onto my driveway.  I also ran over it with my 3,500 pound Camry w/o any incident.*

*I only had 20 rounds of Remington UMC in the magazine at the time I ran over it with my car, not 30.  I figured that if the worst happened, 20 rounds were fewer than 30 rounds to try and collect, as they spilled out and rolled down the hill.  Since this did not occur, maybe I need to retest this with a fully loaded magazine.

The magazine is easy to disassemble for cleaning by pushing in on two tabs located on the sides of the magazine body, about 1/2" from the bottom of the magazine body.  They appear to be designed with the idea of using two bullet tips to push in both tabs at the same time.  This is a nice feature that the GI mags lack.



The magazine follower is patterned off of the green GI one, but is not identical.



Neither the Green GI, nor the Orange MagPul followers will fit the Lancer Magazine Body.

I tried the magazine in all three of my Rock River lowers and they locked up fine and activated the bolt catch.  If you do not have a RRA lower, YMMV.

Fully loaded with 30 rounds, the magazine was only slightly more difficult to insert then my L-Plate equipped GI mags loaded w/ 28 rounds.

I shot WOLF FMJ, WOLF HP, Remington UMC FMJ, PPU HP-Match, and handloaded 69gr SMK's using the Lancer Systems magazine.  It took awhile, as outdoor range at French Creek does not allow "rapid fire" (more than one round per second).  I had no problems with the magazine, nor my carbine.  Now, my puny 200 round, 90 minute, range test with one AR carbine proves little, except that the Lancer Systems magazine works as well as my rebuilt aluminium bodied ones.

Because the Lancer Magazine Follower is patterned off of the Green GI one, I decided to see if I could mod an Orange MagPul to fit the Lancer Systems magazine body, and still have the magazine work.  After taking and writing down a bunch of measurements, it turned out to be quite easy to mod the MagPul to fit the Lancer Magazine Body.



Now, the magazine still takes 30 rounds, but is slightly more tip resistant than the current follower and is as easy lock in place as with the green, factory, follower.





+  The magazine body is tougher then the current GI aluminium body.
+  The magazine comes with a rubber base pad, standard.
+  The magazine could be loaded with 30 rounds, loaded with the BCG forward, and be reliable.

-  The follower follows the Green GI pattern, which is fine, but I would prefer it if the existing rear of the magazine follower was extended to, roughly, 0.730".  This would make the follower more tilt resistant.
-  I think that there should be a notch, roughly 0.075" deep and 0.200" long, on either side of the front of the magazine follower to raise the face of the follower above the front of the magazine body, to prevent the possibility of rounds hanging up due to the bullet tips hitting the front of the magazine.  I did this to the factory magazine follower, you can just make out the small cut on the left hand side of the follower at the front.

*  Now, are either of these changes REALLY needed?  They weren't on my three AR's.  But then Murphy was an optimist and, IMO, I think that with these two small changes, this will move from a very good product to a GREAT product.

Now, I have communicated my suggestions to Greg and he said that they would review my suggestions.  Regardless of whether or not Lancer Systems listens to my two suggestions, all and all, I really like this magazine.

I think that the aluminum magazine days are numbered.

The more choices, the more better!!

good review -

Just a few photos I took of my Lancer magazine. I have not been to the range with mine yet but so far the quality "feel" of this magazine is nice. If it performs as well as it looks and feels then this magazine will be a winner for Lancer. I also posted some comments about this magazine in the other thread on this magazine.

I have been working with a T&E mag this week also.

Bill, I was thinking about doing the same thing to a Magpul follower. An unmodified follower allows the mag to hold 24 rounds, I think. When I put the Magpul follower in, it had VERY smooth operating action. I ran out of time that night to modify a Magpul follower. Thanks for doing that.

I'll add what I found when drop testing. I tested dropping the H&K, USGI, Pmag, and the L5 all loaded with 30 rounds from 5' onto concrete.

The Pmag had no issues. Looked as good as new.
The USGI let 1 round pop out and had some scuffs on the base plate. No dents.
The H&K let 1 round pop out and was dented on the corner of the base plate.
The L5 let 1 round pop out and looked as good as new.

Polymers have an advantage in durability. How much? I don't know. I know that I'd take my USGI mags over the heavier H&K's. I think the USGI will not deform like the H&K in certain conditions.

I don't have a pickup to run them over with, so I haven't tried. I think running over them is an interesting test, but I don't think it is an analytical test. If you think about it, the pressure applied is being distributed over the contact area of the tire. I don't think the pressure really gets that high while running over it.

I think Magpul did that as a demonstration of how the properties of their polymer mags have advantages over the properties of steel and aluminum. Magpul's polymer mags are able to return to shape where, under certain conditions, a UGSI and H&K cannot.

I am pretty sure the properties of the Lancer are similar to the Pmags.

There is a reason why the US Gov't has specified the next weapon mag will be plastic.

ETA: I also left the mag fully loaded and stored outside in temps from -8 to -15 for three nights. I did drop testing from 5' onto an ice covered parking lot. The L5 let 1 round pop out and looked as good as new. The cold temps did not affect the mag.

I think I'll get one of these to try.  Initial reports look favorable.

(tentative sip of the kool aid)

But can it hold up to the bite test?  Pmags can be biten and still work.  Please bite one and report back.  If it can hold up to the bite test I may buy one.  Pics will be needed for proof.

Quoted: I think that the aluminum magazine days are numbered. You could be very correct in that statement. That magazine will have to outperform the aluminum in every aspect and over an extended period of time. Remember the aluminum magazine has served you and this country well for over 40 years. And at a price point that makes sense. It is very very exciting that you the recreationl shooter, law enforcement and the military have choices. Plastic, stainless steel and aluminum. The freedom to choose, exactly what this country is all about. Larry C Products Ps. Nice post, well thought out and informative.

50 years from now the aluminum in an unused aluminum magazine will be as strong as it is today.  How strong are plastic/polymer mags going to be?   Polymers are long chain molecules that degrade over time into short molecules.  What polymer are they using? How quickly does that polymer degrade?  Do they use a plasticizer that will migrate and leave the magazine brittle?  These and many other questions prevent me from taking the leap to plastic/polymer mags.  

Magazines are made to be disposable, hence their pricing. I do not consider them disposable though because I have to pay for them out of my pocket. But I will say that if I buy 10 magazines and have to replace them in 5-10 years it will not break my bank. I do understand your reasoning though.

Quoted: 50 years from now the aluminum in an unused aluminum magazine will be as strong as it is today.  How strong are plastic/polymer mags going to be?   Polymers are long chain molecules that degrade over time into short molecules.  What polymer are they using? How quickly does that polymer degrade?  Do they use a plasticizer that will migrate and leave the magazine brittle?  These and many other questions prevent me from taking the leap to plastic/polymer mags.

I have two dozen aluminum magazines and five polymer, six if you include the T&E Lancer.

I have no intention of getting rid of my aluminum bodied magazines just because.

Aluminum bodied magazines will continue to be made and sold because they are a good balance between cost and reliability for most people.

Magazines are issued as a replaceable/disposable item if they break.  The impact resistance of both the PMags and the Lancer mean, at least to me, that they will hold up longer to the day-to-day abuse our servicemen dish out.  I, however, have to buy mine.

As to how quickly they will degrade and how UV will affect them, I do not know.  The .mil people can always order more to be made.

IMO, I do think that, in the near term, polymer magazines will become accepted as issue in the Armed Forces.  Whether this is two years or six years, again, I do not know.

I've had my L5 for about six months and have had zero problems with it.  I have run about 1000 rounds through it and beat it up pretty good and it still runs like a champ.  I have a bunch others that also run great, but I figured I would really beat on one to see how it took the punishment and save the others for regular use later on.  NO problems and I really like the simplicity of looking at it to see how many rounds are left instead of trying to feel how heavy it is and guessing how many rounds are left.  I think they are well worth the money considering you get a basepad with them.  I have about 50 alum and twenty or so pmags, and from now on they will be safe queens as an investment.  I will shoot the lancer's.

Well, I showed my mag to some fellow LEOs at work today. They all liked the magazine's appearance. They were, however, surprised when I disassembled it and began to jump up and down on it wildly in my office. They thought it was going to break.

It didn't crack, creak, bend split or break. To say they were impressed is an understatement. I weight around 190-195 so they just knew it was going to split in half at the seams or crack under the pressure.

I recieved some mags for testing a few weeks ago.  I have had zero function problems I will post a better follow up when im com plete with the tourture tests.

Quoted: Magazines are made to be disposable, hence their pricing. I do not consider them disposable though because I have to pay for them out of my pocket. But I will say that if I buy 10 magazines and have to replace them in 5-10 years it will not break my bank. I do understand your reasoning though.

If we are "legally"able to!

Quoted: Quoted: I think that the aluminum magazine days are numbered. You could be very correct in that statement. That magazine will have to outperform the aluminum in every aspect and over an extended period of time. Remember the aluminum magazine has served you and this country well for over 40 years. And at a price point that makes sense. It is very very exciting that you the recreationl shooter, law enforcement and the military have choices. Plastic, stainless steel and aluminum. The freedom to choose, exactly what this country is all about. Larry C Products Ps. Nice post, well thought out and informative. 50 years from now the aluminum in an unused aluminum magazine will be as strong as it is today.  How strong are plastic/polymer mags going to be?   Polymers are long chain molecules that degrade over time into short molecules.  What polymer are they using? How quickly does that polymer degrade?  Do they use a plasticizer that will migrate and leave the magazine brittle?  These and many other questions prevent me from taking the leap to plastic/polymer mags.

I've wondered this myself after owning many plastic things that ended up brittle, soft, or degraded after temp, sunlight, time, or solvents had their way with it.

I will say that plastics have come a long way in the past few years, but time itself is the worst enemy of plastics.

How does it stand up to normal gun cleaning solvents?
Maybe a little gasoline or acetone?

Clear plastic can behave more strangely with solvents than colored.

Here is the email I sent Scott at Lancer Systems:

Scott,

I received 4 translucent magazines from you this past Feb.  I was able to test them out yesterday and here are my findings.  

Rifles: (2) Bushmaster XM15-E2S full-auto gov. models
Ammunition: M855
Courses of Fire: BZO and qualification course (Low impact, slow to rapid fire)

I experienced the following failures of the magazines:

1. Bolt hold open properties non existent (3 out of 4)
2. Magazines would not seat without great force when inserted on a closed bolt, even with only 10 round capacity. (All 4)
3. Followers tilted down and into the magazine body upon last rounds fired. (All 4 with 1 mag experiencing gross failure...Picture attached)

Although the magazines successfully fed all rounds fired, the problems I experienced will preclude me from using these magazines for duty use.  I will not rule out the possibility that some of the problems might be attributed to the Bushmaster lower receivers, but with that said, I have not experienced any problems with these rifles using USGI magazines.  

I understand my test was limited in test samples and test platforms, but looking at my experiences from the viewpoint of randomness, my confidence in these magazines is no doubt "tainted".  My humble suggestions are to improve the follower design to prevent complete tilt into the magazine body, and implement a completely cut out magazine catch hole as found on USGI magazines, instead of the currently featured "slight depression".  This might aid positive magazine seating.  

I would like to test these magazines in my personal RRA CAR-15 when I next rotate out on home leave.  I will contact you late summer.

Thank you for the opportunity to test out your product and best of luck,

[Brad in Baghdad]

Quoted: Here is the email I sent Scott at Lancer Systems: Scott, I received 4 translucent magazines from you this past Feb.  I was able to test them out yesterday and here are my findings.   Rifles: (2) Bushmaster XM15-E2S full-auto gov. models Ammunition: M855 Courses of Fire: BZO and qualification course (Low impact, slow to rapid fire) I experienced the following failures of the magazines: 1. Bolt hold open properties non existent (3 out of 4) 2. Magazines would not seat without great force when inserted on a closed bolt, even with only 10 round capacity. (All 4) 3. Followers tilted down and into the magazine body upon last rounds fired. (All 4 with 1 mag experiencing gross failure...Picture attached) Although the magazines successfully fed all rounds fired, the problems I experienced will preclude me from using these magazines for duty use.  I will not rule out the possibility that some of the problems might be attributed to the Bushmaster lower receivers, but with that said, I have not experienced any problems with these rifles using USGI magazines.   I understand my test was limited in test samples and test platforms, but looking at my experiences from the viewpoint of randomness, my confidence in these magazines is no doubt "tainted".  My humble suggestions are to improve the follower design to prevent complete tilt into the magazine body, and implement a completely cut out magazine catch hole as found on USGI magazines, instead of the currently featured "slight depression".  This might aid positive magazine seating.   I would like to test these magazines in my personal RRA CAR-15 when I next rotate out on home leave.  I will contact you late summer. Thank you for the opportunity to test out your product and best of luck, [Brad in Baghdad]

Brad,

Nice review. E-mail inbound.

We did some testing in Bushmasters, though not in an XM15-E2S, and all were successful.  

Based on your report it sounds like the magazine sets a high in your lower receiver and the magazines followers not engaging the bolt stop.  

Can you do a quick test for us and confirm these two conditions?

Inspect all your Lancer magazine followers, are there indentations on the rear ?
With no magazine in the rifle, pull the charging handle to the rear and release, put the rifle on safe.
Pull out the rear take down pin.
Rotate the upper receiver up so you can see into the magazine well and see the bolt catch
Insert the Lancer Magazine into the magazine well fully until it’s fully seated.
Did the bolt catch hit the rear of the follower and depress the follower?  
Hold the Lower receiver level and bring the upper receiver down onto the lower receiver, do not force it all the way down, is there a gap between the upper and lower receiver?

Repeat the same test with a USGI magazine

Here is what we think is happening, your finding will confirm this;

- The magazine sets too high in your lower receiver; this is causing the difficult to load condition

- The magazine’s followers are not engaging the bolt catch; this is causing the bolt to not lock to the rear on the last round.  As the bolt comes forward it’s catching the rear of the follower, causing the tilt down condition.

We are sorry the magazines did not function with your Bushmaster, your test and feedback is greatly appreciated.  This information will help us to make improvement in the Lancer Magazine ensuing it functions is the greatest number of systems.

Thank you for the T&E and for your service!

Yeah, Polymers degrade, but aluminum wants to be aluminum oxide.  Entropy is the enemy of all your hardware...

Bump