AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Lancer L5 Translucent Magazines? (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 1/22/2012 5:02:30 PM EDT
|
I look through all the posts in the AR forums and I don't recall seeing anyone using these. Are they comparable to P-Mags?
http://www.lancer-systems.com/L5.html |
|
Quoted: I look through all the posts in the AR forums and I don't recall seeing anyone using these. Are they comparable to P-Mags? http://www.lancer-systems.com/L5.html Lots of people using them. They work quite well. The AWM has an anti-tilt follower, but the L5's have not let me down. The original green followers did have an issue with some bolt catches (Shrubmaster?), so they modified the rear tab and changed the color of the follower to black. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I prefer them over Pmags, but honestly I have more Pmags because Lancer is killing themselves with the pricing. not really, you can get clear AWM's for $18.99 and the standard AWM's for $15.99 i just ordered 10 from midway the other day That is still up there. If you want the clear colored ones they are $25+. You can find windowed pmags under $14 all the time. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I prefer them over Pmags, but honestly I have more Pmags because Lancer is killing themselves with the pricing. not really, you can get clear AWM's for $18.99 and the standard AWM's for $15.99 i just ordered 10 from midway the other day That is still up there. If you want the clear colored ones they are $25+. You can find windowed pmags under $14 all the time. true, but i honestly dont like the clear ones which is why i chose the standard black ones i also ordered from midways cause of the coupons they always have, with the coupon each mag came out to 13.99 which isnt bad |
| I have Lancers and GI mags love the lancers both types and Botach has buy 3 get 1 free with the new advanced warfighter mags that brings them down to like $13 a mag..I know botach tactical is a dirty word for some but ive ordered from them 5x in the last 2 months no problems and free shipping.I got the OD mags.For $220 I got 20 mags 15+5 free buy 3 1 free thatst he best deal going so far. |
My Lancer L5 translucent mag which I had been using for almost 4 years Quoted:
I look through all the posts in the AR forums and I don't recall seeing anyone using these. Are they comparable to P-Mags? http://www.lancer-systems.com/L5.html If you look at the archived thread you'll find them starting about 2008 which is when I got some of mine, also take a look at Lancer's Industry forum and see the pic and discussion threads there. I have one pre-production translucent mag and several production mags that have the original followers that don't have an anti-tilt feature yet, I could make the followers tilt when I push the extreme edges in the middle of the mag with a long rod (or screwdriver) but it never failed on me with normal use. As for strength it is not as strong as a PMAG, I won't run it over with my SUV but there are members here that accidentally stepped on it and it survived all the time. If you want a more stronger mag Lancer also makes their L5 AWM model, they don't have translucent versions yet but they announced during the SHOT Show last week that they will start making the AWM clear translucent 10 round mags also the black and smoke 10 rounders that should be available from their authorized dealers shortly. I mainly use my Lancer mags for training and target practice because it's nice to see if the mag is loaded and how much ammo is left in the mags. Lancer New Products at 2012 SHOT Show - AR15.com vid link Lancer L5 AWM Mag model info - Lancer site link |
|
Quoted: http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/Alpha-Romeo3/Hunting%206X4/LMT_REC_NORGON_L5_MAG_LH_L221-FP-1-1.jpg My Lancer L5 translucent mag which I had been using for almost 4 years Quoted: I look through all the posts in the AR forums and I don't recall seeing anyone using these. Are they comparable to P-Mags? http://www.lancer-systems.com/L5.html If you look at the archived thread you'll find them starting about 2008 which is when I got some of mine, also take a look at Lancer's Industry forum and see the pic and discussion threads there. I have one pre-production translucent mag and several production mags that have the original followers that don't have an anti-tilt feature yet, I could make the followers tilt when I push the extreme edges in the middle of the mag with a long rod (or screwdriver) but it never failed on me with normal use. As for strength it is not as strong as a PMAG, I won't run it over with my SUV but there are members here that accidentally stepped on it and it survived all the time. If you want a more stronger mag Lancer also makes their L5 AWM model, they don't have translucent versions yet but they announced during the SHOT Show last week that they will start making the AWM clear translucent 10 round mags also the black and smoke 10 rounders that should be available from their authorized dealers shortly. I mainly use my Lancer mags for training and target practice because it's nice to see if the mag is loaded and how much ammo is left in the mags. Lancer New Products at 2012 SHOT Show - AR15.com vid link Lancer L5 AWM Mag model info - Lancer site link I ran my L5 over with my Camry and the only thing that happened is three or four rounds came out. I also threw it around the asphalt and all I did was scratch it, a little. Still have that test magazine Greg gave me. Still works. I mod'ed up a non-tilt follower for the L5 series based on a Magpul follower. It worked just fine, but did not work any better than the existing follower. |
|
I look through all the posts in the AR forums and I don't recall seeing anyone using these. Are they comparable to P-Mags?
No, not by a long shot. IMO they are better, much better. I shoot my .458s as much as I do my 5.56s and I want mags to work with both rifles with any bullet I choose to use. The P-Mags do not work well with some .458 bullets, so as far as I am concerned, they are not my first choice, in fact, they are not even on my list. The Lancers, on the other hand, are outstanding mags. I have never had one fail, the L5 or the AWMs. I only wish they would work with 6.5s, 6.8s, 5.45s, and 7.62s. All that said, the P-Mags in 5.56 are fine and I have no complaints when used with the round they are designed to be used with, but I still like the translucent Lancers better. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was also a video of a guy putting a pmag on a rope and driving 40+mph through the desert and on pavement. I cannot find any of them though |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was also a video of a guy putting a pmag on a rope and driving 40+mph through the desert and on pavement. I cannot find any of them though no doubt PMAGS are tough, i just think the thing that made the Lancer a little better was the steel feed lips ETA: 3 mags with M855, 7 mags with SWA 75gr TAP 
super easy dis assembly, took me 1 second to get it apart 
and my cat wanted a photo op 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was also a video of a guy putting a pmag on a rope and driving 40+mph through the desert and on pavement. I cannot find any of them though no doubt PMAGS are tough, i just think the thing that made the Lancer a little better was the steel feed lips ETA: 3 mags with M855, 7 mags with SWA 75gr TAP http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1769.jpg super easy dis assembly, took me 1 second to get it apart http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_3115.jpg and my cat wanted a photo op http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1277.jpg I would own all Lancers, but honestly they are to expensive. Not many places have them so there never is any deals. I just ordered windowed pmags for $12 a piece. If you look at the colored translucent mags, they are $24+ each. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was also a video of a guy putting a pmag on a rope and driving 40+mph through the desert and on pavement. I cannot find any of them though no doubt PMAGS are tough, i just think the thing that made the Lancer a little better was the steel feed lips ETA: 3 mags with M855, 7 mags with SWA 75gr TAP http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1769.jpg super easy dis assembly, took me 1 second to get it apart http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_3115.jpg and my cat wanted a photo op http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1277.jpg I would own all Lancers, but honestly they are to expensive. Not many places have them so there never is any deals. I just ordered windowed pmags for $12 a piece. If you look at the colored translucent mags, they are $24+ each. thats true, im not much for the translucent though, i dont need to check how many rounds i have left, i can tell when im empty or close just by removing the mag. i got mine from midway for $14 each |
| I started out with a bunch of pmags since that's what was recommended to me by everyone. I later picked up a couple of the original Lancer L5 mags and they were neat but I really didn't use them much. I eventually noticed that a number of my pmags had cracked along the spine, including mags that didn't have much use on them. At that point I bought a bunch of the L5A Lancer mags (the AWM wasn't out at that time) and they're what I've been using since. I haven't had a single problem with any of my Lancer mags and they've served me well in some pretty wet and muddy classes and matches and general plinking. My remaining pmags sit unused in a drawer now, and I have no plans to move back to pmags. |
| I own a few of the Lancer L5s. They are very nice. Seem every bit as durable as the Pmags and from the sound of what some were saying, maybe even more so. I've never had a problem with either. The only thing that I don't care for is that they are considerably harder(vs Pmag)to lock into the lower when fully loaded and inserted on a closed bolt. From what I understand, Magpul intentionally made Pmags easier to do this with. However, that may have been something that Lancer addressed in the later models, I wouldn't know as I've never used them. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was also a video of a guy putting a pmag on a rope and driving 40+mph through the desert and on pavement. I cannot find any of them though no doubt PMAGS are tough, i just think the thing that made the Lancer a little better was the steel feed lips ETA: 3 mags with M855, 7 mags with SWA 75gr TAP http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1769.jpg super easy dis assembly, took me 1 second to get it apart http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_3115.jpg and my cat wanted a photo op http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa273/SinlesSorrow/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1277.jpg I don't know why I said pmag. It was the original lancer he did that to. I think he tried it with a pmag but it didn't fair too well |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was no real second place. He broke everything except the lancer and was quite surprised how well USGI mags held up. I would suggest you find the article and draw your own conclusions. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was no real second place. He broke everything except the lancer and was quite surprised how well USGI mags held up. I would suggest you find the article and draw your own conclusions. I cannot believe some people still talk about a Shotgun News story, involving a guy dropping magazines off of the back of a 5 ton truck as if it was some sort of laboratory standard test. Back then our internal testing did not jive with the Shotgun news story and since then most of the magazines tested have undergone major enhancements (or are no longer available) so the results are even less relevant. I think the PMag tested was a first gen which we have not made since late 2007 For reading data the golden rule is - Garbage In, Garbage Out As an example of a base to read test results from- Our drop and impact testing at Magpul involves calibrated fixtures that provide repeatable impacts for weight, velocity and direction all of which are filmed with high speed cameras to study the impacts in slow motion. Our Environmental tester can cycle magazines from -60 up to 290 degrees with humidity from 0-100%, all computer controlled. We never take just one reading on any of the tests, we utilize a decent sample size to confirm results and plot them prior to reading anything from the results. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was no real second place. He broke everything except the lancer and was quite surprised how well USGI mags held up. I would suggest you find the article and draw your own conclusions. I cannot believe some people still talk about a Shotgun News story, involving a guy dropping magazines off of the back of a 5 ton truck as if it was some sort of laboratory standard test. Back then our internal testing did not jive with the Shotgun news story and since then most of the magazines tested have undergone major enhancements (or are no longer available) so the results are even less relevant. I think the PMag tested was a first gen which we have not made since late 2007 For reading data the golden rule is - Garbage In, Garbage Out As an example of a base to read test results from- Our drop and impact testing at Magpul involves calibrated fixtures that provide repeatable impacts for weight, velocity and direction all of which are filmed with high speed cameras to study the impacts in slow motion. Our Environmental tester can cycle magazines from -60 up to 290 degrees with humidity from 0-100%, all computer controlled. We never take just one reading on any of the tests, we utilize a decent sample size to confirm results and plot them prior to reading anything from the results. I'm sure if your magazine had won that test you wouldn't be here complaining about how unscientific it was. It's great that you have controlled tests for your internal use, but sometimes it's nice to see stuff tested in the manner it would get damaged in the real world, such as dropped or stepped on or whatever. We don't live in laboratories and while their use in designing a better product is certainly worthwhile, I think it's a bit silly to imply that the reason that your mag failed and the Lancer didn't is down to some slight variance in how they hit the ground. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
didn't gunwritr do a mag comparison years ago where the lancer actually came out on top? yes nd the PMAGS were a very close second, they had a small amount of cracking There was no real second place. He broke everything except the lancer and was quite surprised how well USGI mags held up. I would suggest you find the article and draw your own conclusions. I cannot believe some people still talk about a Shotgun News story, involving a guy dropping magazines off of the back of a 5 ton truck as if it was some sort of laboratory standard test. Back then our internal testing did not jive with the Shotgun news story and since then most of the magazines tested have undergone major enhancements (or are no longer available) so the results are even less relevant. I think the PMag tested was a first gen which we have not made since late 2007 For reading data the golden rule is - Garbage In, Garbage Out As an example of a base to read test results from- Our drop and impact testing at Magpul involves calibrated fixtures that provide repeatable impacts for weight, velocity and direction all of which are filmed with high speed cameras to study the impacts in slow motion. Our Environmental tester can cycle magazines from -60 up to 290 degrees with humidity from 0-100%, all computer controlled. We never take just one reading on any of the tests, we utilize a decent sample size to confirm results and plot them prior to reading anything from the results. I'm sure if your magazine had won that test you wouldn't be here complaining about how unscientific it was. It's great that you have controlled tests for your internal use, but sometimes it's nice to see stuff tested in the manner it would get damaged in the real world, such as dropped or stepped on or whatever. We don't live in laboratories and while their use in designing a better product is certainly worthwhile, I think it's a bit silly to imply that the reason that your mag failed and the Lancer didn't is down to some slight variance in how they hit the ground. Actually we called our own PMag truck test "unscientific" in 2007 for the same reasons I stated above... 
Also we have actual real combat use data, over 4 years, involving millions of magazines deployed that show results counter to the "drop of of the truck test" but everyone is free to choose the information they wish to listen to. |
|
For those who would like to see some additional 'real world' 'tests' may I suggest:
PMAG vs. Military Transport (YouTube) PMAG Function Test in M249 SAW (YouTube) PMAG = Bulletproof? (YouTube) |
| I said to read the article and draw your own conclusion. You seem to want it to go away. The article was discussed at length on THIS VERY FORUM when it came out and not a peep then about how "unscientific" it was by anyone. It is one of the few unbiased comparison tests out there (ie, not done by a manufacturer) Every manufacturer claims to be the best. BTW, isn't this a Lancer thread????? |
|
Quoted:
I said to read the article and draw your own conclusion. You seem to want it to go away. The article was discussed at length on THIS VERY FORUM when it came out and not a peep then about how "unscientific" it was by anyone. It is one of the few unbiased comparison tests out there (ie, not done by a manufacturer) Every manufacturer claims to be the best. BTW, isn't this a Lancer thread????? Yes this is a Lancer thread and you will notice we are saying nothing negative about them at all. Their are plenty of valid technical reasons for someone to prefer a Lancer over other magazines. Treating a guy dropping mags off of a truck as "serious testing" does not help Lancer or Magpul as it creates a noise of misinformation that hinders the end user from choosing the right equipment for his mission. |
|
I never said "serious test"
I never said "standard labratory testing" Your words, not mine It is an article written by an unbiased forum member in a trade publication. BTW, your guy just posted links to someone driving over a magazine and shooting a hole through it. Hardly scientific, so how do you criticize Fortier's article when you do and publicise the same exact thing????? P.S. I seriously, seriously doubt someone's mission will harmed by a SGN article or it's discussion. |
|
Quoted:
I said to read the article and draw your own conclusion. You seem to want it to go away. The article was discussed at length on THIS VERY FORUM when it came out and not a peep then about how "unscientific" it was by anyone. It is one of the few unbiased comparison tests out there (ie, not done by a manufacturer) Every manufacturer claims to be the best. BTW, isn't this a Lancer thread????? I'd say 87% of the comments over the years have been by people who did not actually read it, and probably wouldn't even know what is was published in.  "I heard something that Bob said that John said that Susie said that Luigi said that Frank said...." it's a daily living example of the "Whisper down the lane" game teachers played in grade school.
When I get time, I'll dig out the article and post the actual results. |
|
Quoted:
I never said "serious test" I never said "standard labratory testing" Your words, not mine It is an article written by an unbiased forum member in a trade publication. BTW, your guy just posted links to someone driving over a magazine and shooting a hole through it. Hardly scientific, so how do you criticize Fortier's article when you do and publicise the same exact thing????? P.S. I seriously, seriously doubt someone's mission will harmed by a SGN article or it's discussion. The only thing you should take away from any video or test in this thread is entertainment. That's the point. If we are collectively smart enough to own guns as a people we should also be smart enough to separate entertainment from real testing (that have things like controls, sample size, consistency and documentation). Again you decide what information is important to you to make a decision but there is a reason why mechanical engineers use these testing parameters to design rockets, planes etc. |
|
Also we have actual real combat use data, over 4 years, involving millions of magazines deployed that show results counter to the "drop of of the truck test" but everyone is free to choose the information they wish to listen to.
Where is this "combat use data" I havn't seen it posted.... |
|
Quoted:
Also we have actual real combat use data, over 4 years, involving millions of magazines deployed that show results counter to the "drop of of the truck test" but everyone is free to choose the information they wish to listen to.
Where is this "combat use data" I havn't seen it posted.... We gather all information from the field and use this information to continuously improve the PMag product line. Some of it is public record and some not. |
|
Quoted:
Just got 4 OD Lancers from Botach for $11 each. Love the metal feed lips, if they work as good as they look I'll be ordering lots more. WoRk they do, did you get the AWM? If so there is a way to file down the follower stop to allow for 31rnds, this makes it easy to seat 30 on a closed bolt Lancers IMO have always been ahead of the game, they kept the mag well part of the magazines but kept the proper curve for the 5.56 by only curving the internal part of the magazine at the mag well area. And their feed lips are the most durable there is, the new AWM's with the wrap around steel just makes them stonger and less likely to split Theyre also the only ones to make a proper translucent magazine, everyone else thats tried has failed even magpul From lancer The internal geometry of the Advanced Warfighter Magazine is a constant curve that has been maximized to feed the 5.56X45mm NATO round and has a non-tilting follower for trouble-free feeding. The feed lips are made from a single piece of precision formed steel that is hardened, then PTFE coated for corrosion resistance. The body and component materials are corrosion and chemical resistant, passing military chemical testing, including exposure to DEET. The L5 AWM is compatible with modern weapon systems; M4/M16/AR, HK416, SCAR16, and the ARX160 to name a few and is available in 10, 20 and 30 round capacity with a translucent or opaque polymer body. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also we have actual real combat use data, over 4 years, involving millions of magazines deployed that show results counter to the "drop of of the truck test" but everyone is free to choose the information they wish to listen to.
Where is this "combat use data" I havn't seen it posted.... We gather all information from the field and use this information to continuously improve the PMag product line. Some of it is public record and some not. So share the stuff that is public........remember it was you that chimed onto this Lancer thread and trashed Fortier's article. If your data is so good why keep any secrets????? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also we have actual real combat use data, over 4 years, involving millions of magazines deployed that show results counter to the "drop of of the truck test" but everyone is free to choose the information they wish to listen to.
Where is this "combat use data" I havn't seen it posted.... We gather all information from the field and use this information to continuously improve the PMag product line. Some of it is public record and some not. So share the stuff that is public........remember it was you that chimed onto this Lancer thread and trashed Fortier's article. If your data is so good why keep any secrets????? Actually I keep out of Lancer threads (out of respect that they are also site sponsors) unless someone specifically mentions PMags and even then I try to address the PMag specific points. I did not "trash" Fortier's story. I stated that testing should involve some sort of normal parameters like like controls, sample size and repeatable test conditions. I am not here to "sell" you on PMags. In the original 2001 Magpul manual I state "Nothing in here should be treated as Gospel. Trust in what you know, not what someone tells you". I am just here to make sure the correct information is available in a technical forum. For more information on this please review our Magpul Foundations |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also we have actual real combat use data, over 4 years, involving millions of magazines deployed that show results counter to the "drop of of the truck test" but everyone is free to choose the information they wish to listen to.
Where is this "combat use data" I havn't seen it posted.... We gather all information from the field and use this information to continuously improve the PMag product line. Some of it is public record and some not. So share the stuff that is public........remember it was you that chimed onto this Lancer thread and trashed Fortier's article. If your data is so good why keep any secrets????? Actually I keep out of Lancer threads (out of respect that they are also site sponsors) unless someone specifically mentions PMags and even then I try to address the PMag specific points. I did not "trash" Fortier's story. I stated that testing should involve some sort of normal parameters like like controls, sample size and repeatable test conditions. I am not here to "sell" you on PMags. In the original 2001 Magpul manual I state "Nothing in here should be treated as Gospel. Trust in what you know, not what someone tells you". I am just here to make sure the correct information is available in a technical forum. For more information on this please review our Magpul Foundations Didt you say garbage in garbage out in regards to the post with the article? |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Lancer L5 Translucent Magazines? (Page 1 of 3)
AR Sponsor