[]; (function() { var gads = document.createElement('script'); gads.async = true; gads.type = 'text/javascript'; var useSSL = 'https:' == document.location.protocol; gads.src = (useSSL ? 'https:' : 'http:') + '//www.googletagservices.com/tag/js/gpt.js'; var node = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; node.parentNode.insertBefore(gads, node); })(); Glock Talk - View Single Post - Thoughts on surplus GI mags?
View Single Post
Old 11-19-2012, 17:55   #23
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Eastern Kentucky
Posts: 5,850

Originally Posted by Jason D View Post
My guns don't really prefer one contractor over another, as I have never had a problem with any of them.
Agreed. Back in the day, the WWW was scant with reviews so I was always keen to look for items that DoD trashed (i.e. Sanchez brand M16 mags and some companies for the M9 9mm mags).

Prior to anything synthetic, Labelle was known as the "King" of reliable AR15/M16 mags and were not more expensive (if at all) than some other so-so contractor's offerings.

As for PMags, they are constructed quite well and possibly over-engineered like true AK steel mags, which suits me just fine.

And being less than low-drag-high-speed, the LAST thing I need is to have a defective AR mag when my 200-meter paper target decides to go all rogue on me at the range!
Leigh is offline   Reply With Quote