U.S. Army to Introduce Enhanced M4 Magazine

[Artful]

http://kitup.military.com/2016/07/u-s-army-to-introduce-enhanced-m4-magazine.html

POSTED BY: MATTHEW COX (http://kitup.military.com/author/matt-cox) JULY 25, 2016

The U.S. Army TACOM is introducing a new M4 Enhanced Performance Magazine, according to a TACOM Maintenance Information Message first reported by Soldier Systems.net.

The new magazine will feature a tan body and blue follower and will be engineered to address feeding issues with M855A1 ammunition, according to Soldier Systems.

The M4 EPM has been assigned NSN 1005-01-630-9508 and will be introduced through attrition of the current magazine.

The Army first started to improve M4 magazines in 2008 after reliability tests found that the original follower caused many of the weapon’s feeding malfunctions during the test.

We will be watching for further updates.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I don't see why they don't just buy P Mags? I have never had any malfunction with any of my 20 or so P Mags in Several AR's and my KT SU16 which uses the same mags. That's 10,20, and 30 round mags.

Randy

[garym1a2]

I prefer the 30 rnd Al mags myself with Magpul followers. When I push the eject button I want the mag to jump out. With magpuls you sometime have to pull them out. I save my magpuls for 300 Blk.

[Artful]

http://www.guns.com/2012/05/26/us-army-improved-magazine-pmag-ban-tan-is-the-plan/

US Army Adopts New M4 Magazine, Bans All Other Magazines (Even PMAGs)In a massive reversal of policy, the Army has declared that soldiers may only use Army-issued magazines. They are banning the PMAG. Soldiers have been using polymer magazines like the Magpul PMAG (http://store.magpul.com/prod_detail_list/2), Lancer L5 (http://www.lancer-systems.com/L5.html) and a handful of other high-performance magazines for years, all for their improved performance, reliability and durability properties.
The PMAG has an National Stock Number and could be ordered by soldiers and branches of the Army, and is even standard issue for Army regiments including the 75th Rangers and 61st Cavalry (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/05/25/in-reversal-army-bans-high-performance-rifle-mags.html).
“This just follows a long line of the Army, and military in general, not listening to the troops about equipment and weaponry,” said one Army infantryman serving in Southwest Afghanistan, who asked not to be identified. “The PMAG is a great product… lightweight and durable. I have seen numerous special ops teams from all services pass through here, and they all use PMAGs. Also, a large amount of Marine infantry here use PMAGS, including their Force Recon elements.”


MenuSkip to content (http://www.guns.com/2012/05/26/us-army-improved-magazine-pmag-ban-tan-is-the-plan/#content)


Reviews (http://www.guns.com/category/reviews/)
Industry News (http://www.guns.com/category/product-a-industry-news/)
Concealed Carry (http://www.guns.com/category/concealed-carry-guns/)
2nd Amendment (http://www.guns.com/category/politics-a-2nd-amendment/)
More (http://www.guns.com/2012/05/26/us-army-improved-magazine-pmag-ban-tan-is-the-plan/#)





















Gun Bazaar (http://www.guns.com/category/bazaar/)
The Wire (http://www.guns.com/the-guns-com-wire/)


SearchSearch
US Army Adopts New M4 Magazine, Bans All Other Magazines (Even PMAGs)5/26/12 (http://www.guns.com/2012/05/26/us-army-improved-magazine-pmag-ban-tan-is-the-plan/)| by Max Slowik (http://www.guns.com/author/max_slowik/)
(http://www.guns.com/2012/05/26/us-army-improved-magazine-pmag-ban-tan-is-the-plan/#)
(http://www.guns.com/2012/05/26/us-army-improved-magazine-pmag-ban-tan-is-the-plan/#)

In a massive reversal of policy, the Army has declared that soldiers may only use Army-issued magazines. They are banning the PMAG. Soldiers have been using polymer magazines like the Magpul PMAG (http://store.magpul.com/prod_detail_list/2), Lancer L5 (http://www.lancer-systems.com/L5.html) and a handful of other high-performance magazines for years, all for their improved performance, reliability and durability properties.
The PMAG has an National Stock Number and could be ordered by soldiers and branches of the Army, and is even standard issue for Army regiments including the 75th Rangers and 61st Cavalry (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/05/25/in-reversal-army-bans-high-performance-rifle-mags.html).
“This just follows a long line of the Army, and military in general, not listening to the troops about equipment and weaponry,” said one Army infantryman serving in Southwest Afghanistan, who asked not to be identified. “The PMAG is a great product… lightweight and durable. I have seen numerous special ops teams from all services pass through here, and they all use PMAGs. Also, a large amount of Marine infantry here use PMAGS, including their Force Recon elements.”
http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/four_magazines1.jpg
The thinking behind this sweeping condemnation of all non-Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command (LCMC)-issued magazines is not entirely clear. One possible reason is that the Army’s recent improvements to the standard-issue aluminum magazine have shown better performance than the PMAG and other designs.
“Tan is the Plan” (http://peosoldier.armylive.dodlive.mil/2009/12/14/armys-improved-magazine-increases-weapons-reliability-%E2%80%9Ctan-is-the-plan%E2%80%9D-for-the-new-magazine/) with this third-generation Army 5.56 NATO magazine. While externally similar (if not identical) to older magazines the Army’s newest mag has a redesigned follower (http://peosoldier.armylive.dodlive.mil/2011/12/27/equipment-piece-of-the-week-m16m4-magazine/)that incorporates an anti-tilt design, one that arguably takes a cue from Magpul’s PMAG (http://kitup.military.com/2012/05/army-stands-ban-unathorized-pmags.html). The Improved Magazine effectively reduces the risk of magazine-related stoppages by more than 50 percent compared to the older magazine variants. Identified by a tan-colored follower, over 500,000 of the improved magazines have been fielded to units in Iraq, Afghanistan and in the U.S.
http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Magazine-Follower1.jpg
“With the improved magazines, we’re taking weapons reliability up another notch,” said LTC Chris Lehner, Product Manager Individual Weapons. “By incorporating a heavier, more corrosion resistant spring, along with a new follower design that does not tilt inside the casing, our engineers were able to develop a magazine that presents a round to the weapon with even greater stability. Increased magazine reliability results in overall improved weapon system performance.”
But there is another possibility. During the re-evaluation process of the 2007-issued green follower magazines the Army tried to acquire the design rights to the PMAG, something Magpul was not inclined to give up. The irony is that despite banning the PMAG, along with all other non-TACOM-approved magazines, the Army is still recommending that soldiers use the old green follower magazines, the very equipment they have stated is a serious flaw in the M4 system.
http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/m4_magazines_black_green_tan1.jpg
So in the process of replacing the flawed hardware, the Army has banned the better alternatives and ruled that soldiers shall continue to equip themselves with the knowingly-troubled magazines until they are issued new ones with a fix.
While it isn’t likely that these new tan follower magazines are as bad as the older magazines, what isn’t know is if they are superior to PMAGs and the rest. And knowing this will have to wait for independent testing, because TACOM has not released the results of their tests nor their testing methods.
We can only hope that in the face of this mag ban that all the right Army eyes look away while soldiers continue to use the equipment they know and trust best, and that this very obvious mistake gets reversed quickly.

[Mk42gunner]

I think my biggest gripe with the M16 and AR15 is the magazines. I can't think of a single trip to the range that didn't have at least one stoppage due to magazine problems. I always thought it was because the aluminum mag bodies and feed lips weren't strong enough to hold the rounds in position.

Robert

[StuBach]

Looks like government red tape will put our soldiers in another flawed equipment situation which can possibly cost lives. Would have thought the roll out of the M-16 with all its issues then would have stopped this.

All of my friends who served in the recent past carried pmags. When I fist needed to buy AR mags I found a video test done by a group of soldiers in Afghanastan where they tested the durability of three mags available to them, by running them over with a Humvee. Pmags were only survivor and still shot after all tests. Why ban something that works just cause it's not your product?

Hope the last article is right and officials just look the other way till new equipment is available.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Geezer in NH]

Will it be 10 round to match state laws???

[OptimusPanda]

Frankly the best running mags I have are the old all aluminum 20s. They've never given me any fuss.

[Scharfschuetze]

Frankly the best running mags I have are the old all aluminum 20s. They've never given me any fuss.

I'm in agreement. When we first got our M4A1 carbines, we had terrible feeding problems with the FN manufactured weapons. It was all eventually put right with mods to the weapon itself. It wasn't a problem with our aluminium mags.

I've used the Magpulls, but experienced failure to feed jams now and then. SPORTS is the military acronym that is applicable in this situation. It usually works. As they are not as slippery as the aluminum mags, they would at times not fall free from the mag well.

Many of my comrades liked and preferred the Magpulls. Six of one and a half dozen of the other I guess.

At retirement, I still equipped my kit with aluminum 30 round mags and I was fully confident in their reliability. That experience or confidence spans service from VN with the M16A1 to the GWOT with the M4A1 and its various SOFMODs. My son who has made a few trips to the sand box with the Rangers prefers the aluminum mags in preference to the later designs also.

Magazines are part of the weapons system and should not be abused, but cared for the same as the weapon. If one goes bad, then it gets destroyed to prevent its use later.

Time will tell if the new mags are worth the R&D expense. Hopefully they will be. For now I'm still using the 20 round aluminum mags for sport and for NM competition. These mags are over 40 years old now and still function 100 percent with ball, green tip ball and Sierra Match Kings. When we gradually converted to the 30 round magazine in the mid 70s, the 20 rounders were often just disposed of. Naturally many of them found their way into personal inventories.

[Combat Diver]

I just gave new 65 tan follower mags to an SF ODA as replacements. They use a combination of USGI and PMags. Last night I ran a combination of magazines using M855 ball and Mk262 match out of a 10.3" M4A1. No issues with either black, green or tan followers. Course I still break down my mags for cleaning. I do have PMags at home but prefer USGI as they are lighter, easier to remove and insert mag holders.


CD

[Tackleberry41]

How long has the military been fighting this mag issue? That was generally the source of feed problems when I was in 88-92, was mags. Yea you can swap them out, but not much good in a fight. They keep trying to fix the same thing, instead of I dont know something new. The original design the mags were not even meant to be used over and over again. 50yrs from now rest of the worlds armies will be using plasma weapons, we will still be using the M-16A12 and the same magazines.

[Earlwb]

When I was in the USMC those 20 round aluminum magazines worked fine. I never had any problems with them at all.

I suspect that the military industrial machine got upset with the troops not wanting to use their junk magazines that they sell at premium prices to the military. so the companies put pressure on certain congressional leaders and they put the pressure on the military. Thus the new restrictions. It is usually about money, not whether the thing works better or not, but who gets the profits.

[Dan Cash]

I would follow the money and bet I found a Clinton Foundation cohort/Obamabuddy in the profit line.

[Scharfschuetze]

I would follow the money and bet I found a Clinton Foundation cohort/Obamabuddy in the profit line.

That's a hoot and there might be something to it.

I never understood the need to fix something that wasn't broken. I will admit that the aluminum GI mags had/have been in service for a LONG, LONG time and I've destroyed a few that were starting to fail; but I never found the fix in this instance all that great or really necessary. I used the aluminum mags for over 40 years as both a GI and an LEO with perfect satisfaction.

[merlin101]

Frankly the best running mags I have are the old all aluminum 20s. They've never given me any fuss.

They are tough to find, and now illegal here in NY unless there pinned at 10 rnds.

[Earlwb]

I used to wonder about leaving a loaded Magpul polymer/plastic magazine loaded for a long time. But there have been several reports where people left them loaded for three or more years and the magazines still worked and functioned fine.

My thoughts were the same as others in that the magazine lips would spread apart more over time when loaded. But it doesn't look to be the case with the magazines though. One fellow got a loaded Magpul magazine that was forgotten and left under the seat of a pickup truck for more than three years and it still functioned OK too. Now then maybe here in the hot summer Texas heat, plus being left loaded in a car truck might cause a problem with the plastic, but I don't know. I never tried to age a loaded Magpul magazine like that.

Now if you had a loaded magazine inserted in your AR, ready to go, then the top cartridge is being pushed down slightly by the bolt carrier. Thus it would not be putting any pressure on the magazine lips. So I would assume that a magazine in the gun would be good indefinitely then.

One thing is that the plastic polymer compounds they use today are far more superior to the plastics used in the past. So the stuff could be really much better than the aluminum magazines now. The metal magazines do have that problem where they don't take dents or bends very well.

[sundog]

+1 on the issue 20-rd aluminum.

[nicholst55]

No sense in buying Pmags when you can get a buddy a contract to supply mags for 3 or 4 hundred dollars each!!!

Marvin

Ummm, Uncle pays $11.20 each for them.

The issue they were designed to correct, or so I was told, was the bare steel tip of the M855A1 cartridge gouging the upper receiver as it feeds into the chamber. The new follower and redesigned feed lips position the tip of the bullet slightly higher, so there is less (maybe no) contact between the steel bullet tip and the aluminum upper receiver.

[Tackleberry41]

Odd the govt pays $11.20 ea for magazines they obviously buy in bulk, when you or me can buy the same mag retail for often $11. Would think they were getting them way cheaper.

And love how its always a liberal plot, could never be some company run by a republican looking for favors.

[reivertom]

I don't see why they don't just buy P Mags? I have never had any malfunction with any of my 20 or so P Mags in Several AR's and my KT SU16 which uses the same mags. That's 10,20, and 30 round mags.

Randy

That makes WAY too much sense for the Federal Government to do.

[Kevin Rohrer]

It's a shame our military doesn't adopt a rifle in a serious caliber.

[nicholst55]

Odd the govt pays $11.20 ea for magazines they obviously buy in bulk, when you or me can buy the same mag retail for often $11. Would think they were getting them way cheaper.

And love how its always a liberal plot, could never be some company run by a republican looking for favors.

Standard 30-round mags (green or tan follower) cost Uncle about $8 each. The new-and-improved tan mag with the blue follower costs Uncle $11.20 each. And FWIW, the gubiment does NOT get volume discount, on anything that I'm aware of, anyway. You would certainly think that they would, especially on something like magazines. How many millions of 30-round mags has the gubiment bought over the decades?

Republican, Democrat; same-same. Just a different name for the same thieves, liars, and cheats.

[RugerFan]

http://www.guns.com/2012/05/26/us-army-improved-magazine-pmag-ban-tan-is-the-plan/

US Army Adopts New M4 Magazine, Bans All Other Magazines (Even PMAGs)

In a massive reversal of policy, the Army has declared that soldiers may only use Army-issued magazines. They are banning the PMAG.....



This article is complete garbage. There was no “massive reversal” and PMAGs were never banned. Technically PMAGs are unauthorized equipment, but commanders can still choose to allow their soldiers to use them. However in doing so, they take complete responsibility for any harm to their soldiers or equipment in the case of a malfunction etc.

[nicholst55]

This article is complete garbage. There was no “massive reversal” and PMAGs were never banned. Technically PMAGs are unauthorized equipment, but commanders can still choose to allow their soldiers to use them. However in doing so, they take complete responsibility for any harm to their soldiers or equipment in the case of a malfunction etc.

I don't recall P-Mags ever being specifically mentioned by name, but I do recall an message from TACOM several years back stating that only the aluminum 30-round mags was authorized for issue. While the P-Mag does have an NSN assigned, it has not been tested by Big Army, and at least at that time, was prohibited from issue. Not that that stopped anybody from using them.

EDITED TO ADD: Okay, did a little research. Back in April 2007, U.S. Army TACOM issued a Safety Of Use Message (SOUM) stating that ONLY the old green-follower mag or the new(er) tan follower mag were authorized for use. They specified that since TACOM had never tested other mags, said mags were prohibited from use. Two months later, in June 2007, they clarified Big Army's position and said 'yeah, that's what we said, but its not what we meant! Continue to use your P-Mags.'

[Scharfschuetze]

Two months later, in June 2007, they clarified Big Army's position and said 'yeah, that's what we said, but its not what we meant! Continue to use your P-Mags.'

So thankful that I had little to do with "Big Army" and their shenanigans for most of my service.

[nicholst55]

So thankful that I had little to do with "Big Army" and their shenanigans for most of my service.

Unfortunately, I cannot say the same thing! :roll: I've been dealing with Big Army's **** for over 40 years (active duty and now as a DA civilian). One example that I'll never forget was the decision that unit commanders could authorize their soldiers to paint their weapons to blend into their environment. Not 30 days prior to that announcement, I was involved with an incident where a LAR (Logistics Assistance Rep) discovered a painted rifle in an Arms Room. I had seen the rifle several times, and simply told the armorer that painting weapons was unauthorized, and although I was confident that HE hadn't painted the rifle, not to paint any more. The LAR saw it one day during a visit, and the brown stuff hit the fan! That particular incident went all the way up the chain to DA, and the poor armorer was ordered to remove every last speck of paint. Less than 30 days later, Big Army announced that it was now okay to paint weapons, but ONLY if you followed TACOM's step-by-step instructions! Give me a break!