M855 and Gen 3 Pmags (Read 9518 times)

PalisadesKid

M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« on: June 30, 2017, 11:25:06 PM »
When I first got my AR-15, I stocked up on about 6 Gen 2 Pmags. Local FFL had them on sale so why not at the time?

But fast forward to the announcement about the military contracting Pmag GEN 3s and in one of the articles, it was claimed that the GEN 3 Pmags allowed the rounds to feed at a slightly higher angle than GEN 2s thus allegedly preventing the M855 ammo, with its steel core, from damaging the lower or the barrel extension.

HOWEVER... isn't that what the M4 feed ramps are for? AND to add to that, isn't that why the H buffer was also added in Colt M4s to allow ammo "more time" to seat properly in the magazine before being chambered during high cycling?

Wondering if the whole thing about GEN 3 Pmags giving a "higher angle" for ammo to feed into the chamber is just B.S.

Flapp_Jackson

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #1 on: July 01, 2017, 12:35:16 AM »
As far as I can see, and from the comparisons online, both feed at the same angle.  The anit-tilt followers look identical in shape, but are different on the edges to fit the M2 or M3 body's internal grooves.

I did see that the over-travel insertion stop was added.  Some mags, including GI, can go into the magwell too far.  That could be the difference in the angle when feeding you mentioned.  An over-inserted mag would feed against the top of the barrel extension/chamber.  That might cause some damage as the steel tips would not be centered while it's chambered.

The M3 also has a straighter top section (less curved than M2), which makes it compatible with non-M4 standard rifles.  There's a narrower floor plate/butt end on the M3 that fits tight carriers more easily.  And there's a "pixeled" area at the bottom of the M3 on each side for labeling.

They also learned from users of the M2 they often loaded 28 rounds versus the 30 max.  This gave them better success when loading a mag on a closed bolt.  A full mag sometimes resisted insertion to the locked position on closed bolts.  So, the M3 added the ability to almost insert 31 rounds.  Depending on mag and ammo size variances, you may actually be able to get the 31st round inserted without jamming it in.  But, with 30 rounds, it's supposed to be better able to reload a full mag on a closed bolt.

Other than the dust cover not coming standard on the M3, those are the highlights I can see/find.

Some people report empty M3's don't drop without assistance in certain rifles.  You'll have to take a sample of each and test on your own guns.  Most people who have no drop issues prefer the M3s over M2s due to the added features and increased compatibility.

Don't know if that answered the specific question, but it might help narrow things down if you see something more detailed.

 :shaka:
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

ren

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #2 on: July 01, 2017, 10:22:28 AM »
When I first got my AR-15, I stocked up on about 6 Gen 2 Pmags. Local FFL had them on sale so why not at the time?

But fast forward to the announcement about the military contracting Pmag GEN 3s and in one of the articles, it was claimed that the GEN 3 Pmags allowed the rounds to feed at a slightly higher angle than GEN 2s thus allegedly preventing the M855 ammo, with its steel core, from damaging the lower or the barrel extension.

HOWEVER... isn't that what the M4 feed ramps are for? AND to add to that, isn't that why the H buffer was also added in Colt M4s to allow ammo "more time" to seat properly in the magazine before being chambered during high cycling?

Wondering if the whole thing about GEN 3 Pmags giving a "higher angle" for ammo to feed into the chamber is just B.S.

The M855A1 is solid copper core with an exposed, hard steel penetrator. When the steel tip hits the feedramps it introduces quite a bit of wear, therefore the new mags have a follower that increases the feed angle. The M855's penetrator was enclosed in a the softer copper jacket.
In my experience, the 855A1 round is pretty good, on par with my 77s Noslers at 600 yards.
Deeds Not Words

mangosteenqueen

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #3 on: July 01, 2017, 08:13:45 PM »
I heard that the military teaches their recruits to "white glove" clean their rifles which they literally scrub and scratch the barrel extension and whatever to make it shiny clean, which damages their rifles in the process (hence all the hate on the service rifle malfunctioning in combat).
If they claim that the M855a1 damages the rifle when using Gen2 pmags with it, then it's most likely a problem with the design of the ammunition itself. I've always heard that the M193 is the sweet spot. 

ren

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #4 on: July 01, 2017, 08:40:03 PM »
I heard that the military teaches their recruits to "white glove" clean their rifles which they literally scrub and scratch the barrel extension and whatever to make it shiny clean, which damages their rifles in the process (hence all the hate on the service rifle malfunctioning in combat).
If they claim that the M855a1 damages the rifle when using Gen2 pmags with it, then it's most likely a problem with the design of the ammunition itself. I've always heard that the M193 is the sweet spot.

no
Deeds Not Words

mangosteenqueen

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #5 on: July 01, 2017, 08:54:51 PM »
Which part? The whole thing? State your rebuttal

ren

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #6 on: July 01, 2017, 09:06:19 PM »
There's nothing wrong with the design of the A1. It is already fielded. The Army issued new followers to address the issue of barrel ext. wear. M193 was replaced by M855. Don't know what you mean by "sweet spot"/ M193 was a common 55 gr FMJBT where 855 was a 62 gr with a steel penetrator encased. The placement of the penetrator was a factor in its accuracy.
Sure, we were taught to scrub and clean the crap out of our M16s without any attention to the rifle's accuracy. Crowns were dinged up in favor of being clean. I saw a BCG stripped of its parkerizing. Drill sergeants didn't know what made a rifle accurate nor did they really understand how the rifle functioned. I got yelled at for touching my magazine while I shot it. Got yelled at for resting the magazine on the ground.
Deeds Not Words

mangosteenqueen

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #7 on: July 01, 2017, 09:16:21 PM »
http://modernriflemanradio.com/mrr101-inrangetv-joins-us-to-talk-about-the-ar-15-and-5-56/
I've been basing my information off of this podcast. However I've yet to hear detailed reports on the performance of the M855a1 in combat against flesh and barriers

ren

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #8 on: July 01, 2017, 09:22:28 PM »
http://modernriflemanradio.com/mrr101-inrangetv-joins-us-to-talk-about-the-ar-15-and-5-56/
I've been basing my information off of this podcast. However I've yet to hear detailed reports on the performance of the M855a1 in combat against flesh and barriers

Instead of relying on 3rd party info, have YOU shot 855A1?
I've read reports from the program manager who shot it at Perry.I've echoed his results shooting it at 600 yards. I've issued it to soldiers and had them qualify with it and this is without the new updated mags. A1 is most accurate fielded ammo I've shot besides Mk262 in the M16.
In referencing the OPs question of Gen 2 mags vs Gen 3 mags the difference is the use of A1 with its exposed steel penetrator. If you aren't shooting A1 ammo regularly I wouldn't worry much. A1 ammo is expensive. It is loaded hot.

This is what the M855A1 bullet looks like


notice that the penetrator is not encased in the softer copper gilding

and here's the story
https://www.army.mil/article/177640/army_fielding_new_magazine_optimized_for_m4m4a1_carbine_and_m855a1
« Last Edit: July 03, 2017, 03:49:10 PM by ren »
Deeds Not Words

PalisadesKid

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #9 on: July 03, 2017, 03:23:50 PM »
Thanks for the thoughts guys but I picked up a few PMag M3 (Gen 3) with the M2.

Below are a few pics and the easiest to see is the first one. On the left is the M3 and the right is the M2. Its obvious the angle of the rounds are slightly "higher" than the M2. Both STANDARD CAPACITY MAGAZINES  :) are loaded to capacity BTW with just XM193.

The next two pics from left to right are harder to see but I tried to position the cartridge forward just touching the barrel extension and while the pics won't make it clear, the M2 does feed the ammo (middle photo) just a touch lower than the M3 (third photo). The M2 has the bullet touching the feed ramp on the barrel extension whereas the M3 has it "hovering" just above it.

Guess Im just over-thinking about stocking Pmag M3s in the event I end up adding XM855 to my "stash". On the surface it looks like the M2s present no issues.

Flapp_Jackson

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #10 on: July 03, 2017, 04:25:12 PM »
Thanks for the thoughts guys but I picked up a few PMag M3 (Gen 3) with the M2.

Below are a few pics and the easiest to see is the first one. On the left is the M3 and the right is the M2. Its obvious the angle of the rounds are slightly "higher" than the M2. Both STANDARD CAPACITY MAGAZINES  :) are loaded to capacity BTW with just XM193.

The next two pics from left to right are harder to see but I tried to position the cartridge forward just touching the barrel extension and while the pics won't make it clear, the M2 does feed the ammo (middle photo) just a touch lower than the M3 (third photo). The M2 has the bullet touching the feed ramp on the barrel extension whereas the M3 has it "hovering" just above it.

Guess Im just over-thinking about stocking Pmag M3s in the event I end up adding XM855 to my "stash". On the surface it looks like the M2s present no issues.

Since you're all set with both mags for comparison, try inserting a full mag, one M3 & one M2, on a closed bolt.  The M3 is supposed to be easier to do that.  It might be one reason to lean M3 if you can tell a difference.
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

PalisadesKid

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #11 on: July 03, 2017, 06:40:24 PM »
Since you're all set with both mags for comparison, try inserting a full mag, one M3 & one M2, on a closed bolt.  The M3 is supposed to be easier to do that.  It might be one reason to lean M3 if you can tell a difference.

Bought 3 standard cap M3s and 3 10 round M3s and the standard cap M3 is easier to insert with a closed bolt - feels just as easy as my M2s with two less rounds.

But the fully loaded 10 round M3 remains difficult on a closed bolt. Figured that might be the case but taking the magazines apart I see no differences, probably the shorter spring I guess. 

Flapp_Jackson

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #12 on: July 04, 2017, 12:51:21 AM »
Bought 3 standard cap M3s and 3 10 round M3s and the standard cap M3 is easier to insert with a closed bolt - feels just as easy as my M2s with two less rounds.

But the fully loaded 10 round M3 remains difficult on a closed bolt. Figured that might be the case but taking the magazines apart I see no differences, probably the shorter spring I guess.

Good to know.   :thumbsup: :shaka:
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

PalisadesKid

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #13 on: July 05, 2017, 04:00:30 PM »
Good to know.   :thumbsup: :shaka:

CORRECTION. Believe it or not, I actually had 11 rounds in that 10 round Pmag M3. I wondered why it was a bit snug.. LOL.

BUT, at full capacity, the 10 round Pmag M3 fits well on a closed bolt just like the standard capacity M3s.

PalisadesKid

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #14 on: July 05, 2017, 04:01:15 PM »
CORRECTION. Believe it or not, I actually had 11 rounds in that 10 round Pmag M3. I wondered why it was a bit snug.. LOL. I took the magazine apart and compared it to the other ones and the spring is a coil shorter. Hmmm....

BUT, at full capacity, the 10 round Pmag M3 fits well on a closed bolt just like the standard capacity M3s.

Flapp_Jackson

Re: M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #15 on: July 05, 2017, 05:32:57 PM »
CORRECTION. Believe it or not, I actually had 11 rounds in that 10 round Pmag M3. I wondered why it was a bit snug.. LOL.

BUT, at full capacity, the 10 round Pmag M3 fits well on a closed bolt just like the standard capacity M3s.

If you don't have the 20 round M3, I might have one to test.  I know I have a few M2 20 rd.

Since the 10 & 30 rd work on a closed bolt, I'm predicting the 20 rd is no different.

Happy to see Magpul's products live up to their specs.
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

Wake27

M855 and Gen 3 Pmags
« Reply #16 on: July 06, 2017, 11:59:36 PM »
M193 is mostly garbage and well-known to ice pick people. M855 will not damage the upper receiver. After about 6-8k rounds, M855A1 will damage the M4 feed ramps if not fed through an M3 PMAG or the Army's new tan GI mag (EPM I think). There is a fairly significant difference between the 855 and 855A1 and the latter is near impossible to come by on the civilian market. I don't think it'll be easy to get ahold of for many years so I really wouldn't worry. So far, I have been impressed with the performance of the A1 but it is loaded extremely hot and will definitely shorten the service life of the rifle. Testing has apparently shown it to have very effective terminal ballistics, both against barriers and meat. The M3 mag has a wider range of rifles in which it'll drop free compared to the Gen 2 and other polymer mags.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk