High Ground Media, LLC

Introduced in 2015, the Adaptive Magwell (AM) by Lancer Systems is a bolt-on upgrade that expands the magwell opening of the standard AR-15 for easier drive of a magazine into the receiver and quicker reloads.

 

Made from either a single piece, or two (depending on which model of AM is selected) of machined 6061 T6 aluminum, the AM has a solid construction that ensures a high degree of abrasion and impact resistance. For the purpose of this review, the single piece AM was selected.

 

From the sides, the AM expands the overall width of the magwell to 1.63” across with angled interior sides to help further drive the inserting magazine inward. From the top to bottom, the AM expanded the length of the AM to 3.02”.

 

The Lancer AM’s angled funnel directs magazines into the magwell regardless of approach angle or cant. This can decrease reload time and improving reliability under stressful or adverse conditions.

 

It should be noted the AM is not compatible with Magpul’s Gen3 PMAG’s due to the Gen 3’s robust over-travel stop.

Specifications:

• Designed for milspec AR-15 rifles and standard forged lower receivers with removable trigger guards
• Includes rubber gaskets for a snug rattle-free fit
• Compatible with most standard M4/M16/AR15 pattern magazines

The Adaptive Magwell is only available in a matte Black (featured).

 

Product Evaluation Scores:

• Cost – Average (3/5): At an MSRP of $115, the Adaptive Magwell (AM) (either single piece or two-piece) is made from a solid block of T6 aluminum for maximum strength and durability. The AM is perhaps one of the larger non-polymer magwells on the market and will resist all but the most serious abrasion, impact, or chemicals. In comparison, the Armaspec Rhino ($20.90), MAS Defense Flared Magwell Adaptor ($44.99), Sylvan Arms Adaptor ($54.99), or Cobalt Kinetics Magwell Extension ($75) show just how diverse the market is in design. It should be noted while the AM is one of the most expensive AR-15 magwells available, it is also one of the largest, durable, and functional. As such, the cost balances against those factors to give the AM an average scoring.
• Comfort – Excellent (5/5): Once installed, the AM was very lightweight and did not negatively affect the balance of the rifle. The pronounced size of the AM’s flared edged, and how it bolted into the lower receiver, made for an excellent and very solid mount with zero movement. Indeed, the AM was solid and large enough that it also doubled as an additional magwell grip surface while holding the rifle.
• Durability – Good (4/5): Made from 6061 T6 aluminum, the AM offered an expected level of durability from an alloy specifically designed for maximum abuse. The AM exterior was struck approximately 10 times on each side with a rifle magazine, in addition to repeatedly feeding magazines into the rifle over a 30-day period. The only impact to the AM itself was minimal surface marring to the exterior surface coating, but not to the extent to compromise the sub-layer of metal. The exterior appeared to have a thin matte black powder coat, and as the only negative point to the AM’s durability, it would be a recommendation to Lancer to examine improving the AM’s exterior paint hardening process or consider an alternative exterior coating type.
• Functionality – Good (4/5): What set the AM apart from the more inexpensive magwell adaptors on the market was its size as related to function. The AM measured approx.. 0.856” tall with an interior cavity at approximately 1.623” across which, once mounted, gave the slanted interior a wide slope by which to direct magazines into the center of the magwell. Regardless of approach angle, cant, or speed in which magazines were driven into the magwell, the AM directed all magazines where they needed to go and ensured proper alignment. This was especially of interest to shooters approaching training from a competitive aspect as it allowed further speed in magazine transitions without worry of where the magazines feed ramp/lips were angled. In many of the aforementioned market alternatives, their design amounted to basically a plate that sat under the magwell, and provided only minimal surface area. This could translate to potential magazine hang-ups or damage to polymer-framed designs. Thus, while the AM is one of the larger/bulkier adaptors, its size fits a specific purpose and one that gives an overall good function for those looking for an added accessory to help speed magazine transitions.
• Weight – Average (3/5): At 0.25 pounds (or 4 ounces) the biggest influence to the AM’s weight was simply due to the principle atomic weight of aluminum, which is fixed and directly related to the overall design. While measures could have been taken to perhaps shave down the AM to save weight, the impact would have been a negative to its intended function. In comparison, the Armaspec Rhino (1.73 ounces), MAS Defense Flared Magwell Adaptor (2 ounces), Sylvan Arms Flared Magwell (2 ounces), or Cobalt Kinetics Magwell Extension (5.5 ounces) place the Adaptive Magwell at the higher end of weight, but appropriate (or average) for its size and function.

Overall Rating – Above Average (19/25)

Product Link: https://lancer-systems.com/product/adaptive-magwell/

I am reviewing this product as a courtesy to the manufacturer and via STL Shooting Enthusiasts, so that I can evaluate it and provide my honest feedback. I am not bound by any written, verbal, or implied contract to give positive reviews. All views are my own, and based off my personal experience with the product.

The views and opinions expressed on this website are solely those of the author. The views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the administrative staff, and/or any/all contributors to this site.

 

Introduced in 2012, the Magpul Storage/Type Restricted (STR) Carbine Stock is intended to provide an option for shooters looking for improved cheek weld and storage capacity. Today the STR remains a mainstay of Magpul’s diverse product line and continues to find service among recreational and professional shooters.

The STR Stock was developed to be among the many in Magpul’s line of polymer buttstocks that combines the minimalist function of the CTR stock, with added utility storage for power sources along both sides.

These water-resistant storage compartments are sufficient enough to allow for two CR123A lithium batteries, or two AA batteries to be stored by the rear-facing, hand-removable rubberized plugs. In turn, these storage compartments give the STR a broader area for an angled cheek piece which translates to a greater cheek weld with the shooter.

The reinforced and compact A-frame design of the STR includes a shielded operation lever that “unlocks” the stock from the buffer tube. The corresponding friction locking system then allows the STR to move to any position of the buffer tube, and once a position is determined, to maintain a positive position with minimal movement.

A reversible QD mounting cup, a 0.30” thick replaceable rubberized buttstock, and two integral sling loops (to accommodate a sling up to 1.25” wide) finish off the additional features to the STR.

Specifications:

• Accommodates AR10, AR15, M4, M16, M110, SR25 platforms
• Stock dimensions 7.3” (L) x 2.6” (W)

The STR Carbine Stock is available in Black (featured), Stealth Grey, FDE, and OD Green.

Product Evaluation Scores:

• Cost – Average (3/5): At $79.95 the STR represents a perfect balance of materials over cost wherein the efficient design allows for some essential storage, improved function, at a minimal increase over the more basic CTR ($59.95) stock. Magpul has made its products synonymous with aftermarket rifle products and the STR has a lot to offer shooters from the basic to more advanced. In comparison VLTOR’s IMOD ($89.95) is perhaps the closest comparator in both material and function, followed closely by B5 System’s SOPMOD ($58.99). Given that the STR’s price falls roughly between these, that gives its cost an average rating within the market. The one aspect Magpul has to offer is a very diverse product line and the STR sits within the middle of its lineup so if the STR isn’t quite what the consumer is looking for then Magpul almost certainly has an alternative.
• Comfort – Good (4/5): The biggest aspect of the STR’s comfort was its improved dimensions for a larger cheek weld over the more basic A2-type stocks. The tube itself was angled with a wider base that gave it a quasi-triangular appearance. This design not only gave the shooter more real-estate for contact when shouldering, but sufficient space for the two storage compartments that run the length of the stock. The two rubberized plugs had a comfortable fit inside the storage tubes, and were easily removed with the fingertip. Internet research illustrated that some variances in buffer tube dimensions may result in a minor amount of wiggle between the STR and buffer tube, but there are a number of personalized and simple remedies to resolve that issue.
• Durability – Excellent (5/5): The STR was made from the same polymer material as Magpul’s magazines, this gave it a good degree of resiliency and durability throughout evaluation. The thickness of the stock’s tube and A-frame help ensured any force or tension was transferred throughout the design and mitigated. In addition to several drop tests, the STR was used for several stressor iterations going from prone to standing while using the STR as a means to brace the movement. In all cases the STR supported the pressure and was never compromised beyond some minor surface marring.
• Functionality – Good (4/5): Functionally the STR’s operational and friction lock both provided a solid connection to the buffer tube and the stock, keeping the overall STR in place. Movement along the various positions was solid and the operational lock avoided any accidental slippage. As noted, the biggest aspect of the STR was the improved cheek weld over the CTR or other A2 style buttstocks. While there was a little added bulk due to the angled sides of the tube and its storage compartment, it is minimal at most. The ability of the QD cup to be moved from either side was accomplished simply by unscrewing the hardware and reassembling on the opposite side. The only noted negative from a functional aspect was the removable plugs for the storage tubes did not have any type of attached lanyard or connection, making them very susceptible to loss when removed.
• Weight – Fair (2/5): Coming in at 12.3 ounces, the STR is in the mid-rage of the Magpul family with the lighter CTR weighing 8.8 ounces, and the UBR being 23.36 ounces. But for its advantages; improved cheek weld, storage and adjustability the STR is one of the more logical options for those looking for an appropriate blend of lightweight function and form. In comparison however, the VLTOR’s IMOD (9.5 ounce) and the B5 System’s SOPMOD (10.25 ounces) both come in under the weight of the STR making it the heavier option. The weight of the STR will aid in absorbing some of the recoil, but it is still a fair weight amid similar competitors.

Overall Rating – Above Average (18/25)

Product Link: https://magpul.com/firearm-accessories/stocks/ar15-m4-m16-sr25-m110-ar10/str-carbine-stock-mil-spec.html?mp_global_color=118

I am reviewing this product as a courtesy to the manufacturer and via STL Shooting Enthusiasts, so that I can evaluate it and provide my honest feedback. I am not bound by any written, verbal, or implied contract to give positive reviews. All views are my own, and based off my personal experience with the product.

The views and opinions expressed on this website are solely those of the author. The views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the administrative staff, and/or any/all contributors to this site.

Recently released, the 6304RDS (RDS standing for Red Dot Sight) and the 7304RDS Drop-Rig holsters by Safariland are among the newest of the Automatic Locking System (ALS) series of holsters. While each features some of the same fundamental aspects that lend themselves to the Safariland legacy, each is slightly tailored to a different end user. Knowing the differences can help you decide which is best. 

Shared Values

The 6304RDS uses a thermoformed plastic material called Boltaron for its body, with an interior suede lining to help protect a firearm’s finish, and optional cordura outer covering, on top of the Boltaron.  If the outer cordura covering is not chosen, the outer body will be the Boltaron material itself, commonly known as an STX Tactical finish.

The 7304 holsters is made from a proprietary blend of injection-molded, nylon polymer called SafariSeven™. The SafariSeven™ material is a DuPont product that makes the holster and mounting system very durable and highly resistant to moisture, oil, or resins. In addition, SafariSeven™ can withstand extreme temperatures between 300 degrees to -50. It also features an open-top design with multiple interior risers that give ample distance, or an “air barrier” between the holster and all firearm surfaces.

The top of both the 6304 and 7304 include a removable hood guard to help prevent firearm takeaways or close contact with the ALS Lever when drawing/holstering a firearm.

Both holsters feature Safariland’s ALS design. This feature ensures a solid locking mechanism when the firearm is holstered. De-activated by a thumb-pressure lever, the ALS locking mechanism is released, and the firearm can be easily drawn straight up. As noted, small risers inside the 7304RDS holster also help maintain that “air barrier” so that any water or debris inside the holster can easily fall through and not obstruct function.

Like many other Safariland holsters, both the 6304RDS and 7304RDS come with a thigh mounting platform, with a single or double leg strap (user specifies based on model), and quick-release buckle off the belt is also an option (but changes the model designation from the 6304RDS to a 6305RDS, or a 7304RDS to a 7305RDS). The thigh platform also includes front and rear mounting holes for magazine holders or other accessories.

Likewise both holsters are configurable at the time of purchase for a variety of popular weapon lights, such as the Streamlight TLR-1 HL (featured). Note from Safariland: When ordering a holster for a handgun with a compensated barrel, you should order the next size up. For example if using a G19 with a Zev Tec Comp, you should order for a G34.

Where They Differ

Perhaps the biggest area where the 6304 and 7304 holster differ (other than the materials used and manufacturing process) is in the protective hood design of the Self Locking System (SLS) that safeguards the RDS. While they both feature the SLS, the 6304RDS features a more inclusive red dot shroud design, wrapping around the sides of the RDS. In contrast, the 7304RDS is a more paddle/tab design that rotates on a hinge-type axis. Regardless, the SLS and protective red dot dust cover design in both holsters can still accommodate; Leupold Deltapoint, Trijicon RMR and SRO (model dependent), Vortex Viper/Fastfire, and Holosun 407/507/508 style red dot pistol optics.

Otherwise the 6304 features a Cordura® nylon wrap finish that is intended to reduce its IR signature, with a suede liner to further protect the handgun’s finish. But both the 6304RDS and 7304RDS have dual silicone strips on the leg strap for enhanced traction and slip resistance.

Whereas the 7304RDS is an entire SafariSeven™ shell without a liner that gives the holster a lower profile and more streamlined design.

The 6304RDS is available for Glock, Sig, S&W, FN, and Staccato (formerly STI) patterned handguns and is available in Multicam (featured), Black, Coyote, and Khaki, and Ranger Green in cordura, and all STX Tactical finishes.

6304RDS Product Link: https://safariland.com/products/model-6304rds-sp10-als-sls-single-strap-tactical-holster-model_6304_sp10_rds

The 7304RDS is only currently available for Glock and Sig patterned handguns and is available in Coyote (featured), and Black. The 7304RDS can also be configured for TLR-7 weapon lights, as well as TLR-1/X300U.

Product Link: https://safariland.com/products/model-7304rds-7ts-als-sls-tactical-holster-model_7304rds

Product Evaluation Scores:

• Cost – Fair (2/5): Both the 6304RDS and the 7304RDS have a variety of options (draw hand, finish, color, etc.) available as well as recommended add-ons that effect the overall cost, but the 6304 holster has a start price of $249.50 while the 7304 starts at $263.50. This price reflects the size, materials and (most importantly) the design/fit of Safariland’s specific holsters. Both the 6304 and 7304 are full-coverage holsters, to include optic shroud, that protect the firearm while still keeping it within easy and immediate access. Other market alternatives to this similar holster design include the Thigh Holster ($110) from Ares Tactical, the SERPA Level 3 Thigh Holster ($149) from Blackhawk!, and the Leg-Drop Holster ($169) from Stealthgear USA. However, in all of these alternatives, they lack the comprehensive design, safety features, and materials as what Safariland does. And while the 6304 and 7304 are indeed some of the most expensive holsters on the market—that price is fair for the features and materials included in the purchase.
• Comfort – Good (4/5): Overall the fit of the thigh platform to both the 6304 and 7304 was more comfortable than other manufacturers experienced. The crescent shape of the 6304 and 7304 contoured to the mid-thigh, whereas other vendors have used a complete half-circle. While body dimensions often differ, the 6304 and 7304 platform took that into account by having a wider/broader contour and felt more comfortable against the leg. Otherwise from a comfort aspect, disengaging the ALS locking mechanism was simple and the draw felt smooth. The interior rails that contact the slide to provide retention did not bind nor lock the gun or WML, nor resist when re-holstering. The SLS design and RDS dust cover options, although different in both holsters, did not inhibit the draw. Overall both holsters felt smooth in function and there was no observable hard-angle or unfinished edges.
• Durability – Good (4/5): As with most of its holsters, the 7304 was made from a proprietary DuPont polymer blend called SafariSeven™. Safariland maintains this makes the holster tougher, and more wear and oil resistant. The 6304RDS, as mentioned earlier, used a heat formed plastic material called Boltaron. The additional difference here was that the 6304 had a Cordura nylon wrap contoured around the exterior, which made it more resistant to abrasion and contact with hard surfaces. That said, continual drawing/holstering and strong arm racking off the holster did eventually leave some surface marring on the interior and exterior surfaces of the holster (most likely from the front sight post or optic) but none on the firearm’s slide or RDS. Extensive attempts were made as drawing/removing the firearm while keeping the ALS engaged, even to the point of two individuals attempting to pull the holster and pistol apart, however none of them were successful and the holster/hardware was not compromised. The only noted negative was that as abrasion increased, some fraying of the 6304 Cordura material along the edges was noted (but nothing a lighter didn’t resolve). Surface blemishes to the 7304 could were resolved similar to other SafariSeven™ holsters by using a lot-grit pad to buff out the marring.
• Functionality – Good (4/5): Functionally the biggest difference between the 6304RDS and 7304RDS was the RDS dust cover feature. With its more enclosed design, the 6304 felt more appropriate for duty and field work with its protective enclosure completely around the RDS. However, the RDS hood/enclosure still allowed for total clearance of the RDS (in this case a Holosun 507v2, regardless if the iron sights were forward of the optic or behind it. When released, the SLS provided quick mechanical movement to clear the weapon retention strap and allowed for free movement of the hood during the draw. Where the 7304 differed was the dust cover design protecting the RDS was more a paddle, and felt more appropriate for competition use given that it facilitated in a slightly faster draw and provided a little more in range of motion coming out of the holster. The paddle was very reminiscent of the “break away” feature in some hardware that, when unlocked, there was absolutely no restriction in movement of the firearm as the paddle fell freely away. Like the 6304, the 7304 had sufficient room at the top of the holster for the RDS (again a Holosun 507v2) and iron sight, regardless of the iron sight’s position. Elsewhere, the ALS to both holsters provided a consistently secure hold on the firearm despite multiple attempts to dislodge the weapon, and the mechanical mechanism to the weapon retention release functioned smoothly throughout. With the overall SLS and ALS locking mechanisms on both holsters, it felt a little tight to reach down and depress the release button between all the hardware just because the shooter had to thread their thumb between the various elements for a small push-button. One suggestion to Safariland would perhaps think about making the actual button larger so it would be more tactile and easily found (especially when not looking).
• Weight – Average (3/5): The weight difference of both holsters was miniscule with the 6304RDS coming in at 1.6 pounds (with thigh platform and leg straps) and the 7304RDS at 1.5 pounds (with thigh platform and leg straps). The difference being directly attributable to the Cordura nylon wrap of the 6304, but in both cases the overall holster was still light enough so as not to be burdensome on the outer thigh nor fatigue the hip. In comparison, the Thigh Holster (1 pound) from Ares Tactical, the SERPA Level 3 Thigh Holster (1 pound) from Blackhawk!, and the Leg-Drop Holster (15.2 ounces) from Stealthgear USA all show that while slightly heavier, both the 6304 and 7304 are right around the appropriate (or average) weight for holster of this style and material.

Overall Rating – Above Average (17/25)

Product Link: https://safariland.com

I am reviewing this product as a courtesy to the manufacturer and via STL Shooting Enthusiasts, so that I can evaluate it and provide my honest feedback. I am not bound by any written, verbal, or implied contract to give positive reviews. All views are my own, and based off my personal experience with the product.

The views and opinions expressed on this website are solely those of the author. The views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the administrative staff, and/or any/all contributors to this site.