PTP Fascination

[going_home]

Customization = AGD.

Make it yours.

[vintage]

I put them with the same fascination as those of us that are trying to collect complete splash kits. and I do both.

[GoatBoy]

Would someone kindly take a micromag body/rail unit, sans feedneck if possible, throw it on a scale and weigh it? (Photo would be nice so we can verify what you're taking a photo of). It should come in around 13-14oz?

[luke]

Micromag 2K is 12.3 oz. No photo, I would but, well I don't want to. lol

[GoatBoy]

Micromag 2K is 12.3 oz. No photo, I would but, well I don't want to. lol

That actually sounds correct for a 2K. Mostly the photo is to verify the feed neck, but the 2K has the feed neck built in?

[MAGgot]

[Nobody]

Hmmmm, that is interesting... A micromag body is actually lighter than a stock body. Volume does not equal mass.

[GoatBoy]

I'm going to smear my responses out over a series of posts instead of making one big one.

So... PTP went *backwards* in weight savings with the MM2K and beyond.

Micromags were "ULE before ULE". But was that really "revolutionary"? (Should we rebadge the MM2K's as "UHE"?)

Let's pretend to be technical people for a few minutes.

Classic SS body is about 7-8oz, give or take. The maximum you can do is cut that about in half by switching to aluminum because of the difference in density. So you maybe save 4oz at most in the body; reality is those bodies have extra material in them in various places so it's not an even trade.

(By the way I penned this part before seeing Maggot's pics. Thank you for the pics. Turns out, yeah, you save a little less than 4oz between top pic and bottom pic.)

However, they fused the rail to the body as well. When you fuse the rail to the body, you lose the ability to shed weight in the rail (as far as I can tell). Stock mag rail is 4.5oz, already in aluminum.

This is a problem for the "weight savings" argument, because we already know you can make a 1oz rail, in either aluminum or plastic.



That's the plastic version. Full Trracer top rail adds 1.5oz can can be trimmed to 0.5oz, which puts that setup at parity with the middle pic.

Essentially, all the trouble and effort put into making a lightened mag body? That coudn't produce a win against a heavy stainless body and a lightened rail. That's just bad design.

Considering cocker threads and fixed detents are only 10g of plastic away, the only thing you gained was the ability to anodize.

The fact that history bent this way instead of the other way was a matter of random chance. So some of us have a less rosy view of "historical significance". I think this stuff took us backwards for a few decades.

[JKR]

Yeah, its easy to reflect on history and play around with numbers to arrive at the conclusion you want. However, I don't recall seeing "back in the day" anyone milling rails or providing anything but the stock rail to the public. The offerings of rail alternatives and milled rails is something of a new offering, say within the last ten years...give or take a couple of years.

When PTP was doing its thing, no one was offering milled rails so indeed, they offered a lighter alternative. Not to mention a much cooler one...if you want subjective analysis on the matter!

[Frizzle Fry]

If the unibody design "took us back" then why was the Xmag, one of the final innovations and probably the greatest AGD product - easily the most desirable now - a unibody?

In a world where lighter = better (which is not my opinion) consider not just that the marker itself was lighter, but how much weight is shed by going from a twistlock barrel with a huge haft to an autococker threaded barrel. I would point out that at the time PTP landed on 'cocker threading, "high-end" markers were all trying to establish their thread pattern as the superior one and would go on to do so until the late 1990s. PTP accurately predicted Autococker threading as being the best choice years before it became the standard, or at least took a gamble on it and won, which is surprising considering that it's such an illogical thread pattern (even Bud Orr will admit that; it was just a tap that he had on hand, or something).

As for the other merits, it definitely makes the marker much easier to assembly and disassemble. The later generations with the "wing" over the valve to me made it easier to install and uninstall, and the site rail was much less complicated than those on the RT and RT Pros - definitely better than the slipon/screwdown ones for the classic bodies, and you'll note that the Xmag had the same feature. The detents offered throughout the 90s were wire which had the potential to be a nightmare (rusting, bending, slicing paint, etc) and the unibody allowed for a better (at the time) system to be used - plastic nubbins didn't come from AGD until much later.

It's VERY easy to look back at things that happened 25+ years ago and say that they're unimportant, or not revolutionary, but you have to have some perspective and apparently that's only gained by having been there at the time, or putting some serious thought into what changed and when. In a world where 3D printers exist, Chinese manufacturing is cheap and readily available (since the trade agreement), the internet provides a marketplace for the easy purchase of parts, upgrades and services (including anodizing and milling) as well as free tech and service references on forums and youtube videos OF COURSE these older don't stack up to today's standards. However, in a world where markers were purchased at fields or out of catalogs, upgrades the same, and "tech references" were in the form of photocopy manuals and mail-order VHS tapes, or the advice of another player given in person, a fully upgraded marker with brand new features which made maintenance and play easier/better was a big deal. It's a matter of perspective, and looking at how things developed from the BEGINNING forward, not the END back.

For comparison - look at an early 60's Cadillac with an automatic transmission... Loud, clunky, inefficient compared to today's cars, with seatbelts as an "option" and no airbags. However, they had one of the most revolutionary, bulletproof and low maintenance automatic transmissions ever made, setting the standard going forward - and the cars looked cool, too. Do we tell owners and enthusiasts of classic Caddies that because the Northstar motor was a piece of crap 30 years later that their 1964 is junk? Or complain about how a modern CVT is so much more efficient, or a standard might serve you better in a race?

[Frizzle Fry]

Automag:

• Autococker Barrel Threads
• Aluminum Bodies
• Removable Feednecks
• 45 Gripframes
• Double Trigger Grip Frames
• Unibody Design
• Integrated Site Rail
• Upgraded Detent System
• Threaded Sear Pin
• Emag Frame (co-developed with AGD)

Autococker

• Factory Detent
• Halfblock Body Design
• 45 Gripframes
• Integrated Beavertail Gripframes
• Factory Body Drilling (hammer lug)
• Factory Adjustable Trigger
• Removable Feedneck
• Powerfeed

Food for thought.

[MAGgot]

Yeah, its easy to reflect on history and play around with numbers to arrive at the conclusion you want. However, I don't recall seeing "back in the day" anyone milling rails or providing anything but the stock rail to the public. The offerings of rail alternatives and milled rails is something of a new offering, say within the last ten years...give or take a couple of years.

When PTP was doing its thing, no one was offering milled rails so indeed, they offered a lighter alternative. Not to mention a much cooler one...if you want subjective analysis on the matter!

Exactly.

I do want to correct one thing though, before Eclipse came out with the final generation of splash kit that had milled rails, I can only think of one other company who produced a nicely milled Mag rail... PTP/Benchmark

[Walker]

About 2 years ago I started on a mission to own every gun and product that PTP ever made. I came pretty close...

Me too... I have seven MicroMags, one of each generation and an extra Gen 2. My Micromag 2000 is a Micro eMag. I also have a Sleeper Cocker, PTSC2, Armson Rifle, Armson Semi, VMX, and a BeamHits LMTS. I am missing the microCocker, but one will come up eventually.

Needless to say, I'm a fan of PTP products....

I can understand why some are not fans, but each to their own....


Walker

[Nobody]

If the unibody design "took us back" then why was the Xmag, one of the final innovations and probably the greatest AGD product - easily the most desirable now - a unibody?

I surmise that the unibody was not necessarily choosen(though the next time i see Simon, i can ask) because of simplicity, but for the fact that with the inclusion the eyeboard and the reflective eye, this could not be done very well at the time.

In a world where lighter = better (which is not my opinion) consider not just that the marker itself was lighter, but how much weight is shed by going from a twistlock barrel with a huge haft to an autococker threaded barrel. I would point out that at the time PTP landed on 'cocker threading, "high-end" markers were all trying to establish their thread pattern as the superior one and would go on to do so until the late 1990s. PTP accurately predicted Autococker threading as being the best choice years before it became the standard, or at least took a gamble on it and won, which is surprising considering that it's such an illogical thread pattern (even Bud Orr will admit that; it was just a tap that he had on hand, or something).

The barrel threads was NOT an accurate prediction, it was necessary to be cheap. Here is why. Ptp is a small shop, small shops can't always afford all the tap and dies to make the parts. If PTP were making their own bodies and not using slugs from WGP, then they would need to thread the barrels for them. It is easier for a secondary shop to choose one threading for their line versus a new or even a different thread from a specific gun(putting Shocker threads on a cocker). So if you were to go after the cocker crowd, who already has cocker barrels. It makes sense to use them.

This choice was made by nearly everyone who didn't make barrels, if they made guns. Looking at AKA, they targeted the spyder crowd with spyder specific parts and bodies. It makes no sense to give a spyder body with ICD threads.

It has only become defacto to cocker threads being standard.

As for the other merits, it definitely makes the marker much easier to assembly and disassemble. The later generations with the "wing" over the valve to me made it easier to install and uninstall, and the site rail was much less complicated than those on the RT and RT Pros - definitely better than the slipon/screwdown ones for the classic bodies, and you'll note that the Xmag had the same feature. The detents offered throughout the 90s were wire which had the potential to be a nightmare (rusting, bending, slicing paint, etc) and the unibody allowed for a better (at the time) system to be used - plastic nubbins didn't come from AGD until much later.

Just because they eliminated the possible problem, does not make it the best choice. The plastic nubbins are so much better than the wire. I know if i had a plastic nubbin, it would have saved 1 barrel of mine. But as we all know, the Mag was ahead of its time. Only when the L10 was introduced was the Mag able to reach its full potential without the snear or talk of the gun being a "paint blender".n do not confuse innovation with doing things differently.

It's VERY easy to look back at things that happened 25+ years ago and say that they're unimportant, or not revolutionary, but you have to have some perspective and apparently that's only gained by having been there at the time, or putting some serious thought into what changed and when. In a world where 3D printers exist, Chinese manufacturing is cheap and readily available (since the trade agreement), the internet provides a marketplace for the easy purchase of parts, upgrades and services (including anodizing and milling) as well as free tech and service references on forums and youtube videos OF COURSE these older don't stack up to today's standards. However, in a world where markers were purchased at fields or out of catalogs, upgrades the same, and "tech references" were in the form of photocopy manuals and mail-order VHS tapes, or the advice of another player given in person, a fully upgraded marker with brand new features which made maintenance and play easier/better was a big deal. It's a matter of perspective, and looking at how things developed from the BEGINNING forward, not the END back.

True. The early part houses did do a lot for the player, taking up the questions that are later being answered on the internet. Experience always dictates what works, what people liked and so forth.


I will say this. You are beating the PTP flag extremely well. I believe you have got some facts wrong and are trying to puff up the brand, as you think it deserves. I am one that doesn't care. Rare does one not like the way a gun looks and still use it.

[Frizzle Fry]

The barrel threads was NOT an accurate prediction, it was necessary to be cheap. Here is why. Ptp is a small shop, small shops can't always afford all the tap and dies to make the parts. If PTP were making their own bodies and not using slugs from WGP, then they would need to thread the barrels for them. It is easier for a secondary shop to choose one threading for their line versus a new or even a different thread from a specific gun(putting Shocker threads on a cocker). So if you were to go after the cocker crowd, who already has cocker barrels. It makes sense to use them.

This choice was made by nearly everyone who didn't make barrels, if they made guns. Looking at AKA, they targeted the spyder crowd with spyder specific parts and bodies. It makes no sense to give a spyder body with ICD threads.

But PTP did make barrels... and they made them for ICD, Spyder, F1s, VM68s, Prolites, Sovereigns and many others - it wasn't "cheap-out" to them. Bud Orr made the choice to thread his cockers based on either having the tap on hand, or being able to buy it locally, or something - I don't remember the exact story but that's why it's such a goofy thread. Many other companies were pushing their own style of barrel attachment, thread patterns and otherwise, and for whatever reason PTP elected to use the type of threading that would go on to become standard but not until many years later despite having the tooling to utilize any thread pattern on the market. A few tap and die sets aren't much of an expense when you have millions of dollars worth of machinery in your shop.

They weren't a "small shop" either - they were massive compared to the competition at the time, which is part of my point... if you look at a majority of custom guns from the era when PTP started you'll see a lot of simple, raw cuts, and a mishmash of aftermarket parts used on their markers. PTP made everything from the frames to the barrels to the feednecks to the velocity adjusters and bolts in house; the markers came fully upgraded and uniformly finished. Sure, BBT and Carter caught on and did the same but they still had a less uniform product line until years later, an a higher pricepoint.

Just because they eliminated the possible problem, does not make it the best choice. The plastic nubbins are so much better than the wire.

I'm not saying that it's the best choice now, but it was then... they saw a problem and created a new solution. That's the definition of innovation.

Mags had inferior detents (evidenced by the fact that they changed the design, albeit much later) so PTP made a better detent system. Autocockers had NO detent whatsoever, and custom shops were sticking the same wire detents on them that mags were using... PTPs design was superior to that, as well - even to early thread-in ball detents ("cocker detents") which were often mismeasured when done as a custom job, because PTPs could be adjusted forward and back by trimming the delrin finger. Has their detent been surpassed by several others since then? Sure. Doesn't change that it was innovative at the time.

I will say this. You are beating the PTP flag extremely well. I believe you have got some facts wrong and are trying to puff up the brand, as you think it deserves.

I'd love to know what I've got wrong... PTP may have screwed up their products and customer service in recent years, but to anyone who was there and playing in the early and mid 90s it's undeniable that they were innovators in the field, were well ahead of their time with many of their products, and that they played a big part in the growth of the Automag platform almost from the start. I'd love to hear what Tom has to say on the subject, at least with regards to automags... As for 'cockers, creating the first production halfblock has to mean something, as does adding a functional factory detent system.

[MAGgot]

As for 'cockers, creating the first production halfblock has to mean something, as does adding a functional factory detent system.

They also made virtually all of the aluminum slider frames on the market (Benchmark, Pro-Line, WGP, KAPP, etc)

[Frizzle Fry]

They also made virtually all of the aluminum slider frames on the market (Benchmark, Pro-Line, WGP, KAPP, etc)

True... And were one of the earliest, if not the first 45...

I think one of the biggest things that speaks to them as a company is their relationship with Tom and Bud in their heyday.

[Nobody]

But PTP did make barrels... and they made them for ICD, Spyder, F1s, VM68s, Prolites, Sovereigns and many others - it wasn't "cheap-out" to them. Bud Orr made the choice to thread his cockers based on either having the tap on hand, or being able to buy it locally, or something - I don't remember the exact story but that's why it's such a goofy thread. Many other companies were pushing their own style of barrel attachment, thread patterns and otherwise, and for whatever reason PTP elected to use the type of threading that would go on to become standard but not until many years later despite having the tooling to utilize any thread pattern on the market. A few tap and die sets aren't much of an expense when you have millions of dollars worth of machinery in your shop.

Cutting threads onto a tube, on a lathe(i am assuming a manual lathe), is WAY different than cutting them with a tap and or die. There is a distinction.

Also, do not confuse selling barrels versus making them. Just as Smart Parts was the distributer for E lipse and Belsales products/guns; Armson mames the barrels. PTP sells the barrels. That is it. If PTP did make barrels. Why do they not make more or a 2 piece, or whatever? Its because Armson makes it. PTP just sells it for them in the US.

They weren't a "small shop" either - they were massive compared to the competition at the time, which is part of my point... if you look at a majority of custom guns from the era when PTP started you'll see a lot of simple, raw cuts, and a mishmash of aftermarket parts used on their markers. PTP made everything from the frames to the barrels to the feednecks to the velocity adjusters and bolts in house; the markers came fully upgraded and uniformly finished. Sure, BBT and Carter caught on and did the same but they still had a less uniform product line until years later, an a higher pricepoint.

Correct me if i am wrong. There is Forrest, Tracy & a 3rd person... Size is not a detriment to ability or quality of work. The finished product should determine that. Do not confuse it. It is not a bad thing. Many manufacturers started out small. Inception Desings is a small company, much smaller than what most people think.

I'm not saying that it's the best choice now, but it was then... they saw a problem and created a new solution. That's the definition of innovation.

I judge innovation as coming up with an idea that is different, but then becomes common place as the idea is so good that you can not do without it.

Mags had inferior detents (evidenced by the fact that they changed the design, albeit much later) so PTP made a better detent system. Autocockers had NO detent whatsoever, and custom shops were sticking the same wire detents on them that mags were using... PTPs design was superior to that, as well - even to early thread-in ball detents ("cocker detents") which were often mismeasured when done as a custom job, because PTPs could be adjusted forward and back by trimming the delrin finger. Has their detent been surpassed by several others since then? Sure. Doesn't change that it was innovative at the time.

Remember, since the start of paintball to maybe 96 or so, there were no detents on guns. Many guns did not have them. PTP just offered them as standard, as the rest of the industry was. Plus the early ones where done by people. Again, do not confuse people making a home mod versus a factory one. 2 different things.

I'd love to know what I've got wrong... PTP may have screwed up their products and customer service in recent years, but to anyone who was there and playing in the early and mid 90s it's undeniable that they were innovators in the field, were well ahead of their time with many of their products, and that they played a big part in the growth of the Automag platform almost from the start. I'd love to hear what Tom has to say on the subject, at least with regards to automags... As for 'cockers, creating the first production halfblock has to mean something, as does adding a functional factory detent system.

You are wrong on your assumptions. They had started a few things, but other people perfected them. The halfblock, aluminium mag bodies, 45 or double trigger frames. Yes, PTP was there first, but it doesn't mean they are the best. They do not make ARMSON barrels, they just sell them. They had problems with the 2k9 bodies, but barely made a mends to retify it near 7 years later, by all the moaning still done. Henry Ford didn't make the first car, or even the best car. He just made a car that he was able to get out to everyone. I do know you like them, love them and support them, but you have to look at that they are not on the pedestal that you have them on.

[going_home]

I'd love to hear what Tom has to say on the subject, at least with regards to automags...

From what I've seen of him on AO, I'd wager to say he's a man that would rather say nothing publicly if he had nothing good to say.

Tuna on the other hand tells it like it is.......

[luke]

From what I've seen of him on AO, I'd wager to say he's a man that would rather say nothing publicly if he had nothing good to say.

I remember a very specific comment TK made years ago on the subject. Right here on AO in fact, probably in the archives somewhere. It wasn't necessary derogatory but it was something that relates directly to parts of this discussion.

[blackdeath1k]

I started playing in 93-4. With a prolite. It had a detent from factory. Then my mag I bought the same year had the wire nubbin. The original spyders at the time had some sort of detent as well. So detents were present at the time. But I agree totally that ptp did a lot of stuff back then that nobody else did. They were a pioneer of innovation in the early 90s.

[Frizzle Fry]

Correct me if i am wrong. There is Forrest, Tracy & a 3rd person... Size is not a detriment to ability or quality of work. The finished product should determine that. Do not confuse it. It is not a bad thing. Many manufacturers started out small. Inception Desings is a small company, much smaller than what most people think.

Tracy, Forrest and Russell tackled the MM2K9 project, if that's what you mean. They have had different employees over the years and have grown and shrunk over the years, as well as relocating their production facilities and warehouse several times. I doubt anyone here thinks that Inception is more than a few people... We all know Simon, and many of us were here for the inception of Inception.

I judge innovation as coming up with an idea that is different, but then becomes common place as the idea is so good that you can not do without it.

That's an interesting perspective but it's simply not the definition of "innovation", nor the common understanding of it... Feel free to look it up.

Remember, since the start of paintball to maybe 96 or so, there were no detents on guns. Many guns did not have them. PTP just offered them as standard, as the rest of the industry was. Plus the early ones where done by people. Again, do not confuse people making a home mod versus a factory one. 2 different things.

I remember because I was playing and buying markers, and many markers at that... There were plenty of very popular markers with factory detents before '96, including Tippmanns in '89, Automags in '90, Illustrators in '91 and VM68s in '93. Autocockers were an oddball in that respect; the most popular semis had detents, they just tended to suck. Wires rusted, bent, cut paint, and got damaged. Foamy finger detents hardened over time and tore. Spring detents in Tippmanns were actually OK. PTPs detent was a better option.

I'm not confusing home mods with factory ones; I'm talking about the beginning of Autococker detents - Bud Orr didn't want to incorporate them, so they were offered only as a modification by proshops and custom shops, or an option on custom/private label markers. Most people were adding inferior wire detents, or drilling for threaded ball detents - I owned a BPS Express (my first 'cocker) with a misdrilled detent, and went on to buy a Skirmish 'cocker which had a similar problem, and a later a BBT which unsurprisingly had a poorly placed detent - this was not an uncommon issue. PTP offered a "factory" detent on their marker, which was essentially scratch built from a blank body rather than a marker purchased, customized and modified for resale (like most other offerings at the time) and the detent was superior to the other offerings of the time because it was generally perfect out of the box, but could be adjusted if it wasn't.

You are wrong on your assumptions. They had started a few things, but other people perfected them. The halfblock, aluminium mag bodies, 45 or double trigger frames. Yes, PTP was there first, but it doesn't mean they are the best.

Please point out where I said "best" - I simply said they developed those things first. That's innovation. They did a thing before anyone else did that thing, and many people decided to do the same thing as a result... for many years later, or after many years. Did others do it better? Sure, but somebody had to do it first... Somebody had to think of a new concept, or identify a need in the market and address it. That's what PTP did. Essentially the definition of innovation.

At some point they stopped innovating, at least in their own products. The designs stagnated, other than perhaps their work on the Emag frame, and shortly after they stepped away from their traditional marker platforms to sell products in the Milsim market and partner with VL for something different, while focusing on military contracts and other branches of the business.

They had problems with the 2k9 bodies, but barely made a mends to retify it near 7 years later, by all the moaning still done....

...I do know you like them, love them and support them, but you have to look at that they are not on the pedestal that you have them on.

Don't get it twisted, I don't support them anymore. I like Forrest and Tracy as people, but I got screwed on the MM2K9 just as hard as everyone else who bought it... I got two bodies and only one of them worked, and I never got the other stuff I paid for. What I did get was years late. I watched the 'cocker debacle go down on CustomCockers and it looks like others got screwed too, shame on them for not paying attention to the MM2K9 debacle and taking heed, or shame on PTP for using their past reputation to write a check they simply weren't capable of cashing? Probably a bit of the former and a lot of the latter.

What I love were their old products. What I'm saying here is that it seems like a bunch of people with a hair across their ass about a much more recent issue, who have no perspective on the past because THEY WEREN'T THERE, are trying to tear down every past success and innovation of a company who used to make top notch products based on a grudge and a genuine lack of information about the time period or the subject in general. Beyond which, they're effectively calling out anyone who supported a company in the past, or likes their old products, for what that company does now. Seems kind of silly to me. More than a little offensive, even, and I doubt I'm the only one who feels that way.



Lastly, before I shut up and ditch this forum once again...

If PTP is so bad, has such a horrible history of QC issues before the 2K9, then why did AGD partner with them to develop the Emag frame? Why did AGD partner with them to develop the FN303 and its predecessor prototypes? Why allow PTP to produce Automags, provide branded valves, etc? Both of those development partnerships happened after almost a decade of PTP making and selling Micromags... If Tom had such a big problem with their older products (almost all of which predate the partnerships, the MicroEmag being an exception), wouldn't he seek out someone else to work with? Or cut them off completely? He had a problem with the Colonial, and tried to put a stop to that...

Simply put I have owned MANY Micromags; bought many new, and many used... I tallied it up a few years ago with Saint Noir (who was playing at the time PTP started as well) and we came up with a number over 50. I never encountered a major QC problem with a Micromag before the 2K9, and fewer minor ones than with other high end markers of the era - I won't count sanding the breech so that the L10 will work properly. That's 50+ markers, and I know there are users here with one or dozens of them that are still going strong after 1-2 decades. They like them, they will keep using them, and after this thread they likely won't care what you think about it because they work and look good doing it.

[saintnoir]

hmmm..*looks around*......PTP....

they did some amazing things early on....and really jumped the shark with there mm2k9 and cocker return...but damm there is some real bitterness here...and i got hit on the mm2k9 and cocker...uggh

[GoatBoy]

Sorry guys, super busy lately. I promise to keep it fun and informative.


BENCHMARK GRIP FRAMES



Do we need to discuss this?

I guess we do.

These grip frames suck. The frame is out of spec and the triggers are wobbly.

They're also heavy.

That is my picture up there. I picked it up around 2008, determined there was no better reason for me to own it in 2008 than there was in the 90’s and immediately sold it off. But not before I threw it on the scale because I am just wired like that.

Now, I think the body there is a little heavier than Maggot’s, so I’m conservatively saying it’s about 11oz. Probably closer to 12 but we’ll fudge that out.

The foregrip I think is about 6oz.

That leaves 7.8oz for the grip frame. Let’s round down to be nice. 7oz.

What does a plastic stock gripframe weigh?



Oh dear. So that 3-ish oz weight reduction you barely managed to get with the “unibody”? Obliterated when you put the Benchmark frame on. I’m not even talking about the milled or plastic rail anymore. Stock rail. Stainless body. Stock grip frame.

Sure, you can put a plastic frame on the Micromag if you want the weight savings back.

But you won't.

Why?

Because you wouldn't want to split up that beautiful matching anno pair.

So the artful anno job is actually screwing you over. You paid all that money for fancy design, advanced milling, high tech aluminum, artful anodizing... and you can't even beat a stock stainless mag with full rail and CF grip frame in the weight department despite all the advertising and testimonials that the Micromag is lighter.

[JKR]

So...much...hate...


As for me...nothing changes my love for my PTP Micromag.

[vintage]

So...much...hate...


As for me...nothing changes my love for my PTP Micromag.

thats one thing i've picked up on since i joined this forum. people hold onto hate here if they have ever been burn't by something, they never seem to let it go. i've been burn't(not here) and yea it hoovers but eventually i move on but always keep it in the back of my mind as a reminder of what can happen.

[going_home]

Just fun and informative .

Not hate, just no love , zero .

[MAGgot]

Sorry guys, super busy lately. I promise to keep it fun and informative.


BENCHMARK GRIP FRAMES

Do we need to discuss this?

I guess we do.

These grip frames suck. The frame is out of spec and the triggers are wobbly.

They're also heavy.

That is my picture up there. I picked it up around 2008, determined there was no better reason for me to own it in 2008 than there was in the 90’s and immediately sold it off. But not before I threw it on the scale because I am just wired like that.

Now, I think the body there is a little heavier than Maggot’s, so I’m conservatively saying it’s about 11oz. Probably closer to 12 but we’ll fudge that out.

The foregrip I think is about 6oz.

That leaves 7.8oz for the grip frame. Let’s round down to be nice. 7oz.

What does a plastic stock gripframe weigh?

Oh dear. So that 3-ish oz weight reduction you barely managed to get with the “unibody”? Obliterated when you put the Benchmark frame on. I’m not even talking about the milled or plastic rail anymore. Stock rail. Stainless body. Stock grip frame.

Sure, you can put a plastic frame on the Micromag if you want the weight savings back.

But you won't.

Why?

Because you wouldn't want to split up that beautiful matching anno pair.

So the artful anno job is actually screwing you over. You paid all that money for fancy design, advanced milling, high tech aluminum, artful anodizing... and you can't even beat a stock stainless mag with full rail and CF grip frame in the weight department despite all the advertising and testimonials that the Micromag is lighter.

So an aluminum .45 frame weighs more than a thin plastic one... that's your point? I guess you think the Emag frame, Intelliframe, all other aftermarket frames, etc are all trash too?

If the only thing that matters to you is the weight of a marker, just go play with a space *****! Why are you playing with a mid-90's mech?

[Walker]

Hmmmm... Interesting weight comparison.

It seems to me a better comparison would be a Micromag with it's Benchmark frame, and a Classic Mag with it's stainless body/aluminum rail and an aluminum .45 frame that was available when the Micromags came out (were there frames other than the Proline or Benchmark?). Comparing Apples to Apples, would the MicroMag be lighter? I'd also be curious as to the weight of a Classic with the plastic frame compared to above other setups.

Hmmm..... Another comparison might be a microEmag to a stock AGD eMag?

I use Benchmark frames on my Micromags, because they match the gun. I don't have any issues with them. If they are out of spec, what are they being compared to that was available at the same time? As to their wobbly triggers, what was available at the time to compare them to?


Walker

[kutter]

I find it rather amusing that some of you are having a discussion about shaving a couple of OUNCES from your gear. It reminds me so much of that fat guy in the bicycle shop (not saying anyone is fat by the way) that is weighing tires for his $5000 road bike to get the lightest one but has spent to much money on the latest 3000 calorie laden drink from Starbucks.

If you want a light gun, buy an Axe. You will have a soulless piece of equipment, but it will be light, efficient, and from what I can see, always work. As someone pointed out, comparing 90's tech to modern tech is just silly. If I can tote my VM-68 around for a 24hr scenario, then my Micro and E-mag seem light as a feather.

Oh yeah, if you are still hung up on weight, carry one less pod of paintballs, that will more than make up for the difference.

As for liking PTP, they did some really neat things for a long time, then the screwed it all up, that pretty much sums it up. I would love a 2K9 but I am not willing to take the risk to get one. Will build something else instead, probably a pneumag or ULT.