T HE M n+1 AX n phases (n = 1, 2 or 3, M = transition metal, A = A-group element, X = carbon or nitrogen) are usually classified into three groups based on their n values, i.e., "211" for n = 1, "312" for n = 2, etc. In addition, there is also a category of "intergrown phases" such as the "523" and "725" phases, with alternating half-unit-cell layers of "211" and "312" (="523") or "312" and "413" (="725"). These phases were first reported in 2004 in the Ti-Si-C system by Palmquist et al. 1 Since then others were discovered as minority phases in bulk samples, 2 and thin films. [2][3][4][5] Palmquist et al. 1 noted that the alternating stacking of even and odd M layers induces a lateral translation of the A position, breaking the P6 3 /mmc symmetry of the regular MAX phases. Said otherwise, the A atoms are not positioned above each other until after three repetitions. It follows that the c axis of a M 5 A 2 X 3 phase has to be three times the average of the M 2 AX and M 3 AX 2 c-axes. This description has been echoed in several other papers. 6,7 A complete structure description was, however, not available until we very recently synthesized bulk samples with a high fraction of Ti 5 Al 2 C 3 which, in turn, permitted a complete structure determination. 8 We concluded that the space group was P3m1 and the crystal structure indeed consists of three formula units, with a c lattice parameter of 48.23 Å .Very recently, Wang et al. 9 reported on Ti 5 Al 2 C 3 prepared by hot pressing Ti, Al, and C powders, and suggested a structure with P6 3 /mmc space group symmetry. It is important to note at the outset, that neither the X-ray diffraction (XRD) nor transmission electron microscopy (TEM) results presented by Wang et al. are sufficient to verify their proposed stacking sequence. Their hypothetical structure [see Fig. 1(c)] has Ti 1 and Ti 2 at Wyckoff position 4f, Ti 3 at 2d, Al at 4e, C 1 at 2a, and C 2 at 4e with lattice parameters a = 3.038 Å and c = 32.261 Å . The purpose of this comment is to make the case that this structure is most probably incorrect.Our evidence against P6 3 /mmc symmetry is multifold. First, in Wang et al.'s suggested structure, the Ti-C layers appear with a BaCaB stacking [ Fig. 1(c)], where the upper case is for the Ti and the lower case is for the C atoms. This stacking has never been observed in any M n+1 AX n phase with n > 1. In all known 312 and 413 structures, the M-X layers have a stacking sequence of BcAbC.Second, Fig.