U.S Army picks Sig.

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is interesting that a process that took several years has finally ended 5 days after the incoming SecDef got grilled by Senators over the Army's Modular Handgun bid. I am assuming it is 9mm but none of the articles are definitively saying that which is also interesting. It doesn't have a manual safety either from what I can tell. I guess not having them on all the Glock 19s already out there hasn't been big deal.
 
Now this is a surprise to me. Glock had been rolling up Federal contracts with great success of late. That Big Army selected Sig is amazing. Of course, that Glock did not have an external safety may have been the decider. None the less, Good Going for Sig.
 
Yes, the bid specified ammo, parts, training, and even some accessories. It's extremely comprehensive and that is why so many other gun makers didn't submit. Because of that the contract is actually less gun and more supply chain logistics.

When you compare the specs to what they were looking for in the 1954 Army trials they seem to have finally gotten what was asked for 63 years ago. Compact, lightweight, around a 4" barrel, and not a 1911. Wonder what the Marines will say about it when the Chief of Staff are instructed to reduce expenses and adhere to a DOD standard firearm. Then again all the smaller agencies buy whatever they like anyway.

Which brings up: What will the DOD do with millions of M9's? New administration or not, expect them to be given away as military aid to our allies and the CMP to go begging even longer. I will be surprised they are even allowed to handle a few in the atmosphere of holding back on 100,000 broken down 1911's. Presidents tend to keep previous policies in place and this will be another case of let's see what really happens.
 
Wow. I have no experience with Sig guns so not sure if this is good or bad. Does this mean Sig will produce a gun with a safety for civilians?
 
It feels weird to have outlived a service pistol that I grew up admiring as a piece of hardware. With small-ish hands, I never liked the reach to manipulate the safety; the fact that the safety could be engaged while manipulating the said; or, the long trigger reach to DA. But it was a pistol I adapted myself to be able to shoot as well as needed, and that adaptation was a good, grinding lesson as a shooter. The model was a companion for three tours downrange, and countless rounds in between honing my proficiency for those tours in different forms, including a government-sponsored trip to the national matches. Twice I drew a Beretta for defensive purposes, once in Afghanistan and once in Arizona. Both of those times, if it had to be a handgun -- because all handguns suck -- I was okay with it being that handgun.

So, bye Beretta, congratulations to Sig, and wishes for stalwartness to the Glock owners who give their G17 a tighter hug than usual tonight. How long until salty veterans start talking about how much they miss the M9 and soldiers complain about the crappy 320 when it occasionally fails after having been fired tens of thousands of times and used to pound in tent stakes...
 
I would love to see details of the testing. How many rounds fired, average failure count, cost per unit, test conditions (like the old cement mixer and the mud slurry they used back in the 80's), and all of the details.

I hope that Sig (or if this selection gets over turned, who ever it is) has the best quality control and makes the most reliable and accurate pistol as possible. These service men and women go into harms way, and they should have confidence that every piece of equipment they have will function when called upon.

So, those of you in the US Army that carry a side arm, what is the load out? How many rounds do you carry for the side arm?
If I recall correctly, the load out for the M4 rifle is 200 rounds (or maybe 300, can't remember for sure).

I believe that any manufacturer with proper funding can make a consistent quality firearm. I hope those that produce firearms for our service personnel make the best, every time, all the time.
 
Tirod said:
Yes, the bid specified ammo, parts, training, and even some accessories. It's extremely comprehensive and that is why so many other gun makers didn't submit. Because of that the contract is actually less gun and more supply chain logistics.

When you compare the specs to what they were looking for in the 1954 Army trials they seem to have finally gotten what was asked for 63 years ago. Compact, lightweight, around a 4" barrel, and not a 1911. Wonder what the Marines will say about it when the Chief of Staff are instructed to reduce expenses and adhere to a DOD standard firearm. Then again all the smaller agencies buy whatever they like anyway.

Which brings up: What will the DOD do with millions of M9's? New administration or not, expect them to be given away as military aid to our allies and the CMP to go begging even longer. I will be surprised they are even allowed to handle a few in the atmosphere of holding back on 100,000 broken down 1911's. Presidents tend to keep previous policies in place and this will be another case of let's see what really happens.
Click to expand...

The Marines are not issuing the 1911. MARSOC is allowing operators to use a Glock and most have made the switch.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/...perators-to-choose-glocks-over-marsoc-45.html
 
sirgilligan said:
I would love to see details of the testing. How many rounds fired, average failure count, cost per unit, test conditions (like the old cement mixer and the mud slurry they used back in the 80's), and all of the details.

I hope that Sig (or if this selection gets over turned, who ever it is) has the best quality control and makes the most reliable and accurate pistol as possible. These service men and women go into harms way, and they should have confidence that every piece of equipment they have will function when called upon.

So, those of you in the US Army that carry a side arm, what is the load out? How many rounds do you carry for the side arm?
If I recall correctly, the load out for the M4 rifle is 200 rounds (or maybe 300, can't remember for sure).

I believe that any manufacturer with proper funding can make a consistent quality firearm. I hope those that produce firearms for our service personnel make the best, every time, all the time.
Click to expand...

My last go ended in 2012, but standard kit for a rifle was 210 rounds (6x magazines in pouches, one in the gun). For my M9 pistol, I was issued 2x 15-round magazines, which I substituted for 4x, 20-round MecGar magazines with the extra ammo obtained from a friendly armorer. One magazine went in the gun, the remainder rode top center of my plate carrier.
 
sirgilligan said:
I would love to see details of the testing. How many rounds fired, average failure count, cost per unit, test conditions (like the old cement mixer and the mud slurry they used back in the 80's), and all of the details.

I hope that Sig (or if this selection gets over turned, who ever it is) has the best quality control and makes the most reliable and accurate pistol as possible. These service men and women go into harms way, and they should have confidence that every piece of equipment they have will function when called upon.

So, those of you in the US Army that carry a side arm, what is the load out? How many rounds do you carry for the side arm?
If I recall correctly, the load out for the M4 rifle is 200 rounds (or maybe 300, can't remember for sure).

I believe that any manufacturer with proper funding can make a consistent quality firearm. I hope those that produce firearms for our service personnel make the best, every time, all the time.
Click to expand...
In Iraq in 2009-2010 it was 210 rounds for M4 and 45 rounds for M9
 
Ramey said:
Wow. I have no experience with Sig guns so not sure if this is good or bad. Does this mean Sig will produce a gun with a safety for civilians?
Click to expand...
Sig-Sauer already makes a Massachusetts compliant model of the P320 with an external safety.
 
http://www.military.com/daily-news/..._term=Editorial - Military - Early Bird Brief

What a tremendous waste of tax dollars. Pistols serve a very, very limited role in modern warfare. The Ma911A1 did the job just fine, as did it's replacement, the M9. Special units who had use for pistols with other specifications have always bought them in small lots as needed. This is not going to change that. $520 million of our tax dollars was just flushed down the urinal. My gut tells me that this was awarded to keep the incoming administration from killing the program.

It's not like we are going wait until Sig makes all these pistols before we field them. We are simply adding another pistol to the supply system and for at least 15 years we will support the existing M9s and M11s. Which means we will still buy parts to maintain the older models while the new pisotls trickle into the system. I don't know if it will fit the existing issue holster, but it certainly won't fit the Safariland and Blackhawk holsters that units have purchased with RFI funds for their M9s. This is going to cost a lot more then $520 million dollars when they are done and what will we have for that money? A pistol that pretty much does the same thing the pistols we already have.

sig-sauer-p320-army-1200x800-ts600.jpg
 
I am pleasantly surprised they picked the Sig 320. I thought for sure this was going to be another chest pounding opportunity for Glock and the fanatics that follow them. My guess held true that the Army would require (or at least strongly prefer) a manual safety. Sig delivered and Glock likely stomped their feet while shouting NO.
 
herrwalther said:
I am pleasantly surprised they picked the Sig 320. I thought for sure this was going to be another chest pounding opportunity for Glock and the fanatics that follow them. My guess held true that the Army would require (or at least strongly prefer) a manual safety. Sig delivered and Glock likely stomped their feet while shouting NO.
Click to expand...

As if Glock has never made a pistol with a manual safety for a government contract before.

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/thumb-safety-glock/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Army wants a harder-hitting pistol
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
160
Views
10K
Sam1911
S
D
  • Locked
SIG SAUER, Inc. Secures a $306 Million Pistol Contract by the U.S. Army's Material Co
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Frog48
F
tarosean
  • Locked
Glock Files Protest ~ XM17
Replies
11
Views
1K
CNobbe
C
G
  • Locked
US Army to Seek New Service Handgun
Replies
2
Views
421
RustyShackelford
R
T
  • Locked
Is this old news already?
Replies
1
Views
763
ugaarguy
ugaarguy
Back
Top