U.S Army picks Sig.

Status
Not open for further replies.
PabloJ said:
Let me help so that masses can understand you. 'Militia' = National Guard.
Click to expand...
That's the definition that those who would like to strip you of your Second Amendment rights would have people believe when they try to convince those who don't know any better that the framers of the US Constitution put a state right near the top of the US Bill of Rights and then continued on with the list individual rights that had specific prohibitions of governmental power.

However that's not what it meant originally.
 
tarosean said:
You do realize they recalled the FBIs new toy cause they didnt work?
Click to expand...
Yup, I do realise that, but my point was to show that Glock is open to redesigning their firearm in order to meet the requirements of a large contract, not that the changes were necessarily for the best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vba
ROCK6 said:
Is this a necessity? No, it's really not, but change is as much mental as it is physical. Our mission has changed over the past decade plus, the face of our enemy has changed, our TTPs have changed and our equipment has changed exponentially from when I first enlisted over 28 years ago.
Click to expand...

I enlisted in the Army on 6 December 1974 and retired on 1 November 2003. I have just a tiny bit of experience to draw on here. I am quite familiar with what is going on in the Army now as my middle son enlisted in 2002 and is also a career Infantry NCO (just like I was) with multiple deployments under his belt. He is going back to Iraq this Spring. TTPs are changing back to preparing for a mid to high intensity conflict with a peer opponent.

We don't need a new pistol to change our mindset. It wasn't the fielding of the Abrams and Bradley in the 80s that broke the Army out of it's post Vietnam identity crisis. It was leadership. It was the young thinkers at the service schools who abandoned active defense and created Air Land Battle. The Army would have excelled had we kept the M60s and M113s. It wouldn't have been as capable, but it still would have excelled. It was leadership not equipment.

ROCK6 said:
If anything, this will reemphasize training,
Click to expand...

How is this going to reemphasize training? Units will send officers and NCOs to a short class on the new pistol. Those officers and NCOs will present a short block of instruction to the people in the unit who are issued pistols and then they will fire the same pistol qualification course they have with the M9. Some units, mostly in the special operations community will continue to conduct meaningful pistol training, because they are resourced for it and everyone else will put them in the arms room and break them out when they go to the field and conduct their bi-annual qualification. Little changed in training when we switched from 1911A1s to M9s. Changing from M9s and M11s to Sig 320s will require even less change.

ROCK6 said:
but this is a positive move from a broader perspective and holistic viewpoint; this isn't the Cold War (at least not yet, again).
Click to expand...

Explain why this is a positive move from a broader perspective and holistic viewpoint. It's a 9mm semi auto pistol that doesn't do anything significantly different then the 9mm semi auto pistols we already have in service. What can we do with the new pistol that we can't do with the M9? This isn't a great leap in capability like mounting our mechanized units in M2 Bradleys instead of M113s. Adopting a new pistol is not going to require any change in doctrine. Our units aren't going to fight any differently with Sig 320s in their holsters then they do with M9s and M11s in their holsters.

Pistols ceased to be important battlefield weapons when we took the horses away from the Cavalry and eliminated the need for a trooper to be able to fire a weapon on horseback.
 
I like the 21 round magazines they have for these. Not too long but a nice boost in firepower. Hopefully the .mil have have a good supply of those on hand.
 
Dog Soldier said:
There was a time before the 1960s gun control mania this would have been good news. The NRA/DCM would receive all the Milsurp Beretta 9mm Military pistols to sell to civilians.
Ah, those were the days.:thumbup:
Click to expand...

There's a chance with the new administration that we could see the M9 pistols being sold through the CMP.
 
I disagree it is a waste of $, not the new pistol and transition at any rate. They can just keep good M9's in service until they wear out, replace the beat up ones. The 5 year program to figure out what they want was a waste perhaps. Just about every M9 I've seen or been issued has been beat to hell. I've only been issued crap holsters for them and have never used an issue holster, I buy my own. I have large hands, but the grip and trigger reach is too long for most, mag changes difficult and don't get me started on the stupid slide mounted safety/decocker!

The P320 is a huge step up. Smaller, lighter, better trigger (probably cost less), will fit more hands and yes, it still has a safety, but it is frame mounted and the neural pathway for disengaging it with your thumb is the same as for the M4. Now, I'd like to see some real emphasis placed on training as at the end of my career, having been issued M9's throughout and deployed twice, nobody in the Army ever gave me any training on it. (I make it a point to train as many soldiers as I can on the M9 if they are issued it).
 
F-111 John said:
And I suppose all of the changes they made to create the "17M" for the FBI contract is irrelevant to how much Glock is willing to accommodate a government contract today?
Click to expand...

17M was a Gen 4 frame with a mag well and minus the finger grooves. And a slightly different taper on the slide near the barrel. Oh wow. Glock really thought out of the box for that one. The dimensions for the polymer cast without finger grooves are probably still on file because of the Gen 2 Glocks. So the only real change there was keeping the RTF texture and backstraps of the Gen 4 frame while adding a mag well. Once again, I am astounded at Glock's innovation. I am sure it would be more difficult for Glock to add a manual safety to a Gen 4 frame than the changes they did to make the laughable failure we call 17M.
 
Gaston has already made enough money to last 10 lifetimes and seriously pursuing a .gov contract may have been somewhat pointless for the old Nazi, who at 87 years of age figures he doesn't have too many left after two strokes. Especially since he dumped his wife and married the new hottie nurse. Maybe she keeps him distracted. No?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...life-threatening-illness-threatens-gun-empire

M
 
Last edited:
PabloJ said:
Let me help so that masses can understand you. 'Militia' = National Guard.
Click to expand...
That is what the Anti-Second Amendment Orgs. want us to believe. The Antis want the citizens rights denied unless we belong to the Government's National Guard. Can you show me where the Founding Fathers proposed a National Guard? Remember the 2nd Amendment was to protect the citizens from that government. It is too bad what the Public Schools are teaching today. :(
 
Wonder when civilian M17s will start shipping? Hopefully it's not after the decade-long contract is fully filled.
 
M1key said:
I guess you win then...

M
Click to expand...

Easy there! I'm just saying that Google hits isn't a very compelling metric here. Try Googling 'Obama' and 'reptiloid'.;) Over my 40+ years of shooting I've heard people griping about almost every gun out there. Chattering doesn't necessarily mean much. Maybe I'm giving the Army too much credit but presumably they actually tested the pistol they're buying and found it to be satisfactory.

No matter what they pick half the grunts will love it and half will hate it. Same for the Call of Duty set that do all their shooting from an Xbox.

The larger issue to me is that the Army didn't really need a new handgun. If they were going to blow money on small arms they could have looked for a better rifle. Of course even that is probably a waste of money since the M4 has done a pretty good job up til now.
 
What this thread is really proving is that any thread regarding our military's choice of small arms is going to devolve into contentious back-and-forth about what our military personnel really need and what each individual poster personally believes works best ... pretty much all subjective perspectives and no one really wins ... Even those of us who have been there, done that, armed with whatever we were issued back in our day are all going to have wildly differing opinions.

I was violently opposed to the adoption of the M9 when my branch was completing its exchange, which didn't really finish until after the (first) Gulf War (I thought Col. Cooper was the messiah and the 1911 was my personal sacred talisman) ... yet, over the years, I came to appreciate the Beretta and now actually feel sad and old knowing it's getting replaced. But this time, having experienced the new pistol (the 320), I'm feeling as though our folks are getting a worthy replacement, and can actually see some benefits with this model over the M9. The change is gonna happen no matter what we believe. I just hope the young people currently serving have a more open mind about their new weapons than my generation did ...

As far as the taxpayers' money getting spent for what many here seem to believe is an totally unnecessary change ... that's really a subject that's not just about guns.
 
When the M9 was originally adopted, it was to replace the various handguns (semiautomatic & revolvers) in the inventory. It didn't exactly work out that way did it? Special Operations went their own way in regards to weapon selection. At some point during the next thirty years I won't be around to see what happens. The only constant in life is change be it good - indifferent and or bad.
 
The Army published a report years ago that the Berettas will go about 30 thousand on the slide and 15 thousand on the frame. I wonder what the service life of these new Sigs will prove to be?

M
 
strambo said:
I'm sure more than that, I bet Team Sig has more rounds than that on their 320s.
Click to expand...

You must not of got the memo that they shut down their shooting team last year.. Max might be the only member left... (?????? havent really kept up if he is still employed by sig or not)
 
Hangingrock said:
When the M9 was originally adopted, it was to replace the various handguns (semiautomatic & revolvers) in the inventory. It didn't exactly work out that way did it? Special Operations went their own way in regards to weapon selection. At some point during the next thirty years I won't be around to see what happens. The only constant in life is change be it good - indifferent and or bad.
Click to expand...

Ummm...

SpecOps will ALWAYS go their own way, hence the term "SpecOps".

SpecOps also does not reflect more than a tiny, tiny fraction of the service branches oveall. Using them as a yardstick to measure their respective branches by is not realistic.

The P320 is not, and never was, meant to be a SpecOps choice. It was meant to be a general service sidearm.
 
I wonder if this will raise the price of new Beretta 92's. I've always seen them as equal to Sig classic series pistols and just assumed that all of the sales that they got from the government contracts allowed Beretta to sell them at a lower price point much like Sig and the sp2022.
 
M1key said:
The Army published a report years ago that the Berettas will go about 30 thousand on the slide and 15 thousand on the frame. I wonder what the service life of these new Sigs will prove to be?

M
Click to expand...
There are some shooters over on the SIG forum who report having round counts over 25,000 on their P320s.
 
lot of angry folks here about this. if we are mad at the pentagon waste of money on this pistol....we got a whole lot more to be mad at the Pentagon at, that cost much more. not to mention the govt in general wastes on a yearly basis that makes this contract look like peanuts....sadly.
 
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
420
RustyShackelford
R
T
  • Locked
Is this old news already?
Replies
1
Views
763
ugaarguy
ugaarguy
Back
Top