New US armed forces/DoD XM9 contract; CNN.....

[JRWhit]

I would assume the front runners to be: "not specifically in this order"
Springfield XDM
SIG 2022
S&W M&P
H&K
Glock, " Gaston's troubles haven't seemed to slow his contracts with other departments.
Anyone think Ruger will throw in the SR line?

 

[RustyShackelford]

My picks....

Id say these models/brands or variants(milspec-prototype) will be seen:
Smith & Wesson/GD M&P
Glock 22/17/20 or a new model with a frame mounted ambi safety.
FNH/FNS
Walther PPQ
SIG Sauer 320(a decent selection for the features/quick changes)
Heckler & Koch P30 or a HK45 variant with ambi safety
Beretta PX4 Storm
I doubt Ruger will even bother to submit a SR model after the awful time they had in the 1980s with the new P85 9mm. It was later revised as the more practical P89 model.

 

[tarosean]

we are only half way through the 5yr 100,000 unit contract they got in 2012.

Dont see any changes coming with us being broke..

 

[fanchisimo]

Having carried one in Iraq and owned one myself, I will say that the Beretta does the job it's supposed to do. Replacement may seem like a waste because there is a low amount of pistol use, but if another pistol can be procured that will in the long run save money, I can see changing it. I think polymer pistols have proven themselves and it might be time for the DoD to consider them.

Personally, I hope that they would go with S&W as it is an American company. However I think a Glock would serve our troops just as well. If they go that route, please at least use Made in USA Glocks. Lol.

 

[Zerodefect]

I prefer Glock because I can fix the trigger, and then they work well for me. So I hope they pick the S&W since it has a better trigger out of the box.

I wonder if they'll get metal sights? I don't see the lame plastic sights on any of these stock pistols winning anyone over.

 

[pearsonm]

Thank you for those links, tipoc.

 

[tarosean]

However I think a Glock would serve our troops just as well. If they go that route, please at least use Made in USA Glocks. Lol.

Unless they change their requirements 72 different ones, two of which are external safety and lanyard attachment.. glock doesn't produce a pistol that meets just those two...

 

[RustyShackelford]

Who are "we"?.....

Forum members keep saying "we" .
If the US Department of Defense(DoD) or the US armed forces(Army, Navy, USAF, USMC) state openly they are going to look for a new pistol or set up a T&E program at a specific date or time period(Jan 2015) then that's it.
What you think or what you would do isn't going to matter.
Beretta USA also said the firm has ___ # of M9s left to fulfill their military contracts. They(Beretta) can not lie or deny that figure.
It's a public record.
We(the US public) pay for these T&Es & can access these records.
If a firearms maker says we have __ left why would they lie about it?

 

[pearsonm]

Here are a couple of articles that I don't believe have been posted yet:

http://www.businessweek.com/article...tary-pistol-contract-return-to-american-hands

http://www.tactical-life.com/magazines/special-weapons/beretta-m9-battle-legacy/

The Army's specifications are supposed to be released within the next few weeks. One will be more stopping power ('enhanced terminal balistics').

 

[Jaymo]

So, the BS artist is also a total scumbag.
Not surprised.

 

[fanchisimo]

external safety and lanyard attachment

Lanyard probably wouldn't be too difficult to add. Just put it in that gap behind the magwell. As for a safety... surely it wouldn't be that hard to add one especially when it's being considered for THE DoD contract. Then again maybe the bean counters can be convinced that the safeties that Glock, S&W, and various other brands are adequate.

 

[MAKster]

General Dynamics?

As far as I know General Dynamics has never made a handgun. I suspect their "contribution" will be the dozens of retired Generals who are on their payroll. They will surely call their former colleagues in the procurement office and "put in a good word" for S&W's gun.

 

[RustyShackelford]

US Navy aircraft carriers.....

The US Navy has made huge aircraft carriers for decades. The "bomb magnets" are often decried by bean counters & budget flacks.
But the DoD & armed forces pump billions of $$$ into them.
These handguns are the same.
Research the XM9 trials. This was a big mess.
In short it came down to the Beretta M9/92F & the SIG Sauer P226.
The Beretta USA pistol had a slight edge. They already had a US factory(MD) & cost a shad less per gun than the P226 XM9 9mmNATO.

SIG got back in the game with the compact M11 9mm(P228). This is still very popular with armed forces members in SW Asia.

 

[Onmilo]

Unless they change their requirements 72 different ones, two of which are external safety and lanyard attachment.. glock doesn't produce a pistol that meets just those two...

25 years after introduction and people who have never used Glock pistols STILL don't understand that the guns DO have an external safety, probably because they can't get past the fact it is mounted on the trigger and not on the frame or slide and
Glock pistols DO have a lanyard attachment point and if you need a larger loop a separate grip plug can be fitted

 

[crazysccrmd]

The Glock safety isn't bad, but it doesn't work for dumb or careless Soldiers who put their booger picker where it doesn't belong. A separate safety or a longer/heavy DA first pull is a safer option. I think a P226 with the slimmer E2 grips might be a better fit for most users, solve some perceived problems with the M9 and not blow the budget developing something totally new.

 

[Sergei Mosin]

If the safety can be disengaged by pulling the trigger, it isn't much of a safety.

 

[tipoc]

From Onmilo:

25 years after introduction and people who have never used Glock pistols STILL don't understand that the guns DO have an external safety, probably because they can't get past the fact it is mounted on the trigger and not on the frame or slide...

On many a gun forum people who regularly use Glocks point out quite often that "there is no external safety" on their favorite gun to get in their way or confuse them. So I can attest, and you can also observe for yourself, that there are many folks who don't get the point that you made above.

tipoc

 

[jeff-10]

As far as I know General Dynamics has never made a handgun. I suspect their "contribution" will be the dozens of retired Generals who are on their payroll. They will surely call their former colleagues in the procurement office and "put in a good word" for S&W's gun.

Yep.

Not a fan of the M&P at all but it may very well, in some form, be the next sidearm of the US Army.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by MAKster:

As far as I know General Dynamics has never made a handgun.

You can bank on it.

BUT: I seriously doubt that anyone who works today for Smith and Wesson has aver responded successfully, if at all, to a DoD procurement solicitation in recent years.

Who at S&W understands the rules? Does anyone there even understand the language, much less comprehend how to formulate a winning business strategy? I doubt it.

Understanding the process, being able to comply with the necessary terms and representations, and being able to navigate through the rules of a competitive procurement, all require considerable knowledge and experience.

It's a minefield. Stepping one place could disqualify the bidder. Stepping on another could make the offerer ineligible to receive any Government contracts at all. And then there are fines and imprisonment.

General Dynamics knows the business.

That's their contribution.

I suspect their "contribution" will be the dozens of retired Generals who are on their payroll.

Okay, then.

They will surely call their former colleagues in the procurement office and "put in a good word" for S&W's gun.

Well, that "good word" will not enter into the source selection process at all, in any way. And who can call whom and when and for what reason is governed by procurement regulations rooted in Federal law. No one takes that stuff lightly these days.

 

[Onmilo]

From Onmilo:



On many a gun forum people who regularly use Glocks point out quite often that "there is no external safety" on their favorite gun to get in their way or confuse them. So I can attest, and you can also observe for yourself, that there are many folks who don't get the point that you made above.

tipoc

in all honesty I really think you need to be a gunsmith to even come close to understanding this,,,

 

[Gtscotty]

Well, that "good word" will not enter into the source selection process at all, in any way.

The smart contractors don't try to affect the source selection process directly, they go after the users/requirements generators. It's a lot easier to win when the requirement looks a lot like it was written around your product... been there, dealt with that. This contract will be high profile and as such will draw a lot of scrutiny, I wouldn't expect too much in the way of blatant shenanigans. It's not uncommon for larger defense contractors to either partner, be a sub for, or be a prime for a smaller less experienced contractor that actually makes the required product. It should also be noted that depending on the way the contract is written, the DOD may not actually have to buy any production pistols at all... sometimes the first articles are the only part of the buy that's set in stone. Large production quantities can be set up as options, to be exercised if the procuring activity decides to move forward with the buy.

new gun, new ammo, new holster, everything.

That particular line kind of makes you wonder what they envision the new ammo being... There's only so much you can do with Ball 9mm... maybe .40?

 

[RustyShackelford]

.40Super, .41AE, .45Super.....

I disagree.
The huge push for a new .40 caliber pistol round in the late 1980s/early 1990s showed promise.
The new & innovative concepts like .41AE(Action Express), 10mm, .45Super, 9x23 Winchester, .356TSW, .357sig, etc had merit.
A powerful handgun round that offered good vel, KE level, marksmanship, feeding-cycle, and did well in the FBI "protocol tests" could be had.
I think the .40Super never got a fair shake. It didn't have support from the big ammunition & gun industry firms like the .40S&W or the .357sig.

Will the new T&E bring out any new ideas?
We will see but I'm hopeful these tests/selection will be a benefit to the US shooting sports/military small arms industry.

 

[ugaarguy]

Unless they change their requirements 72 different ones, two of which are external safety and lanyard attachment.. glock doesn't produce a pistol that meets just those two...

Full size Glocks have (had?) a lanyard attachment point that's simply a hole drilled into the bottom of the hollow area of the grip behind the mag well.

As for the manual safety, Glock actually produced both the 17 and 22 with frame mounted lever type safety for the police of the Australian island state of Tasmania:

They also made for / in anticipation of the UK MoD pistol trials at least one prototype model 17 with a cross bolt safety that was similarly situated to the cross bolt safety on the UK MoD issue SA-80 rifle. See The Firearm Blog for details.

I have no doubt that all the big players will modify their existing designs to address any shortcomings the requirements set forth as this latest potential purchase gains traction. It's too big of a potential contract not to go after.

 

[USAF_Vet]

we are only half way through the 5yr 100,000 unit contract they got in 2012.

Dont see any changes coming with us being broke..

A smart business plans ahead. When you know you have a contract expiration, even looming on a far away horizon, you still plan for it. My idiot company did not do this, even 3 years in advance of a contract we did not win the rebid, and we are suffering for it this fiscal year.

DoD is smarter, in theory, and would thus plan accordingly. Beretta may still be contracted to deliver X# of M-9 pistols, but X does not replace every old, worn out istol in DoD inventory. The X new M-9s that get delivered over the next couple years remaining on the contract will be in service for a long time, and the T&E trials may simply choose the Beretta M-9 again for the future contract. Anything is possible. Even with a new service pistol, the Beretta M-9 will remain in inventory for quite some time.

But not to plan at all is folly.

 

[RustyShackelford]

True

I went into the US Army in 1989 & they still had 1911a1s in use all over the world: Asia, Germany/Europe, South America, etc.
This doesn't include US Army Reserve & National Guard units which often get older weapons & trade ins.

A 2011 issue of American Rifleman noted how a National Guard aviation unit didn't even qualify with M9s prior to a extended SW Asia deployment.