rellascout
member
By displaying your ignorance of how the process works. Most people in this discussion may not agree 100% but they are not injecting stupidity into the discussion.
Sigs are better than Glocks !
- Thread starter sigman
- Start date
- Status
searcher451
Member
Truth be told, I've gotten along fine for a lot of years now without owning either a Glock or a SIG. Reckon that I'll get along fine for a number of additional years, god willing, without owning either one, though a SIG has been known to tempt me from time to time. Still, too many Walthers to get and not enough time or money to get them all.
By the way, I thought we didn't encourage mine-is-bigger-than-yours threads. No?
By the way, I thought we didn't encourage mine-is-bigger-than-yours threads. No?
rellascout
member
Yet so many participate..... LOL
Blues Brother
Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 248
I still dont have anything against glocks. I just like sigs and XDs as they suit me better. I guess its just personal preference. I do have to say I have found this thread very intersting though. there is alot of good info here that gives good insight into the strengths and weaknesses of each brand.
rellascout
member
Exactly... 99% of what has been stated has been done so in a perfectly civil matter. Barbs have been exchanged but in a tongue and cheek manner.
The only people who are bent out of shape are those who treat their choice in firearm as an extension of themselves. When in reality there is no single Choice. It is simply a tool.
“It’s just a tool box. You pick the tool for the job.” -Sam from Ronin
"It's just a gun it does not define you as a human being. Don't make a bigger deal out of it then it needs to be. It just a tool."
NinjaFeint
Member
You are showing your "stupidity" if you thought my high point comment was serious.
rellascout
member
Then your little jab was then in fact bringing down the discussion was it not?
If it was a joke then why did you continue to defend the position?NinjaFeint
Member
I was being facetious and my point was to illustrate that cost is not the only thing taken into account with the bids as you had stated. As I stated in a previous post, I work for a company that bids on government contracts. We have a laundry list of criteria we must meet and we have to try to do that at a lower cost than our competitors. You were misrepresenting the process and I was trying to show that with a far fetched example. So I have spelled it out.Then your little jab was then in fact bringing down the discussion was it not?
rellascout
member
I did not misrepresent the process at all. Lowest bidder wins. Those who do not meet the spec do not bid.
Using your example Hi point would never bid because they could not meet the spec.
Using your example Hi point would never bid because they could not meet the spec.
NinjaFeint
Member
If you had of said it just like that, you would have been correct originally. If you are going to state a fact, state the whole fact.
Full Metal Jacket
member
rellascout said:
rellascout
member
If you are going to quote me you should also quote what I was reply to: Context is everything.
I stated that moving from Sig to Glock is a monetary decision. It has nothing to do with quality. It has everything to do with price. I was reply directly to the above statement.
If you had quoted me in context you would see that it makes perfect sense.
Even if you do not want to take it in its proper context agencies reject bids from inferior vendors on their face. They are never even considered. I was making a statement in the context of this discussion. Glock Vs Sig. Both were assumed to meet the requirements. Glock wins more contracts simply because they sell for less. The only way Sig wins contracts is via sole source contracts or by helping the contracting officers/agents write the contract so Sig is the only complying vendor. This is the art of Govt contracting when you have a higher priced product in a market dominated by a low price competitor like Glock. If you are a govt contractor as you claim you would know that and understand the context of that statement.
I stated that moving from Sig to Glock is a monetary decision. It has nothing to do with quality. It has everything to do with price. I was reply directly to the above statement.
If you had quoted me in context you would see that it makes perfect sense.
Even if you do not want to take it in its proper context agencies reject bids from inferior vendors on their face. They are never even considered. I was making a statement in the context of this discussion. Glock Vs Sig. Both were assumed to meet the requirements. Glock wins more contracts simply because they sell for less. The only way Sig wins contracts is via sole source contracts or by helping the contracting officers/agents write the contract so Sig is the only complying vendor. This is the art of Govt contracting when you have a higher priced product in a market dominated by a low price competitor like Glock. If you are a govt contractor as you claim you would know that and understand the context of that statement.
Last edited:
NinjaFeint
Member
Not a government contractor but I work for a company that bids on government contracts yearly. Never claimed to be a government contractor. You keep adding details to what you originally said and as such I will end our fun little discussion on this subject.
rellascout
member
Cool you work for a company that does contract work for the Govt but you are not a Govt contractor. 
In the end price is what wins most LEO contracts for Glock. They meet the min requirements and are able to deliver the weapon for less than their competitors can. They make a pretty nice profit to boot.
I am not knocking Glock for that. GG has done a very good job of dominating that market. Sig for the most part cannot compete, mainly because of price not quality. This is one of the reason production was moved from German, high labor, to the US, still high labor but less than Germany. People claim that S&W is making in roads with the M&P but I have not seen a lot of data to back that up.
In the end price is what wins most LEO contracts for Glock. They meet the min requirements and are able to deliver the weapon for less than their competitors can. They make a pretty nice profit to boot.
I am not knocking Glock for that. GG has done a very good job of dominating that market. Sig for the most part cannot compete, mainly because of price not quality. This is one of the reason production was moved from German, high labor, to the US, still high labor but less than Germany. People claim that S&W is making in roads with the M&P but I have not seen a lot of data to back that up.
NinjaFeint
Member
Rellascout, I know I said I was done but then you said
"Cool you work for a company that does contract work for the Govt but you are not a Govt contractor"
I, "I" being the key here, do not work on the government contracts or participate in the bidding process. I am aware of them and their details because I know a lot of the folks involved with the processes. The people who work on the government contracts are on a different employment contract with my company than I am. My company is a government contractor, I am not. Understand?
Also, I could give two craps about Glock vs Sig vs XD vs M&P. I already posted in this thread they are all good guns and you should pick the one you like.
"Cool you work for a company that does contract work for the Govt but you are not a Govt contractor
"I, "I" being the key here, do not work on the government contracts or participate in the bidding process. I am aware of them and their details because I know a lot of the folks involved with the processes. The people who work on the government contracts are on a different employment contract with my company than I am. My company is a government contractor, I am not. Understand?
Also, I could give two craps about Glock vs Sig vs XD vs M&P. I already posted in this thread they are all good guns and you should pick the one you like.
rellascout
member
QFT !!
rockhound758
Member
FMJ, thanks for the "Picard and Riker" pic...gave me a much needed laugh! "Another Glock vs. Sig question? Oh no..."
Full Metal Jacket
member
lol no prob. i like that one too, rockhound
Sapper771
Member
I guess I will have to chime in too, but it will repeat a lot of what has already been said. I am by no means a pro, so what I am about to say is simply from my own experience and opinion.
I have to disagree with the OP's statement. Even if the OP's statement was Glock is better than Sig, I would still have to disagree. I agree that the choice between the two is personal. Just because a Sig works for the this guy, doesn't mean that it will work for the other guy. For every video that we show of a glock kabooming, we can also show pictures of the Sig's extractor problems. No manufacturer has a clean rap sheet. My last 1911 came from a very well respected and high end custom shop. Out of my initial 39 rounds fired through it , only 4 rounds fully extracted. I was upset, but I understand that it is a machine, and machines aren't perfect.
I own both Sigs and Glocks. I carry a Glock on duty(G31) and off duty(G21SF). The Glock just works better for me, and that doesn't mean the Sig is a POS. I have also owned numerous glocks in different sizes and calibers, never had a problem out of them. I have been to several different training schools where all of the involved officers and cadre carried Glocks, only problems I have witnessed were magazine related, never a kaboom or FTE/FTF. With that being said, that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. I own 3 sigs currently, a P6, 226, and a 232. All my Sigs are West German/German. I love shooting them, they are accurate and reliable. I am contemplating with running my Sig 226 through the sand and mud to see how she will do, we will see.
Yes, my preference is toward glocks simply because I have more contact time with them and they are what fills my needs and wants. I have also been in water, sand, dirt, and mud with my Glock 21, and it has never had an issue. Its just what works for me.
Its all in what you need, want, and what works for you. Saying that one is better than the other is just picking a fight.
I have to disagree with the OP's statement. Even if the OP's statement was Glock is better than Sig, I would still have to disagree. I agree that the choice between the two is personal. Just because a Sig works for the this guy, doesn't mean that it will work for the other guy. For every video that we show of a glock kabooming, we can also show pictures of the Sig's extractor problems. No manufacturer has a clean rap sheet. My last 1911 came from a very well respected and high end custom shop. Out of my initial 39 rounds fired through it , only 4 rounds fully extracted. I was upset, but I understand that it is a machine, and machines aren't perfect.
I own both Sigs and Glocks. I carry a Glock on duty(G31) and off duty(G21SF). The Glock just works better for me, and that doesn't mean the Sig is a POS. I have also owned numerous glocks in different sizes and calibers, never had a problem out of them. I have been to several different training schools where all of the involved officers and cadre carried Glocks, only problems I have witnessed were magazine related, never a kaboom or FTE/FTF. With that being said, that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. I own 3 sigs currently, a P6, 226, and a 232. All my Sigs are West German/German. I love shooting them, they are accurate and reliable. I am contemplating with running my Sig 226 through the sand and mud to see how she will do, we will see.
Yes, my preference is toward glocks simply because I have more contact time with them and they are what fills my needs and wants. I have also been in water, sand, dirt, and mud with my Glock 21, and it has never had an issue. Its just what works for me.
Its all in what you need, want, and what works for you. Saying that one is better than the other is just picking a fight.
REAPER4206969
Member
Wrong. The Beretta beat the SIG fair and square in both of the U.S. military trials.
I am not Trolling !
I was just stateing my opinion based on what i've read on the THR postings here throughout the months !
One thing is for sure ,Glocks are more sensitive to crap/cheap ammo.,and if fired " limp wristed " ,they may fail to recycle properlly.Plus if the plastic on the magazines become to chewed-up it may interfere with setting correctly into the pistol for proper feeding.
I was just stateing my opinion based on what i've read on the THR postings here throughout the months !
One thing is for sure ,Glocks are more sensitive to crap/cheap ammo.,and if fired " limp wristed " ,they may fail to recycle properlly.Plus if the plastic on the magazines become to chewed-up it may interfere with setting correctly into the pistol for proper feeding.
Blues Brother
Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 248
what is glock cool aid???? please dont tell me that gun companies are making powdered fruit punch drinks now.
- Status
