Springfield Armory awarded 1911 MEU contract

[Gunsnrovers]

Looks like the USMC MEU guys are getting 150 Springfield Professional models in late March.

http://www2.eps.gov/spg/DON/USMC/M67854/M67854-05-M-1038/Synopsis.html


10 -- MEU(SOC) 45 caliber pistols

General Information

Document Type:
Special Notice

Solicitation Number:
M67854-05-M-1038

Posted Date:
Feb 15, 2005

Original Response Date:
Mar 16, 2005

Current Response Date:
Mar 16, 2005

Original Archive Date:
Mar 31, 2005

Current Archive Date:
Mar 31, 2005

Classification Code:
10 -- Weapons

Naics Code:
332994 -- Small Arms Manufacturing


Contracting Office Address

Department of the Navy, United States Marine Corps, Marine Corps Systems Command, 2200 Lester Street, Quantico, VA, 22134-5010


Description

This is notice of intended sole-source procurement on behalf of the Marine Corps Systems Command (MCSC).???? The procurement is for Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU), SOC .45 caliber pistol posted in accordance with FAR 5.101(a)(1).

The Marine Corps Systems Command (MARCORSYSCOM) intends to contract on a sole-source basis with???? Springfield Armory, 420 West Main Street, Geneseo, IL 61254 for MEU (SOC) .45 caliber pistol and associated packaging, marking and shipment.?????????? The following represents the governments intended parts list with quantities covered by this solicitation:

(1)???? PC9111MC: Professional 1911-A1 .45ACR pistols
Number: 150


The anticipated dollar amount is $284,850.00

Period of Performance:???? Date of Contract to 31 March 2005.
FOB: Destination
Delivery Point(s):

1.?????? 75 pistols delivered to:
DODAAC: MMSA01
Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany, GA
Traffic Management Officer
MCLB Bldg 1221 Dr 20
MF FSD MMSA01 Weapons Whse 1340 Dr 9
Albany, GA 31704-5000

Attn: Mr. Willie Harris, (229) 639-5533

2.?????? 75 pistols delivered to:
DODAAC: MMSA02
Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow, CA
DLA and G MF MMSA02
Bldg 625 WE Yermo Annex
FSD MCLB
Barstow, CA 92311-5048

Attn: Ms Jane Sloat or Mr. Tony Marquez
?????? ?????? Phone: 760-577-7345


Responsible sources capable of satisfying this requirement are encouraged to submit a statement of capability and costs, which, if timely received, will be considered.???? Information must be provided to the contact cited above not later than 3:00 PM (EST) 16 March 2005.



Point of Contact

Larry Gillman, Contract Specialist, Phone 703-432-3722, Fax 703-432-3531, Email [email protected] - Alice Pladson, Contract Specialist, Phone 7034323736, Fax 7034323531, Email [email protected]


Place of Performance



Address:
AS STIPULATED IN BODY OF ANNOUNCEMENT

 

[lee n. field]

280K$ for 150 pistols. They'd better be pretty darn nice.

 

[Gunsnrovers]

Comes to $1899 per pistol. Not bad. Street price for the Pro seems hover between $2000 and $2200 when you can find one.

USMC estimated it was costing them about $2000 each to build their own.

 

[WT]

Another waste of taxpayers money.

Why can't they buy a plain, simple 1911?

 

[Ivy Mike]

or buy better guns from Sig or Glock?

 

[stans]

Yeah, but a plain Jane 1911 wouldn't have an accessory rail for flashlight, bayonet, and grenade launcher.

I think our troops would be well served by a 1911-A1 with something like King's Tappan sights. Simple, easy to use, reliable, and durable.

 

[Onmilo]

American GIs with Brazilian handguns,,,,,
Whatever happened to American products for American troops?
Last I heard Kimber had this deal all sealed up, what happened?

 

[Warbow]

Last I heard Kimber had this deal all sealed up, what happened?

The Kimber ICQB Pistols were just temporary until they could find a pistol suitable for the Improved MEU (SOC). There's a great article in the December '03 SWAT issue by Pat Rogers which explains everything.

 

[1911Tuner]

Pro Contract

No real surprise there. I anticipated that if the U.S. Military were to ever return to the 1911 that Springfield would probably get the nod. Why did Kimber lose out? Very likely because of the Swartz system that the government had tested and rejected nearly 60 years ago. Too busy and too much Murphy Opportunity. If it's simple and it works...why muck around with it?

According to many reports...never seen one up close and personal...the Pro is a solid performer, albeit a little pricey. If the government returns to the 1911 across the board, we can expect the price per unit to fall dramatically,
especially if the rank-and-file issue pistol isn't up to the same standards as the semi-custom Professional Model. A general-issue, no-frills "Mil-Spec"
pistol would probably be supplied by the tens of thousands in the 200-dollar price range.

The Pro's 1900-dollar price tag also probably includes a little armorer tweakin' to help insure that the guns don't fail to perform in the field. These guns aren't meant to be toys by any stretch of the term. They're probably going to war...not as a symbol of rank or an issue weapon for tank crews and such for a "just in case" scenario...but straight into the thick of things as a backup to the primary weapon, or as a primary extreme close-quarters battle implement, and they have to be right. Lives depend on it.

This could be a lucrative deal for Springfield, and I wish them success. It could also mean that more attention will be paid to any small parts that will be stored for the guns...in the event of a re-adoption...and that means that good things for the civilian end of the spectrum...Maybe not immediately, but eventually. Maybe this will ensure that the 1911 will live on for another century.

 

[Rob96]

Why did Kimber lose out? Very likely because of the Swartz system that the government had tested and rejected nearly 60 years ago.

Couldn't have been the case, as the guns that Kimber submitted and the interim guns Det. 1 is using are Series I guns. I was acutally sirprised by this, because of the sub-article in SWAT magazine. In it Pat rogers mentioned that the Corps did get Pro models from Springfield. They hwever were not impressed or have a need for the magwell. Also, in the articel, it is stated the Pro's were to tight. they had reliability issues and difficulty doing press checks. Speculation will abound until Pa Rogers can coment on this.

It is too bad that Colt doesn't have its act together yet. This could have been huge for them.

 

[PaleRyder]

Brazil is America....

 

[Boats]

The Marines using these pistols are shooters, not poseurs, so why would they want a SIG or a Glock?

 

[1911Tuner]

Tight Pros

Rob said:

> They however were not impressed or have a need for the magwell. Also, in the articel, it is stated the Pro's were too tight.<
*****************

Ahhhh...More information comes forth. It seems that the military still likes just a bit of "rattle" in their weaponry.

Springfield pistols have been a bit too closely fitted of late. Every G Mil-Spec that I've encountered ran much better after a few minutes of being subjected to the "Slurry Treatment."

if the history of the 1911's adoption is studied, it becomes clear that the Army Ordnance Department made several suggestions as to how the pistol should be modified to better fit their requirements...so maybe the initial gripes as noted above will one day become the U.S. Army Model of 1911A2....coming full circle and returning to square one. Many of the purists
have often stated that when the design began straying from original parameters, that something was lost in the translation...Maybe this is just the next evoltionary step. Maybe the weapons will return to being designed by and for warriors rather than what the market demands. What works in the civilian arena occasionally falls flat on its face in a military theater of operations. Maybe...We shall see. It will prove to be interesting as to how
everything stands when all is said and done.

 

[Gunsnrovers]

From guys that own them and from what I have seen, the bushing/barrel fit on the Pro model is very tight, but loosens up to finger tight in a few thousand rounds.

The pistol is mostly a mix of Springfield, Nowlin, and Wilson parts. Aside from frame and slide forgings started in Brazil, these are all finished and built in the US. They are as "US" as you can get. The steel in a Colt slide and frame is not from the US. Small parts for Colt and Kimber come from different sources, some of whom are not American companies.

The folks that use these things will be putting more rounds down range in practice then many folks do in the life of their pistol. Practice weeks for some of the MEU stuff can be 2500+ rounds in a week. These will be going to the Recon Navy and USMC guys in the MEU. They certainly won't be hip warmers.

 

[Old Fuff]

I think two things are self-evident ...

The designation "PC9111MC" suggests that the basic "professional" pistol was modified slightly to meet USMC requirements. Undoubtedly there was some testing and feedback.

If more then one potential supplier presents a satisfactory product, the one with the lowest bid will get the business. If only one meets all of the requirements, or it can be made to seem that way, that company will get the contract.

 

[foghornl]

I've never even seen one of the "Pro" models, but yeah $1899 per does seem a bit steep....particularly since the "Springfield GI-45" model Mrs. Foggy bought for me last year was $439+tax.

That being said, whatever it takes to give our guys the best stuff available is OK with me. If the Pro has better sights, accessory rail, ambi safety, so be it. Just as long as it goes BANG! every time needed. [Like my Champion & GI-45]

 

[Master Blaster]

Small parts for Colt and Kimber come from different sources, some of whom are not American companies.

Kimber parts = Chip McCormick, Kimber years ago bought the company which was located in Yonkers that makes all of the Chip McCormick parts, ALL of Kimbers parts are made in their owned plant.




Dont they know that if its not a COLT its just a copy?????????

 

[Rob96]

Pat Rogers posted about this at Hilton Yams website. He does feel that $1899 is too much for the Corps. he doesn't slam the gun, says he wouldn't feel bad carrying it. Butin his comments, he doesn't seem pleased with the choice.

http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=1036&an=0&page=0#1036

 

[Gunsnrovers]

Sorry. I forgot S&W no longer supplies Kimber.

 

[shooter.45]

Why would they go from perfection to MIM. They will be sorry.

 

[Jammer Six]

Hoo-ah!

Many of the purists
have often stated that when the design began straying from original parameters, that something was lost in the translation...Maybe this is just the next evoltionary step. Maybe the weapons will return to being designed by and for warriors rather than what the market demands.

That's "oo-rah" to you jarheads.

 

[Tecolote]

Anyone have any pics?

 

[Kruzr]

These 150 pistols are not replacements for the Kimber DET 1's (no FP safety) nor do they represent anything more than a single purchase of pistols. MEUSOC is planning on purchasing 2800 pistols. The first ones were the 200 Kimbers which went to Detachment 1. These are destined for another unit.

During the first round of testing, Pat Rogers felt that the Pro was too tight for combat service and as he said a few days ago...........Overpriced. Great pistols but maybe overkill for the intended service.

 

[Gunsnrovers]

To be more specific, he went on to clarify "overpriced" and issue of tightness. He stated the price was fair for the product, but that the pistol was more then they need.

The SA Professional is a good pistol. It is tight, no doubt, but a lot of shooting makes that go away.
Certainly those who have been using the original guns like them.
I think it may be more then what is needed- the "near match" thing that has been with the MEU(SOC) pistols since the begining.
I stated before that i wouldn't be embarrassed to carry one (not at all...).
I do think that while the USG price is better than retail, it is still probably more then what is needed.
The MEU(SOC) saga continues, and no matter what they decide, those who carry it will make good use of whatever the make, price etc.

There have been a lot of RFI's, RFP's and false starts. We'll see what happens.

 

[Rob96]

"These 150 pistols are not replacements for the Kimber DET 1's (no FP safety) nor do they represent anything more than a single purchase of pistols. MEUSOC is planning on purchasing 2800 pistols. The first ones were the 200 Kimbers which went to Detachment 1. These are destined for another unit."

Being it was reported that SOCOM has decided against Det. 1, I wonder if the ICQB project will still go thru.