U.S Army picks Sig.

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by JonEvans1990FL, Jan 19, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. pblanc

    pblanc Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2014
    Messages:
    691
    Anyone recall the 535 million taxpayer dollars that the Obama administration pissed away on the failed Solyndra "green energy" debacle?
     
    Wreck-n-Crew likes this.
  2. Sergei Mosin

    Sergei Mosin Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,918
    It might be a drop in the bucket - but half a billion here and half a billion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money.

    I can't see the point of replacing the M9 either, unless switching to the P320 is going to be cheaper than continued M9 procurement. Otherwise, why bother?
     
  3. hdwhit

    hdwhit Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    4,976
    Location:
    Salem, AR
    Yes, I do. But what does that have to do with the topic at hand?

    In remembering Solyndra, I also remember that even counting the losses from Solyndra, the renewable energy investment loan program that it was a part of has ended up being a money maker for the Treasury.
     
    Phaedrus/69 likes this.
  4. strambo

    strambo Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,961
    Location:
    Oregon
    I did, that was just the expanded team accessible to mere mortals. Sad to see it turn out like that. They still have a small team of sponsored Pros.
     
  5. ROCK6

    ROCK6 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    276
    Location:
    Georgia
    Sorry Jeff if you're thinking of just a new pistol; that's all it is but it's a positive step (even if small) in the right direction. I just see this as a catalyst for our focus which must be flexible, constantly evolving, mission-oriented, and this is a small token for that. We now have new leaders at the national level and this is a small manifestation of change that (I hope) will continue. I would rather have us put our efforts on a new handgun, training, and logistics support than the hundreds of man-hours (and likely millions) we spent forced to implement and execute the Army's "transgender transition training". I whole-heartedly agree that change is spearheaded by leadership, not equipment. TTPs evolve from innovative leaders married with experience; however, technology does play a significant role.

    I have been living an Army at war for the past decade-plus and I knew the drought we had in the 90's. We have been up and down on policies and inconsequential changes. I gladly welcome the change of a new pistol even if it is not a significant equipment change. That's a focus I would rather have our units and Soldiers spend their efforts vice the hundreds of hours of training that has zero to do with unit missions. We may disagree with the importance of this new handgun for the Army, but I both think we agree that our Soldiers would be better off learning a new pistol on a range than spending time in the classroom spending priceless time receiving Powerpoint training on social issues that are irrelevant to the purpose of the military.

    ROCK6
     
  6. ArchAngelCD

    ArchAngelCD Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    26,794
    Location:
    Northeast PA, USA
    I don't know which world some of you live in but in my world a half billion is real money and a hell-of-a-lot of it!!!
     
  7. jjones45

    jjones45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    883
    Location:
    Ohio
    IMG_0662.JPG

    For those who didn't see it in page 2
     
  8. M1key

    M1key Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,909
    Location:
    SW
    Sig fans are gettin' wood looking at those pictures...

    M
     
    bbqreloader likes this.
  9. Arizona_Mike

    Arizona_Mike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    Messages:
    3,453
    I used to own a Sig 220 in .45 many years ago. Great gun. Seemed very solid and precise. I had buyers regret almost immediately at the range when it proved a little too small for my hands. Ended up selling it to a friend. Settled on a Glock 20.

    Mike
     
  10. Wisco

    Wisco member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2013
    Messages:
    1,239
    Seems like a solid pick by a reputable brand. Totally different pistol, but I loved the M11 I carried.

    At the very least, all the staff officers, senior NCOs and other rear echelon types will have a cool status symbol. It will remain to be seen whether the groups who really require a combat pistol will embrace this one or keep buying other stuff - either to have their own status symbol or for functional reasons.
     
  11. Old Dog

    Old Dog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    9,049
    Location:
    on Puget Sound
    Of course we are. But I still love the Beretta, and the 1911 is still the first girl I ever kissed ...
     
  12. jjones45

    jjones45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    883
    Location:
    Ohio
    Poppa Woody lol
     
  13. PowerG

    PowerG Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2010
    Messages:
    558
    Location:
    Mississippi
    Huge waste of money IMO. Is this the most good $500M could do for the Army?
     
  14. F-111 John

    F-111 John Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2011
    Messages:
    1,263
    Location:
    Holt, MI
    Don't forget the all important ambi slide stop. I think both of our points have been made.
     
  15. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    34,689
    Location:
    Alma Illinois
  16. jhb

    jhb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2010
    Messages:
    966
    Location:
    dixie, but some call it florida

    it's a lot. a massive mind blowing amount to many of us here myself included, but seeing how the army's budget alone for 2016 was 146.9 billion.........yeah i fact checked that amount...a 500+ million over 10 year contract is peanuts to their budget. let alone the entire dod's budget which is over 580+ billion this last year. yeah we have big spending issue problems to solve.....

    i want to clarify i'm not for this new pistol spending, but there is nothing i can do about it. so of the choices i'm okay with the sig, as the winner.
     
  17. ROCK6

    ROCK6 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    276
    Location:
    Georgia
    Waste is relative despite the amount. I've seen the Army contract 1 Million to put a tower up in Iraq only to find out it couldn't be certified and then spend another half million to bring it down. I would also guess the Army spent well over a million on their new "transgender" training material that has been mandated. I would much rather see the Army spend money on weapons systems and training with weapons. I do agree accountability is just as important as making smart fiscal decisions. I do agree their is an enormous amount of waste in the military; much of it is redundant or poorly executed contracts. I don't think we should replace effectiveness with efficiency, but I do believe we should be more accountable to the tax payer's money and make smart decisions that are focused on equipping and training units for their missions.

    ROCK6
     
  18. Alec

    Alec Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Washington State
    For some reason, it reminds me of a mid-90s Camaro with a crank starter.
     
  19. strambo

    strambo Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,961
    Location:
    Oregon
    All this hand-wringing about the pistol cost. It is for a new weapon system replacing a 30 year old gun with a crappy slide mounted safety/de-cocker that fit nobody's hand well. Long overdue, even if it could have been done more efficiently and sooner. To put it in perspective, the Army wasted about 4x as much on the ACU uniform fiasco. We had the "Multicam" -ish pattern back in '04 and could have just went BDU-OCP in 2005.
     
    Nature Boy, ROCK6 and Panzerschwein like this.
  20. Panzerschwein

    Panzerschwein member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,122
    Location:
    Desert
    I agree. As a man who has used the M9 in uniform, I think the M17 will be a good replacement. A more consistent trigger pull, plenty safe, lighter, greater magazine capacity, and fits hands much better than the M9. I think this gun is a step forward. I think the whole "modular" thing will be a nice benefit for some, but the other benefits I mentioned will be what most of the force experiences in a positive way.
     
    ROCK6 likes this.
  21. pblanc

    pblanc Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2014
    Messages:
    691
    It doesn't have much to do with the topic, other than a reminder to those who are bemoaning the waste of this deal that our Federal government has done much, much worse in the past.

    My hope is that a bit more research and thought went into this half-billion than it did for the Solyndra "investment".

    I think it was inevitable that the Army was going to go to a lighter, polymer-frame pistol that required less training to shoot effectively and fit the various hand sizes of soldiers better than the Beretta. Was this the right time to do it? I am really not in a position to know, but if the alternative was to continue to make large investments in the M9 platform, it might have been. Was the P320 the best choice? Again, I don't know but I think it was a good choice. Should the selection process taken so long? No, but bureaucracy will be bureaucracy.

    But at the end of the day, there will be something to show for this investment as opposed to the money having just gone poof and vanished into thin air.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2017
  22. .455_Hunter

    .455_Hunter Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2005
    Messages:
    4,515
    Location:
    Colorado Front Range
    Not real excited about this decision...

    I carried the M9 on active duty and had no issues with it. I thought the M9A3 was probably the best way to go, especially with the improved grip.

    At least the Army did not drink the striker kool aid too much and still insisted on a POSITIVE manual safety- a 100% absolute necessity given the P320 trigger. I still expect many commanders will opt for condition 3 carry in their units.
     
  23. lsudave

    lsudave Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2007
    Messages:
    992
    If this is a good pistol, then I'm fine with it.

    As an aside, I'm a little sad, solely for nostalgic reasons. This will likely be a deathblow to reasonably priced metal-frame pistols.
     
  24. SSN Vet

    SSN Vet Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    6,419
    Location:
    The Dark Side of the Moon
    Sig's facility in Exeter, NH has been going bonkers with hiring and expansion for a couple years now.

    Also, they hatched a deal with Ionbond about 5 years ago, that they would use the Ionbond coating process on production guns (I believe they previously only used it on special order upgrade guns), but only if Ion Bond set up a factory nearby. So Ionbond set up a state of the art facility on the old Pease SAC base (now a big industrial park with the air strip used by both the NH Air National Guard and commercial and charter airlines).

    So this deal will drive jobs right here in the good old USA and Trump should love it.
     
  25. Phaedrus/69

    Phaedrus/69 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    2,300
    Location:
    Big Sky Country
    I just read on one of the online gun mags that Sig is selling them to the army for $207 each!:eek: The writer opined that the total cost of the new guns would be cheaper than keeping the old guns running, especially since the contract includes parts, service, holsters, etc. I'm not in a position to verify his conclusions but if that is indeed the price then it may well be cheaper than parts to keep the 92 going.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice