US Army solicitation for Mossberg 500's

[Slater]

http://contracting.tacom.army.mil/confls/sol/W56HZV10R0078/0000.pdf

Looking at the above document, the contract could potentially result in the purchase of over 30,000 shotguns over a 5-year period.

I thought the Mossberg 590 was designed with military applications in mind, but the Army seems to prefer the 500. Maybe on cost grounds?

 

[zhyla]

I've seen dozens of threads on what shotgun the military uses. Some people say they have been issued 870's, 590's, 590A1's, older 500's, some semi-autos even. It would appear that the military isn't super picky about shotguns (who would be? they all work fine) and doesn't care about compatibility much.

 

[Slater]

No argument there, as any quality shotgun would probably do the job.

Interestingly, the Coast Guard considers the Remington 870 as it's official shotgun, and will not consider any other brands. According to the below document, the USCG wants to order 100 Model 870 Police shotguns, 350 chokes, and 36 breaching shotguns (all for $83,000). Their justification is that:

" The process to get a weapon approved as a MILSPEC weapon is lengthy and expensive; the costs associated with buying shotguns from a new manufacturer and having it enter the DoD system to replace the over 3000 current Remington shotguns in the CG far exceeds the $83,000 being requested for this purchase."

and:

" Remington manufactures the current shotguns used by the Coast Guard and DHS. The Coast Guard does not allow personnel or units to deviate from the standard weapon of issue. To maintain the Remington as the service standard then all replacment weapons and new mission weapons must be Remington 870 shotguns or the CG must re-compete for a new weapon to replace the over 3000 currently in service. The cost of training all CG personnel on a new weapon and putting it into the field is extreme compared to the cost of buying additional weapons to meet new requirements."


Translation: We really like the 870 and we don't want any other brand. Yes, we know that the Mossberg 500 pump shotgun is a MILSPEC weapon, and already in the supply system (and with a new contract that we could possibly piggyback on), but it sucks.

https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=043d8eadaeb4396f4f9d5404c635ef62

 

[Mags]

The Air Force has 870s, 500s, and 590s in service. There is no service standard issue shotgun. I mean the Air Force is just one service and they use 3 different ones and those are just the ones I have seen.

 

[augustino]

Which shotguns for the military???

This sort of discussion is kind of like what's better the Mossberg; the Remington; the Winchester?

Truth be told I heard so many voices shout out how inefficient the military is when they switched from the 1911 45acp to the 9MM Beretta. Some still scoff at that change.

So why should those same minds be any different when it comes to SGs. Remington 870 are good. Sure there are some issues with some of them but every once in a while I get an ache or pain in places I didn't know I had.

Then I hear the Mossberg is great! But alss! Every now and then you run into an issue or two with a Mossy. And the same holds true for just about every gun, thing, widget under the sun. Heck let's not even get onto Glocks! I love them but I'll bet many of you out there hate 'em.

So it's whichever SGs they choose. Let's just hope they don't use theirs to take away ours.

 

[dfariswheel]

The US military criteria on shotguns is not "which is the best gun for our needs", it's "what gun can pass the standard acceptance test AND is cheapest".

In other words, since most any pump shotgun can pass the minimum standards test, whatever gun costs the least is the one that gets the contract.
Since Remington can't make a steel receiver heavy-duty internals shotgun as cheap as Mossberg can make a cast aluminum stamped internals gun, Mossberg gets the contract.

Mossberg used to advertise that "Only Mossberg passed the grueling US Government shotgun tests".
Fact was, only Mossberg bothered to submit a gun for testing, since no one else could make a gun as cheap as theirs and the cheapest gun would get the contract.

As for the request for bids, I wonder who's going to get the guns. It might be a contract for guns to go to Iraq or even Afghanistan for the use of the new governments there.

 

[valorius]

Interestingly, the Coast Guard considers the Remington 870 as it's official shotgun, and will not consider any other brands. According to the below document, the USCG wants to order 100 Model 870 Police shotguns, 350 chokes, and 36 breaching shotguns (all for $83,000). Their justification is that:

That sounds like a horrible price.

 

[Guns and more]

USCG wants to order 100 Model 870 Police shotguns, 350 chokes, and 36 breaching shotguns (all for $83,000).

Not counting the chokes, that's $610 each.

 

[Youngster]

If that price is just for the guns and chokes it's robbery, however if it already includes the Trijicon sight, Speedfeed stock and 14" barrel that the CG likes to deck out its 870s with, then it's not so bad.

 

[Al LaVodka]

The US military criteria on shotguns is not "which is the best gun for our needs", it's "what gun can pass the standard acceptance test AND is cheapest".

In other words, since most any pump shotgun can pass the minimum standards test, whatever gun costs the least is the one that gets the contract.
Since Remington can't make a steel receiver heavy-duty internals shotgun as cheap as Mossberg can make a cast aluminum stamped internals gun, Mossberg gets the contract.

Mossberg used to advertise that "Only Mossberg passed the grueling US Government shotgun tests".
Fact was, only Mossberg bothered to submit a gun for testing, since no one else could make a gun as cheap as theirs and the cheapest gun would get the contract.

As for the request for bids, I wonder who's going to get the guns. It might be a contract for guns to go to Iraq or even Afghanistan for the use of the new governments there.

You've no idea how the system works.

The least expensive responsive and responsible bidder that meets the requirements wins.
Remington didn't respond to the last two non-named solicitations because a) they doubted their guns would pass and b) any money they'd make on a government sale they forecast would be eaten up by warrantee repairs due to declining Quality Control (which would also open them up to penalties and fines) and, more importantly, they'd lose the now-undeserved reputation they have in the consumer market where people continue to buy poorer quality arms from them for more money, regardless.

Remington will NOT bid until they are losing their consumer sales and are more desparate than the unappologetic cost-cutting company that today can only continue to lose ground.

Al

 

[Virginian]

Remember, an elephant is a mouse built to Mil-Specs.

 

[Joe Demko]

The least expensive responsive and responsible bidder that meets the requirements wins.
Remington didn't respond to the last two non-named solicitations because a) they doubted their guns would pass and b) any money they'd make on a government sale they forecast would be eaten up by warrantee repairs due to declining Quality Control (which would also open them up to penalties and fines) and, more importantly, they'd lose the now-undeserved reputation they have in the consumer market where people continue to buy poorer quality arms from them for more money, regardless.

Remington will NOT bid until they are losing their consumer sales and are more desparate than the unappologetic cost-cutting company that today can only continue to lose ground.

Cite?

 

[VinnAY]

I personally saw and issued to an active Army MP Det brand new W1200's...they were pissed LOL

 

[doubleg]

The shotguns we have are pistol grip Mossberg 500's that say "Military" on them and have an aluminum trigger housing and saftey.

 

[wideym]

Some units have discretion on small quantity purchases for special weapons and equipment authorized for TO&E changes. My National Guard unit was authorized 10 shotguns per company before deploying to Iraq, but goverment issue shotguns were in short supply and we had a six month window before deploying.

My company Supply Sergeant was authorized by Brigade to use his GSA card to purchace the shotguns locally with the only stipulations being that they had to be new Remington 870s or Mossberg 500s with 18" barrels, synthetic stocks, no pistol grip only guns, and they all had to be the same model. He called the local Wal-Mart and found 10 Mossberg 500s just like Brigade required and bought them. I don't know what paperwork was filled out, but they are on the property books.

The only problem we ran into was with one bent mag tube and two others had the tang safety fall off, but third shop had Mossberg replacement parts in stock at Taji.

 

[jmr40]

Remington is capable of making an 870 that will outperform the Mossberg by a wide margin. But they can't do it for $250. It seems the public is not willing to pay much more than $250 for a pump shotgun however. Remington has ruined their reputation trying to make one for that price. Complain about Remington all you want, they are just building what the majority of the public wants to pay for.

I hear people complain about the quality of todays 870 Express and cite how much better the 870's from 30 years ago were. They will also concede today's Wingmaster is a great gun, but $650 is way too much to pay. If you look at the price of 870's from 30 years ago, and factor in for inflation, $650 is about right. Quality ain't cheap.

35 years ago I was working for $1.90/hour. I was paying $1.00/gal for gas, putting it in a 1969 Firebird that got 6-8 mpg. I literally had to work 2 hours out of each day to pay for my gas to and from work. If I could find a way to scrape together $150 for a quality shotgun then, people should be able to scrape together $650 for a quality shotgun today. The economy was just as bad, or worse then, as it is now.

50 years from now when the $600 shotguns the Coast Guard bought are still working it will seem like a bargain.

 

[dfariswheel]

In a lot of government contracts the per unit price sounds outrageous until you realize that the contract usually includes spare parts as part of the unit price.

In many contracts, the spare parts are where the profit is for the company.
So while $610 sounds high, if it includes spare parts and tooling to repair broken guns, the actual price of the gun itself may be significantly lower.

Also remember, that Remington doesn't bid police or government contracts with the Express. They bid for the Police model, which costs a lot more then the Express.
Even an Express made as cheap as possible still can't under price a cast aluminum and stamped internals shotgun like the Mossberg.

I'm also wondering if those Mossberg Model 500 bid requests aren't really for the 590-A1.

 

[MAKster]

The military seems to call them all 500s, but the Mossberg's they are buying have the same mag tube set-up and metal parts as the 590A1s.

 

[Texas Bacon]

35 years ago I was working for $1.90/hour. I was paying $1.00/gal for gas, putting it in a 1969 Firebird that got 6-8 mpg. I literally had to work 2 hours out of each day to pay for my gas to and from work. If I could find a way to scrape together $150 for a quality shotgun then, people should be able to scrape together $650 for a quality shotgun today. The economy was just as bad, or worse then, as it is now.

Where the heck were you living? Gas was about $0.35gal and minimum wage was $2.10 here in Texas.