New Sig P320 (New CF Pistol?)

Expendable Nate said:
^^ your right we have just been in a conflict that lasted twice as long as any other conflict. Ad that will probably never happen again......... Or maybe we should be prepared for a conflict like that again. Or maybe for one on a even grander scale. But we should probably wait until then to buy more pistols.
Click to expand...

A-stan was also an area where a lot of firefights occurred in extremely long distances, not ideal for pistols. Training your average soldier on pistols costs more money, money the gov is not spending right now. Like Kevin B said a small portion of the armed forces are actually issued pistols. Long story short no manufacturer is willing to set up a factory in canada or sell their TDP to a rivalling company. The smart thing for canada to do, is to stop being stupid, and hold a trial and pick the best pistol in the test regardless of where they are made. Otherwise, Hi-Point might be willing to set up a factory in canada and supply our forces lol.
 
Expendable Nate said:
I personally found my pistol useful almost daily overseas and I wish it had been more dependable
Click to expand...

Oh don't get me wrong, I think everyone should be issued with a rifle and pistol before shipping out. In fact that's how I thought it was for the longest time till I was educated otherwise. If it were up to me you guys would all have P30L by now, although I may be a bit biased.
 
Kevin, others, the 60 000 number was on I threw out there for obvious reasons, yep the cf is I minor buyer but to argue whom is going it be issued what for the next hypothetical war is kinda like picking pepper out of fly sh!t or if candy mints are better than breath mints
 
Last edited:
I'll caveat this with the fact that I think that every CF member should be issues and trained on a pistol (trained as in shoots a min off 10k a year of ammo in training, with real training on the pistol done by guys at DHTC).

However I will say that the conventional forces usage (as in shooting folks) of the pistol is minimal, and I view other weapon improvements to be of much more operational value.
 
KevinB said:
I'll caveat this with the fact that I think that every CF member should be issues and trained on a pistol (trained as in shoots a min off 10k a year of ammo in training, with real training on the pistol done by guys at DHTC).

However I will say that the conventional forces usage (as in shooting folks) of the pistol is minimal, and I view other weapon improvements to be of much more operational value.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the boys at DHTC will line up to do those courses lol
 
Ironically DHTC has offered to teach a lot of units in both carbine/rifle and pistol...

The problem is many don't know what they don't know, and don't accept offers.
 
TDC said:
One of the dumbest requirements I have ever seen. Obviously many feel depressing the trigger without dumping a round into yourself or someone else is far too difficult for MIL or LE types to accomplish. If that is indeed the belief, then issuing a firearm to said folks is even less intelligent. The take down method of any pistol is not and should not be a selection criteria. Safe operation of any tool is a training issue not a design issue.

TDC
Click to expand...

So, how do you explain the number of NDs with the HP? The fact that you need a mag to fire the pistol and many dumbwits forgot that if you put the mag in and rack the slide, a bullet will go in and when you'll press the trigger to lower the hammer, you'll either shoot yourself or pass 4 inches of killing someone (I've seen the hole beside the cot of a guy).

For the Army, simplicity is the best policy or dummy proof. Even then....
 
M.Orange said:
So, how do you explain the number of NDs with the HP? The fact that you need a mag to fire the pistol and many dumbwits forgot that if you put the mag in and rack the slide, a bullet will go in and when you'll press the trigger to lower the hammer, you'll either shoot yourself or pass 4 inches of killing someone (I've seen the hole beside the cot of a guy).

For the Army, simplicity is the best policy or dummy proof. Even then....
Click to expand...


You don't you can trip it with your finger inside the mag well...


The CF should have pulled the mag safety from those guns years ago --- It's even been documented years ('97 ish) on a UCR.
 
Avenida said:
please show me where it says it was ergonomically designed and I will buy 2 Glocks tomorrow, so then, I shoot HK. It has all I like!

Fanboyism by 10.000 please, thank you.
Click to expand...

Funny you say that. I just watched the hour and a half long travis haley handgun video. And he did say (almost certainly misquoting at least a little) he likes the glocks grip because it was designed to fit the human hand properly.

I raised an eyebrow at that line. Ultimately, I neither agree nor disagree because the glock grip doesn't bug me when I am not shooting and I don't notice it when I am shooting. I think that may be the case for most people who are really determined to put many holes in paper quickly, simply, and reliably.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom