Army drops Smith & Wesson from pistol competition to replace the M9

[Kidd X]

According to this other thread, the US Marines have standardized on the G19 for MARSOC.
As much as the services are in competition with each other, I think, like taprack9 said, the Glock, probably the M version, will win the Army trials also.
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1461489-Yet-more-good-news-for-the-Glock-19

The Glock 19 has been in use in SOCOM for over a decade. The news about the SEALs adopting it was literally the last SOCOM unit to officially make the move.

My money is on the new FN pistol....and it's not in 5.7....I've seen it and handled it. Much improved over the FNS and a really great gun. No one is talking about it because it has not been released to the public...so we keep hearing about Glock this and Glock that. It is extremely accurate and does not require any armouring for 30000 rounds. This is a requirement in the RFP. Glock cannot meet this as parts, like recoil spring assemblies need to be changed before then.
No one has a closer relationship with US Forces than FN. They supply the largest range of weapons to US Forces.

Rich

No one's recoil spring can last 30,000 rounds between changes. I'm not saying a pistol can't function with the same spring at 30K, just that it isn't going to be as reliable as a gun with a new spring or one that has been replaced sooner. Recoil spring replacement takes all over 30 seconds to accomplish.

 

[Rich LPS]

Well well Kidd X, most of HK's handguns are rated for 30K on the same recoil spring....and so is the new FN, rated for no armorer's work or parts change for 30K.
Realistically this is a bit of a un-necessary requirement when a Glock recoil spring assembly is a $10 part to us....and likely $4 part to big army.

Rich

 

[Canuck44]

If I were a betting man and close to the insiders who make this decision I would go with the US Army going Glock 19 or.....drum roll .... sticking with the Beretta 92 with a rail and a version with an extended barrel for a suppressor. They might even squeeze in a Compact version. The Glock 19 is idiot proof which makes it a perfect fit for the end user.

In Canada we will eventually go with a Glock 19 because it a) Has a prohib barrel and b) the Liberals will refer to it as an assault pistol.

How is the Glock ever going to hit paper at 50 meters? Just asking.

Take Care

Bob
ps No offense on the idiot comment. We are after all taking about a country that is about to elect either a Trump or a Hillary.

 

[j2kool]

Don't see why the US is wasting money replacing the M9. Surely they have more important things to spend money on.

glock will win it foregone conclusion , marine special forces and and navy seals had adopted it so did the FBI and other agencies so does the the British army ...waste of tax payers money that do all this testing. I'm not a glock fan boy ..i owned hk , but common sense . Glock reliability and superb parts support will win get the contract .

https://www.armytimes.com/story/mil...w-pistol-send-me-cabelas-17-million/82132450/

 

[maxman1]

Problem with the P226 is the grip size and training noob's on SA/DA.

You mean, like the M9?

 

[Canuck223]

My money is on the new FN pistol....and it's not in 5.7....I've seen it and handled it. Much improved over the FNS and a really great gun. No one is talking about it because it has not been released to the public...so we keep hearing about Glock this and Glock that. It is extremely accurate and does not require any armouring for 30000 rounds. This is a requirement in the RFP. Glock cannot meet this as parts, like recoil spring assemblies need to be changed before then.
No one has a closer relationship with US Forces than FN. They supply the largest range of weapons to US Forces.

Rich

Would you mind pointing out on which page of the RFP this requirement is listed.
It doesn't seem to have made it to my copy.

 

[Rich LPS]

My mistake, not in the RFP. I have heard that it's a stated as a requirement though, so some entries are striving to meet it, some can't some can.

Rich

 

[Canuck223]

My mistake, not in the RFP. I have heard that it's a stated as a requirement though, so some entries are striving to meet it, some can't some can.

Rich

The competition includes routine service and maintenance during the shooter in the loop testing. The cost of required parts is part of the RFP, as is the requirement for providing the armourers and general service manuals.

If the vendors remaining are ballsy enough to try and avoid negative feedback on the surveys by specifying no service being required, I wish them all the best.
Going that route from my reading means if a gun goes south it will be removed from the test and doesn't eliminate the requirement to deliver the manuals and training program.

 

[Rich LPS]

30000 rounds is ballsy agreed.....but if you can do it and someone else can't maybe you get the nod.

Rich

 

[Big Bad]

The Glock 19 has been in use in SOCOM for over a decade. The news about the SEALs adopting it was literally the last SOCOM unit to officially make the move.

But now the US Marine special force, MARSOC, is the latest to adopt the G19. Not sure who's left.

All peace to S&W, but they are not known for their super reliable semiautos and should maybe have stuck to wheel guns. At one point in the long ago, they had the semiauto law enforcement community in the palm of their hand, with the S&W 59, but in the end those pistols just pooped out in comparison to others. I personally own a little S&W M&P 22 and while it's a good cross trainer (due to various frequent failures in firing) , I regret to say S&W has shown no improvement in performance or reliability nearly 40 years later. If you can't make a good .22, what can you do?

 

[870P]

But now the US Marine special force, MARSOC, is the latest to adopt the G19. Not sure who's left.

All peace to S&W, but they are not known for their super reliable semiautos and should maybe have stuck to wheel guns. At one point in the long ago, they had the semiauto law enforcement community in the palm of their hand, with the S&W 59, but in the end those pistols just pooped out in comparison to others. I personally own a little S&W M&P 22 and while it's a good cross trainer (due to various frequent failures in firing) , I regret to say S&W has shown no improvement in performance or reliability nearly 40 years later. If you can't make a good .22, what can you do?

The S&W 3rd generation autos were pretty good IMO, but they just couldn't compete on cost with Glock and other polymer designs, nor were they able to completely overcome the bad reputations of their previous duty autos.

 

[Canuck44]

Big Red do you know why the S&W was dropped or are you just blowing smoke. The M&P is a reliable platform and has won it's share of contracts. With the US who knows right now what the issues are or were. Until a new contract actually takes place, and I would not rule out another cancellation, it is in the hands of the angels. I do agree with others though, seems like a lot of money being spent for a low level purchase.

Take Care

Bob

 

[Chuckbuster]

For those of us who do not know how such things work...what is the "shooter in the loop" test phase?

 

[hank2]

I just don't understand why they need this dog and pony show. Issue Glocks, cheap and cheerful and already in service with your tier one operators. In truth the side arm is the most underused piece of kit in any deployment

I agree, they are proven, and durable.... but not my first choice for fun at the range, but to take to a war, the army couldn't go wrong

 

[rkm456]

But now the US Marine special force, MARSOC, is the latest to adopt the G19. Not sure who's left.

All peace to S&W, but they are not known for their super reliable semiautos and should maybe have stuck to wheel guns. At one point in the long ago, they had the semiauto law enforcement community in the palm of their hand, with the S&W 59, but in the end those pistols just pooped out in comparison to others. I personally own a little S&W M&P 22 and while it's a good cross trainer (due to various frequent failures in firing) , I regret to say S&W has shown no improvement in performance or reliability nearly 40 years later. If you can't make a good .22, what can you do?

Aren't those .22's actually made by Walther?

 

[Canuck44]

Aren't those .22's actually made by Walther?

Yes.

Take Care

Bob

 

[cancer]

Glocks are great. But I don't see much value in replacing a M9 with a Glock. I suspect that change for the sake of change plays a factor in this.

 

[hank2]

Glocks are great. But I don't see much value in replacing a M9 with a Glock. I suspect that change for the sake of change plays a factor in this.

I would agree, if they go to a glock then maybe they do not need replacing? But the glock may be easier for some to shoot?

 

[Thomas D'Arcy McGee]

After Dropping Gun-Maker, Army Says Handgun Program ‘On Track’

After Dropping Gun-Maker, Army Says Handgun Program ‘On Track’

Posted By: Brendan McGarry October 3, 2016


The U.S. Army made headlines last week when news broke that it had dropped the gun-maker Smith & Wesson from its Modular Handgun System competition.

Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, who has criticized the program in the past, on Monday didn’t comment on the service’s recent decision — or the status of any of the companies involved — but said the acquisition effort is now “on track.”

Speaking at the annual Association of the United States Army annual conference in Washington, D.C., Milley said he wouldn’t provide an update on the status of the MHS program “because of where it’s at in the process. I’ll just let that settle.”

But he added, “I’m confident as chief of staff of the Army that it’s on the right track.” He vowed to provide more information “in due time. But I’m comfortable right now, as opposed to whatever it was a year ago or a little bit less than a year ago.”

At one point, Milley reportedly explored the possibility of the Army joining the Army Special Operations Command’s pistol contract to buy Glock 19s.

Smith & Wesson, which teamed with General Dynamics, was one of five gun makers competing in the program to replace the Army’s M9 9mm pistol made by Beretta.

More than 20 companies expressed an interest in competing for the acquisition program by turning out for an informational event last year at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey.

The Army had planned to down-select to three competitors by this summer — and its decision to drop Smith & Wesson appears to be part of that process. The service next week may release additional information about the remaining competitors.

The Army last year launched its long-awaited XM17 MHS competition to replace its Cold War-era M9 9mm pistol.

One of its major goals is to adopt a pistol chambered for a more potent round than the current 9mm. The U.S. military replaced the .45-caliber 1911 pistol with the M9 in 1985 and began using the 9mm NATO round at that time.

–Matthew Cox contributed to this report.

 

[Import]

Interesting read....thanks eh...I'm sure it's a horribly protracted process...