Our 1944/45 Hi Powers are done. All can agree on that. They're an excellent gun, but they're old and worn out and no longer sustainable as parts are getting harder and harder to come by.
My $0.02 on a few points from this thread:
1. The requirement for a self-contained fire control group narrows the field to, as has been mentioned, a Steyr, a Beretta, and the SIG. What is gained by this in terms of functionality? Nothing. It's not as though we're going to have 14 different pistol configurations so every troop gets their personal custom fit dinner gat. This is the CAF we're talking about. Even if they get a model with replaceable back/front straps or interchangeable grip modules those items will disappear into a bin in the back of a vault and virtually never be used outside of SOF, MPs and the competitive CAFSAC types. Nobody else gets to spend any appreciable amount of time working with a pistol, certainly nobody will teach the 2Lt assigned as this week's RSO to add extra time into his/her Training Instruction / OP Order to allow for people to swap pistol parts around to get the best fit. Am I being cynical? Maybe. But that's been my experience over the past 15 years. Conclusion: BS Requirement for most uses, and for those who actually would use them (MPs mainly), equally well met by interchangeable grip modules or replaceable back/front straps as done by several manufacturers. CITT got this right, the requirement should be for the size of the grip to be reconfigurable to meet the various hand sizes of those who carry them. It never ceases to amaze me how the folks in Ottawa are so terrible at following their own rules. You'd think someone in procurement would get trained on how to write an RFP based on the bona fide requirements and not have it be obviously tailored to a predetermined result.
2. The requirement to not need to pull the trigger to disassemble. This has been discussed a great deal here, but I must respectfully disagree on the following basis: We already pull the trigger as part of the unload on our small arms. You always unload before disassembling. Our NDs happen on the unload. If someone is going to ND on disassembly, they will already have had that ND on the unload, so I don't see this as something that's actually likely to increase NDs. Furthermore, the fact of the magazine disconnect going away will reduce NDs caused by improper unload drills by simplifying the process and making it essentially the same as the service rifle.
3. The requirement for a manual safety is also, IMO, junk. The plain fact of the matter is that most people who will carry a pistol (outside of SOF and MPs) in the CAF will do so rarely and be poorly trained at it. Yet the time may come when they need to use it. In the military context, when you need your pistol, you need it right friggin' now, because the enemy is stepping on your throat and everything has gone to hell. That is not the time for adding another step in the process of firing that gun. Point, press, repeat until threat ends. No additional fiddle-farting around with levers and switches ought be required. That is the great advantage of modern striker-fired pistols over external hammers. Somebody mentioned the trigger getting caught on brush and such. Nonsense. If it's in your hand and you're so inattentive as to manage to pull the trigger on a tree, you've no business holding a firearm. If it's holstered, the trigger is enclosed and that just doesn't happen. I could see it with a rifle on a sling while crawling through a thicket, but this is a pistol we're talking about, and not one with a polished 0.9lb 1911 race trigger either.
On those opinion points, I welcome discussion.
FWIW, I'll be happy with the SIG, or a Glock, or a CZ, or just about any other likely contender that might come along as a result of the changes directed by the CITT. Those of us that can shoot pistols will learn to be good with whatever we get. Those of us that can't will continue to blame the pistol just as they currently blame the BHP. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
