SIG P320 at $207USD each

[easyrider604]

I suppose a Cdn$1200 pistol/optic package is within reason. At Cdn$900, the civilian-military price ratio is around 3 to 1. Not that shabby anymore.

I like mil-spec optics. My very first red-dot, the Aimpoint 3000 purchased in 1989, is still serving reliably atop my S&W 686. IIRC, this Aimpoint 3000 was the first red-dot issued by the US Army. Its antiquated but works fine.

I wonder, out of topic though, how much Mossberg (at the time) sold the 590 to the Military. $100 each? They've been milking that success for its advertising worth for more than 20 yrs. Probably sold 10 times more 590s to civilians than to the Military. Well, they sure convinced me. Two 590s, 2 x 500s and 1 x Maverick in that time period.

 

[Import]

Not sure about that Canuck...recon my 320 sits a little higher than my glocks..but your right about value..including optic it's not unreasonable...I can only wish they hit the 900-1000$ mark...

 

[Canuck44]

Not sure about that Canuck...recon my 320 sits a little higher than my glocks..but your right about value..including optic it's not unreasonable...I can only wish they hit the 900-1000$ mark...

Fair enough on the bore axis, just not to sure how important all that is. I have CZ's with very low bore axis and shoot them well but no different than my SIG 226.

If our dollar took a jump we could see better pricing on our favourite pistol but given Trudeau in power and his idea of floating deficits I dount we will see much improvement there. I have been buying slightly used as opposed to new fearing any rise in the dollar outs you underwater quickly on a new purchase over and above normal depreciation.

In any even the gun will sell up here as I am sure there is a market for it.

Take Care

Bob

 

[Master-G]

The SIG 320 bore axis doesn't seem to be any higher than the Glock's just saying.

Although it didn't bother me when I owned one, the P320 bore axis is noticeably higher than a Glock's. Here's my old P320 compared with Glock 31 (from my P320 review here):

 

[MustangFrank]

I'm guessing the manual safety was a requirement from the Army ? Did the Glock have one as well ?

 

[Canuck44]

Would have had to have to fit the requirement.

Take Care

Bob

 

[Geoff B]

Do you have any examples of this or are you just repeating something you read on the net?

Take Care

Bob

The navy frigates have German generators and French diesel cruise engines. I know people who work on them and the cost of spares is way more than North American equivalents.

 

[easyrider604]

The navy frigates have German generators and French diesel cruise engines. I know people who work on them and the cost of spares is way more than North American equivalents.

Pistol contract already includes spare parts. But yes, Euro manufacturers make a lot of profits from spare parts sales, ie., Mercedes Benz and BMW parts are more expensive than domestic or Jap auto parts.

 

[Canuck44]

The navy frigates have German generators and French diesel cruise engines. I know people who work on them and the cost of spares is way more than North American equivalents.

Well this is a gun forum and as has already been pointed out the pistol contract includes parts and often a service contract as well. I don't doubt your friends work on the generators and engines but I do doubt they have any knowledge regarding what the gov't pays for parts or how they would have comparative values.

The SIG pistol in question will be made in the US from US sourced parts. The fact SIG is a German/Swiss company owned by a European holding company has little to do with pricing. From what I can see foreign exchange variances would be a non issue as well as both manufacturing costs and income stream will be in US dollars for the pistol.

Take Care

Bob