Sig Sauer won us army contract
- Thread starter James1873
- Start date
Winning a contract doesn't mean you had the best product. The Beretta is garbage and they "won" the contract in the 80's. The US adopted the chauchet machine gun many years ago and is known as the worst gun ever built. The US adopted blue digital camo then changed to multicam at the cost of a cool $5 billion when anyone with a brain could tell you that multicam was the winner. Canada adopted the dumb extended charge handle for their rifles and the Elcan neither being that great. Money plays a factor and there is always dirty deals when it comes to gov. I think SIG had already tooled up for large numbers of 320's for the FBI and were floored when they lost. Knowing that sales are connected to "who's using what brand" mentality they low balled their way into the US army contract win. At a unit price of $207 each including spares, magazines AND holsters. I don't see a lot of profit for SIG.
And I'm not distraught by any means. I could care less what the US mil adopts or what individuals buy.
The VP70 was the first poly striker fired gun, but it was a complete lemon that never took off and is not even close in design or attributes to a Glock. HK offered the VP70 until 1989 which is 7-9 years after Glock started offering pistols(depending on who's data you trust). If it was such a great design then Glock wouldn't have taken off and HK would still offer the VP70.
On this we agree completely...I have never understood the whole deal..never had a pistol that was ever an issue...some didn't fit my hand well...but that's just preference..[/QUOTE]
We have to remember that these pistols are for MILITARY and LAW ENFORCEMENT uses. They don't need to be comfortable as neither is using or handling them for long periods of time like the civilian target shooter does.
Seeing as they are ordering less than 3% of their guns in the compact format it makes the whole modularity program kind of pointless. Order full size (or compact) guns with medium frames and be done with it. Compared to the Beretta anything else has a small grip(except the older SIG pistols). The time MIL personnel get on handguns is almost zero so wasting money and resources trying to "fit" the gun is a joke.
Fully ambi(not true) with the same tiny tiny slide stop lever as a Glock, which is a major whining point for Glock haters. Fun fact, the slide stop on a Glock is tiny and unobtrusive because it was designed to be used to MANUALLY lock the slide to the rear and NOT to release the slide. Knowing that it makes the wannabe copies a joke as they followed suit but clearly don't understand why it was done in the first place. Even more comical are the Glock haters that run said wannabe pistols with similar tiny slide stop that preach "full ambi". The stop is difficult to use and is very small so making it available on the other side does nothing to improve mechanics. Add in the poor location of the slide stop on the 320(very far back) where your dominant thumb may ride the slide stop when using a proper leading thumbs grip, preventing the slide from locking open on empty. And the stop is nearly impossible to reach with your dominant thumb should you be left with only one working hand. I'm old school and stick to what works which is overhand grasp of the slide or if need be using my dominant thumb. Lefties can use the overhand grasp and trigger finger on the slide stop one handed if need be.
The 320 is not "full ambi" as the magazine release is not ambi out of the box, it can be swapped to the other side but it cannot be activated from both sides. Not much point in making one control ambi all the time and the other moveable. Every lefty I know just deals with the right handed world and does just fine. I don't know any lefties who have swapped their mag release as they have become comfortable with using their trigger finger to drop mags and/or the slide.
Modular means nothing really. The interchangeable frames is akin to interchangeable backstraps except you have to buy the frames separate. And like the backstraps you pick the one you feel comfortable with and the rest sit in a box. Going from full size to compact is only a slight savings over buying a second gun. My opinion is why waste your time with a full size if the compact does the same job? Same could be said for the full size, if it does what you need it to do why would you concern yourself with a compact?
Last edited:
TDC's back?
I never had any interest in P320 and to be honest its not the gun I expected them to pick at all. Love my Glock, but Beretta is garbage? That's bull#### and plain ignorance. 92 is STILL great gun and back in '85 was the best choice.
ChromeArty
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Sunshine Coast (PR)
Wow... that was a lot of good points...
I absolutely love my PPQ 5"... but my one dislike falls under something you mention. The bloody slide stop being to far back and too easy to ride with your thumb. On both my NAVY model (sold) and 5". I almost never have the slide stay open on the last shot due to my grip.
I absolutely love my PPQ 5"... but my one dislike falls under something you mention. The bloody slide stop being to far back and too easy to ride with your thumb. On both my NAVY model (sold) and 5". I almost never have the slide stay open on the last shot due to my grip.
We have to remember that these pistols are for MILITARY and LAW ENFORCEMENT uses. They don't need to be comfortable as neither is using or handling them for long periods of time like the civilian target shooter does.
Seeing as they are ordering less than 3% of their guns in the compact format it makes the whole modularity program kind of pointless. Order full size (or compact) guns with medium frames and be done with it. Compared to the Beretta anything else has a small grip(except the older SIG pistols). The time MIL personnel get on handguns is almost zero so wasting money and resources trying to "fit" the gun is a joke.
Fully ambi(not true) with the same tiny tiny slide stop lever as a Glock, which is a major whining point for Glock haters. Fun fact, the slide stop on a Glock is tiny and unobtrusive because it was designed to be used to MANUALLY lock the slide to the rear and NOT to release the slide. Knowing that it makes the wannabe copies a joke as they followed suit but clearly don't understand why it was done in the first place. Even more comical are the Glock haters that run said wannabe pistols with similar tiny slide stop that preach "full ambi". The stop is difficult to use and is very small so making it available on the other side does nothing to improve mechanics. Add in the poor location of the slide stop on the 320(very far back) where your dominant thumb may ride the slide stop when using a proper leading thumbs grip, preventing the slide from locking open on empty. And the stop is nearly impossible to reach with your dominant thumb should you be left with only one working hand. I'm old school and stick to what works which is overhand grasp of the slide or if need be using my dominant thumb. Lefties can use the overhand grasp and trigger finger on the slide stop one handed if need be.
The 320 is not "full ambi" as the magazine release is not ambi out of the box, it can be swapped to the other side but it cannot be activated from both sides. Not much point in making one control ambi all the time and the other moveable. Every lefty I know just deals with the right handed world and does just fine. I don't know any lefties who have swapped their mag release as they have become comfortable with using their trigger finger to drop mags and/or the slide.
Modular means nothing really. The interchangeable frames is akin to interchangeable backstraps except you have to buy the frames separate. And like the backstraps you pick the one you feel comfortable with and the rest sit in a box. Going from full size to compact is only a slight savings over buying a second gun. My opinion is why waste your time with a full size if the compact does the same job? Same could be said for the full size, if it does what you need it to do why would you concern yourself with a compact?[/QUOTE]
You can talk through your ass all you want Kiddx. But at the at the end of the day...
THE SIG P 320 WON.
Cheers.
Very large overall size, large grip, exposed barrel, 64 parts, fixed front sight(although corrected on newer models) slide mounted safety that usually gets activated when overhand grasping the slide. Fragile three piece locking block. If it was great the US Army would buy more as that would be cheaper and easier than the trials, testing, and logistic nightmare of adopting a new model.
You can talk through your ass all you want Kiddx. But at the at the end of the day...
THE SIG P 320 WON.
Cheers.[/QUOTE]
SIG was awarded the contract, doesn't mean they make or offer an excellent product.
You can sing accolades of the Beretta all you want, but one of the most important factors of a handgun is fit. The grip on the Beretta M9 is a fat pig. There is no curing that. The one size fits all doesn't work anymore. Not even in Big Army. Reliability, price, etc doesn't matter if the shooter can't hit the target because their gun doesn't fit.
Yes Beretta 92's grip is on a larger side so I guess I can see how guys with little hands might be frustrated. I've had a number of women shoot my 92 over the year and don't recall any of them having an issue, maybe size matters more of a guy thing..
You sure the issues with the M9 was the exposed barrel? It may have been but the parkerized mags made by Checkmate Tech. I am told were the major problem. The US Army insisted the mags be Parkerized against the advice of Checkmate. Apparently the Pakerized finish leaves the mags with a rougher finish that traps sand. This caused the pistols to jam. Beretta mags worked fine in the sand and apparently are designed to prevent sand from accumulating.
The primary reason for looking for a new pistol was changing requirements and the M9's in service were simply worn out. Same thing happened 30 years ago with the 1911's.
I have to concede, like most who have posted here, to the minds of the US Army who do study these things and probably no a heck a lot more about firearms than we do and they chose the 320. I also would expect they did it for very good reasons. One of which probably was the 320 was the best pistol for their requirements. Just saying.
Major police departments in the US likely will be taking a hard look at the SIG's modular design and their new RX version. Their in house designed optic has some interesting features.
Take Care
Bob
From what I understand, it was a 2 year long trial. And it came down to Sig and Glock. And the P320 won due to the military wanting a modular design. Which Glock did not offer.
You seem like a smart man Kiddx. Not sure if it's just from reading on the internet or if you really know your ####, but I do find your input informative. Would be cool to have a beer with you and discuss firearms.
But We all have different tastes and biases. I prefer full metal pistols. And love Sigs. They are very high quality. Here's a few of my favourite pistols.
You seem like a smart man Kiddx. Not sure if it's just from reading on the internet or if you really know your ####, but I do find your input informative. Would be cool to have a beer with you and discuss firearms.
But We all have different tastes and biases. I prefer full metal pistols. And love Sigs. They are very high quality. Here's a few of my favourite pistols.
The Butt Hurt over SIG winning the US military contract is HUGE all the Beretta fan boys need to change your panties and get over it . The M9s are in service with the US military are in worse shape than our Browning Hi Powers are .. I hear that there is a safe place so that you can decompress at the Liberal party HQ LOL
Lungorthin
Regular
- Location
- Calgary, AB
This.
The contract usually goes to whichever they can get at the best price while still meeting requirements.
It's more a case of there's a lot of people who have used, know, and trust the M9, and now the 320 is the "new thing" that they don't have any experience with, so don't have a level of trust with.
The same happened when they switched fro the 1911 to the M9.
Only time will tell if the 320 is a success in service. Military history is full of weapon procurements, where the weapon performed exceptionally well in trials and testing, and failed miserably in the field.
Mostly I just get kind of a giggle out of all the much touted "modularity" of the gun.
99.9% of soldiers who get them, will get the bone stock version of it. Because that's how the big green machine works.
The ones who get issued ones with blinkin lights etc., are the kinds of soldiers (special applications soldiers) who have a lot of leeway in choosing their own weapons anyway.
The p226 won the original M9 contract but was screwed out of it because they had no US manufacturing. It all comes down to US jobs.
Since then SIG has moved into the states and is employing thousands of people and they make a gun that is adaptable to all hand sizes and all duties.
The gun is as modular as the 1911 and the M16 unlike the euro-trash M9.
Since then SIG has moved into the states and is employing thousands of people and they make a gun that is adaptable to all hand sizes and all duties.
The gun is as modular as the 1911 and the M16 unlike the euro-trash M9.
With a grip as large as the Beretta you only get 15 rounds, that's pathetic. No one is saying you can't make do with the large grip but there is no need for such a monster and it isn't CCW or glove friendly. The Beretta is 1.45" wide! That's a quarter inch wider than a Glock!! The 320 is 1.3" wide so it's no skinny b*tch either but still slimmer than the Beretta. Your Beretta weighs in at 34.5oz unloaded, 320 weighs 29.5oz that's more than a quarter pound savings. A Glock 17 weighs 25.1 oz unloaded which is over a half pound of savings, hell a G17 loaded weighs 32.1 oz which is almost 2.5 oz lighter than your empty Beretta and that's with two extra rounds and a quarter inch thinner profile with half as many parts and a consistent trigger pull(same on the 320) without the use of a pointless mechanical safety(sadly the safety was added to the 320 for big green). The SIG 320 is a huge improvement over the Beretta.
Absolutely true Bob, the magazines were a huge problem and pure junk in that configuration. However the pistol still has shortcomings.
I wouldn't say people trust the M9 but they are familiar with it. You're right about who gets the guns and what format they will receive them in. The Super special switched on soldiers are using Glock 19's and some used to use the SIG 226 and 229.
Absolutely Scarecrow. Beretta would play ball when SIG wouldn't and now SIG will play ball when Glock won't.
When you make comments like that about one of the most combat tested pistol in modern history you come across as a juvenile. The first M9's were assembled with Italian parts. Beretta has been a family owned gun company for over 500 years and you imply they don't make a quality product!
The 226 lost to the 92 design in the trials. You are either serious misinformed or just not informed and there is a difference. One can be corrected the other not so much.
Take Care
Bob
I'm still laughing over Eurotrash.
