Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Army Chooses SIG's P320 as New Service Pistol

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Army Chooses SIG's P320 as New Service Pistol

    Army Chooses SIG's P320 as New Service Pistol

    http://comight-tech.com/2017/01/army...ervice-pistol/
    After 10-year effort, Army selects new pistol maker

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/19/politi...uer/index.html

    ...just an fyi

  • #2
    Another case of Ebola shoving it up the incoming Presidents ass. Nothing like spending over a half billion on your way out the door.

    Im no fan of the big ass bastard Beretta but it does its job. I am a fan of Beretta Co's stance in firmly supporting the 2A after Newtown and I think the reason they did not get a fair shot at this contract was largely based on the fact they stuck their finger in Ebolas eye. Im very interested in the revision 3 of the M9 just because they did such a good job standing up for freedom.

    Im guessing the Sig is a fine gun if a bit bore high. Pick any of the plastic guns from the big name builders and whats the difference, just Glocks of a different flavor. As weapons of last resort just about any quality manufacturer will provide a suitable plastic service pistol. Might as well go Smith and Wesson M&P to get the money to a parent company that is USA based. The Smith gets the barrel down a bit closer to the grip also.

    In the end if the gov is buying a service pistol Id think an alloy frame would be a better option. Glocks might be suitable for units of a higher level of training but Im betting bored privates on guard duty at the back gate will figuring ways to turn these in with broken lowers, run over by Hummers or melted from leaving the duty belt on the space heater.

    Well its a pistol contract let the controversy begin par for the course.
    "...But they would never find anything to beat the old Springfield ...the long sleek streamline, very slim but with potent bulges, all in the just exactly right places to give it that pugnaciously forward-leaning, eager look that marked the Springfield. Beside it, the M1 looked like a fat old man puffing with a lack of training...the two most beautiful things made in America were the ax-handle and the clipper ship? ...they should have added one more thing: The Springfield '03 rifle..."

    Comment


    • Skunk
      Skunk commented
      Editing a comment
      I think the point of this pistol is the modularity. As I understand it, only the locking block is serialized. So, when the bored Privates break the trigger guard or grip off the thing, the armory can swap a new lower on it and back to service. None of the paperwork associated with coding out a whole weapon as loss, adjusting inventory, etc.

      The military learned this from 50yrs of reliable service with the M16.... One of my recently issued guns was built on a General Motors lower.

    • pmclaine
      pmclaine commented
      Editing a comment
      Yes the gun is the serialed steel internals that fit into the plastic 'overpackaging'.

      Okay, I can see that benefit. That is even more "modular" than your M16 example because the AR lower is the serialed part and a lower is a pretty significant piece of the assembly as opposed to what is basically a locking lug and frame for the fire controls on this pistol.

      I hadn't seen that benefit stressed in any of the media reports I had read most seemed to be emphasizing the grip and it being able to be configured fit smaller hands.

  • #3
    The SIG P250 and P320 "pistol systems" are attractive to Police Depts b/c they can buy a limited number of costly serialized "fire control assemblies" (see pic #1 - which is technically the "firearm") and then a larger number of relatively inexpensive polymer/plastic frames in different sizes to fit different-size human hands. And for a little more money different length slides & barrels to fit Dept needs: such as full size pistol for uniformed officers, perhaps with small girth frames set aside for women officers who may prefer a smaller frame, and perhaps shorter frames and shorter slides for plain-clothed/under cover detectives where they need something more concealable, etc - but again the Police Dept only has to maintain and track a relatively fixed number of serialized fire control assemblies in such a flexible/modular system like the one SIG developed. (In addition, changing calibers from 9mm to 40S&W to 357SIG to 45ACP is not a big deal with this modular system.)

    I suspect the military also finds this system attractive for the same reasons. I've read the wide-girth of the Beretta 92/M9 pistol has always been suboptimal for people with smaller hands, and in particular women with smallish hands who have joined the U.S. armed services over the past few decades. Beretta introduced the Vertec pistol (with smaller girth) a dozen years ago to try to address this issue. The recent Beretta 92A3 was their attempt to keep the gravy train running with additional U.S. military sales...(see link) http://www.beretta.com/en-us/m9a3/
    ...but it looks like SIG ultimately won the contest with their highly modular system (see attached 2nd pic.. Not shown, but the serial number of the 'fire control system' can be seen via a cut-out/window on the right side of the plastic pistol frame. No other parts are serialized on these pistols).

    I think Skunk is right that maintaining these modular pistols should be easier for the DoD - assuming the serialized fire control assemblies are robust enough over time - as they will surely be abused as noted in the previous posts.... Glock apparently came in 2nd place in the DoD evaluations.

    I also think the original US Army RFI (Request for Information) dated back to 2007/2008, so it did indeed take a long time for this procurement to get finalized by the DoD. The 1985 choice of the Italian-made Beretta was controversial and contested. (Beretta's offer included making the US military pistols in Maryland). So, I guess the US military's procurement officers were really cautious this time around, and the competition for the replacement pistol was needed to be seen as extensive and fair as possible...(and apparently the Army's requirements might changed some over time as well, and that created delays in the process).. Anyhow, congrats to SIG. I assume these pistols will be made at their facility up in New Hampshire.
    Last edited by Random Guy; 01-23-2017, 09:33 AM.

    Comment


    • #4
      Although I am not a polymer/striker fired gun type, I kind of like the gun. I do question the intelligence behind choosing a striker fired gun for military use. Back when the Glocks first came out anyone in a five county area that owned one had bought it from me. Me and a friend at the local PD put a 17 through an extensive and rigorous amount of testing including firing over 5000 rounds without cleaning it. One thing it would NOT fire consistently was ammo intended for submachine guns. It had about an 75% failure to fire on the first click. The PD was still carrying revolvers at the time, but my friend was pushing for the Glock to be an option for off duty. He got it approved.

      Comment

      Working...
      X