|
Quoted: Agreed. Quoted: Quoted: I like Berettas but they are giant pigs. Agreed. The grip is too fat (and I wear a large glove) and the safety location/actuation sucks massively. Yea, pretty decent shooter, and if the CSM isn’t around you can treat it as DA/SA and leave the safety off but that’s not the intent. An M&P is a decent shooter, I can tweak it to my grip, and the safety works properly like a 1911 and every other normal pistol. M9 didn’t kill anyone but was overrated. |
|
M9 didn't deserve any of the hate it got. Even clapped out ones with NATO ball would hold the black of a B-8 at 25 yards if you could shoot. If you can't shoot with a DA/SA it's because you're a retard, not because DA/SA triggers are bad. Ours were clapped TF out and still worked fine till we turned them in and went to Glock 19's. |
|
Quoted: Blame glock. They're the one's who put in a shitty ass fucking proposal for all the non-gun factors and had a stupidly high fucking price. I use the MHS as a good example of how not to win by not paying attention to all the criteria. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1762c5bc1c934ebf06ac650b9c721ab6cbaaa9fae9bccf5d3d0ae1ca43a0021d.jpg Those are subjective results by people who thought the M17/M18 is a great service pistol. Put 5 different panels on there and you’ll get 5 different results. That doesn’t mean shit. Sig’s proposal sold the firearms at a loss, Glocks allowed for a modest profit to cover actual costs and overhead. Stupidly high price is a wild overstatement. There’s no requirement for companies to sell to the government at cost or a loss and Glock is successful enough to not have to play that political game. Doubt there’s a single person at Glock Inc. who is losing a second of sleep right now, their company is doing just fine. Their submission turned into a huge success in the civilian and LEO market and it didn’t require losing one penny to the morons running the MHS program. |
|
Quoted: Those are subjective results by people who thought the M17/M18 is a great service pistol. Put 5 different panels on there and you’ll get 5 different results. That doesn’t mean shit. Sig’s proposal sold the firearms at a loss, Glocks allowed for a modest profit to cover actual costs and overhead. Stupidly high price is a wild overstatement. There’s no requirement for companies to sell to the government at cost or a loss and Glock is successful enough to not have to play that political game. Doubt there’s a single person at Glock Inc. who is losing a second of sleep right now, their company is doing just fine. Their submission turned into a huge success in the civilian and LEO market and it didn’t require losing one penny to the morons running the MHS program. They sell it at a loss? That's insane. |
|
Quoted: M9 didn't deserve any of the hate it got. Even clapped out ones with NATO ball would hold the black of a B-8 at 25 yards if you could shoot. If you can't shoot with a DA/SA it's because you're a retard, not because DA/SA triggers are bad. Ours were clapped TF out and still worked fine till we turned them in and went to Glock 19's. Range weekend always had lots of 28-30s on the new pop up pistol qual in my reserve REMF unit. |
|
Dont forget to mention a target price of 100 mil less than Glock. As James put it on TFBTV, if they had gone longer than 12.5k on rounds, would it have passed. Lots of things going on , but I wouldnt toss the idea if bribery on Sigs behalf to get the contract. Hell, easiest thing they prob could do is just ditch the manual safety part and just roll Glocks. |
|
Quoted: Those are subjective results by people who thought the M17/M18 is a great service pistol. Put 5 different panels on there and you'll get 5 different results. That doesn't mean shit. Sig's proposal sold the firearms at a loss, Glocks allowed for a modest profit to cover actual costs and overhead. Stupidly high price is a wild overstatement. There's no requirement for companies to sell to the government at cost or a loss and Glock is successful enough to not have to play that political game. Doubt there's a single person at Glock Inc. who is losing a second of sleep right now, their company is doing just fine. Their submission turned into a huge success in the civilian and LEO market and it didn't require losing one penny to the morons running the MHS program. Quoted: Quoted: Blame glock. They're the one's who put in a shitty ass fucking proposal for all the non-gun factors and had a stupidly high fucking price. I use the MHS as a good example of how not to win by not paying attention to all the criteria. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1762c5bc1c934ebf06ac650b9c721ab6cbaaa9fae9bccf5d3d0ae1ca43a0021d.jpg Those are subjective results by people who thought the M17/M18 is a great service pistol. Put 5 different panels on there and you'll get 5 different results. That doesn't mean shit. Sig's proposal sold the firearms at a loss, Glocks allowed for a modest profit to cover actual costs and overhead. Stupidly high price is a wild overstatement. There's no requirement for companies to sell to the government at cost or a loss and Glock is successful enough to not have to play that political game. Doubt there's a single person at Glock Inc. who is losing a second of sleep right now, their company is doing just fine. Their submission turned into a huge success in the civilian and LEO market and it didn't require losing one penny to the morons running the MHS program. |
|
Quoted: I'm surprised the CZ P07/09 doesn't get more love. That thing is perfect.  But yeah the M9 makes the most sense, with the military already having mags, holsters, training etc on it. I've never been a fan of stryker fired for some reason. Sad to see SIG losing the great reputation they once had.Strykers can fire pistols? |
|
Quoted: You might get your wish, OP. The Marines are looking into going back to the Beretta on a division by division basis. If Sig would have put more effort into fixing it early on instead of denying everything, the 320 might be a good gun now and the problems chalked up to development. Instead, they get to quote Tiger King. "I'm never gonna financially recover from this." Didn't Ian or someone check it out and think the design is mechanically fine, but speculated Sig is using too loose tolerances on some parts because it's cheaper, so if you get a mix of parts that are out of spec in a certain way, the gun can fire on its own. I'm not mechanical, so I'm doing a poor job describing what was stated. |
|
Quoted: [b]The government does IGCE's. There's a minimum threshold that can disqualify you on pricing due to performance risk too. Glock fucked up their final bid. Hard stop. Period. Can you tell us the “minimum threshold” or not? Otherwise you’re not proving your point. |
|
Quoted: dont worry, in a couple post someone will be along to talk about how in 1984 their 1911 that fought in ww2, korea and vietnam had a malfunction Quoted: Quoted: This. But to be fair, never heard of 1911s or M9s going off by themselves. dont worry, in a couple post someone will be along to talk about how in 1984 their 1911 that fought in ww2, korea and vietnam had a malfunction I’m your huckleberry. I was in a Weapons Squad: 3 three man machine gun teams, 3 RTOs, 1 Squad Leader. Two men in each gun team had 1911s, as did each RTO (radio/telephone operator). Our squad was assigned eleven 1911s, of which two never went “to the field”. They were all old as hell, with no finish left, and would rust after mere contact with our leather holsters. ^^^^ They were all malfunctioning pieces of shit until…… ….. I completely disassembled every pistol to the last and smallest part- even disassembling the mainspring housings. Most of the problems were remedied with new sear springs, and cleaning out decades of gummed-up mainsprings and mainspring housings. One of these even had a portion of a leaf inside the mainspring housing and I have no ideas how that is even possible, but it was there. ^^^^ They seemed to work ok after this. GI magazines are another issue with these. This was in 1986/1987 (we got M9s in mid-1987). I don’t care for 1911s, not even a little bit, however, I would like to have an all GI Ithaca 1911 simply for nostalgia because that’s what I was issued. |
|
Quoted: Or glock, or hk, or cz, or s&w, hell maybe even ruger But no, bribery and kickbacks won the day over logic and reason. They could've went with the new M9 and be done with it. If nothing else, that airman would still be alive. Prove there was bribery and kickbacks. Put up or shut up. GP is famous for making shit up. I would take a Sig P-226 over anything else. |
|
Quoted: Prove there was bribery and kickbacks. Put up or shut up. GP is famous for making shit up. I would take a Sig P-226 over anything else. Are we talking about the P-226? I thought this conversation was about the P-320. Edit to add that you’re naive as hell if you think Sig isn’t in the back pocket of somebody in procurement. Bribes aren’t like in the movies where a guy brings a suitcase of money in a back alley. They’re done in other ways where the payoff is hidden in some other detail and therefore difficult to discover, “prove”, and prosecute. |
|
Quoted: This. But to be fair, never heard of 1911s or M9s going off by themselves. Quoted: Quoted: There's nothing they could pick that we wouldn't bitch about. After watching clearing barrels get shot twice with m9, I'm not real quick to blame sig. |
|
Quoted: I see your point, who needs someone with experience giving advice?  Quoted: Quoted: Once you become a flag officer, you should be banned from working for any defence contractor. Way too much of a good ol' boy club. I see your point, who needs someone with experience giving advice? There are tens of thousands of people who understand how DoD acquisitions works. When these companies hire former GOs/FOs they aren’t buying advice, they’re buying personal contacts and influence. And that’s the best case scenario. |
|
Quoted: The M&P 2.0 was the perfect choice. Reliable, accurate, good capacity, designed and made in the USA. There are a lot of good gun makers, but the deciding factor is often price, manufacturing deadlines, and support. The tests are tough and challenging. Sig won. It sucks that every other gun maker can't win. There were crybabies when the M-9 was selected and the 1911 lost. Oh, my god, the crying was apocalyptic on GD. There are always butthurt whiners when their favourite toy loses. We could be having teething problems no matter who won. Colt is having recalls, too. Glock, Remington, and about every other gun maker have had issues with a new product at one time or another. The biased GD experts come out of the woodwork no matter what, guaranteed. |
|
Quoted: There are a lot of good gun makers, but the deciding factor is often price, manufacturing deadlines, and support. The tests are tough and challenging. Sig won. It sucks that every other gun maker can't win. There were crybabies when the M-9 was selected and the 1911 lost. Oh, my god, the crying was apocalyptic on GD. There are always butthurt whiners when their favourite toy loses. We could be having teething problems no matter who won. Colt is having recalls, too. Glock, Remington, and about every other gun maker have had issues with a new product at one time or another. The biased GD experts come out of the woodwork no matter what, guaranteed. Links to ArfCom crybaby posts when the M9 was adopted in 1985?  Sorry your P320’s are worth less than a Canik now. |
|
When I was an MP we were issued 1911's. Mine rattled and looked like shit, but it always worked, even with the crappy magazines issued. Dog handlers and female MP's were issued S&W Model 10's. They always worked. We all got into exactly the same amount of gunfights while doing our REMF jobs as MP's. ZERO. I say reissue the S&W M10's to most of the troops. High speed types that might actually NEED a pistol can do something else. It is interesting to note that when we were assigned to something that MIGHT be real......we drew our M16A1's from the arms room. Pistols are mostly a decoration. |
|
Quoted: M9 didn't deserve any of the hate it got. Even clapped out ones with NATO ball would hold the black of a B-8 at 25 yards if you could shoot. If you can't shoot with a DA/SA it's because you're a retard, not because DA/SA triggers are bad. Ours were clapped TF out and still worked fine till we turned them in and went to Glock 19's. On the DA/SA triggers, you are 100% right. The M-9 was heavy. Weight is always an issue. The 1911 was even worse. The M-17 is 4 ounces lighter than the M-9. Not everyone has large hands. The modularity of the M-17 was a big selling point. There was nothing modular about the M-9. BTW, the M-9 also had discharge and cracked slide issues when first adopted. The Colt 1911 also had a long history of discharge issues until the 80 series came along. Wow, it took Colt 70 years and how many wars to fix it? |
|
Quoted: Blame glock. They're the one's who put in a shitty ass fucking proposal for all the non-gun factors and had a stupidly high fucking price. I use the MHS as a good example of how not to win by not paying attention to all the criteria. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1762c5bc1c934ebf06ac650b9c721ab6cbaaa9fae9bccf5d3d0ae1ca43a0021d.jpg Before the trials Baretta plopped down the M9a3 which gave them everything they needed and we're told to pound sand. The problem was solved before the shit show even started. |
|
Quoted: Yup. Pistol is a secondary weapon. You can argue about features till the cows come home, but for the mil it just needs a safety, to go off when its supposed to go off, and not go off when its not supposed to go off m9 did just that, 320 failed All the high speed guys get to pick what they want anyway for everyone else its just as likely to kill a clearing barrel as a bad guy ETA I hated my issued m9, but having shot one that hasnt been through decades of abuse this meme hits https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fqn4tcep566ta1.jpg%3Fwidth%3D1080%26crop%3Dsmart%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D2b990b5662d6f0fdcaa484eefd6bb33afa6f13c4&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=5c416591a267667e68062f9e113aaf62a84f31e5c87549dd43d624f716f02800 This |
|
Quoted: Those are subjective results by people who thought the M17/M18 is a great service pistol. Put 5 different panels on there and you’ll get 5 different results. That doesn’t mean shit. Sig’s proposal sold the firearms at a loss, Glocks allowed for a modest profit to cover actual costs and overhead. Stupidly high price is a wild overstatement. There’s no requirement for companies to sell to the government at cost or a loss and Glock is successful enough to not have to play that political game. Doubt there’s a single person at Glock Inc. who is losing a second of sleep right now, their company is doing just fine. Their submission turned into a huge success in the civilian and LEO market and it didn’t require losing one penny to the morons running the MHS program. You are saying Sig was less greedy. Interesting. |
|
Quoted: I read the solicitation when it came out.....when Winchester--who had been making 9mm ammo for the army for years--partnered with Sig, I knew it was over. Glock should have hired a government contracts expert to help prepare thier proposal. Glock should have actually submitted a modular handgun to the Modular Handgun Competition. |
|
Quoted: Are we talking about the P-226? I thought this conversation was about the P-320. Edit to add that you’re naive as hell if you think Sig isn’t in the back pocket of somebody in procurement. Bribes aren’t like in the movies where a guy brings a suitcase of money in a back alley. They’re done in other ways where the payoff is hidden in some other detail and therefore difficult to discover, “prove”, and prosecute. The comment about the P-226 is appropriate since even the OP is offering up an alternative. Your gaslighting is not going to work. You offer no evidence of criminal activity, yet make the accusation. When challenged to provide evidence, you attack the person rather than admit you don't know jack. You can say that about any winner of a govt. contract, but you know that is a lie, do you not? |
|
Quoted: There are tens of thousands of people who understand how DoD acquisitions works. When these companies hire former GOs/FOs they aren’t buying advice, they’re buying personal contacts and influence. And that’s the best case scenario. @Ege Are you saying companies should not hire advisors? General Keane had 37 years in the Army. No one in the civilian world has the experience he has. What defense company wouldn't want that experience, advising them? Get real, please. Yes, contacts are also legal and valuable to have. Keane also works for Fox as an advisor and commentator. Are you saying the public should not have access to his experience to understand what is going on? I understand many people assume there must be some criminal activity going on when their favourite toy loses in a contract bid. Stop wearing your pants backwards. This is the world for the big boys. |
|
Quoted: Links to ArfCom crybaby posts when the M9 was adopted in 1985? Sorry your P320’s are worth less than a Canik now. Wrong again, I wouldn't own a striker-fired pistol. I like a hammer on my gun. It is just my preference. There were articles all over the place back then. Even when I joined Arfcom in 2003, people were still whining about it. There were also slide separations. When problems are discovered, you fix them. Life moves on. The cracked slide and accidental discharge issues with the Beretta M9 were addressed and largely resolved. Beretta implemented engineering changes and design improvements to correct the problems. Cracked Slides: Initial Issue: Early M9 pistols experienced frame cracks and slide failures, primarily due to the locking block absorbing excessive recoil energy. Beretta's Response: Beretta implemented an engineering change proposal to reduce the force transmitted to the rear of the frame when firing. They also modified the slide design to prevent separated slide pieces from injuring the shooter. Resolution: Subsequent design changes to the locking block and a shift in manufacturing to Beretta USA eliminated the cracking issue for the most part. Accidental Discharges: Initial Issue: There were concerns about accidental discharges, though the exact cause wasn't definitively linked to the cracking issues. Resolution: The Army incorporated a slide capture mechanism and a hammer pin modification, which, along with a clearance slot in the slide, aimed to prevent accidental discharges. Overall: While there were initial problems, Beretta took action to fix both the slide cracking and accidental discharge issues. The Army also adopted measures to mitigate risks associated with these problems. Additional info. https://sightm1911.com/lib/history/true_story_m9.htm |
|
They should have just adopted the M9A3 that Beretta offered. It did everything but optics, and the A4 model would have fixed that (though I doubt the military will actually issue optics on most sidearms). Beretta was offering it for cheaper than the M9, despite it having improved mags, improved locking block (something crazy like 15k-20k rounds without recoil spring changes and it'll still hold up), 1913 rail, interchangeable grip sizes, easily swapped safety/decocker and decocker-only levers, improved sights, and a threaded barrel. And it'd still work in some existing holsters (I've used a surplus Safariland 6004 SLS holster designed for the M9 with a M9A1 and 92X without issues), use existing mags, and use almost all of the existing parts (as most of the gun is still the same). The gun was safe, easy to take apart, easy to clean/maintain, and absurdly reliable when the Army wasn't issuing drastically out-of-spec bargain-bin mags. |
Do away with the whole affair.  Let the HSLD operators get what they want. 226, M9, plausible deniability HiPower, whatever Take all the 320 slide assemblies and send to CMP. Captain Crunch the receiver for #FTS. Tell Sig to come up with a proper receiver without the FCU BS to fit all the 320 slide assemblies. Give everyone else either a proper PDW or a HiPoint that they carry Israeli style. If you need to defend yourself, then defend yourself with a proper personal defense weapon. If it gets down to pistol range, then the HiPoint gives you enough rounds until you can use it for an impromptu melee weapon. Doesn't matter, no one is gonna be happy about whatever regardless. 
|
|
Quoted: Or glock, or hk, or cz, or s&w, hell maybe even ruger But no, bribery and kickbacks won the day over logic and reason. They could've went with the new M9 and be done with it. If nothing else, that airman would still be alive. But how would General Officers get cushy retirement jobs and kickbacks be handed out??? |
|
Quoted: They could but it was the stupid modularity concept that doomed the M9 from consideration. The funny thing the XM9 requirement had a compact pistol that had to be similar to the full size version to be adopted. Too bad the Army didn't adopted the P226 because of costs. But adopted the M11 for other purposes. The modularity requirement could be met by different grip sizes, which the M9A3 had. Beretta has always made a compact 92, and it's always been awesome. |
|
Quoted: M9 didn't deserve any of the hate it got. Even clapped out ones with NATO ball would hold the black of a B-8 at 25 yards if you could shoot. If you can't shoot with a DA/SA it's because you're a retard, not because DA/SA triggers are bad. Ours were clapped TF out and still worked fine till we turned them in and went to Glock 19's. Have you met or shot with most non-SF/SOCOM pistol users in the DoD? Two vastly different trigger pulls, while not an impossible hurdle to train past, is fucking retarded when the user group shoots maybe once a year if you are lucky. The only reason people shot them well is because nobody shot DA during qual. I guarantee under stress in the real world the first shot would be a miss for about 95% of shooters. |
|
Quoted: The modularity requirement could be met by different grip sizes, which the M9A3 had. Beretta has always made a compact 92, and it's always been awesome. The Compact Carry was not released until 2017. The Beretta 92 Compact Carry is a later, smaller, and more concealable version of the 92 series, designed for civilian concealed carry and not intended for military use. |
|
Quoted: Glock should have actually submitted a modular handgun to the Modular Handgun Competition. Quoted: Quoted: I read the solicitation when it came out.....when Winchester--who had been making 9mm ammo for the army for years--partnered with Sig, I knew it was over. Glock should have hired a government contracts expert to help prepare thier proposal. Glock should have actually submitted a modular handgun to the Modular Handgun Competition. They did. The backstraps fulfilled that requirement |
|
Quoted: Wrong again, I wouldn't own a striker-fired pistol. I like a hammer on my gun. It is just my preference. There were articles all over the place back then. Even when I joined Arfcom in 2003, people were still whining about it. There were also slide separations. When problems are discovered, you fix them. Life moves on. The cracked slide and accidental discharge issues with the Beretta M9 were addressed and largely resolved. Beretta implemented engineering changes and design improvements to correct the problems. Cracked Slides: Initial Issue: Early M9 pistols experienced frame cracks and slide failures, primarily due to the locking block absorbing excessive recoil energy. Beretta's Response: Beretta implemented an engineering change proposal to reduce the force transmitted to the rear of the frame when firing. They also modified the slide design to prevent separated slide pieces from injuring the shooter. Resolution: Subsequent design changes to the locking block and a shift in manufacturing to Beretta USA eliminated the cracking issue for the most part. Accidental Discharges: Initial Issue: There were concerns about accidental discharges, though the exact cause wasn't definitively linked to the cracking issues. Resolution: The Army incorporated a slide capture mechanism and a hammer pin modification, which, along with a clearance slot in the slide, aimed to prevent accidental discharges. Overall: While there were initial problems, Beretta took action to fix both the slide cracking and accidental discharge issues. The Army also adopted measures to mitigate risks associated with these problems. Additional info. https://sightm1911.com/lib/history/true_story_m9.htm Quoted: Quoted: Links to ArfCom crybaby posts when the M9 was adopted in 1985? Sorry your P320’s are worth less than a Canik now. Wrong again, I wouldn't own a striker-fired pistol. I like a hammer on my gun. It is just my preference. There were articles all over the place back then. Even when I joined Arfcom in 2003, people were still whining about it. There were also slide separations. When problems are discovered, you fix them. Life moves on. The cracked slide and accidental discharge issues with the Beretta M9 were addressed and largely resolved. Beretta implemented engineering changes and design improvements to correct the problems. Cracked Slides: Initial Issue: Early M9 pistols experienced frame cracks and slide failures, primarily due to the locking block absorbing excessive recoil energy. Beretta's Response: Beretta implemented an engineering change proposal to reduce the force transmitted to the rear of the frame when firing. They also modified the slide design to prevent separated slide pieces from injuring the shooter. Resolution: Subsequent design changes to the locking block and a shift in manufacturing to Beretta USA eliminated the cracking issue for the most part. Accidental Discharges: Initial Issue: There were concerns about accidental discharges, though the exact cause wasn't definitively linked to the cracking issues. Resolution: The Army incorporated a slide capture mechanism and a hammer pin modification, which, along with a clearance slot in the slide, aimed to prevent accidental discharges. Overall: While there were initial problems, Beretta took action to fix both the slide cracking and accidental discharge issues. The Army also adopted measures to mitigate risks associated with these problems. Additional info. https://sightm1911.com/lib/history/true_story_m9.htm Beretta never had an issue with accidental discharges |
|
Quoted: The Compact Carry was not released until 2017. The Beretta 92 Compact Carry is a later, smaller, and more concealable version of the 92 series, designed for civilian concealed carry and not intended for military use. Quoted: Quoted: The modularity requirement could be met by different grip sizes, which the M9A3 had. Beretta has always made a compact 92, and it's always been awesome. The Compact Carry was not released until 2017. The Beretta 92 Compact Carry is a later, smaller, and more concealable version of the 92 series, designed for civilian concealed carry and not intended for military use. Their compact existed well before 2017. It's the size of a g19 and just as suited to .mil as the m9. Just like the g19 would be. |
|
Quoted: I like Berettas but they are giant pigs. This. I have huge hands and they still feel like shit to me. Slide mounted controls are also retarded. Something like a CZ P01 is about as perfect as a DA/SA as you're going to get. If it must be striker fired, go Walther. |
|
Quoted: Wasn’t the (non-MHS) proposal by Beretta, to upgrade all M9s in service to M9A3 spec? It would have been an engineering change, not a replacement, per se. BUT the end result would have been entirely new handguns. Seems like a better deal, in retrospect. Heh. The a3 is basically a whole new gun the receiver has to be different or cut for a assy rail. The top slide front sight block on a m9 is welded and needs milled it would have been cheaper to just replace the whole slide |