Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 6
Posted: 8/19/2010 8:09:38 AM EDT
An article about handguns that includes the phrase "blows up", and it's not talking about Glocks. Beam me up, Scotty, I think I've seen it all!

Hmmm... most jams were "shooter-induced". I know if I limp-wrist my P226 it will jam...

GAO blows up Sig Sauer’s contract award protest against ATF

The GAO has thrown out a protest from handgun manufacturer, Sig Sauer, Inc., which has supplied the .40 caliber handguns currently used by agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), after that agency eliminated Sig Sauer from the most recent procurement competition to supply new handguns to the ATF.

Three gun manufacturers, Sig Sauer, of Exeter, NH; Smith & Wesson Corp., of Springfield, MA; and Glock, Inc., of Smyrna, GA, competed for a contract to supply the ATF with a new “handgun system,” which would consist of two separate weapons of identical function and design, said the GAO, “a standard-size duty weapon for enforcement operations and a compact model for backup and auxiliary needs.”

During phase two of a three-phased evaluation process, the ATF asked 20 of its agents to put all three proposed handguns through identical “live-fire” tests.

“Based on the results of the shooting tests, the [source selection board] recommended to the contracting officer that Sig Sauer’s handgun be excluded from further consideration as unacceptable with respect to reliability,” said the GAO, in a decision document released on August 18. ATF agents had recorded 58 stoppages with Sig Sauer’s full-size and compact pistols, 13 of which were considered to be gun-induced and 45 shooter-induced.

Sig Sauer raised a variety of objections to the manner in which ATF considered various criteria during the evaluation process, but the GAO didn’t buy the company’s arguments.

“In sum, the record shows that ATF reasonably evaluated the firms’ proposals in accordance with the solicitation’s evaluation criteria and concluded Sig Sauer’s offer was not one of the ‘most suitable for performance to the Government’ to continue to phase III,” said the GAO, in a protest denial signed by Acting General Counsel Lynn Gibson.

The decision document did not make clear if the ATF has issued a procurement contract yet to either Smith & Wesson or Glock.

Sig Sauer is an ISO 9001 certified company with over 380 employees. It is the largest member of a worldwide business group of firearms manufacturers that includes J.P. Sauer & Sohn and Blaser, Gmbh. in Germany and Swiss Arms AG in Switzerland.

http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/4023393.htm
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:14:28 AM EDT
Poor SIG. I remember when they made very decent handguns.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:15:39 AM EDT
Sig Sauer also contends that ATF placed too great an emphasis upon reliability in determining which offers should continue to phase III.


Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:15:49 AM EDT
Wow, my SIGs have never malfunctioned, they must have some stupid shooters
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:18:54 AM EDT
I wonder what user-induced failures they had?

I wouldn't suspect limp wristing because the plastic guns are usually the easiest to limp.

Just more ammo against Sig as of late.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:19:42 AM EDT
I have 6 sigs. They need to dump their CEO like a tonne of bricks.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:20:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Bubbles:
An article about handguns that includes the phrase "blows up", and it's not talking about Glocks. Beam me up, Scotty, I think I've seen it all!...

Three gun manufacturers, Sig Sauer, of Exeter, NH; Smith & Wesson Corp., of Springfield, MA; and Glock, Inc., of Smyrna, GA, competed for a contract to supply the ATF with a new “handgun system,” which would consist of two separate weapons of identical function and design, said the GAO, “a standard-size duty weapon for enforcement operations and a compact model for backup and auxiliary needs.”

...

The decision document did not make clear if the ATF has issued a procurement contract yet to either Smith & Wesson or Glock.



You sure about that?

Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:20:46 AM EDT
Not the first department to drop SIG in recent years, nor will it be the last. If for no other reason cost. Be quite a blow to SIG. If I recall correctly ATF has used SIGs for a long time.

That said, my 1994 edition 228 runs great.

If Smith gets this contract I think that would be the first fed agency going to the M & P.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:22:18 AM EDT
My Sig's personally have never failed me, but maybe Sig needs to up their QC game...
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:23:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2010 8:23:30 AM EDT by 87GN]

Originally Posted By WIZZO_ARAKM14:
I wonder what user-induced failures they had?

I wouldn't suspect limp wristing because the plastic guns are usually the easiest to limp.

Just more ammo against Sig as of late.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

The only description of such in the GAO report is failures to lock back with the S&W, and a female shooter. Everyone's going to blame it on her, but the problem was corrected with a larger grip insert/palmswell. I think her grip placed her thumb atop the slide release while shooting, which led to the failures to lock back (which are apparently counted among the 16 shooter-induced stoppages for the S&W). I have the same problem with the new G19 Gen 4, the smaller grip shifts my thumb position slightly in comparison with the Gen 3 and I had failures to lock back until I swapped in a bigger insert. I had no such issues with the Gen 3.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:23:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2010 8:25:21 AM EDT by PattyOSullivan]
Yeah and Glock is in some tax trouble with the IRS, so giving them more government contract wouldn't be the greatest idea.

ETA: for link
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147036107809.htm
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:23:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 87GN:
Sig Sauer also contends that ATF placed too great anemphasis upon reliability in determining which offers should continue to phaseIII.




Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:24:21 AM EDT
Well if they order Glocks in .40S&W I hope each agent pays their $200 tax and file the proper forms for destructive devices.



Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:24:26 AM EDT
My P239 (.40) doesn't like the WWB with the "brass" colored bullet. I get a FTF about every 3 mags or so.


Everything else it eats like a bear just out of hibernation. Including Wolf. HPs give me no problems.

I'd still buy a Sig in a heartbeat.

Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:25:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By goldtop:
I have 6 sigs. They need to dump their CEO like a tonne of bricks.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


I agree with this statement 100% Cohen's got to go...

Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:26:50 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SIG-shooter:
Wow, my SIGs have never malfunctioned, they must have some stupid shooters


Same

Maybe they were clogged with dog hair?
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:26:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Rick-OShay:
Originally Posted By Bubbles:
An article about handguns that includes the phrase "blows up", and it's not talking about Glocks. Beam me up, Scotty, I think I've seen it all!...

Three gun manufacturers, Sig Sauer, of Exeter, NH; Smith & Wesson Corp., of Springfield, MA; and Glock, Inc., of Smyrna, GA, competed for a contract to supply the ATF with a new “handgun system,” which would consist of two separate weapons of identical function and design, said the GAO, “a standard-size duty weapon for enforcement operations and a compact model for backup and auxiliary needs.”

...

The decision document did not make clear if the ATF has issued a procurement contract yet to either Smith & Wesson or Glock.

You sure about that?

Sheesh, the primary subject of the article is Sig Sauer. Next time I'll be more accurate.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:27:29 AM EDT
I have two pre-2003 P226's that run perfectly.

And I haven't heard a single good thing about Sig post-2005. They let their QC fall drastically.

I agree with the guy above, they desperately need a management change. Maybe shut down the Exeter facility entirely.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:30:47 AM EDT
I have a 2008 P229, P250 2 sum and a Mosquito that all function well, the only gun that I have a few problems with is the mosquito the others are flawless.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:32:00 AM EDT
I have 2 SIGs. A P239 in 9mm from around 1999 or 2000 which is a superb gun. And a SHR 970 in 30-06 which if it had a pussy I would marry it. I guess they are slipping.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:33:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DLaw:
My Sig's personally have never failed me, but maybe Sig needs to up their QC game...


I keep hearing grumblings that SIGs QC has declined over the past few years.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:34:30 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2010 8:36:46 AM EDT by ThEWayOftheGUn1]
Wow amazing

how the mighty have fallen.... Or have they?

Who won the Contract?


Seriously... I have 3 sigs (245, 239 & 229) that are very reliable.

I do think Sig has to address the QC issues a little better. Keep as many lemons off peoples hands. Reliability is what Sigs were known for.

I think as a company tends to grow & introduce new products,

they forget what got them there (like Toyota & their reliability reputation).

With that said I have very little data about these tests but if your sending weapons for testing

I would suppose Sig checked them for reliability before sending them??
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:36:39 AM EDT
my sigs all have ran like champs, i wonder what the hell they did exactly to have that many stopages?
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:36:57 AM EDT
People are harping on Sig's quality.

They're made in the U.S.

Union plant?

(BTW, my Sig is U.S. made)
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:38:10 AM EDT
Originally Posted By XMM:
Poor SIG. I remember when they made very decent handguns.


Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:39:36 AM EDT
SIG's QC has gone to shit over the past few years, I blame the dude they hired from Kimber, but it could be another reason. I've seen some pistols that honestly shouldn't have been delivered. There are other negative stories regarding current quality from friends of mine who use them in a professional manner and shoot, a lot.

It's a shame, they used to be great pistols, I think highly of my older ones.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:43:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By AcidGambit:
SIG's QC has gone to shit over the past few years, I blame the dude they hired from Kimber, but it could be another reason. I've seen some pistols that honestly shouldn't have been delivered. There are other negative stories regarding current quality from friends of mine who use them in a professional manner and shoot, a lot.

It's a shame, they used to be great pistols, I think highly of my older ones.


no, I'm pretty sure you have it right
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:47:53 AM EDT
love the old 226's, havn't shot any recent ones so cant say if they went to shit.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:48:08 AM EDT
Remember in Glenn Beck's OMG Glenn has a P220 thread that I said Glock>SIG?


Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:49:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2010 8:55:43 AM EDT by John_Wayne777]
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:49:49 AM EDT
I'd be interested in what the 45 shooter-induced stoppages were, and why the shooters induced them.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:51:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2010 8:56:57 AM EDT by John_Wayne777]
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:54:02 AM EDT
I wonder if there will be any big, if any, improvements that will make .40cal Glocks on par with the 9mm models.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 8:54:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2010 8:55:08 AM EDT by AeroE]
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:01:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
I've been telling people for quite some time that the P250's were absolutely dismal weapons that were flaming out in spectacular fashion in a high profile test....this was the test. Now hopefully all the dinguses who insisted that I was just making shit up will read the goddamn report and perhaps conclude that I just might know what the fuck I'm talking about. The report doesn't have all the information relevant to the P250 in it, but you can get a glimpse of how things were going in the GAO report.

The FAMS are still having problems with the P250's they bought...and I've even heard that the ones that were issued are being taken back and the P229's they replaced are being re-issued.

I was thinking that it was the 250 since the GAO report mentions that the Sig pistol tested offered design features not available with the S&W and Glock. I was struggling to come up with something that the P22X series offered in terms of the design features so described that were not at least semi-satisfactorily offered by the other two designs. Obviously, the ATF places a lower priority on the "modularity" of the P250.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:01:47 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SIG-shooter:
Wow, my SIGs have never malfunctioned, they must have some stupid shooters


reference ATF fuckstick who shot himself with a Glock during a classroom speech! oops!
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:03:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:


Sig was making good guns but was not terribly profitable. Under that guy's leadership the US branch of Sig became very profitable. He's now head of the entire company, IIRC. They marketed based on the reputation Sig built for reliability over the years, but stopped doing a lot of the things that earned that reputation to make more money. It worked.



Seems to be a lot of that going around lately .
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:03:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2010 9:27:25 AM EDT by MEH]
Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
I wonder if there will be any big, if any, improvements that will make .40cal Glocks on par with the 9mm models.


The best improvement that Glock could make to the .40 S&W line would be to cancel it all together... 9mm FTW!
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:03:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/19/2010 9:04:22 AM EDT by John_Wayne777]
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:05:55 AM EDT
I hate SIGS, there I said it. Tall, overweight, over priced, long trigger pull and reset and their DAK's blow donkey balls.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:08:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By XMM:
Poor SIG. I remember when they made very decent handguns.


I'm not a Sig expert, and I don't know what the issue is with their current QC, so I've only bought older used Sigs.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:08:28 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:09:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Originally Posted By ultramagbrion:
Seems to be a lot of that going around lately .


It gets worse....anyone remember the Sig Navy guns? Those were originally the idea of a member of SOF who approached a former Sig employee about doing them. The Sig employee put all of it together with a portion of the proceeds going to a charity for wounded members of SOF. The Navy guns were to be built entirely to NSWG's specs. Nobody at Sig expected them to sell...but they sold like hotcakes.

So after the initial run of true NSWG guns that dedicated a portion of the proceeds to the charity for wounded members of SOF, some people at Sig decided to keep the little anchor logo as a marketing tool, but nevermind building the guns to NSWG spec or donating any of the proceeds to that charity anymore! So they still sold "Navy" guns that were nothing like the originals...but they didn't tell the people buying them any of that.

Sig is at record levels of profitability.
Wow

Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:10:26 AM EDT
My current collection of Sigs include a P220R, P228R, Sig 556 and a Mosquito. I've also owned early Sigs; a couple of 226's and a 225. ALL have been excellent, totally reliable and accurate. That being said, too many have complained and have documented issues with recently manufactured Sigs for their claims to not be reliable. Other signs that might substantiate a Sig decline include what appears to me a loss of direction in marketing and product development as evidenced by the offering of what I consider bizarre and "tacky" custom finishes and configurations. Also, there seems to be confusion as to product pricing which has become inconsistent lately, especially in pricing of the Sig 556. Sig came out recently with the Sig 516, a gas-operated AR-15 version and they seemed about to tout it more heavily than the 556. Now, I don't see or hear much about it. in the meantime, I've seen 556's advertised for as little as $1,000.00.

I just sense loss of direction, which always begins at the top, and it does seem to coincide with the advent of Cohen taking the reins.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:11:31 AM EDT
I've had one malf in my 229 in 6 years. Some how on the last round the casing failed to eject, and was driven open end into the bottom of the feed ramp, never figured out how it happened, and it never happened again.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:12:05 AM EDT
Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
Originally Posted By ultramagbrion:
Seems to be a lot of that going around lately .


It gets worse....anyone remember the Sig Navy guns? Those were originally the idea of a member of SOF who approached a former Sig employee about doing them. The Sig employee put all of it together with a portion of the proceeds going to a charity for wounded members of SOF. The Navy guns were to be built entirely to NSWG's specs. Nobody at Sig expected them to sell...but they sold like hotcakes.

So after the initial run of true NSWG guns that dedicated a portion of the proceeds to the charity for wounded members of SOF, some people at Sig decided to keep the little anchor logo as a marketing tool, but nevermind building the guns to NSWG spec or donating any of the proceeds to that charity anymore! So they still sold "Navy" guns that were nothing like the originals...but they didn't tell the people buying them any of that.

Sig is at record levels of profitability.


man that's fucked up! makes me not want to buy anything new from sig.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:12:11 AM EDT
What model SIG was used in the tests? Anyone know?
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:12:30 AM EDT
I haven't met a single person, who has owned a Mosquito who has had anything good to say about them.
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:12:47 AM EDT
I bought a NIB SIG P220 SAS about 2 years ago. It was the most picky gun on ammo. It would not accept S&B, WWB, or any other low cost ammo without a feed failure every other round. It sickened me. All this hype about how great SIGs are and stuff and the first one I buy wont even feed practice ammo. I sold it the next day.

Oddly enough I was taking a handgun class a few months later and one of the main instructors was a big SIG guy and was always talking crap about Glocks. I was shooting a Glock that day and was doing pretty damn good in that class. We were talking during a break and I told him about my experience with SIG and he said that was impossible.. I laughed at him. He said you should have sent it back to SIG and had them fix it. So I told him If I buy a gun at that price and it doesnt run perfect out of the box then I don't want it and it is a low end gun IMO.

Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:12:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By XMM:
Poor SIG. I remember when they made very decent handguns.


One of my very first posts here was filled with Sig hatred.

Absolute garbage.

(donning hardhat and kevlar as I type this).
Link Posted: 8/19/2010 9:17:17 AM EDT
Originally Posted By PattyOSullivan:
Yeah and Glock is in some tax trouble with the IRS, so giving them more government contract wouldn't be the greatest idea.

ETA: for link
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147036107809.htm


Holy shit. How'd I miss that?

I think I'm gonna buy another one just for that.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 6
Top Top