Glock Crying Over Loss to Sig P320 for Army Contract Files Protest!

Viking1204 · Mar 1, 2017

I have no problems with the decision, the Army should use guns made by an American company.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/02/foghorn/glock-protests-sig-p320-win-armys-mhs-conract/

Telum Pisces · Mar 1, 2017

When it comes to large government procurement contacts it's almost a given that one or more of the companies not awarded the contract will file a protest. They have lawyers on staff just for this type of thing!

But that does not fit a good click bait news headline!

Stagman · Mar 1, 2017

The best doesn't always get the contracts, there is always dirty politics involved in these situations.

JBryan314 · Mar 1, 2017

The Army got a good weapon out of the deal, and as a matter of fact, I just bought a P320 yesterday (wife will be carrying it, she picked it after firing a few boxes of ammo through someone else's). But the Army picked it for the wrong reason. They picked it for the modularity.

The Army is currently obsessed with everything modular, which in this case will result in many migraines for XOs in companies across the force. It has the potential to be a nightmare inventory scenario. I predict that every company arms room will build their pistols all in one configuration and will attempt to leave them that way forever. No CO wants to let his privates and specialists taking advantage of a pistol's modular capabilities. They already break enough stuff. On top of that, for some reason the Army doesn't trust any of it's soldiers to handle any weapon without a safety, which is kind of stupid. Back to inventory, the need to use a certain piece of equipment has to be really high to convince a supply NCO or armored to release it for use. They'd rather a soldier go without than risk breaking, losing or even adding normal wear and tear on a piece of gear. It gets kind of stupid sometimes. When I was in Korea, we had a hard time getting the supply room to release new batteries for our NVGs for night fighting training. The excuse was that we might lose the dead batteries. Yeah. They wanted the dead batteries back for inventory.

The special operations community, to include Special Forces, CAG, Rangers and SEALs, are migrating to the Glock 19.

My bottom line: Both pistols are exceptionally suited for military use and you can't go wrong with either one.

SAWMAN · Mar 1, 2017

Long,long,story for me . . BUT . . I really wish that our military would have went with a Glock. And . . . . . in a Gen 3 style. The specops guys can use whatever they want,but for the "normal" soldier/sailor/airman,they deserve a Glock. --- SAWMAN

JBryan314 · Mar 1, 2017

SAWMAN said:
Long,long,story for me . . BUT . . I really wish that our military would have went with a Glock. And . . . . . in a Gen 3 style. The specops guys can use whatever they want,but for the "normal" soldier/sailor/airman,they deserve a Glock. --- SAWMAN

I agree, the Glock is probably best for the job. But big Army always has some reason for just slightly missing the mark. They're fascinated with modularity, unfortunately.

Armyvet35N · Mar 1, 2017

I carried the Beretta m9 on my first few weeks in afghanland until an jealous officer made me turn it into the armory so he can have it.

After that happened, I stop giving a shit about what handgun the army issued or award for contracts. I don't mind carrying my m4 around like a real man.

just my .02

wildrider666 · Mar 2, 2017

Most, if not all of us have shot firearms that don't "fit". Like it or not, people can adapt to shoot what they are mandated to use. This allows everyone trained with it to make grip or handling adjustments as needed. One handgun everyone uses and can use any one in the inventory. That is lost with the PC move to modularity to better fit people of smaller stature. The limp requirement for use undercover MP/Inv or Covert Ops could be covered with a couple hundred "special" handguns. This will boil down to another embark box of usless crap being dragged around by every Army Unit.

Not a lot of difference between this and men and women doing the same job but have different physical fitness standards, always extra baggage to carry for someone else. IMHO

FrankT · Aug 10, 2017

Trouble with Sig, Glock is there to save the day!

The Army's New Handgun Is Under Fire Because of Troubling Safety Defects

https://www.maxim.com/news/sig-sauer-p320-prone-to-discharge-2017-8

Red · Aug 10, 2017

Reading thru this thread, there are many valid awesome points. I agree there is always some sort of shady dealings with big contracts. Much like the Army ACU fiasco, the most worthless camo ever devised and the tax payers payed billions and Soldiers paid with blood. Also agreed that the Army has a thing for all things modular right now even though the regular Army troops will have their guns built to a "one size fits all" for accountability purposes. Just to make it easier. I am not familiar with the Sig 320 but if it does not have an external safety I would be shocked. If it doesn't I can bet that troops wouldn't be allowed to carry with one in the pipe. Especially after that one guy in every platoon manages to have a negligent discharge. One point, and this is just my experience is that for the regular Army, not enough rifle training is done let alone pistol time. Machine gunners, platoon Sgt's and PL's usually only carry sidearms, most didn't know how to employ them properly or safely transition from their long gun to a pistol anyway. The most use they got out of their pistols was being able to walk around the FOBs with their sidearm instead of their longgun. The number of regular Army guys that have had to employ their pistols in combat is likely very small, at least this wars generation, can't speak for the older vets. I guess my point of view is that the Army needs to just get back to mastering what we got now instead of throwing something new in the mix just because. People complain about the 556 and want to replace all the M4s. Well I have seen what green tip does to a humans chest and heads and I can confidently say I would never want to be hit with one. Anyway, congrats Sig and whoever else is getting rich off of something new we don't need.

JBryan314 · Aug 10, 2017

The Army models of the P320 do not suffer from the safety defects that the civilian models do, namely the drop fire defect.

All civilian models produced now will also NOT suffer from those defects. Sig will be announcing Monday (August 14) on their website how they will remedy the safety defects in models that were already purchased.

FUPAGUNT · Aug 11, 2017

Piss on Sig I hope they go belly up. They knew that gun wasnt safe but they put it in the publics hands anyway, hence the quick "solution" to the problem. I hope that cop wins his suit and people think twice about buying their overpriced guns.

SAWMAN · Aug 11, 2017

I have been around long enough to remember the last time Glock got screwed over for them silly Berettas.
It was all political back then,and most likely is now.
I remember the Sig people trying their best to explain the hammer drop control on the gun. "Oh yeah,with a live rd in the chamber,just push this down,the hammer falls and goes clack,but the rd will not fire . . trust me". My boss told the Sig guy . . . "EFF YOU !!! And threw his sample gun down on the table.
The services will bring it's members in and tell them that they are part of the decision making process. Everyone will feel good. The civilians will laugh at the military behind closed doors. Then they will stuff huge sums of money in their pockets and live happily ever after. --- SAWMAN

JoeCorrado · Aug 11, 2017

It does seem really sketchy that Sig already had a fix for the drop fire issue. Why not issue a recall and be proactive instead of waiting on an injury or possible death? I actually hated Beretta's while I was in the Army. My mission dictated that I had to have an M9 and it was old and clapped out. After getting out I had a buddy that convinced me to try one out that was actually taken care of and I liked it. I now own 2 92's, one of which is a Wilson Combat 92G and that thing is the bees knees! Love that pistol!! I'm pretty shocked that the 320 was chosen over Glocks' offering. It's my understanding that a lot of special ops use the 19Gen4. It's hearsay as I don't know anyone currently serving in the role but I don't have any evidence to refute it either. I thought the brass wanted one type of firearm across all branches of service so who knows what money lined whose pockets on that deal. I also agree that armorers and supply will hoard all the different frames and never issue them unless it's an extreme case or an officer that has really small or large hands. What a fiasco that would be. Pretty much the same deal with Gen4 Glock's though so 6 in one, half dozen in the other. Our tax dollars at work here folks.

wildrider666 · Aug 11, 2017

FWIW: ANSI/SAAMI Z299.5-2016: American National Standard
Voluntary Industry Performance Standards
Criteria for Evaluation of New
Firearms Designs Under Conditions
of Abusive Mishandling
for the Use of Commercial Manufacturers.

The above testing standard is VOLUNTARY. Note the deliberate wording "under conditions of abusive mishandling" and not drop testing: clearly putting causation on the user not the manufacture. It also requires firearms to impact a one inch thick rubber pad over concrete. It excludes black powder, target firearms and those with trigger pulls less then THREE pounds. For reference, in the CA mandated drop tests guns hit directly on concrete.

Sig being a major manufacture surely complies with the above test/spec. Does the drop vid and resulting discharges exceed that testing: YES! Here is the bottom line: If you expect or want a unlimited testing drop safe firearm mandate: many popular designs will end production and you better like heavy triggers from Hell as guns with manual safties are tested with safety OFF.

Lets broaden the liability factor a bit. There are people all over the Net slamming Sig but they also love those aftermarket triggers or rework their triggers: how much of that is drop tested? This is not apples and oranges. The Sig met the specs did your modifications?

Just as there are no accidentally discharges, they are negligent discharges with a human root cause: dropping a firearm is a loss of control and also user negligence.

All IMHO.

FrankT · Aug 11, 2017

I hear that High Point is trying to by Sig so they can at least bring them up to their standards...

wildrider666 · Aug 11, 2017

Do firearms Mfg need to engrave them with "Do not drop firearm as discharge may occure causing injury, death or property damage", like McDonald's "coffee is hot warning" on cups?

FrankT · Jan 31, 2018

Whoops, Army's New Pistols Often Eject Live Rounds and Don't Work Well With Regular Bullets:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...ounds-and-dont-work-well-with-regular-bullets

From Glock Talk:
Army wanted Sig.
Army wrote specs for Sig.
Army shorted testing, for Sig.
Army in deny, deflect, and redirect mode. For Sig.
If they follow suit, Army will banter, browbeat, harass, threaten, or court marshal anyone who is critical.

MauserLarry · Jan 31, 2018

Red said:
Reading thru this thread, there are many valid awesome points. I agree there is always some sort of shady dealings with big contracts. Much like the Army ACU fiasco, the most worthless camo ever devised and the tax payers payed billions and Soldiers paid with blood. Also agreed that the Army has a thing for all things modular right now even though the regular Army troops will have their guns built to a "one size fits all" for accountability purposes. Just to make it easier. I am not familiar with the Sig 320 but if it does not have an external safety I would be shocked. If it doesn't I can bet that troops wouldn't be allowed to carry with one in the pipe. Especially after that one guy in every platoon manages to have a negligent discharge. One point, and this is just my experience is that for the regular Army, not enough rifle training is done let alone pistol time. Machine gunners, platoon Sgt's and PL's usually only carry sidearms, most didn't know how to employ them properly or safely transition from their long gun to a pistol anyway. The most use they got out of their pistols was being able to walk around the FOBs with their sidearm instead of their longgun. The number of regular Army guys that have had to employ their pistols in combat is likely very small, at least this wars generation, can't speak for the older vets. I guess my point of view is that the Army needs to just get back to mastering what we got now instead of throwing something new in the mix just because. People complain about the 556 and want to replace all the M4s. Well I have seen what green tip does to a humans chest and heads and I can confidently say I would never want to be hit with one. Anyway, congrats Sig and whoever else is getting rich off of something new we don't need.

Red,Some good points here I've always wondered about. We wore the "OD Green" uniforms that were really the best thing. We started getting the "Woodland" style when I got out and it never seemed to fit anywhere. Just looked odd. Another thing I wondered about was giving everybody a pistol that breathed. I was in with a bunch of Nam vets and nobody ever mentioned shooting a bad guy with a pistol. We only fired once a year and then only a few weapons so everybody wouldn't have to clean theirs. I never hit much. We wore shoulder holsters that hung up on everything and some got lost with the usual uproar that goes along with a weapon loss. We had 4 of the old grease guns (M3???) inside the tank that had I had to fight on the ground was my first choice anyway. I had immense confidence in that old sucker. Fired every time and I always looked foreword to the yearly range firing with it. I understand that certain specialty troops need pistols but I doubt the need for everybody having one. And everything from the very top down to squad level in the Army is political.

Please read the new forum rules! REQUIRED!

Click Here: https://www.gulfcoastgunforum.com/threads/general-forum-rules-code-of-conduct.70770/

Glock Crying Over Loss to Sig P320 for Army Contract Files Protest!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Gulf Coast States

Member Benefits:

Master

Master

Master

Master

Master

Master

Expert

Master

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Master

Master

Master

Master

Expert

Master

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Master

Attachments

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Master