[cciman]

I've told this before; but when I was a young airman, I asked our commander why we had to carry S&W 38s and the Army got 45s...He told me, "If you're shooting the enemy with a pistol, you are already F----d."

I want a rifle...

Yes, the RIFLE is the primary weapon that does the most work in any military. The pistol is what is often forgotten, when the rifle goes empty.

 

[Hydra-SHOKz]

Glock>Sig

 

[fastbolt]

Modularity. A modular pistol design was requested. The Glock isn't really modular by any sense of the word compared to the Sig which could swap frames, slides, switch out safety, etc. at will from the serialized chassis.

The lower cost was also probably a significant factor.

Probably a combination of both. Even if the SIG hadn't been any more 'modular' than the Glock MHS, it likely would've still won on bid.

 

[italianstallion]

Can't we all agree it came down to Glock vs. Sig, 2 quality name brand gunmakers who are the two largest suppliers of handguns to militaries and LE around the globe.

If the military looked for the absolute cheapest bidder, our military would be made up of Ruger, Kel Tec, Taurus, and S&W at this point.

Who did our military go to when they were not impressed with the sidearm at the time, the M9? Glock and Sig. SEALS, SWCC, NCIS, Air Force OSI, CID, Coast Guard went Sig while Delta, Force Recon, Army Rangers, and a few others went Glock. No Kel Tecs, No Rugers, No Taurus, no Smith Wessons.....

Look at federal law enforcement, who did DHS pick as their sidearm? Glock & Sig. Some went P320 such as ICE and Veterans Affairs Police and others went Glock like Coast Guard and CBP.

Do we finally see a pattern here?

 

[ScotchWhisky]

I don't care what or why the military picks as its firearms.

My tastes are far too specific and my standards too high.

 

[Rocks]

Can't we all agree it came down to Glock vs. Sig, 2 quality name brand gunmakers who are the two largest suppliers of handguns to militaries and LE around the globe.

If the military looked for the absolute cheapest bidder, our military would be made up of Ruger, Kel Tec, Taurus, and S&W at this point.

Ding...ding...ding.
Winnah....winnah....chicken dinner!

 

[RetropM]

Both great guns and both would have served equally well. It comes down to this: SIG won so Glock and some Glock fans didn't Iike it. If Glock had won, SIG and some SIG fans wouldn't have liked it.

Glock won big anyways with their FBI contract that led to them winning the contracts for almost every other Federal agency afterwards.

 

[sod]

Why do some people like chocolate, when I like vanilla?

 

[italianstallion]

Both great guns and both would have served equally well. It comes down to this: SIG won so Glock and some Glock fans didn't Iike it. If Glock had won, SIG and some SIG fans wouldn't have liked it.

Glock won big anyways with their FBI contract that led to them winning the contracts for almost every other Federal agency afterwards.

Spot on.... Don't forget Glock also now fielded by USSS and they won partial DHS contract (USCG, CBP)

 

[CBTENGR]

We heard the same grumblings when Beretta was chosen over Sig and others back in 1986. And I can remember how the M9 had issues and didn't work so well in the sand during Desert Storm. I was a hold out and kept my 1911 at that time, it worked quite well.

I cared about what weapons were chosen when I was in and still care since I want to see the troops get the best.

As far as Sig vs Glock getting the contract, there were just as much if not more politics involved than actual test results. It was the same way when the M9 was adopted too.

Being an end user along with being a machinist that had to repair weapons, I can tell you just because something meets military specs does not mean it is the best.

Another thing that a lot of people over look when talking about costs is the spare parts and maintenance that is included in the contracts. One pistol might be cheaper but parts and maintenance might cost more over the life of the contract. Another pistol might be more expensive but spare parts and maintenance is cheaper over the life of the contract.

 

[Deputydave]

Not sure why so many people not in the military are obsessed with which handgun was chosen and not chosen .

This is actually a point worth discussing. It seems the gun world in general thinks very highly of what the military and LE carry. But I'll submit that 'generally speaking' it may not be the best indicator. For example, the typical soldier in combat is going to of course carry a rifle. And the typical soldier isn't likely to be issued a pistol. So an issued pistol in the military is going to be, at best, a secondary weapon in combat, if used at all. In LE the 'average Officer/Deputy/Agent' isn't a gun person. So that issued sidearm will likely only be shot during qualification or training courses. In other words, in both instances the average military pistol/LE pistol isn't going to get a lot of use. I say on 'average' because there will be exceptions. But your typical soldier/marine isn't going to storm a beach front with a pistol. And the average LEO isn't going to put more than the qualification/training minimum through a pistol. So using them as a benchmark really doesn't mean a lot.

Yes, an issued pistol (military or LE) will be CARRIED in a lot of different environments. But most will not be used (unless the issued pistol is also a training pistol).

What would mean a lot is training pistols used in the military, LE academies and range rentals at the LGS. These pistols WILL get a lot of rounds put on them, in lots of different hands, usually over a shorter duration of time.

I've commented on this as well, several years ago there was a YT video with four SF guys sitting around a table in a LGS talking about their pick for CCW. Okay, that's great and nothing against SF but their opinion of CCW really holds no special level of credibility. Again, nothing against SF but a CCW isn't really part of their forte. Sniper rifles, yes. Different full and semi-auto rifles, yes. High speed/low drag gear, yes. A CCW pistol...not so much. So while it was an interesting video, and fun to watch, I didn't agree with any of their choices.

Just tossing out some personal ponderings

 

[meeko]

I've told this before; but when I was a young airman, I asked our commander why we had to carry S&W 38s and the Army got 45s...He told me, "If you're shooting the enemy with a pistol, you are already **."

I want a rifle...

I also started with a S&W Model 15 in the USAF. The AF got the wheelgun from 1962-92 because General Lemay. Lenny is also responsible for the USAF being first to get the M 16 (after shooting Watermelons at a BBQ with it and being impressed)

I personally loved my Model 15.

mad far as the whole Glock Sig deal folks get wrapped up it was nothing more than SIG giving guns to the Army. Glock was allowed to counter the offer and said they aren’t in buisness to give guns to the US Mikitary. Then turned around and made a mint in 3 months off the19X and still dominate LE and a lot of other Military.

and apparently AF OSI said no they want Glock so there’s that

New SA firearms will enhance flexibility, reliability, safety

Special Agents will soon have the option of carrying the Glock 19 or 26 sidearms, with the first batch set to roll out later this year, as announced recently by the Office of Special Investigation’s

www.osi.af.mil

 

[CBTENGR]

What would mean a lot is training pistols used in the military, LE academies and range rentals at the LGS. These pistols WILL get a lot of rounds put on them, in lots of different hands, usually over a shorter duration of time

Yes looking at how well a pistol holds up in military training units, police academies, and rental ranges is a better indicator. I have been assigned to many different types of units in the Army. I only fired a pistol for annual qualifications in some units while I went to the range weekly or monthly in other units. For me, most of the time a pistol was a secondary weapon only. And 9 times out of 10, if I had to use a pistol, we were in trouble.

For the military it will depend on what a person's job is along with the type of unit they are assigned to. Same can be said about law enforcement too. It will depend on the department and if you are assigned to a rapid reaction team/SWAT or if you are assigned to a patrol beat.

 

[DIRTBOY]

How many times are people going to rehash this debate??
Only the most rabid Glock fanboys will keep making excuses for why Glock lost the US Army contract. Its seems VERY simple to most people's eyes. The US Military wants a 'Modular" pistol and Glock neither makes ones or made one for the the contract. They also wanted an external safety and maybe Glock could have done this or did.

Both Glock and SIG will give the best deal when they want this contract. Don't think Glock bids the lowest for so many LEO or other contracts? Or is just solely the best period and everyone else maks junk?

SIG and Glock makes among the best pistols on the market. both are reliable, easy to work on, quality and parts are ready available.
Best comparison is Glock is a Toyota. Excellent, reliable, get the job done and quality. SIG is Lexus will all the same attributes, with a little more refinement and quirks (modular).

So the contract went to the Modular design. Did Glock just think they could ignore what was asked and just win?

I wonder if it also had to due with SIG having rifles and winning that contract too? Glock still does not make a Rifle at all.

I own a G19.5 MOS and its a great pistol. What is not to like expect aesthetics and that in the eye of the owner. Reliable and feeds anything and goes bang. I also have a SIG 320c and does the same, modular and slightly more accurate. Advantage to the G19.5 for being an ounce or so lighter.

 

[Pluto57]

Not sure why the military is so abscessed about modularity when those who actually use these guns in combat aren't allowed to make any changes to their pistols.

I'm impressed to see abscessed spelled correctly, but confused about its usage here.

 

[dbuck47]

HRFunk has a pretty good video on YouTube where he goes through the thing point by point.
Cost was definitely a factor but not the only one.

I like the Glock better but the Sig is good.

 

[bubbatime]

Read the solicitation. It was HAND WRITTEN EXACTLY for the Sig P320 platform. Down to each and every design detail. Someone was given a kickback or some huge Sig fanboy was in charge of procurement. Then.... it gets worse. Then these weenies write up more contract solicitation for a Sig Fury rifle using Sig manufactured new caliber ammunition. And now Sig will be building hundreds of thousands of new rifles to go along with hundreds of thousands of new pistols. Sig will gain billions and billions of dollars off of these two weapons contracts for the next 25-30 years. Its not a coincidence.

 

[DIRTBOY]

Read the solicitation. It was HAND WRITTEN EXACTLY for the Sig P320 platform. Down to each and every design detail. Someone was given a kickback or some huge Sig fanboy was in charge of procurement. Then.... it gets worse. Then these weenies write up more contract solicitation for a Sig Fury rifle using Sig manufactured new caliber ammunition. And now Sig will be building hundreds of thousands of new rifles to go along with hundreds of thousands of new pistols. Sig will gain billions and billions of dollars off of these two weapons contracts for the next 25-30 years. Its not a coincidence.

Yeah nothing of merit. [emoji849]
You Glock Fan Boys are just something.

Maybe the solicitation was exactly what the Military wanted.

Glock lost, Glock does not make rifles or ammo.
Glock makes a great pistol as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[bubbatime]

Yeah nothing of merit. [emoji849]
You Glock Fan Boys are just something.

Maybe the solicitation was exactly what the Military wanted.

Glock lost, Glock does not make rifles or ammo.
Glock makes a great pistol as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I like the Sig rifle and the Sig pistol. I like both of them a lot. I have no problem with them. I think they both will serve well.

I do have a problem when the solicitation is written in such a way that one, and only one pistol can win the contract. When some big wig has already decided what will be the next handgun selection, and completely removes the competitive process by writing up a new solicitation that is so unique that only one true pistol can meet that solicitation. Which is exactly what happened.

 

[fastbolt]

I like the Sig rifle and the Sig pistol. I like both of them a lot. I have no problem with them. I think they both will serve well.

I do have a problem when the solicitation is written in such a way that one, and only one pistol can win the contract. When some big wig has already decided what will be the next handgun selection, and completely removes the competitive process by writing up a new solicitation that is so unique that only one true pistol can meet that solicitation. Which is exactly what happened.

The Army decided what it wanted in the next generation of service pistol. The other gun makers had the opportunity to design their own submissions to better meet the desired specifications in the solicitation.