Army chooses Sig
Moderator: carlson1
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 26796
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
- Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
- Contact:
Re: Army chooses Sig
So much for the G19, I guess. I'm a little surprised.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 9655
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 9:22 pm
- Location: Allen, Texas
Re: Army chooses Sig
no clue what design they submitted. It could be a polymer design like the the P320 Series.
Beiruty,
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
-
- Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 3:01 pm
Re: Army chooses Sig
Apparently it's the P320, or a variant of the P320
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017 ... istol.html
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017 ... istol.html
-
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:21 pm
- Location: North Texas
Re: Army chooses Sig
Modified P320 is what is being reported according to TFB - M17
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017 ... s-shot-17/
ETA: noooo you beat me
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017 ... s-shot-17/
ETA: noooo you beat me
TSRA Member since 5/30/15; NRA Member since 10/31/14
Re: Army chooses Sig
Not too surprising when you consider that big army caters to the lowest common denominator. Unless Glock was willing to mass produce a variation with a manual safety, they were ruled out from the start.The Annoyed Man wrote:So much for the G19, I guess. I'm a little surprised.
Re: Army chooses Sig
P320 has a manual safety?jkurtz wrote:Not too surprising when you consider that big army caters to the lowest common denominator. Unless Glock was willing to mass produce a variation with a manual safety, they were ruled out from the start.The Annoyed Man wrote:So much for the G19, I guess. I'm a little surprised.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 9655
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 9:22 pm
- Location: Allen, Texas
Re: Army chooses Sig
Breaking news: It is reported by NRA Rifleman mag's O'keefe that it is P320 variant
Beiruty,
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 1335
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:17 pm
Re: Army chooses Sig
Not as originally released. I think it's an option they added. There is no retrofit currently available.WTR wrote:P320 has a manual safety?jkurtz wrote:Not too surprising when you consider that big army caters to the lowest common denominator. Unless Glock was willing to mass produce a variation with a manual safety, they were ruled out from the start.The Annoyed Man wrote:So much for the G19, I guess. I'm a little surprised.
My P320's don't have safeties. I'd say they are disasters waiting to happen but they are curiously satisfying to shoot and very reliable.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 26796
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
- Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
- Contact:
Re: Army chooses Sig
The is a Glock variant with an external safety: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glocktreadlightly wrote:Not as originally released. I think it's an option they added. There is no retrofit currently available.WTR wrote:P320 has a manual safety?jkurtz wrote:Not too surprising when you consider that big army caters to the lowest common denominator. Unless Glock was willing to mass produce a variation with a manual safety, they were ruled out from the start.The Annoyed Man wrote:So much for the G19, I guess. I'm a little surprised.
My P320's don't have safeties. I'd say they are disasters waiting to happen but they are curiously satisfying to shoot and very reliable.
Given the shear numbers involved, I can't believe that Glock couldn't have added an external safety to the G19 or 17 in order to win the contract. I can only conclude that they weren't that interested in winning it.The Glock 17S is a variant with an external, frame-mounted, manual safety. Small numbers of this variant were made for the Tasmanian, Israeli, Pakistani, and perhaps several South American security forces.[77] They are stamped "17", not "17S". They resemble, but are distinguishable from, standard Glock 17 pistols that have been fitted with the after-market Cominolli safety.[78] An additional safety variant Glock 17 that was tested by the British Military included a frame safety similar to that found on the British service rifle, the SA-80.
As far as the P320 not having one either, the one time I handled one, it seemed that the trigger was a LOT like a Kahr trigger — quite long, but light and very smooth. The length of pull IS the safety. The Sig is a good gun. I almost bought one once. The main reason I was surprised that Glock didn't win is the recent adoption of the G19 by both Army Special Forces, and the SEAL Teams. If Special Forces likes 'em, why not the regular Army?
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 1436
- Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: SW Fort Worth
Re: Army chooses Sig
Sure does, if you order one with a safety...WTR wrote:P320 has a manual safety?jkurtz wrote:Not too surprising when you consider that big army caters to the lowest common denominator. Unless Glock was willing to mass produce a variation with a manual safety, they were ruled out from the start.The Annoyed Man wrote:So much for the G19, I guess. I'm a little surprised.
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan, 1964
30.06 signs only make criminals and terrorists safer.
NRA, LTC, School Safety, Armed Security, & Body Guard Instructor
30.06 signs only make criminals and terrorists safer.
NRA, LTC, School Safety, Armed Security, & Body Guard Instructor
Re: Army chooses Sig
I have heard of Glock making a model with a manual safety before, but the wiki article says they only made a small number. Maybe they just weren't willing to mass produce it.The Annoyed Man wrote: The is a Glock variant with an external safety: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GlockGiven the shear numbers involved, I can't believe that Glock couldn't have added an external safety to the G19 or 17 in order to win the contract. I can only conclude that they weren't that interested in winning it.The Glock 17S is a variant with an external, frame-mounted, manual safety. Small numbers of this variant were made for the Tasmanian, Israeli, Pakistani, and perhaps several South American security forces.[77] They are stamped "17", not "17S". They resemble, but are distinguishable from, standard Glock 17 pistols that have been fitted with the after-market Cominolli safety.[78] An additional safety variant Glock 17 that was tested by the British Military included a frame safety similar to that found on the British service rifle, the SA-80.
As far as the P320 not having one either, the one time I handled one, it seemed that the trigger was a LOT like a Kahr trigger — quite long, but light and very smooth. The length of pull IS the safety. The Sig is a good gun. I almost bought one once. The main reason I was surprised that Glock didn't win is the recent adoption of the G19 by both Army Special Forces, and the SEAL Teams. If Special Forces likes 'em, why not the regular Army?
As far as SOF units selecting Glock, unfortunately that doesn't mean too much. While SOF will make common sense decisions, big army typically does things the hardest and least sensible way possible, often times caring more about appearance than actual performance.
Re: Army chooses Sig
The timing of all this is quite interesting.
A few days back at General Mattis's hearing on Capitol Hill they made a big deal about how slow the Army was at deciding this and how much money they had spent then....whatta ya know! :)
A few days back at General Mattis's hearing on Capitol Hill they made a big deal about how slow the Army was at deciding this and how much money they had spent then....whatta ya know! :)
Please know and follow the rules of firearms safety.