Gen 5 Glocks

My question is, where does this effect S&W,Ruger, & Sig??

It doesn't, really. A new model means a sales boom for Glock, but not necessarily at the expense of the other manufacturers due to a lack of overlapping fanbases.

The other part is that the new Glock is remarkably unexciting. It doesn't really have any new features. If anything, the most notable thing about is a lack of a previous feature. Everything else consists of incremental changes and parts cheapening.

I'm just waiting for someone to accuse the previously mentioned brands for copying Glock in omitting fingergrooves.

Can anyone really compete with Glock????

Sure. As a pistol, the Glock is ...unrefined, and Sig won the Army contract.
 
This Gen 5 torture test was a epic fail. I am sure the P320 owners are getting a little payback from all the shots they have been getting from the Glock crowd. Not sure I have ever seen a Glock do so bad in a debris test.

Just a horrible Gen 5 test.
https://youtu.be/ZR0Ss3yVV5I
Id love to see any gun get shoved in mud, sand and dirt without the magazine and have it work properly....

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Everything else consists of incremental changes and parts cheapening.

What parts have been cheapened?

As a pistol, the Glock is ...unrefined, and Sig won the Army contract.

I have a P320 and enjoy it as a pistol, though I am currently waiting on information about sending it in for the voluntary upgrade. That all said, even the GAO admitted that the major reason the P320 won was due to the notably lower cost per unit. On what little they provided in terms of performance from the evaluation there wasn't much difference between the two.
 
Beretta didn't outbid SIG by a dollar. The SIG P226 GUN was less, but Beretta beat them on spares and training.

There was a rumor that the Army and FBI wrote their RFP specs out of the SIG catalog.
Glock found a way to meet the FBI spec for less money but not the Army.
 
What was the price on the sig vs beretta?
I had always heard it that Sig accused Beretta of some how finding out the bid by nefarious means and undercut them by a dollar.
 
The Beretta bid substantially undercut the SIG bid, by way more than a dollar.

Besides, the P226 had failed in the XM9 trial during a dried mud test that then 40 year old plus 1911A1 control pistols passed. That SIG bid at all was charity to them.

And the SIG bid was unrealistic. Unlike Beretta, SIG had no factory in the US at the time of the bid and everything they made was in W. Germany and imported.

The 92FS has held the line on price against inflation for thirty years now. The P226? Not so much?
 
It was a good while, thousands and thousands of guns, before Beretta was set up in the US.

Anyhow the usual rumor was that it was a political payoff to buy Italian in exchange for IRBM basing rights.
 
Back
Top