New FBI handgun

Which handgun do they have in mind? By not even mentioning those requirements in your post, this is basically a drive-by.
 
The link says it's the SIG P320 series. The RFP specifies features to include it and exclude most of the competitors.

Because of that the article speculates it's preselected. Remains to be seen.
 
Skimmed through the article. Seems that the FBI has basically tailor-made the RFP to fit only the Sig P320. I'm personally not a fan of Sig's high bore axis on all of their handguns. With the Army looking at the P320 as well I guess Sig is Uncle Sam's new golden child when it comes to handguns.
 
Sorry for the almost-drive-by, I didn't think I should repeat the entire article in my original post.

But I agree on Sig not being my favorite. I understand not wanting a safety or decocker or whatever, but limiting it based on backstraps, finger grooves, and barrel length?

Barrel length itself disqualified two great guns, the M&P9 and FNS9, both of which I'd pick over the Sig.

And no finger grooves eliminates the G17/19, which I'd think makes the most sense. They're already trained on Glock, and their armorers (I'm assuming they have some) wouldn't need to recertify on Sigs.
 
I agree that Glocks, while not my favorite handguns, are the most logical choice for the FBI for exactly the reason you mentioned. The FBI would save a ton of money and training time switching to the G17 and G19 instead of any other company's pistol.

That said I personally have a preference for CZs. Given the reason that the FBI is switching calibers, a handgun that soaks up recoil like the steel frames CZs would male perfect sense.
 
^Not sure I think it makes "perfect" sense. 9mm out of any of the medium to large frames polymer striker fired pistols is easily doable. I certainly don't see the FBI going from a striker fired pistol back to DA/SA or SAO. I'd think they'd want to keep the manual of arms pretty consistent. Why they don't simply switch to 9mm Glocks is pretty ludicrous to me.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting, their criteria is so tight, it would appear they decided on the final solution then published the criteria that selects that solution. And disqualifying the M&P for a slight difference in trigger weight (an easy change for you and I in the aftermarket, even easier for S&W).

Exactly what they did on IWIN, a billion dollar bungle of your tax dollars and the unforgetable "Virtual Case File", and many other questionable contracts.
 
For S&W to not submit a M&P that meets the trigger pull critera is strange to me. They already make the M&P pro that makes the barrel length spec. Just produce an FBI trigger (ala Glocks NY trigger) and recapture some of the American LE market
 
Assuming they do go 9mm for ALL agents I would be shocked if it didn't play out in some way to be a Glock 17 or 19. RFP specifics or not.

My overall take is
Cheaper ammo
Same training
Same holsters
Same general parts/supply chain
Same distribution channels/relationships
History of reliability and durability
Dirt cheap pistols for a federal LE contract.

I just think it's a bit of a dog and pony show. I think there will be agents still carrying .40 GLOCKS for some time and I think the switchover to 9mm will go to Glock unless the reality of it ends up being a much smaller group of agents (desk guys vs field)

I have been wrong more times then I can count so take it for what it's worth.
 
Glocks To FBI...AGAIN?

Most posts support FBI return to Glock pistols for many good,solid,reasons.And yet,Logic,can become a problem for some. Skeets
 
So the FBI, with roughly 10,000 agents worldwide, is going to change firearms to one with "no significant difference in ballistic performance" because ___________ . There has to be a good reason in there somewhere. The guns they are using now (G22 and G23) are not likely breaking down at unacceptable rates. I get that 9MM ammo is slightly cheaper (and I expect slightly is a key word when you are talking government sized contracts) but the cost of reequipping and retraining all those agents is not going to be small either.
 
I have the Glock23 .40 and it's been a really good handgun.
I think the love affair between the FBI and Glock,has come to an end.
And because they have a lot of women now in the FBI, they wanted to go with a 9mm.
Also today we have a lot of really good 9mm Ammo. that meets the FBIs requirements.
I still would not be surprised to see them staying with Glock, and going with a Glock 9mm.
But if Sig has a better pricing then it's going to be a Sig.
 
Last edited:
Talk about government waste. The contract is worth $80 million for 10,000 agents - that's $8,000 per agent (or gun). Even with the spare parts, inert practice/training guns, etc., that seems way excessive. They could easily re-fit their existing 40's with 9mm barrels (and any other misc parts, magazines) for less than $200 per gun.

And like mentioned above, and in the article, the RFP was written around the Sig 320. Before this is over, there'll be protests by other manufacturers, dragging this out and possibly allowing some change. But, in the end, the FBI will get their way. It's all part of the 'rigged system'.
 
Surprise surprise - Just a .40 under a different name. I guess 10mm and .40 were just too powerful; 9mm too wimpy, so they opt to go with a .357 sig in a small polymer frame. FBI = Fumbling Bumbling I...., well bureaucratic waste at its finest using taxpayer dollars.

I say give the FBI agents Rossi .357 revolvers and call it a day. The world will be safer, the agents will be safer and taxpayer's interests protected.
 
Surprise surprise - Just a .40 under a different name. I guess 10mm and .40 were just too powerful; 9mm too wimpy, so they opt to go with a .357 sig in a small polymer frame.
Click to expand...

Unless I really missed something, the contract is for a 9mm.
 
Having a gun is one thing. Having mostly handguns to fight a military veteran who served in the U.S. Army Rangers during the Vietnam War and was armed with a rifle is a different thing.
 
My two cents.

The FBI has had problems with agents qualifying and re-certifying with the .40's. So a decision was made to go back to 9mm - where they were in the 80's. I am going to go on record here as I have other places and say that there has been no "significant" improvement of a quality 9mm bullet from that time till now.

Fancy terms and marketing may make it seem so. But a basic copper jacket and lead core hollow point is still that. So if the 9mm was too whimpy then, what makes it so much better now ?!

And I know that many folks will disagree with that assessment.

The most sensical thing is to simply switch over to the Glock 17/19. But I know how disfunctional the government is and how just as many times as not common sense, and even smart fiscally responsible moves have NOTHING to do with the decision making process.

SIG sales continues to pat the right backs and for reasons I still don't get after many years has a very clear back channel into government contracts. Look no further than the Secret Services steady reliance on SIG's. I am not surprised at all that this contract favors or nearly specifies a SIG.

Regards,

Rob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top