Sig P320 announced the winner of US MHS contract

It's a P320 with a manual safety and a cut for an optic. Unless you really want the designation (and I expect SIG to mark it up) its not that special.
Click to expand...

I find the manual safety desirable. The designation would be neat to have as well for historical collectortating purposes.
 
I find the manual safety desirable. The designation would be neat to have as well for historical collectortating purposes.
Click to expand...

I believe we've seen the manual safety version before, I just don't think it's made it out to the market in decent numbers http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/9170043904.

As for the designation itself, I guess. I like military firearms but honestly I prefer older pistols for collecting purposes. This is a plastic wonder that will be made in the hundreds of thousands. Now I have nothing against polymer for use, but to me it just doesn't strike me as collectible. Add in the fact that SIG already has a history of making up designations, such as the M11-A1, to sell its pistols and I don't see this as being rare. The only rarity will be short term as they try and fill the order and after that I'm sure there will be designations coming out of the demon hole. Their marketing department is going to milk the heck out of this given their passed history, and I guess I can't blame them.

To me this is as collectible as a mid 2000s Honda Civic, but hey it's a buyers' market and it's your money.
 
but hey it's a buyers' market and it's your money.
Click to expand...

Call me a boob but I just want to have one. It is after all the next U.S. service pistol. Collectible or not, it's part of the lineage now and beside I've been looking for a good striker fired 9 to play with anyhow.
 
The US never ratified the section that banned expanding bullets and frankly, restriction of bullet types during war is a silly notion. Most of the enemies the US armed forces fight now are not members of a nation's military anyway.

Pistols are a soldier's next line of defense, so the .357 Sig and it's power is well suited to the task.
Click to expand...
All true, but none of it supports a claim that the .357SIG was built for use on the battlefield. It was built for use by LE and citizens on the streets.
9mm feeds pretty well, certainly not so problematic as to adopt an entirely new caliber.
Click to expand...
Nor to justify the magazine capacity loss inherent in a bottleneck cartridge.
 
A little bit off topic, but I find the Sig P320 to be an ugly pistol. I am not a Sig Sauer hater, I own many of their products and like them very much. I only seem to have a problem with the P320, it just seems so ugly and the polymer feels very cheap and scuffs easily (unlike other polymer framed pistols).

I had to get this off my chest:

Our soldiers will be carrying an ugly pistol :(
 
wizzamen said:
A little bit off topic, but I find the Sig P320 to be an ugly pistol. I am not a Sig Sauer hater, I own many of their products and like them very much. I only seem to have a problem with the P320, it just seems so ugly and the polymer feels very cheap and scuffs easily (unlike other polymer framed pistols).

I had to get this off my chest:

Our soldiers will be carrying an ugly pistol :(
Click to expand...
I agree on all points. :D
 
If you want a SIG P320 with an external safety, find a Massachusetts-compliant model.

It has both the external safety and the "M-CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED-".
 
I initially thought it was ugly. But it had all the features (specifically the rx) I was looking for. The price was very good so I overlooked the aesthetics and fired one. The grip feel was excellent, the accuracy was very good and so was the trigger so I quickly looked past the ugly. The looks have since grown on me.

Have you seen some of the other new pistols? Way uglier btw IMO. Hk vp9? Ppq?
 
I have not had issues with the polymer on mine.

And it looks much better with a carry grip on a full size slide. Gives you a more traditional look.
 
A little bit off topic, but I find the Sig P320 to be an ugly pistol. I am not a Sig Sauer hater, I own many of their products and like them very much. I only seem to have a problem with the P320, it just seems so ugly and the polymer feels very cheap and scuffs easily (unlike other polymer framed pistols).

I had to get this off my chest:

Our soldiers will be carrying an ugly pistol
Click to expand...

War is an ugly thing.
 
"The .357 Sig is built for use on the battlefield. Sure, it's not NATO standard, but the US is likely pulling out of NATO, so there's no point in choosing a pistol to accept the same ammunition as what the Eurotrash uses. "

Pulling out of the unifying arrangement between our allies that supports our troops when deployed in an all out war? I sure to god hope this is wrong has history has supported it (ie, no WW with super powers since it)

Actually, your comment is totally offensive and historically indefensible.
 
Good for sig. They were the lowest bid. So now they can make the pistols cheaper for the military and charge us civilians more to make up the difference. Again Good for sig.. Now they just have to figure out what caliber they want. Hope its not one that I have cause then the ammo will go up too...
 
Don't forget it's all about the UID sticker, sig will introduce the mil config quickly judging by how their marketing been running lately
 
Trump might surplus them through CMP. I think the congressional authorization is in place, so he would just need to make the decision.
Without outside influence they will be put into storage with ongoing costs.
The bean counters will want them melted down because that might just be the cheapest way to dispose of them.
 
Because the Gov. will buy up all the ammo in that caliber in bulk so it will be rarer and harder to find. That will bring the cost of that ammo. It sounds nut but just look at the price history of 45 acp and 9mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top