US ArmyDown to 3

D

Doc Holliday 1950

New member
Here's my question. The bids are in and down to 3 companies to provide the US Army with a new modular side arm.
Who do you think will win and why??? I know who my $$$ is with.
Doc
 
I think it's the P320, Beretta APX, and the Detonics MTX or something like that. I'm hoping the APX takes it, I'm liking the sounds of it. And I'm not sure why the P320 is in it, they've always wanted a thumb safety.
 
Guys. McCain wanted this to be an All American deal. Baretta & Sig Sauer is out and so is Glock. So, who's left that can fulfill a 1.2 billion dollar deal?
 
Guys. McCain wanted this to be an All American deal.
Click to expand...
And where does the idiot senator think Beretta's are manufactured? I don't see Beretta not remaining the side arm provider
 
Guys. McCain wanted this to be an All American deal. Baretta & Sig Sauer is out and so is Glock.
Click to expand...

All those companies have plants stateside. The US military already uses carbines, rifles, and light machineguns made by FN, a Belgium company, because it has manufacturing capacity stateside. The same is true for Beretta and HK.
 
I'm always a little bit surprised when it turns out Detonics is still in business. They do make good pistols, though, when they can take some time off from their day jobs to build some. Detonics+STI=$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, so I don't really see them being able to get the low bid.

And, at STI's current production capacity, it would take OVER THIRTY YEARS to make enough pistols.

Uncle Sugar would have to buy the design and have someone else mass produce it. That seems logistically troublesome, so that's already a strike against them.

I'm a little disappointed Ruger decided not to compete, and especially with their new pistol.

I'm also a little disappointed FN isn't making a go of it.

So, just like last time, it's Sig vs Beretta.

I wonder if we need any more missile bases in Italy?

EDIT: And wouldn't it be cool if the CMP got the old M9's?
 
Last edited:
From what I understand since that article is about 7 months old that's just what the author thinks are going to be the top contenders correct? All the companies with bids are still in competition trials I think? I saw another article that general dynamics just made a run of barrels for the S&W entrant they're partnered for.
 
Isn't S&W throwing in with general dynamics or some such for a bid, with the M&P?


While I don't disparage the idea of replacing the current M9 with a more modern pistol... I do think the whole process of the selection has been made over complicated in a very bureaucratic way.


I don't know too much about the new Beratta, so I reserve a bit of judgement until I do.


But the Sig 320 seems to be a front runner to me... The requirements of the program seem taylor made for the 320... The modularity of the design makes it so the likelihood of retiring a serial numbered weapon very unlikely/rare. The serial number is on the sub frame, and every other part is replaceable. The slide rails are not likely to wear out for a few hundred thousand rounds, so that sub frame can keep trucking along, and all the other parts including the frame/grip and slide can be replaced several times if need be.


The new ruger design was similar, but they didn't enter.


The M&P is less modular overall, but easy to work on. It has a shot mainly due to the fact it is from an American company. Having the other company join forces with them on the ammo requirements of the program help too.

I think the ammo requirements are the reason Sig has gotten into the ammo game recently.


I don't think Detonics has the capability to keep up wit the contract requirements... So they may not be able to win unless they can prove to the government they have the ability to quickly expand production and meet the contract requirements and quality standards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top