Who will US Army pick

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kinda surprised HK isn't in this fight--having won a light machine gun contract and their pistols I've heard are liked by some SF's.
 
Frankly, except for the silly magazine disconnect, I don't see a lot wrong with the MkIII Browning Hi-Powers. It's almost certainly more small hand-friendly than the Beretta.
Click to expand...

Even more so for the Browning HP-DA. Grip is approximately the same size as the SA Hi-Power, it's hi-cap, and, best of all, it's all steel.
 
Just for grins does anybody remember how many 'studies', how many 'trials', how many 'competitions' and how many 'reviews' were done and how long these went on before the venerable 1911 was actually replaced by the M9?

I know it was years and years but I don't recall how many years and how many 'studies' were done to get the change.
 
I don't see the Army going to the Glock or any other striker fired gun, they are big on manual safeties.
Click to expand...

Most of the Special Forces guys have already gone with Glocks. I look for the Army to drop the silly trials and simply do the same. All the testing has already been done. They just need to look at the data.

If 65% of our nations cops can carry Glocks on a daily basis there is no reason not to trust our troops with one. Probably 90% of the troops already own one anyway.
 
If 65% of our nations cops can carry Glocks on a daily basis there is no reason not to trust our troops with one.
Click to expand...

Other than the fact that there aren't any 17 year olds that have never held a gun before that are cops..............
 
zincwarrior: Its Hi-Point. Trust me.

You make it sound like POTUS will decide
Click to expand...

They're getting a special price. Buy the new Hi-Point carbine and get the pistol free!

Seriously though, I don't see why the military would change.
1. Nothing wrong with the Beretta-its a side arm.
2. There are budget constraints. The pistol contract doesn't spend enough money! :eek:
 
I'll believe it when I see it, but a nice semi modular system with multiple sizes and one manual of arms for all DOES seem like a good idea, especially if it is lighter than the M9.
 
DaleA,

The first prototype of what became the M1911 was the Colt M1905. The final prototype submitted was an M1910 modified to include a thumb safety lock. Thus, the process took roughly five years, with the Army doing a lot of testing along the way. As I recall, other interim prototypes, each incorporating feedback from the Army, were the M1907 and the M1909.
 
jmr40 said:
Most of the Special Forces guys have already gone with Glocks.
Click to expand...
But the vast majority of soldiers are—by definition—NOT Special Forces.
FITASC said:
My understanding was that there was also the requirement to supply a certain quantity of ammunition and that S&W had partnered with an ammo maker (Remington?) and was the only one to do so. Did I misread that?
Click to expand...
I read the same thing. The other company is General Dynamics, which is basically unknown on the American commercial gun market, but has a long and storied history as a defense contractor and provides a substantial percentage of U.S. military ammo as I understand it. The article (which I'll search out later) made the point that GD's participation is a major coup for S&W because it offsets their perceived lack of experience with modern U.S. military contract work.
 
There is one important item that I forgot to add to this post. From what I could
gather, The United States Army seems to be placing a high value on

"MADE IN AMERICA"

"GO ARMY"

Respectfully,

Doc
 
Last edited:
I'm still betting Ruger. American company. American design. Manufactured in America.

Ruger is the largest right now and they have the resources.

AND the grip modules are three sided, not one. The length and width are both adjustable and the grip modules must be MUCH MUCH cheaper than the Sig accessories. Several dollars with originals included compared to hundreds for the sig sets.

The CEO did not say they were not entering the competition. Find and re-read the statement Ruger gave if you think he did.
 
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...y-finally-releases-solicitation-for-xm17-mhs/

But the likely challenge for competitors is navigating the intricacies of the military’s program and costs — reasons why Mike Fifer, chief executive officer of Sturm, Ruger & Company, told investors in July during a conference call why Ruger is not participating.

“There’s enormous cause to participate and an extremely low likelihood for any one company of winning it,” he said.

“If you win it, obviously you’re in the capital receipt for the next 25 years, but I have a feeling competing for it’s going to be a little bit like being hit against a brick wall, and you’ll feel real good when you stop,” he said.

“The risk factor of putting the huge investment of time, people and money into competing for something that there’s really very low likelihood of winning even if you have a much better product,” he said. “And so those are kind of the pros and cons right there.”
Click to expand...
 
Kinda surprised HK isn't in this fight--having won a light machine gun contract and their pistols I've heard are liked by some SF's.
Click to expand...

I love my HKs but personally I can't see HK in the running due to their financial difficulties.
 
SIG is showing a P320 model with a manual safety at SHOT 2016.
Click to expand...

This if they can pass the reliability tests which they could not last time they entered a gun into a large trial like this. Last time it was the P250 which is what the P320 is based on with a striker assembly not a DAO hammer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top