why did DoD reject the S&W M&P?

That thread is from 2001. No examples of any polymer framed guns were given melting in the sun in that thread.

Can anyone link to a verified report, with pics, of a polymer framed gun melting in the sun anywhere?

To a report from any reliable news source or website?

Polymer framed guns have been available and in use for over 30 years in handguns, double that in long guns. Can anyone link to a verifiable report of a gun melting in the sun under common use?

The U.S. military conducts training and maneuvers in the Mojave desert. I have seen no reports of M16s or M4s melting. Can anyone find one?

There are 4 major deserts in the continental U.S. Great Basin, Mojave, Chihuahuan, and the Sonoran. Any reports of melting guns in the sun at any of these under normal use? I allow that if I put a gun in the full sun sitting on a steel plate and leave it there for a few weeks or months that there will be damage. But that's not normal use.

We have nothing but speculation so far and too much of that I think.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary back up. Assumptions and imaginings don't make it.

tipoc
 
Yep. Here the proof Glocks melt when sticking them to the dashboard of a car.
It wasnt James Yeager who said it but the Yankemarshall here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CrzyMBex1sQ

Quote: “I have seen Glock melting frame while sticking in dashboard of a car“. For whatever valid that testimony may be.

If people have seen Glock frames melting then it must be true.
 
If people have seen Glock frames melting then it must be true.
Click to expand...

Yup, anything read on the internet is true.

FWIW Yankee clarifies in the comments, the first one below the video, that he didn't see the pistol melt firsthand. He saw the aftermath of what was claimed to be a melted Glock from that situation.

You didn't pay much attention did you? I said I saw the display a local gunshop had on their counter and it is an example of the types of arguments some people make against Glocks. Anyone that has been to the gunroom in Portland has seen it. So call all the BS you want. You will still be wrong.
Click to expand...

And then folks correct him by pointing out that his comment doesn't jive with what he claimed in the video.

The fact that you keep going with this despite it being explained to you across multiple threads from multiple people and even a mod telling you that it's both off topic and ridiculous tells me that you have a clear bias you're never going to get over.
 
Last edited:
The Federal Government is not going to publish information that will prejudice the reputation of a Corporation's products. Military acquisition is as much a political process as an economic one, and the Business community who runs the Government is not interesting in seeing their product sales drop after a military test program.

A century from now, if the test results are still around, maybe you will get to see what happened, but don't count on it. All you need to know is that one weapon was selected.
 
The P320 was the winner in a competition for a MODULAR gun. It was simply the best design and is a true modular design. The trigger/action group comes out in one piece and you can change calibers without much if any mods. The P320 does not have a lock that disables the pistol either.
 
Even the 34 oz would be just barely heavy enough for me for an 9mm Luger pistol.
Plastik pistols in the ballpark of 22 oz are too lite for the caliber (tto much kick and muzzle flip).
34 oz is about right for an 9mm Luger pistol.
Click to expand...
Just weight? There are several other factors that add up in determining how much muzzle flip/recoil a gun has. Things like bore axis, grip location, balance, gun fit, and the power of the load would be some examples. Because there are so many different factors it can lead to a lighter gun having less recoil/muzzle flip that a heavier one.
 
I wonder how the Luger P08 would compare in modern trials.

If you want ergonomics and a pistol designed to be held and shot single handed i read go for Luger P08.
Modern pistols almost all gave to be shot double handed.
 
The Luger was a great design... for the early 1900s...

Accuracy could be excellent, but the gun didn't take well to dirty environments, and magazines could be more-easily damaged than you'd expect.

(The original ones were hand fit -- nowadays, of course, they'd have better production methods, using CNC technology. But they'd have to do a redesign to get past the 8-round capacity.)

I've had two, and they're great-looking guns. Both of mine were tack-drivers. Unique. They could be finicky.
 
The Federal Government is not going to publish information that will prejudice the reputation of a Corporation's products. Military acquisition is as much a political process as an economic one, and the Business community who runs the Government is not interesting in seeing their product sales drop after a military test program.

A century from now, if the test results are still around, maybe you will get to see what happened, but don't count on it. All you need to know is that one weapon was selected.
Click to expand...

Well sometimes...

As a result of law suits and congressional hearings we knew about all that anyone could about the trials, tests and procedures that resulted in teh selection of the M9 and M11 back in the 1980s. All the essentials became public.

I think It will be a lot less than a century before we'll know.

tipoc
 
The way it would run in Southamerica is: SIG had put down a bigger “downpayment“ in form as distributive bribery to most important decision takers.
I am sure the US reached some degrees of similar levels as well.

As long as the gun does not shoot backwards too often economics decide all.

Besides that SIG P250/P320 is the best bet after all.
For sure SIG won against Berettas model because they offer the P320 a long time already in different calibers.
A great way to choose your caliber as well. The modularity is really the way to go for a plastik gun.
 
Last edited:
As a result of law suits and congressional hearings we knew about all that anyone could about the trials, tests and procedures that resulted in teh selection of the M9 and M11 back in the 1980s. All the essentials became public.
Click to expand...

Congress is a big bunch of horse's asses but there are limits what information they can release. They have classified briefings and they have briefings out side of the public view. For example, where is the copy of the Torture Report? I think it got deleted. Opps! :rolleyes:

The Program Manager who brought the pistol program through its down select briefed my Gun Club about the process. It was very interesting. I am certain that some of the slides I saw, never made it into the general public.

As for what makes it into the public domain, just take a look in the Commerce Business Daily for everything the Government is buying, and find anywhere in any of the descriptions for procurement's where the results will be released to the public:

http://www.cbd-net.com/index.php/doc/home
 
The Sig Sauer company produces arms and ammunition as well as training to purchasers of their products. The P320 is a quality example of a modular gun that is easy to maintain as it is to shoot. They have a world wide reputation for quality products that fill not only the police and military roles but other roles as well.
S&W has a shabby reputation when it comes to building quality. Their air weight revolvers crack at the frame/barrel junction even using factory ammunition. The S&W autos do not stand out in any capacity and certainly don't have the reputation that Sig Sauer has. If S&W wants to sell guns to the military they need to return to making strong guns with modern production of modern designs. Like Colt, they can only live off their past reputation for so long. Mediocre guns from a mediocre manufacturer have no place in the military and police market today.
 
Because it wasn't a Glock?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's probably the reason. Probably also the reason that they rejected the Glock entry. :rolleyes:
If people have seen Glock frames melting then it must be true.
Click to expand...
Maybe the car was on fire. A Glock frame should stand up to temps anywhere under 400 degrees F. It will not melt until it gets above 400 degrees F. The actual temperature limit is probably significantly higher than that, but that's a good safe number.

The plastic does soften somewhat (which is not the same as melting) at lower temps, but as long as the frame is under about 260 degrees F it should be strong enough to be fired without cooling it down first. If it's over 260 degrees F, it should be allowed to cool before firing.

260 degrees is well above the boiling point of water which is 212 degrees F. So as long as you're not getting a Glock frame up well over the boiling point of water, you can fire it (with gloves) without fear that it will be damaged.

This video shows a dashboard getting up over 190 degrees F with the outside temperature of about 110 degrees F.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnpSABil6zg

This study, performed in Iraq, suggests that temps can "approach" 212 degrees F (100 degrees C).

https://www.researchgate.net/public...e_Distribution_Inside_Parked_Automobile_Cabin

That is still not nearly hot enough to melt a Glock frame--or the frame of any other pistol made from a polymer similar to what Glock uses. In fact, it's not even hot enough to soften it to the point that it would be unsafe to use it.

By the way, here is the 350+ page document that the military put out to explain what they were looking for and how to submit entries.

https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=6b270ab67d59ba947c5fdbc3e97ee8e2

That doesn't include all the detailed specifications for the pistol. There are other documents that apparently aren't available for public download.

The above document does state that the reliability of the handgun would be evaluated "in both extreme high temperature and extreme low temperature environments". One could assume that the military wrote several hundred pages specifying what kind of pistol they wanted but then forgot that they should have reminded the manufacturer that it shouldn't melt when left in a vehicle in the desert. But I don't think that would be the most reasonable assumption to make.
 
Likely because they wanted a MHS aka modular hand gun system. And SIG is the only one that is truly that.
SW nope
Glock nope
SIG yup the sn part is the trigger group which is swappable between the frames in different sizes and calibers.

Truly a modular set up.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Its almost like they wrote rules for the firearm manufacturer they wanted. Thats never ever happened before in government...;)
 
This is an important part of the solicitation:

The MHS procurement is intended to be an open caliber competition, which means the choice of caliber is left to the discretion of the
Offeror. Offerors are permitted to submit up to two (2) proposals configured to the specific caliber it chooses for evaluation. If an
Offeror chooses to submit two (2) proposals, their submissions must each be chambered in a different cartridge of the Offeror's
choosing. In addition, each proposal must be submitted independently from each other.
Click to expand...

Ya gotta like how they left this bit up to the manufacturers. They could not decide on a caliber. At first it was that they wanted something that hit harder than a 9mm. This sparked a few years of gun store and internet discussion about what they were maybe gonna switch to. Smart bets were they would stay with the 9mm and ball ammo, which is what they ended doing.

On the other hand it did present any manufacturer who had some new ammo they wanted the Army to look at, a chance. Well something that resembled a chance anyway. Mostly it gave the military an opportunity to say that they gave manufacturers a chance.

Someday we may learn exactly who, other than FN, submitted any guns in any other caliber than 9 and a few 40 S&Ws.

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