Army Chooses Sig Sauer P320 As Next Service Pistol

[ShootSpeeders]

Caliber hasn't been picked yet but it will almost certainly be another piddly 9mm to keep the girls happy. So why not stick with what we have? The Beretta 9mm is fine if you like a 9.

Army Chooses Sig Sauer P320 As Next Service Pistol

jan 19 2017 The U.S. Army on Thursday awarded Sig Sauer a contract worth $580 million to make the service’s next service pistol.

Sig Sauer beat out Glock Inc., FN America and Beretta USA, the maker of the current M9 9mm service pistol.

“I am tremendously proud of the Modular Handgun System team,” Army Acquisition Executive Steffanie Easter said in a Jan.19 press announcement. “By maximizing full and open competition across our industry partners, we have optimized private sector advancements in handguns, ammunition and magazines, and the end result will ensure a decidedly superior weapon system for our warfighters.”

The Army did not offer any details about what caliber the new Sig Sauer pistol will be.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Should we even issue handguns to our troops? Handguns are important to cops and civilians but not to a soldier - to them a handgun is just a confidence builder.

 

[NLT]

should go back to the 1911.45 cal

 

[Silent Warrior]

I believe that the Army's main concerns with the M9 were that it's not accurate enough, not lethal, and not reliable for the service's purposes. The Army has not stated what caliber the new Sig will be, but they make it in .357 and other hard hitting calibers.

 

[Silent Warrior]

Should we even issue handguns to our troops? Handguns are important to cops and civilians but not to a soldier - to them a handgun is just a confidence builder.

Most handguns are issued to MP's and officers. The regular grunt doesn't carry one.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Should we even issue handguns to our troops? Handguns are important to cops and civilians but not to a soldier - to them a handgun is just a confidence builder.

Most handguns are issued to MP's and officers. The regular grunt doesn't carry one.

Oh yes they do. Even if they have to buy it themselves. Grunts like handguns but the brass knows that's kinda silly.

 

[Tom Horn]

I believe that the Army's main concerns with the M9 were that it's not accurate enough, not lethal, and not reliable for the service's purposes. The Army has not stated what caliber the new Sig will be, but they make it in .357 and other hard hitting calibers.

It's said the M9's best self-defense capability is throwing it at an enemy.

Trump should cancel any contract that doesn't involve AMERICAN-MADE RUGER.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I believe that the Army's main concerns with the M9 were that it's not accurate enough, not lethal, and not reliable for the service's purposes. The Army has not stated what caliber the new Sig will be, but they make it in .357 and other hard hitting calibers.

10mm or .40 caliber, maybe?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

I believe that the Army's main concerns with the M9 were that it's not accurate enough, not lethal, and not reliable for the service's purposes. The Army has not stated what caliber the new Sig will be, but they make it in .357 and other hard hitting calibers.

357 is essentially the same caliber as a 9 and just slightly faster. Don't military rules specify FMJ ammo which means it still won't hit like a 45. Furthermore putting a 357 in an auto has always been a problem because the cartridges are so long and since they are contained in the grip, it takes a long finger to reach the trigger.

Anyway - even if the sig is slighly better than the beretta, is it worth $600 million to make the switch? And that figure is almost certain to be way too low. This switch with likely cost several billion dollars.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Trump should cancel any contract that doesn't involve AMERICAN-MADE RUGER.

Ruger is a great company - no doubt about that. A great american success story. Put Bill Ruger on our $20 bill instead of that silly harriet tubman.

 

[Silent Warrior]

I would go with the .45 myself, but they never asked me.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

I would go with the .45 myself, but they never asked me.

Girls can't shoot it. Of course we could give the men a 45 and the girls a 9 mm but that would be admitting girls are inferior and it's better to let soldiers die.

 

[Silent Warrior]

Not much of a reason. My wife shoots my .45 with no problem and handles it well like many women do. The idea that the recoil is too much for a woman is a myth. Now a .44 mag, that's another story.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Not much of a reason. My wife shoots my .45 with no problem and handles it well like many women do. The idea that the recoil is too much for a woman is a myth.

Then your wife is an amazon. The army found out in vietnam that even small men have a problem with the 45.

 

[Silent Warrior]

I suppose that's supposed to be insulting, but is actually funny. How many 112lb Amazons do you know? The recoil is handlable to small women with training. If the army had problems with small men unable to handle it perhaps that was during don't ask don't tell. I see women at the range constantly shooting the .45 on a 1911 frame. Many are quite tiny and have no problem.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

I suppose that's supposed to be insulting, but is actually funny. How many 112lb Amazons do you know? The recoil is handlable to small women with training.

Most men can handle the recoil of a 45 without training. So you advocate spending more money to give our female soldiers special treatment.

 

[Silent Warrior]

Nope, I advocate using a better caliber weapon. Isn't weapons training already part of basic? During that training couldn't they be trained to handle the recoil along with your small men? Do you advocate arming untrained soldiers?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Nope, I advocate using a better caliber weapon. Isn't weapons training already part of basic? During that training couldn't they be trained to handle the recoil along with your small men? Do you advocate arming untrained soldiers?

I advocate ending affirmative action. If women can't do the job, they shouldn't have it. THINK, you man-hating feminist.

 

[bripat9643]

should go back to the 1911.45 cal

Nah, a .357 magnum has much more hitting power and less recoil.

 

[jasonnfree]

Nope, I advocate using a better caliber weapon. Isn't weapons training already part of basic? During that training couldn't they be trained to handle the recoil along with your small men? Do you advocate arming untrained soldiers?

I advocate ending affirmative action. If women can't do the job, they shouldn't have it. THINK, you man-hating feminist.

I'm not sure about America, but Russia had women snipers during ww2 that were pretty deadly, so they were able to do the job. And some of them appear to be just young teenagers.

The deadly Soviet women snipers that terrorized Nazis