Army chooses new service pistol

A place for sharing news stories related to armed citizens, law enforcement & 2A/CCW topics.

Please note that when linking to an article you must cite the source URL and provide no more than a brief preview of the article to ensure fair-use standards are met.

NO DOCUMENT DUMPING.

Posts in violation of these rules are subject to immediate deletion without warning.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Brian D.
Posts: 16229
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Army chooses new service pistol

Post by Brian D. »

Mr. Glock wrote:
carmen fovozzo wrote:Trump isn't going to like it....He's on a Made in America trip..
Don't worry, they will put up a US factory. Beretta did.
SIG has been operating U.S. manufacturing facilities for a long time already, guys.
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!

********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
User avatar
catfish86
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 2571
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:44 pm

Re: Army chooses new service pistol

Post by catfish86 »

Mr. Glock wrote:The 9x19 (and 5.56 also) will be here for years to come, even if we drop out of NATO. The 9mm, for the same reasons that LEOs are switching back- easier to shoot within the diverse army we have today- and it is not a primary war-fighting weapons system. The 5.56 because there has been no sizable improvement in different ammo options (that aren't significantly larger/heavier/costlier per round) that would make a switch outweigh the costs.
http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammo/6-5mm ... t-to-have/

The 6.5mm Grendel would be a marked improvement. Lethality is much better and so is range...M16/M4 are easily converted. Of course, I am a .40 man myself for pistols. Yes sir...a chicken in every pot, 40S&W and 6.5 Grendel...I'm running for President...
:wink:
God,
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can
and the Wisdom to know the difference.

Carrying a gun is a right, not a crime.

Gun control is racist.
User avatar
Mr. Glock
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 8965
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: Army chooses new service pistol

Post by Mr. Glock »

Brian D. wrote:
Mr. Glock wrote:
carmen fovozzo wrote:Trump isn't going to like it....He's on a Made in America trip..
Don't worry, they will put up a US factory. Beretta did.
SIG has been operating U.S. manufacturing facilities for a long time already, guys.
Yes, but they will no doubt be investing in another one or a nice expansion. That's how DoD procurement works for this sort of thing.
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
User avatar
Mr. Glock
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 8965
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: Army chooses new service pistol

Post by Mr. Glock »

catfish86 wrote:
Mr. Glock wrote:The 9x19 (and 5.56 also) will be here for years to come, even if we drop out of NATO. The 9mm, for the same reasons that LEOs are switching back- easier to shoot within the diverse army we have today- and it is not a primary war-fighting weapons system. The 5.56 because there has been no sizable improvement in different ammo options (that aren't significantly larger/heavier/costlier per round) that would make a switch outweigh the costs.
http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammo/6-5mm ... t-to-have/

The 6.5mm Grendel would be a marked improvement. Lethality is much better and so is range...M16/M4 are easily converted. Of course, I am a .40 man myself for pistols. Yes sir...a chicken in every pot, 40S&W and 6.5 Grendel...I'm running for President...
:wink:
The sizable increase in the rim diameter doesn't mean as much in a civilian gun, but I'd guess it makes a difference in sustained full auto.

That said, the day the Army picks up the 6.5 G and 40, I'll send you $1,000 :mrgreen:
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
Tru-Heathen
Posts: 694
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 1:17 pm
Location: Hardin County

Re: Army chooses new service pistol

Post by Tru-Heathen »

https://www.armytimes.com/articles/army ... -sig-sauer

Bought one almost a year ago. :wink:

The Army wanted a manual safety added to the P320, wasn't an issue. Sig has had that as an option; since some law enforcement agencies require one on their issued duty guns.

Image
A wayfarer should not walk unarmed,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need a spear,
Or what menace meet on the road.

- Verse 38 from the Havamal, the Wisdom of Odin.
Sasquatch.45
Posts: 570
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:05 pm
Location: Bellevue Ohio

Re: Army chooses new service pistol

Post by Sasquatch.45 »

catfish86 wrote:
The 6.5mm Grendel would be a marked improvement. Lethality is much better and so is range...
:wink:
While I will leave the subject of range for future debate, One could argue that tactically, the reduction of lethality is a (sadisticlly) useful attribute.
If you shoot and kill fifty enimy combatants, You create fifty fallen 'comrades' 'heroes', 'martyrs', who's enraged... hundred(s) of 'best buddies' / 'comrades in arms'... Are now hot with bloodlust for revenge.
While an imperfectly placed 5.56 round lacks instant lethality of larger caliber projectiles, its pronounced tendency to yawl and tumble after impact lends it to causing grievous and debilitating wounds that mangle muscle, shatter bone and cause all sorts of mayhim to adjacent organ systems.

It doesn't make a "neat little .22 puncture hole" that you just 'suck it up' and ignore, while you soldier on...
Each wounded combatant is now an bleeding mess who is in desperate need of medical attention... His two best buddies, now, instead of avenging his death, are now out of the fight, administering first aid, trying to stop the bleeding, and carrying him off the field in a desperate attempt to get him to medical treatment so that they can keep him alive.

Witnessing a sudden death can be demoralizing, and disturbing... But it pales in comparison to witnessing the horrors of the stifled gasps and groans of the suffering wounded, especially when the wounded is one of your beloved brothers.

A dead man, you step over, run past, and angrily, stowickly seek to avenge... You grieve for them after the battle.
Worst comes to worst, you can use a corps to lay behind as a meat baricade...it can absorb some shrapnel, and you can pillage his supplies when you start to run low on amo...

Short term, A dead soldier costs a body-bag and a few blisters, if and when his comrade get around to digging a temporary grave to roll his corps into.

An injured soldier continues to need to be fed clothed, and cared for... When you add in the bandages, medication, protection from elements, and provision for all of the many special needs of the recovery and rehabilitation process, you find that caring for a single wounded soldier can divert and consume two or three times the total resources of a healthy, functional soldier.

In short when you kill an enimy, you take one of his men out of the fight.
When you wound an enimy, you take three of them out of the fight.

A dead combatant ceases to consume resources... wounded combatants continues to drain resources, divert man power, strain moral and tax logistics and support infrastructure..

If you kill half of a fighting force, the other half remains as a functional force, and can continue to be a credible threat as long as they have both supplies and will.
If you maim or critically would half of an enemy force, you reduce the entire force to shambles. They can not possibly deal with the massive logistical nightmare of caring for so many criticality wounded and simultaneously remain a credible fighting force.

In a twisted way, it lends one to take a rather cinical view of the 'more humanitarian use of less-lethal implements of war'.
No law of prohibition ever prevented a crime of violence, They simply provide a framework for punishment for those who fail to commit suicide after going postal.

The devil never made me do anything…However, he did have a couple of really cool ideals…
User avatar
HancockCountyHAl
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 7:48 pm
Location: Hancock County, Ohio

Re: Army chooses new service pistol

Post by HancockCountyHAl »

true_pair wrote:[
I believe when Sig says frame they are referring to the serialized steel frame and the trigger group. What we would consider a frame is called grip module. So according to their own terminology the frame is indeed steel
That must be it. It certainly looked like another polymer gun, but it had me interested for a while.
HancockCountyHaL
User avatar
catfish86
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 2571
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 12:44 pm

Re: Army chooses new service pistol

Post by catfish86 »

http://www.popularmechanics.com/militar ... -handguns/

Popular Mechanics did a history of US Military sidearms. Quite interesting and I thought of this thread.
God,
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can
and the Wisdom to know the difference.

Carrying a gun is a right, not a crime.

Gun control is racist.
Post Reply