Requests for proposal (RFPs) apparently go out in January...
http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/03/news/companies/army-gun-new-beretta/index.html
http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/03/news/companies/army-gun-new-beretta/index.html
U.S. Army wants a new gun
- Thread starter Hokiefyd
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2006
- Messages
- 2,326
I've heard this before. Now with the Republican majority, it might happen.
Those S&W M&Ps are supposed to be some pretty nice pistols. I hope they decide on the Sig P226. Great pistol!
It is pretty clear that author does not know too much about guns. He described the M16 as "mostly plastic".
I don't think the Sig 226 will do well if Sig submits it for one reason alone...cost. It lost out to the Beretta 92 on cost back then, and polymer framed guns are much cheaper to produce. So as long as a polymer gun as similar reliability, accuracy, and durability....cost will be the deciding factor.
I look for FN, Beretta, Glock, and S&W to be the main contenders because they all have US manufacturing now and produce darn fine tupperware guns.
I don't think the Sig 226 will do well if Sig submits it for one reason alone...cost. It lost out to the Beretta 92 on cost back then, and polymer framed guns are much cheaper to produce. So as long as a polymer gun as similar reliability, accuracy, and durability....cost will be the deciding factor.
I look for FN, Beretta, Glock, and S&W to be the main contenders because they all have US manufacturing now and produce darn fine tupperware guns.
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
I've always liked the 5.7 x 28 round. Very compact and quite fast. It makes for a nice shooting, low recoil, laser accurate pistol, and a lightweight, high capacity rifle.
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
I've always liked the 5.7 x 28 round. Very compact and quite fast. It makes for a nice shooting, low recoil, laser accurate pistol, and a lightweight, high capacity rifle.
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
You would never be able to access any surplus ammo as the "good stuff" is banned for civilian use.
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
You would never be able to access any surplus ammo as the "good stuff" is banned for civilian use.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
Lots of people think the 9mm is not what the .45 ACP used to be in terms of stopping power. What's the FBI use now?
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
Lots of people think the 9mm is not what the .45 ACP used to be in terms of stopping power. What's the FBI use now?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
You would never be able to access any surplus ammo as the "good stuff" is banned for civilian use.
That's bull. Any "ban" against handloading? And what, exactly, is in, say, "Banned" "government" 9MM that I can't buy at Walmart?
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
You would never be able to access any surplus ammo as the "good stuff" is banned for civilian use.
That's bull. Any "ban" against handloading? And what, exactly, is in, say, "Banned" "government" 9MM that I can't buy at Walmart?
If the Army is anything like the Navy on this one, some guy with stars will insist on having a manual safety on the firearm -- downcheck against Sig P226 unless they modify the weapon.
(Seriously...if I pull the trigger, that means that I want the weapon to fire. Unless it's an M240, of course.)
(Seriously...if I pull the trigger, that means that I want the weapon to fire. Unless it's an M240, of course.)
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
You would never be able to access any surplus ammo as the "good stuff" is banned for civilian use.
That's bull. Any "ban" against handloading? And what, exactly, is in, say, "Banned" "government" 9MM that I can't buy at Walmart?
If you read I was replying to you would see that the good stuff that is banned from civilian use is the 5.7x28mm ammo(SS190 Duty round). If the US adopted the FN Five-Seven pistol (as the one poster I was replying to was hoping for) we would not ever be able to get any surplus ammo. The military ammo is considered armor piercing and is not available for civilian purchase thanks to the BATFE.
Originally Posted By: Robenstein
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
I would jump for joy if they picked a Five-SeveN, but I know it will not happen. That would mean the 5.7x28 ammunition would go down substantially in price, and I could stockpile more.
You would never be able to access any surplus ammo as the "good stuff" is banned for civilian use.
That's bull. Any "ban" against handloading? And what, exactly, is in, say, "Banned" "government" 9MM that I can't buy at Walmart?
If you read I was replying to you would see that the good stuff that is banned from civilian use is the 5.7x28mm ammo(SS190 Duty round). If the US adopted the FN Five-Seven pistol (as the one poster I was replying to was hoping for) we would not ever be able to get any surplus ammo. The military ammo is considered armor piercing and is not available for civilian purchase thanks to the BATFE.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Kuato
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
There are issues with the performance of the old pistols. Not a waste of money at all.
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
There are issues with the performance of the old pistols. Not a waste of money at all.
I hope the selection is based on the needs of the soldier that will have that new weapon in their hands. An upgrade is long overdue but using an ammunition because it's used by someone else is not the way to make a selection. At least it's going to be interesting to watch the process unfold. There will be a lot more information available as the process proceeds than ever before. And with the prevailing corruption in our government I hope there's still a chance to make the correct selection.
Originally Posted By: Bgallagher
Those S&W M&Ps are supposed to be some pretty nice pistols. I hope they decide on the Sig P226. Great pistol!
Sigs are fairly unreliable. The older made in Germany models were outstanding. But since the CEO who ruined Kimbers quality move on to SIG, well sigs kinda suck.
Those S&W M&Ps are supposed to be some pretty nice pistols. I hope they decide on the Sig P226. Great pistol!
Sigs are fairly unreliable. The older made in Germany models were outstanding. But since the CEO who ruined Kimbers quality move on to SIG, well sigs kinda suck.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
Big issue with supply of the old (the M92) - they're WORN OUT. The Beretta became the Army's gun in 1985.
I'm a Beretta fan. I've carried guns in the USN, my wife owns one, but the simple fact is: After 35,000 rounds, the guns are simply worn out. Add the abrasive element of sand over the last few years, and those with far fewer rounds are worn out too.
So, the Army has to start buying guns...why not consider other options besides the Beretta?
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
Big issue with supply of the old (the M92) - they're WORN OUT. The Beretta became the Army's gun in 1985.
I'm a Beretta fan. I've carried guns in the USN, my wife owns one, but the simple fact is: After 35,000 rounds, the guns are simply worn out. Add the abrasive element of sand over the last few years, and those with far fewer rounds are worn out too.
So, the Army has to start buying guns...why not consider other options besides the Beretta?
I have a S&W M&P 9mm pistol. For the price, quality and reliability, it's hard to beat. Don't get me wrong, those sigs are nice, but the price tag is the down side.
Here in Canada, the RCMP have always used S&W revolvers and pistols. I'm not sure why they always have done so.
Here in Canada, the RCMP have always used S&W revolvers and pistols. I'm not sure why they always have done so.
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Kuato
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
Big issue with supply of the old (the M92) - they're WORN OUT. The Beretta became the Army's gun in 1985.
I'm a Beretta fan. I've carried guns in the USN, my wife owns one, but the simple fact is: After 35,000 rounds, the guns are simply worn out. Add the abrasive element of sand over the last few years, and those with far fewer rounds are worn out too.
So, the Army has to start buying guns...why not consider other options besides the Beretta?
I have a friend that does a lot of Ipsc and he says he goes through a gun a year, but what he does is gets a new barrel, spring and sometimes a trigger assembly. I assume you can do that with a beretta?
Originally Posted By: Kuato
More gov't waste, they'll want to replace all the "old" pistols on a two year schedule at our expense.
Any issues with supply or performance of the old? No? Then stop. wasting. money.
Big issue with supply of the old (the M92) - they're WORN OUT. The Beretta became the Army's gun in 1985.
I'm a Beretta fan. I've carried guns in the USN, my wife owns one, but the simple fact is: After 35,000 rounds, the guns are simply worn out. Add the abrasive element of sand over the last few years, and those with far fewer rounds are worn out too.
So, the Army has to start buying guns...why not consider other options besides the Beretta?
I have a friend that does a lot of Ipsc and he says he goes through a gun a year, but what he does is gets a new barrel, spring and sometimes a trigger assembly. I assume you can do that with a beretta?
- Status
