How many slides have blown off a Sig so far??? That's what I thought...
You should do some research so you don’t sound so ignorant. The broken slides and cracked frames in beretta 92 AND sig p226 were caused by grossly over pressured ammo. Not by gun design.
The beretta was and is a fine pistol. The lockup design has seen extensive military use since 1938
How many slides have blown off a Sig so far??? That's what I thought...
You should do some research so you don’t sound so ignorant. The broken slides and cracked frames in beretta 92 AND sig p226 were caused by grossly over pressured ammo. Not by gun design.
The beretta was and is a fine pistol. The lockup design has seen extensive military use since 1938
Yes, when Beretta examined the 9mm rounds the US Military had produced to be issued with the M9 they discovered that they were loaded to proof levels of pressure (45,700 psi), not standard service pressure of 36,500 psi. No 9mm handgun could have stood up to them for long. Beretta, in fact, sued the US Military and won on a libel claim, since their business suffered based on the Military's claim there was something wrong with Beretta steel. In fact, the only reason Beretta beefed their guns up after this was that the US Military didn't know how many of the proof level 9mm rounds were still in military supplies around the world, and paid Beretta extra for the beefed up guns for that reason.
Woodsman was referring to the first trials in the early 1980s when the slides cracked on some of the Berettas, injuring a handful US service personnel.
I know. I’m well versed on the 80s trial and the early ammo issues causing failures in the beretta 92 and the sig p226.
I was referring to the 2017-18 trail. I think the Glock was the obvious choice. Iirc it was a 19 upper on a 17 frame they submitted. That would have been a good choice though I prefer the standard Glock 17.
Truth be told none are a significant upgrade to the beretta…but I’m sure after almost 40 years they were getting worn out. Both the P226 and the 92 are awesome pistols.
My real life experience with the M9 for both service use, extensive marksmanship competitions, and my personal 92FS.
Far too big for the cartridge particularly 9mm ball, bulky grip which females and dudes with smaller hands found challenging, and some magazines from one manufacturer that were garbage (but of course the pistol took the blame). Also, no possibility of changing sights or mounting lights/lasers until the M9A3.
The other side of the coin: I won 3 matches with mine so they are accurate (just like the 1911 when they aren't slap arsed worn out), utterly reliable (see the magazine comment), and a real beast when loaded with modern HP's for home defense.
To say the Sig wasn't tested is a fallacy. The real draw of the P320 design for we in the military was the grip modules which could be tailored to large or small hands. The same weapon was easily converted for OSI or other troops that need a small, concealable pistol. Plus it reduces inventory as the undercover weapon was the Sig M11 (P228 and P229 in 9MM). Also, better sights and a pic rail for accessories.
My experience shows that both weapons have plusses and minuses, but both have their place. My experience tends to favor the Sig.
Stowing my soapbox.
Pershing 1A. No city too big, no populated area too small. We even get the roaches.
Wonder how many conversations sounded just like this when the M9 replaced the 1911.
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same... President Ronald Reagan
He says the Beretta was better, and that they never did the testing on the Sig before adoption.
I think that guy takes the opposite view of the popular opinion, no matter what.
Watched a few of his videos, but stopped when he spent an entire video trashing the M-14 as a worthless failure.
It seems he makes a point to trash whatever military arms replaced the previous ones... Granted, some military rifles could have been better, but many were cornerstones of today's modern arms.
He says the Beretta was better, and that they never did the testing on the Sig before adoption.
I think that guy takes the opposite view of the popular opinion, no matter what.
Watched a few of his videos, but stopped when he spent an entire video trashing the M-14 as a worthless failure.
It seems he makes a point to trash whatever military arms replaced the previous ones... Granted, some military rifles could have been better, but many were cornerstones of today's modern arms.
My cousin was a sniper in the Canadian Armed Forces and served in Afghanistan. For sidearms, the CAF have traditionally used the Browning Hi-Power. I am surprised to see that they are transitioning to the SIG P320. I had not heard that, but I guess that at some time you have to retire the Hi-Power which was adopted in 1944.
Since retiring from the CAF, my cousin has been involved in several ventures, including training civilian shooters in long range shooting and training Iraqi Armed forces as a contractor. As a contractor, he could carry anything he wanted. His choices are a Glock 17 and an AK47.
So a former CAF sniper chose a Glock 17 as his sidearm while working in Iraq. However, I don't know if he ever tried the P320.
It is a pavement pistol, fine for law enforcement.
Sucks as a service pistol.
GR
Reliability was only an issue with Checkmate made magazines, because they were parkerized, so retained sand. Beretta mags were polished, blued steel, so the follower just slipped past any sand grit in the mag.
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
And Beretta undercut Ruger on the price. It was a crying shame the US Govt picked the Beretta over the Ruger. The Ruger was a much tougher and better made handgun. More reliable and robust, too.
While I’ll admit the Ruger was ugly, the Beretta sure as heck wouldn’t win any beauty contests. 😬
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
Maybe but I own both the 92FS and the M-17. I would not feel under gunned with either one of them. I have owned several of the Berettas and I'm here to tell you, they are accurate as a pistol comes. Both are great guns!
A 380 in my pocket is better than a 45 in my truck!
Violence may not be the best option... but it's still an option.
"Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet." General James Mad Dog Mattis
Didn’t work out very well for Custer’s Troops at the Little Big Horn. 😜
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
In all reality what good are the opinions of those who havent carried either weapon in a military combat deployment environment?? Just because your civilian M9 or M17 function fine while being carried in a non combat environment, it doesnt mean they will perform the same way on a rigorous deployment. I carried neither so cant personally opine on the topic, but know plenty who did and NONE are particularly huge fans of the M9 and the vast majority were glad to literally being issued ANYTHING to replace it.
When Mr. Potato Head modularity is the decisive factor for awarding contracts, with little girl grips most important, how good a gun you gonna need anyhow? We ain't fightin' no more real wars, except culture ones. Tranny pistols is what you want....
Didn’t work out very well for Custer’s Troops at the Little Big Horn. 😜
That's because 1) they were hugely outnumbered, and 2) their primary arm was a single shot rifle, while the Indians had lever action Winchesters.
Actually, I believe they had Henry LA 44’s, IIRC. And bows & arrows. 🤪
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
There was no political nonsense with the M9. Ruger was not undercut.
Here is the truth. The Beretta 92f and the Sig P226 were the only two guns that made it to phase two testing. Both passed with flying colors. Far more testing than our current sig completed btw.
With the sig and beretta both meeting all requirements it came down to a competitive bid where both guns were priced exactly the same. The beretta won based on the cost of replacement parts. End of story.
Reports of Beretta slide failures and sig frame cracking were caused by grossly over pressured ammunition being issued. Both guns experienced failures. Ammo exceeded proof pressures fwiw.
Beretta actually won a settlement from the govt due to the damage its reputation suffered due to issue caused by ammo. Sound familiar M16 guys?
The Ruger P85 failed in phase 1 testing. As did SW and FN and Colt offerings.
Later reliability issues were traced back to checkmate contract mags that used parkerized finishes that didn’t work well in the sand when oil or moisture was introduced. Checkmate fixed this issue and later magazines made by them were and are great.
The Beretta 92/M9 is a fantastic pistol with a proven track record all over the globe.
Please…refute any of these claims.
It’s amazing what a clown show the internet can be sometimes…
How many slides have blown off a Sig so far??? That's what I thought...
You should do some research so you don’t sound so ignorant. The broken slides and cracked frames in beretta 92 AND sig p226 were caused by grossly over pressured ammo. Not by gun design.
The beretta was and is a fine pistol. The lockup design has seen extensive military use since 1938
What was the over pressured ammo that they used? In ‘86 we fired some ammo in our squadrons S&W 39s that seemed awfully hot, especially in an indoor range.
NRA Life,Endowment,Patron or Benefactor since '72.
I've got no skin in the game and only reported what a man I knew at the time that was present at the trials Ruger competed in. He told me it was the most reliable. They were late and didn't compete in the first two trials and some manufacturers boycotted the third. Beretta had won the first two and they went with it. The P85 was originally developed as a replacement alternative for the U.S. Military's 1984 Joint Service Small Arms Program, a venture to replace the aging M1911A1 to a higher-capacity, NATO-compliant weapon. The P85 met all of the military's requirements, including a 20,000-round life expectancy. Despite this, the P85 was not completed in time for the first two trials. It was, however, able to compete in the later XM10 trials in 1988, for which Ruger supplied 30 P85s to the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland. Despite performing well, the Beretta M9, which had succeeded at winning the previous two competitions, won once again and was awarded the contract.
The Ruger P85 did find success with some police departments and civilians, as its rugged design and military qualities did see it adopted by the San Diego Police Department and the Wisconsin State Patrol.[4] Both P85s and P89s were approved for carry by the Chicago Police Department. The P85 was also adopted by the Turkish National Police.[5] In 2004, the US Army awarded Ruger & Co., Inc. a contract for 5,000 KP95D pistols to be delivered to the Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command, which issued them to Iraqi Army and Police units.[6][7]
How many slides have blown off a Sig so far??? That's what I thought...
You should do some research so you don’t sound so ignorant. The broken slides and cracked frames in beretta 92 AND sig p226 were caused by grossly over pressured ammo. Not by gun design.
The beretta was and is a fine pistol. The lockup design has seen extensive military use since 1938
What was the over pressured ammo that they used? In ‘86 we fired some ammo in our squadrons S&W 39s that seemed awfully hot, especially in an indoor range.
As I understand it, it was commercial powder charges in NATO brass resulting in pressures that were at or near proof loads…grossly exceeding even +p+ sub machine gun ammo.
Ruger never won a major military contract foreign or domestic and his pistols are a footnote in history.
Wonder how many conversations sounded just like this when the M9 replaced the 1911.
All of them
"The Church can and should help modern society by tirelessly insisting that the work of women in the home be recognized and respected by all in its irreplaceable value." Apostolic Exhortation On The Family, Pope John Paul II
There was no political nonsense with the M9. Ruger was not undercut.
Here is the truth. The Beretta 92f and the Sig P226 were the only two guns that made it to phase two testing. Both passed with flying colors. Far more testing than our current sig completed btw.
With the sig and beretta both meeting all requirements it came down to a competitive bid where both guns were priced exactly the same. The beretta won based on the cost of replacement parts. End of story.
Reports of Beretta slide failures and sig frame cracking were caused by grossly over pressured ammunition being issued. Both guns experienced failures. Ammo exceeded proof pressures fwiw.
Beretta actually won a settlement from the govt due to the damage its reputation suffered due to issue caused by ammo. Sound familiar M16 guys?
The Ruger P85 failed in phase 1 testing. As did SW and FN and Colt offerings.
Later reliability issues were traced back to checkmate contract mags that used parkerized finishes that didn’t work well in the sand when oil or moisture was introduced. Checkmate fixed this issue and later magazines made by them were and are great.
The Beretta 92/M9 is a fantastic pistol with a proven track record all over the globe.
Please…refute any of these claims.
It’s amazing what a clown show the internet can be sometimes…
Good post ^^^ 92 and P226 are both good pistols. Fanboyism and butt soreness redlines in these "military contract" threads.
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
Desert storm was years after the M9 was adopted
"The Church can and should help modern society by tirelessly insisting that the work of women in the home be recognized and respected by all in its irreplaceable value." Apostolic Exhortation On The Family, Pope John Paul II
"The Church can and should help modern society by tirelessly insisting that the work of women in the home be recognized and respected by all in its irreplaceable value." Apostolic Exhortation On The Family, Pope John Paul II
Sig 320 is a fine pistol but the Glock 17 is also fine. I carry a Glock 20 cause of grizzly reasons but my Sig 320 is a great pistol.
The 92 was always a bad choice but pistols don't matter much on the battlefield.
For carry I would take the Sig 320/G17/G19/GWhatever#/S&W MP over the 92 all day and every day. But a 92 would sure beat throwing rocks.
Johnny rehab. You admitted on here you never touched a firearm when you served as a gas pump attendant in the AF
It’s funny when try and discuss firearms having no background in the actual use
' Ribeka, GTFO of this thread and go play somewhere else. You don't know anything about this. Now scoot !
LOL
You confused old boomer do you know what year it is?
I ve carried every day at work in the military and as a Leo 34 years and as a FIC I trained hundreds of military and Leo’s how to shoot And I’ve been to colt Sig and Glock amorer schools . I tested the sigs and glocks for feedback and taught FI classes at FLETC and Artesia and completed in the army
What do you and Johnny vodka bring to this thread?
Sig 320 is a fine pistol but the Glock 17 is also fine. I carry a Glock 20 cause of grizzly reasons but my Sig 320 is a great pistol.
The 92 was always a bad choice but pistols don't matter much on the battlefield.
For carry I would take the Sig 320/G17/G19/GWhatever#/S&W MP over the 92 all day and every day. But a 92 would sure beat throwing rocks.
Johnny rehab. You admitted on here you never touched a firearm when you served as a gas pump attendant in the AF
It’s funny when try and discuss firearms having no background in the actual use
'
Originally Posted by Direct_Drive
Ribeka, GTFO of this thread and go play somewhere else. You don't know anything about this. Now scoot !
LOL
Originally Posted by ribka
You confused old boomer do you know what year it is?
I ve carried every day at work in the military and as a Leo 34 years and as a FIC I trained hundreds of military and Leo’s how to shoot And I’ve been to colt Sig and Glock amorer schools . I tested the sigs and glocks for feedback and taught FI classes at FLETC and Artesia and completed in the army
What do you and Johnny vodka bring to this thread?
Now zip your flappin cock holster the big boys are talkin.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
John Burns
I have all the sources. They can't stop the signal.
Sig 320 is a fine pistol but the Glock 17 is also fine. I carry a Glock 20 cause of grizzly reasons but my Sig 320 is a great pistol.
The 92 was always a bad choice but pistols don't matter much on the battlefield.
For carry I would take the Sig 320/G17/G19/GWhatever#/S&W MP over the 92 all day and every day. But a 92 would sure beat throwing rocks.
Johnny rehab. You admitted on here you never touched a firearm when you served as a gas pump attendant in the AF
It’s funny when try and discuss firearms having no background in the actual use
' Ribeka, GTFO of this thread and go play somewhere else. You don't know anything about this. Now scoot !
LOL
You confused old boomer do you know what year it is?
I ve carried every day at work in the military and as a Leo 34 years and as a FIC I trained hundreds of military and Leo’s how to shoot And I’ve been to colt Sig and Glock amorer schools . I tested the sigs and glocks for feedback and taught FI classes at FLETC and Artesia and completed in the army
What do you and Johnny vodka bring to this thread?
' Why so snarky Ribeka ? I thought we were pals ? It's the prostate again, isn't it ?
They are both unsat. I see them every day here at work. BOTH continue to break, Should have gone and stuck with the P-226
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
Does anyone know if Glock sent an off the shelf pistol to be evaluated?
I CAN NOT find it anymore - but I distinctly remember a youtube discussion around the Glock vs Sig vs Beretta discussion. DOD wanted a manual thumb safety or decocker. Sig, sent their M17 with a thumb safety. Glock sent a bone stock G17 figuring "We're Glock, take it and like it".
I know you can have a safety installed on the Glock - just trying to see if I'm mis-remembering a youtube video I saw from years ago. So figured I'd ask - does anyone here know what Glock actually sent and if it actually met parameters that way?
They sent G19x with safety similar to SiG or S&W M&P. Despite what "Mr. I got my permit at 17" replaceable backstraps do not constitute modular design. Nobody really cares if some of you disapprove of SiG M17 or M18.
They sent G19x with safety similar to SiG or S&W M&P. Despite what "Mr. I got my permit at 17" replaceable backstraps do not constitute modular design. Nobody really cares if some of you disapprove of SiG M17 or M18.
I can think of no one with less credibility than you to comment.
They sent G19x with safety similar to SiG or S&W M&P. Despite what "Mr. I got my permit at 17" replaceable backstraps do not constitute modular design. Nobody really cares if some of you disapprove of SiG M17 or M18.
I can think of no one with less credibility than you to comment.
LOL!
No doubt!
Everything he knows about the subject can fit easily on the point of a needle!
Does anyone know if Glock sent an off the shelf pistol to be evaluated?
I CAN NOT find it anymore - but I distinctly remember a youtube discussion around the Glock vs Sig vs Beretta discussion. DOD wanted a manual thumb safety or decocker. Sig, sent their M17 with a thumb safety. Glock sent a bone stock G17 figuring "We're Glock, take it and like it".
I know you can have a safety installed on the Glock - just trying to see if I'm mis-remembering a youtube video I saw from years ago. So figured I'd ask - does anyone here know what Glock actually sent and if it actually met parameters that way?
No, Glock sent a manual safety version that later became the G19X.
The contract called for a modular grip design that fit both a "compact" and full-size role. Glock's way of meeting the solicitation was one gun where Sig offered two guns and the modular grip modules. CZ, FN, Beretta, and a few others also entered submissions.
Glock and Sig were the only two pistols to make it to the final rounds of the trial, either due to failure to meet requirements or because of performance. Both Glock and Sig met requirements, but Sig severely undercut Glock's price. The selection was made without completing the final round of testing as I understand it.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
When Mr. Potato Head modularity is the decisive factor for awarding contracts, with little girl grips most important, how good a gun you gonna need anyhow? We ain't fightin' no more real wars, except culture ones. Tranny pistols is what you want....
This could win the award for the most uninformed comment of the thread.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
Desert storm was years after the M9 was adopted
In Desert Storm it was still common to see many support units carrying M16A1s and 1911's as the A2 was adopted in 1986 (83 for USMC) and the M9 in 1985.
And more units were still driving the M1008/M1009 vehicles (K5 Blazers and 3/4 ton GM trucks) than HUMVEEs then as well.
I even saw USAF guards carrying brand new M16s (NOT even A1s--no forward assist) in 1997 in Bosnia.
Once something is "adopted" by the military it takes years for it to be completely fielded, even smaller items such as individual weapons
They sent G19x with safety similar to SiG or S&W M&P. Despite what "Mr. I got my permit at 17" replaceable backstraps do not constitute modular design. Nobody really cares if some of you disapprove of SiG M17 or M18.
I can think of no one with less credibility than you to comment.
LOL!
No doubt!
Everything he knows about the subject can fit easily on the point of a needle!
I don't know. I imagine he has the Airsoft versions of many of the guns being discussed.
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
The M9 was selected long before Desert Storm.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
I've got no skin in the game and only reported what a man I knew at the time that was present at the trials Ruger competed in. He told me it was the most reliable. They were late and didn't compete in the first two trials and some manufacturers boycotted the third. Beretta had won the first two and they went with it. The P85 was originally developed as a replacement alternative for the U.S. Military's 1984 Joint Service Small Arms Program, a venture to replace the aging M1911A1 to a higher-capacity, NATO-compliant weapon. The P85 met all of the military's requirements, including a 20,000-round life expectancy. Despite this, the P85 was not completed in time for the first two trials. It was, however, able to compete in the later XM10 trials in 1988, for which Ruger supplied 30 P85s to the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland. Despite performing well, the Beretta M9, which had succeeded at winning the previous two competitions, won once again and was awarded the contract.
The Ruger P85 did find success with some police departments and civilians, as its rugged design and military qualities did see it adopted by the San Diego Police Department and the Wisconsin State Patrol.[4] Both P85s and P89s were approved for carry by the Chicago Police Department. The P85 was also adopted by the Turkish National Police.[5] In 2004, the US Army awarded Ruger & Co., Inc. a contract for 5,000 KP95D pistols to be delivered to the Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command, which issued them to Iraqi Army and Police units.[6][7]
Have you considered you were lied to?
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
The M9 was selected long before Desert Storm.
THIS. The S HIT you read on these forums. The reason Beretta won is they were cheaper AND threw in a factory here in the US (Maryland) for manufacture. SIG now has a plant here in the US. I still say the P-226 would have been the way to go.
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
The M9 was selected long before Desert Storm.
THIS. The S HIT you read on these forums. The reason Beretta won is they were cheaper AND threw in a factory here in the US (Maryland) for manufacture. SIG now has a plant here in the US. I still say the P-226 would have been the way to go.
I'm rather partial to the P226 as well.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
The M9 was selected long before Desert Storm.
THIS. The S HIT you read on these forums. The reason Beretta won is they were cheaper AND threw in a factory here in the US (Maryland) for manufacture. SIG now has a plant here in the US. I still say the P-226 would have been the way to go.
All military small arms are required to be built in the US. Sig, fn, and beretta all have plants here.
A us beretta plant had nothing to do with it. More mis information.
Beretta was the same price…replacement parts were cheaper. End of story…both pistols passed phase two testing.
Guys…this is public information. Don’t take my word for it.
For liberals and anarchists, power and control is opium, selling envy is the fastest and easiest way to get it. TRR. American conservative. Never trust a white liberal. Malcom X Current NRA member.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
The M9 was selected long before Desert Storm.
THIS. The S HIT you read on these forums. The reason Beretta won is they were cheaper AND threw in a factory here in the US (Maryland) for manufacture. SIG now has a plant here in the US. I still say the P-226 would have been the way to go.
All military small arms are required to be built in the US. Sig, fn, and beretta all have plants here.
A us beretta plant had nothing to do with it. More mis information.
Beretta was the same price…replacement parts were cheaper. End of story…both pistols passed phase two testing.
Guys…this is public information. Don’t take my word for it.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
Pre Desert Storm the Ruger beat the Beretta but they picked the Beretta because they needed Italian airspace to attack Kuwait.
The M9 was selected long before Desert Storm.
THIS. The S HIT you read on these forums. The reason Beretta won is they were cheaper AND threw in a factory here in the US (Maryland) for manufacture. SIG now has a plant here in the US. I still say the P-226 would have been the way to go.
All military small arms are required to be built in the US. Sig, fn, and beretta all have plants here.
A us beretta plant had nothing to do with it. More mis information.
Beretta was the same price…replacement parts were cheaper. End of story…both pistols passed phase two testing.
Guys…this is public information. Don’t take my word for it.
From the article. Yes, Beretta had a small factory here but agreed to obviously increase production, Sig (nor any of the other competitors or so it appears) had plants here:
The Winning Bid Beretta held a distinct advantage over SIG when bidding was opened: It already had a fully functioning small arms factory operating in the United States. Despite this advantage,
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
I love the CZ75. Of the wonder nines, my favorites in no particular order are the 92FS/M9, Sig P226, CZ75, Glock 17, and HK P8/USP. Hard to go wrong with any of them.
One could make an argument for the Glock 19 over the 17 but I feel the 19 grip is ever so slightly too short, and the shorter barrel leads to more muzzle flip over the 17. One of the funny things about the 19 is that it recently replaced the sig P226 for use by the Navy Seals. As I understand it, they were able to sneak it in without going through regular procurement channels because its was a "compact". Compact in name only LOL. Good gun regardless.
Army should have adopted the Glock...not the abortion Sig that has already had issues. A glock is the single most tested handgun in the world at this point imho.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
+1 The 226 for general issue and the 228 for aircrew and plain clothes LE. The M9 is an overly large pistol.
I had a West German marked P 228 throughout the 1980s and early '90s. Sorry I sold it, even if only due to the collector value it would demand today. I wasn't a huge fan, though, as a shooter, due to the high bore axis making the recoil impulse noticeable verses other designs.
Does anyone know if Glock sent an off the shelf pistol to be evaluated?
I CAN NOT find it anymore - but I distinctly remember a youtube discussion around the Glock vs Sig vs Beretta discussion. DOD wanted a manual thumb safety or decocker. Sig, sent their M17 with a thumb safety. Glock sent a bone stock G17 figuring "We're Glock, take it and like it".
I know you can have a safety installed on the Glock - just trying to see if I'm mis-remembering a youtube video I saw from years ago. So figured I'd ask - does anyone here know what Glock actually sent and if it actually met parameters that way?
No, Glock sent a manual safety version that later became the G19X.
The contract called for a modular grip design that fit both a "compact" and full-size role. Glock's way of meeting the solicitation was one gun where Sig offered two guns and the modular grip modules. CZ, FN, Beretta, and a few others also entered submissions.
Glock and Sig were the only two pistols to make it to the final rounds of the trial, either due to failure to meet requirements or because of performance. Both Glock and Sig met requirements, but Sig severely undercut Glock's price. The selection was made without completing the final round of testing as I understand it.
Let's face it, most military personnel can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, and that's from inside the barn.
Same solution that worked in the 1940's would work today, just re-issue the M1 carbine only chamber it in .357 Magnum Rimless (which is what it should have been back then anyway).
Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery. Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
I always wonder about the source of the butthurt when a military selects something other than a person's favorite firearm. Is it because the butthurt genuinely believe their choice is better, and wants troops to have the best? Or do the butthurt need the external validation?
Let's face it, most military personnel can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, and that's from inside the barn.
Same solution that worked in the 1940's should work today, just re-issue the M1 carbine only chamber it in .357 Magnum Rimless (which is what it should have been back then anyway).
I saw this first hand during my Navy time. Our unit had a pistol team which consistently won the admiral's cup and other awards in the area military competitions. The worst group we shot against was the Cubi Point Marine Separate Guard Company team. This is bullseye shooting we're talking about, with High Standard .22's and 1911's. When we got to the 50 yard events some of the Marines struggled to keep it on the paper.
Fast forward a. number of years, when my son was in the Navy on his Middle East deployments he was required to be armed up 24/7 and had a choice of sidearms he was allowed. He always stuck with the Beretta. Stateside, when doing personnel protective services he again had a choice of sidearms, but stayed with the Beretta. Being a pretty good sized young man he had no problem keeping it concealed under a suit coat.
All this gun gack talk about military/defensive handguns, stopping power, reliability, accuracy is all well and good, a lot of fun to talk about but pretty much meaningless in reality. How often are handguns ever really used in combat situations outside of movies and adventure novels? Let's face it, the primary purpose of a handgun in the military is as a security blanket for those whose jobs preclude their carrying a rifle or as a last ditch means for officers to enforce discipline.
Kinda puts me in mind of a guy I used to work with when asked why he carried a .32 automatic when deer hunting. His words, "In case I get charged by a bear and my rifle jams."
I have shot a M92, Only two beefs with that gun, the grip is to big for my hand and the overall size of the weapon, Just seems overly large to me. Otherwise it works. Many of them went to war and were used under tough conditions. When pointed correctly, that gun killed bad people.
Let's face it, most military personnel can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, and that's from inside the barn.
Same solution that worked in the 1940's would work today, just re-issue the M1 carbine only chamber it in .357 Magnum Rimless (which is what it should have been back then anyway).
.357Sig, 140 gr. FP or 147 gr. Hornady Custom XTP.
Let's face it, most military personnel can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, and that's from inside the barn.
Same solution that worked in the 1940's would work today, just re-issue the M1 carbine only chamber it in .357 Magnum Rimless (which is what it should have been back then anyway).
.357Sig, 140 gr. FP or 147 gr. Hornady Custom XTP.
I have one CZ design. It has a safety and double/single action similar to the M9 and it has never missed a shot due to a jam or malfunction. It's only down side is, it's a steel frame and it's from a former USSR company. Now that CZ owns Colt, I'm betting the Sig won't last long and the CZ 75 design will be making an appearance at some time in the future.
Just my guess.
kwg
For liberals and anarchists, power and control is opium, selling envy is the fastest and easiest way to get it. TRR. American conservative. Never trust a white liberal. Malcom X Current NRA member.
Let's face it, most military personnel can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, and that's from inside the barn.
Same solution that worked in the 1940's would work today, just re-issue the M1 carbine only chamber it in .357 Magnum Rimless (which is what it should have been back then anyway).
My Father was issued an M1 Carbine in 1942. After seeing how many times his fellow Marines had to shoot Japanese soldiers with the .30 Carbine ball ammo before they were no longer a threat, he said that he thought that the 351 WSL with its standard 180 grain bullet would have been a better cartridge choice.
Does anyone know if Glock sent an off the shelf pistol to be evaluated?
I CAN NOT find it anymore - but I distinctly remember a youtube discussion around the Glock vs Sig vs Beretta discussion. DOD wanted a manual thumb safety or decocker. Sig, sent their M17 with a thumb safety. Glock sent a bone stock G17 figuring "We're Glock, take it and like it".
I know you can have a safety installed on the Glock - just trying to see if I'm mis-remembering a youtube video I saw from years ago. So figured I'd ask - does anyone here know what Glock actually sent and if it actually met parameters that way?
No, Glock sent a manual safety version that later became the G19X.
The contract called for a modular grip design that fit both a "compact" and full-size role. Glock's way of meeting the solicitation was one gun where Sig offered two guns and the modular grip modules. CZ, FN, Beretta, and a few others also entered submissions.
Glock and Sig were the only two pistols to make it to the final rounds of the trial, either due to failure to meet requirements or because of performance. Both Glock and Sig met requirements, but Sig severely undercut Glock's price. The selection was made without completing the final round of testing as I understand it.
' Glock will provide a safety to meet certain contract requirements. There have not been many of these contracts but they can be searched. Portugal is one, 40,000 units.
This thread is the perfect example why I don’t engage in conversation with strangers at the gun counter, the guys behind it or the guys in front of it.
He talked about single action colts. Used when clearing tunnels. Elmer Keith sent him cartridges that had 22 shorts imbedded backwards in the slugs.
April Fools, right? Otherwise, you cannot be serious about this.
I have heard that .45 caliber revolvers were the handguns of choice for Tunnel Rats, so it's not beyond belief that the SAA .45 might have played an occasional part in it. Mostly, though, Tunnel Rats used old M1917 revolvers in .45 ACP. The reason was to avoid hot brass in their faces should they have to fire inside the tunnel.
So, has anyone from the military experienced the same sort of unintentional discharges that the police report?
I think the military is being hush hush on that.
' M17/M18 military versions have the manual safety. The cops typically do not have the Manual Safety models. When they have a negligent discharge, it's someone's job on the line. Then the personal injury attorneys enter the equation and the class action lawsuits begin. SIG has won all of these lawsuits. Cops have been dismissed and/or disciplined for the ND's or for being less than truthful about the event.
No one has been able to prove that a P320 will discharge uncommanded. This has been hashed and re-hashed for at least the past 8 years.
I have one CZ design. It has a safety and double/single action similar to the M9 and it has never missed a shot due to a jam or malfunction. It's only down side is, it's a steel frame and it's from a former USSR company. Now that CZ owns Colt, I'm betting the Sig won't last long and the CZ 75 design will be making an appearance at some time in the future.
Just my guess.
kwg
Based on what? It will be years and years before the Sig will be replaced. Maybe decades.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
Watched some special forces show. The guy said he'd rather have an extra canteen of water than any pistol. The whole modularity gimmick is hokie. But so is the American military. Is the army any more rational than the air force with their multi role, do nothing well, over complicated fighter/bomber turkeys? Or trying to catch up?
Watched some special forces show. The guy said he'd rather have an extra canteen of water than any pistol. The whole modularity gimmick is hokie. But so is the American military. Is the army any more rational than the air force with their multi role, do nothing well, over complicated fighter/bomber turkeys? Or trying to catch up?
That would depend on the task at hand. People kicking in doors are going to take the pistol as a rifle going down is a much bigger deal than running out of water. The guy out on a patrol, the water is going to be a commodity when support isn't so close.
Situation dictates. Statements like that are silly without context.
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
I qualified with the S&W M15 and later the M9. I liked the M15 far more than the M9. Neither were easily carried in a shoulder holster under a flight suit. The M9 was more of a PITA to carry that way. IME a Glock 19 would be a disaster for many of the aircrew members I served with. Most only shot the issue weapons once every three years.
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong. Getting into reloading to save money is like getting married for free sex.
I qualified with the S&W M15 and later the M9. I liked the M15 far more than the M9. Neither were easily carried in a shoulder holster under a flight suit. The M9 was more of a PITA to carry that way. IME a Glock 19 would be a disaster for many of the aircrew members I served with. Most only shot the issue weapons once every three years.
You can carry .38 Special in a .357 Magnum revolver.
I have one CZ design. It has a safety and double/single action similar to the M9 and it has never missed a shot due to a jam or malfunction. It's only down side is, it's a steel frame and it's from a former USSR company. Now that CZ owns Colt, I'm betting the Sig won't last long and the CZ 75 design will be making an appearance at some time in the future.
Just my guess.
kwg
Based on what? It will be years and years before the Sig will be replaced. Maybe decades.
' Yep, M9 to M17 was 32 years give or take. Based on that, M17/M18 have another 25 years to go.
I qualified with the S&W M15 and later the M9. I liked the M15 far more than the M9. Neither were easily carried in a shoulder holster under a flight suit. The M9 was more of a PITA to carry that way. IME a Glock 19 would be a disaster for many of the aircrew members I served with. Most only shot the issue weapons once every three years.
You can carry .38 Special in a .357 Magnum revolver.
What does that have to do with anything he is talking about? None of the handguns he is referencing is chambered for .357 Magnum.
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.
I qualified with the S&W M15 and later the M9. I liked the M15 far more than the M9. Neither were easily carried in a shoulder holster under a flight suit. The M9 was more of a PITA to carry that way. IME a Glock 19 would be a disaster for many of the aircrew members I served with. Most only shot the issue weapons once every three years.
You can carry .38 Special in a .357 Magnum revolver.
What does that have to do with anything he is talking about? None of the handguns he is referencing is chambered for .357 Magnum.
True. I read it too fast. I thought a comparison was being drawn between the Model 15 S&W and the Model 19 S&W. Had I read more carefully, I would have seen the word Glock in front of 19.
I qualified with the S&W M15 and later the M9. I liked the M15 far more than the M9. Neither were easily carried in a shoulder holster under a flight suit. The M9 was more of a PITA to carry that way. IME a Glock 19 would be a disaster for many of the aircrew members I served with. Most only shot the issue weapons once every three years.
You can carry .38 Special in a .357 Magnum revolver.
What does that have to do with anything he is talking about? None of the handguns he is referencing is chambered for .357 Magnum.
Not everyone here was in the military and even if they were does not mean they know about all handguns issued. Excluding .45 Colt and .45 ACP Americans used different .38 Special revolvers. One 2" light weight S&W, rest were 4" models made either by Ruger or S&W.
I have one CZ design. It has a safety and double/single action similar to the M9 and it has never missed a shot due to a jam or malfunction. It's only down side is, it's a steel frame and it's from a former USSR company. Now that CZ owns Colt, I'm betting the Sig won't last long and the CZ 75 design will be making an appearance at some time in the future.
Just my guess.
kwg
Based on what? It will be years and years before the Sig will be replaced. Maybe decades.
Based on political pressure from the corporate Colt/CZ owners. We are talking the military, the pentagon and deep pockets. Special emphasis deep pockets. It might be after we are gone but If Colt is still the #1 producer of rifles to the troops, I see CZ pistols right behind.
Personally, I was skeptical of the M9 and abandoning the 1911. But, after shooting and carrying the M9, I am no longer a skeptic. It's as good of a gun as the 1911. The only drawback is the 9mm instead of the .45.
I also believe the reason the 1911 was abandoned was politics. It was time to share the American tax dollar wealth with another NATO member. Just like going with the Sig. It's a German companies turn to cash in. It's all politics.
I don't have big hands and I have no issues with the 1911 or the M9 and the grip size. Taking a SWAG, the grip size of the M9 might affect what, maybe 1 or 2 percent of the entire US military ? Big whoopee.
The political string pullers are just sharing the wealth with another NATO member. This time it's a German company because the last company was Italian. CZ's day is coming. All they have to do is be patient.
kwg
For liberals and anarchists, power and control is opium, selling envy is the fastest and easiest way to get it. TRR. American conservative. Never trust a white liberal. Malcom X Current NRA member.
I have one CZ design. It has a safety and double/single action similar to the M9 and it has never missed a shot due to a jam or malfunction. It's only down side is, it's a steel frame and it's from a former USSR company. Now that CZ owns Colt, I'm betting the Sig won't last long and the CZ 75 design will be making an appearance at some time in the future.
Just my guess.
kwg
Based on what? It will be years and years before the Sig will be replaced. Maybe decades.
Based on political pressure from the corporate Colt/CZ owners. We are talking the military, the pentagon and deep pockets. Special emphasis deep pockets. It might be after we are gone but If Colt is still the #1 producer of rifles to the troops, I see CZ pistols right behind.
Personally, I was skeptical of the M9 and abandoning the 1911. But, after shooting and carrying the M9, I am no longer a skeptic. It's as good of a gun as the 1911. The only drawback is the 9mm instead of the .45.
I also believe the reason the 1911 was abandoned was politics. It was time to share the American tax dollar wealth with another NATO member. Just like going with the Sig. It's a German companies turn to cash in. It's all politics.
I don't have big hands and I have no issues with the 1911 or the M9 and the grip size. Taking a SWAG, the grip size of the M9 might affect what, maybe 1 or 2 percent of the entire US military ? Big whoopee.
The political string pullers are just sharing the wealth with another NATO member. This time it's a German company because the last company was Italian. CZ's day is coming. All they have to do is be patient.
kwg
Nope, Americans are switching to new assault rifles and light machine guns both from SiG Sauer.
For a CZ fanboy I sure like my Italian Beretta. Smoothest nine I ever shot. Love the decocker/safety just where it is. Replaceable front sight and a CZ grip shape/ mag capacity would bring it up to date. Why that isn't obvious in Italy given all their screwy new stuff isn't obvious at all. My Turk CZ knock offs are better than the Czech in accuracy, finish and fit however. Complex but rugged design with strong performance record worldwide. Simple strikers are best for military and police, personnel and armorers alike, seems to me. The new M&P's surpass Glock in every way except long standing record for reliability. One size fits all though. Screw diversity. And screw Sig. Buy American!
Let's face it, most military personnel can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, and that's from inside the barn.
Same solution that worked in the 1940's would work today, just re-issue the M1 carbine only chamber it in .357 Magnum Rimless (which is what it should have been back then anyway).
My Father was issued an M1 Carbine in 1942. After seeing how many times his fellow Marines had to shoot Japanese soldiers with the .30 Carbine ball ammo before they were no longer a threat, he said that he thought that the 351 WSL with its standard 180 grain bullet would have been a better cartridge choice.
The .mil already has the MK18 which is a 10.3 barrel AR/M4.
Shorter and more compact than the M1 Carbine, better terminal ballistics, possible to mount optics/RDS.
Even the standard M4 is shorter than an M1 Carbine.
John Burns
I have all the sources. They can't stop the signal.
I have one CZ design. It has a safety and double/single action similar to the M9 and it has never missed a shot due to a jam or malfunction. It's only down side is, it's a steel frame and it's from a former USSR company. Now that CZ owns Colt, I'm betting the Sig won't last long and the CZ 75 design will be making an appearance at some time in the future.
Just my guess.
kwg
Based on what? It will be years and years before the Sig will be replaced. Maybe decades.
Based on political pressure from the corporate Colt/CZ owners. We are talking the military, the pentagon and deep pockets. Special emphasis deep pockets. It might be after we are gone but If Colt is still the #1 producer of rifles to the troops, I see CZ pistols right behind.
Personally, I was skeptical of the M9 and abandoning the 1911. But, after shooting and carrying the M9, I am no longer a skeptic. It's as good of a gun as the 1911. The only drawback is the 9mm instead of the .45.
I also believe the reason the 1911 was abandoned was politics. It was time to share the American tax dollar wealth with another NATO member. Just like going with the Sig. It's a German companies turn to cash in. It's all politics.
I don't have big hands and I have no issues with the 1911 or the M9 and the grip size. Taking a SWAG, the grip size of the M9 might affect what, maybe 1 or 2 percent of the entire US military ? Big whoopee.
The political string pullers are just sharing the wealth with another NATO member. This time it's a German company because the last company was Italian. CZ's day is coming. All they have to do is be patient.
kwg
Colt has lost most all of their US-military contracts years ago.
Where are you hearing the inside baseball that CZ is applying political pressure to the DoD?
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
I qualified with the S&W M15 and later the M9. I liked the M15 far more than the M9. Neither were easily carried in a shoulder holster under a flight suit. The M9 was more of a PITA to carry that way. IME a Glock 19 would be a disaster for many of the aircrew members I served with. Most only shot the issue weapons once every three years.
You can carry .38 Special in a .357 Magnum revolver.
What does that have to do with anything he is talking about? None of the handguns he is referencing is chambered for .357 Magnum.
Not everyone here was in the military and even if they were does not mean they know about all handguns issued. Excluding .45 Colt and .45 ACP Americans used different .38 Special revolvers. One 2" light weight S&W, rest were 4" models made either by Ruger or S&W.
Can you site your source of a Ruger revolver contract with the DoD?
"Full time night woman? I never could find no tracks on a woman's heart. I packed me a squaw for ten year, Pilgrim. Cheyenne, she were, and the meanest bitch that ever balled for beads."
Just to agitate the kettle. I worked as a contract handgun and rifle instructor for the US g for 5 years following 9/11. Trainees were mostly mil and oga remfs and transport folks who were given a basic course for their weapons of issue prior to going to the sand. Our armorers were kept busy and expected the m9s to fail [broken locking blocks] at close to 14k rds.
Note: de-cockers are not a fix for stupid, trying to get a line of non-warrior types to de-cock prior to holstering is a task worthy of Sisyphus.
Glocks are the choice of serious people.
mike r
Don't wish it were easier Wish you were better
Stab them in the taint, you can't put a tourniquet on that. Craig Douglas ECQC
Let's face it, most military personnel can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, and that's from inside the barn.
Same solution that worked in the 1940's would work today, just re-issue the M1 carbine only chamber it in .357 Magnum Rimless (which is what it should have been back then anyway).
To the many kind folks who quoted my post, note the underlined word "today".
Now why would I use an underline to change the meaning of the word "today" in that context from "nowadays; the general current time frame" to mean "specifically this date; the date of this post"? Hmmm...
I will stand by the statement that most military personnel (and the public in general) can't hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun, at least based on the Swiss cheesed state of the pistol range at Ft. Jackson, SC, and observation of hundreds if not thousands of shooters at public ranges.
Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery. Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
Just to agitate the kettle. I worked as a contract handgun and rifle instructor for the US g for 5 years following 9/11. Trainees were mostly mil and oga remfs and transport folks who were given a basic course for their weapons of issue prior to going to the sand. Our armorers were kept busy and expected the m9s to fail [broken locking blocks] at close to 14k rds.
Note: de-cockers are not a fix for stupid, trying to get a line of non-warrior types to de-cock prior to holstering is a task worthy of Sisyphus.
Glocks are the choice of serious people.
mike r
LOL.
Nothing wrong with Glocks and I carry one most days but lots of serious people use other pistols.
Why don't you tell the class of a single gun fight lost because there was a different handgun in the holster.
Thanks.
John Burns
I have all the sources. They can't stop the signal.
I personally wasn't a fan of the M9. Nothing against the pistol per se, just the ones we had. Dam things were worn out. Couldn't get new ones. When I was in charge of our armory, I carried my 1911 with authorization from CO, in writing. Legal or not....
I like my m17. Maybe cuz it's not worn out and it's tight. My m11-a1 shoots better but the m17 isn't bad
I have one CZ design. It has a safety and double/single action similar to the M9 and it has never missed a shot due to a jam or malfunction. It's only down side is, it's a steel frame and it's from a former USSR company. Now that CZ owns Colt, I'm betting the Sig won't last long and the CZ 75 design will be making an appearance at some time in the future.
Just my guess.
kwg
Based on what? It will be years and years before the Sig will be replaced. Maybe decades.
Based on political pressure from the corporate Colt/CZ owners. We are talking the military, the pentagon and deep pockets. Special emphasis deep pockets. It might be after we are gone but If Colt is still the #1 producer of rifles to the troops, I see CZ pistols right behind.
Personally, I was skeptical of the M9 and abandoning the 1911. But, after shooting and carrying the M9, I am no longer a skeptic. It's as good of a gun as the 1911. The only drawback is the 9mm instead of the .45.
I also believe the reason the 1911 was abandoned was politics. It was time to share the American tax dollar wealth with another NATO member. Just like going with the Sig. It's a German companies turn to cash in. It's all politics.
I don't have big hands and I have no issues with the 1911 or the M9 and the grip size. Taking a SWAG, the grip size of the M9 might affect what, maybe 1 or 2 percent of the entire US military ? Big whoopee.
The political string pullers are just sharing the wealth with another NATO member. This time it's a German company because the last company was Italian. CZ's day is coming. All they have to do is be patient.
kwg
Colt has lost most all of their US-military contracts years ago.
Where are you hearing the inside baseball that CZ is applying political pressure to the DoD?
Not hearing. Speculating. But, now that CZ has made major inroads into American firearms. Especially a big dog like Colt, I find it hard to believe they won't be pushing for some contracts. The gravy train is just too good to pass up.
kwg
For liberals and anarchists, power and control is opium, selling envy is the fastest and easiest way to get it. TRR. American conservative. Never trust a white liberal. Malcom X Current NRA member.
Just to agitate the kettle. I worked as a contract handgun and rifle instructor for the US g for 5 years following 9/11. Trainees were mostly mil and oga remfs and transport folks who were given a basic course for their weapons of issue prior to going to the sand. Our armorers were kept busy and expected the m9s to fail [broken locking blocks] at close to 14k rds.
Note: de-cockers are not a fix for stupid, trying to get a line of non-warrior types to de-cock prior to holstering is a task worthy of Sisyphus.
Glocks are the choice of serious people.
mike r
LOL.
Nothing wrong with Glocks and I carry one most days but lots of serious people use other pistols.
Why don't you tell the class of a single gun fight lost because there was a different handgun in the holster.
Thanks.
Why don't you tell the class about your training and experience in combat arms?
You are welcome.
#holstersniffer
mike r
Don't wish it were easier Wish you were better
Stab them in the taint, you can't put a tourniquet on that. Craig Douglas ECQC
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/tTpFhhcj/20231110-125845.jpg)
![[Linked Image from ]]( https://legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Trump-Tweet-Image-Im-Just-in-the-Way-e1577149651503.jpg)
![[Linked Image from hosting.photobucket.com]](https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e78/montanasam/(edited)_(edited)_(edited)_20240206_150648.png?width=960&height=720&fit=bounds)
![[Linked Image from external-content.duckduckgo.com]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F68.media.tumblr.com%2Fccd2d6865b47b4fd22986e63ddb26b3d%2Ftumblr_mx9cbe8H9a1qhm2duo1_500.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=159b1a1ca7a19ff8207c07c595f98f9ba8688950bd9cea3dd2dee1160f3829be.gif)
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/B69sGq7w/IMG-3102.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/dDV0yF0/19MHS.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/full/252877.jpeg)
