Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Should The US Military Have Ever Switched To The Sig?

Highlights?

He says the Beretta was better, and that they never did the testing on the Sig before adoption.

Wow.


I have a stainless 92. It's a good gun...but it ain't a patch on my G45.

The sig was a downgrade imho

How many slides have blown off a Sig so far??? That's what I thought...

An open slide, fixed barrel design was a poor choice for a service pistol.

The Glock G19 was a far better choice.

That Sig abortion was some bureaucratic barbie-doll wet-dream.




GR

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

My thoughts exactly

Fwiw I think a Glock 17 was the obvious choice.

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.

Perhaps, but it was still quite new when the original Beretta vs Sig trials were taking place in the early 1980s.

No…not the 80s trial. Talking about the last one.

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.

So the 320 is a bad gun?

Not a gun that was anywhere near properly tested for military service, and has proven to have had issues as a result, vs the Beretta M9.

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.

Exactly.

It might be a fun topic to debate but the choice will have zero impact on the outcome of any current or future war.

The M9 & P320 were both political contracts.