Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Army receiving new squad designated marksman rifles

Formy,

Is the Tango 6 the equal of the Nightforce or the SWFA, in your opinion?

Prolly pull up an old post of mine where I had bought a Tango 6 and a couple of Whiskey5 hunting scopes.

Think Form said something like....If you don’t mind having lenses falling out, you’ll love the scope.

Form trashed them.

😎

Uh oh spaghettios..

good quesiton, aren't all of sigs stuff made in the Philippines?

WTF. It’s like I’m defending Sig and SCARs.






Our experiences with SCARs are quite different. I’ve used them off and on since 2010- mostly H’s. The SCAR-L didn’t replace the M4 not because it didn’t work, but because users preferred an updated DI M4 and it didn’t do anything really better. As for SCAR-H’s, they are going away because they are bulky, they eat most optics, the charging handle is poorly designed (by requirement), most users prefer a Stoner design, and most importantly most have figured out the 7.62 battle rifles are not good for the vast majority of use. Shoot ability is the issue, not reliability. The SCAR-H is one of the most reliable modern 7.62mm battle rifles.








No. The M17 and M18’s never had any drop issues. I am intimately familiar with two of the higher profile P320 “drop safety” cases that started the whole thing. Neither was a drop issue. One was unequivocally a pulled trigger, and one almost certainly caused by a pistol in a gym bag and the holster not covering the trigger.

The original P320 will only fire when dropped in a totally contrived way, that no one carries them in. The issue is that it passes all industry and mil drop test protocols. There are multiple popular pistols that can be made to fire when dropped if you purposefully put them in conditions they will never be in, in real life.




Having said all that, Sig sucks, SCARs are stupid.

LOL. A little bit.



The Hs had application in the stan (well, .308 did, anyway). We had Mk14 EBRs in Iraq, which the Bravos drooled over. Ours ended up in the turret with the minigun because, well, short stroke one of those and you’re OOC for the rest of the contact. The EBR was Plan B.

Incidentally, they did operate properly when we returned. And don’t get me wrong. Some individuals in our local “trials” loved the SCARs. They just didn’t have to carry and use them. Didn’t matter. Ultimately, the Ls were never deployed.



Lets agree to disagree here. I’m not intimately familiar with any case, nor am I still in the life, but I stuck around close enough to provide overwatch. According to the DOT&E’s (now removed) evaluation report from the tests in Aberdeen, there where concerns with drop issues. It’s not my opinion. It’s a statement in an official document. Later, DOT&E backed off the report’s claim (after acceptance) by saying it wasn’t realistic drop situation and it met all requirements.

Subjectively speaking, I believe they needed to double down at that point because they had entered the contract and Glock was legally protesting DOD’s winner for several reasons. Drop fire being only one of them. Lets not forget Glock’s previously successful protest with S&W in Iraq. A little remaining DOD scorn perhaps?

Furthermore, Sig’s responses to the previous P320 issues and the timing of their striker “enhancement” wreaks of a corporate work-around to correct a known deficiency without the liability of acknowledging a dangerous design. If you look at it, Sig’s enhancement is the equivalent of adding a “half cock” to catch the sear.....in the event it slipped without the trigger being depressed. Weird. What could cause that? Also, look at the timeframe in which that occurred. That alone, suggests something.

I’m not here to start a pissing contest. You’re obviously experienced and well read on the equipment, which leaves me just as perplexed as you that you chose to champion the SCAR and M17 in direct response to my comment on their awarding of DOD contracts over the HK416 and G19x. With the exception of my rant that is clearly described as subjective, the points made in my original post and here are facts.

Ha. I’m not championing them. Not at all. The written word is hard to tell where someone is coming from. I was trying to provide a bit of context, as saying “jam-o-matic Scars” to most people without an experience base can lead to incorrect conclusions. When was the MK17 selected over the 416? I don’t remember it ever being involved in a test with the SCAR.

Both of the situations around the SCAR and especially the M17 are (I am tired of this word) nuanced. The SCAR is pretty accurately reported. The M17 trials and P320 recall not so much. We probably agree on this, but it doesn’t come across well.



Just some info for readers-

Sig handled the issue extremely poorly and they should be reminded of that. But, I think it’s better to talk about where the Sig is at this point and what uses are getting from their issued pistol. I dislike Sig decisions nearly across the board. In the past I have been a hater of Sig. Having said that, after using the pistols extensively, and measuring shooter performance I have to come off of that.

I might have more actual experience on government issued M17/18’s than anyone that doesn’t work for Sig. In 2018 I shot over 19k rounds on them, 2019 just over 14k on an M18 and a combined 15k on various M17’s. Additionally I watched 40 guys put just under 200,000 rounds on M18 and 17’s in 2019.
The M17 and M18 are very good pistols. In their base form users shoot them to a higher level than G19’s or 17’s. That is- better bulls-eye scores, better splits, faster reloads, etc. Performance with straight as issued M17/18 pretty well matches heavily modified Glocks. Due to the design of the M17/18, they can be safely modified far beyond what a Glock can. When taken to its limit, the Sig is as close to a 1911/2011 that can be had in a striker fired polymer pistol.
They do have a couple issues though. The front sights tend to walk and need to be staked. Also the M18’s barrels seem to suffer from poor grouping once they get 10-15k rounds on them. It looks to be a lockup issue. Barrel and recoil spring replacement corrects it. Other than a batch of M18’s with bad recoil springs, reliability has been a non issue. I personally have not had a single malfunction with any of the ones I’ve used. They’ve done well enough that the guys I’m around have Zev’d up, tricked out Glocks sitting in their box’s, while they shoot (now modded) Sigs.

Very enlightening.

Thank you.

Yep. And that's why they are the "PSA" guns I buy.

Yes but it isn't likely they would build all of their 7.62's in Georgia and then build this M110 somewhere else, especially considering they are built beside Ft Benning where the US Army trains it's Infantry!


Mike