Where have all the knights gone?
- Thread starter Mj30wilson900
- Start date
No I'm not quoting Sig's press release now loose the insults. This is Sig's press release and it's not nearly as detailed the information posted in Soldier Systems and many other publications.
https://www.sigsauer.com/press-rele...er-receiver-group-surg-with-mcx-rifle-system/
I’ve found NAVFAC to be a better customer than USACE, albeit even more detail oriented. But my slice of the pie is narrow.
Notice how no one here who disagrees is making any effort whatsoever to talk objectively about the KAC and show specifically how the KAC is more reliable more accurate more modular or a better choice for continuous suppression (which is probably the future on the battlefield) than the MCX and there's a reason why it's because you can't because it isn't.
Instead the replies are focused on disqualifying the information presented (the SURG test results) even though that information is undeniable after having been covered by multiple publications that can be located in a few minutes with a simple Google search. That's because what each and every one of you including myself knows is that if that information from the SURG results is true then this isn't a debate whatsoever.
KAC has a 30+ year proven track record of putting out some of the most reliable, durable and shootable guns on the planet. They have been one of the leading innovators with many of their inventions becoming mainstream later down the road for both the 15 and -10.
There are numerous examples of guns going 10. 15. 20k+ rounds without cleaning and just lube. The SR25 as the early 90's guns, the MK11 , K series, ect have been a mainstay of US special operations for 30 years.
KAC guns are a known quanity. They are ALWAYS hard to find becuase they get bought almost as fast as they are produced. This was true for the Early Knights guns, the Mod 0, Mod 1 and Mod 2. Their accessories and parts are always sold out because as soon as batch hits distributors, they sell out. The market , especially the informed gun market know what they are getting.
Sig on the other hand , specifically SIGUSA has an abysmal track record and I could write a book about how they took one of the most respected names in the firearm world and drove it to the ground. Lucky there are enough low information consumers to buy their shit, despite the same cycle happening again and again over the last 20+ years.
No one with two brain cells to rub together would take a SIG gun over a KAC.
These guns will be low rate white side SOF supplementing /replacing the MK18 while most everyone will be running a M4 derivative of some sort. Black Side will continue to buy whatever the fuck they want, and its not Sig.
So at the end of the day the boys downrange get saddled with a substandard product from a company known to put out untested shity products by a bunch of functional retards in contracting and the careerist shitbags at FORCEMOD.
It will most likely go like the PSR, few units shipped, mostly stay in arms room because they will break when run hard and taken out of service a few years later because they don't want them.
The Contract is what is know as an IDIQ. its not a real contract, its like a credit card with a limit to how much you can spend.
That means they can buy up to $48M, They can also decide to buy none . They could buy 5 guns and say fuck it, end the contract. There is a snowballs change in hell they will ever procure that many of these guns.
They obligated $24K in the first year of award(2018) That is like 10 guns...........Tells you how ready they are to buy these... LOL
To those with no experience in government procurement, its easy to bullshit them with press releases and terms they don't understand. Harder to fool the people who do it for a living.
Last edited:
So your suggestion is that the information on Soldier Systems and the several other publications that covered it is a shill advertisement paid by Sig. That's quite a mouthful and why would Sig pay other publications to shill ads which discuss how other manufacturers SURG entries couldn't meet the contract requirements because if that's not true then Sig and/or the publication could be civilly liable for slander that's potentially damaging to a competitor's product's reputation. I think this is a weak argument you're making here.
Lol the 20,000 round without cleaning your speaking of is from a magazine publication (it was Ballistic Radio) who ran an SR15 during the test however it was not shot suppressed for 20,000 rounds like the Sig which I would argue is an unlikely feat for a DI gun. Funny how some can be picky and choosy about the publications they listen to and ignore based on if they like hearing the information or if they don't.
To Expand on this.
As somebody who spent almost 8 years testing DoD equipment ranging from Small Arms, and body armor to small, medium, and large caliber ammunition, for the Army Test and Evaluation Command, interpreting a publicly released statement regarding an award/IDIQ as test data/results is quite silly. An example of test data would be something along the lines of Dispersion or mean rounds between failure(MRBF). These are values that are present in every test conducted with the DoD. . The information that Ronin is repeating really says nothing about the test results.
What I would ask in regards to not only the SURG test, but any test is, was the test actually completed. Do we we actually have a full set of data to make an honest assessment on how good a piece of equipment may be. Do we know what vendors submitted and how those weapons fared against each other.
From my experience, reading the following link,
Crane “Contaminates” SURG Test Samples By Crosspolinating Weapon Components Between Vendor Submissions, Calls On Offerors For New Samples | Soldier Systems Daily
Naval Surface Warfare Center - Crane in Indiana is responsible for the testing and procurement of USSOCOM’s weapons. One of the projects they have been work ...
soldiersystems.net
The SURG test reads as a total shit show, and I would not at all be surprised if they just chose something at a certain point because they could not read and carry out a test plan.
What I can tell you from direct experience, is that The CSASS testing was awarded prior to the completion of phase 3 of testing, at at the time of the award, of the 3 weapons that were down selected, the weapon chosen was the heaviest, least accurate, most expensive and least reliable weapon. The decision to make the award was made absent of test results almost 700 miles south.
That is why it has taken almost 5 years to actually start getting some of weapons in the hands of the warfighters. The weapon that won the csass, was a complete shit show.
This is very not remarkably different that how a weapon with reliability issues was selected for as the MHS.
Let me tell you how awesome it feels to be carrying out a test, and in the middle of testing, somebody in New Jersey announces that a system that which in now way can be view as outperforming its pears was awarded the contract/IDIQ.
So yes, based on the test and evaluations that I participated in, the lack of test data, the limited amount of weapons that show up down range, the number of weapons that were complete shit shows getting tied up in lot acceptance testing, I am somewhat skeptical of any claim that may indicate how good a weapon may be just because of an award.
In regards to KAC, I pretty much agree with the above poster in that, They have been a constant presence within the DoD testing community for almost 3 decades and they have done an excellent job taking test data and refining their weapons systems. That is part of the reason that History of the SR25 ranges from the original match rifle, to the Mk11, to the M110, to Battle rifle, to the K1 to the SOCOM 6.5 upper kit. I can say with a fairly high degree of confidence that across their product line, KAC puts out a pretty good product. I base this not only test results, but operation and personal use. Is it worth the premium that they charge. Maybe, Maybe not. I like mine, but I don't think that its significantly better than many of its peers.
Last edited:
That article also discusses how CRANE corrected that situation
"Last week, Crane contacted vendors and informed them that any offeror which had passed Phase I could resubmit three samples by 26 October in order to continue participation in the solicitation.
The government will then reaccomplish Phase I and then move on to Phases I & III with the resubmitted samples."
The purpose of the SURG program was to address that (in SOCOM's own words)
"Current Legacy systems are not designed for continuous suppression"
And to improve upon
"Improved reliability and endurance over legacy unsuppressed systems, Improved thermal characteristics, Improved System durability and Reduce the toxic fume and blowback exposure to operators.”
That was another internet article. What was submitted, what was down selected, were all phases of ITOE testing completed, and if so how did system identified in the IOTE fair in OTE/lot acceptance testing.
Outside of information that found itself on a couple websites there is no test data available.
If somebody handed me a CSASS or M17 down range, even two years removed from contract award, after being involved in those test, I don't know if I would give them the crazy eyes or fight them.
Last edited:
What companies are each you affiliated with and what is your postion within them?
I think enough data's available to draw the conclusion that the Sig is a better rifle than the KAC unless we're stuck on the theory that such data was just a big conspiracy shill despite the legal liabilities involved.
You keep using that word. I don't think you know what it means
Can you point out what the systems MRBF or Dispersion was. Those are both pretty simple data points.
This gun was to compete with the 416's mission. Short, Suppressed, High volume without shooting itself apart. Problem is most of SOCOM doesn't need or want a 416. As some have reported, its more common to see them with support folks and strap hangers than assaulters. This is telling.
The 416 has its own set of issues but unless you are running Short Barreled, Suppressed, high volume where durability is a concern, then DI is always superior to a piston system, especially in an AR. Lots and lots of DA
The 416 may or may not be getting phased out.
There is exactly one Piston system on the planet that is worth running in an AR. And unless you meet the criteria above, you are better off with DI.
This gun was a White side SOF procurement. The types of units that need that capability, are generally Black side or SMU/JSOC level. Those guys are going to buy whatever they want because their own R&D departments make big SOCOM procurement look like a teeball team.
So this is a novelty that I predict will be short lived because when it is run hard, it will be a typical SIG product. The contract was created in a way that the Gov can walk away at any time , which it will most likely do in the next couple years.
A couple officers get promotions a couple other ones get jobs with Sig or a think tank that sig pays the salary for and the guys on the ground will keep using what works unless something better comes along. Doubt this is it.
The 416 has its own set of issues but unless you are running Short Barreled, Suppressed, high volume where durability is a concern, then DI is always superior to a piston system, especially in an AR. Lots and lots of DA
The 416 may or may not be getting phased out.
There is exactly one Piston system on the planet that is worth running in an AR. And unless you meet the criteria above, you are better off with DI.
This gun was a White side SOF procurement. The types of units that need that capability, are generally Black side or SMU/JSOC level. Those guys are going to buy whatever they want because their own R&D departments make big SOCOM procurement look like a teeball team.
So this is a novelty that I predict will be short lived because when it is run hard, it will be a typical SIG product. The contract was created in a way that the Gov can walk away at any time , which it will most likely do in the next couple years.
A couple officers get promotions a couple other ones get jobs with Sig or a think tank that sig pays the salary for and the guys on the ground will keep using what works unless something better comes along. Doubt this is it.
An observation regarding Sig and some of their more recent awards and or evaluations. I would guess that around 6 or 7 years ago, one of our test directors ended up getting a job with Sig. In speaking with him before he popped smoke, He said that he was going up there to help them with their testing program in order to fair better when being evaluated. While small arms testing has not really changed in the last 50 years, I can see how bringing on somebody who from the testing world could pay dividends down the road.
I think that Sig has excellent engineering team, and I really like their vision but I really don't think their quite there in regards to execution. Personally speaking, I really like the Spear/ Sig NGSAR concept, especially the .277/6.8 Bimetal case design but I think it will be years into we see anything commercially released or adopted in the .277 from Sig.
But with all things Sig their is a they did something really weird by choosing a bullet diameter that really doesn't have alot of VLD bullets to chose from. So the .277 outperforms the 6.5cm but practically speaking, you are only going to see an extra hundred yards for range so is that worth running at 80k vs 60k.
We have figured out how to guns reliably with ammo that generates 60k PSI but it was a little rough getting to that point. running at 80k, that is going to be a challenge.
Oh How I miss the drive to Edgewood every morning....NOT. One of my mday officers was a PM on the XM25 project. Its amazing anything happens gets developed/tested at APG. Then again I didn't have access behind the real fence line.
Knocking off work on wensdays to go shoot skeet and trap with the old heads was the only thing redeeming working at that dump.
Knocking off work on wensdays to go shoot skeet and trap with the old heads was the only thing redeeming working at that dump.
OH God. That monstrosity,lol They could never get those stupid little 25mm to work, I think that was one of the weapons that worked good in environmental testing but shit the bed during ambient or something like that. Really weird stuff. They ended up trying the same fuzing on some 40mm a couple years later and I don't recall what came of it.
Edgewood/APG was a trip, I think we had almost a half dozen people get killed while I was there. Mark Henry and a couple of his crew got killed when a round detonated in the chamber of a T64, George drowned at the Super Pond, Two Navy Divers Drowned on the day that it reopened, a grass cutter got killed on a zero turn lawn mower and an electrician got electrocuted. Complete shit show.
Shit... I remember when one of the test directors was proofing 120mm M1 barrels and when he went super elevated somehow his crew loaded an 829 incited of a canon proof slug and launched that thing. Radar lost the projectile at 20,000 meters . Nobody really said anything about that.
But god forbid a stupid dear walks onto a range a couple hundred yards behind a dispersion target.
But, I tell you what, Wings and pies had some pretty damn good old bay wings
Last edited:
