• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Sidearms & Scatterguns Army REJECTS Glock 19X, "It's a shitty pistol that is not worth the Army's time and money." - General James C. McConville, Army Chief of Staff

Instead of buying new guns the army ought to have dedicated those funds to bullets and range time. Most infantry soldiers get no time with a pistol on the range. It’s hard to be confident in a skill that is never practiced.

I was in the Army for 10 years in a MOS that used sidearms, 95B. We were still using 1911's when I went in and units in my MOS received some of the first M9 pistols. The only range time with our "new" pistols was during qualifications twice a year. Outside of qualifications getting onto a range to practice was next to impossible. This was in the 90's so funds were tight for the military so most non essential functions were reduced or cut out completely.

But even with the shortage of funds we could have still easily afforded the ammunition costs to practice throughout the year. Instead of having "Range Month" for all of September, ration so much a month to let those who want to practice on their own time do so.

Every September it was the same thing in the Army, range day 5 days a week just burning through ammunition as fast as we could so we could ask for more only to end up shooting that up or even burying it instead of actually using it for something useful.
 
Most infantry soldiers don't get time with a pistol because most infantry soldiers don't get issued a pistol.
I wasn’t an MP so I dunno how much those guys get to shot pistol. I know I did carry as pistol as a 240 gunner and i shot about 50 or 100 rds a year.
 
Last edited:
The MPs probably don't get much either.
I know in 1-10 we trained the MPs there on a few flat ranges and helping them draw their pistols in a timely fashion left me fearing for them if they actually had to do that for real.
 
Where’s the Sig Cross owners in this thread?! :D. Gotta love that Sig QC.
44A5B4BD-655B-4C3F-8731-A907A431AE27.jpeg
 
Right here: I pulled the scope, muzzle brake, and grip off already. Luckily I kept the box to ship it back in because I absolutely knew this was gonna happen.

The good news is after the third recalled Sig I just saved the address in our UPS account so it’s saved a lot of time waiting on labels. As soon as I buy a Sig now I go ahead and slap a return label on it so I’m ahead of the curve when it tries to shoot itself.
 
LOL! Not really, Sig just barely beat them out, but I fucking hate Glock Fanbois!

tell us more.,... What Fanboys do you love?
 
tough to buy a bad handgun these days. Never owned a Glock, and the one Sig I had was a P226 legion. Wasn't my cup of tea, but not against trying a 320 or something like it in the future.
 
LOL! Not really, Sig just barely beat them out, but I fucking hate Glock Fanbois!

Gotta love the Sig fanbois complaining about the Glock fanbois. I don't personally prefer one over the other and have shot both during LAPD D platoon training.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theLBC
Gotta love the Sig fanbois complaining about the Glock fanbois. I don't personally prefer one over the other and have shot both during LAPD D platoon training.
+1
there are few guns i didn't like shooting. good revolvers are so sweet shooting. triggers like butta.
i'll admit the casul was novel, but not what i would call fun to shoot. the reactions from others was fun, or watching them shoot it. :p
was shooting a .357 right after and i thought i was shooting .38 spl.
 
It’s not like the Sig was chosen because of cost or that the M17 had some pretty bad issues after being accepted or anything. After all, Sig is known for their rock solid QC whereas Glock just rolls new shit out without proper testing.
 
I have never liked Glock trigger especially, to be honest all strikers are "decent".

I shot glocks, 320 and few other strikers and decided to get P10C.

I have not had a single malfunction on it yet since it was brand new, so it is running well during this "break-in" period, reached (only) 1k recently with it.

As I really like my P10C, I wonder why the CZ lost, I guess they could not reach that $180 per pistol..

Why the hell do they do trials, when they end up buying the cheapest? And why they just do not task selecting the best pistol to the people here in hide?
 
The MPs probably don't get much either.

They don't. I was an MP for 10 years and worked in the schoolhouse for MPs for 3 of it. We NEVER, EVER had any additional time on the range or any sort of training with pistols outside of biannual qualifications. And prior to stepping on the range they pointed out things on the pistol like the safety, magazine release and the sights. No mention of how to clear malfunctions or remedial action during a malfunction. Just "Raise your hand if you have a problem". And these were not dumb privates but soldiers with time in.

And to be honest most MPs that were NOT garrison didn't care to be issued or carry a pistol.

For those who do not know there are two type of MPs and you could be assigned to either type of company. There are garrison MPs and then there are Field MPs. The garrison MPs do law enforcement activities on military installations. They are the boots spit shined, pressed uniforms and everything polished up. Those are the ones most other soldiers hate. I HATED BEING A GARRISON MP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Field MPs did things like POW operations, route security, QRF operations and a lot more. I LOVED BEING A FIELD MP. What sucked, like being in a support MOS, is you could be in a relatively easy, stable position seeing your family every day then you get transferred to the field field unit and you are gone, ALL...THE...TIME. I preferred it, not because I wanted to get away from my wife but because being a baby sitter to other soldiers in garrison wasn't my idea of fun. Seemed like every other person you stopped was be a Major who made sure to tell you he knows the Provost Marshall.

I preferred the field MP companies over garrison. The field units were pretty quick to transfer those who were turds into garrison MP companies. So the field units tended to be filled with higher speed folks.
 
I have never liked Glock trigger especially, to be honest all strikers are "decent".

I shot glocks, 320 and few other strikers and decided to get P10C.

I have not had a single malfunction on it yet since it was brand new, so it is running well during this "break-in" period, reached (only) 1k recently with it.

As I really like my P10C, I wonder why the CZ lost, I guess they could not reach that $180 per pistol..

Why the hell do they do trials, when they end up buying the cheapest? And why they just do not task selecting the best pistol to the people here in hide?
I think they entered the p-07 and p-09 not the p10c.
 
Probably because there's no real operational (specific) requirements for a common pistol. Not like a squad automatic weapon or sniper rifle. The majority of the requirements are likely administrative and logistical in nature like maintenance, replacement, etc. Fact is, the Army at large, just doesn't kill people with pistols. There are just a lot of environments where Joe-blow needs to have a weapon on him to walk from Salsa night, to his CHU, to the JOC. Very few Soldiers are in places where a pistol is their primary. Those that do, use a pistol driven by operational requirements.

T'were it me, I'd just have the Army buy G19's. Some things don't require a downselect imo. We don't do them for printers(do we?🤔). But I think in some cases the full blown procurement process is followed to maintain the environment of fairness when dealing with vendors that also might be competing in something that matters, like the SAW.

As to letting SH rando's pick a pistol! LMAO! If the Army did that they'd be rocking Rem 700's in 308 with 20" barrels and 3.5lb triggers, and Gen 2 Mildot reticles, ha ha!

I dig the amount of logic here.
 
Fact is, the Army at large, just doesn't kill people with pistols. There are just a lot of environments where Joe-blow needs to have a weapon on him to walk from Salsa night, to his CHU, to the JOC.
Finally someone here with a good point! The number of people Army Soldiers killed with a pistol can be counted on one hand. Instead of spending millions testing a new weapon systems, we should have called it good with the G19. When I was in Iraq, I used my M9 to walk to and from the chow hall and that's it. I carried a captured TT on missions along with my M4.
 
A Tangent Theta? Dang...

ISIS be ballin'! They be hatin' 🤣
I wish lol. Obviously a TT-33. My experienced happened way before ISIS and CHUs...Back during the Rumsfeld day of, "you goto war with what you have". 82nd ABN Fallujah 2003.
 
Small world, I was in 1-504PIR for the 2003 Fallujah trip.
 
Small world, I was in 1-504PIR for the 2003 Fallujah trip.
Very small world. DCo 2-504PIR "White Devils". I commanded the the attached weapons company to you guys. What company were you in?
 
I wish lol. Obviously a TT-33. My experienced happened way before ISIS and CHUs...Back during the Rumsfeld day of, "you goto war with what you have". 82nd ABN Fallujah 2003.
TT-33? Was it due to lack of other options? Frankly speaking, between a Beretta 92FS/M9 and a TT-33, I would pick the Beretta. For all its flaws, in my opinion it is still a better pistol than a Tokarev.
 
Back in the good ol days there was a lot of “pick-up pistol or no pistol?”
 
Ok. For those of us out of the loop guys who know only about wheel guns what is a "good" pistol for the Military.
 
B Co and HHC
Cool. I admired how B Co used it's ingenuity using gym wall lockers for improvised armor on your cargo HMMWVs. We didn't have shit in 2003 to defend against IEDs. The capability that our guys have now is awesome.
 
Way back in the day I had a Glock 17, then I got a 19, then a 34. I shot them often and the 19 was my EDC. That went on for a few years. I liked the Gen3 Glocks...sadly, even after some parts tweaking, my Gen4 19 was never on the same level...and loved throwing brass into my face. Minor issue at least. They were reliable enough - only ever had issues with the 19. Eventually, I got to shoot a P320. Shortly afterwards, I didn't own any more Glock pistols.

My P320 is my main pistol. I shoot fewer and fewer other pistols these days, but still enjoy some variety. It is, easily and by a wide margin, better than any Glock I've ever fired. My issue M17 is more or less the same...no flexibility to swap out the issue sights, unfortunately, and the trigger is heavier. Far, far, far better than any M9 I've ever fired on its best day. Better, even, than my old 92G Elite II. Push comes to shove, I'd take the Glock over the Beretta.

It really just boils down to fit. Glock and Beretta fit my hand badly...no other word for it. Just not a good shooter-pistol interface. They shoot well, but they suck to shoot. At some point, you get tried of fighting the gun. That's enough justification for me to run a SIG. I don't hate Glock. Recommended the 19 for my brother and helped him set it up. Really like the looks of the 48 and might pick one up to replace my Kahr P9 and P320 compact. The 19 is a better carry gun than the P320, even if it's less pleasant/more difficult to shoot well.

I have zero interest in the 19X as an issue gun while the 34 (or even the 17) exist. If you're gonna give me a 19, I'll take the compact original.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Doctorwho1138
For those of us out of the loop guys who know only about wheel guns what is a "good" pistol for the Military.

My original question.

The MPs here at Fort Wood seem to shoot quite a bit, but all I see is M9.

Thanks for the info. Better than the lame ass non answer I got. Old Corps retired Marine here and wanted to know what people are looking for in service weapons. Of course no surprise that in my era the 1911 was it for us and all we had in Nam. It did it's job. Don't how it stacks
up to some more modern composite designs I see now.
 
@wbm ~ without going line by line through the solicitation, this time around it was (IIRC) modular, with a safety, 9x19. The cheap and reliable are implied, of course.

The main advantage of any of these new pistols compared to the 1911 is the ability to shoot 7 times...and then keep shooting 8 more times (or 10 in some cases). Also, for big Army, exposed hammers in the cocked position are scary.

I sent my P320 out to have some work done a few years back (GGI action, Dawson sights) and swapped over to shooting single stack for USPSA while it was out. The P320 was somewhat new to me at the time and I actually enjoyed a little performance increase on certain courses of fire moving to the 1911. It was comparable overall. Production limited to 10 rounds, single stack to 8...even without going “meta“ and running a .45 ACP instead of a (.40), I really enjoyed running my 1911. With more time on the P320 I’ve moved on, of course. The main advantage being the easier reach to the controls, easier reloads (for actual shooting).

Compared to the Beretta, I would take the 1911 every day and twice on Sunday. I say that having learned to shoot on an M92FS Inox and spending a fair amount of time on a 92G Elite II. I’d take my P226 over the Beretta as well, but the Army disagreed there. I’d likely take a Glock 34 over any of the aforementioned.
 
Compared to the Beretta, I would take the 1911 every day and twice on Sunday.

Appreciate it.

Got to sit in at one of the "hands on" parts of the testing for a new police firearm over a decade ago. It was at one of the Native American reservations.. Each manufacturer gave their spiel and demonstrated the capabilities of their weapon. The worst by far was the S&W...almost embarrassing actually...and the best ended up being the Glock...that's what the tribe picked. Got to handle the S&W.. Trigger pull was so bad I thought the weapon was on safe and when it did engage it felt like it had sand in it. Being a certified professional curmudgeon I thought "hell I'll go with my old Colt Diamond Back any day."
(Yeah I know but if I need more than six I figure I had a bad plan going in and anymore wouldn't help.)
 
Where’s the Sig Cross owners in this thread?! :D. Gotta love that Sig QC. View attachment 7504472

The cross is an epic pile of shit. Believe it or not you can accept that some companies make some good and some bad products, it’s when you fall for everything being amazing because you’re a fanboy that you look really stupid, a lot of people do that and I’ve never understood why. Small minds I suppose.

Except if you like glock, because it’s “perfection” because they say so. Glock has put out some trash too though. The first couple years of the gen 4’s were atrocious, they actually had reliability issues and not just the inconvenience of throwing brass at your face. They’re also notorious for wearing the slide catch excessively fast compared to others to the point that they won’t lock back or will go into battery from the slightest movement because the catch is a thin shitty design. I also had the trigger bar or something fail in one of mine (I couldn’t figure it out, everything looked normal but Glock fixed it) that was 100% stock and didn’t even have 1k rounds on it and wouldn’t fire. So no, Glocks are not perfect either.

Sig has had some documented issues with the P320’s but only the non safety models, the M17/M18 has been solid. Yes I’m sure some defective parts go into guns and slip through the cracks, but the same thing happens everywhere. Glock has a warranty/service department that stays busy too, and most departments have a Glock armorer for this very reason too.
 
Except if you like glock, because it’s “perfection” because they say so.
i wish retards would actually take a look at the glock website before they commented.....because then retards would realize the "glock perfection" is referring to glocks PURSUIT of perfection....not them claiming their products are perfect.

but then retards wouldnt be retards.
 
i wish retards would actually take a look at the glock website before they commented.....because then retards would realize the "glock perfection" is referring to glocks PURSUIT of perfection....not them claiming their products are perfect.

but then retards wouldnt be retards.

That’s not the way the fanboys see it. Guess they’re not quite there considering they lost the contract though.
 

Attachments

  • C0C176BD-FAA3-483E-923E-9AAD9E1D7962.jpeg
    C0C176BD-FAA3-483E-923E-9AAD9E1D7962.jpeg
    262.8 KB · Views: 41
That’s not the way the fanboys see it. Guess they’re not quite there considering they lost the contract though.
eh, at least glock didnt make a gun that went off by its self, knew about it, and released it to the public anyways.

but i guess "perfection" is making a cheaper pistol that meets minimum requirements....eh?
 
The requirements were posted posted for the MHS contract.
Glock just sent in their model with the most minimal requirements hit, which Sig actually developed a platform specific to the requirement to compete.

I'll bring up the idea that Sig might be willing to work with their contracts versus Glock's inability to conform to requests. Maybe once Gaston realizes he should just sit on profit and relinquish creative control of the company.

EDIT: I feel what @lowlight feels now. *shake head*

Hi,

Except every firearm adopted by SOCOM gets real users feedback during the T&E phase and shit is still fucked up; up to and including the very day SOCOM signs adoption papers they seek "fixes", lolol.

Sig sold at cost, hahahaha Ford dealership just had a commercial that I could by a new truck at dealer cost too.
Did big Army actually pull the vendor and supplier COGS that Sig pays?
Did big Army actually pull the machine run time vs manhours per each pistol?
Shit...does big Army even know how many manhours it takes per each pistol?
Entirely no way big Army knows what it cost Sig to make the pistol.

Sincerely,
Theis
 
Some of you need perspective.

Ernst Langdon - awesome shooter w/ various versions of Beretta, still committed to the design. Also the SIG P220.
Dave Sevigny - awesome shooter w/ various Glocks, including the 19 (shooting to win with a stock pistol at least once).
Max Michel - awesome shooter w/ various SIG, just took the overall win at USPSA Area with a Carry Optic 320.
Jerry Miculek - rocking people's socks since before I was born (I think...maybe not...I'm getting old), S&W M&P -AND- revolvers.
Angus Hobdell - awesome shooter w/ various CZ
Rob Leatham - called "TGO" for a reason, 1911/single stack

I could go on, and there is probably a nuanced discussion that can be had reference the merits of various designs...but, that sure as hell isn't happening in this thread. The idea that any of these designs are more than marginally better, one way or another, is pretty far fetched when you consider what people who can actually shoot do with them on a regular. The vast majority of shooters, especially military shooters, are so far from the edge of what's possible with their pistol that they'll never hit the design limits. The accessibility of the design will be far more important.

"But Dave, those guys are all USPSA/IPSC/IDPA shooters and competition is toally Bull$hit, only 'the street' matters!" Oh, right, I totally forgot that having an accurate and reliable pistol doesn't matter at all for competition, how silly of me. Seriously, though, if a pistol starts its design life as a duty gun and makes the transition to the pinnacle of speed and accuracy, it may be worth discussing the changes and modifications required to get there and whether they have merit for duty use. E.g. I would never consider the extensive work that guys like Brian Enos did to Gen3 S&W autos as even remotely viable/practical.
 
The MPs here at Fort Wood seem to shoot quite a bit, but all I see is M9.
Could be wrong but you probably see MPs shooting more at Leonard Wood because that’s where their initial qualification takes place. I just don’t think MPs and any regular army unit gets quite a bit of range time with pistols.
 
I think that anytime somebody comments on a pistol thread, it should be mandatory to also include a video of them shooting their preferred pistol. Any drill of choice as long as it includes a reload, is done on a shot timer, and shows the time and hits on target. Or better set, shooting a set course of fire with all those elements plus movement. I'll wager that 95% of people claiming a pistol is trash are probably just trash at shooting and their opinions can be safely ignored.
Agree 100%
#1 reason I'll never enter into the fray!
 
I think that anytime somebody comments on a pistol thread, it should be mandatory to also include a video of them shooting their preferred pistol. Any drill of choice as long as it includes a reload, is done on a shot timer, and shows the time and hits on target. Or better set, shooting a set course of fire with all those elements plus movement. I'll wager that 95% of people claiming a pistol is trash are probably just trash at shooting and their opinions can be safely ignored.

i would, but i don't want to scratch one of my mags. :ROFLMAO:

74pwXR0.jpg
 
I did testing for the MHS program. It was about money that's it. The SIG is also VERY accurate.
 
What's "very" accurate?

It's also not very accurate when shot like this, which is sort of the point many are making

Go check out Gray Guns. I’m assuming their original work with the P320 is still around somewhere on the internet. They were definitely seeing below 3” at 50 yards, but how good it was is lost to my memory. The accuracy of the P320 isn’t really in question. You do have me curious about my example now...

ETA: https://grayguns.com/grayguns-range-report-sig-sauer-p320/

See what time does to your brain? His average was 3“ @ 50 yds for the stock gun. He noted his buddiy’s example threw flyers out of the group for manually cycled rounds and had a very loose slide to frame fit to which he attributed that.
 
Last edited:
My OCD is bothering me. In the OP article it says the 19x is “Glocks first crossover pistol”?

They had one out years ago. Maybe the 30S falls under a different designation?