This Is Why the U.S. Army Chose Sig Sauer Over Glock for Its New Handgun
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 янв 2024
- In 2017, the U.S. Army announced that Sig Sauer won its XM17 Modular Handgun System competition. Sig Sauer beat out Glock Inc., FN America, and Beretta USA, the M9 9mm service pistol makers at the time, in the competition for the Modular Handgun System, or MHS, program.
Support us:
RUclips : @USDefenseNews
Facebook : / usdn.official
Instagram : / us_defensenews
If you have any problems viewing this Video, please report it here: usdn.official@gmail.com 
Наука
![PIECE BY PIECE - Official Trailer [HD] - Only In Theaters October 11](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7Bc6trBc1kc/mqdefault.jpg)
Over 35 years of experience in the IT industry as a government contractor has taught me the rules of government contract awarding. It is the lowest bid that meets the requirements of the RFP. Since Glock was a finalist along with Sig, it is obvious they both met the requirements. It was the $102 million lower bid on Sig's part that resulted in their selection.
This pops into my mind every time I hear a government contract has been awarded lol lowball = win
Absolutely
Mil spec, highest quality for the lowest price
Trust me bro
Well, you have two handguns that fundamentally have very little to choose between them as far as ease of use, maintenance, and reliability. But one of them costs almost 100% more than the other....
I can see why saving $102 Million was a huge incentive for the Army. That'll buy three toilet seats and a hammer!
Ha-ha, a good one.👍
Biden economics lol
and none of them will work.
LOL
you must have been living under a rock your whole life
3:27 looks like this dude's first time handling a pistol.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed.
and his helm hanging down
Hahaha brand new Army Officer right there.
Came here to say that exact thing...
He looks scared
Watching this video, I was surprised how many people did not know how to grip the handgun.
For real
Gripping the handgun should always be practiced with many different attempts. When you get to the point you need a handgun, it's unlikely you'll be using the same stance and/or grip.
It's like the trainers don't even deal with that, just point & shoot
Sig had the added feature of being able to shoot the enemy when they force you to drop the gun.
HA! good one.
😂😂😂
That's funny.
Talk on, talk on !
Truer words were never spoken 😅
Lmaoooo 😂
“If you pull a pistol in the middle of combat, you are in deep” - that really hit home
Truth in that
Or fighting in a cramped building. Which is probably worse.
Only Use your pistol to fight your way to a rifle
lol.. yep.. a self firing weapon is great if you get disabled.
deep state is working
"Remember that all your equipment was made by the lowest bidder." -Sarge Pepper, China Beach.
as were the NASA Space shuttles......
Just like the M16 I went to Vietnam with. We actually thought they were made in a Matel Toy factory.
@@muzzlebrake100 your not entirely wrong early ar15 variants being made out of bakelite are found in alot of toys back in the day.
@@muzzlebrake100there was literally a batch of m16’s made by Mattel for the war effort that gave that rumor wings
To paraphrase Neil Armstrong, IIRC, on sitting on top of the rocket that would take him to the moon, "I can't tell you how comforting it is to be sitting on top of a bomb made of a million parts, each by the lowest bidder."
3:26 wtf is that stance & grip? No way that guy is serious 😂
The times they are a changin', as is the military readiness.
He's actually the best in his class!
Stance and grip are good plans. They always say - no plans survive first contact.
But yet he had the balls to join in while you play keyboard army
It seems to me that the stiffness of his new gloves impedes a more natural grip. I hope it is that, and not his intuition that makes him do that. I mean, I do airsoft skirms every now and then, and I practice with my airsoft replicas all the time, including all kinds of handguns, ranging from Walther PPQ to Desert Eagle. Although I don't shoot real rounds, I know how to handle a pistol, assault rifle, marksman rifle, and sniper rifle. Weight and proportions are similar to the real steel. But I cannot imagine as how to get myself to hold a pistol like that, except for some condition that eludes me.
3:26 Leadership needs to show this man how to shoot a pistol correctly
He is not a soldier, he is an actor with a military suit.
Get him a proper sized helmet too.
As a former small arms instructor I thought the same thing.
I looking if anyone was thinking the same. Holy crap on a cracker…
@@pedroparamo-fw6ezthank you haha, this video was made off of that subscription service where you can get professional footage of anything, Cant remember the name rn, but thats what you're bound to find, not actual military footage
Yikes! some of those shooters look like it is their first time shooting a gun.
I almost died at 4:58, lol
@@petehaack5228 Yeah I thought I was watching some police drama from the 1970's with that grip!
It probably was their first time and I wouldn’t say that the military puts all much time into pistol training for most soldiers.
@Grouse2275 Accurate statement. I was an ASARIQ guy (up to .50 cal) and we only had people shoot 40 round quals once a year. With a one for one brass turn also, no one wanted to do much shooting either as it required crawling around in the overgrown range grass, trying to find each casing. And no, we didn't bring excess brass as if you got caught during a spot check, you were going to have a nice chat with the folks from CID.
If you think that's bad, you should see how average police are with handguns, especially unloading them, holstering and unholstering...
I always liked the Beretta. I retired from the military over sixteen years ago.
M1911: Am I joke to you...
@@PurpleBossonius What?
@@TheRetiredVeteranThe M1911 was the longest standing pistol issued to military personnel.
@@mitherapeuticmassage I know that. I served on active duty for over twenty-one years. The Beretta was in use while I was in the military. As a commissioned officer I carried the Beretta as my side arm.
and what was the issue with the 92F back in the day ??
The only reason why they went for the Sig was the price.
But price isn't everything.
Cheaper components does not necessarily mean better.
The Army is like that with everything from tanks to pencils, if they can get it done cheaper, that's the option they'll go for. Sometimes the quality is the the same, but a lot of times it isn't. I don't think SIG has an inferior product though
Love watching Sig and Glock fans get after it while most of us just buy both and appreciate them both for what they are... pretty great guns overall
Thats what i did
@@batistanoreSame here. I like them both.
Same but those on active duty deserve the best we can offer and a lot of service men are reporting frame failures and parts failures.
@@Shackleford_Rustygive literally one piece of evidence of that. I won’t wait
As an army Airborne Infantryman i have to say i like the m17, no complaints here.
Murphy's Law of Combat: "Always remember your weapon was made by the lowest bidder."
The lower bidder that met the specs... which is much different from what you are attempting to imply here.
@@thomgizziz Yeah these guys are off. If I want a car that will go 0-60 in 10 seconds or less and last me 250k miles or whatever, why would I be wrong for buying a toyota or honda when I could buy the customcar2000? Yeah it isnt the best car out there but if it does what I want it to do whats the problem? Change your requirements if they arent what you actually needed lol
@@thomgizziz The P320 actually didn't meet the specs. That was the whole controversy around it being picked. The trials were halted as soon as Sig announced their bid price which was cheaper than a Hi point.
Amen! Your weapons and ammo are made too easy for military service! In bulk and you must make the most with what you have ! And you question why you volunteered for this!
And we probably also should talk about the ammo. And of course quality of the guns sent in for testing vs. quality of guns delivered for the soldiers.
The ability too break it into 2 sharp combat knifes is the innovation the handgun markets been desperately needing
Sig Sauer also got contracts with the army for the new infantry rifle (XM7) and machine gun (XM250).
OK, so who in congress gets the kick back ?
@@dannoringer
That’s some scary 💩.
As a police officer of over 20 years, I have been always been a glock guy. In the past few years I have purchased 3 Sigs. The Sig P365, P322 and recently a P365 X Macro. Glock dropped the ball in the concealed carry market for sure. The capacity and size of a Sig P365 and P365 X Macro is a game changer. After thousands of rounds through the P365, I've yet to have a single malfunction.
But the 365s are prone to corrosion, right? I'd rather have an FN Reflex.
@@kwinzman I've never heard of that issue and I have never had that issue while carrying a P365 over the past few years.
@@kwinzman My g42 rusted to hell after 3 months in a texas summer. Ive carried my 365 for close to two years and it doesnt have a speck of rust on it
As somebody who owns multiple Sig and Glock products myself, the Sig P365 and P320 are two totally different products with drastically differing user bases and experiences. It should be mentioned that since its release, the P320 has been plagued with numerous safety and reliability issues, and numerous Law Enforcement departments won't even go near them due to the liability (or perceived liability), especially considering the numerous reports of firearms discharging while in holsters or when dropped. AFAIK the P365 models do not suffer from this issue, but it should also be mentioned that Sig as a company has been known to release products to the public without extensive testing prior, and then making changes to the product after a significant amount of a particular issue becomes apparent, essentially letting its customers be the (unknowing) beta testers of new products. With a new model Glock you can expect it to perform as reliable as any of the previous models, and to many this is extremely important.
I run the Glock 43x with shield mags for my concealed carry and have zero problems
3:24 Gomer shoots a handgun for the first time
😂
5:22 is wearing gardening gloves 😅
The cringe factor is high
Right? I don't even shoot, and I knew that was incredibly poor form. But I wouldn't blame him, I'd blame his instructors.
Quite possibly the gayest presentation of a firearm I’ve ever seen
I found both to work quite well. No issues with either.
Watching some of these military folks shoot, gives me heartburn. We are in big trouble.
Is no one going to mention how they hold and grip them pistols? This concerns me...
I cringed
How is the army training these days ?
The design of the Sig grip makes it harder to maintain a high purchase compared to a Glock. Consequently, muzzle flip is much worse.
@@RUclipsHandlesAreMoronic I own 4 different variants and have not once “tea cuped” my firearm…the big f up sig did was not release it in a 1911 style grip. For me I have banana hands so the original frame wasn’t awful but a 320 in a 1911 frame is a game changer. A 320 in a steel frame is even better.
@@DecayingReality try the P80 grip module for the P320. It totally changed the shooting dynamics.
@@alfayadh DOD kicked out all the senior cadre so now no one in the DoD knows how to do anything anymore. Like the amount of training accidents with aircraft and naval exercises is absolutely horrendous. Like we are almost getting more casualties right now than the entire GWOT.
There were plenty of better guns on the market. This met the specs and was cheapest. There wasn't anything wrong with the M9 other than they had been worn out. The only reason the 1911 stayed around so long was that there were so many made in WWII, that it took until the late 70s for the supply to get critical.
On point. The price was the sole reason the M9 was being replaced and the price was the only reason the sig was chosen. It didn't even pass any of the reliability trials which is why we got that silly dropping AD issue out the gate. But, its an entire handgun weapon system sold for the same price as a Hi point, any military would be stupid not to jump on that deal. Even if groups like SOCOM picked up Glocks instead, having a large supply of insanely cheap handguns to throw into circulation is well worth the purchase.
@@DaveSmith-cp5kj Military Grade equals good enough.
They should have looked at the Steyr M1
Yeah but they ran an ass load of ammo through the 1911s every one was on a 9 mm kick
In the XM9 program, the 1911 was the control weapon and, to the rules of the competition, to obtain a significantly lower score than the 1911 in even one of the tests meant to be kicked out of it. The entries had to demonstrate to be better weapons than the one they replaced.
In the XM17 program, there was not a M9 around to be seen.
"Beating out the competition" in a military contract doesn't necessarily mean it's the best. In the 1984 tests the Sig P226 actually outperformed the Beretta M9 in testing, but the contract was awarded to Beretta because they offered the lower price. I guess Sig didn't want to get undercut again, so this time they severely underbid Glock to the point where the final phase of testing between the two finalists never happened. Subsequent individual testing of the Sig M17 (aka P320) after approval revealed some issues, including a poor performance in drop testing that had to be addressed. Remember, the military contracts are always awarded to the lowest bidder out of the final selections that have passed their minimum requirements.
Does anyone know what pistol Delta, and Seal teams prefer to use.??
I'd imagine that when you get to that point in your career, there's a list of approved weapons you can basically pick from, barring specific mission requirements. Basically anything that meets that services standards for reliability and accuracy.
Hi-point
If you read, “No Easy Day,” the memoir of a Seal from DEVGRU on the mission to get Bin Laden, Matt Bissonette describes having their choice of weapons, optics, setups, etc.
Seriously, how often are the modular features really going to be used in a military handgun?
realistically, never
Ikr. Our enemies are not using .357 Sig or 40 cal. They either be using 9mm, 9x18 or 7.62x25. The police departments throughout USA? Well. I don't know any police that uses .357 sig. Also police department isn't like us who switch caliber carry all the time.
S serial numbers are only on Tigger guard
Never. SIG buys contracts they dont earn them.
You never know. But they want that ability more than pompous glock telling them what they will or won't need.
From a maintenaince standpoint, the sig frame cam be replaced as it gets worn or damaged without replacing the serial number. This makes it much easier to replace the part.
Polymer frames are not typically a ware point in pistols. The replaceable frames offer absolutely 0 real world benefit for a military. Soldiers are not going to swap out frames nor are the armorers going to want to provide such a capability. The military doesn't benefit from any legality concerning the chassis considering it isn't subject to any firearms legislation as it is. The chassis requirement was clearly decided by Sig Sauer and the US military prior to the contract to artificially limit competition.
@@LawlessNate”not typically a wear point” sounds like you haven’t seen some arms rooms out there… I’ve heard and seen some horror stories that even if the frame is swappable is a plus…
@@Maverick1944 On a metal framed pistol that has a hundred thousand rounds of .45 through it? Maybe. A polymer framed pistol with 9mm? That's not going to ware out. You aren't going to shoot enough rounds through it to wear it out. Other things in the gun will break before the frame. There are polymer framed pistols documented to have several hundred thousands rounds through them, and their frames aren't breaking.
Also, if anything, the chassis of a 320 itself is likely to wear out before a traditional polymer framed pistol's frame ever would.
@@LawlessNate guess my point was missed, I’m not talking about just shooting the gun, I’m also talking about pure neglect on the part of some soldiers. I’ve seen guys treat M4s like garbage. One soldier was asked to move the M4s a few yards to get them out of the way and the guy was pushing them over with his feet before he was stopped by his CO and corrected. There are already reports of polymer frames breaking in extreme cold. So having that replaceable seems like a pretty nice feature without having to replace the entire gun.
@@Maverick1944 if neglect and abuse are an issue, id go Glock every day of the week and twice on weekends if my life depended on it working.
I like the p320 xl. It bounces right back at what I was aiming at. Good stuff.
What was wrong with Colt m 1911 cal 45 or the SW revolvers?
Revolvers are extremely heavy compared to other pistols that have similar stopping power, and they take way too long to reload. And in my experience, the 1911 jams more often than it shoots.
There are plenty of arguments about what's better between the 1911 or the striker fired pistols - but 1911's jamming is a cop-out. I have 4 1911's and will shoot cases of ammo through them and never have a jam. They don't jam anymore than anything else, and if they do it's usually due to poor ammo or limp wristing - or maybe if they are completely and utterly abused and never cleaned, ever.
Jamming in most cases is the ammunition . I only own European quality handguns. Walther, FN, H&K. I am not a SIG fan. Find it interesting a large number of police departments are getting rid of the SIGs. The FBI has dropped the .40 cartridge so why would the Army even contemplate using the .40. The .45 ACP is abetter round.@@unclecrunch9581
7 bullets is not enough for a combat pisol. Also no mounting options for a red dot or weapon light.
That was a long way to say Sig sold them so cheap they lose money in hopes to make it up from others because they want the gun that the army has.
Also a long way to hear Glock fanboi's whining that they didn't win. I have nothing against either gun, I've fired both and both are pretty great for different reasons.
@@gund2281 This video didn’t seem to be from a Glock fan boy, rather a breakdown of just what happened with cited sources. 😂 What are you on about?
@@seand.3085 Yes, cited that Glock was whining about the process that THEY thought was insufficient. That's not an objective data point, it's an opinion.
@@seand.3085 This video appears to have been made by an AI lol. But no, I don't think the originator is necessarily a Glock Fanboi. But the sourced material you speak of contains a LOT of Glock whining.
@@gund2281 No it's literally an objective fact the P320 didn't beat the Glock. The testing trials were canceled as soon as Sig announced their sale price to be lower than a hi point. This is the entire reason the dropping AD issue was never caught because one of the trial testing factors is a drop test which Sig never went through.
Have both Sig and the Beretta,
Love em BOTH, both have been extremely accurate and wonderful reliable👊🏻👊🏻
I personally think the US military has made great handgun decisions over the last 100 years. The 1911 > M9 > M17 is a really good track record actually. I just hope the same can be said about our new combat rifle... A new supplier, piston operated, an all-new round... A lot of changes being made at once.
I was military during the Beretta days, wasn’t a fan of it.
I’ve worked for three different law enforcement agencies and among those three agencies I was at one time issued the following sidearms in the following order:
Glock 22
Sig 229 .40
Glock 21SF
Sig 229 .357 Sig
Glock 19
Two of my three agencies used the Sig at some point.
Both got rid of them, at some point.
"This is not about Glock., This is not about Sig. And it's not about the U.S. Army. Its also not about those that are on the ground, in harms way. It's about the lowest bid" - The screaming truth in the quiet parts.
Why is every quote from someone at Glock and not anyone from Sig?
Because the Glock pistols are the most popular and best ever. That Sig 320 SUCKS!
@@Asidebar i can assure Glock is definitely not the best, i had a Glock 35 and the Glock 41, they both gave me nothing but constant jams even thought i tried different ammo brands and constantly cleaned them but nothing seemed to work
Because when you're the best ou don't have to make a bunch of racket. It's just known.
@@deluxalpha4138 that weird i have a glock 19 and 17, had the 19 for 5 years ran thousands of rounds through them never have had an issue once
@@deluxalpha4138 I have a Glock 22 that I have run over 20,000 rounds without cleaning. I have had only two issues and both were ammo related, not the gun
I had an M9 in the early 90s as an Infantryman,I always qualified Expert at the range,I enjoyed carrying it.😊
I've got both Sig and Glock pistols. I've got several and used to love shooting my Sig P220 and P229. I love my Sigs, but I'd rather have a Glock for combat. My opinion is its more robust, has tons of extras (like full auto adapters, mag extensions, etc.), and the trigger safety is preferable for when you need to quickly draw and fire the weapon from the holster/hip. From personal experience I'd choose the Glock.
Sig is the only one with an extensive, documented track record in combat & trigger safety isn't what Glock is known for. So go figure.
I agree, from personal experience also. When bullets are flying, the less complex the weapon the better. I've used the Glock in all kinds of weather and conditions. In 50 below temperatures, the holster might freeze up some, but the weapon always worked.
I think because Sig had other contracts with military, they were able to negotiate a better deal with Sig than with a Glock.
I can see why they chose Sig over Glock. The most important reason was that military specifically mentioned that they want a gun to have basically 3 guns in one with a purchase of interchangeable parts. Sig was selling P320 for $500 plus two interchangeable parts for $300 each. So an actual price was $1,100. Additionally gun had to have a manual safety, which military version off P320 had, but Glock didn’t. Glock went ahead and added manual safety, as a result price went up for additional $150, for a total price of $600. As I mentioned before requirement was that 1 gun had to achieve what 3 can. Glock didn’t offer that, despite that being a requirement. Basically you’ll have to buy 3 Glocks for $1,800, to kind of accommodate that, or get P320 w/ 2 interchangeable parts. In the end P320 met requirements for $1,100 per gun, and Glock didn’t, they only offered 3 pistols for 1,800, or one 19x for $600. So, it’s not that complicated. Glock just didn’t follow an important instructions of what US military actually wants. Still a good gun, but I prefer my P229 with 2 different barrels .40 S&W and .357 Sig. Two guns for a price of one ;)
Being retired Army, I got to enjoy the original 1911(45) and the M-9, but I'm now a 2011 fan.
Appreciate your service boss! Did you like the M9? Have several buddies that were GWOT Rangers and they either loved it or hated it. Always thought it was interesting.
Coming from the 1911(45), it was a huge upgrade, so me and friends really enjoyed it and love going to the range to shoot it, use to run from the range with that old ass 1911.@@lethalbutterknife3409
@@lethalbutterknife3409 The M9 wouldn't have been bad if the military changed their training to allow a hammer back carry. Because they require decocking, your first shot is heavy and long compared to the subsequent shots. This is exceptionally bad because the first rounds on target are what matter the most. You can train around it, but its a pointless time sink when training should be applied to other aspects of weapon handling. Lots of Rangers carry glocks now AFAIK, so the issue is pretty much moot.
@@DaveSmith-cp5kj I loathed the slide mounted safety…
Sig was the only manufacturer to actually READ the contract, and all of its long term requirements. Logistics is a huge part of it, and that's where most of the submitted brands historically fail.
Technically, the first modular handgun from Sig wasn't the P320. It was its predecessor, the Sig P250. It was also built around a fire control unit with changable slides, grips, and caliburs. The difference is that it's a double action only hammer fired system as opposed to the striker fire of the P320 and probably one of the reasons it was eventually discontinued, but it did lay the groundwork for this concept. Sig was probably able to do this cheaper because it probably wouldn't have cost as much to change already existing manufacturing tools from the P250 to the P320 versus having to build it from scratch like the other companies would need to do.
A huge factor for me would be the ease of disassembly/assembly. During my time in the South African defence force (70’s) our handgun was the 9mm Star BM. The constant dust in the African bush made it necessary to often clean the weapon and I don’t know how many times in the pitch dark night a slip of the fingers in clipping back the barrel bushing resulted in it and the spring going flying off in the dark, leaving the soldier with nothing more than a piece of metal to club the enemy.😄
Glock and SIG both have a proven track record but I am partial to the P226. As far as I am concerned that is the only SIG that is really battle tested. Glock’s rock folks so don’t be hatin…. God bless all of you and Happy New Year!
Glock is "battle tested". It has been used in SOCOM for well over a decade, not to mention it is adopted in a lot of countries militaries around the world and 3D printed glocks have been used by insurgency forces in civil wars throughout the world for about the last 6 years or so.
Yeah, Mr. Molon Labe here knows nothing of “battle,” and what the folks who actually “battle” carry.
@@DaveSmith-cp5kj SOCOM folks get to use what they want though :p
@@pfury67 The glocks were actually standardized because of the demand. The official format is kind of weird though, it's a full sized frame but a compact slide or something like that.
@@DaveSmith-cp5kj He didn't say Glocks AREN'T battle tested, he even said they HAVE a proven track record and they rock. So why do you get defensive over absolutely nothing?
The gun that fires itself.
🙄
Funny how it's mostly female cops and deit hires who have this issue.......
Taurus?
@@eldridgedavis wrong, those don't fire at all. ...next,?
many feet will end up with holes through them
The wait time for NFA items is exactly like a layaway program that your paying interest on and the only surprise is that Mon-Fri you finally get the word back that your good to go
Well Glock, there is no use in complaining if your product is more expensive.
Gotta love that Sig Shake Awake feature on their handguns!
Forgive my ignorance but...huh?
😂
@@gund2281 the p320 when it first came out had a problem with the striker and when you dropped it the gun could go off. It was fixed long ago but glock fanbois are salty and bring up the past like it has any bearing...
😂😂😂
@@thomgizziz There's a new video every month of it happening, Ron Cohen and Sig suck ass
The government also wanted the Sig contract so they could get their rifle, optics and ammo. That’s not a coincidence either.
Also Sig's light machine guns. There's vids on RUclips.
Then why can’t Glock product ammo, red dots, and rifles lol
Fort Bragg, 2000, was the first time I fired the Beretta M9. Don't know why but it felt so "right" and it surprised me to see one pop-up target after another go down. Finished 50 for 50. Never did so well on subsequent ranges but always fired Expert. Disassembly and reassembly seemed easy, too, as I'm reminded by my new Hellcat Pro. Maybe the weaker springs and more slop on the Beretta due to my not being the first to have shot and cleaned it. I wonder why the Beretta dropped out of the running. For my money it was a great gun.
Beretta didn’t drop out. They just weren’t selected. The Beretta APX was also in this competition. Both it and latest iteration of the M9 made it far in the trials, but ultimately Sig won the competition.
Oddly enough, the APX is the only other finalist I’m aware of that met the *actual* core requirement of the contract-ie being modular.
Please tell me the soldier shooting at 3:28 works for Stars and Stripes or is just footage of a Larper. Good lord man! Who knows where that round landed.
Back in the 70’s there were two fighter jet company’s trying for a new government contract for the next multi roll fighter. Two aircraft fought it out, F16 and F20. The F20 was faster, more maneuverable, went further on a full load or fuel, was cheaper to maintain and cost less. The F16 got picked up. Now the F16 has been a good aircraft, but, the F20 would have the better fighter to go with. Our government doesn’t always go with the best option……..
The Army told the Air Force "hold my beer" and just wait until you see what the Army picked for future vertical lift, lol. I did shoot the new M17, though, after carrying the M9 for around 30 years and the M10 .38 revolver before that, and I surprised myself by actually really liking it.
saying that the F20 "would have been better" is an unprovable statement and therefore a fallacy.
The F20 was a big failure world wide, only a couple of poorer countries chose it. The F16 is still breaking records and outflying anything the enemy has. In a close in dogfight the F16 will out maneuver a F35 or F22.
I have always liked the F20. even a trainer version of that would have been better than the new T-7
@@MichaelGarcia001 I worked for Northrop in 1978 - 1984. I will admit to being bias. However nothing I stated was false. Three independent print articles made the statements I made. One of them Air&space magazine, others were trade magazines.
If you flew F16’s or worked for General Dynamics, I can understand your comments…..
The Department of Defense preferred the Glock, but Budget & Control Dept decided to contract with Sig solely for financial reasons! This information is available and can be found if anyone would like to investigate it themselves and read how it all played out at that time. Lawsuits were threatened and alot of backlash was coming from the Defense Department when all of a sudden everything about it was silenced and it just went away. Like many things the government does, it just got swept under the rug I guess!
I also don’t see how Glock me the requirement for a modular handgun?
That's a load of malarkey. Glock was the company that disputed the award. Glock failed to read the program requirements in full and didn't hit all the bullet points, as well as asking for over $100M USD more than SIG.
Where can I find this information?
Glock fanboy fantasy.
In the video it said it came down to price
What is the stoppage rate?
It also really does not hurt to offer key personnel from the final selection team jobs in the company to get what they wanted.
I could care less who wins the contract. But the entirety of manufacturing should take place within in boarders of the US. If it's not, then it is a clear threat to national security.
Which sig is made entirely in the US.
LOL wow what a load of CRAP!
I mean Sig is in New Hampshire and Glock is in Georgia.
@@miked7925 No its not at all.
Both companies manufacture their products for the military in America. Sig and Glock made US daughter companies specifically for being able to fulfill berry amendment compliant products. The biggest threat IMO is the Nett warrior, which uses COTS (aka store bought) smartphones which are supposedly sterilized by the NSA, but that assumes the government isn't going to miss something. The EUD handles everything from communications, uav links, and GPS positioning. Compromising the EUD literally gives you complete access to the entire infantry level network.
I’m just happy that Glocks entry, the 19x, was then brought before the LEO community, who said if Glock can make it in black….they would contract them. And hence came the g45 gen 5 Glock that accepts all gen magazines while holding the 19x frame and slide sizing. I got one, added the maritime spring cups from the 19x, and just love it. Johnny Glocks combat trigger system, some tritium sights, with oem Glock +2’s and what a performer she is. Zero failures zero regrets.
Ever tried a canik?
That's exactly the issue with "Glock Perfection." Once you buy it, then add a better trigger and sights, you've got a great gun. (Well, you'll still have a less than ergonomic grip angle.)
Or you can get a Walther, Canik or CZ (and a few others) and have it all right out of the box.
@@cpiper6338 exactly
@@cpiper6338 I’m personally a fan of the shadow systems offerings, but honestly I made myself proficient with a 100% stock Glock 19 first and foremost, then added piece by piece for personal comfort….but I’ve always heard every change you make is a chance of ruining reliability. So, with that knowledge, I only aim to make it better than how it comes, using only Glock parts. For example I recently bought a g45. I added maritime spring cups from the 19x to save hydrolock. I added a np3 coated glock (-) connector, and that’s it! It broke in to about 3.7lb consistently smooth trigger breaks. And all parts are straight from glock so the reliability doesn’t take the hit. I also do my own dremel work on the bottom half cuz unless you go to thin in important area’s, it literally does nothing to the pistol but get more comfortable in hand. But ya…..the 920 from shadow is the bomb! Right outta the box. I’ve recently come across Johnny Glocks also….and I like the message he spits….”reliability and safety” is PARAMOUNT! First and foremost. And his combat trigger system along with the “vex” trigger shoe, is just insanely smooth and breaks like a glass rod predictably and repeatable.
Glock perfection: almost 30 different variations of the same thing and every single one of them needs after market parts to make them worthwhile.
In my career, I’ve been issued Sigs and Glocks (and others). I’m pleased they chose the Sig.
You must be a Tactital Mall Operator 😂
How can you say that?????????
I shot "Expert" on the range every pistol qual when they switched to SIG. I don't know why or what I did differently over the years I carried the M9 but I thought the ergonomics felt better with the SIG, even with the high bore axis. I'm sure someone somewhere else can claim the opposite though.
Politicians decide which firearm will be procured, not the soldiers.
Hell, the S&W M&P has met all of these military criteria for the past 10 years
And it's an iconic American company. That 5inch 2.0 should have been the winner.
Wrong!!it lost to Glock in the Tortue test!!GLOCK SUCCESSFULLY SUE SMITH WESSON.
S&W can't make a good firearm..
I think it lost because it was no modular enough.
I still don't know how Glock managed to stay in the trials as it isn't modular, which was one of the requirements of the trials.
Ummm 47
Do you know the contract requirements? Glock met all of them.
Its why they lost they did not meet the req. Easy peasy.
@@Nuke-China "Handgun technology has advanced significantly thanks to lighter-weight materials, ergonomics and accessory rails since 1986, when the M9 entered the Army's inventory," Dawson said. "The Army is seeking a handgun system that outperforms the current M9 system. It also must be modular, meaning it allows adjustments to fit all hand sizes."
@@octavian1783 The Glock more than met the requirements. The M17/18 only have interchangeable grip frames over the Glock not having them. Since then, the Military is staying with a standard frame size and not giving servicemembers an option for changing grip sizes so that is a moot point. The rest of the attachments criteria are the same.
The military model with the external safety eliminates the going off in the holster
I considered getting a P320, until I watched several videos of them going off, including in an officer's holster. That didn't even shut me down, because eventually they would get it fixed. What shut me down cold was when they blamed an officer when it went off in his holster and he wasn't even touching it, and it was on video.
Glock captured the LE market decades ago through a combination of low bid, generous trade ins of decommissioned and confiscated sidearms, and er ahem, entertaining promotional venues for VIP purchasing agnts and decision makers. Now that, may he R.I.P., Herr Gaston Glock has passed, it remains to be seen if his successors will implement some updates towards modularity and engineering evolutions as indicated by the 45 through 49 models. Nevertheless, SiG is still an awesome company, and has contracts for incoming updated machine guns and rifle platforms. I'm a fan of both. And favor CZ and S&W in the wings too.
Hated the M9 Beretta, the FN was a better pistol, as was the Glock.
@@edmundcharles5278 I don't understand how anyone can HATE the Beretta - that's just a crazy over-the-top reaction to a great handgun.
Sig is my preferred, I don't like Glocks because the ergos don't work for me - I'd own several of them if it wasn't for that because everything else about them is great. I've never shot a CZ but I've heard nothing but greatness about them. Same with H&K, so I think both those companies are on my "to do" list.
$75 the cost to make a Glock. Read the book. Glock the rise of America’s Gun. Good read too. I like both Sig and Glock. No preference other than how I feel at the time.
@@micway71 Got Glock and hammer fired SIGs, dont trust their striker fired ones.
Unfortunatly on my first deployment with the Marines as a FMF Corpsman in 1988 I was issued an old rickety 1911 that was nothing more than a rattle trap. During DS/DS I was given an M9 which wasn't to bad, but the mags didn't handle sand very well at the time. I think later on they changed magazine manufacturers and solved that issue. Near the end of my career most of us that were part of SOCOM were given P226's, although I know some of the Force Recon guys and other specialized Marine units were carrying highly modified 1911's still. I have to say I really liked the 226 even though it is a very large gun. I have not ever been much of a Glock guy, I think they are really good reliable guns. I personally just don't like the grip angle it's not what I learned to shoot with and takes me a little getting used to each time I fire one.
Damn no love for the ole 1911? I think it woulda been sweet if they issued the modernized 2011’s in true American fashion, but they are obviously way too expensive
Fair Points. My dad was an old Army guy and loved the 1911 and I bought a Glock 17 when I got into the Semi Auto. Dad had big hands and never liked the Glock. He preferred his 1911 or a .357. I have one of the Glock 19X, which was Glock's bid for the contact. I've been shooting Glock for well over 20 years so I'm familiar with the Glock. I really like that 19X. Full size 17 frame and 19 slide.
I've yet to get a Sig. But I live in NH and you can never have too many guns. Maybe I'll get one.
You're not alone in your assessment of Glocks, man. And the simple fact is that there's no reason to "get used to" Glock ergos - and basically change the way you shoot - with SO MANY great alternatives on the market. So I just don't. I bought a Glock about 20 years ago. Owned it for 6 or 7 years, Shot it a LOT. Finally realized how much I really just hated shooting the thing and sold it off. M
@@DeadRingerMachine I think hammer firing guns are inherently better than striker fire handguns. Main issue is most people don't know how to operate one properly, so the gun manufacturers just supplicate to the market.
The question is did you quality expert with it? 1911's were never initially designed with tight fitting parts to begin with. Most people who are issued out Pistols as their TO weapon can't qualify expert with them anyway. The reason why the 1911's get so much love is due to the size and shape of the grip (those with man sized hands) and usually the single action crisp trigger. Yeah that heavy 45 cal round has some lore to it. I must admit the most accurate pistol I ever shot was a Sig P229 in .357 Sig straight from the dealers shelf to his range. Spot on accurate. If you have been taught proper marksmanship any pistol will work.
I own all three and if I had my druthers I would take Glock 17. or if we are splitting hairs a Glock 21. My Sig P229 and Sport are nicely machined and have such tight tolerances that I would never consider taking it into the field let alone the new Sig XM.
Does this mean the 320 no longer fires by itself? Thanks!
If I won a bid for being $102m under the next bid I would fire myself 😂
I’d carry the CZ75 over both. But it’s crazy because SIG was in competition with Beretta and lost, but military intelligence are words combined that can’t make sense.
Kinda like JUMBO Shrimp☺
Kinda lost for the same reason, cost.
SIG P226 was found to be overall better than the Beretta M9, but M9 was cheaper and met the requirements not too far from the P226.
@@Rashed1255In the original competition Sig and Beretta tied on points but Beretta agreed to manufacture in the US- "Beretta USA." Have owned both. Fine handguns.
I kinda thought your phrasing of "Military Intelligence" might've been a coincidence, but your name suggests otherwise. Was that meant to be a subtle reference to Hanger 18 by MegaDeth?
Also, unabashed Beretta 92 fanboy myself. I think the whole program was a massive waste of money.
@@MerihemXx yes it is Hanger 18 by Magadeth. One of the few songs I like by them. The Beretta is a great gun, a little too bulky for my taste, still in my opinion hammer fire is safer and more reliable than striker fire.
very informative. being retired Navy i enjoyed. loved the old M9. Great content.
did you shoot any people?
One things for sure vortex scopes aren't cheap and they won the government contract too
In a throwaway world they don’t expect these pistols to last decades 😮
It was called the MODULAR handgun system competition. Glock didn't even read the assignment and still made it to 2nd place.
Glock made modularity with it's changeable back straps not the chassis system
@@aliceakosota797 "MHS requirements called for a non-caliber-specific weapon with modular features that allowed adaptation of various fire control devices, pistol grips, and alternative magazine options. This weapon fits a variety of hand sizes and is equipped with a targeting enabler using a Picatinny rail"
Glock: Erm... we have backstraps.
Glock: your not going to use all that nonsense anyway so we are not giving it to you.
Thank goodness Glock didn’t win. They’d be even harder to get and more expensive if they had! And their qc would probably suffer as Sigs has.
@@Shintenzudoesn't matter what you think.. SF and Ranger Batt don't care about budget or logistics. Only reliability and capability. And they all still run glocks. Ask me how I know. Glock is the true winner, and any service member that actually kicks doors and uses their weapons outside the range knows this.
Something to think about worked with a company that under sold its competitor I was informed that by making a government sale that lost money we would make up money by selling to civilians that wanted the same product. Also the government after you win the award will want changes which is were the profit is made. SIG played the system lose money on the initial government contract and make it up on the back in and sales to civilians.
"it comes down to the importance of a pistol which doesnt sound like much but if you pull a pistol in combat you are in deep" no capping with that statement!!!
I don't own a sig just a couple Glocks in regards to these brands but I have been told once you shoot a sig you won't want to carry anything else. Does sig make a 10mm?
The sheriff in the next county over switched over to sig 320 and one of their sheriff's hanging out in the locker room not bumping anything had a negligent discharge in his holster while having a conversation with people and that round traveled down the back of his thigh hit the back of his knee cap and deflected outwards blowing his knee open.
Sig bids $102 million less but I go to the store and the M17 is more than a 19x… makes sense
They're making their real money off the civilian market. But when you buy a sig 320 you're buying the control unit mostly. You can then buy different slides, gross, and barrels to configure different "pistols" for ultimately less than having to buy a whole other pistol.
@@jmanswat2457 I mean it’s exactly the same for Glock, plenty of different slides or barrels you can buy for changing calibers, etc. without having to buy a whole other pistol. But yeah, sig is definitely ripping off the civilian market.
@@jmanswat2457 I converted my m17 to an m18 and it was only like $200 less than a new pistol. In hindsight I honestly should have just spent the money and had two pistols instead of one pistol and a bunch of expensive useless parts. It’s a nice idea in theory but in practice it ends up being kind of silly.
@@jmanswat2457 On point. People always think military contracts are big money but the reality is that companies only want military contracts for clout. The civilian markets for weapons (particularly American market) is like 10x the value of the entire international military market. For example Honeywell makes most of the explosives used by the DoD, yet they make 4x more money selling air conditioners at walmart.
I bet if you went to the store and bought 5 million M17's you'd get a very good price ... most likely a better price than the 19X. "I'll take What are Economies of Scale of $1000 Alex."
Got forbid the military saves the American tax payers some money for once.
god forbid they actually give the troops the best weapon possible.......you serve?
They did... the sig was the cheapest option that met the requirements... how are you this obtuse?
We can save literally everywhere else but I don't mind not skimping the military.
And use it towards what?
@@AverageGIJoeOutdoors
To be fair, no one uses pistols in combat.
Yea...switching over to striker fire is kinda' like the forward assist fiasco in reverse....
It is what it is..
Cheers!
Ghosting the trigger is a reference to the Movie. Since we can’t be there with you, we have to wrap our hands around yours and feel the trigger along with you. In other words, you are the Demi Moore and we are Patrick Swayze (RIP). Lol. Yes, it’s a GT original.
Thanks for the video
Would be nice if the Army actually completed their test, but no Sig under bid and the Army said "Yup, that's good enough".
That's the Army for ya...
Well tbh it was a smart move. I would also be afraid of the cheap gun failing. It's not like the handgun is the bread and butter weapon system for infantry, so being able to seal a deal on a large number of cheap guns well under budget is a good thing. I say this as a Glock Perfection diehard as well. Like even though the sig had that dropping AD issue, once the contract has been signed Sig is liable for correcting issues anyways, so no harm no foul. I totally get Glock feeling like they were screwed over by the GAO over this though. However, saving money was literally the sole explicit reason the MHS contract was started to begin with.
@@DaveSmith-cp5kjSIG isn’t a cheep gun. Affordable would be the proper word. Remember kids, Glock is, in FACT the single most returned firearm in the market today.
@@GenXMafia The P320 was sold for the same price as a hi point, that's why it was chosen despite not going through any of the testing trials.
Glock is the most returned firearm because it is the most used handgun in the world currently. There are over 10x more glocks sold than Sig handguns, and that's not including the 3D printed glocks.
imagine simping for auto fire feature sig Lmao.@@GenXMafia
I guess they didn't want a pistol with cheap aftermarket $10 magazines, thousands of holsters to choose from, and absolutely stone-cold reliability.
yeah... civilian with a gun he coddles (me) vs a soldier in dirty, wet, nasty, abusive combat situations...I'd prefer my G19 over my xCarry or xCompact.
@@lazvt8469 I tell people new to firearms that if they're going to get 1 pistol only, get a G19
@@coleramus561 And that's why it's the most returned handgun, ok it's also the best selling.
There's a reason why the Green Berets use the G19 and not the dumbass sig
I've seen too many glocks fail to trust them.
Isn't the P320 the one that goes off for no reason? Like, in the holster?
5:36 NOT THE TEA CUP NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO haha
I love Glocks, but what does Glock expect?? Army asked for a modular handgun and Glock couldn’t produce one.
Y’all keep saying this like that was a factor. It wouldn’t have been a top 2 finalist if it missed what you goofy people keep claiming as the sole reason they lost the contract. It wouldn’t have even been in consideration if that was a core requirement “not met” by Glock. 😂
@@seand.3085 Exactly, if Glock not meeting this modularity requirement was a thing, they would have disqualified them from the start. I swear some people have absolutely zero common sense and know nothing about how DoD works. As usual, the contract went to the lowest price. Besides, the modularity is absolute garbage anyway. Will never be utilized in Big Army. You get what you get. You're not allowed to mod your weapon. I was SOCOM and we got whatever we wanted and did whatever we wanted to them, so it's not even a requirement for SOF because you're not stuck with standard issue anyway. So it's a completely moot f'ing point.
@@GTRNights Literally. People just want to hate and all these clowns classify modularity as something only applying to the grip of the FCU for sig. 😂😂😂
Just gonna put it out there that no battle or war has ever been won by a pistol.
But it has saved lives many times.
And that is all what matters in my opinion.
And that is why I want the most reliable pistol possible for the troops and that is a Glock in my humble opinion.
If they truly gave this contract to Sig Sauer to save a bit of money that they for sure will waste on something else and risking the lives of the troops doing it, then it is totally disgusting.
And if the Glocks can be shot much more before getting worn out as I suspect from having shot both brands for decades, then they are in reality not saving any money at all.
There may have been some lives lost because their pistol failed - our fighting forces should have the best arms that taxpayers will buy.
Sgt. York sure as heck gave it a shot though....
3:35 'The P320 is Sig Sauer first Glock and was introduced in 2014'
What the narrator wanted to say 😂
Added feature of the Sig, it will just shoot itself while holstered or in your hand. After the contract was awarded, Sig had to go back and design a whole new trigger system because of AD’s with the weapon. Image that, once law enforcement started using the Sig because if the military wants it, it must be great right, the AD’s just kept coming. Numerous cases of these Sig’s, civilian version, P320, going off while holstered and a class action suit against Sig by numerous law enforcement agencies was won and Sig’s solution, well you can send your gun in and we will do some trigger work on it. There is a really good video of one of these weapons going off in the holster while officers are in a physical altercation with a suspect. According to Sig, it wasn’t the weapons fault, it was the holster that the officer had the weapon it that made it just go bang while moving around. I carried a Glock for about 25 years or so in law enforcement and as far as a combat weapon, it goes bang every time you pull the trigger and doesn’t when its not pulled. I carried a 1911 for a lot of years also and as far as accuracy, I can shoot rings around my Glocks, but running and gunning in combat situations, sorry, put my 1911 in my safe and carried the Glock. I have done more abuse to those Glocks and they still ran than I could ever think of doing in real life while training. Dumping mags into several inches of mud, picking them up and slamming them back into the weapon, rack the slide and just keep pumping rounds out without missing a beat. Were they more expensive, yep, why, because they shot when you wanted them to and didn’t when you didn’t want them to. Thats worth a few extra dollars.
If I understand correctly, you're saying the Sigs will have a problem with their trigger even though that issue was already solved with the redesigned trigger?
If i can translate, he's saying dyeeerp. There were like 3 recorded drop discharges and that issue was fixed. There is not a single accidental discharge since that didn't involve the trigger being pulled with round in chamber and safety off (or nonexistent). With different frame configurations, the holster has to match the firearm. The woman cop who had it loose in her purse with no safety and round in chamber also claimed she never touched the trigger. Anyone STILL posting that nonsense in 2024 is of the special short bus variety
It is nice to be able to shoot multiple cartridges through the same pistol. I shoot 9mm, 357 Sig. and 40 S&W in my 3rd gen. G22.
Only the fcu and grip module are compatible with multiple calibers. If you want to shoot a different caliber you need to swap the complete upper (barrel and slide assembly) as well as the magazines.
@@sfdclay, with a 3rd. gen. Glock G22 (40 S&W), all you need to shoot 357 Sig. is swap the G22 barrel for a G31 barrel, magazines work fine with either. Same goes for the G23/G32 and G27/G33 size pistols.
To shoot 9mm in a G22 or G31, you need to get a 9mm conversion barrel. The outside diameter is larger on the 40 S&W and 357 Sig. barrels. You need a 9mm barrel with the same outside diameter. I have a Lone Wolf Distributor 9mm conversion barrel. You also have to use 9mm G17/17L/34 magazines. Same goes for the G19 and G26 size pistols.
I don't know too much about the Sig. M17/18/320 pistols. I'm not a fan of them.
Could it possibly be that Glock did not win the Modular Handgun System competition because Glock did not submit a modular handgun? Somebody at Glock should have read the military's requirements and realized that a traditional full sized gun and a traditional compact gun did not make a modular system.
"modular" per the definition in the contract meant it could change grip sizes to accommodate different hand sizes. A removable fire control unit was NOT a requirement. 100% of all the pistols submitted met all the requirements in the contract. I should also add that glock holds a lot of contracts across the world, so they know what they are doing regardless of their inability to innovate. I should also add that glock tried to fight the decision in court because the military broke their portion of the awarding process by not performing phase two or three of testing which is what involved the torture tests, and longevity tests, thereby wasting a ton of money spent by all who developed pistols for the trials only to find out they weren't looking for the best pistol, but the cheapest.
I find this quite humorous. Guess who will be making the lowers for this Sig. That’s right SCCY Florida.
Fort Moore Army Base just “lost” 31 of these pistols from a secure facility ran by civilians…and the civilians are still working there. 😮
The S&W M&P semi-auto pistol in .40 was chosen by Victorian and South Australian Police in Australia to replace their ageing S&W revolvers chambered in .38 & .357 about 13 years ago. Was it the best sidearm? Probably not, but it was the lowest price as S&W offered both States a buyback $$ amount for the old revolvers so they could be taken back to the US and sold as "ex Australian law enforcement revolvers highly collectible and antique". Good business win for S&W. $$
The M&P series weren't US Military contract winners, but they are very good pistols which have been widely adopted by civilian LEA around the world. Those Australian law enforcement agencies got a great deal and a great pistol with top notch support and (eventually) another factory buyback option in future.
The M&P is a fine gun. I carried them for the past 10 years without any complaints.
I will stick with my Glock 19. The only modification made to it is trijicon sights. 20k rounds later, all the same parts that came with the pistol. Never a single malfunction.
Looks like a fine duty handgun. Army issued me an M9 some 30 years ago, it is still a fine duty handgun.
I used both in Law Enforcement. Both were good weapons. Quality built.
Waaa Waaa Waaa ! I love reading the below comments from the Glock fanboys. Waaaaaaaaa ! 😂😂😂
Like the Army will use (or offer) the gun in anything other than 9mm. 2 frame sizes but don't worry , you the end user will not got to choose the frame you want. It came down to cost.Neither pistol was or is vastly superior to the other.
Thank the Department of the Navy for that. The USN and USMC insisted on that capability.
1003 hpa 45/75% 4°C/25°C low wind below 35 km/h above 1003 hpa we increase the resistivity of the ball below 1003 hpa we accelerate the speed per second cold slows down the ball heat accelerates the ball 340 meters per second minimum above 1003 hpa the ball goes down below 1003 the ball goes up
I have a Beretta 92FS the old M9. One of the best pistols that I have ever shot, even though it is 9mm. Safety is just beyond belief, decocking safety at that. I have a Sig Saur mini 1911. I think it sucks, prefer my S&W M&P Shield 2.0 to the Sig, so I am selling the Sig. Both are .45's.
*The Sig won because you can't beat German engineering. In Iraq I put over 1000 rounds through my Sig and it never jammed once. I still have not cleaned it and the barrel looks new. Sig makes an amazing pistol!*
You never cleaned it?
@@Grouse2275 You don't have to clean a pistol when it's in Call of Duty.
Sig cloned an amazing pistol.
@@GTRNightsyou made me laugh so hard I about pissed myself
@@Grouse2275 *Even today never cleaned. All I do is 'hose it down" with WD40 once ever few years. Works FINE!*
From a logistics standpoint, the Sig wins because the firing module is the only serialized part of the gun. I can buy a bunch of them from Sig then go to all my other vendors and suppliers to get the different-sized frames, slides, barrels, and mags. That's the way I want to do it if I have to accommodate hand sizes in the modern military ranging from a 95-percentile American male to a 5 percentile Asian female.
That’s completely incorrect on how the military orders weapons. They get them from sig in either the m17 or m18 and they won’t get different grip sizes either, just medium. I watched the rollout of the new m18 that replaced the m9.
As a rule when it comes to military arms. Corruption is the main reason for most deals.
Japan SDF also choosed Sig Sauer. Before the M18 they used the P228 as the main side arm.