Another bad day for the military.

[Tuna]

Well it seems the new Sig sidearm for the Army is junk. Several problems with it are begging to be cured but so far Sig has not done much of anything to fix them. The first one is if you drop the pistol it can fire. The second one is when the new pistol is firing the new ball ammo it fires and ejects the empty case and a loaded round at the same time. Oh no your out of ammo so reload real quick. Seems Glock is suing Sig and the Army for unfair testing and ending the testing before they were complete. The kicker is the Army has already deployed some of these weapons overseas. I for one would not want one of these on my hip. It also seems that Sig has known of this for sometime now as it has been apparent in there commercial version too for over a year now. Why can't it be an American company like S&W or Colt that would get the contract and not have the profits go overseas.

[leftyo]

if its true, someone should hang. there should absolutely be a fool proof protocol for testing and implementing new firearms, especially after the M16 fiasco!!!

[S.A. Boggs]

The fire problem has "supposedly" been taken care of, haven't heard anything on the cycling problem...sounds like a timing problem. Glock couldn't meet some of the specifications and wanted the Army to change them. The interchangeable back strap was the hang up on Glock. The 1911 took some time to be perfected and the Beretta had teething problems as well. My son broke a Beretta slide which for him was not hard to do. Personally I feel that Sig can alleviate the problems and much better then the Glock.
Sam

[Sandpebble]

Business profits is what rules here in the good ol USA .... as far as the latest military side arm thing goes .... we just gotta blame Obama ... right?

[p246]

The drop issue was fixed early on the civilian side. If dropped from 6 feet and the butt of the gun struck the ground at around a 17degree angle the original 320 could AD. I have an original 320 I never sent back. We are T and E ing new pistols to include new 320s. The drop safety is different obviously. To me the trigger pull is not as good as the original. In none of the examples have I noticed feeding issues.

The Army wanted a modular hand gun. GLOCK could not meet that requirement.

We also are T and E ing new Gen 5 Glocks, Smith and Wesson 2.0s Springfield XDMs and a CZ. There are a lot of good polymer pistols to choose from in today’s market.

[clintonhater]

Who goes up against an AK with a Sig, Glock, or any other handgun. I'd like to know how many US servicemen have had to defend themselves with ANY handgun.

[leftyo]

Who goes up against an AK with a Sig, Glock, or any other handgun. I'd like to know how many US servicemen have had to defend themselves with ANY handgun.

its been known to happen once in a while, and it would be nice if the handguns worked when they are needed.

[S.A. Boggs]

I had a chance to evaluate the Glock 9mm when it first came out, had a friend who owned a police supply business. The two flaws that I found was with the tube and the open butt area. I had a chance to buy the gun but I declined. Any time something is chosen other's will degrade it, this happened when the M1 was first adopted. No weapon is 'idiot proof' and no weapon is idea for all so a compromise has to be obtained. Glock could not meet the grip compromise as tested, Sig could. Early on the M9 had metal problems which gave broken slides, that was resolved. Sig hopefully will do the same and the pdw will be acceptable for our troops. I am a big fan of the 1911, I carry a Sig P220 daily as I find it a better pistol then the 1911. For me the Sig is easier to break down for basic cleaning then the Glock, the 1911 for complete repair/cleaning then wither of the two. The 1911 is a Chinese puzzle that once mastered is easy to work on without tools, as the tools are built in. The Glock and the Sig do not have this capability, the 1911 is more natural pointing then any pdw that I have found.
Sam

[Tuna]

This is more then unacceptable. It can put a member of our military in danger with their issued side arm. A drop from 6 foot or less should not discharge any issue firearm pistol or rifle...period. I would admit to being a Sig fan for many years and have always felt that the Glock was a CROCK but Sig has KNOWN about this and it's still not fixed for the military. I have seen far too many problems with Glocks over the years to have any faith in them. I will admit that S&W over the years has produced excellent weapons and still I prefer a good solid steel weapon in my hands compared to...the Good Lord help us....PLASTIC and that includes S&W.

Now the new Sigs do not feed the new ball ammo well at all. Less then 50% reliable with it while with the new Hollow Point round it feeds at a rate of 95%. So one has 50% and 95% and it should be 100%. Not all of the blame is Sigs as I would put as much blame if not more on the Army. But at least the Navy and the Air force have put the procurement of the new Sig on hold and will stay with what they have for now.

[Sunray]

"...should absolutely be a fool proof protocol for testing..." There is, but weapons are selected for political reasons not for the quality. M-16's didn't work when first jammed down the military's throat by McNamara either. The Berretta(chosen to alleviate other NATO countries complaining about the trade balance in military kit.) filled the assorted forums with stories of cracking frames. The so-called 'drop test' was invented, as I recall, by anti-firearms groups to stop the sale of Sig firearms to civilians.
"...Glock is suing..." Sounds like an excellent strategy to not be invited to any further requests for submissions.
Use of "the new Hollow Point round" in combat is a war crime.
"...easy to work on without tools..." That's a different thing than field maintenance by the user. And a 1911/1911A1 is a first generation pistol. Hordes of small, easily lost parts.