Sig Sauer Releases The MPX For Public Sale

For the last several year readers have been rather irritated with Sig for not selling the MPX to the public. Well the time has come. I had a meeting with Sig this morning and as usual we talked about new guns and any changes in status of present guns.

I happened to ask about the MPX and the possibility of them being release to the public.Without hesitation he replied they are now open for public sale. There will be several models available. The first is an SBR semi-auto, a semi auto carbine and a rifle version. All versions will be semi-auto.


The muzzle device that many of you like is still temporarily on hold. The ATF blocked that device from being an allowed accessory. Sig is very confident that issue will be resolved shortly. That’s certainly good news. The MSRP is to be announced shortly.

I hope the readers will be pleased by this change in policy!

Phil White

Retired police officer with 30 years of service. Firearms instructor and SRU team member. I still instruct with local agencies. My daily carry pistol is the tried and true 1911. I’m the Associate Editor and moderator at TFB. I really enjoy answering readers questions and comments. We can all learn from each other about our favorite hobby!


  • nester7929

    I’m not surprised that the ATF cracked down on that muzzle device.

    Wonder what the odds are of it being below $1500? I’ve always liked the MP-5, but the MPX is going to be more affordable than finding an old HK.

    Now bring on the MCX Sig, that way I can get my Honey Badger fix also.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      I’ve already seen $1999 and $2199 floating around

      • Ian F

        It was listed as $1,999 on the display today.

        • True it is listed at that price

          • Paul

            Please help. Sig 2014 catalog with no mpx-c. Is it coming out later? Or are they make it along side of the pistol version. I only have the money for one right now, but I want to buy both.

          • Paul

            This pic is from sig website. Revised vid on the mpx-c

  • JumpIf NotZero

    I’m uncertain, and it would be awesome if someone from TFB at SHOT could check, is the upper or lower the registered part?

    It looks like the lower to me.

    • The lower was serialized, the upper was not. My money is on the lower!

      • it’s the lower on that one

        • Ian F

          Makes sense considering how much it borrows from the AR-15, in terms of design inspiration.

  • ColaBox

    Any news on how the MCX coming along?

  • Kevin1911

    Great, another fun toy Californians are going to miss out on.

    • Cymond

      It just needs a custom bullet button. Someone will make one.

    • Yomama

      Can I get a button that blocks CA whiners?

    • Dan

      If it is that important to you, move.

      • Dan

        You guys don’t seem to understand, what happens if everyone just moves from states like California? That’s right, ALL states will eventually become like California. We can’t give up territory no matter how hopeless it turns out because if we ignore fellow patriots we are setting ourselves to face whatever adversity comes our way ourselves. Plus, telling someone to just pack up and move is pretty ignorant. Not all of us (actually few of us) can afford luxuries like that. Careers, income, and most importantly family is a bigger factor than just a cool gun.

        • John

          Well then on the CA pro gun people need to fight like CO did.

        • MattInTheCouv

          you call it ‘giving up ground’. i think most folks here would see it as more akin to ‘consolidating forces’.

          plus, nobody is saying to do it today. but nothing good in life comes easy. for instance, i (who work in OR, and live in WA, because i just LOVE getting double ended by the tax structures of TWO inefficient bureaucracies) have been applying to jobs in the great state of Texas for about 2 years now. a week ago i received a tentative offer of employment (pending background check and whatnot). my wife and i have made sure we have money saved to make the move. i’m taking a pay-cut, but cost of living is less, and housing is much cheaper, so we can make it work. so, i’ll be in a place with political/moral/social/firearm cultures much more in line with my own belief structure.

          it’s called “voting with your feet”.

      • Dan

        On a second note, hey! We have the same username! Then again, I am posting guest…

  • Dan

    I (unfortunately) called it! The ATF has been pretty darn consistent about rulings regarding suppressor parts, and that “muzzle break” is clearly a suppressor PART regardless of whether you have the sleeve for it.

    • I understand the looks won’t change because of the needed alterations to comply with the ATF ruling.

      • Tim U

        If you can’t get the suppressor to connect to it, I would much rather see a true 16″ barrel than a 10″ brake

    • BillC

      It’s a “brake” as in car brake, which slows something down; not “break”, which is the destruction of an object.

  • GreenPlease

    Interesting idea: have the baffles pinned and welded from the factory to bring the rifle to 16″ overall but leave off the shroud. That way you could sell it as a “muzzle brake”. Buy the shroud later once you get the tax-stamp and suddenly you have a 1 stamp 16″ suppressed rifle. I like it.

    • Blake

      That was their original plan at the announcement.

      It’ll be interesting to see how they get around the BATFE issues…

  • Jacen

    If HK isn’t going to release a civilian MP5, somebody needs to do it.

  • beanfield

    What’s the rds? Is it sig branded?

  • Jeff S

    What’s the word on a pistol version?

    • d

      My LGS owner was told yesterday those are the first shipping

      • BillC

        If true, that’d be easiest to convert to an SBR

    • in the works–

  • MZupcak

    I was baffled (no pun intended) by the original plan to sell what was basically a DIY suppressor permanently attached to the weapon. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out.

    • MadMonkey

      Same reason they sell an AR pistol “arm brace” 😉

  • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

    I just need one in 10mm….

  • what the WHAT?

    Why none on if “they are now open for public sale?”

    • DougMasters

      It’s because they aren’t released for public sale. Dealers have no idea when this thing is coming, MSRP hasn’t even been published, and it’s up in the air what models civilians can even get. I’ve wanted this thing for a year and it’s all a big fail so far. All the dealers list the MPX-C, and then want to take a deposit for it with no release date, and the pistol is what they are saying is coming first. Then, I’ve read the SBR is coming instead of the “C” because of ATF issues, and no pricing on barrels, etc – so who knows….hopefully SIG will issue a real press release at some point with real details.

      Also, this blog states “the first is an SBR semi-auto, a semi auto carbine and a rifle version.” According to a comment today on Sig’s own facebook page, the pistol version is shipping first “in a few weeks” with nothing about the other versions…

  • Blake

    I’ll take one in .357sig, please!

  • DougMasters

    Finally a good video from a SIG employee explaining what they mean about SBR and Pistol configs and what is shipping and when:

    • Someguy

      Oh dear god!! I need to whore myself out for some more cash!!

  • Jason Jenkins

    $2450 for an integrally suppressed PCC that I could have, minus the sleeve, while waiting for ATF approval was intriguing. $2000 for a plain SBR – not as much. Is this worth the price of 2 Glocks + 2 RONI conversions?

  • LeeC

    Upon seeing the MPX tiny thumbnail, I thought… “Bayonet?” Disappointed to see a flashlight!! }:o)

  • AJ

    The MPX carbine and pistol have been for sale on distributor website for a while but are hard to get right now. The MSRP is 2200 and 1999 but I want the SBR I’m wondering parts wise if I can get the stock and just do the ATF paperwork, that is how I would like to do it,

  • Jason

    Update: The ATF is reconsidering its designation of the device as a silencer. Once Sig sued, they agreed to reconsider. My guess is they will allow the MPX-C to be sold as is. Reason being, they denied Sig’s request for reconsideration twice already. Once Sig sued, ATF agreed to reconsider. Why reconsider if you aren’t ready to allow it to be sold as is; especially if you’ve already denied reconsideration twice. The ATF has until August to issue a new ruling on the device’s classification. If they classify it again as a silencer, the court proceedings will re-start again. Sig agreed to stop the lawsuit pending the ATF’s reconsideration. Why would Sig agree to postpone it’s lawsuit unless they also know the device will be reclassified?