TFBTV News: MHS Contract Awarded To The SIG Sauer P320!

The Sig Sauer P320 was selected as the winner of the Modular Handgun System contract on January 19th, 2017. This was the largest weapons contract that the Department of Defense has awarded in the last 32 years for a small arms replacement program. You can read the full details over at The Firearm Blog at the below link.

Breaking Story on The Firearm Blog: http://bit.ly/2jIiPtD

A special thank you to our good friends at Ventura Munitions for letting us steal their showroom to film this video on such short notice. Make sure you visit them at the below link to support them.

Ventura Munitions: http://bit.ly/1LKxNRP

Thanks to our sponsors:

Proxibid – Track Down Your Perfect Rifle On Proxibid.com

 Ventura Munitions – Retailer of quality ammunition.

 

Please subscribe!!! Click here.

Please subscribe!!! Click here.

 





Patrick R

Patrick is a Senior Writer for The Firearm Blog and Co-Director for TFBTV. He is a verified gun nerd and also podcasts at The Firearms Podcast. With a lifelong passion for shooting, he has a love for all types of firearms, especially overly modified plastic handguns, precision rifles, and AR based things. You can follow Patrick on Instagram @tfbpatrick, Facebook, or contact him by email at tfbpatrick@gmail.com.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • I M Deplorable

    Does this mean we’ll be able to snap up those surplus M9s for $200 like Stars?

    • xebat

      Probably. If the German military chose a new sidearm, you know what they would do with the old firearms ? They would destroy them… happened with the P226 of the German Police … F#ck my country.

      • Kivaari

        We used to buy them on the US surplus market. Lots of P1s and even PP Super 9x18mm Ultra.

      • iksnilol

        Well, better than storing them. Then you wind up with Bullit Reports

    • …. in maybe 80 years time. We are still waiting on those 1911s.

    • Nicks87

      They will go out for bid by civilian PDs and then if nobody wants them they will be destroyed. That’s what happened to our Berettas but who knows with the new administration we might get lucky and they will go to CMP or something.

      • Kivaari

        The contract calls for buying new pistols over the next 10 years. The M9s will go into the hands of reserves and national guard for the next 30 years.

        • Esteban Cafe

          I bet you’re right.

    • Core

      They will be antiques and will run the market value. Add that to the CMP markup and an obscure and vague auction process bound by red tape they’ll be approximately $2500 each in the year of our Lorde 2120.

  • JumpIf NotZero

    How many more posts with the exact same information? It’s been a day.

    And when will someone make a joke about all the Glock fanboy rage? – despite no one actually doing that

    • Jack Morris

      But you guys, a handful of bureaucrats just made a purchase requisition! I’m so pumped about the government using my tax money to buy more 9mm pistols that will probably only be fired in basic training! I need to read about it, like every day for at least another week.

    • Jack Morris

      muh Glock

    • Dougscamo

      Had to give the Disqus servers a break….

    • Core

      Destroying perfectly good M9s is the reason why America has issues. Allowing a leftist political agenda prevent the civilian sale of M9s and 1911s. The sad reality is under Obama’s administration we were more likely to see ISIS or Mexican cartels, holding our surplus M9s than law abiding American citizens. I love the CMP but we should be able to allow the surplus command to resell our surplus online to citizens and avoid the guys in the middle that may or may not allow these guns to be sent overseas and end up on the hands of our enemies.

      • Warren Ellis

        1. Aren’t most M9s completely worn out by Army use?

        2. Aren’t civilians getting superior M9s compared to the ones the military has? Their M9s I thought stayed the same since they were first designed whereas civilians can get a superior M9A3?

        • Core

          That’s not the point. It’s not about the availability of a better M9 it’s about sustainability. By passing the M9s into a transparent surplus system that allows law abiding citizens to purchase the pistols at a substantial discount, it allows folks to put them to good use. It also allows manufacturers to sell replacement parts and accessories. It’s not a capitalist dream as far as not being the current ideal of disposable products that will undoubtedly cost some new pistol sales, but overall it’s better for the people. After all the people paid for those small arms to begin with. I have no doubt manufacturers would cringe at these types of surplus sales but tough titty. Flood the market with surplus M9s and it will encourage consumers to pay up for better tech. And it will allow consumers on a tight budget to own a defensive firearm to protect themselves in and outside their home.

          • Kivaari

            They will not go into surplus for 30 more years. They will rebuild as many as possible and issue them to the reserves and guard. This is a 10 year acquisition contract. So for ten years front line units will still have the M9.

      • Esteban Cafe

        I suppose I’d buy one IF they were in the $150 range. I noticed that my friend’s M9 will fire the hard Russian primers (in reloads) better than either my CZ, Sig or Glocks: these have to strike them twice.

    • Esteban Cafe

      RAGE !
      There. Done.

  • John

    I know function over aesthetics but to be honest, I think the P320 is one ugly gun….

    • Mark Wynn

      For any weapon I’m going to make a “keeper,” long or short gun, pocket or fixed-blade knife, I agree with you, and aesthetics is one of the considerations. Talking practical aesthetics. I don’t invest in guns or knives that are too beautiful to use.

    • Core

      It’s prettier than some of its predecessors. I can safely say it sexier than a Glock, and uglier than a 1911. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder..

  • JQ

    Excuse my lack of knowledge but why wouldn’t the different branches of the military want to adopt the same pistol platform instead of one adopting the P320 and another adopting the Glock 19?

    • Holdfast_II

      The other branches will generally follow the Army and buy this Sig. Only the Marines Special Ops (MARSCO) bought the G19.

      • Andandand

        …and the US Army Rangers, and SEALS/DEVGRU, and US Army SOCOM (Delta)

  • Dougscamo

    To quote Patrick…”if your dog chews it up, you’re not out a gun”….guess that goes for War Dogs as well….

      • Dougscamo

        LOL….not a war dog….put still pretty darn funny!….

        • Mark Wynn

          Fetch me a perp ….

    • tic…tic…BOOM

      Dogs [my favorite animals] don’t chew on guns with steel frames. Give me a steel framed gun any day. The plastic P320 slide rides on 4 little rails as a part of the trigger group. My steel SIGs ride on full length rails. They have a hammer and de-cocker. They shoot great and Thor doesn’t chew on them.

      • Chief58

        Your mom rides my steel rail..

        • tic…tic…BOOM

          Why would you make a disgusting comment like that?

  • MrBrassporkchop

    Holy cow people go bonkers over this.

    • codfilet

      Seriously! The Army could still be using 1873 SAA Colts, and it would really make no difference at all to military operations.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        You aren’t wrong – BUT – the real story is that the aftermarket for the P320 is going nowhere but up.

        I’ll bet you that by SHOT 2018, there is a third-party P320 frame that takes glock mags, a modular pistol caliber carbine based on the P320 fire control, and/or 80% fire control groups. Definitely all of those things within 2 years.

        Meanwhile… Glocks still have finger grooves. S&W released a “2.0” that is nearly identical to their 1.0. Beretta can’t even manage to show a picture of their modular gun, APX. Remington clones the PPQ. The HK guns come in colors, wow.

        You can hate the gun or the idea of an Army handgun being big news, someone at SIG made good decisions, and it may change the entire industry.

        • codfilet

          Oh, I was just rattling some of the Fanbois cages, but Being I’m a US Martial arms collector, I’m sure I’ll pick up whatever version of that new pistol that I can eventually.

        • Vhyrus

          I bought a P320 last year for my daily carry. This must be how those guys that started backing trump 2 years ago feel.

        • iksnilol

          I never thought about, but you could register the FCG as an SBR and then put it in a Beretta Storm like assembly.

          Kinda like registering an AR lower as an SBR and using it for different stuff.

          • Kivaari

            Buy the Storm as it is made. It’s a well built carbine, well suited to being shortened.

          • iksnilol

            Sadly it is illegal in my AO. Just thinking that something like it will be built for the SIG 320 FCG.

          • Kivaari

            Too bad. I have one and it’s a pretty good little carbine. Good enough and short enough that I didn’t SBR it. It is shorter than my SBR M4.

          • iksnilol

            I imagine it’d be a good small game carbine. Especially if integrally suppressed.

          • Kivaari

            For me it isn’t accurate enough to be a small game rifle. It shoots 3 in 50 yd. groups with iron sights or a red dot. A good 22 rifle would be a better choice. I am not sure why I keep the thing, other than it is fun to shoot, is small, and lightweight. Precise, it is not. Well made, it is. It has a trigger that varies a great deal from one gun to the next, that is horrible. If it were not for the trigger it would probably shoot pretty good.

          • iksnilol

            3 in at 50!? … Sounds like a challenge… Or a Mini 14 :p
            .

          • Kivaari

            3 inch groups at 50 yards. Not easy to hit a small critter with. I’ve checked out a couple of them, and some have a great trigger. Mine however, has a horrible trigger.

  • nova3930

    Told you so!

    Written requirements matter…

  • Bill Revoir

    Nobody is going to mention “Bore Axis”? Nobody??

    • Scot168

      Bore Axis.

      • Esteban Cafe

        LOL. Well played sir; well played indeed.

  • A bearded being from beyond ti

    Since Edward was in this video, i gotta ask, what pistol does the Canadian army use?

    • jay

      High powers.

      • PhaserOuter

        Brits are using Glock 17 Gen4’s as they are phasing out their Hi-Powers.

  • noob

    yikes! I guess the Hudson H9 is gonna have to wait another 27 years.

  • L Cavendish

    does this mean I might be able to buy a Beretta APX in the USA soon?

    • DW

      HPA would have passed by then

  • tiger

    When Starfleet adopts phasers. Some sob will be online saying the should go back the the 1911….sigh….

    • Esteban Cafe

      Yeah, I had a Kimber and the other competitors named it, “Malf-o-matic”. I’ll still take a Glock.

      • Kivaari

        When I was doing IDPA the guns I’d see with stoppages at every match were Kimbers.

    • Mark Wynn

      The .45 has more stopping power than the phaser due to its bullet weight and … the mystical properties of the 1911 in the hands of True Believers.

      • .45

        The obvious solution: Mini photon torpedoes in the bullets. With the use of sights and quick trigger resets that the standard phaser lacks, a single redshirt is worth a dozen Klingons!

      • Esteban Cafe

        Right: the 9mm will kill you, but the .45 will kill your soul, too.

  • Jimney123

    The Regular Army is now going to have superior sidearm than our SOCOM units who have to settle for an effing Glock? Nonsensical.

    • maodeedee

      depends on your personal opinion and whether you prefer DA/SA or DA Only/Striker fired. I consider a Cocked and Locked SA superior to both and I consider first shot accuracy to be critical.

      • Vhyrus

        P320 has a superior trigger to a glock stock for stock. It is almost as good as a PPQ trigger.

        • RommelMacDonaldsMcPicklePocket

          You drive a Ford Pinto, don’t you?

    • Esteban Cafe

      Yeah, tell that to all the shooting champs who use the Big G to win.

      • iksnilol

        After gutting the internals and putting on a new slide.

      • Jimney123

        These are going into combat, not to some sissy shooting range. And second of all, I’ve yet to see a Glock that isn’t full of aftermarket parts. You can pull a CZ 75 SP-01 right off the shelf, change nothing, and outshoot Glocks all day long. Glocks are the AK of pistols, they do enough right for the price. Other than that, it’s a simple and cheap pistol, with crappy plastic sites and terrible ergonomics.

        • Esteban Cafe

          SF can get anything they want–they CHOOSE Glock for performance, reliability and the fact that hits what it’s aimed at: I have all three (CZ 75 AND 2 Sigs) weapons. I like the Glock best. Just like the SF boys do. And it’s the loose nut behind the trigger that is the key to hitting. Ergo ? LOL, it’s the BEST !

          The primary difference will be the Sig’s weight: you can throw it to better effect once it’s malf’d from dirty ammo. Now, please do not go all 1911 on me (malf-omatics).

          • Jimney123

            I have an 18 series MOS…not a one of us carried or preferred a Glock. We all gladly carried H&K or Beretta and we all thought highly of the sidearm. If we were to carry a Glock, it would surely be modified. BTW…I never ONCE EVER fired my pistol in a combat situation.

  • maodeedee

    This decision is an illustration of why the term “Military intelligence” is an Oxymoron. why would the army pick a design that was more expensive to manufacture and more difficult to service in the field?

    Why? Two reasons: 1.) The Sig was more “modular” 2.) the Sig was DA/SA and had an external safety and is supposedly more “Idiot-proof” for poorly trained recruits who aren’t issued sidearms anyway.

    • Vhyrus

      How is this gun “more difficult to service in the field”? The whole damn thing can be taken apart without tools, cleaned, and have worn or broken parts replaced by the soldiers themselves. For that matter, how is the P320 “more expensive to manufacture”? It uses an injection molded polymer frame instead of a machined steel one ffs.

      • Esteban Cafe

        You mean like a Glock ?
        (Sorry dude, had to)

  • Mark Wynn

    I’m sure it’s a fine pistol … but strongly believe the US Armed Forces should purchase USA-made weapons. Why fund another country’s arms industry, and put our arms manufacturers at a disadvantage. Jobs? Taxes going back to our government? Suggest if this proposal were let after today’s inauguration, the military might have been incentivized to work with US manufacturers until suitable models were developed and bid.

    • Scott P

      SIG is hardly a German company anymore. Everything is made stateside now even the P320 which was designed and currently made in America.

      If you are going to bring up Glock then don’t bother because it was designed in Austria and owned by an Austrian, Gaston Glock.

      • Mark Wynn

        Thanks for the info on SIG, but who brought up Glock? Methinks your anti-Glock shields are up, Captain Kirk. I said “our arms manufacturers.”

    • iksnilol

      You do know that SIG is an American company now (partially explains why it sucks for the most part)?

      • Mark Wynn

        Thanks … I did some research per your input … and, while it’s not clearly laid out, it seems Sig Sauer is an American company, with hq in the USA, but part of an international group owned by a German. Guess that’s as close as we can get in today’s global corporations. (Except Ruger, S&W, Colt and other others are USA owned and located companies.) At least, the pistols contracted by the US government seem to be slated for manufacture in the USA. Which will be good for jobs, taxes back to the USA, etc.

        SIG Sauer GmbH is a firearms manufacturer and importer. A partnership between Schweizerische Industrie Gesellschaft of Switzerland and Sauer & Sohn of Germany, it is the subsidiary of Lüke & Ortmeier Gruppe (L&O Holding), which also owns Swiss Arms AG

  • Richard Lutz

    I cannot believe the Glock 19 was not adopted. At least it is a Glock type pistol.

  • efred1

    Well, at least it isn’t a Glock, or another defective Beretta. It would’ve been nice if an American-owned company got the contract, but oh, well.

    Interesting to note that the military made their selection one day before Trump was sworn in. Kind of reminds you of the hostage crisis in ’80, when Iran released them just as Reagan was sworn in.

    • TeaPartyPagan

      From the Sig Sauer website….
      This move provided the firearms manufacturer with significantly increased manufacturing capacity.

      The recently remodeled 206, 000-square-foot facility houses the SIG
      SAUER manufacturing facility and corporate staff offices, and is just
      about 20 minutes from the company’s Exeter NH manufacturing facility and the Epping, NH training academy. At the heart of this new headquarters is the state-of-the-art manufacturing floor, featuring a significantly expanded machining production center, quality control (QC) testing facilities, and an indoor, multi-position test-fire range, which includes a 100-meter precision rifle range.

      • efred1

        And that’s sad; foreign companies buying American businesses. By purchasing them, it still has an American name, but the funds still go offshore to their world headquarters, because we tax the crap out of every American business. It’s no wonder.

        • TeaPartyPagan

          Actually, Sig Sauer is a Swiss Company, who decided to move to USA, just as FN is a Belgian company who decided to move manufacturing to USA same as Kalashnikov opened a USA subsidiary, as did Beretta, over 30 years ago. We may lose some businesses in the global market, but we gain others. I could get all politcal about it, but I won’t

  • Nimrod

    I’m thinking The Donald may have something to say about this contract before all is said and done.

  • Wow!

    If we are going to pick a handgun with no improvements over the M9 and at a higher cost of mfg, why are we changing over again? It’s like if we replaced the M16 with a Mini 14… why?

    • Kivaari

      The SIG doesn’t cost much. It is easier to maintain and is simpler to use. A bonus is it is lighter and more compact as well.

    • TeaPartyPagan

      The original contract Berettas are wearing out, you have to replace them with something. The Beretta’s open slide is a nightmare for dirt collection. With a slide change, the P320 becomes a .40S&W. If the gun doesn’t fit your hand, just get a new grip frame. These are huge advantages for the P320.

      • Wow!

        Personally I would just replace it with more Beretta but apparently these handguns are very cheap, so I am actually backing the decision if the cost savings are true. As far as open slide for dirt, while torture tests are nice to try out, I think they are misleading since next to no one will jam any firearm with enough dirt that it fails to fire, especially a handgun which is well protected in its holster for most of the time.

  • NukeItFromOrbit

    The Army choose right for once? Wow. The stars must have aligned or something. It’s hilarious that regular infantry will be getting something better than the Glock SOCOM is stuck with.

  • NukeItFromOrbit

    Who gets access to those fancy hand-built M1911 variants or the massive Mk.23 that was all the rage back in the early 2000s.

  • Kivaari

    Recoil is quite manageable in the Glock.

  • SGT_B

    Something I just realized that makes this pistol very inconvenient for soldiers. The pistol requires disassembly to access the serial number. Who here has had to do a sensitive item inventory? Imagine disassembling dozens of pistols in the arms room just so that you can get to the serial number. FML.

  • Wow!

    I used to think the same way you did but in reality, I think it would hurt the firearm market more than it would help. Basically supply and demand. A private business can never compete with a government funded by taxpayers. If M9s were available for like $100 MFG like Hi point, and all other cheap mfg would go out of business, and then we would be really dependent on gov surplus to ensure a market of cheap weapons were available for the less fortunate man looking for defense.

    We could easily have the DPMS and FNH M16s in the public market for 250 each, but if we did that it would bankrupt all the other mfg of AR’s and lower our options and the flexibility of the market.

    • Core

      It might shift the dynamic a bit but it would spur support services and accessories for the surplus guns. If I had a surplus M16 and M9, assuming they were reasonably priced, I don’t see how they would fill any gaps. Despite being very blue collar, disposable income is readily available assuming prices would be reasonable. Companies like Wilson would have to hire more employees to customize more surplus M9s. This isn’t the model that current manufacturers want, because labor is expensive. But think of the jobs and possibly savings passed to the consumer by providing cheap surplus guns that can be customized. My first rifle was a 19xx Enfield 30-06 bolt action sniper rifle that was sporturized with a Fajen stock. The stock was bedded, and I installed aluminum pillars and rebedded it myself, and had a Smith install new rings and a nice scope. I installed a nice sling and scope caps etc. I also had a local gun store load me some custom hunting cartridges. At the same time, I purchased a very clean and accurate SKS, a Walther P-38, my grandfather left me his Arisaka 7.7, and the story continues. I needed a good shotgun for bird season, and my mother won a bid on a Winchester 1200 for me, I still have this cherished gift. My father gifted me a custom Winchester 94 in .44 mag. I spent plenty of cash modifying these guns. As a hunter I need many guns to do the job. I also have family heirlooms and gifts, yet I still need EDC handguns for different dress. After my military days I purchased an assortment of tactical rifles, shotgun, carbines, and pistols. They’re all tools, not collections for me. My grandfathers guns are cherished heirlooms, but all serviceable. I still like to hunt whitetail deer with my grandfather’s Remington model 8 in .35 REM. I also like to fish and have numerous polls for everything from fly fishing trout to deep sea fishing. In my region we are in it to fill the chest freezer with meat. I’ll probably never buy a new M9A1 because I just don’t need one, but I would buy a surplus model and customize it. The parts industry would do very well. Yeah it would impact the current trend of beta testing new and unproven guns on customers. But so many like myself will never be stupid enough or willing to part with hard earned cash to beta test someone’s new gun that has no track record of reliability, and durability. I’m not going to hunt bear with a rifle with a trigger that might discharge when I chamber a round or carry a pistol that might explode in my face of its slightly out of battery. I believe it would encourage healthy competition. Yeah maybe we wouldn’t see a bunch of beta junk hitting the market, but I can live with that.

      • Wow!

        I think the effect will be a lot bigger than that. Look on firearm forums and see how quickly people say “why buy (insert new and reasonably price product) when you can buy a mossberg/glock/ar for $100 more?

        That kind of dissuasion would only increase when $250 ARs and Handguns fill the market which even if it doesn’t completely hurt the existing market, will definitely prevent the new and innovating market from appearing and taking hold. A great majority of gun owners are those who buy the cheapest single gun and put it in the night stand to forget. If even half of those sales go to gov surplus, the market will take a huge hit that could seriously cripple many of the business options we enjoy.

        As much as we want the Government to stretch our tax dollars, we do not want them to be a competing business. The best option I can see is that the government sells the best of the lot as collectors items and cuts it at that. Quality over quantity essentially to reduce the effect.

        Surplus guns are also unbelievably worn out. The Gov, through a sense of misplaced priorities, tends to give our men old equipment and will not replace it until duct tape absolutely won’t hold it together (I exaggerate, and at the same time, maybe not be too far from the truth) I seriously doubt anyone would choose a surplus gun for customization since there are fundamental issues in wear that would take more time to fix than using a brand new weapon and starting from scratch. Rather than surplus, I rather have a new company get their feet wet making economy options and securing the market for their product.

        One direction that is good is that surplus equipment is starting to be trickled down to law enforcement. Many departments can hardly afford rifles or even spare magazines, and having rifles available (no matter how crappy) is a good option to equip the less active federal employees who still may need to be armed just in case. This frees up the new and more reliable rifles for those who will likely use it. In many cases, the department armorers can break down and reassemble old rifles into more than serviceable weapons sometimes almost like new with just a few replacement parts (a testament to the M16 platforms modularity and logistical superiority for sure).