I have a multi-piece set of spanners, what do I win?

I guess I can see the tamperproof on the striker removal as the 320 has a rather unique & easy to loose hairpin spring on the striker drop safety that is not only very easy to loose but not the easiest to reinstall correctly.

Also, nothing cast in stone requiring the FCU tamperproof screw to remain in place. Each unit could determine if they want their users to be able to remove the FCU for cleaning.

On the 1911a1's that I carried when in the service the firing pin & extractor came out rather easily but we never removed those in the field.

quote:

Originally posted by Voshterkoff:
No chance of people using a fork, none whatsoever.

That WAS Top Secret information...

Having been in, this sadly makes a lot of sense to me. I think a lot of people are looking at this as gun owners and fans, not as service members who may not know as much as you think about their guns.

This should keep the ones who don't know their guns from doing something stupid and for Joe the tinkerer, he'll probably mess it up so spectacularly as to be the obvious cause.

Give it to a platoon or a flight, tell them not to mess with it and turn your back for 15 minutes.

They can be almost as fast as a couple of 8 year olds.

Instant LTP.

Little. Tiny. Parts...

And now we know the reason for the selection over the G19. Lol

Paul Harvey.

I've seen grunts loose the cotter pin holding the firing pin on the BCG of an M16 while in the field. I can see why big army doesn't want grunts having access to removing the FCU in the field.

It'll eventually get to where the rank and file are just issued whatever grip is already on the gun.

Loose vs. Lose.

There is a difference, but some participants on this thread seem to be it ignorant of that difference.

Well, maybe they just think of it as a loosely defined concept.

I like my P320C, but as a retired Ordnance Corps officer the whole current state of weapons procurement kind of chaps my ass.

While the emphasis seams to be on "modularity" and some BS terms like "increased lethality" tossed-around, I haven't seen anything about dirt or sand tests, salt corrosion tests, MRBF, accuracy tests, etc.

After talking to the PM on the late M8 rifle project, I started to realize that these days it's PowerPoint and razzle-dazzle, which may or may not result in a good piece of equipment.... And "discovery learning" can sometimes suck.

quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
It's a nice bronzey, golden-ish finish.

SIG is making a killing on all those grip frames. Dolla-Dolla-Billz.

Not really, they are only charging the Army a bit over $200 per gun.

Yes they are.

It only cost 80 dollars to produce a Glock. They basically give guns away free to departments. But they make their money on spare parts and training.