quote:

Originally posted by Icabod:

quote:

Originally posted by KMitch200:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chowser:
It made it to the final 3 of selection but didn't meet the requirements??? What makes you think that? It wouldn't have even been tested if that were true.

A possible explanation:

"Only the Sig Sauer P320, with a serialized core frame and the ability to swap different grip lengths and slide-barrel combinations, seems to meet the requirements of the RFP among the named designs*. The Beretta APX, CZ P09, Smith & Wesson M&P, and Glock models only offer swappable backstraps. They lack any kind of actual modularity and the ability to change frame sizes and slide/barrel lengths on the same chassis."
https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/...-armys-next-handgun/

I believe the author of that article is incorrect regarding the APX from Beretta. I believe it does have a modular trigger assembly, but I could be wrong.

However, you've hit upon a very good point. The P320 was what the contract was written for. The modular concept - at the time the contract was written - gave Sig a five-to-ten-ish year head start on every other company out there. (P250 first available in 07-08 area). It was a hypothesis in search of testing, not a hypothesis derived from testing. But all of these contracts are. A person could spec a test so that there can be only one logical winner. Kudos to the government for at least giving the others time to try to field a competitor.

Now, put yourself in the Glock CEO's shoes. Do you want to explain to a board that you lost the contract to the US Army, but somehow neglected to appeal that decision? Win or lose doesn't matter; you have to try. It's not a matter of sour grapes, it's just business.

Second, the P320 is by almost all accounts a very good firearm. It's not like they decided against Beretta and S&W and Glock and then bought a bunch of Bryco Jennings guns. It's on level ground with the others in the competition, and it met the spec. Every gun had the same chance to win, but Sig had the - however many years of - experience with modularity (P250) to fall back on, so it wasn't their first foray into that design. Experience won.

And it's no real surprise to people who own them why that would be.

Just like it's no real surprise that Glock filed to contest.

What's not clear is whether GAO is required to withhold award and to suspend contract performance until a decision is made on the protest. GAO Bid Protest Regulations, § 21.6 Withholding of award and suspension of contract performance.

Regardless, don't expect this to be over anytime soon. If Glock doesn't like GAO's decision, they can then file a claim with the Court of Federal Claims.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
Typical of any government contract. If you cannot win on a products' merits, sue (or contest). Seems a lot of the time what happens is a new test is ordered, the process gets drawn out, and then finally cancelled and no one wins.

Anyone familiar with big Government contracting knows this. The potential win, compared to amount of legal fees spent in protest, outweighs everything.

Lots of big contracts are now "multiple awards", so nobody can protest, then each batch of work is big out among the 'winners' (everyone).

quote:

Now, put yourself in the Glock CEO's shoes. Do you want to explain to a board that you lost the contract to the US Army, but somehow neglected to appeal that decision? Win or lose doesn't matter; you have to try. It's not a matter of sour grapes, it's just business.

Absolutely correct. People get all attached to their firearm, yet Glock / SIG / Beretta are businesses. Nothing personal, simply dollars and cents.

quote:

Originally posted by Prince Herman:

quote:

I appreciate Glocks for what they are (I own two), and honour Gaston Glock for the innovation he brought to the

could you kindly expand on that "innovation "? I'm doing a research project and that information would be helpful. Thanks

They invented the polymer framed, striker fired, double stacked handgun!

Just ignore his one, m'kay?

Oh, just be quiet. Damn.

The VP70 was an abortion of a handgun. Don't act like you just landed on Earth and you're consulting the internet for answers.

But for the lousy trigger, the VP70 is a decent gun. The rest of the complaints about it are style choices HK made to appeal to the European market, not the American market. It's just the ultra heavy trigger that did it in. If we could wave a magic wand and give it a Glock like 4.5# trigger, what would be wrong with the VP70Z? Euro style mag release? A bit thicker than the steel framed/slide handguns of the day?

I have no interest in playing footsie with you. The Glock has been in continuous production for 35 years. Something on the order of five million pistols have been produced. Figure it out for yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I have no interest in playing footsie with you. The Glock has been in continuous production for 35 years. Something on the order of five million pistols have been produced. Figure it out for yourself.

And that is why they lost. Just because they are big doesn't mean they will automatically win. I still have not seen what was modular about their XM17 submission? Interchangeable back straps? Not new and most polymer guns now have that. Interchangeable slides and calibers? Sig and maybe Beretta's APX have that. Serious question, what is really different from a Gen1 Glock and a Gen4? A light rail and backstraps? ooh. Innovators. Especially since others were doing it first. Like that VP70.

Glock lost. This is more than sour grapes. At best, this will slow down the award, and cost Sig and the taxpayer money defending. And who pays for that? The taxpayer. And if Glock gets their way and gets the contract tossed, how many millions did we just waste (don't forget the other pistol trials that ended in nothing the past decade) only to restart for zero for the new contract?

Jesus, man, just be quiet. I've forgotten more about the history of firearms than you'll ever know, so just be quiet, huh?

I don't give a rat's ass what Glock wins or loses, but when you come in here, trying to be right on a technicality about a freaking machine pistol that HK modified and foisted on shooters who didn't know any better back then, I'm going to speak up.

quote:

Glock lost. This is more than sour grapes.

As other have been pointed out already, this is SOP. Really, just cut it out.

Maybe Sig and Glock could compare pictures of each others weapons with the frame under the slide where there are pieces cracked off of them.
Oh, wait, never seen a pic of a Sig like that, just glocks.

quote:

Originally posted by Voshterkoff:
I recall that SIG did the same during ATF trials.

Yep, and it didn't work out well for SIG, and probably won't go well for Glock either.

quote:

Originally posted by Aquabird:
Maybe Sig and Glock could compare pictures of each others weapons with the frame under the slide where there are pieces cracked off of them.
Oh, wait, never seen a pic of a Sig like that, just glocks.

Had this whole thing typed up with a picture and everything, but if you're telling me you know nothing of the cracked rail issue on Sigs, or have never bothered to google "Sig cracked frame" then I really don't think it will help.

People see what they want to see.

One company contesting another is SOP in government contracting. Lockheed Martin does it when Boeing is awarded something and vice versa, its all part of the game.

Sometimes the government even gives part of the contract to the contesting company IIRC, so in theory you could see Glock being given the part for building the barrels and magazines or something like that.

I've had several contracts (me being the customer, requiring the services) such as a bus, food service, and laundry service protested. In all cases I had to extend them a few months with the current provider. This was bound to happen with the handgun selection and I was waiting for it.

In our zeal to support your brand, let's not put our ignorance on display.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IHwO...GKPy6I/s1600/000.jpg

If you put an overcharged handload into the chamber of any pistol, the cartridge case is susceptible to blowing out. When this happens in, say, a steel framed 1911 with wooden grip panels, the blast from the overcharge might crack your grip panels, but the frame will remain structurally sound.

Pop quiz- since its inception, what percentage of Glock's pistol production has polymer frames- 100%

What percentage of SIG-Sauer production has been polymer framed pistols? Substantially less than 100%

You have a jillion shooters shooting a gazillion rounds over decades in Glocks. Oh, here's pictures of Glocks that catastrophically destructed. What percentage of their production is that? A fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of Glock's output.

Polymer framed pistols from other manufacturers can catastrophically destruct. You'll see it in the 320 as well, when enough shooters over enough time have put enough rounds downrange, as has been done (in spades) with the Glock.

quote:

Originally posted by bionic218:

... The P320 was what the contract was written for. The modular concept - at the time the contract was written - gave Sig a five-to-ten-ish year head start on every other company out there.

Maybe that's the meat of the objection. Maybe they'll claim that the specification was written to eliminate all except the desired winner.

quote:

Originally posted by whanson_wi:

quote:

Originally posted by bionic218:

... The P320 was what the contract was written for. The modular concept - at the time the contract was written - gave Sig a five-to-ten-ish year head start on every other company out there.

Maybe that's the meat of the objection. Maybe they'll claim that the specification was written to eliminate all except the desired winner.

Agreed. Both the MHS and FBI contracts were written like someone was referencing the SIG P320 manual / promo materials when they wrote it.

If SIG prevails in the award, we'll get to see how durable it really is with all the grunts dragging it all over the place, neglecting them, running them over with tanks / trucks / etc.

Should be interesting to see.

Here's hoping Glock wins. The Army would be far better served with any of the Glock variants than whatever flavor of the month SIG is currently peddling. And as a former SIG fanboy, that pains me to say.