quote:

Originally posted by schatzperson:
I really want to try out the MPX......
As much as I wanted my FAMAE and MP5 to feel as smooth-good as an UZI or a Sterling.
They did not and I sold them both.

I am not prejudiced, my views based soley on merit.
I would really like to see a pistol caliber carbine shoot and feel butter slick like an open bolt gun.
Holding my breath.

I had a clone MP5, but it just wasn't reliable enough. I'm thinking about getting a RRA LAR9 pistol to play with until the MPX comes.

LDD,

Is there any updates on the MPX? Or we just hoping for nothing or do you think these will really come to market?

Also in another article you mention that the former head of the MPX division Robert Hurt is no longer there. Will that have an effect on the MPX release?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: tpd312,

Not that Mp5s are not clever things, but its still a ductape fix for a closed bolt gun.
Naturally, HK did all the preliminary tests with closed bolt blowbacks and discovered as everyone one else that without the shock absorbing effect from differential locking (by advanced primer ignition)....it all goes south very quickly. Absolutely no combination of bolt weight and spring will make up for the loss of open bolt ignition.
HK, threw in those roller locks and it still felt too rough. Maybe they fluted the chambers and fielded the thing because they HAD to do something. You still had the slap, still felt almost like a spring blowback.
All that said, I ask myself, why it has taken this long for someone to market a simple gas op rotary bolt on a subgun !
Several answers come to mind, and none are technical.
But I still want to try it out :-)

quote:

Originally posted by tpd312:
LDD,

Is there any updates on the MPX? Or we just hoping for nothing or do you think these will really come to market?

Also in another article you mention that the former head of the MPX division Robert Hurt is no longer there. Will that have an effect on the MPX release?

LDD,

Any update to this post? I know you were probably busy watching my beloved Seahawks lose the Super Bowl

Sig Posted this in response to a question about the MPX in their posting of a Gun Talk radio link.

"Sig Sauer Sean, the SIG MPX is in initial production. Once these units clear the testing and QC process we will begin full production and those will start to ship to distributors. As soon as this happens, we will let everyone know."

I'm not sure if this is marketing/facebook not knowing what production is doing, as this is the exact same line they gave us 3-4 months ago. But it is infinitely frustrating and inexcusable to have this bad of communication for a product launch.

Sig said the same thing back at the 2014 Shot Show saying they were in production and shipping in Feb. Well it's Feb a year later and the same old BS story from Sig. Very disappointed.

I cancelled my preorder today. I still plan on buying one but I got tired of having that much money spent on something with no firm ETA.

Rockwell was very cool about it and said I should have my refund shortly. When the MPX is out and ready for purchase I will definitely consider buying from them again.

quote:

Originally posted by tpd312:
Sig said the same thing back at the 2014 Shot Show saying they were in production and shipping in Feb. Well it's Feb a year later and the same old BS story from Sig. Very disappointed.

They were supposed to ship to distribs shortly after SHOT.

If I had anything solid I would let you know.

Right, that's the same exact thing Sig said after the 2014 Shot Show. Here we are same time frame with a new year and hearing the same story again. Don't mean to be negative, but is this the norm for the firearm industry?

quote:

Originally posted by tpd312:
Right, that's the same exact thing Sig said after the 2014 Shot Show. Here we are same time frame with a new year and hearing the same story again. Don't mean to be negative, but is this the norm for the firearm industry?

Unfortunately yes, particularly with the advent of rapid-prototyping (which isn't a factor in this case, but is part of the general trend of too-early-release).

As a consumer, I used to hate being shown something I couldn't buy...and I still do.

But then I became member of the gun-media and it was my job to ask "What's new!?! What's new!?!" It didn't matter if no one could buy it for the next two years. If I didn't cover it and it came out somewhere else, then I wasn't doing my job (even if I knew it wasn't ready for consumers).

That's why I try not to cover non-firing mock-ups--they're just not far enough along to be relevant. But people ask about them, so sometimes I don't really have a choice if I want to be responsive.

There is the pressure to stay relevant with new and interesting products--everyone in the industry feels it. But the problem with weapons systems is that sometimes it takes longer than a year to go from ideation to production. And there is the constant pressure to show something new even if it's not ready to be sold.

Thanks LDD for that clarification. Hopefully anytime now. That MPX is a sweet little gun.

quote:

Originally posted by LDD:
There is the pressure to stay relevant with new and interesting products--everyone in the industry feels it. But the problem with weapons systems is that sometimes it takes longer than a year to go from ideation to production. And there is the constant pressure to show something new even if it's not ready to be sold.

If it were a matter of just showing things at SHOT and then it not going to market till it was done that would be one thing. But it isn't that, Sig has brought all of this upon themselves. What exactly are they gaining from putting out misleading, an image of "the very first production #MPX #9mm." 10/1/14 on instagram and flat out deceptive, "#mpx starting to ship." 11/7/14. They only manage to piss off their most ardent supporters. Give anyone whom might have purchased one pause because it's keeps being tested so it has a major flaw, and did they actually fix it when it does go on sale. Or be so late and expensive to the party that the market has moved on or competitors have already sucked up the customers money.

quote:

Originally posted by full.tang.halo:
What exactly are they gaining from putting out misleading, an image of "the very first production #MPX #9mm." 10/1/14 on instagram and flat out deceptive, "#mpx starting to ship." 11/7/14.

My understanding was that the first shipments of MPXs were for overseas/LE/mil. Is that not correct?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Shackelford,

Oh let the foreign governments be the beta testers, good job Sig

I have had money set aside to purchase a MPX-PSB 9mm with SIG suppressor since last fall.
I will hold out until Jun 2015, but after that will move on to another firearm.

quote:

one pause because it's keeps being tested so it has a major flaw

I am just thinking aloud:
To make this a barrel interchangeable weapon, they must have made the gas ports very close to the chamber.
This is not necessarily the best place to tap off gas for a short stroke rotary bolt gun.
In a pistol caliber you might just about get away with the low pressure impulse. It will be a devil to stretch out the bolt turn period, unless the short stroke has some clever delay.
Don't know. I am wrong in my assumptions probably. But generally, gas op guns work best with gas taps far forward.
Designs with rear taps work well in gas brake retarded blowbacks, like the Steyr GB, Hk P7 pistols and the new Walther CCP. I am in fact surprised we have not seen subguns in 357 sig, 10mm etc etc. using this configuration.
That said I watched the MPX clips and it appears to work well.

quote:

Originally posted by LDD:

quote:

Originally posted by tpd312:
Right, that's the same exact thing Sig said after the 2014 Shot Show. Here we are same time frame with a new year and hearing the same story again. Don't mean to be negative, but is this the norm for the firearm industry?

Unfortunately yes, particularly with the advent of rapid-prototyping (which isn't a factor in this case, but is part of the general trend of too-early-release).

As a consumer, I used to hate being shown something I couldn't buy...and I still do.

But then I became member of the gun-media and it was my job to ask "What's new!?! What's new!?!" It didn't matter if no one could buy it for the next two years. If I didn't cover it and it came out somewhere else, then I wasn't doing my job (even if I knew it wasn't ready for consumers).

That's why I try not to cover non-firing mock-ups--they're just not far enough along to be relevant. But people ask about them, so sometimes I don't really have a choice if I want to be responsive.

There is the pressure to stay relevant with new and interesting products--everyone in the industry feels it. But the problem with weapons systems is that sometimes it takes longer than a year to go from ideation to production. And there is the constant pressure to show something new even if it's not ready to be sold.

I think it's the norm for Sig. What about Ruger? The show a gun and it's in the stores 6/8 weeks later. The new Cz EVO we saw it at a year ago and the said not for US , then in November 2014 the said we're bringing it the US and it's here. I got to handle one Monday at the LGS and I'm number 2 now on their list. Anyone want to guess when the 220 10mm will be in the stores?

I can address two of the points brought up following my post on too-early releases.

On the first production MPXs going to a foreign gov't contract: True. The MPX started out as a two-position selectable-position piston system. The problem was it wouldn't run with both the really light frangible stuff and the hot +p+. Guns going to foreign government contracts will likely be fed a known quantity and characteristic of ammunition for their entire life. Thus a gun going to, say GSG9 or King Saud's personal guard are actually a bit easier to "program" than guns going into the American marketplace.

So it makes sense that SIG would be comfortable releasing MPXs to foreign contracts before releasing them on the American marketplace.

The MPX is now fitted with a self-adjusting piston system, so the frangible vs +P+ balancing issues have been solved. Not sure if the guns shipped to the foreign contract had the old two-position or the newer self-adjusting piston.

On comparisons to Ruger: SIG knows that the release of the MPX was not done well. Certain staff members (and I'm not saying who) have admitted as much and some even cited Ruger as a company that does a good job with their releases. To their credit, SIG is working with at least some products that are more complex and novel than the tried-and-true/same-ole' offerings that characterize Ruger's lineup. Releasing a never-before-sold weapon system like the MPX or MCX is not the same as dropping another "budget" DI AR on the market, or modifying a reliable and proven existing design (22/45 lite, breakdown 10/22, etc).

I'm not particularly pleased with the delayed release of the MPX (I told people they could have it in 2014!?!). I've had a full deposit for one + magazines sitting at my FFL since late last year. But the reciprocal question also applies: So Ruger could have done a better job releasing the MPX; but could they have made one in the first place? And with Ruger's styling (or lack thereof) would you buy it?

Gas Position vs bbl length on the MPX SIG has achieved reliable results with the self-adjusting gas piston on barrels shorter than 4" (which is the shortest slated production model). I do know the exact bbl length figure, it's quite a bit shorter than 4" but I was asked not a publish it. Suffice to say, if the previous is true (and I have no reason to believe it isn't) bbl length and balancing issues have been solved.

LDD, I would agree with you on both points. Sig is far more technically advanced than say Ruger by a long ways and nothing that special about Rugers as they are pretty much old school in the firearm business. I remember when the FN SCAR was first announced and I belive it took awhile for that to finally hit the consumer market as well.

quote:

their credit, SIG is working with at least some products that are more complex and novel than the tried-and-true/same-ole' offerings that characterize Ruger's lineup. Releasing a never-before-sold weapon system like the MPX or MCX is not the same as dropping another "budget" DI AR on the market, or modifying a reliable and proven existing design (22/45 lite, breakdown 10/22, etc).

I don't quite see how the complexity of the product has anything to do with market release.

Yes, there is tremendous pressure for a company like SIG in a mature market to constantly be releasing "new" stuff, but their lack of self-control is the only thing shooting them in the proverbial foot here.

Ruger is successful because they strike when the iron is hot; by only announcing product when it's actively being produced (and often with some launch inventory on hand), they capture immediate sales when press coverage is at it's peak.

Thanks to SIG, I've had a 0% loan out to my LGS for something like a year now on my MPX deposit. They could have sold 20k of these things the day after it was announced at SHOT, the coverage was so massive. Alas, at this point, it's only die-hards that are still following this thing and SIG is gonna need to work their butts off to re-stoke the fires when the Makino cells start spitting production units out.