SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    Army Times: "Cabela’s might have been a cheaper option for the military’s newest handgun after all, report shows"
Page 1 2 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Army Times: "Cabela’s might have been a cheaper option for the military’s newest handgun after all, report shows" Login/Join 
Member
posted
The link as several videos.

https://www.armytimes.com/news...Early%20Bird%20Brief

Cabela’s might have been a cheaper option for the military’s newest handgun after all, report shows

by Todd South 18 hours ago

Back in 2016, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said publicly that he could probably get a better deal on a new handgun to replace the decades-old Beretta M9 if he had $17 million on a credit card to spend at the outdoor store Cabela’s.

Well, it turns out the eventual $580 million, 10-year contract for the Modular Handgun System is a bit pricier than that speculative shopping trip, but it is still competitive with a straight commercial purchase, according to a recent Congressional Research Service report.

“We’re not figuring out the next lunar landing. This is a pistol. Two years to test? At $17 million? You give me $17 million on a credit card, and I’ll call Cabela’s tonight, and I’ll outfit every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine with a pistol for $17 million,” Milley said at the time. “And I’ll get a discount on a bulk buy.”

The two-page Congressional Research Service report noted that the four services have plans to buy as many as 473,215 pistols from Sig Sauer, the winner of the MHS contract last year. That will include a combination of the 9mm M17 handgun and its compact version, the M18.

Those numbers break down to:

Army: 238,215 weapons.
Air Force: 130,000 weapons.
Navy: 70,000 weapons.
Marine Corps: 35,000 weapons (not officially announced but in budget for next fiscal year).

While report authors Moshe Schwartz and Jason A. Purdy pointed out criticisms in other reports of the Army’s handgun procurement — including the length of the procurement effort and the lack of clarity in the original Request For Proposals to replace the M9 — the pair also wrote that observers blamed acquisition statutes and regulations that delayed decision making and ramped up administrative issues.

And though a straight apples-to-apples comparison between using the procurement process and doing a direct off-the-shelf purchase isn’t available in the report, its authors estimated that ammunition and weapons purchases to meet the quantities needed would come to about $552 million over a decade — a $28 million discount from the awarded contract.

They listed Cabela’s prices as $800 for the full-sized civilian version of the M17, known as the Sig Sauer P320, and $650 for the compact version. Holsters came out to $50 each.

The military version of the M17 and M18 are slightly different than the P320, with some internal mechanisms and external controls, according to the company.

The CRS report’s estimates didn’t include intellectual property such as technical data purchased by the Army nor the additional training that is included with the package, according to the report.

And, the authors made a very conservative estimate of cost increases at about 1 percent annually for the weapons. The estimates did not include increases for included items such as the holster, ammunition and maintenance kits.

An interesting side note showed the Army-only Beretta M9 contract made back in the 1980s for 321,260 pistols came in at about $178.9 million in today’s dollars.

The final verdict, according to CRS analysts?

“Based on the final cost of the weapon program, the Army appears to be procuring the weapon at a competitive cost, particularly if the value of the intellectual property is included,” according to the report.
 
Posts: 16049 | Location: Eastern Iowa | Registered: May 21, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer
posted Hide Post
They lose credibility with the $150 price difference between full size vs compact (or Carry, for that matter). All features being equal (except size), the price should be the same, regardless if Cabela's sells it or anyone else. We certainly sell them at the same price, albeit a fair bit less than Cabela's does.
 
Posts: 8983 | Location: Drippin' wet | Registered: April 18, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
E tan e epi tas
Picture of cslinger
posted Hide Post
Yeah but is cabellas going to provide support for those guns for decades to come. Smile

I get where he is coming from though. Spending the time and money to slog through a process for what amounts to a weapon less frequently used in military applications then a radio seemed a bit excessive when there were perfectly good COTS guns that were already well vetted.

Personally I think they should have bought Glock 17/19s and been done with it. Not because I think they are some massively superior handgun just that they are well proven, cheap, available and already in limited use.


"Guns are tools. The only weapon ever created was man."
 
Posts: 7970 | Location: On the water | Registered: July 25, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Go ahead punk, make my day
posted Hide Post
Yeah but without that MHS contract who knows if the P320 special drop feature would have been 'found' and 'fixed'. Wink
 
Posts: 45798 | Registered: July 12, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Rule #1: Use enough gun
Picture of Bigboreshooter
posted Hide Post
Only an idiot would buy guns at Cabelas' pricing.



When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed. Luke 11:21


"Every nation in every region now has a decision to make.
Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." -- George W. Bush

 
Posts: 14826 | Location: Birmingham, Alabama | Registered: February 25, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Sigforum K9 handler
Picture of jljones
posted Hide Post
The only problem with this is that as of today, the true military version can’t be bought at Cabelas. I get the fact that they are talking a COTS procurement versus the process, but it’s not the same animal.




www.opspectraining.com

"It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it works out for them"



 
Posts: 37252 | Location: Logical | Registered: September 12, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of RichardC
posted Hide Post
I tried to tell them that the Beretta M9A3 was the best way to go, but they wouldn't listen.


____________________



 
Posts: 16271 | Location: Florida | Registered: June 23, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I thought the contract included ammunition. Did it not?


------------------------------------------------
Charter member of the vast, right-wing conspiracy
 
Posts: 1870 | Registered: June 25, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of CLEANDEAN
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RichardC:
I tried to tell them that the Beretta M9A3 was the best way to go, but they wouldn't listen.
I like Sig .45's (P227 & P220) a lot. However the 320 does't do any yearning or stirring of desire.
I would take one if you gave it to me. Something about a Beretta new model 9A3-1 is making me fill my wild feralhog Bank.
Army should have stayed with Beretta for several reasons


Never judge a man, till you have walked a mile in his shoes.....
That way, you'll be a mile away from him; and you'll have his shoes.
 
Posts: 190 | Location: So. of 3 Rivers < Penna. VIGILANT CURMUDGEON | Registered: April 12, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Hop head
Picture of lyman
posted Hide Post
I'm thinking the reference to Cabela's was just to make a point,

he could have taken that same 17mil to Dick's ( Smile) or any other firearms retailer and made a buy,



https://chandlersfirearms.com/chesterfield-armament/
 
Posts: 10634 | Location: Beach VA,not VA Beach | Registered: July 17, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by lyman:
I'm thinking the reference to Cabela's was just to make a point,

he could have taken that same 17mil to Dick's ( Smile) or any other firearms retailer and made a buy,


Yeah...well, the military could get a pistol at Dick's, though Dick's couldn't transfer outside state boundaries, but even the military couldn't get a semi-automatic rifle at Dicks sporting goods.
 
Posts: 6650 | Registered: September 13, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Unapologetic Old
School Curmudgeon
Picture of Lord Vaalic
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RichardC:
I tried to tell them that the Beretta M9A3 was the best way to go, but they wouldn't listen.


Beretta said the M9A3 was going to be cheaper than the current version M9 to the military, but the civilian version is $350 - $400 more.




Don't weep for the stupid, or you will be crying all day
 
Posts: 10764 | Location: TN | Registered: December 18, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Go ahead punk, make my day
posted Hide Post
quote:
but the civilian version is $350 - $400 more.


Maybe recouping R&D costs..? And making $$$, the good old fashioned way...
 
Posts: 45798 | Registered: July 12, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of JAFO
posted Hide Post
I wonder what the "included intellectual property" is? And perhaps Beretta was planning on not including it, to allow them to use it in the civilian market.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
"I drank what?" - Socrates
 
Posts: 5182 | Location: S.A., TX | Registered: July 20, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
When the contract was awarded press reports said the per gun price the military was paying would only be $207. This new report seems way off.
 
Posts: 838 | Registered: September 27, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Go ahead punk, make my day
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fundman:
When the contract was awarded press reports said the per gun price the military was paying would only be $207. This new report seems way off.
Yeah per gun.

Plus magazines, frames, barrels, slides... Wink
 
Posts: 45798 | Registered: July 12, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Hop head
Picture of lyman
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sns3guppy:
quote:
Originally posted by lyman:
I'm thinking the reference to Cabela's was just to make a point,

he could have taken that same 17mil to Dick's ( Smile) or any other firearms retailer and made a buy,


Yeah...well, the military could get a pistol at Dick's, though Dick's couldn't transfer outside state boundaries, but even the military couldn't get a semi-automatic rifle at Dicks sporting goods.



hence the smiley



https://chandlersfirearms.com/chesterfield-armament/
 
Posts: 10634 | Location: Beach VA,not VA Beach | Registered: July 17, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
quote:
Originally posted by Fundman:
When the contract was awarded press reports said the per gun price the military was paying would only be $207. This new report seems way off.
Yeah per gun.

Plus magazines, frames, barrels, slides... Wink


$207 per gun. Plus magazines, ammo, training, maintenance support and the aforementioned intellectual property.

As the article demonstrates, the military isn't getting ripped off on the price we pay for items. The waste is driven by the extremely inefficient contracting processes and all the hoops to jump through.

DOD cost per M4 is something like $630, less than the civilian market for a Colt 6920. M249s are $4k-ish I believe, semi-auto civvie versions $7-$8k.




“People have to really suffer before they can risk doing what they love.” –Chuck Palahnuik

Be harder to kill: https://preparefit.ck.page
 
Posts: 5043 | Location: Oregon | Registered: October 02, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Plus suppressors (unknown amount), threaded barrels and tall sights to match. And as I said before ammunition.


------------------------------------------------
Charter member of the vast, right-wing conspiracy
 
Posts: 1870 | Registered: June 25, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of mikeyspizza
posted Hide Post
The need to factor in all the contracting costs and overhead including the federal employees, their benefits, the building and furnishings, etc., versus 1 guy with a credit card.
 
Posts: 4068 | Location: North Carolina | Registered: August 16, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    Army Times: "Cabela’s might have been a cheaper option for the military’s newest handgun after all, report shows"

© SIGforum 2024