During testing, they didn't smack the P320 with a hammer at the exact -30 degree angle? :-)Originally Posted by davidjinks
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Member
During testing, they didn't smack the P320 with a hammer at the exact -30 degree angle? :-)
Senior Member
There's an actual mil standard on the requirements for dropping the weapons.
I'm trying to find out from someone who was there about how they half assed the testing.
But I get your sarcasm.
Member
Nothing can change the fact that M9's have a number of inherent flaws compared to modern pistols:
DA/SA trigger pull, the military will never spend the time, money or ammo to get joes proficient with it
Slide mounted safety/decocker with an open slide design, also a fail
Ergonomics of that fat grip, definitely not user friendly for some hands
Thankfully SOCOM went G19, I pity big Army and eventually the USMC and Air Force as they are also testing the Sig for adoption
SF
Senior Member
Well the M9 is based on the impeccable, thoroughbred lineage of the 93R, so I would have to say the M9 is the better gun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Member
This video goes into great detail on the M17 program. Basically they did not do the high endurance test where they shoot at least 25,000 rounds like they did with the M9 vs Sig 226 trials in the 80's.
https://youtu.be/dGI2H0EjDTw
Senior Member
Again, I'm waiting to hear from someone who was actually there.
Last edited by davidjinks; 10-01-17 at 21:16.
Senior Member
Sig 320, I have a nice gussy'ed up M9 after a trip to Wilson Combat, but Id still take my 320 over that gun. Both are very nice guns and having a back up pistol is a great thing, M9 or Sig!! I'd save my fight for the m4 of my choosing
"Air Force / Policeman / Fireman / Man of God / Friend of mine / R.I.P. Steve Lamy"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks