Army looking at 10 Commercial Sub guns...

[RetroRevolver77]

I don't understand this at all. I think subguns have very limited use in today's military. Covert ops by tier 1 units, and as a result need to be more compact than a MP5. I think an updated gun that can be best described as a modern closed bolt mini uzi using plastic in place of sheet metal and redesigned to use a lighter bolt would fit this mission perfectly.

But buying subguns for non front line troops, what does this do, other than waste money.

I'd rather have a subgun in my lap than a carbine if I was driving around. Something small like an MP5K would be ideal but modernized.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

It would be interesting to know what the genesis of this is, where the money came from and who is running the program. I'm sure there is some kind of inside baseball goofiness going on here. Isn't that a much larger number of guns under consideration that usual? Seems like there are usually 4 or so for a new program.

[Wake27]

It would be interesting to know what the genesis of this is, where the money came from and who is running the program. I'm sure there is some kind of inside baseball goofiness going on here. Isn't that a much larger number of guns under consideration that usual? Seems like there are usually 4 or so for a new program.

That’s what I was thinking. A lot of random manufacturers for a DOD contract too. I don’t know where I read it, but I saw something that claimed that the idea is to give one to anyone who is normally issued only an M9, to make them more lethal without “burdening” them with a full M4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pinzgauer]

Shame the Steyr MP-69/81/MPI is no longer made... It would be my pick. Got to play extensively with a dealer sample and burn through some ammo.

It's like a sleeker, product improved Uzi. Lighter, handles better. All the good things of an Uzi, with less (none?) if the bad. It's still open bolt, though, if I recall.

By the way, the B&T mp-9 is a descendent of the steyr sub-gun, they bought out the design/patents from Steyr. (By way of the TMP)

I'm still an mp-5 fan, especially for 50m or further away. But that's not the role most of the time. For protection, the compactness of the MPI would be my pick. Shoulder stock is usable if needed.

I personally don't think of the MP-5 as outdated. If it is, you could say the same for any PDW based on the m-16... I'm not aware of any sub-gun system better developed and flexible than the MP-5.

I'm not a sub-gun fan for general issue, even for officers. I got sub-gun out of my system in college when I ran the same "jungle" lane shooting balloons randomly placed on the run down a valley. 5-10m I could hit just as fast with my pistol and a fraction of the ammo compared to burst fire.

But they still have their role, I could see why the army would want to have them in the arsenal for specific needs.

[ralph]

Why in the Blue F would we buy a Turkish contract MP5 when factory German ones are available for damn near the same price? Unless it's just a way to bring an end to semi auto imports for US shooters because now they have a military contract.

From that list the only ones I'd consider are the Colt, SIG, B&T or the EVO. The Colt would make the most sense IF you weren't going with a factory MP5 for some reason that I can't even begin to understand. And why they aren't looking at the Knights PDW is even more baffling.

Maybe H&K is getting serious about discontinuing the MP5 series and the Army just isn't interested in the UMP or MP7. And in that case, Hans and Franz need to get back into the R&D stuff pronto to bring us the next generation SMG because the UMP was nice, but wasn't quite it and the MP7 is way too special use as a general purpose SMG.

Wouldn't it be nice if HK could marry the roller lock bolt of the MP5 with a new polymer platform available in both .45 and 9mm but in a package the size of the MP5 or better. Kind of like how they married Browning and Walther features for the ground breaking USP handgun series.

But honestly, given the limited use and need of a SMG anyway, the whole idea of searching for a new one is kinda bizarre, especially given some of the candidates. Somewhere Todd Bailey is looking at this list and his blood pressure is spiking hard.

Todd Bailey...Now there's a name I haven't heard mentioned in a looong time....

[26 Inf]

It would be interesting to know what the genesis of this is, where the money came from and who is running the program. I'm sure there is some kind of inside baseball goofiness going on here. Isn't that a much larger number of guns under consideration that usual? Seems like there are usually 4 or so for a new program.

From the article:

U.S. Army Contracting Command, on behalf of Project Manager Soldier Weapons, recently announced it will spend $428,480 to award sole-source contracts to Beretta USA, Colt Manufacturing Company, CMMG Inc., CZ-USA, Sig Sauer and five other small-arms makers for highly concealable subcompact weapon systems "capable of engaging threat personnel with a high volume of lethal and accurate fires at close range with minimal collateral damage," according to a June 6 special award notice.......

.....The weapons will be used in an evaluation to "inform current capabilities for the Capability Production Document for the Maneuver Support Center of Excellence," the notice states.

"The acquisition of the SCW is essential in meeting the agency's requirement to support Product Manager, Individual Weapons mission to assess commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) SCWs in order to fill a capability gap in lethality and concealability."

https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/...e-testing.html

[sgtrock82]

That’s what I was thinking. A lot of random manufacturers for a DOD contract too. I don’t know where I read it, but I saw something that claimed that the idea is to give one to anyone who is normally issued only an M9, to make them more lethal without “burdening” them with a full M4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

An m4 would hardly be a burden if anyone could have one and not add 5lbs of crap to it. Better yet how about pencil barreled sbr.... like an actual carbine or at least what a "carbine" was traditionally meant to be. The lighter shorter weapon you issued to those who werent officers and werent infantry.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

[ABNAK]

An m4 would hardly be a burden if anyone could have one and not add 5lbs of crap to it. Better yet how about pencil barreled sbr.... like an actual carbine or at least what a "carbine" was traditionally meant to be. The lighter shorter weapon you issued to those who werent officers and werent infantry.

Isn't that the reason for the genesis of the M4 in the first place? It morphed into a "beast" (relative term) once it became a general issue weapon.

[MountainRaven]

Isn't that the reason for the genesis of the M4 in the first place? It morphed into a "beast" (relative term) once it became a general issue weapon.

It's funny how that happens.

The M16A1 was a lightweight, handy rifle.

Then, 20 years later, along came the M16A2. (I really don't think it's any coincidence that no sooner had the M16A2 been adopted - and the lightweight, handy M16A1 binned - than Colt said, "You know what the Army needs? A lightweight, handy rifle!")

Then the M4 carbine gets adopted. A lightweight, handy rifle.

And 20 years later, along comes the M4A1 (as a general issue, rather than SOF-specific, weapon).

And so the cycle begins anew.

[HardToHandle]

It's funny how that happens.

The M16A1 was a lightweight, handy rifle.

Then, 20 years later, along came the M16A2. (I really don't think it's any coincidence that no sooner had the M16A2 been adopted - and the lightweight, handy M16A1 binned - than Colt said, "You know what the Army needs? A lightweight, handy rifle!")

Then the M4 carbine gets adopted. A lightweight, handy rifle.

And 20 years later, along comes the M4A1 (as a general issue, rather than SOF-specific, weapon).

And so the cycle begins anew.

Whoa... Was it not the Corps that said we need a heavy barrel, new A2 sights, three-round burst and too long a buttstock- you know, to be riflemen in the Cold War build-up? The Army needed to replace some shot out uppers and had SS109 needing a faster twist, but slapping on more features was “joint” and more rationale for new uppers. The result was a rifle Ill-suited for the last war and the next war. The A2 should have been shitcanned just for the stupid pistol grip duck bill, let alone all the other non-improvement “improvements”.

I fondled the Brownell’s clones a few months ago. They felt awesome -balanced, fast swinging and something so much easier to carry than a present M4. I cannot get them out of my mind... as a guy who switched to a lightweight barrels almost a decade ago.