US Army fields SIG M17 & M18 pistols

[southswede]

Glock claims 90+% of malfunctions are shooter related, 7+% ammunition and the remaining gun related. I wonder if this applies to the Sig P320.......no, I'm sure that would be crazy thinking.

[SSGGlock]

That didn’t take long. Army should back out.

[Slater]

Hell, Remington is probably standing by with their RP9

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

Definitely should have stuck with Beretta unless unless they had went with the original plan of swapping to a better caliber— the Beretta was better than the guns they tried to replace it with...IMHO.

[call_me_ski]

Certain folks inside the USMC and SEAL's already use Glock's so I doubt that they would jump on the Army bandwagon no matter what (and especially not know).



C4

The funny part was that it was the Army that really brought Glocks onboard before anyone else in the US military. They trickled down from JSOC to regiment and the SF groups and their adoption of the Glock 19 on a wider scale lead to SOCOM wanting to standardize on the platform. Now the Army blindly bought guns that may or may not work solely on price when what limited testing that was done revealed that they might not be as reliable as other entries and they didn’t pass drop tests. Is the Army open to liability regarding this acquisition or did that end with the GAO protest?

[Todd.K]

A lot of people seem to be missing all the details. The story is sensational rather than objective. They don't bother to mention most of the stoppages were a straight up training issue.

All of this happened AFTER the trials. SIG had already won. That means it passed the Army drop tests. I doubt they even found the problem themselves.

XM... is not standard ball ammo. If it was standard it would be M... and not XM. No feeding issues in civilian reviews or use that I have seen makes me suspect the ammo first.

No idea what to make of live rounds ejecting without causing a stoppage? Strange and something I feel we would have heard about if it ever happened to civilian guns.

I am not a SIG fan or hater but they will either work out the problems or this will just be one more of many poor procurements.

[Arctic1]

I suggest people read this article.

The problem is limited to the XM1152 115gr TC FMJ round:

https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/...liability.html

[crusader377]

I suggest people read this article.

The problem is limited to the XM1152 115gr TC FMJ round:

https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/...liability.html

That could be true but these issues should have been found in initial testing which the U.S. Army neglected to do. Furthermore, problems shooting ball ammunition is another indicator along with the poor drop test performance of the Sig P320 that the whole platform suffers from inadequate engineering and quality control. End of the day the Army in its infinite wisdom chose to adopt an unproven pistol with minimal testing that was based off a commercial grade pistol design.

[hile]

The way it appears that Sig has acted in all of this leaves me with some disdain for the company. I have 3 Legions (P226, P229, and wife's P226 SAO) and a 2004-ish production P229. I had wanted to pick up one or two P220 Legions (10mm and .45ACP), but the whole affair with the commercial P320 and (it would seem) the M17/M18 puts them in the not for a long time camp. And a certain gunsmith (whose work I respected) has lost a customer, too.

[Arctic1]

A requirement in the contract was to OPTIMIZE the handgun for the "go to war round", ie the 147gr HP round.

Both pistols passed that testing, with flying colors. The Army says that the system is still good to go for warfighting.

The issue is the 115gr TC FMJ ball round. If I were a betting man, I would put money on the shape of the projectile being the main culprit, as TC generally doesn't feed as well as RN bullet profiles.

Varying reports from people involved in the fielding says it does fine with 124gr NATO ball as well.

Do the math.