View Full Version : Glock 21 SF
I keep hearing that the G21SF was to have been Glock's entry in a cancelled Army handgun competition. Accurate or just Internet BS?
As accurate as any Glock. They arn't target guns, but they always work.
They are the AK of the handgun world. Neither are pretty, but my SLR
106 is developing a certain appeal, pretty is as pretty doe's
Low...i think you missed the point of his question.
I too am interested in more information on this as i was under the same impression as the OP.
The G21SF is the commercially released version that is based in part on the designs being considered for the SOCOM/JCP/CP/AFFH program(s). Various incarnations of the draft requirements have included, for example, a manual safety (the trigger safety would not have been sufficient), etc.
Now that the entire thing is back in limbo, G21SF sales (much like M&P45, HK45, SIG P220 Combat, etc.) are helping to repay development expenses related to the mil programs.
Think the 21SF will eventually totally supplant the standard G21, or will both versions continue to be offered?
The 21SF has nothing to do with the SOCOM etc. requirements and everything to do with competing with the slimmer gripped XD .45's, M&P's, etc. GAP round Glocks sure weren't doing it. The Socom project was long over before the 21SF was in conception. Not to mention the grip size of the 21SF (which I happen to like) is way to big to issue to any branch of the military. The HK 45 was in development before the requirements. The Sig P220 Combat strikes me as a particularly weak effort btw. I mean is a tarted up 220 the best Sig could come up with? I like the 220 but it's kind of long in the tooth these days. Then again tarting up existing designs seems to be Sig's plan these days.
The 21SF has nothing to do with the SOCOM etc. requirements and everything to do with competing with the slimmer gripped XD .45's, M&P's, etc. GAP round Glocks sure weren't doing it. The Socom project was long over before the 21SF was in conception. Not to mention the grip size of the 21SF (which I happen to like) is way to big to issue to any branch of the military. The HK 45 was in development before the requirements. The Sig P220 Combat strikes me as a particularly weak effort btw. I mean is a tarted up 220 the best Sig could come up with? I like the 220 but it's kind of long in the tooth these days. Then again tarting up existing designs seems to be Sig's plan these days.
What do you think the "SF" stands for?
The G21SF was a direct result of the JCP draft specs. As were the XD45 and M&P45.
The "Socom (sic) project" wasn't over before the G21SF went into development, and in fact arguably still isn't over.
The P220 Combat was a stopgap intended to answer the call if the JCP project really hit the street as early as originally intended. At that time, there was no XD45, no M&P45, even the HK45 hadn't been released yet. The goal was to take an existing platform and improve it to meet the draft specs as closely as possible.
Short Frame.
What do you mean it isn't over? Dead and buried as far as I know.
All these other companies supposedly designed all new handguns for this and Sig came up with a stopgap? Not saying it isn't true, just that it seems short sighted of them.
Yeah, and the 92G-SD was officially "Special Duty" instead of "Super Dave," too. :rolleyes:
The P220 Combat might seem short sighted in hindsight. At the time, SOCOM was pushing to get testing and fielding done by the end of 2005. We knew the P220 as-is was lacking certain features that would make it competitive. At the time, the only other player was the early prototype HK45. So the goal of the P220 Combat was to create a gun that could meet the SOCOM spec's finish and durability requirements, have a better trigger pull, and less felt recoil. 10rd mags were developed, the barrel was chrome lined and finished in Nitron, a different more durable takedown lever was used, internal parts were made more corrosion resistant, and sights were developed for use with a suppressor.
Another version with both a manual safety (1911'ish) and a traditional SIG decocking lever was also created, but never saw the light of day.
Simultaneously, in theory a .45-cal version of the P250 was being developed. It was everyone's hope that we could delay JCP long enough to get the P250-45 done, but then various issues with the P250-45 development (and overall P250 design) spun that out of orbit.
As for the SOCOM pistol project, certain iterations are dead & buried but the push and plan to get a new pistol is still very much alive. However, the project is getting less attention now that Congress is becoming curious about the M4 replacement thing.
My understanding is that SF (in the world of Glock pistols) stands for Short Frame.
Joe Mamma
Jay Cunningham
08-11-08, 13:09
Todd *might* know what he's talking about.
Just sayin'...
Some of us do as well. I am aware that Todd worked at Beretta and Sig.
I'm wasn't aware of the trigger on the P220 Combat being different, although I have seen some DAK versions, or how felt recoil would be different. I don't see the military going for those 10 round extended mags. I do like the corrosion resistance features. Too bad they removed it from the "Navy" Sig. My guess is we will see no new military pistols for some time due to other priorities.
Yeah, and the 92G-SD was officially "Special Duty" instead of "Super Dave," too. :rolleyes:
The P220 Combat might seem short sighted in hindsight. At the time, SOCOM was pushing to get testing and fielding done by the end of 2005. We knew the P220 as-is was lacking certain features that would make it competitive. At the time, the only other player was the early prototype HK45. So the goal of the P220 Combat was to create a gun that could meet the SOCOM spec's finish and durability requirements, have a better trigger pull, and less felt recoil. 10rd mags were developed, the barrel was chrome lined and finished in Nitron, a different more durable takedown lever was used, internal parts were made more corrosion resistant, and sights were developed for use with a suppressor.
Another version with both a manual safety (1911'ish) and a traditional SIG decocking lever was also created, but never saw the light of day.
Simultaneously, in theory a .45-cal version of the P250 was being developed. It was everyone's hope that we could delay JCP long enough to get the P250-45 done, but then various issues with the P250-45 development (and overall P250 design) spun that out of orbit.
As for the SOCOM pistol project, certain iterations are dead & buried but the push and plan to get a new pistol is still very much alive. However, the project is getting less attention now that Congress is becoming curious about the M4 replacement thing.
Thats what Glock says. They have no chance of getting it accepted as a standard military weapon due to grip size alone.
My understanding is that SF (in the world of Glock pistols) stands for Short Frame.
Joe Mamma
I'm not going to get into a debate about the name. If you think Glock made the only substantial design change to its gun in about a decade (shorter trigger reach, ambi mag release) for some reason other than a huge military sale potential, more power to you. :cool:
I'm wasn't aware of the trigger on the P220 Combat being different, although I have seen some DAK versions, or how felt recoil would be different. I don't see the military going for those 10 round extended mags.
Sorry, my comment was unclear. SIG's belief was that the trigger pull and recoil control of the P220 would be superior to the only other competitor at the time, the prototype HK45.
As for the extended mags, they were a requirement in all of the spec drafts.
I do like the corrosion resistance features. Too bad they removed it from the "Navy" Sig.
Dude ... do not get me started. :mad:
I'm not looking to get into a debate about it. I would have a hard time choosing between the Glock 21SF, M&P .45, and HK 45 as a military sidearm for myself. I can't even decide which one take to the range...
mrosamilia
08-14-08, 20:09
+1 on deciding which to take to the range. I have to say I have had all of the pistols mentioned and the only one that I still do not have is the Sig.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.