View Full Version : ZEV OZ-9X Combat for US DOE
Who needs a silly old Glock anyway?
"The U.S. Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration’s Office of Secure Transportation are set to procure ZEV’s OZ-9 X Combat. A notice of intent to procure was posted on SAM.gov announcing that the Office of Secure Transportation are responsible for the safe and secure transportation of nuclear weapons and components and special nuclear materials."
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2022/08/03/office-secure-nuclear-transportation-selects-zev-oz-9-x-combat/
Coal Dragger
08-04-22, 12:37
Did Zev finally get the OZ9 to work right?
Did Zev finally get the OZ9 to work right?
Seems like it did OK during testing:
"The notice also noted that field testing of the ZEV pistol ran between January 25 and 27, 2022, with the ZEV 0Z-9 handgun not only scoring the highest overall technical score among six (6) 9mm gun manufacturers, but the ZEV 0Z-9 handgun received the highest individual testing criteria scores in regards to weight, damage resistance, low light operations, pointability, ergonomics, malfunctions, recoil management, and overall impression."
We’ll, the more they spend this year, the more of a budget increase they’ll secure for next year.
What does this do better than a Glock 17/19 Grn 5 MOS or a HK VP9 PR or a S&W M&P9 OR?
titsonritz
08-04-22, 14:17
What does this do better than a Glock 17/19 Grn 5 MOS or a HK VP9 PR or a S&W M&P9 OR?
It is essentially a customized Glock, nothing more. I know a guy that sold his Glocks after he got some time behind his OZ-9X.
Our tax dollars at work. Shadow Systems guns would have been less expensive
sidewaysil80
08-05-22, 06:08
What does this do better than a Glock 17/19 Grn 5 MOS or a HK VP9 PR or a S&W M&P9 OR?
Superior grip/ergonomics but due to steel receiver its is heavier and has noticeably less muzzle rise/flip.
Superior grip/ergonomics but due to steel receiver its is heavier and has noticeably less muzzle rise/flip.
That frame doesn't appear to be steel to me.
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/OZ9-Combat-Pistol-Standard-Black-Slide-Black-Barrel_media-1-660x440.jpg
Coal Dragger
08-07-22, 07:59
It’s steel, just the grip and trigger guard are polymer. They’re also replaceable with different size grips. The actual frame is all steel.
I fondled one the other day at the LGS, and I’m seriously contemplating picking one up.
I look these pistols up and the cheapest I see is over $1400? What the hell?
Not their money I guess.
I look these pistols up and the cheapest I see is over $1400? What the hell?
Not their money I guess.
It's a super duper customized glock inspired clone. I'm sure the .gov contract cost per gun is nowhere near the advertised MSRP.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTCtueJ-sZE
Skip to the 11 minute mark for the field stripping showing the metal modular fire control unit, in the flavor of the Sig 320.
Skip to the 11 minute mark for the field stripping showing the metal modular fire control unit, in the flavor of the Sig 320.
So what does the modular fire control do for you other than allowing you to swap out the grip unit? I've seen no evidence that they make guns perform better. Seems like a solution in search of a problem to me. Not that there's anything particularly bad about it, but I can't see paying anything extra for a gun that has one.
I have a few OZ9s, Shadow Systems, and of course Glock guns.
the OZ9 is a really flat shooting gun (as all Glocks are). I'd say they shoot flatter than the Glock, they are heavier so a touch softer, and they had a 1911 flat backstrap grip angle if that's a plus for you. Magwell is a win, and the trigger is nicer. Honestly the OZ9 feels absolutely great to me in my hand - they did some nice work on the grip module contouring. In fact I'd say the OZ9 is the flattest shooting non-comped non 2011 9mm gun I've ever shot.
Mine don't run worth a darn with provided Pmags, but that's not just a Zev problem. Mine have run fine so far with real Glock mags.
RDS setup is very nice on them. Dot sits nice and low directly mounted to slide.
OZ9 can be found 25% off pretty easily. Probably the govt version purchased has simpler slide cuts or hopefully no (crap catcher) holes machined in the slide. Bet Zev gave them a great deal just to get on the .mil/LE radar.
Shadow Systems run awfully close for less $ and have more flexibility to fit the user with interchangable backstraps. My shadow systems guns have not burped yet, regardless of magazine used.
sidewaysil80
08-07-22, 19:53
So what does the modular fire control do for you other than allowing you to swap out the grip unit? I've seen no evidence that they make guns perform better. Seems like a solution in search of a problem to me. Not that there's anything particularly bad about it, but I can't see paying anything extra for a gun that has one.
The increased weight combined with grip make it a flatter shooting gun with less muzzle rise. While it’s not as flat as say an Atlas or all steel 1911, comparing it to gen5 G17 and SS DR920 , it’s a noticeable difference.
OZ9 Combat can be had for less then $1200. Factor in rmr cut, upgraded trigger, upgraded sights, and grip/texture compared to oem glock…it’s really not that much more then adding those on your own. But like I said, you also get the extra weight and steel receiver that slide reciprocates on. Honestly another benefit at least for me is the slide stop is recessed into/shielded by grip. So in my case I have a very high and aggressive grip that often times on oem Glocks interferes with last round lock back, but not with OZ9.
As the owner of a CZ 75B (and a CZ 97B), you definitely notice the weight of a steel frame.
So what does the modular fire control do for you other than allowing you to swap out the grip unit? I've seen no evidence that they make guns perform better. Seems like a solution in search of a problem to me. Not that there's anything particularly bad about it, but I can't see paying anything extra for a gun that has one.
Just stating facts. Doesn't affect me at all. I don't own a glock or any expensive derivative of one.
I think we've come full circle if people are willing to pay extra for the added weight of a steel frame. Whatever happened to ounces are pounds?
sidewaysil80
08-08-22, 00:19
I think we've come full circle if people are willing to pay extra for the added weight of a steel frame. Whatever happened to ounces are pounds?
In this case we’re talking full size duty guns so the ounces = lbs thing isn’t as relevant as a consideration as if we were talking bug or ccw. Maybe it is for some, but it seems most care about reliability, performance, and cost in this category.
Coal Dragger
08-08-22, 00:50
I think we've come full circle if people are willing to pay extra for the added weight of a steel frame. Whatever happened to ounces are pounds?
There’s this thing called the gym. If a few ounces extra on a duty sidearm is too much I suggest getting your butt into the gym.
Furthermore this is for Department of Energy, those guys don’t spend a lot of time humping their gear around on foot.
Sure, the weight is really no big deal, but paying extra for it and passing it off as a selling point for better accuracy is a big stretch. If that's the case, I hear that IWI's offering quantity discounts on Desert Eagles chambered in 9mm. Buying a Glock and spending the difference on ammunition for training would likely go further towards the goal of protecting the critical locations.
Coal Dragger
08-08-22, 08:53
You must not shoot pistols very much, or you must not shoot them proficiently. Probably both.
Take a look at what top pistol shooters in various competitive disciplines use from Bullseye to IPSC, and you find a bunch of relatively heavy pistols in the hands and holsters of guys and gals who are winning matches. Yes a heavier pistol that soaks up recoil is easier to run fast while maintaining accuracy than a lightweight pistol. You think all those guys and gals use heavier sidearms for the fun of it?
Furthermore you seem to be under the impression that the DOE nuke protection guys aren’t training, or lack training resources and ammo. That is laughably ignorant. Those dudes shoot. A lot. Like enough rounds and skills development to be able to take advantage of a factory tuned up Glock clone. We’re not talking about an underfunded podunk PD that has to stretch a training budget real thin on lots of stuff. The DOE guys who carry those blasters have like one purpose in life: escort and transport nuclear materials point “A” to point “B” and crush any dumb mo-fo who tries to stop them. They train accordingly.
Coal Dragger, there's no need to start dishing out insults. I shoot all the time, but admit that I'm more of a collector than an operator. So what? I'm also a taxpayer that's not interested in having his tax dollars pissed away by the government. Could the difference in cost between that pistol and a standard duty firearm be used by the federal government in a better manner to defend our country? There's no doubt in my mind. Someone had the budget, so they bought cool toys. Failure to spend the money would mean less budget next year.
A pistol is a gun that you take to a gun fight that you're not aware you're going to (or as a backup to another firearm). In other words, it's a compromise. Otherwise, one would avoid the situation or come with a more substantial weapon. The guys that shoot at pistol matches frequently do things to their pistols that they wouldn't in real defensive scenarios. Lighter triggers, trading reliability for accuracy and light pressure (or higher) loads are a few that come to mind. While matches can be good training, they're not real world. What's good for a pistol match isn't necessarily good for defensive carry.
sidewaysil80
08-08-22, 11:14
You’re completely missing the point. It’s not that the simply “made the gun heavier”. A side-effect/fringe benefit of their modular receiver (think of Sig 320’s) is that it adds some weight to the gun. That’s not it’s purpose, that’s not it’s sole function, it’s just an extra benefit or edge it gives the OZ9 over other Glock platforms.
At the end of the day if comparing back to back to other Glocks (like in a T&E process), the OZ9 shoots flatter/faster. So if the weight difference is negligible in hand but it shoots better…it’s no surprise they selected. Don’t take my word for it…
“ZEV 0Z-9 handgun not only scored the highest overall technical score among six (6) 9mm gun manufacturers, but the ZEV 0Z-9 handgun received the highest individual testing criteria scores in regards to weight, damage resistance, low light operations, pointability, ergonomics, malfunctions, recoil management, and overall impression”
Just because you can’t understand why they chose it (based on your own admission of inexperience), doesn’t mean the reasons they did so are invalid. I say that not in an effort to be rude, but I suspect that’s what the crux of the debate is.
You’re completely missing the point. It’s not that the simply “made the gun heavier”. A side-effect/fringe benefit of their modular receiver (think of Sig 320’s) is that it adds some weight to the gun. That’s not it’s purpose, that’s not it’s sole function, it’s just an extra benefit or edge it gives the OZ9 over other Glock platforms.
Well, that was a benefit that was brought up, so I responded to it. As stated earlier, I'm still not seeing the benefit of a modular received (currently own 3 pistols that have them), but that's another topic of discussion.
At the end of the day if comparing back to back to other Glocks (like in a T&E process), the OZ9 shoots flatter/faster. So if the weight difference is negligible in hand but it shoots better…it’s no surprise they selected. Don’t take my word for it…
“ZEV 0Z-9 handgun not only scored the highest overall technical score among six (6) 9mm gun manufacturers, but the ZEV 0Z-9 handgun received the highest individual testing criteria scores in regards to weight, damage resistance, low light operations, pointability, ergonomics, malfunctions, recoil management, and overall impression”
I'm assuming it's a better gun. But what sort of practical real world performance increase do the tax payers get for over twice the cost? Increased real world performance of the operators is theoretical at best. Hopefully, we'll never have a situation where an operator needs to take a 75 yard pistol shot where it might actually make a difference.
Just because you can’t understand why they chose it (based on your own admission of inexperience), doesn’t mean the reasons they did so are invalid. I say that not in an effort to be rude, but I suspect that’s what the crux of the debate is.
I do understand. They're spending taxpayer money so they can maintain the baseline budget for next year. I don't blame them for wanting a better gun. It's just that in the big scheme of things I think the difference in money could be better spent. Of course it's just a drop of water in the ocean of government spending. They gave up on that long ago.
Superior grip/ergonomics but due to steel receiver its is heavier and has noticeably less muzzle rise/flip.
That, an excellent trigger, and great accuracy all out of the box. Mine even came with an RMR. Probably the only guns I left “as is”.
The price is also very good when compared to upgrading a Glock or paying someone else to do so.
Oh, and it has a personally. Good one too.
Wait, it scored the highest score in the category of weight, but it weighs more than a factory Glock? Was better score=more mass? If so, was there nothing heavier tested? Why did it score highest in low-light operations?
titsonritz
08-08-22, 12:52
I'd rather pay good money for the nuke protection guys over an army of IRS pricks who will no doubt have a fraction of the training as the DOE teams.
We could eliminate the IRS pricks all together as far as I'm concerned.
sidewaysil80
08-08-22, 13:25
I'm still not seeing the benefit of a modular received (currently own 3 pistols that have them), but that's another topic of discussion.
We already discussed the performance aspect, but the ability to switch grips on the fly is probably very important to them since they alternate between overt and covert escorts. So having one gun that allows the individuals to switch grips for ccw where concealment is priority as opposed to purchase two separate guns seems like a good idea.
I'm assuming it's a better gun. But what sort of practical real world performance increase do the tax payers get for over twice the cost?
The people literally driving around with nuclear components should have the best gear possible. If they tested 7 guns and they all feel this performed the best, I’m refreshed to see they chose it based on that as opposed to what was cheapest.
I do understand. They're spending taxpayer money so they can maintain the baseline budget for next year.
That is your opinion and the T&E anecdotes don’t support that. In fact that entire premise is based on maintaining annual budget requirements which usually has nothing to do with purchases like these, hence the T&E process.
Wait, it scored the highest score in the category of weight, but it weighs more than a factory Glock? Was better score=more mass? If so, was there nothing heavier tested? Why did it score highest in low-light operations?
It could mean weight in terms of balance or compared to heavier pistols tested I guess. Since it was an individual criteria vs technical one, I’m inclined to think the weight category was how it felt in hand or something to that affect.
We already discussed the performance aspect, but the ability to switch grips on the fly is probably very important to them since they alternate between overt and covert escorts. So having one gun that allows the individuals to switch grips for ccw where concealment is priority as opposed to purchase two separate guns seems like a good idea.
The people literally driving around with nuclear components should have the best gear possible. If they tested 7 guns and they all feel this performed the best, I’m refreshed to see they chose it based on that as opposed to what was cheapest.
That is your opinion and the T&E anecdotes don’t support that. In fact that entire premise is based on maintaining annual budget requirements which usually has nothing to do with purchases like these, hence the T&E process.
It could mean weight in terms of balance or compared to heavier pistols tested I guess. Since it was an individual criteria vs technical one, I’m inclined to think the weight category was how it felt in hand or something to that affect.
Rational, factual and well said. Thank you!
Coal Dragger
08-08-22, 14:43
Coal Dragger, there's no need to start dishing out insults. I shoot all the time, but admit that I'm more of a collector than an operator. So what? I'm also a taxpayer that's not interested in having his tax dollars pissed away by the government. Could the difference in cost between that pistol and a standard duty firearm be used by the federal government in a better manner to defend our country? There's no doubt in my mind. Someone had the budget, so they bought cool toys. Failure to spend the money would mean less budget next year.
A pistol is a gun that you take to a gun fight that you're not aware you're going to (or as a backup to another firearm). In other words, it's a compromise. Otherwise, one would avoid the situation or come with a more substantial weapon. The guys that shoot at pistol matches frequently do things to their pistols that they wouldn't in real defensive scenarios. Lighter triggers, trading reliability for accuracy and light pressure (or higher) loads are a few that come to mind. While matches can be good training, they're not real world. What's good for a pistol match isn't necessarily good for defensive carry.
Go run some pistols hard, you’re going to quickly find out what works for you and what doesn’t. Once you do that, and see what a difference a well thought out pistol that’s made for shooters can do for you it will be easier to understand.
If these guys can demonstrate consistently higher scores with the ZEV vs a Glock, and ZEV has a competitive bid that is within the budget why are you so axle wrapped over this?
If you personally tested a bunch of handguns and found one that clearly outperformed the others and was giving you the best results you’ve seen, and you could afford it…. You would probably buy it too.
Go run some pistols hard, you’re going to quickly find out what works for you and what doesn’t. Once you do that, and see what a difference a well thought out pistol that’s made for shooters can do for you it will be easier to understand.
Just because I don't agree with your view about the cost versus benefit doesn't mean that I don't understand about firearm performance. We're allowed to disagree. These are backup weapons, so I'd be really interested to see what their primary weapons are.
If these guys can demonstrate consistently higher scores with the ZEV vs a Glock, and ZEV has a competitive bid that is within the budget why are you so axle wrapped over this?
A higher score is one thing, but how much higher? It would be very interesting to see the actual results. When the awarded pistol costs over twice what a Glock does and there was only one company allowed to bid, it's hard to make the case that it was a competitive bid. They state "Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements". So these guys have found the one gun manufactured in the world that meets their requirements. Without it we're looking at some sort of nuclear doomsday? Pure BS. I'm not axle wrapped about it. I'm just skeptical as any taxpayer should be. Why are you so axle wrapped about me being skeptical?
If you personally tested a bunch of handguns and found one that clearly outperformed the others and was giving you the best results you’ve seen, and you could afford it…. You would probably buy it too.
I might. If I was spending other people's money, I'd first attempt to quantify the performance increase relative to the cost increase. Do I get twice the performance (2x as reliable, 2x as accurate, etc.)? If not, how much better is it because it still might be worth it, but where do you draw the line? Would a Glock plus an optical sight perform better (for less)? And in case you haven't noticed, we can't afford most of what the federal government does. There's nothing wrong with expecting a real performance justification.
It must be nice to have all that taxpayer money to flit away without a care in the world. A 500 dollar G19 is good enough for Delta Force, but not for the DOE's security guards. Dollars to donuts whoever has their checkbook watched John Wick about ten too many times.
Coal Dragger
08-08-22, 16:16
LOL, you think Delta guys are running around with box stock Glocks.
LOL, you think Delta guys are running around with box stock Glocks.
Yea pretty much. I mean maybe they put nice sights on them and maybe even an RMR these days, but yea I imagine they're pretty stock.
LOL, you think Delta guys are running around with box stock Glocks.
More or less, yes. As are most of SOF. I re-qualed with a G19/RDS/U-boat and a G34/TLR yesterday after breaking my R radius 4-5 weeks ago and it worked out just fine.
None of us running around with Zev pistols. I’m not knocking the choice… I don’t know shit about them. Seems strange, though. Especially the part where they did better in low-light. I don’t see how that is possible.
More or less, yes. As are most of SOF. I re-qualed with a G19/RDS/U-boat and a G34/TLR yesterday after breaking my R radius 4-5 weeks ago and it worked out just fine.
None of us running around with Zev pistols. I’m not knocking the choice… I don’t know shit about them. Seems strange, though. Especially the part where they did better in low-light. I don’t see how that is possible.
The one in the pic in the article has a fiber front sight.:rolleyes:
We could eliminate the IRS pricks all together as far as I'm concerned.
Well we just decided to hire 87,000 more of them so, how's that working out for us? :mad:
Coal Dragger
08-08-22, 21:59
More or less, yes. As are most of SOF. I re-qualed with a G19/RDS/U-boat and a G34/TLR yesterday after breaking my R radius 4-5 weeks ago and it worked out just fine.
None of us running around with Zev pistols. I’m not knocking the choice… I don’t know shit about them. Seems strange, though. Especially the part where they did better in low-light. I don’t see how that is possible.
Probably just a factor of the ZEV being easier to shoot well generally increasing scores in a variety of circumstances. The same improved trigger and grip or whatever it is that is making shooters get better results is still there in low light. I wonder if they are using the weapon light for that portion? Oh look the target is lit up and I can shoot it!
That one is a bit nebulous.
They are the worlds highest trained and best equipped truck drivers in the world. Thier primary training facility is within my jurisdiction and has been for 25 years or so. Over the years I've trained with them and knew several of the instrucotrs. Several of my friends from the military and law enforcement work for them. Many others I know work for them as contractors in various capacities. As an organization they are very low key but have a large footprint in our area. Historically they tend to carry higher end pistols and larger weapons. They also have all the equipment that you could imagine they might need or use if they had to defend or recover stolen nuclear material or actual devices. Many of the contracted instructors come from the various highest speed military units that we have.
dwhitehorne
08-09-22, 09:52
So what does the modular fire control do for you other than allowing you to swap out the grip unit? I've seen no evidence that they make guns perform better. Seems like a solution in search of a problem to me. Not that there's anything particularly bad about it, but I can't see paying anything extra for a gun that has one.
Well I can tell you for me when my department had a motor officer struck in slid down the road on his gun side. The safariland holster saved the slide but the 320 grip and mag were tore up. I was able to replace the grip module and return the gun to the officer instead of processing it for destruction.
Also being a former contracting officer rep, I can say when you put out a solicitation you have to test all qualifying submissions. The pistol that wins the evaluation is usually the one that gets purchased.
I would love to see the statement of work for the solicitation. If it said metal framed or modular pistol that accepted Glock magazines you know what pistol they were looking for and got. David
In the history of DOE, how many people have they shot?
dwhitehorne
08-09-22, 12:15
In the history of DOE, how many people have they shot?
Probably about as many people as the USSS while protecting the presidents. DOE does escort all of the nuclear material moved around the county. David
sidewaysil80
08-09-22, 12:22
Well I can tell you for me when my department had a motor officer struck in slid down the road on his gun side. The safariland holster saved the slide but the 320 grip and mag were tore up. I was able to replace the grip module and return the gun to the officer instead of processing it for destruction.
Also being a former contracting officer rep, I can say when you put out a solicitation you have to test all qualifying submissions. The pistol that wins the evaluation is usually the one that gets purchased.
I would love to see the statement of work for the solicitation. If it said metal framed or modular pistol that accepted Glock magazines you know what pistol they were looking for and got. David
As a former cotr can you shed some light on the finance piece? In my very limited experience soliciting gear (fed tac team), anytime it came time for upgrades or extra gear, it was a bunch of hoops to jump through as it was separate/one off funding. T&E was pretty scrutinized with a lot of writing to justify higher priced offerings. That is where my experience stops. Do purchases like that affect or raise the annual/main operating budget of said agency? In other words, does it incentivize picking most expensive?
dwhitehorne
08-09-22, 15:51
My experience with the USPP was similar to the hoops you have to jump through. The estimated total dollar amount drove what paperwork I had to submit to contracting. Purchases of IFAK's or holsters were usually done on a one time basis as needed. Many times with year end funds. I filled out a salient characteristics document with other contracting paperwork. Generally we purchased what the low bidder submitted after I conducted an evaluation checking if the bidder met all of the characteristics. One time we purchased North American Rescue IFAK's another year they were generic GALLS IFAK's. I clearly preferred the NAR product but the GALLS IFAK did meet the characteristics.
With the pistol and rifle contracts I submitted a statement of work lengthy detailing exactly what characteristics I wanted in a weapons system. When I started the request for a weapons evaluation I had to submit what was called "market research" paperwork to get budgeting estimates. The pistol contract solicited in 2015 was for a 5 year contract. Four manufactures responded to the solicitation and only two met all of the characteristics in the statement of work. The pistol manufacturer I had in mind when starting the solicitation process didn't even submit a bid. I selected a committee of officers who test fired the pistols submitted. I took individual qual scores with each weapon and a 25 question evaluation each officer completed and complied that all into one document with a final total for each pistol evaluated. The P320 compact was the top scoring pistol in the evaluation. Since I was conducting the evaluation the contracting officer never allowed me to see the pricing until the contract was signed. At the end of every evaluation I wrote I had to add a boiler plate response like this piece of equipment meets the characteristics of the solicitation and represents the best value for purchase by the Federal Government. In the pistol solicitation we did compare fullsize and compact versions. They were close but the compact P320 came out on top. Sig advised me that they would be producing a carry version. I was able to write up a request in my final evaluation for the soon to be created P320 Carry and that was the pistol purchased.
A example of a silly contracting issue was the Safariland 6360 holsters we purchased with the transition to the P320. I purchased 250 Safariland holsters in 2015 on a sole source contract as Safariland was the only holster company who produced a flashlight holster for the P320 carry at the time. In 2016 I submitted a request for 200 more pistols and was denied the purchase. The contracting office then said I had to submit and salient characteristics memo and conduct and evaluation of different holsters. I argued that all the uniformed officers needed to be issued the exact same holster and it was shot down as a reason for a sole source purchase. So I had to come up with the exact characteristics to ensure my second purchase of holsters exactly matched the first purchase.
I'm guessing with the Zev there was something written in the solicitation specifying exactly what they wanted and probably only a few manufacturers would meet the characteristics. As for the price, the weapons that I was involved in purchasing where hundreds of dollars below retail. The P320 bid came in way under my market research estimate. When the Army M17 contact came out it was over 100 dollars under what we were paying. David
I have a few OZ9s, Shadow Systems, and of course Glock guns.
the OZ9 is a really flat shooting gun (as all Glocks are). I'd say they shoot flatter than the Glock, they are heavier so a touch softer, and they had a 1911 flat backstrap grip angle if that's a plus for you. Magwell is a win, and the trigger is nicer. Honestly the OZ9 feels absolutely great to me in my hand - they did some nice work on the grip module contouring. In fact I'd say the OZ9 is the flattest shooting non-comped non 2011 9mm gun I've ever shot.
Mine don't run worth a darn with provided Pmags, but that's not just a Zev problem. Mine have run fine so far with real Glock mags.
RDS setup is very nice on them. Dot sits nice and low directly mounted to slide.
OZ9 can be found 25% off pretty easily. Probably the govt version purchased has simpler slide cuts or hopefully no (crap catcher) holes machined in the slide. Bet Zev gave them a great deal just to get on the .mil/LE radar.
Shadow Systems run awfully close for less $ and have more flexibility to fit the user with interchangable backstraps. My shadow systems guns have not burped yet, regardless of magazine used.
Agreed 100%. I love my OZ9c. Mine has feeding issues with Magpul mags as well. doesn't seem to exhibit the same issue with Glock mags.
I am looking to get a Shadow Systems as well, because why not.
titsonritz
08-09-22, 16:42
In the history of DOE, how many people have they shot?
That's classified.
My experience with the USPP was similar to the hoops you have to jump through. The estimated total dollar amount drove what paperwork I had to submit to contracting. Purchases of IFAK's or holsters were usually done on a one time basis as needed. Many times with year end funds. I filled out a salient characteristics document with other contracting paperwork. Generally we purchased what the low bidder submitted after I conducted an evaluation checking if the bidder met all of the characteristics. One time we purchased North American Rescue IFAK's another year they were generic GALLS IFAK's. I clearly preferred the NAR product but the GALLS IFAK did meet the characteristics.
With the pistol and rifle contracts I submitted a statement of work lengthy detailing exactly what characteristics I wanted in a weapons system. When I started the request for a weapons evaluation I had to submit what was called "market research" paperwork to get budgeting estimates. The pistol contract solicited in 2015 was for a 5 year contract. Four manufactures responded to the solicitation and only two met all of the characteristics in the statement of work. The pistol manufacturer I had in mind when starting the solicitation process didn't even submit a bid. I selected a committee of officers who test fired the pistols submitted. I took individual qual scores with each weapon and a 25 question evaluation each officer completed and complied that all into one document with a final total for each pistol evaluated. The P320 compact was the top scoring pistol in the evaluation. Since I was conducting the evaluation the contracting officer never allowed me to see the pricing until the contract was signed. At the end of every evaluation I wrote I had to add a boiler plate response like this piece of equipment meets the characteristics of the solicitation and represents the best value for purchase by the Federal Government. In the pistol solicitation we did compare fullsize and compact versions. They were close but the compact P320 came out on top. Sig advised me that they would be producing a carry version. I was able to write up a request in my final evaluation for the soon to be created P320 Carry and that was the pistol purchased.
A example of a silly contracting issue was the Safariland 6360 holsters we purchased with the transition to the P320. I purchased 250 Safariland holsters in 2015 on a sole source contract as Safariland was the only holster company who produced a flashlight holster for the P320 carry at the time. In 2016 I submitted a request for 200 more pistols and was denied the purchase. The contracting office then said I had to submit and salient characteristics memo and conduct and evaluation of different holsters. I argued that all the uniformed officers needed to be issued the exact same holster and it was shot down as a reason for a sole source purchase. So I had to come up with the exact characteristics to ensure my second purchase of holsters exactly matched the first purchase.
I'm guessing with the Zev there was something written in the solicitation specifying exactly what they wanted and probably only a few manufacturers would meet the characteristics. As for the price, the weapons that I was involved in purchasing where hundreds of dollars below retail. The P320 bid came in way under my market research estimate. When the Army M17 contact came out it was over 100 dollars under what we were paying. David
Hey, if DOE got bedazzled Glock clones for $375 a pop, more power to them. But the U.S. Standard Issue taxpayer is getting sick and tired of buying top shelf gear for the feds, that they couldn’t or wouldn’t buy for themselves. :rolleyes:
Agreed 100%. I love my OZ9c. Mine has feeding issues with Magpul mags as well. doesn't seem to exhibit the same issue with Glock mags.
I am looking to get a Shadow Systems as well, because why not.How does the grip angle compare to a standard Glock? How much closer is it a Sig?
Coal Dragger
08-10-22, 08:23
In the history of DOE, how many people have they shot?
How many people have they shot as an agency in the line of their duty, or how many people have been shot by their agents including those shot prior to employment by DOE?
That number is probably vastly different considering the pool of individuals DOE is recruiting from, last time I looked they really like former .mil folks with combat arms experience. Since we have some recent wartime experiences for the past 20 years, it is probably safe to say that there are plenty of these guys with quite a bit of experience in that department albeit gained prior to their current gig.
How does the grip angle compare to a standard Glock? How much closer is it a Sig?
Let's grab some guns off the display.
Without busting out a protractor; the Zev frame has a noticeably more vertical grip than my Gen3 G19. But I suspect some of that is due to the hump on the back of the G19 grip which does not appear on the Zev.
Compared to the M17 I have the Zev is every so slightly more angled. Meaning the M17 frame is ever so slightly more vertical.
The Zev appears to have a grip angle very similar to my M&P9 1.0
Not sure how my observations jives with the official specs, but it's what I am seeing right now.
Let's grab some guns off the display.
Without busting out a protractor; the Zev frame has a noticeably more vertical grip than my Gen3 G19. But I suspect some of that is due to the hump on the back of the G19 grip which does not appear on the Zev.
Compared to the M17 I have the Zev is every so slightly more angled. Meaning the M17 frame is ever so slightly more vertical.
The Zev appears to have a grip angle very similar to my M&P9 1.0
Not sure how my observations jives with the official specs, but it's what I am seeing right now.
Thanks for doing that! I strongly prefer the Sig grip angle, it just points very naturally for me, but I do like certain things about the Glock platform. There may be a Zev in my future, or perhaps a Shadow Systems.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.