View Full Version : ATF Selects GLOCK and S&W
Glock selection: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=bd51b091482215c94c1c9c89b799f26f
S&W selection: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=e121e835387839577bc2b57c2897e987
Glock will receive the majority (if not all) of the ATF contract, but the award opens the door to S&W to receive contracts from other Federal Agencies. Individual officers in the ATF can also purchase the M&P if they so choose.
I think that many will simply view this as a defeat for S&W, but it will open up doors that have been closed to them in the past.
C4
In the other ATF/Glock selection thread, someone asked about the user induced malfunctions that was listed in the report. That's a good question. My only guess is that the shooter(s) had their thumb on the slide release (not allowing the slide to lock to the rear). Don't really know though.
Thoughts??
C4
John_Wayne777
09-27-10, 14:13
Grip inadvertently stopping the slide from locking to the rear is a fairly common occurrence, at least in my experience. It's also somewhat common for folks to mess up the operation of the slide release. It's possible with the right grip for a lot of folks to reload the M&P without shifting their hands. They can put either their thumb or index finger on top of the slide release and basically let the inertia of their finger operate the release as they slam the mag in.
The downside is that if they mangle the insertion of the mag they can bump-release the slide that way before the mag is in the gun, which requires racking the slide to get the gun up again.
I don't know if that's the sort of thing that got counted in the "user induced malfunction" category or if it's referring to something like "limp wristing". Speaking personally, I've never been able to make an M&P choke by limp-wristing it, not even when using just a 2 finger grip. (Tip of thumb and trigger finger) The details of that particular aspect of the testing would be nice, but the handful of people who know them have all signed NDA's and refuse to talk about it.
Maybe if you get one of 'em drunk or something.
Grip inadvertently stopping the slide from locking to the rear is a fairly common occurrence, at least in my experience. It's also somewhat common for folks to mess up the operation of the slide release. It's possible with the right grip for a lot of folks to reload the M&P without shifting their hands. They can put either their thumb or index finger on top of the slide release and basically let the inertia of their finger operate the release as they slam the mag in.
The downside is that if they mangle the insertion of the mag they can bump-release the slide that way before the mag is in the gun, which requires racking the slide to get the gun up again.
I don't know if that's the sort of thing that got counted in the "user induced malfunction" category or if it's referring to something like "limp wristing". Speaking personally, I've never been able to make an M&P choke by limp-wristing it, not even when using just a 2 finger grip. (Tip of thumb and trigger finger) The details of that particular aspect of the testing would be nice, but the handful of people who know them have all signed NDA's and refuse to talk about it.
Maybe if you get one of 'em drunk or something.
Agree.
As I stated in the old thread, one of the testers for the ATF was shocked to learn that Glock was selected. I hope we hear more details in the future as to why and what.
C4
Speaking in terms of .40 platforms. I wouldnt hesitate to take the M&P over the Glock...
However, hopefully this opens up more opportunities for S&W.
GermanSynergy
09-27-10, 15:04
Both are outstanding platforms in their current iteration, and would feel well armed being issued with either one. This is a win for GLOCK, S&W and the end users of these weapons systems.:)
There are a few more Smith M&P's showing up in individual Officer's holsters here in my area with several depts. But still it's overwhelmingly Glocks in .40 and .45
If anything I think this will bring the Smith offering a little more into the eyes of people that might not have tried it before and that's a good thing.
littlejerry
09-27-10, 22:13
Agree.
As I stated in the old thread, one of the testers for the ATF was shocked to learn that Glock was selected. I hope we hear more details in the future as to why and what.
C4
I'm curious as to why so much of the selection process is kept secret after the fact...
I'm sure departments across the country would love to see the results of the test to make their own conclusions.
At least we get to see that Sig isn't up to the job. Unless, of course, you don't place too high of an emphasis on reliability instead of officer impressions :haha:
I'm curious as to why so much of the selection process is kept secret after the fact...
I'm sure departments across the country would love to see the results of the test to make their own conclusions.
At least we get to see that Sig isn't up to the job. Unless, of course, you don't place too high of an emphasis on reliability instead of officer impressions :haha:
Good question. According to S&W, they still have not heard an official response as to why they lost.
C4
SWATcop556
09-28-10, 10:17
Good question. According to S&W, they still have not heard an official response as to why they lost.
C4
Any reason why not or do you think they will ever here an "official" reason?
Any reason why not or do you think they will ever here an "official" reason?
Hard to say. I am guessing that at some point they will have to tell S&W, but as far as them releasing an official response, I doubt it.
C4
I'm speculating, but it could have come down to cost. Glock may have lowered the price so far that the ATF couldn't resist. But, if both designs passed the technical portion they could have authorized a buy on the M&P as well. Just a guess though.
In any case, I see this as a pretty significant warning to Glock. Since they authorized the S&W as well as the Glock, if Gaston's crew screws up, the ATF can switch to the M&P. It could be a way to keep Glock in line.
I'm speculating, but it could have come down to cost. Glock may have lowered the price so far that the ATF couldn't resist. But, if both designs passed the technical portion they could have authorized a buy on the M&P as well. Just a guess though.
In any case, I see this as a pretty significant warning to Glock. Since they authorized the S&W as well as the Glock, if Gaston's crew screws up, the ATF can switch to the M&P. It could be a way to keep Glock in line.
This is of course possible, but to be honest, most gun companies will give away their pistols at cost just to win the contract and make their money back when they buy the agencies used guns (and then re-sell them).
C4
This is of course possible, but to be honest, most gun companies will give away their pistols at cost just to win the contract and make their money back when they buy the agencies used guns (and then re-sell them).
C4
Smith & Wesson just traded their M&P40s to the Tampa Police Department for their 9mm Glocks this year. They also gave them brand new holsters (Blackhawk SERPAs) and traded them for their 9mm ammunition. Tampa Police were still carrying gen 2 Glocks as the gen 3 was disallowed because of the light rail.
the gen 3 was disallowed because of the light rail.
That is just gay.
Business_Casual
09-28-10, 15:23
Until a non-gun savvy officer uses his light to read your license and point his weapon at you in the process.
B_C
SWATcop556
09-28-10, 16:06
Until a non-gun savvy officer uses his light to read your license and point his weapon at you in the process.
B_C
I've never seen it that bad but I've seen it used to search a vehicle for contraband after the occupants were removed. It was addressed and not repeated.
Regardless if the contrat will be mostly filled by Glock. It is a good step for S&W. I for one want to know why the M&P wasn't chosen if testers were suprised by the choice in Glock.
That is just gay.
Actually very smart to keep officers from attaching a light to a G22.
Actually very smart to keep officers from attaching a light to a G22.
In their case they were using 9mm Glocks. Thus, why I found it "gay". Some departments restrict the use of attached lights/lasers on their pistols which seems far more reasonable than restricting pistols with rail attachements which has become the manufacturing norm.
I for one want to know why the M&P wasn't chosen if testers were suprised by the choice in Glock.
There was one tester alluded to.
[we must tread carefully, anonymous 2nd hand reports is how the prior ATF contract thread got locked] ;)
On this contract, ATF wanted two guns from manufacturers submitted.
It seems companies submitted full size and compacts - 2 models each.
Would this typically mean that ATF or another Fed agency using this contract to place orders would necessarily be required to limit order to only those two models?
For example the Gen 4 G23 is now on the market; would it require other testing to qualify on this contract?
BTW, recently I had an opportunity to fire several magazine through one and it's recoil was exceptionally soft. The gun handled very flat tracking from one plate to the next. I could not easily distinguish much difference in front sight displacement in my vision vs Gen 4 G19s.
I would think the G23 a closer comparison size wise to the M&P FS which is only very slightly larger vs the G22.
Actually very smart to keep officers from attaching a light to a G22.
They were issued 17s, or 19s if you preferred. Detectives could carry a 26. Light rails were disallowed because they didn't want officers attaching "tactical" lights to their weapons. They were allowed 9mm carbines... Colt, Bushmaster or Hi-Point. I shit you not. No lights, lasers or optics.
Thankfully the department has finally changed its policies in the past couple years.
In their case they were using 9mm Glocks.
Completely missed the 9mm in there...
Actually very smart to keep officers from attaching a light to a G22.
What? No way! just had someone tell me that I am the only one that believed this. :no:
C4
On this contract, ATF wanted two guns from manufacturers submitted.
It seems companies submitted full size and compacts - 2 models each.
Would this typically mean that ATF or another Fed agency using this contract to place orders would necessarily be required to limit order to only those two models?
For example the Gen 4 G23 is now on the market; would it require other testing to qualify on this contract?
BTW, recently I had an opportunity to fire several magazine through one and it's recoil was exceptionally soft. The gun handled very flat tracking from one plate to the next. I could not easily distinguish much difference in front sight displacement in my vision vs Gen 4 G19s.
I would think the G23 a closer comparison size wise to the M&P FS which is only very slightly larger vs the G22.
I think they would have to test it.
C4
Robb Jensen
09-28-10, 22:28
In their case they were using 9mm Glocks. Thus, why I found it "gay". Some departments restrict the use of attached lights/lasers on their pistols which seems far more reasonable than restricting pistols with rail attachements which has become the manufacturing norm.
The USSS trusts it's agents around the POTUS but they don't allow it's agents around the POTUS with light rails on their SIG 229s......
Beat Trash
09-29-10, 12:35
What? No way! just had someone tell me that I am the only one that believed this. :no:
C4
I can believe it. My agency issues the M&P 9mm. Gun has rails, but attaching a light to the rail is not an option.
To piggy back onto the GEN 3 G22 with metal light attached issues, I JUST HAD a local cop leave my store with a new M&P 40 in his hand. Which gun was he carrying before? GEN 3 G22. Why did he get rid of it? It wouldn't run with his TLR1 attached.
C4
To piggy back onto the GEN 3 G22 with metal light attached issues, I JUST HAD a local cop leave my store with a new M&P 40 in his hand. Which gun was he carrying before? GEN 3 G22. Why did he get rid of it? It wouldn't run with his TLR1 attached.
C4
Do you plan on getting any M&P .40 compacts in?
Do you plan on getting any M&P .40 compacts in?
I used to stock them, but they never really sold well for me. I can always special order anything you like though.
C4
crowkiller
09-30-10, 07:02
To piggy back onto the GEN 3 G22 with metal light attached issues, I JUST HAD a local cop leave my store with a new M&P 40 in his hand. Which gun was he carrying before? GEN 3 G22. Why did he get rid of it? It wouldn't run with his TLR1 attached.
C4
Is the Gen 4 G22 having these issues also? Have you heard of any other issues with Glock .40s Gen 3 and 4? Thanks
Is the Gen 4 G22 having these issues also? Have you heard of any other issues with Glock .40s Gen 3 and 4? Thanks
Not that I am hearing (on the light issue).
I am hearing of some problems with the guide rod binding and locking the gun to the rear (which cannot be fixed without taking the gun apart).
C4
Don't forget the ejectors falling out, backstraps tearing off, and broken strikers...
Don't forget the ejectors falling out, backstraps tearing off, and broken strikers...
It was established on the previous locked thread, you're supposed to pony up names, places and details. Is this possible yet?
Don't forget the ejectors falling out, backstraps tearing off, and broken strikers...
Are you talking about gen 3 or 4 Glock .40s?
It was established on the previous locked thread, you're supposed to pony up names, places and details. Is this possible yet?
I'm pretty sure DocGKR gets a pass on that one.
John_Wayne777
09-30-10, 17:31
It was established on the previous locked thread, you're supposed to pony up names, places and details. Is this possible yet?
I don't know about the other thread because I didn't lock it...but Doc's input is always welcome even if he is restricted from sharing some of the germane details in the open.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.