Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 61

Thread: M9 vs M17

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    4,332
    Feedback Score
    0

    M9 vs M17

    The SIG M17 has been in service for around five years. So far, it seems a less controversial weapon than the Beretta M9 when that weapon entered service. Part of the reason was possibly that the M9 was replacing the iconic M1911A1, and many people weren't happy about that at all. Nowadays the 9mm round is much more universal (and with more effective loads) than existed in the early 1980's.

    There was also a GAO investigation into the M9 contract, with suspicions of shady dealings with Italy (never proven). Also the slide breakage instances, which I believe were traced to overpressure ammo. Then complaints began about the M9's unsuitability for people with smaller hands, unreliable magazines, the M12 holster sucked, some folks didn't like the M9's sights, the M9 was just too damn big and heavy for a 9mm, and so on.

    Haven't heard the same amount of concerns about the M17, other than a couple bulletins about sluggish slides and PMCS. Or is the SIG a more forgiving design?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    District 11
    Posts
    5,454
    Feedback Score
    24 (100%)
    The 320 was/is pretty controversial. The issues surrounding their safety weren't obscure issues with special units shooting proof ammo either. The 320 has real design flaws that weren't detected because the 320 was selected in a rush decision right as the Trump administration was coming in (my guess it the generals who lined up this deal didn't want the new boys screwing up their deal). They never finished the testing and we ended up with a gun that needed fixing.

    https://www.military.com/daily-news/...ge-wounds.html

    ccidental Discharge, Injuries, as Sig Sauer Refuses to Recall Its P320 Handgun

    https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/11/...-is-a-problem/

    SIG SAUER is offering a voluntary program for P320 pistols. This will include an alternate design that reduces the physical weight of the trigger, sear, and striker while additionally adding a mechanical disconnector.

    The following groups/individuals should use the information on this page to enroll in the P320 Voluntary Upgrade Program.

    U.S. Federal Agency/Military
    U.S. and Canadian law enforcement – including first responders
    Canadian consumers

    https://www.sigsauer.com/p320-us-can...aw-enforcement

    https://thestoddardfirm.com/p320-gun-liability/

    Ultimately though, they seem to have fixed it. The military got what they wanted, a Glock 17 with a thumb safety and some gimmicky modularity.
    Reminder, we don't need to ruin every thread with social/political commentary and thread drift. Sometimes, it's okay to just talk about the topic.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    College Station, Texas
    Posts
    1,860
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by The Dumb Gun Collector View Post
    SIG SAUER is offering a voluntary program for P320 pistols. This will include an alternate design that reduces the physical weight of the trigger, sear, and striker while additionally adding a mechanical disconnector.

    The following groups/individuals should use the information on this page to enroll in the P320 Voluntary Upgrade Program.

    U.S. Military

    The military got what they wanted, a Glock 17 with a thumb safety and some gimmicky modularity.
    Besides the thumb safety, the military M17/M18 fire control unit is not the same as commercial SIG P320s.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    North Alabama
    Posts
    4,405
    Feedback Score
    19 (100%)
    The Beretta was made by a foreign company and the 9mm was not ubiquitous in the US. The 1911 was storied and loved. When we adopted the M9, our military vehicles, machine guns, and technology was US sourced.

    Fast forward some years and so much has changed. M249 and 240 are both FN designs, we bought tons of MRAPs from countries around the world, and a lot of the technology the troops are using are sourced or designed outside the U.S.

    The general public heard of issues with the M9 and most gun savvy folks understand the platform is dated. The military selected a striker fired polymer pistol and modern holsters. I personally feel the military should be rocking S&W M&Ps, but suprisingly they didn't ask me.

    Andy
    Last edited by AndyLate; 07-04-22 at 16:15.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    287
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by The Dumb Gun Collector View Post
    The 320 was/is pretty controversial. The issues surrounding their safety weren't obscure issues with special units shooting proof ammo either. The 320 has real design flaws that weren't detected because the 320 was selected in a rush decision right as the Trump administration was coming in (my guess it the generals who lined up this deal didn't want the new boys screwing up their deal). They never finished the testing and we ended up with a gun that needed fixing.
    I'm active duty Army and have been so for the last 17 years, all GPF. The "controversy" happened on the internet and not in any unit I have been assigned to. While the 2017 test report https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/...-19-113850-680 identified issues but it also stated that the drop safety issue was addressed by an Engineer Change Proposal. It also pointed out that the pistol met most of the reliability goals and that many of the "failures" was the slide not locking back after the last round in the magazine was fired. The report comments that that "failure" could have been shooter induced.

    Most of my Soldiers would gladly swap me for my M17. Me personally, I wouldn't have had an issue if the Glock 17 or M&P 9 won or if we changed the grip on the M9 and called it a day. I also would not have been upset if most of the pistols on the MTOE, including mine, where replaced with M4 carbines. The new Safariland holster is good, but it is bulky and I'm not sure that we need level 3 retention, but it gets the MPs something better then the old Uncle Mikes retention holster.

    If you have access to the access controlled side of DTIC, there is some interesting info there (if you can find it).

    I get a chuckle out of how much energy is spent talking about military pistols given that they are not terribly relevant on the modern battlefield and envisioned future battlefield. I'm more interested in a replacement for the TOW , Stinger, M109, etc. Than I am the M17.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Patron State of Shooting
    Posts
    3,966
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Owned an M9 & have shot many others, thousands & thousands of rounds. Throw a D spring in and I love the damn things and with proper mags and ammo I wouldnt hesitate to hit SHTF/SD/HD/TEOTHAWKI with one.
    NO experience with the Sig and truthfully dont want any.
    " Be NOT ye afraid of them..
    Remember the Lord, for He is GREAT & TERRIBLE!
    FIGHT for your bretheren..for your sons & for your daughters,
    for your wives & for your households"!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    23
    Feedback Score
    0
    I carry the smaller M18 on duty and bought another for personal use. I also get all the negligent discharge reports for my career field and 100% of them were user-induced because of people finger@#$%ing the trigger when they shouldn't be. One individual straight up admitted "I'm just used to the heavier M9 trigger." If you ride the slide it won't always go into battery. All of these things are user/training issues, not the weapon. I despised the M9. Heavy with a useless DA/SA.

    I don't know how it compares to the other entries, so I can't speak intelligently on the trials.

    I don't find the modularity gimmicky either. I regularly swap from the compact slide and grip to the larger carry size depending on what I'm doing. I enjoy the fact that the trigger and overall grip don't change when I do swap. Adjustable grip sizes allows users to be better shooters and when you carry one for a living, any advantage is a good one.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, Az
    Posts
    3,942
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    My brother in law is active Army in a signals unit. He has been active on running the ranges every year. He said the new M17 is performing great and qual scores are increasing. Everyone likes it better than the M9 just due to the simplification of controls and the trigger.

    Im a big fan of the Beretta 92 series but if I were arming a military I would choose something striker fired.
    C co 1/30th Infantry Regiment
    3rd Brigade 3rd Infantry Division
    2002-2006
    OIF 1 and 3

    IraqGunz:
    No dude is going to get shot in the chest at 300 yards and look down and say "What is that, a 3 MOA group?"

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    4,332
    Feedback Score
    0
    I believe part of Glock's protest was that the Army never subjected the SIG to any of the standard adverse environment/reliability/durability testing. The XM9 contenders had to undergo all that testing and the Beretta 92 and SIG P226 came out on top.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    287
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Slater View Post
    I believe part of Glock's protest was that the Army never subjected the SIG to any of the standard adverse environment/reliability/durability testing. The XM9 contenders had to undergo all that testing and the Beretta 92 and SIG P226 came out on top.
    GAO finding on Glock's Protest: https://www.gao.gov/assets/b-414401.pdf
    It appears that Glock was protesting the testing of the compact version of the SIG, not the M17.

    Also, the 2018 Testing report: https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/...-21-155807-603
    Last edited by cd228; 07-04-22 at 19:33.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •