Search found 1 match

by MaduroBU
Wed Jul 12, 2017 2:29 pm
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Why Glock didn't make the Army Cut
Replies: 23
Views: 7971

Re: Why Glock didn't make the Army Cut

The P320 seems like a departure from all of the things that made the older generation of Sigs great pistols. I love my X5, Trailside and my P232, but I don't see anything in their catalong that reminds me of those guns. It's as if they view the P22x series as legacy models.

The triggers on my Sigs are phenomenal; the SA break on my P232 is among the best triggers that I have ever felt on any type of firearm, and it's the only gun I own for which I couldn't justify a trigger job. The X5 and Trailside aren't far behind (though ironically they're the target pistols and both have honed sears). How will Sig maintain that quality with plastic, striker fired guns?

My guess is that they admitted that Gaston Glock was right about combat sidearms and simply decided to abandon accuracy and feel for cost. It seems that they have beaten him at his own game.

Return to “Why Glock didn't make the Army Cut”