TexasCHLforum.com

1911 10MM wrote:Besides being ugly as sin, Glock has a penchant for being involved in "Friendly Fire" incidents.

Yeah, but the Glock they were offering had a safety .. That would have addressed some of the problem.

Just curious. Other than price, Is there any objectively hard advantage of Sig over Glock, or vice versa?
I know some people shoot better with one over the other, some like the feel or fit of one over the other. but both have a reputation as reliable good shooters. Just wondering if there is anything specific in design that either that the military would prefer over the other.

johncanfield wrote:Also surprised Sig significantly under bid Glock. On a tangent, I'm disappointed they are staying with 9mm, maybe a NATO issue. .357 Sig caliber has much better ballistics than 9mm.

Most likely because of economics as well as NATO issues. I like the concept of the .357 sig but if stuck with FMJ I would think that over penetration, and clean thru and through might be less devastating than even a 9mm. The sidearm in the military is not only a combat weapon, but also for armed security, LEO, and personal protection similar to civilian use.

The fact that they are signing on to Jacketed hollowpoints is encouraging. In my opinion 9mm FMJ is a poor selection for anything other than range practice.

Keith B wrote:Good read on why the Army went with Sig Sauer vs. Glock. And the main reason may be not what you think.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015 ... he-m9.html

The referenced article was informative, but I really found one of the quotes in it pretty fascinating when they were talking about the M9 and the ability to process jacketed hollow points.

Walker said it was not his decision, but added that he didn't think the Beretta M9 "is optimized to shoot any of those types of rounds. It's optimized to shoot the M882," the U.S. military's standard full-metal jacket 9mm round, he said.

"Any other round you fire through it, there are system-level effects that can affect a whole series of issues" such as "reliability and how many rounds between having a malfunction."

The design of the barrel and feed ramp, makes feeding hollowpoints inconsequential. The M9 should be ambe to feed just about any shaped bullet as long as the length is reasonable. There is no practical ramp, just a mouth to feed. hard to wrong when feeding any ammo.

Better and cheaper.
Who woulda thought the Glock was the more expencive gun.
I don't understand what the deal is with the "Special Ammo" Are they trying to use some sort of Internationally approved humane softpoint bullets or something?