SIG Talk banner

Glock Protest Denied

2348 26
The URL below is to an article from "The Truth About Guns" that quotes the GAO decision.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...y-denies-glocks-mhs-protest-will-go-sig-p320/
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,262 Posts
No surprise there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
884 Posts
I think that was a long shot to begin with... I also think that was a definite ding to Glock. I know they have a lot of law enforcement contracts but I also see those slipping away. Slowly but... I do have to admit I thought it odd that the "Army" was so specific in their classification of the new firearm. I think it was predetermined to go to Sig. But I am not in the pay grade that is allowed in on such stuff... So... LOL...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,262 Posts
I agree with you in that it looks suspiciously like Sig was awarded the contract before it ever began, but that's no longer a topic of discussion. It's no ding to Glock, if you're referring to the protest. Lots of companies protest these things, but as to Glock losing contracts, Glock has a lot of contracts world-wide, to include military and LE, but if they intend to keep those contracts and grow they'd better get on board with providing a pistol that offers at least what the others offer, such as ambi-controls, removing the finger grooves, and the undercut trigger guard. It wouldn't hurt to offer a model with an external safety and make the trigger guard a little larger as well! If Glock doesn't do these things, at a minimum, they will start to see a lot of contracts fall to the competition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssp270

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
SIG came up with a pistol design that the ARMY wanted. GLOCK should have made a modular handgun. That's what the ARMY wanted and the 320 is cool looking and most the people I know that has one is really liking it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,262 Posts
SIG came up with a pistol design that the ARMY wanted. GLOCK should have made a modular handgun. That's what the ARMY wanted and the 320 is cool looking and most the people I know that has one is really liking it.
Well, clearly it is what the Army wanted, and yes, the P320 is a great gun, but that really has little to do with the fact that Sig was the ONLY manufacturer to make anything remotely close to that design during the 2006 trial, which was cancelled.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,262 Posts
My company generally doesn't protest awards as they feel it does hurt their reputation with DoD.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


Ok!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,978 Posts
I happen to think the whole "Modular Movement" is a piece of over thinking by REMFs wanting everything to be a Chinese menu. Everything is a matter of personal choice.
Inventory be &&&&!
If they truly wanted improvement in sidearms, they would start with ammunition, then platform. Caliber, bullet, and then weapon platform that is standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KZero

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
I border on Being a Glock fanboy myself, but I own them all, and Glock was being a bunch of crybabies over it. They didn't win. So be it. Sig won this one and that's the way it is. Move along.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,262 Posts
Why protest?? the Army asked for a modular handgun and SIG didnt submit a modular handgun.

I love my Glock, but if they can't read and understand what the Army wanted it is their own fault.

Glock failed to innovate and lost
Well, it goes back further than that. Sig developed the P250 for the Joint Combat Pistol trial the Army held in 2005/2006. Nobody wanted the gun. Then, in 2013, the Army initiated a RFI for the XM17 MHS trial. Glock wasn't the only manufacturer who didn't produce a pistol like the P320. The only manufacturer to build a gun exactly to the letter of what the Army wanted, per se, was Sig Sauer, leading many to believe that the Army colluded with Sig on the design in 2005, then cancelled the trial b/c what Sig produced wasn't exactly what anyone wanted. Then, in 2013 the Army initiates its RFI for a modular handgun. Coincidently, Sig produces a striker fire version of the P250 the following year, which the Army ended up selecting.

Now, all of this is speculation, but given that Glock knows how these things work, probably from their own shady business practices, they became suspicious, I'm sure, and filed an appeal (probably knowing it would be denied) just to get it on record that they know what happened in basically what is tantamount to Glock saying "I see what you did there". It doesn't really matter, though. The truth is the Army should have the right to buy whatever gun it wants from whomever it wants, and the convoluted procurement process is prohibitive at best. It's all a big mess, IMO, but at the end of the day, the Army got the gun it wanted, Glock still has a lot of business and the lion's share of the market, and everybody gets the benefit of having a lot of choices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MMinSC and KZero

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,262 Posts
The Beretta APX has a removable chassis that fits into a polymer grip module much like the SIG P250 and SIG P320.
I think we're going to see more of that as time goes on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,313 Posts
I had thought that Beretta came out with the APX too late for the most recent Army trials but the guys over at the Beretta forum (who tend to know about Beretta-related stuff) say that it was tested by the Army along with the SIG P320.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,262 Posts
I had thought that Beretta came out with the APX too late for the most recent Army trials but the guys over at the Beretta forum (who tend to know about Beretta-related stuff) say that it was tested by the Army along with the SIG P320.
It was, but I don't think it was ever really in contention. I think the Army was done with Beretta regardless, and the APX, although seemingly nice, is a little behind as compared to the P320. Sig had some seven plus years on Beretta.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
I had thought that Beretta came out with the APX too late for the most recent Army trials but the guys over at the Beretta forum (who tend to know about Beretta-related stuff) say that it was tested by the Army along with the SIG P320.
Also. Adding to this. I think they may have missed the mark with no external safety and idk if they plan on also doing caliber exchanges and grip module size changes

Plus. I see it like this. Sig went from an excellent pistol manufacturer to a full line provider

With 580 million. Sig can supply. Pistols. Grips. Optics. Bullets. Slides. The whole warehouse

So. Were they in cahoots, possibly. But it looks like they won
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top