Invisio

SIG SAUER Gives Us A Look At Their Modular Handgun System Candidate

FullSizeRender

At AUSA, SIG SAUER‘s Kevin Brittingham walked us through their candidate for the Army’s Modular Handgun System program which may replace the M9 Pistol issued since the mid-80s and based on the Beretta 92F.

IMG_8285

Although based on the commercially available P320 modular pistol, SIG made a few changes to be in compliance with the Army’s requirement.

-Tan Color
-Ambi Thumb Safety
-Lower Profile Ambi Slide Release
-Loaded Chamber Indicator
-Trigger Boot
-Firing Pin Assembly

IMG_8286

Although SIG is very optimistic about their chances, they also look at programs like this as an opportunity to improve their firearms. Some of these changes may we find their way into the P320 and other SIG firearms.

IMG_8283

Tags:

21 Responses to “SIG SAUER Gives Us A Look At Their Modular Handgun System Candidate”

  1. Agentofwrath says:

    Hmmm and maybe a candidate for the new FBI 9mm “family” of hadguns RFP?

  2. jbgleason says:

    Let’s not forget that the predecessor to this pistol was so bad that ATF sent theirs back. I hope Kevin has used some of his smarts to fix what was ailing that model. Great concept but definitely flawed execution first go around.

    • bill says:

      Reports are that the same issues with the P250 are also available in the P320. There’s no way this thing makes it past the first trials, IF they ever happen.

      • SSD says:

        Please share those issues.

        • tcba_joe says:

          Considering he can’t differentiate between the Gen 1 and Gen2 of the P250 I doubt he has any insight as to the success of the P320.

          But you knew that.

        • jbgleason says:

          No clue if this is what Bill is referring to but, in relation to my comments regarding the earlier Gen of this pistol, you can access the GAO report online regarding the issues. In a word, RELIABILITY.

          From the report:

          The RFP provided that “[r]atings on the proposed PQC [the shooters’ tests], any stoppages or parts breakages during testing, and the written evaluations will be recorded and used to evaluate each model.” RFP at 62-63. The record here supports ATF’s assertion that it considered these things when it affirmed the SSB’s earlier determination to exclude Sig Sauer. While each shooter completed a questionnaire on the basis of his or her own individual experience, the SSB conducted a broader review of the cumulative effect of all the stoppages recorded. The shooters’ questionnaires, as a whole, show that 11 of the 20 shooters experienced stoppages with Sig Sauer’s handguns–in some cases, as many as 10 stoppages. In total, the shooters experienced 58 stoppages with Sig Sauer’s handguns, 13 of which were considered to be gun-induced. Given the relatively high number of stoppages by Sig Sauer’s guns as compared to Smith & Wesson’s and Glock’s guns, we think that the SSB reasonably concluded that the stoppages provided a more significant measure of the guns’ reliability than the adjectival ratings for reliability assigned by individual shooters.[10] In addition, notwithstanding the low number of “unsatisfactory” ratings for reliability recorded on the shooters’ scoresheets, the questionnaires included a number of negative comments that the SSB reasonably found questioned the reliability of Sig Sauer’s handguns.

          Sig Sauer also contends that ATF placed too great an emphasis upon reliability in determining which offers should continue to phase III. In this regard, Sig Sauer argues that reliability was only one of a number of elements to be considered in the live-fire assessment, and notes that reliability was not identified as having any more importance than the other elements.[11] We disagree.

          • SSD says:

            That was over four years ago and the SIG P250. Got anything more recent that says that the P320 doesn’t work?

            • bill says:

              Do you have any evidence it will work? Th problems with the P250 represented the worst in SIG and with minor tweaking they have a striker fired 250. But congrats keep pushing that snake oil.

              • tcba_joe says:

                They revamped the P250 early on in its life due to those tests.

                The P320 had been extensively tested.

              • SSD says:

                Snake oil? I asked a serious question looking for evidence and when you can’t come up with anything you claim snake oil. This is why I’m considering closing the comments.

  3. turtleactual says:

    Its exactly what the army wants…. so in the end they wont pick it

  4. Chris says:

    Holy high bore axis batman….

  5. 32sbct says:

    Cost will also be a factor just like it was back when the M9 was selected. I’m guessing that in addition to the SIG, a version of the Smith & Wesson M & P will be part of the competition as will a Glock pistol. Off the top of my head I can’t think of any other manufacturers except those three with an off the shelf pistol that can meet Army’s requirements and have the manufacturing capability to produce a high volume of pistols. Does anyone know who else will be submitting a pistol for the competition?

  6. DSR says:

    I was put off by the high bore axis at first, but if it works, it works. Time will tell. Honestly the 1911 isn’t much lower. My real question is why Sig can’t move their slide catch further forward. That would be a mod I’d pay to have. Maybe the thumb safety would keep my thumb off it since the catch is smaller on this one. I think the 320 is a good concept tho. I hope it works.

  7. Jon says:

    That serialized drop-in chassis sure is a nice design feature. If they would bring down that slide a bit for a higher grip, it would be the leading candidate for my next purchase.
    (Disclaimer: I do love my P226s and other SIGs)

    I guess the moral of this story is that all the guns are currently a work in progress and that it is best to wait until the MHS testing/evaluation/selection is complete before opening up the wallet.

  8. tristate tactical shooting says:

    of all those posts that talk of how poorly the P250 and P320 have, how many have actually fired the pistol or is all this based on the first hand experience of the internet. I have fired some of the first P250s and P320s to roll off the line and they shoot well. The P250 in my vault has digested nearly 5K rounds of mixed breeds and it just keeps shooting. Many folks felt the same way in the late 80s when the M9 was chosen for the military.