G-Code

SOFIC – SIG’s M17 & M18 Modular Handgun Update

When we recently reported that the 101st Abn Div and other Fort Campbell, Kentucky-based tenant units would be the first units equipped with the US Army’s new Modular Handgun System, there seems to be confusion by commenters over which model of pistol units would receive. The 4.7″ barrel M17 is similar to the full size P320 and will be the standard pistol. The Compact M18 features a 3.9″ barrel and will replace the M11, known commercially as the SIG P228.

Above you can see precisely how the M17 will be shipped to the Army. Below, is the M18.

Each pistol comes with one 17 round and two 21 round magazines as well as three frames (small, medium and large). Unlike many pistols, the frames are not the firearm but rather expendable parts. The trigger pack is the serial numbered item. The difference between the M17 and M18 is the length of the barrels and slides.

Currently, the pistol features a anti-tamper device so Soldiers can’t swap out frames on their own.  However, the Army is considering removing this feature and replacing it with a standard commercial fastener.

An additional anti-tamper device prevents Soldiers from accessing the striker mechanism.

SIG introduced two additional safety features. There is a 1911-style ambi-safety as well as a loaded chamber indicator at top center of the breech on the slide. Finally, the slides have a removable sight plate with a Delta Point Pro footprint.

www.sigsauer.com

Tags:

77 Responses to “SOFIC – SIG’s M17 & M18 Modular Handgun Update”

  1. Joshua says:

    Did this gun have no operational testing?

    This seems to be hitting units incredibly fast compared to most procurements.

    • Joshua says:

      Oh also, removing those anti tamper devices would be a horrible idea. Joe will screw that chassis all up.

      • jon says:

        “anti-tamper” Challenge Accepted. Joe will find a way. I’m sure there will be kinks in the system as there always is, but the whole 3 frames and separate slide trigger pack sounds like more of a hindrance than a grip panel (M&P or Gen 4 glock)… We shall see.

        • Che Guevara's Open Chest Wound says:

          I’m not convinced the anti-tamper device’s presence will make any difference. It’s just a spanner screw.

          • SSD says:

            Probably true, but all of the additional frames will be locked up anyway.

            • Jon says:

              Should be locked up, but because there is no serial number on them, they won’t be inventoried the same unless they are part of a BII kit (like the M107’s accessory kit)… I would hope they would be locked up with the armorer, but in some units, I doubt it- it will end up like a big trunk of magazines. One would hope not, but we shall see.

            • Seamus says:

              If there is an “anti-tamper” doesn’t that kill the whole modularity aspect to this gun. I mean it was his the fricking program name.

              Plus I want to buy a commercial grip frame, stipple the hell out of it and put it on my M17. Hell maybe some of the Pimp-my-Glock companies will make new sexy frames and slides for it…since it is modular.

      • Raymond Miller says:

        Soldiers will only do what their leadership expects them to do. The whole point of getting this weapon was to give the soldier a more ergonomic fit. Having to send a weapon off to the repairer to swap frames will ensure what should be a skill level one task will never be done. Weapons will be left on the ‘medium’ frame, and the rest will gather dust in the supply cage.

        It’s time we expect more our of our soldiers instead of just simply saying ‘Joe will ruin that.’ That’s why we can’t have nice things.

        • SSD says:

          Unit armorer

        • Jon says:

          Not saying we don’t expect more of “our” or “my” soldiers, but the military as a whole. I can’t tell you how many times I got called out for UXO in the training area that was inert rounds from TASC that a unit didn’t turn in. What is the ripple effect? That it took an 0-5 signature to get items loaned from TASC for future training. Some units just barely used TASC at that point, we decided to get a memo for long term use signed and worked it out with them. Yes, Joe is capable of maintaining millions of dollars of equipment, BUT you also have those who decide to pawn their kevlars or “test” their IBA…just part of life I guess.

          You are right that it will take Leadership and empower the unit armorer and NCOs (Really, they will be doing the most the O’s will just be checking the cyclic/sensitive items inventories). Empowering them is where a commander will be successful.

      • Mike Nomad says:

        If the “anti-tamper devices” are what they appear to be, they are simply spanner headed screws. Six common sizes, as hex bits, in 1/4″ and 5/16.”

        • Mike Nomad says:

          Sorry… 5/16″.

        • Nick says:

          Here I was thinking it looked like the backside to a certain popular mini red dot tool

          • Mike Nomad says:

            Oh, right. That too. I was in Hardware Store Mode. It would be interesting to see if the sight tool works. At second pass, my words look a little jabberish… was meaning to say those fasteners are commonly available in a number of sizes, as are the bits to manipulate them.

      • d says:

        Anti-tamper device? Fuck off. Joe is either going to mess up the pistol or not.

      • Guy says:

        The p320 has been in use in competition, law enforcement and personal use for 2 years. Its a striker fired version of the p250 that has been out for near a decade.

      • Adam says:

        They dod a ton of testing on these weapons before they won the contract and again after.. I own a commercial version and they are very accurate, durable and reliable.. this gun has been around for a couple years on the civilian market and done really well

    • Nick says:

      OTC hasn’t done assessments on it yet. I saw the order where they are tasking MPs, MPI, and a number of other parties to send people to test the two variants at base that definitely wasn’t Campbell.

  2. Agustin Hernandez says:

    The M11 is a Sig 228 not 229

    • JB says:

      It’s actually both. The 229 is far more common as an M11 these days.

      • DF says:

        No, all M11s in the US military are SIG P228s, as required by the contract. The contract does not allow for 229s to be substituted for the original specified pistols. SIG markets a 229 to “civilians” as the M11A1, but those are NOT in use by the military.

        • JB says:

          Every M11 sitting in our arms room is a P229R.

          Thanks for telling us what we’re not currently using though.

  3. Jon, OPT says:

    Having done numerous inventories as a Weapons SGT and Ops SGT, the idea of a whole frame as a sub-component is just a horrible idea. I’m glad I don’t have to answer to the shortage annexes on this one, also ever explaining to a command that the frame isn’t a firearm and a missing one doesn’t warrant locking down an entire post… someone will consider it a sensitive item, this WILL happen. Have fun with that.

    Otherwise, it’s good to see the M9 being replaced; coupled with a challenge to the Force to outsmart the childproof lighter of sidearms, I give it about 5 minutes with a good 18B with lock-picking training.

    Any word on the Glock appeal?

    • Billiam says:

      *grabs E-tool in preparation for digging up the volleyball pits in front of the company*

    • SSD says:

      My prediction is that the Glock appeal won’t be sustained.

    • PPGMD says:

      What would happen if you were short a couple of grip panels from a M9?

      Because they are basically the same thing, the official SIG terminology is grip module.

      • ThatBlueFalcon says:

        Sure, but the grip modules will be treated as COEI, and they’ll need to be accounted for when you inventory the weapon. It’s the same principle as inventorying a set of AN/PVS-14s and needing to see the bag, the rhino arm, the NVG bracket, the fiberous cord, the filters, etc.

        • SSD says:

          That’s not a daily count or weekly inventory. That’s an annual or change of hand receipt inspection. Fortunately, they are about $20 a pop of you lose one.

          • Jon says:

            SSD- 20 bucks may not be a big deal, but ill prepared commanders/supply teams will have to fit that bill with a FLIPL because it won’t be chopped up to a field loss. That FLIPL also will cause a stop on PCS and anything else until it’s resolved. A commander could pay for it, but that has implications too (poor CSDP), which can negatively effect not just the commander but also NCO’s evals.

            I would expect the lowers be made like a BII kit for the pistol and be added to the sensitive items inventory and be locked in the armory. Just like the accessory kit on the M107 or the headmount for NVGs. In themselves, they aren’t a sensitive item but are accounted for each month….one would hope.

          • Steve says:

            As long as the frames are listed as expendable and the property book office doesn’t assign serials to them “for funsies,” as is the bane of my hand receipt, we’ll all be ok.

    • the Dude says:

      ^^^This man, he speaks truth.^^^

  4. Disco says:

    lol this pistol is a piece of shit.

    • Raymond Miller says:

      so you’ve shot the XM17 as the Army is looking to adopt it, and have made the determination that the M9 is a better system?

      The M9’s have been dealing with cracking slides and locking blocks for almost a decade. But don’t let that little fact interfere with the ‘shitty’ XM17.

    • SGT Rock says:

      Hey stud, how about expanding on your opinion and letting the rest of us know why you think this.

      • Joshua says:

        The guns were only required to fire 12,000 rounds.

        The XM17 testing wasn’t really a good measure of this guns capabilities.

        • SSD says:

          Well, let’s say the average pistol gets 100 rounds a year fired through it. You do the math…

          • PPGMD says:

            Not only that, but the pistol is good for well beyond the 12k that they are contracted for.

            The part replacement schedule for the full size is recoil spring, trigger spring, and slide lock lever assembly at 10k (and IME they are good well beyond that). And striker assembly, take down lever, and extractor at 20k (which were met in my guns, though I haven’t shot it enough to say how far beyond that).

            Major parts like barrels, slides, and the FCU are probably good for 50k plus.

  5. Gerard says:

    Lets give this handgun a chance. The 320 in civilian hands is popular, I might eventually buy one

    • tcba_joe says:

      No kidding. “But Muh Glock shoulda won”.

      It didn’t. At this point learn how to shoot the new DoD handgun or don’t. I don’t care.

      • Seamus says:

        Block should have won, but as a company they have failed to innovate and Sig beat them to the contract. Maybe now Glock and every other polymer handgun company will start looking at the chassis system…who knows.

  6. LikesGlocks says:

    Wonder if this kit will be offered commercially?

    • LCSO264 says:

      Sig 320, been around for a while now. based on the Sig 250, which was plagued with problems. As for the Sig 320, I don’t know much about it as far as teething issues. I will say this, Sig USA has not had the greatest reputation as of late when it comes to QC, but only time will tell how the M17/18 do in the hands of the Army.

  7. Cuvie says:

    Why does it come with 1 17 round magazine and 2 21 round magazines? Why not just have all 3 magazines be 21 rounders?

    • Martian says:

      In case you want one of the magazines to sit flush for concealment reasons?

    • tm says:

      Seems like it’s to provide magazines for both variants… but what is the new basic load going to be? 42 rounds (2 full-size mags) for the M17?

  8. Stone11c says:

    Ofcourse the Army would take a MODULAR handgun SYSTEM and make it so a soldier can’t field strip it down according to its’ original design. Like others have posted on this story, “Joe certainly can’t be allowed to learn every little thing about how their sidearm works…cause…cause…just because!” (Rolls eyes and combines with face palm).

    • Jon, OPT says:

      I would love to see any commander actually come up with a policy memo for HOW individuals assigned this system can evaluate and determine which grip they want to use. Other than SOF I don’t think most units have the ammo to determine that aside from simply holding the weapon.

      • Stone11C says:

        Units have more than enough access to ammo. Either Installations just destroy old ammo outright or they had my units do “Spend-Exs” with 7.62, 5.56, and .50 cal. Our section even shot mortar rounds from the Vietnam era…those crazy looking cheese charges were a pain in the ass!

        • Mac679 says:

          STRAC for AA49 for Infantry units is small as shit. Probably your absolute lowest quantity small arms DODIC except for maybe AA11 and A191. When Jon says most big Army units don’t have enough 9mm to do a true determination, he’s not wrong.

          • Seamus says:

            Truth! And Medical units (which get truck loads of pistols) barely get to qualify every year and most of the Medical officers shoot maybe once every other year. Terrible!

    • PPGMD says:

      Except when I am swapping grip modules or working on the FCU/frame itself, I never took my FCU/frame out of the grip module.

      You really don’t need to remove it from the grip module enough that it is a big deal IMO.

    • Mac679 says:

      I’m going to go out on a limb and bet you’ve never had to replace an M4 front takedown pin detent because a jackass decided to see how it worked while cleaning the rifle….

  9. Thulsa Doom says:

    I suspect most organizations will simply issue the “Medium” to everyone with the SN scribed onto the frame somewhat amateurishly. And then the rest of the frames will be stuffed in a tuffbox in the arms room, never to be seen again…..

  10. Dman says:

    With the anti-tampering device, how are they supposed to change the grip of their gun? Do they need permission to use a special tool to swap out the triggering system to put into the smaller or bigger grip? Seems like a slap in the face to have all grip sizes and you can’t swap them out yourself.

    • SSD says:

      One more time, Unit Armorer.

      • ThatBlueFalcon says:

        Which flies in the face of how big Army says unit armorers can function. Unit arms rooms aren’t even authorized to keep weapons parts like BCGs any more nor are they supposed to swap out pistol grips or stocks.

        • Stone11C says:

          Pretty much. Going to the Armorers course would’ve been cool until it turns out all you do is babysit weapons until they’re drawn out or need to be transported over for the Contractors to inspect them every year. The “I’m closing the Arms Room for an Appointment” superpower they had definetly wasn’t worth signing for hundreds of thousands of dollars in weapons.

      • the Dude says:

        I suspect MOS skills are neither here nor there these days.

  11. Mike says:

    First, God Bless America and all of our fine men and women that protect us and this country. I am not nor have I been in any branch of our military (a decision I regret) and being 53 years of it is out of my reach now.
    I work with many of the SIG model’s manly for competition and concealed purposes and they are a very reliable gun. The P320 is used by many they shoot thousands of rounds through them e every year with any issues.
    I think they will be a favorite among all that will be issued one.
    Thank you for all you do and for letting speak in a chat with great people.

  12. some other joe says:

    RE: the lockout. This is just means a new tool in the armorer’s toolkit. I’m not concerned about something that will probably have more utility in ensuring locking pins don’t fall out in the field.

    RE: armorer’s aren’t supposed to change buttstocks and pistol grips, they’re also not issued a full toolkit that will allow them to do it efficiently, by themselves, and without damaging the springs we’re concerned with. By design, those aren’t concerns with this weapon.

    RE: evaluating what size grip “you” need, I expect sizing instructions in the TM and an update FM 3-23.35. Ideally, SMEs will be present for NET to assist in this. But everyone will likely just get the “schmedium” frame by default.

    RE: Basic load. with 2×21 and 1×17, it’ll probably be 59 cartridges. 3 magazines is the standard basic load, so it’s currently 39 for the M11 and 45 for the M9.

  13. Jeff S says:

    No comments on, “Finally, the slides have a removable sight plate with a Delta Point Pro footprint.” I’m surprised, considering the commercial P320 RX slides are cut for the SIG Romeo only.

    Forgive my ignorance, but is the Delta Point Pro an issued optic?

  14. tcba_joe says:

    Well, I’m going to need one of these and a DP Pro. Hopefully SIG gets these out sooner to civilian side sooner rather than later.

    A kit with both slide lengths would be pretty nifty too.

  15. Dan says:

    11b from 08-12

    Seeing how I experienced NCOs/officers not knowing anything about their gear. I see this going the same way as others have posted medium frames used while others stored in a sealed range box.

    EIB should be a basic training graduation requirement. Why do 11b have to be the dumbest people in the army? Should really be closer a SF standards then to asvab waver bottom of the barrel. Training too far from current tactics being used. Can’t qualify expert after a full day of trying pack your shit and go be a cook. Can’t even zero a peq15 properly let alone shoot with it.(“just lollipop it at 10m”E7) Teaching soldiers to actually think for themselves instead of relying on sops/being told. If you did that then a soldier could make an informed decision on weather he needed gear for a mission of not instead of taking everything and weighing a ton.

    Not saying the army doesn’t need updated gear but would rather see a free float m4 over a new pistol which won’t be utilized properly because instead of going to 240 Gunners they go to NCOs so they can walk around the cop without their heavy m4. The 240 is the most important weapon in the platoon yet we dont make every soldier qualify with it? Same with the m249?

    While deployed I had m4,M14,mk48,m500 and was RTO for a month. Yes it sucked having to redo my kit for each mission but was worth it being able to fill multiple roles for better mission capabilities. Sensitive items check took forever and I always had to take everything to the NCO doing it instead of them coming to me.

    On a night QRF/bda after apaches lit up a team emplacing an IED. By the time we got to within 100 meters of two of them were hiding in an open field. The Apaches didn’t open up on them because they could no longer see if they had weapons.(even though the did and were caught digging in a known IED area). The Apaches ran out of fuel and had to RTB. Platoon sized element in an open field with only the leaders with radios having a 180* idea on where these two are but knowing about 100m away. After 15 mins it became a goat fuck. All the team leaders, squad leaders, platoon SGT, and the PL all in a group talking. When I heard a noise near my squad leaders favorite with m4/203. I ran over there and withing 5 feet of him the two were prone. The favorite froze and I yelled it out and jumped on one messing with something in his hands. Not knowing if he was trying to set off a IED or what my M14 with pvs21 attached was useless as the muzzle went into the mud when I went to the ground.. The other guy was now kneeling there frozen as I wrestled with the one. The one I was on had cell phone in hand and a tac vest on with ak mags. Had to pull out my knife and could have stabbed him but his friend was watching and was up to this point frozen. I didn’t want to stab him and have his friend see and jump on my back/side at this point. I had complete control of the one with my knife at his throat. It seemed like for ever before someone tackled the other guy. Turns out the other guy had a grenade which he could have easily used to take out the huddle of our leadership or anyone. Also had a radio and pistol mag never recovered any firearms but they told the terp the weapons were near by. All though this did end well it could have been a total disaster. If I had a pistol to go with my M14 I probably would have shot both of them.

    Before anyone says anything…. I bought my self for the deployment a crye cage carrier, a Spartan CQC, and some nacre earpro/mic. The crye because the sloppy issue plate carrier sucks. The nacre because ears are life savers(standard square mics are stupid with today’s tech). The cqc for close up needs because I knew I wouldn’t have a pistol. Would of my Benchmade folder that was always in my pocket worked maybe but I am glad I had the cqc. I do think guys go over board with giant knives.

    The slide cut out for a red dot… For fucking real. Strapped to guys leg or in on the front of their vests. That will be broken 100 times over before used. Or the battery will be dead/not on.

    When the army has to try and keep personal from stripping a weapon to far is a sad fucking day. That right there mean zero trust, piss poor training, something to be unfixable in the field. What if after 7 months on deployment it became loose and fell out on mission with one in the pipe. I come to a clearing barrel to clear it before chow…. Does it cause a jam so the weapon can’t be rendered safe? Possible discharge while running around?

    Sorry for an early morning rant

    • Dan says:

      Instead of proper training for people to meet a standard… Just lower the standard so everyone without training can meet it. Fucking stupid… Like mortars/11c can’t hit shit. Well maybe schools a full click off target.

      What’s the next weapon to have an anti temper device? Grenades so before you can pull the pin your squadleader has to use a tool to remove the device? But after he sits down and fills out a risk assestment.

      Sorry i don’t play political shit stupid games. As an 11b going through the warriors leaders course. On the field exercise I was dinged points for being to aggressive for leading the squad to a village with Intel of being possible IEDs. By just not using the road and having a covering fire element ready. I should of walked down the road and asked to have a meeting with the elders.

      Fucking bullshit.

  16. Chris M says:

    As many others have said, we need to stop training to the lowest common denominator and lowering standards. The way the military is currently run, it’s no wonder we have some vets who are unable to think for themselves and fail when transitioning back to the civilian world. It’s all about just do what you’re told, instead of teaching one how to identify, analyze, plan, and execute on one’s own initiative.

    Going back to the pistol itself, heaven forbid that LCpl Schmuckatelli, and PFC Numbnuts actually be taught about their weapon systems beyond removing slide and barrel. I always laughed/ shook my head at people who believe that military training is top notch (maybe in certain circles or specialized units), but particularly when it comes to firearms qualification. It’s ridiculous that as an E-3 I can be trusted to maintain and sign off on a helo to be safe for flight, but yet can’t be trusted to actually know the inner workings of my sidearm or rifle (yet expected to know my .50 cal XM 218, or GAU 21 and how each part works with the other to be able to troubleshoot mid-flight).

    Problem today is more and more people are growing up without ever learning anything about firearms, and the military has always relied on its recruits being at least somewhat familiar.

  17. DF says:

    There sure is a lot of whining and hand wringing about this, for what is merely a backup weapon (with some rare exceptions like the MCIOs). The rifle is the primary, the pistol is the backup. It doesn’t even need to be great, just good enough for the extremely rare cases where someone needs to transition from a rifle to a handgun.

    The level of whining about this, both official, and unofficial (like the comments here), is amusing. Pistols aren’t decisive in battles, and never have been.

Leave a Reply