Primary Arms

USSOCOM Publishes Intent to Purchase SIG Rattlers as Personal Defense Weapons

The United States Special Operations Command has published an intent to award a sole source IDIQ contract for Personal Defense Weapons to SIG SAUER.

The goal of the program is to provide Operators with maximum firepower in a concealable weapon and they have selected the Rattler, a compact version of SIG’s MCX after having conducted ongoing research and review of viable solutions since 2017.

According to the notice of intent, the IDIQ will provide complete PDW weapons (5.56mm and .300 Blackout caliber) that include suppressors (SIG SL series), cleaning kits, magazines, quick barrel change kits and force on force training kits. Furthermore, parts, sustainment, and New Equipment Training will also be part of this IDIQ.

In 2018 USSOCOM awarded SIG SAUER a contract for the Suppressed Upper Receiver Group program which is also based on the MCX. While the PDW contract will deliver complete weapons, SURG is a SOF unique specialized upper receiver which is attached to the M4A1 lower receiver.

After refinement of the design in conjunction with USSOCOM, SIG began delivering SURG last fall. In these images of SURG the version that won the contract includes a mesh cage around the suppressor but was delivered in the low-profile variant shown detached from the M4A1.

SIG CEO Ron Cohen recently shared in an interview the work they have accomplished to reduce the amount of toxic fumes shooters are exposed to while firing suppressed weapons. He explained that the M4 unsuppressed is 100 parts per million at the shooter while the Mk 18 exposes the shooter to four times the amount of an unsuppressed M4. SURG exposes the shooter to less than an unsuppressed M4.

There will be a short comment period for the Notice of Intent to award the sole source contract for PDWs. After that, the contract will be awarded.

21 Responses to “USSOCOM Publishes Intent to Purchase SIG Rattlers as Personal Defense Weapons”

  1. Ray Forest says:

    How much rifling is in the rattler barrel? 3″ or so?

    • JK says:

      About right. Great gun in 300blk. 110gr Barnes TAC-TX group extremely well.

  2. Eric says:

    Aren’t they also in SOCOM as the LVAW?

    • Nick says:

      I’m pretty curious to see if Sig’s going to bid on MRGG, they seem to be having success with the small frame guns inside of SOCOM.

      • SSD says:

        They did and were down selected along with FN and KAC.

        • Nick says:

          Sig was downselected for MRGG, the original run or the second run after the bad ammo?

          Are LMT and Larue still being considered in the second go around?

          • SSD says:

            Only one iteration counts, and that’s the current one they are going to base a decision on. Neither made it this time.

            • Nick says:

              Thanks. I realize that there’s only so much you can say publicly, but can you offer any clarity on why LMT and Larue didn’t make the cut for MRGG 2.0?

              Did USSOCOM alter the requirements for the second go around or did the weapons perform differently with the ammo in the second trials?

    • DangerMouse says:

      The Rattler and LVAW are both based on the MCX. Or, one might even say the MCX is based on the LVAW. But at any rate, they are different variations.

      Suffice it to say the only major differences are the handguard, barrel, upper receiver, and oprod.

      Barrels are 5.5″in Rattler and 6.75″ in LVAW,

  3. Adam says:

    This is SIGs Golden Era.

  4. Davy Crockett says:

    I want one.

  5. Gerard says:

    Another day another Sig contract

    • Joe_K says:

      Nobody else thinks it’s odd that all of America’s weapons are getting built by a company owned by a foreigner?

      • Cuvie says:

        I mean a lot of US small arms are already made by FN, a Belgian company, so what’s the difference?

      • Gerard says:

        I find it odd that the most popular pistols in the world are made by a company owed by a man who served in the German Army in WW2.

      • DangerMouse says:

        Even Colt is owned by foreigners now.

  6. Hodge175 says:

    Who else on US soil cam complete with Sig, they are the only one other than maybe Knights that can complete.

  7. Seamus says:

    Over the next decade the US Army will replace a little over 100,000 M4A1 with the NGSW. That leaves about 300-400K M4A1 left in service for the support forces. The M4A1s left in service will be basically be functioning not as “front line” rifle but more like PDW for the support troops, akin to the M1 Carbine back in WWII and Korea.

    This makes me curious if it is legally possible for the US Army to use the same legal authorities as the USMC, when they expanded the use of the M27 from a designated marksman role to fleet the entire USMC, and take the PDW Rattler / SURG (only with an 11.5” barrel) and replace the entire fleet of M4A1 being used by the support forces.

    Benefit: No need for another long and expensive competition, just to get a rifle with similar ergonomics and operating system that functions in the same basic role.

    • AbnMedOps says:

      But why? The support troops would then be stuck with either .300 Blackout (a one-trick-pony – quiet through a suppressor), OR 5.56 coming slowly out of an 11.5 barrel (shorter than than the super-specialized GAU-5A USAF Aircrew Defense Weapon’s 12.5″ barrel). Either cartridge from 11.5″ would offer very reduced terminal ballistics over the M-4A1’s.

      Rather than waste the $ on Rattler/SURG for the Support troops, spend it on arming them with NGSW. Might as well start doing it now, because that’s the decision that will (probably) be made down the road anyway (unless NGSW program falls apart somehow, like so many procurements). Weapon, parts, and training commonality, same ammo on the battlefield, and maybe a better chance to stop those body-armored enemies ripping through the rear areas!

    • SSD says:

      The army alone possesses just shy of one million M4/M16 rifles.