Police Duty pistol firearms T&E procedure, COF

[msstate56]

I have been tasked with coming up with a T&E course of fire and testing procedure for new duty pistols. We are looking at several mfgs polymer optic ready duty guns, with red dot optics. Does anyone have a T&E testing form/battery that their agency has used that you can PM me? Also, feel free to PM and I'll provide an agency email. Thanks.

[BehindBlueI's]

No form, but I recall we:

Tested at 25y with various weights and brands of both training ammo and duty ammo (124gr, 124gr+P, and 147gr) from a rest for mechanical accuracy

Shot quals with a group of volunteers.

Malfunction testing:

2H shooting
SHO shooting
WHO shooting
Injured Officer shooting (compromised grip, so one handed but with pinkie finger extended to weaken grip and simulate injury)

Repeat with each cartridge as listed above.

No cleaning or lubricating between officers, round count recorded on a form in the box.

[msstate56]

I should get 600-800 rounds per pistol, which will be divided amongst 4-5 instructors. I will definitely include all the above. I was going to do a basic lube at the beginning, and no cleaning or lube for the duration.

[AMC]

With that low a round count, and only divided among an instructor group of 4-5 officers, I seriously wouldn't even bother. You're not going to produce any useful data, or discover any revelations. I was leading this effort before I retired from my department. For reference this was at the time the second largest municipal police department on the West Coast (over 2200 sworn). A couple of things I decided early on was to not reinvent the wheel and duplicate extensive testing that others had done, if that testing was well documented and available. Then we had to have a discussion about why we wanted to change handguns, what the benefits of a new platform would be, conduct a realistic assessment of the costs and timeline necessary, and have that info at our fingertips to answer the inevitable "Why?" questions from Admin.

We then had a discussion of what features/capabilities we wanted in a new handgun (PMO capability was part of that). We obtained T&E guns from 5 different manufacturers. Some new but popular models weren't included, which resulted in butthurt by some fanboys of those guns....but selecting a new 'cool' gun for issue to cops is generally not a good plan for success. Remember, you're selecting a system not just a pistol. Are there holsters in your preferred line available? Do they accommodate your preferred weaponlight and/or Pistol Mounted Optic? Does the pistol have a proven record with other agencies?

Not sure how large your agency is, or how many shooters you need to accommodate, but having a cross section of your workforce work with the guns/holsters on timed, difficult course of fire will potentially give you insight into how well YOUR cops will handle the new roscoe.

This was my long winded way of saying that a T&E form for instructors will never replace the actual work if you want the process to be meaningful.

[BehindBlueI's]

I should get 600-800 rounds per pistol, which will be divided amongst 4-5 instructors. I will definitely include all the above. I was going to do a basic lube at the beginning, and no cleaning or lube for the duration.

I think we were closer to 5k per pistol, and SWAT specific testing went into 10k+ range.

Realistically we could have done this though:

Look at a brochure of a bunch of pistols.
Buy Glocks.

And probably have skipped brochures stage. Glock isn't the only game in town, but we already had the leather and the trained armorers. Nothing else was better, or better enough to warrant the logistics attached of switching. We're still issuing 17Ms, but likely going to gen 5 MOS at some point in the future. Maybe gen 6 by the time the general order actually gets approved...

[feudist]

I should get 600-800 rounds per pistol, which will be divided amongst 4-5 instructors. I will definitely include all the above. I was going to do a basic lube at the beginning, and no cleaning or lube for the duration.

A better test might be taking 4-5 problem shooters and using that ammo to see how they respond to the new gun.
Identify any specific issues it seems to cause them and the remediation drills needed to bring them up to competency.
Maybe a mix of sexes and a range from those who never qualify first attempt to regular high 70s shooters.
That's who you'll have to spin up.

[msstate56]

All valid concerns. It's not my show, nor my decisions. I've simply been asked to come up with a testing procedure that we will put each pistol through. Trust me, I would love to conduct a much more in depth test with much higher round count across a broader selection of shooters. But you know how it is. We aren't looking at anything other than pistols that are already in common use among other LE agencies. Available Safariland red dot capable duty holsters was one of my first criteria. We are going with optics (currently irons only), so new duty holsters are a must anyway. Thus, we might as well try several types other than just "go with brand X cause that's what we've always had."

That said- it will take a measurable improvement to pry away my Glock :)

[Jason M]

AMC is right. However, if you choose to do your own testing, chronograph a good sample of your chosen ammo. Doing this prevented my job from issuing a bad lot of ammo along with our new pistols.

[msstate56]

Please keep in mind:
I didn't select the pistols to test
I didn't select which optics to test
I don't have control over how much ammo we get to use

Just asking for a little help coming up with a COF on paper so we don't just go blast some ammo and say "I like this one"

[msstate56]

We then had a discussion of what features/capabilities we wanted in a new handgun (PMO capability was part of that). We obtained T&E guns from 5 different manufacturers. Some new but popular models weren't included, which resulted in butthurt by some fanboys of those guns....but selecting a new 'cool' gun for issue to cops is generally not a good plan for success. Remember, you're selecting a system not just a pistol. Are there holsters in your preferred line available? Do they accommodate your preferred weaponlight and/or Pistol Mounted Optic? Does the pistol have a proven record with other agencies?
.

We have already had all these conversations.

All the T&E guns are in hand, we just have to test them

[AMC]

We have already had all these conversations.

All the T&E guns are in hand, we just have to test them

Does your agency already issue Glocks? If so, I kinda agree with BehindBlueI's that hitting the easy button on this is a no brainer. Now that the Acro-Footprint Glock 45 is available to agencies (or will be shortly), it's even more of a go-to for Glock agencies. And I'm not even a Glock guy.

As for a T&E process or form for you guys, i'm sorry I can't offer anything there. I just don't think you could get any useful data from that little ammo with that small a test group. If you were able to spread that out to a cross section of shooters, say 100 rounds each, and have them shoot some challenging, measurable exercises that included manipulation skills, then you might get more useful data. And have the shooters also rate their impressions on things like ergonomics and compare it to the shoot results.

I know you're not calling the shots, and believe me I feel your pain. Everybody and their uncle is gonna have an opinion, and will tell you why you're wrong. Or maybe tell everybody else behind your back why you're wrong. I am so glad not to be dealing with that crap anymore, and to only be picking guns and holsters for myself.

[msstate56]

"No plate" type optic mounting is pretty much a requirement. Now that Glock will mill direct, I do like that option.

I'm definitely going to see if I can bring in a few, struggling shooters to see how they perform with each as well.

[msstate56]

I came up with something. I’ll at least have a standard procedure for each pistol/optic combo. Thanks.

[Magsz]

I came up with something. I’ll at least have a standard procedure for each pistol/optic combo. Thanks.

What pistols are you testing if you don't mind me asking?

Also, what optics? My agency issued Red Dot equipped 17's last year. We went with the MOS system and Trijicon RMR's.

In 2022, if you have the option of avoiding the use of a plate, take it. If you have the option of selecting a closed emitter sight, take it.

As far as the testing of the pistols go, I would spend the vast majority of those 800 rounds shooting one handed, specifically weak hand. Most pistols will show their true colors when they're not properly supported. Some deal with this better than others and if you want to present something to the higher ups as far as what pistol might be quantifiably better, this is a decent way to weed out the wheat from the chaff.

Keep us updated on your progress. I hope it all works out well.

[LockedBreech]

I think we were closer to 5k per pistol, and SWAT specific testing went into 10k+ range.

Realistically we could have done this though:

Look at a brochure of a bunch of pistols.
Buy Glocks.

And probably have skipped brochures stage. Glock isn't the only game in town, but we already had the leather and the trained armorers. Nothing else was better, or better enough to warrant the logistics attached of switching. We're still issuing 17Ms, but likely going to gen 5 MOS at some point in the future. Maybe gen 6 by the time the general order actually gets approved...

A generally pretty squared away agency where I'm at has done basically this the past decade

1.) Glocks for 5 years
2.) M&Ps for 2 years. Nah.
3.) Back to Glocks for 5 years.
4.) Sigs for 2 years with the flat Pro trigger. Nah.
5.) Back to Glocks.

Does seem like a trend develops in the case of agency use.

[Lon]

A generally pretty squared away agency where I'm at has done basically this the past decade

1.) Glocks for 5 years
2.) M&Ps for 2 years. Nah.
3.) Back to Glocks for 5 years.
4.) Sigs for 2 years with the flat Pro trigger. Nah.
5.) Back to Glocks.

Does seem like a trend develops in the case of agency use.

If I was paying those bills I’d have some hard questions for the Police Chief and his command staff.

[TGS]

If I was paying those bills I’d have some hard questions for the Police Chief and his command staff.

Even if I was a cop there I'd be pissed off. That's a lot of money in extra mags, accessories, and holsters that I'd have to constantly waste on new guns.

[LockedBreech]

If I was paying those bills I’d have some hard questions for the Police Chief and his command staff.


Even if I was a cop there I'd be pissed off. That's a lot of money in extra mags, accessories, and holsters that I'd have to constantly waste on new guns.

The discontent is definitely there.

The first switch, Glock Gen 3 22s to Smith M&P40 Gen 1s, was legit. The Gen 3 22s started to have their weapon mounted light issues.

The second switch, back to Glock 35 Gen 4s, was justified albeit somewhat less so. The agency is not small but is not especially large (think 300 sworn) and they could not get their regional customer service rep to get back to them on a timely basis when issues did come up. The Glock rep, as I understand it, had always been extremely responsive.

The third switch, to P320 Pros, was entirely unjustified in my opinion. They were switching to 9mms but there was no reason not to just lateral into 9mm Glocks. The holsters would have even matched because Gen 4 was the option. I think it was Cool New Gun syndrome for sure.

The most recent switch was due to a pair of ND incidents with the P320 Pro trigger that occurred in rapid succession. No lives lost, nobody shot, but enough to give brass the willies. Seems like switching to non-Pro trigger P320s might have been a more reasonable option that Sig might have been able to do for free or cheap.

The current new issue is Glock 45 9mms. I think they ought to stick with that for about twenty years to average out the waste of the P320 switch and because it's a great platform they have the institutional knowledge to learn and train well.

[msstate56]

The discontent is definitely there.

The first switch, Glock Gen 3 22s to Smith M&P40 Gen 1s, was legit. The Gen 3 22s started to have their weapon mounted light issues.

The second switch, back to Glock 35 Gen 4s, was justified albeit somewhat less so. The agency is not small but is not especially large (think 300 sworn) and they could not get their regional customer service rep to get back to them on a timely basis when issues did come up. The Glock rep, as I understand it, had always been extremely responsive.

The third switch, to P320 Pros, was entirely unjustified in my opinion. They were switching to 9mms but there was no reason not to just lateral into 9mm Glocks. The holsters would have even matched because Gen 4 was the option. I think it was Cool New Gun syndrome for sure.

The most recent switch was due to a pair of ND incidents with the P320 Pro trigger that occurred in rapid succession. No lives lost, nobody shot, but enough to give brass the willies. Seems like switching to non-Pro trigger P320s might have been a more reasonable option that Sig might have been able to do for free or cheap.

The current new issue is Glock 45 9mms. I think they ought to stick with that for about twenty years to average out the waste of the P320 switch and because it's a great platform they have the institutional knowledge to learn and train well.

You sure you don’t work with me?

[LockedBreech]

You sure you don’t work with me?

Afraid not, I'm out west, bur sorry to hear y'all have ridden the same gun carousel.

[BehindBlueI's]

My department's progression since my hire date:

Glock 22 Gen 2
Glock 22 Gen 3
Glock 22 Gen 4
Glock 17M

During the Gen 2 and 3 days, plain clothes officers could get a Glock 27 instead. How's that for crazy...

I still have my original gun belt and holster for "parade ready" occasions and it still works just fine. Even fits, almost too big.

[jnc36rcpd]

The former chief of my former department wore what every rookie patrol officer wore. The current chief wears a radio, a cell phone, and the only Glock 26 issued by the agency. I suspect we might need to mention to executives who carried be bothered to carry a Glock 17 or 19 that they will pack a gun carried by actresses on TV cop shows to avoid them carrying a pistol that seems larger than they are.

[AMC]

The former chief of my former department wore what every rookie patrol officer wore. The current chief wears a radio, a cell phone, and the only Glock 26 issued by the agency. I suspect we might need to mention to executives who carried be bothered to carry a Glock 17 or 19 that they will pack a gun carried by actresses on TV cop shows to avoid them carrying a pistol that seems larger than they are.

The issue is that they aren't really carrying a gun. They're wearing a symbol of office. That thing on their waist is just a heavy gun-shaped rabbits foot. And command types aren't the only ones who fall into this trap.

[Rick R]

The issue is that they aren't really carrying a gun. They're wearing a symbol of office. That thing on their waist is just a heavy gun-shaped rabbits foot. And command types aren't the only ones who fall into this trap.

Aren’t Glock 26 / 27 pistols the S&W Model 36 of the modern age? I’d be happy they carry ANY gun as I’ve seen a lot of executives and senior staff that couldn’t be bothered. We had some kind of executive confab a few years ago where a belligerent drunk street person barged into the conference room and none of the Chiefs, Sheriffs or hangers on in attendance had a gun or cuffs.

As to the original question and parameters, since you’re stuck with limited testing I’d get your experts to fire the T&E guns on your normal qualification course to judge the new guns against a known standard. Then I’d try to get them in the hands of as many different sized/experienced/tasked officers as I could to at least try to dry fondle any issues to the surface.

[jlw]

As a baseline, you have to include your agency qual course. From there, I would suggest picking several well known drills/tests such as the Five Yard Roundup, the Baseline Assessment Drill, etc. All of this is for hard numbers data.

From there, I'd do some shooting from non-conventional positions and some stuff with forced movement (not necessarily shooting on the move). The point here is to try to see how the guns perform with "not perfect" grips. This is going to be really telling with some weaker performing shooters. Pistols that run fine in a traditional shooting stance may not perform as well in less than ideal conditions.

Another consideration is all of the support gear that would be needed; especially duty holsters. While you have stated that you aren't making the ultimate decision, providing information on that issue might influence the decision makers.

I've been on several ends of this process. I was a rookie officer when the decision was made to simply by new copies of the pistol that we already had simply to not have the new duty gear costs to being an agency instructor making the proposal to the decision maker to being the chief who made a unilateral decision (I did implement an approval process for people who wanted to carry something other than the issued pistol). Feel free to send me a private message if you wish.

[msstate56]

As a baseline, you have to include your agency qual course. From there, I would suggest picking several well known drills/tests such as the Five Yard Roundup, the Baseline Assessment Drill, etc. All of this is for hard numbers data.

From there, I'd do some shooting from non-conventional positions and some stuff with forced movement (not necessarily shooting on the move). The point here is to try to see how the guns perform with "not perfect" grips. This is going to be really telling with some weaker performing shooters. Pistols that run fine in a traditional shooting stance may not perform as well in less than ideal conditions.

Another consideration is all of the support gear that would be needed; especially duty holsters. While you have stated that you aren't making the ultimate decision, providing information on that issue might influence the decision makers.


This is essentially what I have.
Agency Qual course (with different targets w/ better defined scoring zones. It’s not hard to shoot a 100 with all in the “Q” on our normal targets.)
Several other known drills with a timed/scored standard
Manipulation type drills (reloads, dummy rounds)
Night qual course
A few extra things- like spraying optics w water, and attempting to condensate the lens (mostly to show the benefits of enclosed emitter optics)

[msstate56]

So who here issues Sig 320s? How do they perform? What, if any, are your concerns about the “unintended discharge” issues? Has this problem been 100% fixed if you are ordering current production 320s?

[WobblyPossum]

HCM Gadfly

We issue P320s to the vast majority of something like 14k gun carrying personnel. I have not heard of any of the agency guns firing uncommanded/without user input. I heard there was an officer who claims their gun went off on its own but witnesses stated the officer had their finger on the trigger. I have no concerns of uncommanded discharges with regards to the agency guns. I can’t speak to commercial guns or the SKUs that other agencies issue.

Reliability wise, I see issues periodically with our training ammo which is a really dirty 115gr Winchester round. Our duty ammo is Speer 124gr +P GDHP and I rarely see issues during quals and training when people are firing the duty ammo.

I wasn’t with the agency prior to the changeover to the P320. I think I was in the second or third academy class to be issued the P320. The prior pistol was a P229 DAK in .40 S&W. I hear that qual scores immediately improved when the P320 made its way to the field and most people I speak to greatly prefer the P320. They say it’s much easier to shoot. The guns are definitely accurate. The trigger pull is a little lighter than I would prefer, especially once the guns have a few thousand rounds through them and are starting to break in.

ETA: since your agency is going towards optics, we are transitioning to the Sig Romeo 1 Pro with the protective metal shroud. Anyone going through the academy now is issued a gun with an optic. The field is in the process of transitioning those who want an optic. It’s not mandatory for those already in the field. I’ve heard of a few optics having issues but I think that’s to be expected when you’re talking about such large numbers. Periodically you’ll find a lemon. I think I’ve seen more problems with the iron sights on the tactical team pistols staying in their dovetails than I’ve seen with the optics so far, but the optics are still a very new thing. I’ll have more valid observations after the optics have been in the field agency-wide for a while. The guys on the tactical team have been running pistol mounted optics for the last two years or so, but that’s a small number of people compared to how large the agency is. Now that the average joe has an optic, we’ll really find out how easy they are to break.

[HCM]

HCM Gadfly

We issue P320s to the vast majority of something like 14k gun carrying personnel. I have not heard of any of the agency guns firing uncommanded/without user input. I heard there was an officer who claims their gun went off on its own but witnesses stated the officer had their finger on the trigger. I have no concerns of uncommanded discharges with regards to the agency guns. I can’t speak to commercial guns or the SKUs that other agencies issue.

Reliability wise, I see issues periodically with our training ammo which is a really dirty 115gr Winchester round. Our duty ammo is Speer 124gr +P GDHP and I rarely see issues during quals and training when people are firing the duty ammo.

I wasn’t with the agency prior to the changeover to the P320. I think I was in the second or third academy class to be issued the P320. The prior pistol was a P229 DAK in .40 S&W. I hear that qual scores immediately improved when the P320 made its way to the field and most people I speak to greatly prefer the P320. They say it’s much easier to shoot. The guns are definitely accurate. The trigger pull is a little lighter than I would prefer, especially once the guns have a few thousand rounds through them and are starting to break in.

ETA: since your agency is going towards optics, we are transitioning to the Sig Romeo 1 Pro with the protective metal shroud. Anyone going through the academy now is issued a gun with an optic. The field is in the process of transitioning those who want an optic. It’s not mandatory for those already in the field. I’ve heard of a few optics having issues but I think that’s to be expected when you’re talking about such large numbers. Periodically you’ll find a lemon. I think I’ve seen more problems with the iron sights on the tactical team pistols staying in their dovetails than I’ve seen with the optics so far, but the optics are still a very new thing. I’ll have more valid observations after the optics have been in the field agency-wide for a while. The guys on the tactical team have been running pistol mounted optics for the last two years or so, but that’s a small number of people compared to how large the agency is. Now that the average joe has an optic, we’ll really find out how easy they are to break.

Yes we issue P320s and have transitioned to issued optics (Romeo1PRO) via a slide swap program.

Some caveats: We issue and authorize personal P320s but all P320s (issued or POW) must be an agency specific (DHS) SKU FCU. No commercial or even regular IOP/Blue Label guns. DHS SKU / SN prefix FCUs only.

On agency approved personally owned guns officers can use any SIG OEM slide as long as it does not have porting or extra holes in the slide such as lightening cuts and any OEM grip except the gray tungsten infused polymer grips. SIG does not recommend these for duty use as the tungsten makes the polymer more brittle / fragile.

Given the fact, the grip in leading determines a the amount of engagement between this sear in the FCU and the striker in the slide, sticking to OEM grips is probably a good idea.

There have been user induced ND’s but there have been zero “uncommanded” discharges with the DHS SKU 320s.

There is an individual with our agency in Pennsylvania who has a lawsuit against SIG, claiming an uncommanded discharge for an incident in which this individual shot themselves in the leg. This incident occurred during agency training outdoors in the winter. The individual was wearing gloves and was using a personally owned Serpa holster, which was made for their previously issued SIG P229R. The incident was witnessed by agency firearms instructors, who saw the individual putting their finger on the trigger as they drew the weapon. The pistol was examined both by the agency’s national armory, and by SIG, and had no mechanical defects. The basis, for this individual’s claim is that as a former marine and a former correctional officer, he believes himself to be a firearms expert, making it impossible that he could shot himself -roll eyes here.

In this individual‘s lawsuit he claims that a similar incident occurred with a member of our agency in NYC due to an “uncommanded” discharge. However, the Pennsylvania officer is misrepresenting the facts of that incident. The New York incident occurred during firearms training and was witnessed but the witnesses saw the New York officer put their finger on the trigger during the draw, examination of the New York gun found no defects, and most importantly, the NY Officer acknowledged he put his finger on the trigger and ND’ed.

While there are real issues with the original 320s, including the original design 320s, which have been through the factory upgrade there are a lot if bullshit claims by people just looking to get paid too.

We authorize the Romeo1, Romeo1PRO, Romeo2 and Type 2 RMR 06/07. We issue the Romeo1PRO because our contract for the 320s was for the P320 pistol “system” so we can buy P320 related items, like SIG optics via the existing contract.

For those unfamiliar, solicitation, testing and contracting for new equipment, then dealing with the protests, that always result is a lengthy and resource intensive process. So we could have SIG Optics right now for the perfect optic 3 to 5 years from now.

The Romeo, 1 pro is durable and reliable, in terms of surviving high round counts on a reciprocating slide. Battery life with the 1632 and shake awake is decent (1 year, though we change batteries every 6 months). Part of that aspect of durability and reliability is due to SIGs direct mount option being quite robust. The downside to the R1P is like the DPP from which it is derived, it’s a bit fragile in terms of drop and crush durability.

If you wind up doing a package deal for Syd, guns with sick optics, I would definitely push to get the Romeo2 over the Romeo 1 PRO. The Romeo, too, is not a true closed emitter optic due to the removable hood, but it addresses the weaknesses of the R1P.

The last field test of the other one pee before general issue was six months of youse by tactical team members across the US. During that testing, there were issues with iron sites coming loose and three guns were deadlined due to people, bending ejectors while doing gorilla style, magazine changes. I don’t know for sure, but I suspect some of those people are slamming the mags in as hard as possible, hoping to get the slide to auto forward.

The fact that the ejector is a piece of bent sheet metal, which is an integral part of the chassis of the fire control unit is probably the Achilles heel of the P320. If you use magazines that don’t have base pads that stop on the mouth of the magwell, or you have idiots who slam mags in as hard as possible trying to auto forward the gun, and you bend the ejector you have just deadlned the gun.

For commercial customers sick charges $200 to replace an FCU if you’ve been the ejector. How they handle LE guns depends on how big a client you are….

[TGS]

The last field test of the other one pee before general issue was six months of youse by tactical team members across the US. During that testing, there were issues with iron sites coming loose and three guns were deadlined due to people, bending ejectors while doing gorilla style, magazine changes. I don’t know for sure, but I suspect some of those people are slamming the mags in as hard as possible, hoping to get the slide to auto forward.

The fact that the ejector is a piece of bent sheet metal, which is an integral part of the chassis of the fire control unit is probably the Achilles heel of the P320. If you use magazines that don’t have base pads that stop on the mouth of the magwell, or you have idiots who slam mags in as hard as possible trying to auto forward the gun, and you bend the ejector you have just deadlned the gun.

For commercial customers sick charges $200 to replace an FCU if you’ve been the ejector. How they handle LE guns depends on how big a client you are….

I'm curious how the logistics are working out on this given the quicker/easier repair of swapping out modular FCUs was one of SIGs selling points for agency customers. WobblyPossum and Gadfly, feel free to answer as well...

Do you guys keep extra FCUs on hand for this reason? As in spare FCUs which aren't already assigned to a chassis. Or, is the problem rare enough that the agent just gets an entire new gun anyways, as if they had a normal pistol like a Glock/HK/P229?

[HCM]

I'm curious how the logistics are working out on this given the quicker/easier repair of swapping out modular FCUs was one of SIGs selling points for agency customers. WobblyPossum and Gadfly, feel free to answer as well...

Do you guys keep extra FCUs on hand for this reason? As in spare FCUs which aren't already assigned to a chassis. Or, is the problem rare enough that the agent just gets an entire new gun anyways, as if they had a normal pistol like a Glock/HK/P229?

Locally we just keep spare guns but a smaller agency could have FCU’s and a “build a bear” type kit.

Having been to the factory, P320 armorer’s class, it would be worth it to me to have spare FCU’s so I didn’t need to disassemble and re-assemble FCUs..a lot of tiny parts in there.

[LockedBreech]

Aren’t Glock 26 / 27 pistols the S&W Model 36 of the modern age? I’d be happy they carry ANY gun as I’ve seen a lot of executives and senior staff that couldn’t be bothered. We had some kind of executive confab a few years ago where a belligerent drunk street person barged into the conference room and none of the Chiefs, Sheriffs or hangers on in attendance had a gun or cuffs.


My "rural" is really coming out because I'm not even LE, just related to LE, and I actually find this downright offensive, lol. Cops without sidearms? Might as well be college RAs. Lots of stern words without any teeth. Sometimes cops have to do cop shit. Anyone who isn't onboard should offboard the career path.


Locally we just keep spare guns but a smaller agency could have FCU’s and a “build a bear” type kit.

Having been to the factory, P320 armorer’s class, it would be worth it to me to have spare FCU’s so I didn’t need to disassemble and re-assemble FCUs..a lot of tiny parts in there.

I know for a few years the module availability was so low that it was basically nonexistent. Have they at least fixed that on the LE distribution circuit, with enough parts availability to have that modularity function available on a practical level?

[HCM]

My "rural" is really coming out because I'm not even LE, just related to LE, and I actually find this downright offensive, lol. Cops without sidearms? Might as well be college RAs. Lots of stern words without any teeth. Sometimes cops have to do cop shit. Anyone who isn't onboard should offboard the career path.



I know for a few years the module availability was so low that it was basically nonexistent. Have they at least fixed that on the LE distribution circuit, with enough parts availability to have that modularity function available on a practical level?


SIG has been selling FCUs separately for a few years now. Like everything else they were briefly unavailable during the COVID / George Floyd panic buying but that was 2 years ago.

[LockedBreech]

SIG has been selling FCUs separately for a few years now. Like everything else they were briefly unavailable during the COVID / George Floyd panic buying but that was 2 years ago.

I think I had tried to find a module when I got my M17 earlier this year and still had no luck, but I'm glad to hear it's a resolved issue and my timing was just bad as usual. Thank you.

[HCM]

I think I had tried to find a module when I got my M17 earlier this year and still had no luck, but I'm glad to hear it's a resolved issue and my timing was just bad as usual. Thank you.

They separate FCUs are all gold TIN coated.

[msstate56]

My "rural" is really coming out because I'm not even LE, just related to LE, and I actually find this downright offensive, lol. Cops without sidearms? Might as well be college RAs. Lots of stern words without any teeth. Sometimes cops have to do cop shit. Anyone who isn't onboard should offboard the career path.

The fact that you’re not LE shows. Anyone who’s worked LE for more than 10 minutes is not surprised by this at all. 😔

[msstate56]

Yes we issue P320s and have transitioned to issued optics (Romeo1PRO) via a slide swap program.

Some caveats: We issue and authorize personal P320s but all P320s (issued or POW) must be an agency specific (DHS) SKU FCU. No commercial or even regular IOP/Blue Label guns. DHS SKU / SN prefix FCUs only.

There have been user induced ND’s but there have been zero “uncommanded” discharges with the DHS SKU 320s.

There is an individual with our agency in Pennsylvania who has a lawsuit against SIG, claiming an uncommanded discharge for

The Romeo, 1 pro is durable and reliable, in terms of surviving high round counts on a reciprocating slide. Battery life with the 1632 and shake awake is decent (1 year, though we change batteries every 6 months). Part of that aspect of durability and reliability is due to SIGs direct mount option being quite robust. The downside to the R1P is like the DPP from which it is derived, it’s a bit fragile in terms of drop and crush durability.

If you wind up doing a package deal for Syd, guns with sick optics, I would definitely push to get the Romeo2 over the Romeo 1 PRO. The Romeo, too, is not a true closed emitter optic due to the removable hood, but it addresses the weaknesses of the R1P.

The last field test of the other one pee before general issue was six months of youse by tactical team members across the US. During that testing, there were issues with iron sites coming loose and three guns were deadlined due to people, bending ejectors while doing gorilla style, magazine changes. I don’t know for sure, but I suspect some of those people are slamming the mags in as hard as possible, hoping to get the slide to auto forward.

The fact that the ejector is a piece of bent sheet metal, which is an integral part of the chassis of the fire control unit is probably the Achilles heel of the P320. If you use magazines that don’t have base pads that stop on the mouth of the magwell, or you have idiots who slam mags in as hard as possible trying to auto forward the gun, and you bend the ejector you have just deadlned the gun.

For commercial customers sick charges $200 to replace an FCU if you’ve been the ejector. How they handle LE guns depends on how big a client you are….

Is there any way another agency can require DHS sku FCUs?

I’m definitely arguing for the Romeo 2

With the ejector bending issues- would using a full size (17 round mag) in a compact grip (15 round mag length) cause this?
When we had G19s we issued one 15 round mag and two 17 mags as your reloads. I’m interested in using a compact grip frame, but should that only be used with 15 round mags?

[Utm]

My "rural" is really coming out because I'm not even LE, just related to LE, and I actually find this downright offensive, lol. Cops without sidearms? Might as well be college RAs. Lots of stern words without any teeth. Sometimes cops have to do cop shit. Anyone who isn't onboard should offboard the career path.



I know for a few years the module availability was so low that it was basically nonexistent. Have they at least fixed that on the LE distribution circuit, with enough parts availability to have that modularity function available on a practical level?


Most admin promoted way beyond that. They are far removed from cop work.

[HCM]

Is there any way another agency can require DHS sku FCUs?

I’m definitely arguing for the Romeo 2

With the ejector bending issues- would using a full size (17 round mag) in a compact grip (15 round mag length) cause this?
When we had G19s we issued one 15 round mag and two 17 mags as your reloads. I’m interested in using a compact grip frame, but should that only be used with 15 round mags?

No reason I’m aware of another agency can’t buy the DHS FCU guns. Talk to SIG. AMC may have more info on that.

Yes a 17 round mag in a 15 round grip will cause that. Gadfly has posted about it here on PF. Glock mags have and over insertion stop notch at the top of the mag by the feed lips. SIG 320s (and most other guns) rely on the mag baseplate or a slip over sleeve to prevent over insertion.

You might be able to put an extension on a 15 round mag. I’ve had good luck with the Henning group +3 carry extension which SIG also sells on their website. It looks like an aluminum version of a Glock +2 extension.

[AMC]

It should be possible to obtain the DHS Sku guns. When I was pursuing this project I was prevented from doing this by our arcane purchasing requirements, and a very hostile anti Law Enforcement city agency in charge of all large purchases. Just heard from.one of the guys that the whole thing has been cancelled due to some flat out crazy movie level skeezy activity on the part of certain command level personnel.

[msstate56]

It should be possible to obtain the DHS Sku guns. When I was pursuing this project I was prevented from doing this by our arcane purchasing requirements, and a very hostile anti Law Enforcement city agency in charge of all large purchases. Just heard from.one of the guys that the whole thing has been cancelled due to some flat out crazy movie level skeezy activity on the part of certain command level personnel.

Sounds about right.

[ST911]

Is there any way another agency can require DHS sku FCUs?

If they'll make it available you can spec it for a buy. Like other limited skus, you may need to give them a reason to.

Reliable others suggest that if considering the 320, the DHS or mil guns will have the most consistency and best potential.

[Gadfly]

Do you guys keep extra FCUs on hand for this reason? As in spare FCUs which aren't already assigned to a chassis. Or, is the problem rare enough that the agent just gets an entire new gun anyways, as if they had a normal pistol like a Glock/HK/P229?

We don't keep any spare FCUs by themselves. As an agency, we have a policy on how many spare guns to keep in the vault, and it is set by the number of agents in that office. if an FCU breaks, we typically just issue a whole new gun and ship the broken one back to the national armory. Locally we deal with things like installing new sights, replacing recoil springs, installing a flat trigger, swapping a mag release from right hand to left hand... pretty basic stuff. I keep some parts on hand... recoil springs, a couple extractors, grip screws (back when we had 229s and berettas), trigger return springs... simple things.

In my office (about 200 agents) we typically have 5-8 unissued pistols in the armory and a couple of M4s. If an agent gets in a shooting, they pull the gun as evidence and we can issue a new gun that same day. If multiple agents are involved in that same shooting, we can cover multiple agents with a replacement. I we need more than what we had on hand, FedEx would have us new guns but the following day. If there is a personally owned weapon going into evidence or broken/stolen etc, we can still issue a gov weapon to hold them over until they get the gun back or buy a replacement. The agent just has to qual with the new weapon before they can carry it. Typically, Our instructors would make a special trip to the range the same day to get that person qual'ed and able to carry as soon as possible.

[jnc36rcpd]

I experienced and/or participated in several weapon transitions at my former employer. I wish they were all stellar examples of sound reasoning and good judgement, but I serve more as a cautionary tale.

You should absolutely use your qualification course in testing. Your Q course is an example of what skills you feel your officers need and a measurement of their marksmanship and weapon-handling skills. It is an objective testing measure for a proposed weapon. Moreover, your cops are going to need to pass the qualification course with whatever weapon you select. If people are going to need remediation, it's better to find out now.

Malfunctions seem to happen much more frequently on the street than the firearms range. I'd include a significant amount of one-handed and compromised shooting positions in the evaluation process.

Ensure an instructor is actually monitoring any testing. The instructor may note weapons-handling or marksmanship issues that the shooter does not. Ths also ensures every completes the required testing.

Decide early on what characteristics you do or do not want on a weapon (manual safety or not, double action only, DA/SA, striker-fired). If you change this down the line, so be it, bu start out with some criteria.

Test the exact weapon in the conditions in which it will be deployed. Don't test a gun in one caliber and then choose another (we did that). Don't test guns straight out of the box when you're going to authorize or mandate weapon-mounted lights (did that, too). Ensure there will be holster availability for your pistol.

While not an issue with most pistols in 2022, ensure the pistol or a similar model can be used by all units in your department. Ensure it fits everyone on the department. Mad props to the chief of Colby, KS years ago who made the first U.S. law enforcement purchase of Glocks, but he was taking a chance Unless there is really a good reason to select a new gun on the market, you're probably better off carrying what a bunch of other agencies carry.

Whatever you do, don't choose a gun just because you don't want to issue what your "rival" agency carries.

[Jeff22]

Whatever you do, have some options to accommodate shooters with smaller hands. I’ve worked with a lot of cops for whom the Glock 17 platform was a little too big in the grip for them to handle.