With regard to S&W:
...does anyone know if any of the other submittals were knocked out?Originally Posted by TiroFijo
With regard to S&W:
...does anyone know if any of the other submittals were knocked out?
You have obviously never worked with GD-OTS.
To aim and hit, you need one eye only, and one good finger.
Magen VeLo Yera'e
I came across this video on field stripping the APX.
I'm not exactly sure if this guy and his accent are for real, but the pistol looks interesting.
Things I noted:
Takedown does not require trigger press, but does require a punch, or tool.
The captive RSA spring looks pretty wiggly. Not sure if it makes a difference.
Curious take-down lever that you have to 'push', sorta kinda like the P30
Last edited by RJ; 10-22-2016 at 08:26 PM.
I read that with the APX, you can use a tool, like a ball point pen, or pull the trigger like a Glock to deactivate the striker for disassembly.
I had a question regarding this---because holy hell, that's impressive... Are the guns that were tested from the same production line with identical QC (obviously barring lot tests) as the commercial product lines? Just wondering if what I would see on my LGS counter is basically the same thing, or if I need to make sure it's a different SKU number.
Typically it's a contracting process "foul" to cherry pick or specially build samples for testing. Not saying it doesn't happen, but when we (the gov't) find out that it has, it can have fairly significant financial impact on the company in question...
I was thinking it's not so much cherry picking as not building or inspecting commercial guns to TDP specs (I assume there's an M9 TDP, dunno if handguns are different in this regard than other .mil guns) like the difference between Rem 870 police models Vs the 870 express. I also hope that Stimpee isn't insulted by comparing Beretta to Remington, though.
On the Lot tests, the government picks the guns randomly from the lot. We would have no ability to "cherry pick" regardless of it being a foul or not. It cannot happen.
From a production standpoint, the government TDP was originally Beretta's TDP. The process for military vs commercial guns is essentially identical. We have more flexibility in our commercial process, since we do not require government approval to do things that improve efficiency, etc. The primary difference is that the military guns/components do go thru some additional inspections/gauging at the component and assembly level that the commercial guns do not. But from a practical, functional perspective, the differences are quite minor. In addition, the government does not allow us to utilize any of the improvements that have been made to the 90-series over the years. So the improved more durable locking block, a much more durable firing pin block lever, (in all commercial pistols) and the few plastic overmolded parts we use in some commercial pistols, are verboten.
Speaking just for myself, if I knew I had to defend myself or a loved one, and was limited to a pistol, I would have an M9A3 in my hands. There is no other option for me that would provide me with the level of confidence I have in that firearm to hit what I intend to hit, and to function flawlessly.
Last edited by stimpee; 10-31-2016 at 09:44 AM.
Wait, what? They can't even use the Gen 3 block?!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
State Government Attorney | Beretta, Glock, CZ & S&W Fan
Yep.
Reply With Quote