Now I don't own a Glock or a SIG anything. But I was hoping that Glock would win the DOD contract and I was disappointed they did not. I've heard several reasons why and one was lack of modularity. Is this modularity with the G19 and 47 a new idea for Glock? If they had thought of it sooner could they have been more competitive in the DOD contract? Just curious.
I agree with their statement. So far in the end I have not seen another pistol truly beat Glock in performance or reliability. Most that have not chosen Glock ended testing early or went with by far the lowest bidder. It seems like when the department is thorough and fair Glock wins.
As said before we have benefited from Glock losing some of these. But it is a shame that in the end the best OPTION is not chosen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
“Remember, being healthy is basically just dying as slowly as possible,” Ricky Gervais
Well, the 320 has been adopted by ICE, Federal Reserve Police, Texas DPS, and many others. Were these procurements all made in some underhanded manner? To assume it is not a good pistol is unrealistic.
Granted it is hard to argue that Glock is really the industry standard in terms of reliability for a 9mm service handgun. But that doesn't mean there aren't other reliable pistols out there.
Frankly, we have no "inside information" on how many pistols were tested or which ones failed or didn't fail. CBP employees involved in testing signed nondisclosure agreements and are not free to discuss what passed and why.
But again, assuming that the Glock somehow outperformed everything else is a guess and the selection could have been made solely on price. Or delivery timeframe or even recoil spring replacement schedules.
Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk