I think the average civilian gun buyer (not usOriginally Posted by Tokarev
) would have an issue with the empty slot in the “frame”.
ETA: Oops, you said FCU, my bad. Well that would make sense.
I think the average civilian gun buyer (not us
ETA: Oops, you said FCU, my bad. Well that would make sense.
Even the frame (aka grip module) could be pre-slotted. SIG could then use little slide-in fillers like S&W did for the M&P.I think the average civilian gun buyer (not us
ETA: Oops, you said FCU, my bad. Well that would make sense.
While we're at it the ejector should be removable too so the FCU could be configured in 9 MM or 40 or 45.
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Thats one of the biggest misconceptions that people push about the MHS who haven't actually looked at the data surrounding the trials both the Glock submission and the SIGs had about 12,500 rounds through them and both submissions performed about the same the portion of the testing that the Army decided to forgo was the compact pistol testing which would have benefited SIG because they submitted a pistol for both the full size and compact requirements whereas Glock submitted one gun to fill both the full size and compact pistol requirements the Army figured they're wouldn't be much difference between the M18 and the M17s performance which makes sense because the M18 biggest difference from the M17 is slide and barrel length. Its why when Glock filed a protest to the SIG contract award it got thrown out because the deviation (not doing the compact pistol testing) was equally applied to both competitors. The M9 had growing pains when it was first adopted people have such short memories and the XM9 trials were more rigorous than the MHS.
XERXES036: You have incorrect information. The MHS/XM17 program did NOT complete the full test plan, was poorly implemented, and had numerous flaws.
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
I'm not sure what came of this 320 program. But I can now officially say its not OSI's doing:Looks like a OSI requirement per Soldier Systems.
Soldier Systems: Warrior East 21 - SIG SAUER MHX
"When the Army selected the SIG P320 as their new Modular Handgun System, they truly adopted a modular system. The serialized part is the Fire Control Unit and everything else can be swapped out. Already, several organizations have considered ways to use this modularity, like Air Force Office of Special Investigations which wants a sub-compact carry pistol.
At Warrior East, SIG displayed a simple brown box which, when opened, contained the parts needed to convert a standard MHS M18 into an “MHX”, based on SIG’s X-Carry configuration. This kit is based on the OSI requirement for an M18 Gun Conversion Kit, but the reality is that there is a wide variety of OEM and after market parts and accessories which will work with the P320 platform to make it more effective for certain applications. For instance, you’ll note that while MHS is Coyote on color, OSI desires a Black pistol, to blend in better with their plain clothes, law enforcement role.
Expect more organizations to swap parts on their MHS as they complete fielding and units become more comfortable with the platform and what it can do."
https://www.osi.af.mil/News/Article-...bility-safety/
Good for OSI. Hard to argue with the G19 and G26 combo for this type of job. Not to mention the issues with the P320.
Man, fuck them guys. They were the whole reason the rest of us got saddled with the fucking M18 instead of the M17 and now they're like "lol we never wanted this gun anyway."
Plus they have POW policy so most agents just carry whatever their personal gun is
Well, that sucks.
That seems pretty common for the MCIOs, to the point where they are counterintuitively more permissive than other fed agencies.Plus they have POW policy so most agents just carry whatever their personal gun is
There's a significant trend in the MCIOs to get away from big Service procurement for sidearms, since MOST of the folks doing those procurements have ZERO knowledge or experience of firearms, let alone firearms suitable for "plain clothes" use. The M18 is a perfect example of this - whoever decided that thing was a "compact" (or the G19X for that matter) is either Andre the Giant, or a non-gun-toter.
My old agency is switching from Sigs procured off the old DHS contract to G19MOS's off another large federal agency's contract. Not surprised that AFOSI is doing the same, and I know the civilian side (small though it might be at this point) of Army CID is NOT super chuffed with the M18. With their new Director and the move to overhaul and civilianize the agency, I wouldn't be surprised to see the G19 become the MCIO standard with G26 as an optional issue.
Does USMC CID count as an MCIO given that they're in the Provost Marshal Office chain of command?
They were supposed to replace their 19Ms and M11s with M18s, but I'm curious if they're going to hold onto their 19Ms for as long as possible....I can't imagine they'd get shot out within 100 years from what I know of them. I get the impression they don't have the independence that NCIS has, and I'm wondering if they might be "force fed" whatever sidearm they're told to carry. I knew two USMC CID agents when I was in, and both of them said that their carry policy was extremely restrictive...usually only for enforcement ops and usually only to on-installation. It blew my mind that they weren't allowed to carry on base as a matter of routine practice. So, maybe they wouldn't have as pressing a need for a proper compact plainclothes gun.
Just curiosity on my part, figured you would know.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
Reply With Quote
