Nostalgic P226 Selection

[JTQ]

I have always believed that the military picked the wrong pistol, when they went with the 92 over the 226.

I was always amazed that the regular 92 didn't have a decocker (only) and dovetailed front sight, and it took Wilson and LTT to get that done.

I wasn't surprised, the M9 had a manual safety, the P226 didn't.

I think we tend to look at the late 1970's/early 1980's selection process with our 2010 eyes. At the time, there were practically no auto pistols without a manual safety. The military had a manual safety on their hand gun at the time, the 1911, and on their rifle, the M-16. It would seem odd, and risky, if not unusually forward thinking for the military to choose a handgun without a manual safety.

Even with all these years of nearly everybody in the shooting world living with an auto pistol without a manual safety - there can't possibly be a US Military decision maker that didn't start their shooting lives after Glock's became popular - the military chose the M17, a SIG P320 with a manual safety.

[JTQ]

While I was not surprised at the M9 selection, I was surprised they chose the M17 with a manual safety. I figured all these years of Glock popularity and the gun that probably their entire workforce is used to using in their spare time, that they didn't pick a Glock or at least a P320 or other striker fired gun without a manual safety. That I found surprising.

[rathos]

Saw this on GB I think its what you are looking for and a decent price.

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1014442449

[Archer1440]

I wasn't surprised, the M9 had a manual safety, the P226 didn't.

I think we tend to look at the late 1970's/early 1980's selection process with our 2010 eyes. At the time, there were practically no auto pistols without a manual safety. The military had a manual safety on their hand gun at the time, the 1911, and on their rifle, the M-16. It would seem odd, and risky, if not unusually forward thinking for the military to choose a handgun without a manual safety.

I think there has been extensive documentation alluding to the fact that the (minor) price difference between the two platforms was the key factor in the choice of the M9 vs the 226.

[Evil_Ed]

I think there has been extensive documentation alluding to the fact that the (minor) price difference between the two platforms was the key factor in the choice of the M9 vs the 226.

IIRC it was the logistical train that came with the new sidearm. Beretta was willing to provide support, parts, etc for less than Sig was willing to provide it for. At that level it's not so much which one is better, it's which one is cheaper to keep running for longer..

[Archer1440]

IIRC it was the logistical train that came with the new sidearm. Beretta was willing to provide support, parts, etc for less than Sig was willing to provide it for. At that level it's not so much which one is better, it's which one is cheaper to keep running for longer..

Yes, that’s a more accurate description of the various accounts I have seen on the subject. Either way it seems it came down to a relatively small amount of money.

[NPV]

Not sure how relevant this is but Sig did a limited run of P226 “Classics” a few years ago which had the milled slides and no rail. Kind of analogous to the Glock “Gen 1” release.

ETA: It was the “Classic Carry” and a TALK exclusive but had a long extractor.

[HCM]

What ever the machinations involved in the P226 vs Beretta 92 selection in the 1980s, and claims range from price and spare parts to deals for missile bases in Italy, it would not have mattered.

If the P226 had been adopted, it would have the same negative reputation at the M9 has. The guns would be shot with craptastic lead free ammo, not given proper preventive maintenance, and when they break, they would be rebuilt with a bunch of substandard parts from third-party vendors.

The comments about manual safeties miss the mark about the military, and who actually makes up the majority of the military.

Like cops most people in the military are not shooters and the majority do not own personal weapons or carry / shoot pistols on a regular basis.

You’ll find more such people in combat units, but with the current tooth to tail ratio being somewhere between 11 and 14 support personnel for every trigger puller actual combatants are a minority.

Every other weapon system in the military from rifles to machine guns etc. has some type of manual safety device.

For consistency sake, why would you not want pistols to have the same when in many cases you are giving them to teenagers or young adults whose primary job doesn’t involve pulling a trigger.

Those rifles, machine guns and larger weapon systems are the “real weapons. In a military context pistols are an afterthought at best and more realistically are irrelevant.

[TOTS]

What ever the machinations involved in the P226 vs Beretta 92 selection in the 1980s, and claims range from price and spare parts to deals for missile bases in Italy, it would not have mattered.

If the P226 had been adopted, it would have the same negative reputation at the M9 has. The guns would be shot with craptastic lead free ammo, not given proper preventive maintenance, and when they break, they would be rebuilt with a bunch of substandard parts from third-party vendors.

The comments about manual safeties miss the mark about the military, and who actually makes up the majority of the military.

Like cops most people in the military are not shooters and the majority do not own personal weapons or carry / shoot pistols on a regular basis.

You’ll find more such people in combat units, but with the current tooth to tail ratio being somewhere between 11 and 14 support personnel for every trigger puller actual combatants are a minority.

Every other weapon system in the military from rifles to machine guns etc. has some type of manual safety device.

For consistency sake, why would you not want pistols to have the same when in many cases you are giving them to teenagers or young adults whose primary job doesn’t involve pulling a trigger.

Those rifles, machine guns and larger weapon systems are the “real weapons. In a military context pistols are an afterthought at best and more realistically are irrelevant.

All this. And to add, looking DoD wide, more weapons during combat will never get loaded or clicked off safe, than will see action. The weapons that do get used will get used a lot, and are the same weapons. The guys who need the 226s vice the M9s (and now the G19s vs the M17s) ended up with them anyway. #Foblife

[TDA]

Not sure how relevant this is but Sig did a limited run of P226 “Classics” a few years ago which had the milled slides and no rail. Kind of analogous to the Glock “Gen 1” release.

ETA: It was the “Classic Carry” and a TALK exclusive but had a long extractor.

When they were new and hot, I had a West German 226 but I carried a Colt Combat Elite because we loved dumb stuff back then. Eventually I sent the 226 to New Hampshire for the SRT package and ran it in IDPA before certain members of Team Smith & Wesson shamed me out of it. It’s a really nice gun that’s just slightly too big for my hand, but I like them a lot.