All Military branches order XM17/XM18

[JDD]

Don't worry, you guys aren't the only one with a botched pistol transition.

We got a great combo, the Gen 4 26 and 19M. Unfortunately Glock did not have Gen 5 26s available when we bought them, but the real fuckup is that the 26s were procured with standard night sights. So now our two issued pistols that were procured with inter-compatibility being important, now have two different sights with two different points of impacts.

When I get a chance I'm going to swing by our depot and ask them to change to the Agent sights, even if I have to buy them for the 26.

I'm not ICE, but just to add another data-point: we're also prohibited from modifying anything on the fire control group. With our previous issue, the P229, we could have our depot install the factory short reset trigger package, as well as the E2 grip module (which was fairly common along people with smaller hands). I'm not aware of anything that the depot is authorized to change on the Glocks yet, such as the Gadget. I mentioned it to our more tuned-in firearms instructors that do a quality 3 day advanced class, and they thought it was a good idea but had never heard/seen of the Gadget. (I tried, Tom!)

I also have expressed a strong desire to have a striker control device on my issued 19M to our folks. The problem is that our instructors are not the people who make our policy; it is a pretty stark one-way relationship down the power gradient.

I don't mind the regular vs agent sights (although I do very much mind the regulation of the agent sights since their quasi-but-not-fully dot driving nature makes for some interesting 25 yard precision issues). Honestly, aside from the quals, I have yet to carry the 26. It just does not have the capacity I need for a warm and fuzzy feeling, and the 19 conceals a lot more easily for me than the 229.

[TGS]

Honestly, aside from the quals, I have yet to carry the 26. It just does not have the capacity I need for a warm and fuzzy feeling, and the 19 conceals a lot more easily for me than the 229.

The 19M does everything the 26 does for me, does it better, and also allows me a WML. Regardless of the fact I use 17 round reloads and have PMAG 21s, too, I wouldn't be bothered by the capacity of the Glock 26. The PMAG 12 makes a very efficiently sized gun with 1 round less than our P229s. I just can't find a reason to carry the Glock 26, personally.

If we had the option of trading it in for a Glock 43, I'd be down for that. I would have an actual use for that gun, even if it's a very infrequent use. I think it's great that they issued us both as a pair, though, as it's a great solution for the majority of agents. I don't want to bash the accomplishments of A.S. when he was the driving force behind all this......he got us a real good setup, and I feel as if I owe him a beer. Having been involved in inter-office projects, I can't imagine the bullshit and personality conflicts he had to wade through to make it happen for us all. I imagine the decision to buy the Gen 4 26s right then and there instead of waiting for a Gen 5 and accompanying Agent sights is probably due to back-end bureaucratic reasons....i.e., we buy the 70% solution now, or wait for the 100% solution later and risk getting turned down all together.

[HCM]

The 19M does everything the 26 does for me, does it better, and also allows me a WML. Regardless of the fact I use 17 round reloads and have PMAG 21s, too, I wouldn't be bothered by the capacity of the Glock 26. The PMAG 12 makes a very efficiently sized gun with 1 round less than our P229s. I just can't find a reason to carry the Glock 26, personally.

If we had the option of trading it in for a Glock 43, I'd be down for that. I would have an actual use for that gun, even if it's a very infrequent use. I think it's great that they issued us both as a pair, though, as it's a great solution for the majority of agents. I don't want to bash the accomplishments of A.S. when he was the driving force behind all this......he got us a real good setup, and I feel as if I owe him a beer. Having been involved in inter-office projects, I can't imagine the bullshit and personality conflicts he had to wade through to make it happen for us all. I imagine the decision to buy the Gen 4 26s right then and there instead of waiting for a Gen 5 and accompanying Agent sights is probably due to back-end bureaucratic reasons....i.e., we buy the 70% solution now, or wait for the 100% solution later and risk getting turned down all together.

GOV funding is often “use or lose.”

[JDD]

The 19M does everything the 26 does for me, does it better, and also allows me a WML. Regardless of the fact I use 17 round reloads and have PMAG 21s, too, I wouldn't be bothered by the capacity of the Glock 26. The PMAG 12 makes a very efficiently sized gun with 1 round less than our P229s. I just can't find a reason to carry the Glock 26, personally.

If we had the option of trading it in for a Glock 43, I'd be down for that. I would have an actual use for that gun, even if it's a very infrequent use. I think it's great that they issued us both as a pair, though, as it's a great solution for the majority of agents. I don't want to bash the accomplishments of A.S. when he was the driving force behind all this......he got us a real good setup, and I feel as if I owe him a beer. Having been involved in inter-office projects, I can't imagine the bullshit and personality conflicts he had to wade through to make it happen for us all. I imagine the decision to buy the Gen 4 26s right then and there instead of waiting for a Gen 5 and accompanying Agent sights is probably due to back-end bureaucratic reasons....i.e., we buy the 70% solution now, or wait for the 100% solution later and risk getting turned down all together.

Yes, ALL the credit for the work A.S. did! He really made a mark.

I hasten to add that the 26 is a good gun, and I will probably use it more in the future. The 43 and the 26 live in the same mental box in my head. The problem is more that right now I don;t like leaving the house with less than 3 or 4 mags for a 17, so it is hard to justify going with a smaller gun.

[98z28]

Still dose not explain the variation in internal slide machining seen between the commercial X Carry and our issued version. The guns pictured about were both manufactured withing the past year. Perhaps all new pistols will be machined one way over the other?

(My info on only ordering direct through Sig due to unique parts combo was from W.F. at OFTP, and the HSI firearms director at FLETC. I guess Sig sees money to be made, and much like the LEM, has decided to market it.)

I have six or seven 320 compact 9mm slides laying around. All are commercial production guns. I'm not sure any two of them are machined the same, despite buying them in pairs and the serials numbers being very close. Sig is a master at never making the same thing the same way twice. That's not limited to the 320.

[Tokarev]

I have six or seven 320 compact 9mm slides laying around. All are commercial production guns. I'm not sure any two of them are machined the same, despite buying them in pairs and the serials numbers being very close. Sig is a master at never making the same thing the same way twice. That's not limited to the 320.

Design evolution or sourcing products from multiple vendors?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[98z28]

Design evolution or sourcing products from multiple vendors?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

I'm no Sig insider. I've just been intrigued with the 320 and have followed the internet scuttlebutt since they were introduced...and have bought a number of them over the last couple years. So...maintain a healthy dose of skepticism while reading the following speculation:

I think the changes are design evolutions. I have no idea if Sig outsources production of 320 slides. I'd be surprised if they do, but I'm in no position to know for sure. I've read folks from Bruce Gray's shop say that Sig was obsessed with lightening the slides on early 9mm 320 compacts so they would run reliably with lightweight frangable ammo (Jerry Jones posting on Sigfprum, I believe..too lazy to look up the thread from my phone). They went a bit too far and started having extraction issues with standard ammo. My early 320 compact slides have a lot of material removed compared to the more recent ones. The recoil impulse is noticeably different between the light and heavy slides too. I much prefer the heavier slides.

I'll try to get some pictures of various 9mm 320c slide vintages tomorrow.

[pblanc]

I have seen six or seven different variations of "lightening cuts" on the underside of P320 slides and I also believe this was the result of a design evolution.

[gruntjim]

Just this weekend, I ended up talking to a couple of USBP agents.

Their take was that the 320 in 9mm was their new sidearm. No word on ammo, though.

Just another rumor point, as opposed to data point.

[Tokarev]

Just this weekend, I ended up talking to a couple of USBP agents.

Their take was that the 320 in 9mm was their new sidearm. No word on ammo, though.

Just another rumor point, as opposed to data point.

Not yet it isn't.

CBP's just barely getting started on selection and procurement. There is nothing close to being decided at this point.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk