BREAKING: The Army’s New Handgun Is… A SIG!!!

The ergonomics, simplicity and trigger of the Sig P320 make it an easy gun to shoot well.

Presumably, the MHS will be Sig P320.

Wow!  It’s finally over.  The search for the Army’s new Modular Handgun System has ended.

And the winner is, Sig Sauer!!!  Put another way, the Beretta M9 is dead.

“I am tremendously proud of the Modular Handgun System team,” said Army acquisition executive Steffanie Easter in the release obtained by Military.com.

“By maximizing full and open competition across our industry partners, we have optimized private sector advancements in handguns, ammunition and magazines and the end result will ensure a decidedly superior weapon system for our warfighters.”

The search for the new MHS began in 2011.  The goal was to find a replacement for the Beretta M9 in a timely fashion.  The search was anything but timely.  Delay after delay, deadline missed after deadline missed, it seemed as if the Army would never make up its mind.

But it finally did.  And it’s a Sig!  Presumably a P320-based pistol, which beat out Smith & Wesson, Beretta and Glock for the massive contract worth upwards of $580 million!

No word yet on caliber.

“As MHS moves forward into operational testing, the due diligence taken by all of the stakeholders will ensure a program that remains on-budget and on-schedule,” Easter said.

After operational testing, the new pistol should be fielded this year, said the release.

{ 173 comments… add one }
  • cisco kid January 27, 2017, 10:22 pm

    Still the old myth dies hard which is: The .45 1911 was flawless, its caliber knocked men down, or spun them around like a top or made them disappear in a red puff of mist.

    REALTY OF THE 1911 AND .45 ACP CARTRIDGE.

    The .45 acp was tested in 1945 against a John Ingles 9mm High Power. The 1911 45 acp bounced off a helmet at a scant 35 yards while the 9mm went right through the same helmet all the way out to an astonishing 125 yards and might have done it even further than 125 yards but no one was a good enough shot to hit the helmet at any farther a range.

    The .45 acp kicked too hard for the average recruit to shoot accurately, its grip was too big for many soldiers to grasp, and its looping trajectory was inferior to the flatter shooting 9×19 and the soldier could carry more ammo with the 9mm and have a pistol with double the magazine capacity. Just some of the reasons the .45 acp was rejected then and now by practically all the other nations of the world. In other words the gun and the cartridge sucked big time.

    The Moro Myth never happened. Jan Libourel (gun writer) researched U.S. Army records and found not one shred of documented evidence that the .45 acp mowed down Moro Warriors any better than the .38 colt or .45 colt handguns also used in that conflict.

    In the 1980’s Pistolero Magazine went to Mexico and shot barn yard pigs which have an anatomy much like humans but they are of course much more civilized and the 45 acp was proven not to be superior in any way to the 9mm or the 38 special.

    The 1911 is not flawless as it will not feed exotic ammo as well as more modern designed handguns. The U.S. has from time to time used expanding bullets and no the Geneva Convention never out lawed expanding bullets either.

    The 1911 is not perfect mechanically either as a worn or bent sear spring can slip of the sear or the disconnector letting the hammer fall to half cock when the trigger is pulled and ditto for a worn sear and hammer. Its actually quite a common malfunction on heavily used guns. The 1911 can discharge when dropped muzzle first onto a hard pavement (original military guns). Colt knew of this as early as the early 1940’s and invented a Swartz safety to prevent this but never put it into production because it would have increased the cost of the pistol. Like Remington (the model 700 rifle’s trigger) Colt could not have cared less about people being maimed or killed with a pistol that was not drop safe.

    • Elguapo102 April 28, 2017, 10:28 pm

      Hey Man, Stop knocking the .45 cal Colt semi-auto US Army M1911 pistol which saved many thousands of US lives in combat vs the puny and weak 9mm toy round which could not penetrate a turban or a field jacket. True, the 9mm Barretta is too light a frame for the average US trooper. Colt also Does care about the lives of its owners and US troopers and airmen. Cheers,

  • John January 23, 2017, 5:40 pm

    For personal gun, go to a gun show and pick up as many hand guns. The one that feels the best in your hand is the one you should buy. My choice is the 45acp 1911. Over all the 40 is a good bullet. Hollow point is a must. As a retired cop firearms instructor female officers qualified better with the 40. We went from 38 to 357 to 9 mm to 40 and as I was leaving they were in the process of going to 45 cal. Now many departments are looking at returning to the 9.mm. Really good ammo is the overall best way to go!!! I really love my 45. 1911. My mind is still open to any and all hand guns. I am also a Vietnam veteran and my personal rifle is a made in the USA ak 47 with 30 round magazines. There is no one answer to this question but made in the USA should be the way to go for all military contracts !!!

  • cisco kid January 22, 2017, 2:41 pm

    HK p30S

  • cisco kid January 22, 2017, 2:41 pm

    Lets compare the Sig to the Glock.

    The Glock’s striker is only 68.2 per cent cocked which means it will stay stronger longer before it weakens from being cocked and need replace because it becomes unreliable with its ignition. The Sig 320’s striker is supposedly 90 per cent cocked so it will have to be replaced sooner but its ignitions system when new should be a bit stronger being 90 per cent cocked.

    Pre-loaded striker fired weapons have notoriously weak ignitions systems as compared to the traditional hammer fired guns like the Beretta and 1911 pistols. I have tested the ignition strength of both the Glock 17, 19, and Walther P99 and they all failed the high primer test 3 times in a row trying to set off the same primer in each test compared to the various bone crushing ignitions systems of hammer fired guns like the Beretta and the 1911 etc. Its interesting to note that some years ago Germany tested pre-loaded striker fired pistols and found the ignitions so weak in comparison to hammer fired guns they tested the pre-loaded striker fired guns had to have the ignition power factor reduced substantially to even pass the test.

    Pre loaded striker fired guns also have open striker channels that let in dirt, dust, burnt powder , moisture etc which again makes them way less reliable than the closed firing pin tunnels found on most hammer fired guns.

    Safety: “What people cannot see they do not fear”. Guns with hammers let the operator know the gun is cocked and ready to fire. In other words “it scares the shit out of people” especially new recruits that usually have never even held a real handgun before. Not so much with striker fired guns as they cannot see the gun is cocked so the caution value is not there.

    Manual Safeties. The Beretta had a manual safety which was a plus both in carrying the gun and taking it apart. At least the Sig has a side lever for take down rather than the idiotic and totally unsafe Glock take down system that requires you to pull the trigger to take the gun apart. If you forget just one time to check the chamber you either shoot yourself or someone else. Brilliant system.

    The military should demand Sig put a manual safety on the 320 as the average recruit again has not the gun savvy or experience to handle a weapon without a manual safety and ditto for civilians that shoot themselves with Glocks and copy cat guns every day.

    Back Straps: Here Sig really dropped the ball as a person needing more trigger reach must replace the entire plasticky frame rather than just swap out another back strap that is much cheaper and quicker to do.

    Although the Military claims the Sig 320 is one gun that does it all I am willing to bet they end up adopting the 320 compact for tank crews or for air force personal climbing in and out of helicopters and jet planes.

    Since the Military has so many 92’s in stock now they will have to train recruits on two entirely different types of handguns. That takes time and money and in combat situation if you have to pick up the other pistol which you have never used everyday its a prescription for disaster. Another Brilliant move to adopt another totally different type of pistol especially one that is inferior in the ignition system.

    As usual the Neanderthals that procure weapons for the military never think things out from beginning to end and simply replace one system that may not have been perfect and usually end up with another system that is even worse and this time that is certainly the case.

    Of course now we will see Sig bring out a “look a like” military version of the 320 complete with military markings to give the civilian para-military lunatic fringe an orgasm as they believes that since the Military adopted the 320 it therefore has to be perfect in every way and now they all simply must have one.

    If the Military would have had brain one and were hell bent o n adopting a “plasticky pistol” they would have been way better off just adopting the H&K P30S. Its has a reliable ignition system being hammer fired, a manual safety which can be left on when loading or unloading the gun, a safe take down system and an excellent de-cocker lever to safely lower the hammer and the hammer does not crash down against the slide but is caught on the way down to gently lower the hammer. Now that is how to build a pistol even if it is “plasticky” but “plasticky” is about as good as it gets in todays econo-grade “plasticky” world of pistols.

    • Strongarm January 23, 2017, 1:17 am

      P320 seems having several weakness as compared to that well known Austrian plastic pistol;

      – It has single action trigger work. Its cocked mode is ready to go if the dropped, its sear has no blocking piece to stand against to the outside impacts, whereas its counterpart is partially cocked and its sear is fully blocked against to the outside impacts via a plastic blocking mass.

      – P320 drop safety solely is based upon a heavily constructed, passive striker block mounted over the firing pin itself. It seems to work if the gun dropped, it prevents discharging a live round in the barrel but, can not survive the gun’s cocked mode. It leaves its owner with an uncocked gun in a critical situation. Whereas its rival , via the well designed drop safety, continues the cocked mode and might save its owner’s life in a critical scenerio

      – P320 has no automatic trigger safety trough a claim that, its forwardly moving trigger bar would create no inertial movement of the same to reach and release the sear if dropped with the muzzle up. It may be true but, what about the muzzle forward drops…And what about the possible trigger movements coming from the holster chatches or other outside frictions… The Austian’s trigger is purposedly made of plastic for having the least possible mass and the passive safety mounted on, is provided for the purposes listed above.

      – P320 has a take down process free from dry firing, for more secure work appearently. But it uses a long heavy steel lever mounted at the left side working with the take down lever and magazine for this purpose. And, in a case of the magazine withdrawn and the gun dropped muzzle up, this lever acting through inertia, easily releases the sear from its cocked mode and if the drop is biased rather to the magazine up, it even might discharge a live round in the chamber since the striker block would work through inertia. Then, where is the safety. The first locked breech plastic pistol dirccts the user to dry fire the gun as pointing to a safe direction. Which one is safer…

      No needs to state the higher barrel axis and others fındable on through a larger thinking.

    • Deadmeat99 January 23, 2017, 11:51 am

      ” If you forget just one time to check the chamber you either shoot yourself or someone else”

      Then that person needs to forget about carrying a gun and get pepper spray or something similar so they are not a danger to themselves and others around them. They are too ignorant to use a firearm, no matter how many safety devices the weapon is hobbled with.

      • cisco kid January 27, 2017, 9:57 pm

        Your arrogant claim that you are perfect and will never make a mistake should bar you from every carrying a gun.

        Also remember the young mother out shopping who had her 2 year old son who reached in her purse and shot her in the head with a safety-less striker fired gun. It never would have happened with a gun that had a manual safety and might not have happened with a grip safety as well. Ditto for the young mother that was driving her car when her 2 year old reached forward and took her safety-less striker fired gun out of her holster and shot her in the back.

        Of course you lead a charmed life and this could never happen to you and because you are incapable of ever making a human mistake such safety-less striker fired guns pose no danger to you or your family. Famous last words but you know what they say “The Darwin Effect” usually reduces the numbers of people like you very quickly.

  • Jesse January 21, 2017, 7:57 pm

    Let’s not forget, though the army has given Sig this contract, it’s interesting to note that MARSOC and the SEALs will be using Glock 19s. That should tell you something. Why are our nation’s elite using Glocks and not Sigs? Don’t get me wrong, Sigs are great guns but one must ask themselves the question

    • Dawg January 22, 2017, 7:56 pm

      I don’t know what video game you get your intel from but my seal team never used glocks. We used a p226. My buddies over in delta were shooting the p229. Now the last time I checked those were sigs. So before you involve our nations elite in your non sense I suggest you leave your moms basement first and see what’s going on in the real world.

  • Robert Mowery January 21, 2017, 7:34 pm

    Why would you give Sig Sauer a 586 million dollar military contract? What happened to BUY AMERICAN and HIRE AMERICANS. America has plenty of great handgun makers. American Military should carry American made guns.

    • Ira Moe January 22, 2017, 2:41 pm

      For Crap sake ! I believe all this took place BEFORE Trump took office!

    • Kivaari January 23, 2017, 8:19 am

      When did New Hampshire move out of the country?

    • PaulWVa January 23, 2017, 9:27 pm

      Sig P-320s are made in New Hampshire by Americans. Their fantastic ammo is American made too.

  • Richard Alfano January 21, 2017, 3:33 pm

    Sig moved to a new facility in New Hampshire you dummy.

    • NavyVet January 21, 2017, 6:22 pm

      Having fired several had guns revolvers and semi auto’s and firing thousands of rounds using my Sig 226 not once did it jam like the Glocks did

      The Sig 226 set the standard

      For a shot gun nothing can come slose to my Bernilli M-1 and the Remington 870 doesn’t even come close to dependability or accuracy

      On the battle field given a choice I would take the Russian SKS or the Saiga or the M-1 The SKS is lighter and easier to follow up shots and never needs to be cleaned 🙂

      • Kivaari January 23, 2017, 8:21 am

        Seriously?

    • Robert Mowery January 21, 2017, 7:36 pm

      Hey dummy, the bulk of the money still goes to Germany. What are you a Democrat?

      • Kivaari January 23, 2017, 8:22 am

        The bulk of the money stays in the USA for wages and the support side of things. Maybe Italy for magazines, if you want the best.

  • J s January 21, 2017, 2:57 am

    I had a Sig p 320 ,great pistol ,sold it and bought a Sig p320 rxx withheld the romeo 1 red dot,nice shooting gun but,I have a Walter ppx 40 cal ,shot on target at 25 yards,over 2000 rounds ,no problems,so one day I bought a ppq m2 45 Walter . ,out of the box ,the best pistol 15 round mag so I put 200 rounds at 7,15 25 yards,it shot great 6 in targets , so I wanted a carry gun I bought a mp shield performance center pistol in 9 mm ,it was just as good as the other pistols,but I tried some ammo from clark ammo,they sell some of the best ammo,they have some nice 9mm stuff that would stop you dead in your tracks,the ammo to day is state of the art,but you need range time and good ammo,, a good shooter can kill you with a 22 cal ,your only as good as your skills,, the more rang time and the right ammo in a 9 mm 17 rounds you not walking away,the sig p320 can do the job, they make 21 round mags.,take a few in the head shots,you can have the Best gun and ammo ,but you need to be a good shot ,1911 are great guns,but 8 rounds in a gun fight ,with a good shooter , no thanks, I rather have 17 rounds of good ammo p 320.party harry said do you feel lucky today? Punk did I shot 5 or 6 rounds,,,.or did I shot 8 or 17 rounds, who said number s don’t matter, if you ever have to defend your home in the middle of the night against two armed punks,you might think about that .sig p 320 night sights .and a light rail and some super ammo,you just might save your family or yourself,I like like living ,so get some range time in .the more you shot your pistol,you get better,might save your life one day.

    • Jonny5 January 21, 2017, 4:20 pm

      ….aaaannndd breathe……

  • Muns January 20, 2017, 10:55 pm

    Bull crap. Trump needs to have this decision reversed. Buy American. Enough of this crap.

    • Ole' Joe Clarke January 21, 2017, 2:37 am

      “The Sig” won the competition”, that’s a good thing, now license an American based producer to manufacture the weapon, putting Americans back to work, and that would be iceing for the cake”!

    • Glenn61 January 21, 2017, 8:05 am

      Don’t worry, Most likely, Sis Sauer will be opening a plant in Virginia or N. Carolina or somewhere on the east coast to make these guns, just like Beretta.

      • Jim January 22, 2017, 11:53 am

        Sig had a plant in Virginia before moving to New Hampshire.

    • Jim January 21, 2017, 10:20 am

      Agreed!

      • Kenneth P January 21, 2017, 12:42 pm

        They will be mandated to produce in the US as part of the contract…in case there is some kind of skirmish whereby getting them delivered from overseas or across boarders, OR having the plant seized isn’t a problem.

  • Mikial January 20, 2017, 6:31 pm

    I had sort of thought it would be a Glock, but understand why the Ar,my went with the Sig since it is a great gun with a proven track record. People need to realize that the military bases its selection criteria on how well the submission meets the requirements of the RFP. I personally want a gun for myself, my wife and our troops that performs when it’s needed, That means reliable, accurate, and with good ammo capacity to reduce the need to reload when TSHTF. The Sig will do that.

    As for .45 ACP vs 9mm, and all the complaining that it is an accommodation for women, so what? My EDC is a .45ACP (Glock), but the reality is there are women in the military, and if the person next to me is a woman and we’re both to the point of using our sidearms I’d like to feel confident she can shoot well with hers.

    Regarding the whole “Made in America” argument, the last Colt I bought two months ago has a clear “Made by Carl Walther Germany” stamped into the lower receiver.

    Finally, for all you folks who like to dis what you disparagingly term ‘Glock Fan Boys,’ the comments on here about the 1911 being tried and true in combat and saying things like being in use “When real men walked the Earth” seem pretty fan-boyish to me.

    Just saying.

  • David M. Russell January 20, 2017, 6:26 pm

    The Pentagon said Thursday that SIG Sauer had won a $580 million contract to supply the U.S. Army with new handguns, ending a long-running contest that had attracted fierce criticism from a senior military chief.
    The German-Swiss company won out over eight rivals to supply thousands of new handguns that will be made in the U.S. to replace the existing Beretta M9 pistol.
    “By maximizing full and open competition across our industry partners, we have optimized private sector advancements in handguns, ammunition and magazines, and the end result will ensure a decidedly superior weapon system for our warfighters.” the Army said in a statement.
    Gen. Mark Milley, the Army chief of staff, last year criticized the protracted buying process and said he would prefer to take a check to an outdoor retailer to expedite the process of replacing the pistols used for more than 30 years.
    “We’re not figuring out the next lunar landing,”” Gen. Milley said at a defense conference last year. “You give me $17 million on a credit card, and I’ll call Cabela’s tonight, and I’ll outfit every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine with a pistol for $17 million. And I’ll get a discount on a bulk buy.”
    The contest included the elimination last year of Smith & Wesson owner American Outdoor Brands Corp. and partner General Dynamics Corp., and the hundreds of pages of requirements for the contract became a focus for critics of the Pentagon’s acquisition system.

  • BIGKIELBASSA January 20, 2017, 2:56 pm

    As long as it goes boom each and every time our troops need it to . And as long as it hits what our troops are shooting at . My number one concern is the safety of our men and women in the Armed Forces . Why this pistol ? Because a Browning belt fed .50 won’t fit in a holster 😂👍🏼🇺🇸. God bless America and please watch over our Brave Troops .

  • BIGKIELBASSA January 20, 2017, 2:55 pm

    As long as it goes boom each and every time our troops need it to . And as long as it hits what our troops are shooting at . My number one concern is the safety of our men and women in the Armed Forces . Why this pistol ? Because a Browning belt fed .50 won’t fit in a holster 😂👍🏼🇺🇸. God bless America and please watch over our Brave Troops .

  • Paco January 20, 2017, 2:31 pm

    The size and upper body strength of females now assigned to combat units must be a consideration. I believe that the (average) smaller hands of our women combatants is a bigger issue than recoil. My personal preference was to substitute two extra magazines of 5.56 for the weight of the 1911A1.

  • gb18ao6 January 20, 2017, 2:29 pm

    As a retired Army officer who spent most of my years in SOF, I would like to add another view of why some decisions are made in the military that don’t make a lot of sense to civilians. I carried an issue 1911A1 as a side arm for years up until the M9 issue. My annual qualifying to Expert with the 1911A1 was a chore, given the limited range time allotted to most of the military generally and limited availability of .45 cal ammo. The crappy sights (IMO) on the 1911A1 were also a negative influence to getting high scores punching targets. The first time I hit the range with the issue M9 for familiarization and qualifying was a big relief for me since after 2 rounds downrange I was able to use the much better sights and better controllability of the pistol to shoot an expert score with relative ease. Now, as a civilian I have an old 1911 from WWI and an M&P .45 with a thumb safety. The 1911 is now retired and sits in my safe. The M&P goes to the range. I can shoot so much better with it. I carry a Shield in 9mm now and am considering the new .45 version for the knock down power some have mentioned. But that’s for me and me alone. Today’s military is different in many ways. In the old days, marksmanship was a mainstay training event. Today it’s not due to many issues, but ammunition and range availability and training time are now precious commodities. The forces are now more diverse with more women in units that were once only men in the ranks. I know from direct experience that instructing female soldiers to accurately fire an M9 is a helluva lot easier that a 1911A1. Better sights and lighter recoil were the most telling comments made by those I trained. The other issue of concern is for alot of folks striker fired pistols are the way forward. I do not agree with this for a military issue weapon from a safety standpoint. The services, excepting SOF, don’t get the range time to train for this type weapon. If soldiers have numerous accidental discharges with M9 type pistols, I could only dread equipping them with striker fired models and likely increased accidental discharges. Civilians and police, generally, get to train more with these type weapons and are more likely not to have accidents.

    • Mikial January 20, 2017, 5:56 pm

      Agreed on the ease of shooting the M9 vs a 1911. My Army time started when the 1911 was the standard issue sidearm. I too qualified Expert and it was quite a bit of work compared to many other handguns. As for females and handguns, my wife loved her 1911 Government Model, but she carries her Beretta 92 because she shoots better with it and feels it is more reliable. Times change.

      I also know what you mean about ADs, having spent over two years in Iraq and used the very shot up clearing barrels at the entrance to each FOB, but I can’t honestly say that LEOs get more training time and have fewer ADs. Our local range has five repaired bullet holes in the floor of the admin area, and three are from LEOs.

  • Grant Stevens January 20, 2017, 2:19 pm

    Like the Beretta debacle of the mid 1980s, this is another sad day for a nation that pioneered firearms development worldwide. This is just one more globalist shot to the heart of American firearms manufacture. I am incensed that my tax dollars are being spent by the US military to enrich a foreign firearms manufacturer. Even if the guns are made here, the profits still benefit a foreign nation, not America. The US military should only be allowed to purchase US-made firearms and ammunition. How can we be the “arsenal of democracy” if our military arms and ammunition are made by foreign companies? There is absolutely no reason why S&W, Colt, Ruger, Kimber or any number of other US firearms manufacturers could not supply a superior 9mm handgun for US military use. Besides, if the situation is desperate enough for a handgun to be used, it may as well be a .45 acp 1911. No other handgun on earth has its battle-tested credentials. But, then again, that was when real men walked the earth.

    • Adam J Beiting January 20, 2017, 3:49 pm

      I believe around 75% of all small arms used by the US military are owned by a foreign company. FN Hershal sells most of them.

    • Z January 20, 2017, 4:31 pm

      Where was the computer or phone you typed that diatribe on manufactured?

    • Irish-7 January 20, 2017, 5:40 pm

      I concur on multiple points: 1) We should be buying from an American firearms manufacturer. Colt has teetered on bankruptcy for years. They already have a model that the Marine Corps purchased. 2) The M1911 series has been battle tested for over a century.

    • JJ357 January 22, 2017, 9:17 pm

      And thats probably the biggest deciding factor to send in the troops or not. Global arms sale is a HUGE business and it provides a real life demonstration of the weapons systems capabilities. This tank vs the Soviet Tank, our aircraft vs the other nations anti air defense system. Then next years arms sales are based on the prior years results. Simplistic, but sick.

    • Kivaari January 23, 2017, 8:31 am

      What is an American company? Was it S&W when owned buy Bangor Punta or Tompkins Plumbing? Ruger is about the only American gun company left.

  • Mark Wolfson January 20, 2017, 1:42 pm

    New rule: Foreign arms manuf. whose countries that do not allow (their) manuf to sell to their citizens, should should not be allowed to sell their arms here in the U.S. I am not an expert, but does Switzerland allow SIG to sell pistols to their citizens (in an open market), or is there gun control? How about Germans being allowed to buy HK pistols freely? If the answer is no, then we should go with any/all manuf whose countries that allow their citizens the right to purchase/carry. Its a new age, the age of America First. Smith and Wesson is good enough.

    • Jb76 January 22, 2017, 8:08 am

      All capable men and women serve in the Swiss military. Upon their leaving their service they TAKE THEIR RIFLE HOME HOME THEM!!!! per Capita they are most well armed society on the planet. They rely on all Cantons (states) to supply the country with citizen militia in the event of Invasion. We (the u.s.) took the militia model from the Swiss. Learn your history brother. God speed

  • SSG Gibb January 20, 2017, 1:07 pm

    I have been in the military for 16 years and counting. I own a few 1911s, barretta 92, a bunch of other pistols without a doubt one of my favorites is my Sig P220Eur. If you don’t like a Sig there’s a good chance you Don’t own one. Which is prolly why the badmouthing. Yes the pistol is the second to last line of defence, the last being the E-tool. It is my hope that whatever cal. the Army goes with has a lot in not just a little more stopping power then the 9mm which I have carried for three tours and am Not impressed. (But you KNOW it’s going to be a 9mm)

  • Edgar January 20, 2017, 12:29 pm

    A few years ago our agency decided to change our primary duty pistol from the Sig 229 to the new Sig 350. It took several years of trials and competition and the Sig 350 won. However in the field the Sig 350 did not live up to its expectations, certainly it did not live up to the previous Sig 229. The first thing we noticed is that since it is a polymer framed gun …it gets HOT quickly, abnormally quickly. We shoot a lot, probably more than any other Federal agency out there and it became increasingly difficult to train with this gun that needed cooling off in between training sessions. It did not take long before the whole new Sig 350 deal was scrapped and we all received new 229’s. Thank God and country. Sometimes what seems like a winner in competition and trials is not the appropriate gun in the field. Good luck to the Army on this one, but we will have to wait to see what the real warriors in the field say about the new gun. That will be the real test.

  • elgavilansegoviano January 20, 2017, 12:05 pm

    ……No doubt a fine weapon in “perfect” conditions, we we all pay the prize in the real world!,……Just another Big mistake of the Office jockeys in the Pentagon!!,….

    • Kivaari January 23, 2017, 8:34 am

      They all went through the mud tests, dust tests, ice tests, sun tests and every other test possible.

  • Frank Ubar January 20, 2017, 11:25 am

    Hey, at least it’s not GLOCK!!

    • Dave Ope January 20, 2017, 12:34 pm

      amen

    • Jon Ennis January 20, 2017, 2:39 pm

      WOW- Wait till this lands on Trumps desk- US ARMY contracts with a Foreign Producer to supply it’s handguns won’t sit well.
      Hard to believe that our domestic weapons manufacturers couldn’t make what our Army wants!!!
      As Trump said today “AMERICA FIRST”

      • kevin meyer January 20, 2017, 6:06 pm

        Smith and Wesson a American fine producer of firearms was staged to win this contract. If one makes money here, they should spend it here. First Beretta, Then FN and now Sig. Please Mister President, Keep these U.S. Army Handguns Manufactured in our COUNTRY. THANK YOU ! TAX PAYING CITEZEN

        • Jb76 January 22, 2017, 8:11 am

          They are produced here. For like 20 years in NH. Do you see SAN producing this pistol In Switzerland ? No. Bred and born 100℅ In the usa

  • Bisley January 20, 2017, 10:41 am

    I could have made a better choice than that. Is this something Obama’s people rammed through at the last minute (after doing nothing for years) to keep the next administration from having a hand in it?

    • Z January 20, 2017, 2:31 pm

      Yet all you managed to do was disparage an outgoing president you were so certain would take away your guns without stating what your pick for the military sidearm would be. Way to do better champ, go you.

      • a11for1 January 20, 2017, 10:58 pm

        Where have you been previous eight [+] years. The disparaging tone of an individual echoes that of countless voters/ taxpayers/ military/ veterans and several other groups, your choice.

  • Deadmeat99 January 20, 2017, 10:29 am

    Great, a “modular” handgun. This thing will be the F35 of the firearms world: doesn’t do anything well, costs ridiculous money, and the predecessor turns out to be better. The least useful weapon in the inventory and it took them 6 years and a half-billion dollars to fail.

  • Rich Carter January 20, 2017, 10:16 am

    There was very recent news that Sig is building a new manufacturing facility in Arkansas rather than expanding in NH. The company cited the high cost of electricity and tight labor market as reasons. This explains the expansion plans. They must be setting up this new plant for the army contract. It’s privately owned, otherwise this would have been a good opportunity to make some money on the stock.

  • Joe Juarez January 20, 2017, 10:13 am

    I’ll take an Automatic Colt Pistol, caliber .45,Model 1911A1 over a SIG product any day!

    • Bil;l Alderman January 20, 2017, 11:44 am

      I carried a 45 model 1911A1 for over 9 years it never failed or let me down. Colt makes the best then and now. The sixties may be gone but things that worked then will still get the job done today.

      • Mark Wolfson January 20, 2017, 1:55 pm

        I agree. And Sig cannot even sell (this experimental) their arms to their own people. Not a proven product like Colt. American First now, so go with a U.S. manufacturer. We do not need the help of Sig, HK, Turkish manufacturers (unless they sell to their own people and prove their products first). Colt .45 plus a couple of xtra magazines will work fine.

    • Z January 20, 2017, 2:38 pm

      Right, because in a high stress combat situation what every soldier needs is a single action pistol with a single stack magazine. Everyone knows that the breeze of a passing .45 acp will disable an enemy combatant and having fewer rounds in the magazine allows for more quality time spent reloading while taking fire. Excellent choice and well considered perspective. Why, with that line of thinking why doesn’t the military go back to 30-06, 8 round Garand rifles? Obviously carrying around fewer and heavier rounds of ammunition is where it’s at. Touché.

      • Charles B Lemak January 21, 2017, 1:42 pm

        Please stop. You’re making too much sense!

        I am a big fan of the 1911 design because it is a classic, and it’s what we qualified with in the US Navy, back in my younger days. My wife shoots a 9mm, Springfield 1911 exceptionally well. I have four 1911 Kimbers and a Para ordnance P13, all in .45acp, and I love them. However, for practical defense purposes I employ a Springfied XD, 9mm with 16 round mags, or my Beretta 92FS, with 17 round factory mags. When it comes to defense shot placement is everything. A .380 shot well, is better than any .45 shot poorly. While I am proficient with any caliber, the average person in the military will be much better served with a high capacity 9mm that they can shoot well..

  • Joe Juarez January 20, 2017, 10:08 am

    I’ll take an Automatic COLT Pistol, caliber .45, Model 1911A1 over any SIG that is made with outsourced parts.

    • Scott Moore January 20, 2017, 1:45 pm

      LMAO, okay buddy whatever, take your old crappy 1911 and have fun clearing the stove pipes and jams.

      • Mikial January 20, 2017, 6:08 pm

        Got to agree with you on this. We each have a 1911 in our house because they’re fun at the range, and they ARE very accurate. But, neither of us carry them EDC. While I wouldn’t use the term “crappy” to describe the 1911, I do think the Sig is an excellent handgun. All the manufacturers had a chance to submit, and the Sig won the contract. Personally, I want our troops to have the best handgun possible, and a SA, single stack gun with an 8 round capacity isn’t it.

  • Joe January 20, 2017, 10:00 am

    This is, yet, another, rip-off, “Government” (License to Steal) US Government contract. Yes, SIG, gave the lowest bid. But, as always, there will be cost over runs. The Law states that if a manufacturer is unable to meet the terms of a contract at a previously given price, they are in default and said contract must be awarded to the next lowest bidder. However, since so much many members of both the US Senate and the US House of will have sold us (WE the People) out for campaign contributions, bribes and other perks, these contract rules WILL, most likely, NOT be enforced for fear of exposure.
    WE the PEOPLE, MUST regain power by reuniting as a voting body, by petition, and by peaceful and nonviolent public protest.

    • No1hunter January 20, 2017, 11:24 am

      So Joe, what is your point. Are you saying it would be better not to buy firearms for our military because there MAY BE (in your opinion) cost overruns?

    • SuperG January 20, 2017, 11:50 am

      Stunning. Someone else knows how out government works. They don’t call them bribes in Congress though, they call them honorariums. Other than that, you hit the nail on the head! Now watch the committee members who approved this, and you’ll see that their brother-in-law’s all “won” expensive yachts too.

    • Kivaari January 23, 2017, 8:37 am

      Seriously?

  • Dave C January 20, 2017, 9:49 am

    Admittedly, I have never had to carry any of these weapons in combat. Although I did spend 23 years in the military, most of that time was spent in the air punching hole through the atmosphere.
    Ed, just to let you know, I believe this Sig is made in the US. Sig has a US factory
    Obeezy, not sure why you consider the modular system junk, but there are a whole lot of advantages to it. And I did not realize the G19 was now standard Seal issue. It was the SIG MK25. So, not sure when they changed.
    Look, all you nay sayers; Sig makes a fine weapon, as does Glock. Sure, there is always going to be someone who can relate a negative experience with anything. But either would have been a good choice. The Sig 320 has had many positive reviews. I had considered purchasing one. Instead, I saved my pennies and bought a P226 Legion. One of the best guns I have ever shot. To bad the govt. did not pick those to issue. But, a little on the pricey side for a govt. issue weapon.
    As for 9mm vs. .40; I agree that .40 is more potent. My personnel carry is .40. But, you can get more rounds in the average full size 9mm than you can in a comparable .40, usually 15-17 for the 9mm and 10-12 for a .40. Yes there are exceptions. I am just stating the average.
    I realize you old timers feel there is no substitute for a .45. I get it. But, let’s face it; expense, weight, comparable round quantity limit (7-8). Yeah, the .45 has superb knockdown energy, and makes a heck of head knocker when the ammo is gone. But seriously, if you weigh the advantages of the extra rounds in a firefight and the ability the regain your target more quickly, these things kind of diminish. Think back to the transition from the 1903 Springfield to the A1 Garand. Both great rifles. But, the Springfield gave you 5 rounds with a bolt action. The Garand gave you 7 rounds, speed loaded with a clip, and an auto action. Which would you rather have in a fox hole? Look, a properly placed 9mm will be just as lethal as a properly placed .45.
    Okay..so these are strictly the opinions of the author and do not reflect the ideas of this website. Have a nice day.

    • Whyawannaknow1 January 20, 2017, 11:09 am

      You don’t seem to have ever used a Springfield OR a Garand? That’s M1 Garand. You load 8 rounds in a Garand, not 7… Both can use “clips”, 5 round strippers for the 1903, 8 round en bloc for the Garand.

    • TCW January 20, 2017, 11:40 am

      “[As for 9mm vs. .40; I agree that .40 is more potent…]”

      Define “more potent”. Various recent studies have shown there’s virtually no difference between .38 cal (9mm), .40 cal, and .45 cal in stopping a threat.. When it comes to “real world” experiences one caliber has not been shown to be any more effective in stopping a threat vs another in the calibers mentioned above. Shot placement is far, far, more important. My 2 cents.

      • Slim January 20, 2017, 1:37 pm

        If you want to nit pick, 9mm is not 38 cal. Even \”38 special\” isn\’t 38 cal. 9mm is .355, while 38 spl is .357. That is far from .38, as a S&W .40 is closer to .38 than a 9mm is.

        • Kivaari January 23, 2017, 8:45 am

          9mm and 38 are both considered 9mm. It is the hole that the bore is started at and 1/1000th difference is nothing. The .38 Special is the 9x29mmR, the .357 is the 9x33mmR, .38 S&W is the 9x20mmR (and it is a .362 bullet).

      • Scott Moore January 20, 2017, 1:51 pm

        I agree for him to say the .40 is more potent is basically him hanging a sign over his head stating “I’ve never done a serious study of small arms and their wounding capabilities”

        Heres the deal Dave C, handguns suck at killing people. So load up as many shots as you can and shoot until they drop.

    • James Acerra January 20, 2017, 3:32 pm

      I had the pleasure to carry both in the USN/USNR they transitioned between my times of service. We also carried the M14 to the M16 so all in all I carried most of the latest small arms. The .45 1911A1 was a fine pistol a little slow on second round capability but you learned to work it. The M9 was a fine pistol , you either loved it or hated it very few were indifferent to it. The ladies had a tougher time on the controls than most men so let’s hope they fix that with the new wounder pistol. You have to get a hit no matter the caliber with a handgun weight helps but in ball ammunition the difference is not that wide. I worked with the GMG in the arms room as a training armorer in cross deck training. We took the rattle traps and swapped bushings till we found a happy medium. The .45 was built with institutional slop to give dirt or crud room to be swept back with the slide instead of locking it up, The M9 had all that open roof for the same reason. We in the military are clean OCD with our small arms. If your bored and time allows clean! If your taking a break clean! It was just our thing. It will be up to the troops to find out if this is a good sidearm. Not a big fan of no hammer but that me,
      So let’s see if this puppy works.
      Yours in service
      James Acerra
      ACE’S DUGOUT 07FFL

  • Tom Benton January 20, 2017, 9:44 am

    I like the old adage, ” Why do you have a handgun . ” The answer, ” To get back to my rifle ” That said, I hope our military is not placed in a position to use handguns as their primary offensive weapon. A combat rifle is an effective battle weapon. A handgun is a defensive weapon. Would you rather face an enemy with an M4 or any handgun caliber ?
    It is interesting that the FBI and many police forces are reverting to 9mm from 40 cal. It is ludicrous for military weapons to be forced to use ineffective ammunition. The purpose of the weapon is to kill or disable the enemy. Therefore military should use the ammunition that best suits that goal. It is insane to limit military to hardball ammo while law enforcement uses modern hollow point ammo. A 9mm with 124 gr HST ammo is an effective handgun that allows you to carry 17 rounds . Sine even police officers miss targets 66% of the time at 7 yards, capacity becomes a main determinate of handgun choice.
    Finally, we know the contract was 580 million, but what is the cost of a Sig vs a Glock or M&P. My understanding is that Seals have reverted to Glock 19’s. If this special opperation unit can use Glocks, whay not all armed forces. It is ludicrous for different branches of the service to use different weapons. If a handgun is right for one branch, it is right for the others. The cost of providing different handguns to service bracnches is considerably above supplying a single brand. I do believe that special operation units, i.e Seals etc, should be free to choose what they want as they operate under completely different environments.
    Bye the way, I am not a Glock owner, rather an M&P 9mm. It fits my hand much better and I have never had a malfunction with an ammunition.

    • Nate January 20, 2017, 1:58 pm

      Hi Tom. Absolutely right about why handguns are issued. DHS even classifies their purchase of AR-15 platform rifles as “personal defense weapons” so the handgun truly is a backup to a primary weapon.
      Hague declaration IV, 3 prohibits one uniformed army from using “bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body.” This doesn’t hold back the use of non-FMJ ammo during police actions (or against non-uniformed/state enemies), or shouldn’t at least. Interestingly enough, the USA never signed that part, but adheres to it out of convention I guess.
      I sold SIG P-320c for less than $500 retail (usually about $475 if I remember right), and, in bulk, I’m sure they’ll break down to a lower per-unit price than that for the purposes of this contract. Made in the USA, easily modifiable sizes, and one of the best triggers in a STOCK striker-fire pistol all made it immensely popular in my store. When I was introduced to it years ago by my SIG rep I knew it would be a contender for this contract, and possibly disruptive to the industry as a whole. It’s not the gun that’s serialized, it’s the trigger assembly…the essential part of the gun, like the lower of an AR-type platform firearm.
      NSW has started issuing the Glock 19 and phasing out the SIG MK-25. Weight, size, and capabilities were all factors in their decision, and, just as Marines were still using 1911-based platforms, units with special entrance exams (collectively special forces) can choose what they need on a mission-specific basis.
      The beautiful thing about your last statement is that everyone’s hand is a bit different, and thus we have tons of different pistols. From an armorer’s perspective, this is horrible because you can’t track and service 100’s of different platforms and stay effective and good at your job. When your job is to keep the US-ARMY shooting you want to streamline what you can. This new program allows the assignment of a serial numbered trigger assembly and the swapping out of ALL OTHER PARTS (grips, barrels, slides, magazines, etc) easily and without having to reassign a new firearm to that particular soldier. I wouldn’t be surprised if some soldiers who have more modular missions wind up with several frames, barrels, and slides to adjust their armaments as assigned without armorer intervention.

    • Z January 20, 2017, 2:45 pm

      Did you catch what you did there? You cited the seals as using Glock pistols, said every branch of the military should use the same weapon, then you said the seals should be able to choose whatever they wish because the operate under completely different environments. Lacking continuity of though process.

  • ron January 20, 2017, 9:36 am

    But wait – there’s more!! The contract award will almost certainly be protested.

  • W.P. Zeller January 20, 2017, 9:24 am

    We own a 320 in the course of our firearms instruction business. As a military sidearm, it will be awful.. Flimsy, cheesy, and built to a price, not a specification.
    The comments above about a metal-framed gun ring true, too. In close fighting where hitting the adversary with whatever is in hand, including an empty handgun, the plastic gun will be inferior.
    Besides, in all of this, where was the Ruger? The American is a better gun than the Sig 320 in almost every way, and so far (they’re both relatively new designs) shows more evidence of being durable and long-lasting.
    The politics are always ascendant, it seems. Sig’s sales people are more aggressive and more determined than anyone else’s, is the takeaway here.
    Oh, did we mention Bin Laden was killed with a Sig?

    • Z January 20, 2017, 2:48 pm

      Are you disappointed that Bin Laden wasn’t killed with a Ruger?

    • Damon January 21, 2017, 11:30 am

      I had heard bin Ladin was killed with an HK416.

    • Mac Nicol January 22, 2017, 12:06 pm

      RE: Ruger. Yes, why wasn’t the Ruger American Pistol chosen. A true ALL-AMERCAN pistol. Reliable, inexpensive, accurate, customizable, Made-in-American by American Company by American Workers. WTF. Another SNAFU BAFB.
      I missed the reason why the Beretta M9 is no longer acceptable after 30+ years of use. Is this another DOD boon-doggle where a company’s lobbying efforts succeeded in influencing a naive or corrupt governement official into issuing a RFP that was biased to one supplier? Wouldn’t the first time this happened.

  • VAmtnMAN January 20, 2017, 9:24 am

    Lets hope they go with .45 for caliber. I was really impressed with the way that 1911 put the homeboy on his dead dumb ass that tried to rob a gun store you guys posted the video of. He didn’t even have an OH SHIT moment. It was just back 5 feet and lights out. Welcome to hell.

  • Justin Opinion January 20, 2017, 9:19 am

    Congrats to SIG! As a taxpayer, I’m pleased to see the Army make the RIGHT decision. As a shooter and enthusiast, I know firsthand that the P320 Series is well deserving of the contract, and will make a solid sidearm for our troops.

  • Mitch Barkett January 20, 2017, 9:18 am

    I have a 226 and it is the finest most versatile pistol available. With conversion kits it can shoot .357 sig, .40 cal and 9mm. Great guns.

    • Tanker373 January 20, 2017, 11:36 am

      fully concur to your counseling……I started in the Army with a .45 but would take my SIG 226 over anything on the market

    • Arnold January 20, 2017, 4:11 pm

      Could not agree more. Sig 226 and 229 are the best handguns I have ever shot and I have shot most everything out there.

  • J dog January 20, 2017, 8:30 am

    If I’m not mistaken, most if not all Sig Sauer pistols are now made in the US.

    • LHS January 20, 2017, 10:11 am

      I’ve heard quite a bit of negative feedback on the U.S. made Sigs, unfortunately. A compact .40 Sig WAS going to be my next….now am not sure. Maybe a used one….

      • Z January 20, 2017, 2:50 pm

        Find a range that offers rental and try it before you buy it?

      • Jb76 January 22, 2017, 8:36 am

        You lost me at …. .40 …

    • John January 20, 2017, 1:56 pm

      8 of the parts are made in CO. More to come. I personally see them being manufactured and quality inspected. 320 is a great pistol in my opinion.

    • Gary January 20, 2017, 8:37 pm

      Exeter New Hampshire I believe.

  • Leighton Cavendish January 20, 2017, 8:20 am

    OK…so maybe now maybe I will be able to get a Beretta APX for my own personal use…since they lost the competition?

    • Bob I. January 20, 2017, 8:41 am

      If so, I’ll happily give you mine. I hate the dang thing!

    • gary holfstra January 20, 2017, 9:46 am

      Yeah Bob – I carried one as well, hated it.You can already pick them up pretty cheap – the government is about the only buyer out there.

  • Bob I. January 20, 2017, 8:14 am

    This news is heartening, but sadly to say, the caliber will remain the 9mm. The NATO-fication of our Armed Forces’ policies will dictate that our ammo stockages must be consistent with all other NATO countries. Because we must ensure that the French can pickup and fire ammo our fallen Soldiers have left on the battlefield…. {/SARCASM}

    • Infidel7.62 January 20, 2017, 8:52 am

      For sale surplus WWII French army rifles. Never fired, only dropped 3 times.

    • Brian cullimore January 20, 2017, 9:03 am

      From weapons never fired and only dropped once.

    • Dougboffl January 20, 2017, 9:05 am

      That will never happen, the French would be too busy running away…

      • Lucian January 20, 2017, 1:13 pm

        Why is that? Because the French were beaten soundly by the Krauts in WW2? Or is it because we had to “save them” in WW1, showing up at the 11th hour after they’d suffered millions of casualties and done the bulk of the fighting? Or maybe it’s because, after conquering most of Europe, they turned and “ran” from Moscow after taking that city as well? I’m not a huge fan of the French but the idea that all they do is turn and run from a fight is ridiculous. It’s akin to shouting anal rape whenever you hear the word “prison”. It’s just stupid.

    • Z January 20, 2017, 2:58 pm

      The French army didn’t surrender, they were betrayed.
      With Paris fallen and the German conquest of France reaching its conclusion, Marshal Henri Petain replaces Paul Reynaud as prime minister and announces his intention to sign an armistice with the Nazis. The next day, French General Charles de Gaulle, not very well known even to the French, made a broadcast to France from England, urging his countrymen to continue the fight against Germany.

      A military hero during World War I, Petain was appointed vice premier of France in May 1940 to boost morale in a country crumbling under the force of the Nazi invasion. Instead, Petain arranged an armistice with the Nazis. The armistice, signed by the French on June 22, went into effect on June 25, and more than half of France was occupied by the Germans. In July, Petain took office as “chief of state” at Vichy, a city in unoccupied France. The Vichy government under Petain collaborated with the Nazis, and French citizens suffered on both sides of the divided nation. In 1942, Pierre Laval, an opportunistic French fascist and dutiful Nazi collaborator, won the trust of Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, and the elderly Petain became merely a figurehead in the Vichy regime.

      After the Normandy invasion in 1944, Petain and Laval were forced to flee to German protection in the east. Both were eventually captured, found guilty of high treason, and sentenced to die. Laval was executed in 1945, but provincial French leader Charles de Gaulle commuted Petain’s sentence to life imprisonment. Petain died on the Ile d’Yeu off France in 1951.

    • Al Richardson January 20, 2017, 11:04 pm

      It has to be a 9 mm. The white flag that is issued to the French fits tightly in a .355 bore.

  • Mark Tercsak January 20, 2017, 8:05 am

    I assume the Sig-320 is a composite frame handgun?
    I have one small problem with this handgun then.
    In battle shit happens, your out of ammunition and all you have left is your Sig-320, a Plastic Handgun and you decide to use it as a hammer to beat the other guy’s brains out, or you try to buffalo the other guy, good luck with that.

    Number one reason to have a steel pistol.
    Situations like this do happen and happen a lot more than people think and on the battlefield, we want our guys to be in a position that is they have to employ a pistol as a hammer, to beat someone’s brains out, with a pistol, that they have an effective option, plastic is not the way to go.

    Next situation, these plastic handguns do not do very well when getting blown up, saw a test video between Glock and Armscor 1911, the Glock did not survive the 1st round, in fact they only item they found of the Glock was the slide and barrel, The Armscor 1911 was still in tact and functioned. They were both blown up with one pound of tanner rite.

    The Armscor 1911 went on to complete all testing, and passed it was set in concrete was allowed to dry and harden and was blown up again with one pound of tanner rite, remained in tact and still functioned, The Armscor 1911 was shot with a 12 gauge shotgun and it still functioned.

    • Cyrus January 20, 2017, 8:19 am

      In my opinion . . . I would rather stab or bludgeon the enemy with my Ka-Bar then the Butt end of a hand gun if we are getting that close to each other!

      • Boss January 20, 2017, 8:55 am

        If your handgun is in your hand, one quick slap across the noggin will put a dent in your attackers aspirations
        Giving you time to reload for the next guy.
        3rd MarDiv 2/4 67-69
        .When you’ve got ’em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

    • Revolverdude January 20, 2017, 8:56 am

      I believe that if someone hits you in the head with a Sig P320 you will be aware of it.

      • Reaper762 January 20, 2017, 9:39 am

        I agree, one would be aware of it if hit in the head with the P320. It would REALLY make them want to kill you more than before.

    • Lee January 20, 2017, 10:03 am

      I’m assuming your referring to some youtube channel that did “testing”… Cause I’ve had a lot of Armscor 1911’s pass thru my hands, the the majority of them were out of spec garbage that wouldn’t feed a magazine reliably. If you believe everything you see on youtube, you must be a CNN fan 😉 And good god man, all I can say is I really hope your joking an Armscor 1911 isn’t your EDC….

      My friend I can tell your not a combat vet…. You go hump a full load pounds all day, and you’ll figure out really quick why you’d rather have a high capacity polymer framed handgun. Ounces mean pounds and pounds mean pain isn’t just a saying. A single stack heavy all metal gun, with only 8 rounds… when you expend those, your only option is using it as a blunt object. If you had a poly framed gun you still have another 9 rounds. Oh and the Glock actually works very well as a blunt force object. Maybe I’ll make a youtube video about that, then freeze it and blow it up. I’m sure then it will be validated in your mind.

    • Tanker373 January 20, 2017, 11:40 am

      I would rather have the extra rounds in a 9mm or 40 cal with which to shoot my enemy than an empty steel .45 to hit him with

  • Pete January 20, 2017, 8:00 am

    The U.S. adopted the 9MM to be compatible with the rest of NATO. If we intend to remain compatible– and I suspect we will, Trump’s opinion of NATO notwithstanding– the new standard issue gun will be 9MM. For Special Forces, however, the Sig will probably be chambered in .45ACP. That is, for those Special Forces members who don’t already have customized Kimbers.

  • Jack January 20, 2017, 7:57 am

    What a crock. I’m retired from BRL @ APG, Md. I recall the trials which ended in the M9. The test were done at the range next to mine. At that time both the Sig and Beretta qualified/passed the tests. We only adopted the Beretta because Italy bought F16’s. We could have had a Sig 30+ years ago…..Oh well
    There are a dozen or more quality full sized pistols out there. What would make sense is to simply give EVERY armed forces member a $600 check and let him/her purchase what they like and let them keep it.(whatever caliber is chosen)

    Jack

    • Mark January 20, 2017, 8:29 am

      Ummmm….that’s the dumbest comment Iv’e ever read.

      • Paul January 20, 2017, 9:03 am

        No, your comment is the dumbest comment so far. You don’t know what APG is, and you don’t know what the BRL lab is. So stfu.

      • LG January 20, 2017, 11:31 am

        Mark ? I reckon so. This would be a good way to have a platoon armed with
        1 Colt SAA in 45
        1 Browning HP in 30 Luger
        1 Luger in 9mm
        1 Smith and Wesson 500
        1 Charter Arms 44SP
        and to make it “musical”
        1 with an XP100 in 221 Fireball.
        One must smile sometimes

    • wade osborne January 20, 2017, 8:31 am

      You need more than $600 if you’re buying a guality hand gun.

    • Mark January 20, 2017, 9:17 am

      Well said, I would certainly prefer that! However, I could envision many concerns for the military would be training, swap ability of loaded mags in the field, repairs/spare parts, and people actually choosing a quality handgun that is reliable. Maybe, a more amicable option would be to give a small set of choices – Glock, Sig, or 1911.

      Personally, I would much rather use a 9mm Glock 34 than any Sig 9mm. Not to knock down Sigs, they are reliable and quality guns, even their 1911 format guns are great, I have owned several non-1911 Sigs in the past in 3 different calibers, and I currently own a 357 Sig 1911. I sold all my other Sigs because I just shoot a Glock or Dan Wesson 1911, or Kimber Polymer much, much better,

      As for 45 ACP caliber, I would prefer a Glock 30, or a Kimber Polymer (double stack) using the Israeli Bul frame with a few low cost forged replacement parts. In a clean urban environment, I would consider a Dan Wesson V-Bob as well.

    • LHS January 20, 2017, 10:15 am

      Think our gov will ever make such a common sense decision, Jack?😂

  • Pete January 20, 2017, 7:54 am

    The main problem with 9MM in the military is the use of hardball ammo. The Geneva Convention prohibits use of any of the more lethal types of bullets. The .45ACP in 230 grain hardball is probably the most effective pistol round in this form. The main question is the ability of all soldiers to use it.

    • Infidel7.62 January 20, 2017, 8:58 am

      The US never signed the convention. That’s why the SEALS and other spec ops units use hollowpoints.

      • jrkmt1 January 20, 2017, 3:47 pm

        Yes, the U.S. is a signatory of the Geneva Convention. The GC is about proper conduct in battle. The Hague Convention limited usage of military ammunition to full metal jacket (FMJ) and the U.S. is a signatory of that, too.
        Special Operations units are allowed to use more “lethal” ammunition because of the limited types of engagements/missions that they conduct. The restriction of the Hague for the use of FMJ was for general battlefield combat.

    • Shawn January 20, 2017, 9:29 am

      It doesn’t have to be round nose FMJ. The shape of the bullet can be changed. Flat nose will crush a cleaner permanent cavity in soft tissues. Or a solid bullet based on the fluted Devel Radially dynamic bullet can create more tissue damage by cutting tissue as it penetrates and then the subsequent temporary cavity ripping the tears open.

    • MB January 20, 2017, 9:39 am

      The use of JHP has recently been authorized as far as I know,

      • Oldefarte January 20, 2017, 6:03 pm

        MB is correct and the use of JHP has been authorized, at least for the nonce, by the US Military (and not just by SpecOp forces). It must be remembered that the USA is NOT a signatory to the conventions outlawing so-called “dum-dum” and other wound enhancing bullets but has volitionally observed the restriction. Given that the majority of our active enemies are non-state actors (and also non-signatories who likely feel no qualms about violating the tenets of “civilized warfare” – an oxymoronic pairing), I see no reason for our continued adherence to those restrictions, volitional or otherwise. Pete and Shawn are also correct that, without advanced wound enhancing ammunition, lethality is chiefly a factor of projectile size/weight, with some contribution by bullet configuration (while retaining a FMJ). That said, in the selection of any pistol, there are multiple considerations: lethality, accuracy, capacity, reliability, portability (and/or concealability) and versatility – all of which compete in the design of any weapon system and, while one might hope for a dymaxic resolution, trade-offs are inevitable. Given that reality, I must declare my belief that lethality is the primary and most critical design criterion. If we are going to limit ourselves to “hardball” ammunition, that inevitably favors the .45 ACP (with the .40 a distant second), with 9mm being a poor option. One way to mitigate the compromises those trade-offs impose is to treat the weapon and its ammo as both part of the same “weapon system” and that means allowing our troops a choice from a variety of ammunition types. If we embrace that reality, then there are plenty of 9mm ammunition options which more than close the “lethality gap” and favor the 9mm based on the other design considerations (a fact recognized by our police agencies, which are reverting back to 9mm, albeit with plenty of ammo options). Put simply, if we are going to arm our soldiers with a 9mm weapon, then let’s make sure that they are allowed to use ammunition which makes 9mm a legitimate battlefield weapon. If we are not going to go that direction, then I think we need to look at returning to a caliber which guarantees that the target will damn well know it’s been shot.

    • jrkmt1 January 20, 2017, 3:44 pm

      The Convention that restricted the type of ammunition that could be used in combat was the Hague Convention, not the Geneva Convention. It did limit usage to full metal jacket (FMJ) stating that it was more humane. This came about because of Great Britain’s usage of fragmenting lead bullets in various engagements against enemies of the Crown.

  • ToddB January 20, 2017, 7:50 am

    So the same piece of junk that a pile of federal agencies and foreign govts sent back due to reliability issues? The 320 is the striker version of the DAO 250 series. I made a trade for a 250 a while back, I was thinking its a Sig. Well sort of, it aint the made in Europe Sig, but some budget gun made here. With Euro made sigs you dont see bad reviews. The 250 had piles of bad ones, I took the risk, and got rid of it quickly. Hopefully Sig has resolved the jamming issues the 250 had. Or in a few years they will be doing another search for a pistol.

  • Infidel7.62 January 20, 2017, 7:50 am

    Nice they went with a SIG, but striker fired? The 229 was all they needed.

  • Mike January 20, 2017, 7:48 am

    Feel really sorry for all those soldiers being stuck with a SIG. Makes me wonder which government officials were bribed with kickbacks and free items.

  • Mark Tercsak January 20, 2017, 7:41 am

    Way back in the early 20th century , Imperial Germany was looking for a new handgun cartridge, something of mild recoil,
    you can carry a lot of, and ship a lot of in time of war, They tested various calibers and decided upon 9mm caliber, they tested
    projectile’s of various designs and weights.Along came the Geneva Convention Limiting Bullet/Projectile design to non-expanding full metal jacketed projectiles.
    Imperial Germany if I recall, went back to the drawing board and designing full-metal jacketed bullets and testing various weights and designs and tested the new 9mm cartridge as the U.S. Government tested the 45 ACP.
    They decided that a 147 grain projectile was optimum for their new 9×19 Parabellum cartridge.
    Note Imperial Germany was not the first nation to adopt the Luger Pistol as a side arm.
    The Imperial German Navy was the first service to adopt their Luger Pistol that was in 1906.
    The Imperial German Army adopted the Luger in 1908.
    The 147 grain FMJ projectile of the 9×19 Parabellum cartridge remained the standard service cartridge for Imperial Germany, the Wimar Republic and Nazi Germany, and was very effective on the battlefield of Europe, for the Allies they also made use of the 9×19 Parabellum Cartridge , in various pistols such as the Awesome Browning-HI-Power.

    I have known a some WWI vets but a ton of WW2 vets, esp. European Theater some picked up Lugers and lot picked up and used the Walther-P-38, they all said they sights on the P-38 were superior to the 1911, found it easy to use and easy to maintain, and found pistol and cartridge to be effective.

    The 9×19 Parabellum enters U.S. Market and becomes a bastardised Cartridge the 9mm Luger.
    American manufactures decided this cartridge new to be supercharged and in my opinion ruined a perfectly good military cartridge.

    First came the 115 grain projectile Full/metal Jacket, used fo range ammo mostly, than self defense ammunition came to be
    and issues arose.

    When I was a kid companies like Super-Val came out with Hollow point 90 grain projectiles, Those bullets were said to be real screamer’s back in the day, but their effectiveness was wanting.

    Nato uses a FMJ 124 grain projectile, about half the weight of the old German service round of 147 grains.

    I would suggest a 147 grain projectile for Nato, stick with what works.

    Since the U.S. is a member of Nato, the 9×19 Parabellum is the Nato Cartridge. So we will still have it in service.

    • Flyboyron January 20, 2017, 12:26 pm

      So, 124 is now “about half of 147”? Must be some kinda new math…

    • Greg January 20, 2017, 2:00 pm

      So 124 is half of 147?

      I am quite certain that 124gr works well, especially since the NATO designation on a 9mm box of ammo essentially means its somewhere around +P to +P+ Since they will both be round nose they will perform differently based on velocity and weight. The slow 147 vs the fast 124. 124 will deliver much more energy, but 147 might penetrate better, unless body armor is involved, then neither is getting through.
      If the US decides to go with hollow points, then 9mm in a quality ammo is a great choice. They could still decide to go 45ACP, but I doubt it.

    • Oaf January 20, 2017, 3:09 pm

      124 gr is half the weight of 147 gr???

    • jrkmt1 January 20, 2017, 4:02 pm

      It was the Hague Convention of 1899 that limited the use of ammunition in combat to the full metal jacket (FMJ), not the Geneva Convention.

  • Scott January 20, 2017, 7:35 am

    Would you nerds finally shut up with the “stopping power” of the 9! Go back to playing your video games.

    • Royce Hayes January 20, 2017, 8:32 am

      The 1911 .45 is still king of the hill on the battlefield. I own a Colt M45A1 along with a Sig P239 .40 for CCW. Use the right tool for the right job.

    • Lucian January 20, 2017, 1:19 pm

      What are you saying, that people just shrug off 9mm bullets? Give me a break.

  • Scorcher33 January 20, 2017, 7:32 am

    I think the .40 caliber would be ideal for stopping power and magazine capacity.

  • MAS January 20, 2017, 7:28 am

    A colossal waste of time, effort and money. I bet they stay with 9mm.

  • Karl Lynn January 20, 2017, 7:14 am

    I agree with Joe Z It takes 3 9mm rounds to one 45 round for stopping power. I carried the classic 1911 for two tours in Nam and I am still here and the other guys are not!!!

    • namnut January 20, 2017, 8:10 am

      Karl, yea I was with you bro. back in the rear with the gear. not even a scratch. well maybe a couple of visits to the doc for STD’s.

    • R Dean Benson January 20, 2017, 8:42 am

      Ill agree on the stopping power of the 45 vs the 9, i own various pistols in both calibers as they each have their place. As an Enhanced CCW citizen andd a retired militery guy, I prefer the 45, convenience and capacity are the reasons I own 9’s. You should always “Dance with the one that brought you to the dance”! I am also a ‘nam combat vet…i sleep better with a 1911.

    • walter ellis January 20, 2017, 10:14 am

      IF YOUR A GOOD SHOT A 22MAG WILL STOP EM,AND YOU CAN CARRY 1000 ROUNDS

      • Gary R. Anderson January 20, 2017, 4:04 pm

        Let’s face it, a 45 is king in stopping power, and steel is useful as a bledgeon ‘cept it needs a cat’s claw if you think war is still about lack of ammo in foxholes. In today’s military a sidearm is a fashion item, and only brought into the fight to make bang-bang so heads stay down until air power arrives. You can bring two dbl stacked poly guns of any kind, (yeah we’re stuck with 9mm) and way more ammo (34 shots), than with Maxwell’s silver hammer. Which leads into .22’s; What’s wrong with a .223 machine pistol (not LR – not Mag) something with 100 rounds of near M-4 firepower to make sure they never get close enough to need a bledgeon-buss.

  • Mark January 20, 2017, 6:59 am

    As much as I like the Sig..I am surprised they did not go with the Glock.Got to be some politics going on in that decision. I think they will stay with the 9mm. I’d still choose a 17 on my hip if in harms way.

  • ScranunSlim January 20, 2017, 6:59 am

    Cue the “Final Jeopardy” theme:
    THE U.S MILITARY RECENTLY PICKED A NEW HANDGUN OF THIS CALIBER

    “What is . . . 9mm?”

  • Robert Wilson January 20, 2017, 6:50 am

    When you look at the guns currently used in IDPA (iron sights) competition today, the top gun is Glock and then S&W. There is no third place since so few other brands are used in any numbers. In competition I see a few Springfield Armory, an occasional CZ. Never a Berretta and never a Sig. If the Berretta was such a great gun you would see it in competition. Who got paid off this time?

    • Joe Volk January 20, 2017, 11:12 am

      At my IDPA league, I’d say Sig is the #3 brand, behind Glock and S&W. Most league shooters prefer not to use a traditional double action, which I believe is one of the main reasons you don’t see the Berettas. One of my IDPA GUNS is a Sig-Sauer P220 Stainless, and those 25 yard mini-steels always seem to come up on a d/a pull of the trigger! I had a Beretta 96 Brigadier that would spit out boxes of soft lead bullets loaded with old shotgun powder until lead flakes and tarry residue were pouring out of it, so I never questioned the reliability of Beretta!

  • James Larry Franks January 20, 2017, 6:43 am

    9mm is the logical choice—-as the UN members all use 9mm—-ammo would be available world wide—-the development of better and better 9mm ammo gives the US the edge over the rest of the world—-it takes more in depth training for .45 due to recoil for the 230 hard ball over the 145 used in 9mm!!! The older you get the more recoil makes a very big difference to how much you can stand !!! I know most of our military are the young to middle age which could handle the recoil better for a time period!!! But this gun will make 9mm feel like low powered .380 at worst!! The extra clips loaded will be the next consideration!!! The bigger and heavier the “Clips/Loaded” adds up quick!!! More law agencies are moving back to 9mm, which signals the new and better ability and quality of the 9mm!!! I really do not think we have seen anything yet when it comes to 9mm ammo development !!! If the US Military continues to use 9mm then the ammo companies have a goal / target for the R&D monies!!!

    • greenman9 January 20, 2017, 9:28 am

      I am nearly 74 y/o and still use a .45. I carry a Glock M30 with a spare 10 rnd mag every time I leave the house. My home protection gun is a Glock M21. I shoot them on a regular basis. Recoil?? What’s that?

  • Jay January 20, 2017, 6:15 am

    I just don’t understand why our government cant seem to make up it’s mind on a handgun and stick with it! They have thrown away billions of dollars looking for a suitable replace for the 1911. Why not just use the 1911 in either or both the 9mm or 45acp and be done with it, it is a timeless master piece I think most can agree!

    • Paul January 20, 2017, 9:58 am

      Because the 1911 is too heavy, and requires too much pre-fire preparation, both thought and physical chambering of the first round. There needs to be a double action pistol, lightweight, and reliable feed, in a caliber that has sufficient energy to produce massive tissue damage, and penetrability. The pistol is not the main weapon of a soldier, and it doesn’t need to be used as a club.

    • kimberproSS January 20, 2017, 10:30 am

      They probably get hung up on an 8 shot magazine vs. the larger capacities of the 9 mm. And if the 1911 was modified to have more in the magazine, it would become a weight discussion. I can hear all that coming up.

  • Joe Z January 20, 2017, 6:11 am

    Given the need for stopping power, which the 9mm didn\’t have, I think 45 cal.is the correct bullet for the SIG

    • jeff hamil January 20, 2017, 8:02 am

      I totally agree. When our soldiers and Marines use their handgun their object is not to wound the enemy!

    • Tony January 20, 2017, 8:14 am

      There is a reason why both our armed forces and law enforcement agencies went back to 9mm, and that is: ammo capacity, controllability and, in the armed forces case, commonality with our NATO allies. And let’s not get into the issue of cost.

      While stopping power is true for the .45 ask any one who has been in a firefight, look at the data and you’ll see a logic for the 9mm: well placed and repeated shots with a 9mm will get the job done any day of the week.

  • Pseudo January 20, 2017, 5:59 am

    What is a “modular system?” Just who is Stephanie Easter, acquisition executives, does she even know how to use a gun or just a civil service mouth piece.

    Lastly for GOA this article is a whole lot of nothing about a subject which I feel many here are interested in, but which has no actual information other than Sig Sauer being chosen.

  • SGT D January 20, 2017, 5:56 am

    O M G!!!! Im sooo excited, now if only I don’t ets before she gets fielded!! 😉

  • GRA January 20, 2017, 5:54 am

    I think this is going to be a mistake. When a Sig functions it functions well but that’s about it. They should’ve chose the Glock in .40 caliber. I carried a Sig for years with DHS-ICE and the grip screws in the alloy frame would strip often. Every time this happened the weapon had to be sent back to the armorers in PA for repair or replacement. It was the agency-issued weapon and although we all individually carried it on the books, a lot of us chose to purchase the Glock as a personal purchase and carry those as primary duty weapons. They were easier to maintain and we maintained them ourselves instead of dealing with all the agency red tape and other nonsense. Obviously the Dept. of the Army isn’t any smarter. Sad.

    • Joe Volk January 20, 2017, 11:26 am

      Well, luckily, the p320 doesn’t have an alloy frame, or grip screws. The take-down lever is also quicker and easier to train and use than the Glock tabs; you can field strip a Sig while wearing mittens!

    • Greg January 20, 2017, 2:11 pm

      Agree with Joe, this P320 is NOT a P226 or P229. The modular system is what sold it. When I was at SHOT show 3 years ago, the Sig rep showed me the takedown method and it instantly clicked that they did this to win a military contract. No need to pull the trigger, you just turn one lever. You can remove the guts of this gun in seconds and drop it into a new frame without a gunsmith, use it on a different caliber, it doesn’t matter. Externally it’s Sig’s version of a glock, polymer frame and striker fired, and the civilian version has no manual safety lever. You could issue a soldier just a fire control unit and track that part, then they could choose the size frame and/or slide that fits them and the mission best. The same serial# fire control unit can be used on a 12 shot sub compact 9mm or a full sized 45ACP with rail and light and 10rd capacity.

  • Chris Baker January 20, 2017, 5:54 am

    Sometimes change is good. Sometimes change is bad. Change from a vending machine is unlikely. For the military, if it comes to fighting with handguns, I think they’ve already lost and it won’t make much difference if you have a Sig, a Beretta or a Colt (Springfield Armory). It’s totally different from defending your home or yourself in a civilian situation. I like the 1911 and think that it would be just as good for the military today as it was 100 years ago. I guess I’m old fashioned, I keep a revolver for self defense and a supplemental Mossberg 500 for those times when you might find civil unrest is coming to your area.

  • Ron Freese January 20, 2017, 5:46 am

    Great news, but what caliber is it going to be?

  • Ed Sjolin January 20, 2017, 5:21 am

    Having drug the old 1911 around for years as my issue weapon, there is some nostalgia involved in my opinions. The impetus for the 1911 was its stopping power. The .45 ACP had it in spades. I have heard myriad reasons for the switch to the Beretta. Everything from matching calibers with NATO partners to the 1911 being too unwieldy for feminine hands. There is no doubt that Sig makes fine weaonry but isn’t there something comparable, quality-wise manufactured in the US? I mean, wtf, over?

    • Greg January 20, 2017, 2:12 pm

      Most Sigs sold in the US are made in the US and they are building a second new factory to increase production.

  • Dave January 20, 2017, 4:13 am

    This corrects a blunder made over 30 years ago when Sig actually beat Beretta in that competition, but the Army picked the miserable M-9 (M-92) Beretta because it was a few dollars cheaper. I was an Army Ordnance Branch officer at Aberdeen Proving Ground during the 1980’s testing, and knew some of the people involved. The Army made a political decision then when they picked an Italian company, they wanted to throw the Italians a bone because they wanted to station US cruise missiles on the Italian island of Lampedusa. We got stuck with the crappy Beretta M-9 for all those years. Both me and my son had to carry the M-9 in combat, and neither of us had much confidence in it. I would have preferred a rusty .38 revolver left over from World War II over the Beretta. Both Glocks and SIGs are durable, reliable pistols, but the SIG best matched the stated requirements..

  • Charlie J Boudreaux January 20, 2017, 3:54 am

    Not surprised.The “fix” was always in.

  • b January 20, 2017, 3:47 am

    Hard to argue against a Sig.

    • SAM May 4, 2017, 11:52 am

      It’s a near $600 Million dollar initial contract that will over years grow to 6 Billion dollars. It’s my contention that this contract should have gone to a US company for both economic and strategic reasons. Based on the Mil-Spec and review of the competing weapons, at least one of the US companies had an equal and in my opinion a better submission. I’m aware of the reasons given for the award but I can assure you that they are fabricated. It would be naive to pretend that other influences don’t play a part in an award this large, but as I asserted the economic and strategic impact is destructive to our country. It can be argued that this German company has a US based sister company that employs US citizens, however, the profit goes to Germany and the bulk of the salary pays German residents as well. The exportation of our tax money and the impact to our American companies are enough to reconsider the circumstances surrounding this decision. There is a more important reason this should have never happened. Small arms are arguably the most important tool in our military, and half of those weapons have now been contracted with a country that we at one time were in war with. (A country that started both world wars) Even if an alliance is maintained, the complications of crossing boarders during times of war are not as strategically sound as keeping equipment here with US owned companies that have the same US based love of their country during times of war. Even non-military companies joined together to support our war effort. It’s a good assumption that this foreign company would do the same for their country. Today our metal and large machinery has moved overseas, this is one more weak link in our strategic planning.

      Minds and alliances change, were having a hard time keeping Americans focused on the good of our country, we certainly cant count on patriotism from foreign alliances. Furthermore, the US prides itself on designing and providing the best for our troops, this purchase gives us the exact same equipment that many other countries have access to. We could have had better.

      Later this year is another military contract for service rifles (SURG), eventually constituting the other half of our small arms arsenal. This same German company is competing with other competent US based manufacturers; please do not put all of our eggs in one basket!

      Thank you for your time, as someone who wants the best for our country I’m confident that you feel the way I do.

  • Obeezy January 20, 2017, 2:55 am

    I’m a SIG fan (have several) but this 320 platform is a POS. The “modularity” requirement is an unnecessary, handcuffing, limitation. If the G19 is now good enough for standard issue to SEAL Teams– its good enough for the rest. At the end of the day, my sense is that country of origin also played a role, as this stepchild in Sig’s lineup is made at the NH SIGARMS factory. Although Glock might’ve agreed to shift U.S. military-market G19 production to the Georgia-based facility that produces the 42, they probably didn’t want to rely on Austria to supply our standard sidearm. A missed opportunity.

    • Greg January 20, 2017, 2:15 pm

      Since we don’t need different sizes, should we also eliminate uniform sizes? Those with smaller or larger hands will shoot better with a gun that fits.

      • Obeezy January 27, 2017, 3:09 am

        Agreed. And Glock makes one for practically every hand size. If the soldier’s hands are actually too small for a G19 (which is a compact), then they must be related to Mr. Donald J. Trump. lol

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend