Replacement of Browning HP, Sig Sauer 225 begins

[Jarnhamar]

That it is OZ. I recently turned down the chance on owning a Sig Pro P2022 because for another 200 bucks I could get a P226

So uhh shoot me a PM and we can work out a price for that 226 after my next purchase (.308)

Cool pics Kevin.  (Stole your grip tape idea for my .45 before)


The SIG feels like it's make to shoot evil doers in the face.

 

[KevinB]

On metal guns (and plastic fantastic issue guns) its much easier to add grip tape to the gun, than checker/stripple whatever.
  I know some who use Hockey tape - but I find the grip tape is better for me, I tend to sweat a ton when I'm scared 'working', and if I need my pistol, odds are I'm running a pretty tight O ring by that point.

 

[Good2Golf]

...I tend to sweat a ton when I'm scared 'working', and if I need my pistol, odds are I'm running a pretty tight O ring by that point.

World's most interesting man: "I don't always need my pistol, but when I do, I run a pretty tight 'O' ring..."

;D

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Just for comparison to the 226 pictures here are the Sig 2340 and 2022, the 2340 is out of production, basically same as the 2022 but uses the Sig rail

 

[ouyin2000]

So the recent PM's visit to the north has brought back the issue of the Rangers needing new rifles. Has anyone heard anything about the BHP replacement lately? Is it still shelved until they figure out a better criteria?

 

[NavyShooter]

Are there any other new pistols on the market that will fit the requirements yet I wonder?

Or have they changed the requirements?

NS

Well I copy pasted this from above - I wonder what "Full size" means?

1. Full Size, DAO Trigger
2. Current NATO Service + 2 years
3. 9mm
4. Magazine >13rds, >15rds is better
5. Unloaded weight + empty magazine must be < 950g
6. Barrel must be 102mm or longer
7. Trigger pull must be between 4-8 lbs
8. Ambidextrous magazine release
9. Must not need to pull the trigger to disassemble
10. No magazine safety
11. No safety devices to manipulate
12. Must have an M 1913 accessory rail
13. Trigger pull weight must be consistent every Shot.

Color me confused but I don't actually see a pistol that meets the criteria anywhere?

Several Federal Entities down here issue Glock's and Smith&Wesson M&P guns - but in either .40S&W or .45ACP.

Hk seems to have the only truly ambo mag release - with their dual lever.  But the USP is a brick, and a poor contender to their new designs.

28 NATO Countries use the following

Albania - M9/Beretta 92
Belgium - Hi-Power and FN 5.7
Bulgaria - Sig Pro 2022
Canada - No2 Mk1* (Browning Hi-Power) and Sig P225
Croatia - HS2000 / Springfield XD
Czech Republic - CZ-75
Denmark - Glock 17
Estonia - Hk USP
France - Hk USP and Glock 17
Germany - Hk USP
Greece - Glock 17
Hungary - Hk USP
Iceland - Glock 17
Italy - Beretta
Latvia - Glock 19 and Glock 17
Lithuania - Glock 17
Luxembourg - Mk1 Browning Hi-Power
Netherlands - Glock 17
Norway - Glock 17
Poland - well GROM uses the Hk USP
Portugal - Glock 19 (replaced the Hk USP in 2009)
Romania - appears to still be their version of the Tokarev
Slovakia - appears to still be their version of the Makarov
Slovenia - I cannot locate any info
Spain - Hk USP
Turkey - Zignana C45 - a .45 ACP gun
United Kingdom - BHP and Sig P226
United States - M9 Beretta, Glock 19, and 1911




Okay so the current Browning Hi-Power is out, as is the SigP225.

Leaving the remaining 9mm guns as:

Sig P226R -
Sig P228R -
Sig Pro 2022 -
Glock 17 - squeeze trigger on disassembly
Glock 19 - squeeze trigger on disassembly
HS2000/Springfield XD - pretty poor performance in any US LE entity testing.
Beretta M-9 - Not DOA in issue configuration - and too big/heavy
CZ 75 B - not DOA
CZ PO1 - to small
HK USP – expensive and no 1913 rail


Based on the above I believe that the spec has been written for the Sig Pro 2022 exclusively to justify a sole source award.

 

[Haggis]

Unless I missed it (scrolling through this thread after midnight), has this august group of posters considered the Beretta PX4 Storm, similar to what's used by the CBSA?

Granted the CBSA model has a 102 mm barrel and a magazine disconnect, but Beretta offers much more than one model of the PX4 Storm.

 

[KevinB]

Not in use by a NATO military...

 

[J.J]

Unless I missed it (scrolling through this thread after midnight), has this august group of posters considered the Beretta PX4 Storm, similar to what's used by the CBSA?

Granted the CBSA model has a 102 mm barrel and a magazine disconnect, but Beretta offers much more than one model of the PX4 Storm.

They're junk and pray the CF avoids them. They require frequent servicing, break easily and several have come from the factory with some serious issues (sights, pitted barrels etc)

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I wonder how much of the issue is CBSA lack of firearms experience and how much is the market pressure on Beretta to supply guns? A lot of manufacturers seem to suffer Quality issues attempting to keep up to the demand. A quick google does not show a horrendous level of complaint, most of it seems directed towards how the company handles customer issues rather than the guns.

 

[KevinB]

Even folks I know who work for Berretta tell others to avoid that gun.
  It stunk in any US entity testing I am aware of.

I would SERIOUSLY question who tested the CBSA guns, and what the test criteria was.


Looking at the current crop of 9mm guns, I think the Hk P30 is probably the "best gun" - barrel is too short for the CF.

The UK is going Glock, but the requirements of the SOW say that the trigger must not need to be depressed for dis-assembly.

Smith and Wesson M&P9 can be dis-assembled without firing the trigger - but I am not aware of NATO Army adoption.
 
My current CCW is a M&P9 CORE (with Leupold DeltaPoint and SF X300 WML) - as much as I like the ability to place an optic, I don't think the Miniature Red Dots are yet ready for a service pistol beyond some limited HR and covert pistol only roles inside SMU's.


As an honest look at what the CF needs, the S&W M&P9 is probably the best candidate for the weapon (I have no financial ties to S&W BTW).
  Smith may be willing to allow the CF to buy a version of the TDP
  They are in MA, and not too far from the border (8 hrs by car) that Tech Visits would be problematic (Hk or Glock).
However once again not in NATO service - and the mag release is ambi by swapping, so it would depend on the interpretation of ambi, and is striker fired not DOA

Hk P30 is a nice gun - the P30L (longer barrel and slide) - the advantages to it are the grip is modular (which I cannot believe in this day and age that no one required in the SOW for the Pistol...) so the shooter can change the width and length of the grip to accommodate their hands.

 

[Ostrozac]

The criteria for our new service pistol will simply have to be revised, since the original pistol that was described didn't exist, and due to the requirement that it already be in service with a NATO country, no company could modify an existing pistol to meet the requirements. The CF will have to think carefully about what they want, which they didn't do the last time around. If some of the requirements are driven by legal liability issues for military police, or are features intended to reduce negligent discharges, maybe those requirements will have to be met, and things like an inch of barrel length can be handwaved away.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The G19 is likely a great choice, but I agree with kevinB, I think the M&P is a tad better. I have the basic M&P and now also the Compact 9mm, shooting it yesterday, it's a fabulous gun to shoot and from the draw every round went into a 8"x11" target at 20m. Despite the pistol being operated by self.....

 

[KevinB]

For a small fee I would be willing to liaise with the user communities and distill a viable RFP.

:nod:

 

[J.J]

I wonder how much of the issue is CBSA lack of firearms experience and how much is the market pressure on Beretta to supply guns? A lot of manufacturers seem to suffer Quality issues attempting to keep up to the demand. A quick google does not show a horrendous level of complaint, most of it seems directed towards how the company handles customer issues rather than the guns.

How can a pistol coming from the factory with sight issues or a pitted barrel have ANYTHING to do with a level of experience? I am speaking from my experiences and knowledge, I don't need Google. The PX4 has been in service for 6 years and it is still has several issues.

Even folks I know who work for Berretta tell others to avoid that gun.
  It stunk in any US entity testing I am aware of.

I would SERIOUSLY question who tested the CBSA guns, and what the test criteria was.

It was contracted out to the RCMP (who have some experience with firearms). The selection tests appear to have been conducted fairly, they looked at 5 or 6 different products, but service issues and longevity are whats wrong now.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I was speaking to this line: They require frequent servicing, break easily

I should have been clearer in my comment that it addressed both issues.

 

[KevinB]

Perhaps I get spoiled dealing with my customer base but most folks who test a firearm do the following.

1) Write an articulated Requirements Document based on the needs (real and perceived) from their entity.
2) Sometimes they even publish a draft RFP to get feedback from Industry to ensure they have a real product identified
3) Screen the responses to get viable candidates
4) Conduct Baseline testing with the viable candidates (Assess for paper conformity to SOW, Initial Testing (Accuracy, Reliability, User/Human Factors)
5) Short List Candidates to a manageable field (entity dependent)
6) Conduct Limited Operational Testing with small sample size, in conjunction with enhanced reliability & lifecycle testing, Environmental testing
7) Award Contract - and perhaps award it to three companies to give "failure option" with the preferred option.


For those not familiar with #6
  This typically will be done with a No Cost Loan Agreement and samples sent by the manufacturer.
If we say 10 samples - 5 would go for Operational Testing, 3 would be placed in Enhanced Reliability and LifeCycle testing (estimate service life is say 100,000 rounds and/or 10 years - so each gun would be run thru 100,000 round with MRBS and MRBF calculated to that point.  As well 2 weapons would be shot to MRBF in Environmental testing - extreme hot, extreme cold, Salt Spray, Mud, wet/water immersion, dusty etc.  Whatever is service relevant.

While I agree the RCMP has some good experiences and resources in terms of people and facilities - I am curious as to what the CBSA asked the RCMP to do, as that would have determined what the Firearms Lab was allowed to do in the testing protocols.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I was shooting an HK P30L last week and it's an amazing pistol to shoot. It feels like a lot of work was put into making it comfortable and ergonomic. Hopefully if I managed to get my hands on an HK45 it will be just as smooth.

The must be in use by nato critia seems pretty silly to me.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The NATO requirement at first blush sounds reasonable, a tried and combat tested platform. Except that pretty much all the NATO partners are in the same boat in regards to pistols. Technically the Glock now qualifies for that bit, as does the M9. The local sheriffs here have almost all transitioned to the M&P and everyone I have talked to is pleased.

 

[Mr. St-Cyr]

What happened to private purchase? Done deal.