Quick question for every one! How do you feel about the new sidearm of the United States Military? The Sig p320 is fun to shoot, but there has been some serious questions about it’s safety and quality of parts. Do you think that they should have kept the Beretta M9, or do you think that they should have gone with another route for example Glock 17, 19, Sig 229,226, CZ, or HK. I want to know what you think they should have chosen!
So what do you think? keep sig or go with something else? What do you think they should have gone with?
I think Glock or CZ either one is a good choice…I don’t do hammer fired pistols or SA/DA…
Cool! Quick question, and pardon my lack of knowledge what is the difference between the sig p320 and the X carry? I was under the impression they are very close in design?
Answer: only if she is 5’3”, or the real answer cleaning your nation of idols. Dealers choice!
For me I think I would have wanted them to go with the Beretta M9-A3 G model, but we all know the military wants a manual safety.
X-Carry has different frame design and more options. However, you could still exchange frames and slides one to each other.
Ok now I got it. Thank you for the explanation.
I would need to look in to it closer. Glock is a good handgun for civilians, lots of aftermarket options. Sig is also a very good handgun. CZ makes a super handgun, if memory serves, it’s the most widely used handgun world wide for law enforcement. But, for US military use, is should be a US manufactured firearm. IMO.
My opinion is they should have gone with Glock. We’ve had tons of time to see Glocks track record with PD use, and I think it was foolish to go with a mostly unproven design coming from a company whose idea of quality control is to send their crap out to the general public and then deny it has any issues as the poor saps keep sending it back to them time and time again at $40-$50 a pop for shipping. And yes, I have had issues with SIG, and it does color my opinion. If it was a P220, P226, P229 from back when SIG didn’t make junk, then it would be a wash for me.
Not really…I have no use for hammer fired pistols…you have your preference and I have mine…most blondes are not worth the trouble…
I think they should have stayed with the Beretta. I’ve heard quality issues with the Sig. Just my opinion
What were they thinking when choosing the M9?
Bigger, more unwieldy and less powerful than the 1911.
There were a lot of better choices in 9mm, both then and now.
The CZ75 would be a very good choice in my mho.
As someone who carries a Beretta for my job, I will never carry one for my own purpose. I’ve seen too many locking blocks crack to feel ultra confident in them. The Sig 226 is a vastly superior handgun from my experience.
Interesting topic. The M9’s were shot out and due for replacement. I would have picked the Jericho 941 F9. Ron Cohen turned SIG Sauer into a junk brand. MIM parts and dirt poor QC yet still their pistol costs far north of 1k. Such prices are insane. Anything pre-2004 SIG Sauer is good to go, although I still prefer the Jericho due to far lower bore axis and stability. Not only is the Jericho F9 a superior hand gun, buying it as a replacement for the entire US military hand gun inventory would also be a strong political signal to our only real ally and friend in the Middle-East.
This would be a good hand gun setup overall across the entire board:
Israel Weapon Industries Jericho 941 F9 w/;
Meprolight Jericho Tru-Dot Sights
Hogue Jericho Black Rubber Grip
Surefire X300-A Ultra Light
Mec-Gar 19-Round Magazines loaded up w/ Speer LE Duty 124/147gr GDHP Ammo
215 Gear Ultimate COBRA Riggers Belt w/ High Speed Gear Inc Slim-Grip Padded Belt - Slotted
Blade-Tech Custom OWB w/ Tac-Light Holster & Tek-Lok
High Speed Gear Inc Pistol TACO Triple Magazine Pouches
Isn’t the Jericho similar to the CZ?