So is both the M17 and M18 trash or what?
- Thread starter The Quartermaster
- Start date
Box
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2018
- Messages
- 2,149
I believe Sig's response to that video would be - nuh uh
I'm biased because I dont like Sig pistols. The 220 was a nice gun, but for the money I'd have bought a 1911 or a Glock. I even had a CZ clone that was chambered in 45 - and also I liked that one better than the 220.
I put plenty of rounds through the Army M-11 (P228) and the trigger was garbage - not as bad as the 320, but not as good as a Glock. For that matter, given a choice between a 228 and the M9, the M9 would be my go to. When I did a contracting stint training folks on the 320 - I hated it. The gun feels top heavy to me - poorly balanced - and the triggers are garbage.
All just my opinion - but that's why I dont (and wont) have a Sig in my collection.
When I picture in my head, a company that has managed to sell the US Government an over engineered pistol of questionable design that has been demonstrating its poor reliability for almost ten years now - then toss into the mix that it was selected after the government seemed to have inexplicably just stopped testing and went - YEP, BEST GUN, BUY IT...
Then buy a belt fed machine gun and a service carbine that shoot a proprietary cartridge that has already been proven to weari out barrels at a MUCH higher rate that any of the other current or alternative round without a defensible degree of improvement that has ZERO compatibility across other NATO and partner forces logistics chains because 'muh Sig - one of the thoughts that pop into my brain is corporate "collusion" with DOD acquisitions people
corruption is too strong a word
but it is a word
I'm biased because I dont like Sig pistols. The 220 was a nice gun, but for the money I'd have bought a 1911 or a Glock. I even had a CZ clone that was chambered in 45 - and also I liked that one better than the 220.
I put plenty of rounds through the Army M-11 (P228) and the trigger was garbage - not as bad as the 320, but not as good as a Glock. For that matter, given a choice between a 228 and the M9, the M9 would be my go to. When I did a contracting stint training folks on the 320 - I hated it. The gun feels top heavy to me - poorly balanced - and the triggers are garbage.
All just my opinion - but that's why I dont (and wont) have a Sig in my collection.
When I picture in my head, a company that has managed to sell the US Government an over engineered pistol of questionable design that has been demonstrating its poor reliability for almost ten years now - then toss into the mix that it was selected after the government seemed to have inexplicably just stopped testing and went - YEP, BEST GUN, BUY IT...
Then buy a belt fed machine gun and a service carbine that shoot a proprietary cartridge that has already been proven to weari out barrels at a MUCH higher rate that any of the other current or alternative round without a defensible degree of improvement that has ZERO compatibility across other NATO and partner forces logistics chains because 'muh Sig - one of the thoughts that pop into my brain is corporate "collusion" with DOD acquisitions people
corruption is too strong a word
but it is a word
Last edited:
The Quartermaster
Verified Military
- Joined
- May 3, 2020
- Messages
- 1,105
It killed an Airman. The kid enlisted for whatever reasons and I feel sad that it was for nothing now, and no way, shape, or form should anyone be issued a firearm that may potentially kill them or one of us next to them. Zero confidence. Yeah, yeah, he had it pointed at him but that's IMO a leadership failure that needs to be blamed too because the kid probably didn't know right from wrong because no one taught him about muzzle awareness even inside a holster.
That command and Sig need to be put on blast for it.
That command and Sig need to be put on blast for it.
Similar threads
