Is replacing the M9 with the P320/M17 worth the money, time,

>>33042316
I'm optimistic.
If the design is as modular as they say, a shift to 9mm and .45 acp could be interesting.
It could also make a shift to caseless pistol ammo easier.

>>33042316
the m9s were beat to shit and needed to be replaced regardless

>>33042378
This

Like most in the military that we're issued a M9 postol, I only used it once in a war zone. That was against a feral dog. Every other time t was an AR variant. That M9 was used often at the range and was beat to hell with cracks in the slide and frame.

they fucked up and are gettig a version with a manual safety.

>>33042358
>If the design is as modular as they say, a shift to 9mm and .45 acp could be interesting.
what the fuck are you yammering about?
why the fuck would any branch of the dod field a "standard" sidearm in different calibers?

>>33042467
>AR variant
this is how I know you're full of shit

It's not about the handguns, it's about the logistics. Replacing parts is a simpler process with the M17.

>>33042316
The army thought so. M9s are old and busted, dude.

The "modular" part of the P320 that they wanted is really ingenious. Crack the frame? Have a new one, it slips right on. Bore shot out? Change the barrel, it takes 2 minutes.

>>33042358
The model they chose can switch between .357 Sig, 9mm, and .40 S&W.

>>33042791
Military requirement. Can't have soldiers blowing their toes off because of itchy trigger fingers.

This little piggy went to market, this little piggy stayed home...

>>33042972
It's high time we switch back to .45, it's not like the other NATO members ever do anything ever.

>>33042316

The M9s needed replacement due to being beat to shit
The P320s they got at near hi-point prices
The P320 doesn't need fitting when swapping parts between guns, so the supply should last longer

The main issue will be the mags

>>33043366
>It's high time we switch back to .45,
Why?
What possible reason?

.45 has no benefits over modern 9mm.

>>33042791
What is with this stupid fucking manual safeties are bad meme. Kys.

M9s are garbage. Literally, L I T E R A L L Y anything would be better.

>>33042316
It's not about worthiness. You have to replace them, one way or the other.

>>33043366
*10mm
fixed it for you. 45 is for fuds.
>>33047423
moron who has never owned a m9

>>33045413
I don't think we need to switch because of how little pistols get used, but when using FMJs .45 does have benefits over 9mm. They aren't using hollowpoints.

>>33047521
They aren't really using the pistols either. When it comes to people that aren't going to be using or training much with a handgun, capacity and control are still bigger factors. From a logistics standpoint moving to to toaworse to a worse and to a worse and more expensive caliber is retarded.

If they were worried we would use the HP that the US is permitted to use

>>33043068
He can mean he got issued a m16, m4, and m27 at different times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOHeASx7tdw

>>33042316
If for no other reason than they cost about the same to acquire as new M9's, and we are in DESPERATE need of new handguns, yes.

Even if we didn't swap to a new pistol design, we need new pistols because the old ones are ancient and falling apart.

>>33043366
As much as I love .45, I disagree. 99% of the people who get issued pistols get very little training or range time with them, so capacity counts a hell of a lot.

The differences between FMJ .45 and FMJ 9mm are significant, and both have pro's and con's, but ultimately it doesn't matter--they're pistol rounds. Shoot a guy in the chest/head/pelvis with either and they're going down, shoot a guy anywhere else with either and they're not.

Those who actually need good performance from a pistol (SOF) have the latitude to use what they see fit regardless of caliber, and yes they DO use hollowpoints (Gold Dots), pretty much regardless of caliber.

>>33047496
Found the moron that cannot possibly fathom that a pistol made in the late 80's or, if you're really really lucky, early 90's that's suffered decades of abuse at the hands of officers who couldn't give half a shit about it is in no way, shape, or form similar to a civilian 92F/FS.

Military m9's are huge steaming piles of shit. Maybe 30 years ago they were good pistols, but the military opted for a couple options (like the pinned-in-place sights that can't even be drift-adjusted) that make them worse than their civilian counterparts.

>>33048018
>significant
It's 2.4mm wider than 9mm. That's not significant, especially because FMJ doesn't expand.

>>33048038
>hurr my 30 year old car that I've done only the most basic maintenance on is a pile of shit!

That's how retarded you sound. Saying a decades old, beat to shit example of anything is representative of the quality of the thing itself is beyond stupid. They could have just bought new M9s. The only real problem with the M9 is handlets can't grip it well.

Sig must have offered the P320s at some retardedly low price hoping to make money in the long run with maintenance contracts.

>>33048047
Great reading comprehension there fucko.

File: twd-negan-hatchet-204474-640x320-1.png (93KB, 313x320px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 313x320px

>>33048123
Direct quote from (You)
>The differences between FMJ .45 and FMJ 9mm are significant

>>33048120
Sounds like a 100% legitimate argument to me.

And yes, the P320 is costing the government less to buy than a new M9a1, much less the M9a3 that Beretta's been trying to shove down their throats.

>>33048162
>differences
>plural
>as in, there are more than one
Also, having a 21.3% larger diameter is pretty fucking significant.

Also nice cherrypicking, because the literal next sentence is
>but ultimately it doesn't matter

>>33048168
My point was it's not that the M9's design is shit, just that the current battered pistols have reached the end of their lives. Just saying

>M9s are garbage. Literally, L I T E R A L L Y anything would be better.

is fucking stupid. If he had said the M9s currently in inventory, then that would be a different story.

As far as the price goes, thanks, thats what I figured. I just hope it works out, because personally I don't see any reason to go with the P320 over any other modern plastic 9. I highly doubt every soldier will get the frame they actually want.

>>33048184
>>differences
>>plural
>>as in, there are more than one
So what I said is still true
>Also, having a 21.3% larger diameter is pretty fucking significant.
.0008mm is 21.3% bigger than .0006296mm. That's not significant in real size, only in percentages. Lrn2math
>Also nice cherrypicking, because the literal next sentence is
>>but ultimately it doesn't matter
So? You're wrong and you're mad that somebody called you out on your bullshit. Get over yourself, faggot.

>>33048217
I wasn't the one claiming they were "Literally, L I T E R A L L Y anything would be better." though, I was simply pointing out that the ones we have in inventory are beat to shit and worn out.

Also that the military either requested a couple changes or did them themselves compared to the civilian 92F and 92FS that made the guns worse than their civilian counterparts. Not significantly worse, especially when they were done properly (ooh my rear sight is pinned in place but it's shooting straight, big fucking deal), but there have been examples of times where it has royally fucked over a gun (one of the M9's I got issued had a rear sight that was pinned in place with the sight a quarter of the way out of the dovetail and it shot several METERS to the left at 25 yards).

Also the fact that they didn't finish swapping out the shear-prone locking blocks til like 2008 when the deficiency was noted in 1989.

File: Sig-Sauer-XM17-winner-right-side.jpg (110KB, 1170x780px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1170x780px

>>33042316
When will we be seeing these in GI holsters? And more importantly, when will the rest of us be able to buy pic related(preferably with black finish)?

>>33043344
>No .45 acp option
They dun goofed

>>33049564
SOF can get whatever they want, I wouldn't be completely shocked if .45 P320's received some use in the coming years

>>33043344
I'm not really sold on the whole modularity thing, logistics would probably have a fit over procuring any more frames than necessary and it still doesn't fix the rattle from the rails if they get worn out.

Not really saying itll be a problem but I don't see it being an improvement over just getting more M9s or a similar standard frame.

Find it entertaining 106 years later they are still worried about officers blowing off their extremities.

>>33049539
I was going to wait to get one but I don't like the safety and proprietary rear sight plate that prevents you from using regular sights. Went ahead and got a regular P320

File: fJpdLsK.jpg (130KB, 1152x2048px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1152x2048px

The Sig 320 makes sense from a law enforcement/government/military point of view. One gun can be adapted into many sizes and 3 different calibers--that, we all know. Likewise, the mass purchase of parts and x-change kits will bring the cost of configuring these pistols down. And at the same time, the gun has no real faults that make a bad choice--it runs excellently.

HOWEVER, in the civilian market the Sig 320 is an absolute fucking meme. X-change kits cost $300-400--almost the price of a new gun. If you get bored with the lack of variety, spending this amount of money on a conversion kit is not fun. Don't get me wrong: it is better to use one platform than many so you don't lose muscle memory and familiarity with the gun you want to use. On the other hand, if you like to use multiple platforms, the 320 sucks. But even if you individually bought two of the same brands of pistols with different frame sizes or calibers (M&P, Glock, FN) over the Sig 320, how much money would you really save, as compared to one Sig 320 and an x-change kit? Only a couple hundred bucks. At that point, I wouldn't consider the 320 to be much of a bargain to one individual. If you don't like the ergonomics of the 320, it's even less considerable.

The Sig 320 is a good gun in its own right, though, and I don't think it's a mistake that the Army decided to go with it.

Pic related is my 320 compact I got a couple of weeks ago.

>>33047746
had almost forgotten about this guy, why doesn't jewtube promote his videos?

>>33049968
Oh god, they're really sticking with x-change? That is going to lead some people down a bad road.

That aside you hit the nail on the head why someone might want one. Though it ignores instead of a frame you cam have two guns for that price, knowing owing Sig it won't get any cheaper so I expect it to flop on the commercial market.

>>33050181
Maybe he doesn't tag his videos?
I fucking love the man and am selfishly glad his Q&As remain comfy and small.

>>33048120
Its almost as if they need a firearm that fits a wide range of people.

>>33048120
Its almost as if military PT standards favor smaller body types.
>also that slide safety placement.

File: 1487544079437.gif (2MB, 635x348px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 635x348px

>>33051214
>Army
>ever debating to stupid one size fits all solutions
>procurement and logistics
>ever signing off on more than one frame
>armoured
>giving a shit to use more than one frame

>>33042316
Since when has the military done anything that makes sense?

>>33043344
>Military requirement. Can't have soldiers blowing their toes off because of itchy trigger fingers.

This little piggy got a medical discharge.

>>33051272
The smallest guy in my platoon had the highest pt score. Fucking manlet arms make their push ups easy.

>>33051272
It makes sense from an efficiency standpoint, even if manlets are intrinsically inferior.

>>33049646
That's because, 106 years later, even with manual safeties on every-fucking-thing, officers ARE still blowing off their extremities.

>>33049539
Other than the safety that's just a full length RX slide on a carry frame with an extended compact length magazine in 9x19, which all can be bought already.

>>33052789
Thing is, I'm one of the apparently very few people who wants a safety on a striker pistol. Also I'd like the *option* of mounting an optic somewhere down the line, not necessarily having to buy one with the pistol.

>>33050181
It's less flashy and more in depth than the majority of simpletons care to watch

>>33054715
Their optic is pretty good, got to shoot someones RX at the range today because I had my P320 (and mags) with me.
>Mfw I actually made a decent group at 10yd with a pistol
>Astigmatism is hell

File: Tactical Espionage Action Figure Kojima.jpg (266KB, 739x1024px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 739x1024px

>>33042316
>Is replacing the M9 with the P320/M17 worth the money, time, and effort?

Yes, mostly because the long term costs of retaining the M9 appears to be no better.

The Sig won out because it can get guns and parts out faster and cheaper, both now and in the longrun.

The M9 is a perfectly reliable 9mm, but the units in use have long outlasted their service life, and the commissioned replacement part companies (not Beretta) are not top quality.

The same thing was happening to aging M4s in stock armories, before FN took over the contract Colt had.

So from a management perspective, the 320 seems like a big improvement.

>>33055364
There just going to fuck it up like they always fuck up by having shit replacement parts outsourced to some senator's third cousin.

>>33049968
Yeah it's a bit silly, just buy a whole new gun. I think they should be marketing the frames ("grip modules") harder, since they're so cheap. I slightly want a 320 so that I could hydrodip a replacement frame

>>33055944
It is over 300 for one and it won't get any cheaper.

>>33056100
What's $300, the kit or the grip module? I was referring to the cheapness of the $40 polymer frames.

>>33056141
Oh, I assumed you were talking about the kit. Why would anyone give a shit about cheap grips?

>>33042316
I don't see why people are factoring in caliber exchange kits (which are a meme, however frame swapping is extremely useful imo), the military isn't adopting two different handgun calibers, the only modular thing the military is going to use is frame swapping if at all.

File: p320c.jpg (97KB, 640x486px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 640x486px

I've used a Glock 19 gen4 for years and only recently switched to a P320 compact. I'm head over heels for it. It even conceals a little better than the G19 when you use a small grip module. The finger grooves on the Glock 19 are totally unnecessary and a burden for anyone with large hands. P320 ergos are superior in nearly every way. The trigger feels a lot nicer, too. I regret not having switched sooner.

Don't get me wrong. I loved my G19, but I consider it my "beginner" piece.