Replacement of Browning HP, Sig Sauer 225 begins

[MeatheadMick]

Interesting, the Sig P250 seems to meet most of the requirements... and it's designed to be modular.  Could be interesting to see the NATO 9mm in the hands of the majority of the Forces, whereas a .45 could be utilized by MPs and bring us up to the standard of most modern police forces. As well CANSOF, CP Operators and boarding parties could be equipped with the compact version.

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/switch/sig-sauer-p250-e.html

 

[LordOsborne]

Interesting, the Sig P250 seems to meet most of the requirements... and it's designed to be modular.  Could be interesting to see the NATO 9mm in the hands of the majority of the Forces, whereas a .45 could be utilized by MPs and bring us up to the standard of most modern police forces. As well CANSOF, CP Operators and boarding parties could be equipped with the compact version.

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/switch/sig-sauer-p250-e.html

The P250 certainly looks interesting. It's not used by any NATO militaries, though. Also, I think most law enforcement agencies (especially in North America) use .40 S&W, not .45 ACP.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The 250 struggles to be the gun that it's older cousian the 2022 is. The modular concept fell through due to dismal support by Sig. That being said I have no doubt Sig would offer a competative deal on it as they desperatly need a large purchase to make this gun appear to be a success.

I have not drank the Glock Koolaid, but  suspect that the G19 will offer 90% of everything we need at a very attractive price. Considering the training for pistol shooting in the military will be the biggest hinderance and will negate the advantages of any more expensive platform. Buy the Glock and used the money saved to buy decent holsters, extra mags, training ammo and instruction material.

 

[MeatheadMick]

The P250 certainly looks interesting. It's not used by any NATO militaries, though. Also, I think most law enforcement agencies (especially in North America) use .40 S&W, not .45 ACP.

Yeah you're right, brain fart on my bad

 

[Good2Golf]

Has anybody fired the P250?  It looks small - not having all three fingers below the trigger holding the grip is very irritating, I find.  Having shot BHP, 225, 17, P9S and USP as well as hefted, but not shot an M&P, I hope the USP is looked at favourably.  I think it best carries on the spirit o the BHP (particularly the tear-down) while not getting overly funky (Glocks and "that" trigger) or the Sig, which while nice has always seemed a bit skinny  for my liking.

Regards
G2G

 

[MeatheadMick]

Has anybody fired the P250?  It looks small - not having all three fingers below the trigger holding the grip is very irritating, I find.  Having shot BHP, 225, 17, P9S and USP as well as hefted, but not shot an M&P, I hope the USP is looked at favourably.  I think it best carries on the spirit o the BHP (particularly the tear-down) while not getting overly funky (Glocks and "that" trigger) or the Sig, which while nice has always seemed a bit skinny  for my liking.

Regards
G2G

I find the grip on the P225 is a little thin, but it's quite a beefy pistol compared to both the Browning Hi-Pow or the Glock IMO. The P226 is a wider grip so it can fit a double stack mag, and I find it's just an awesome handgun all around. I've heard rumours that when the MP's transitioned from the Browning to the Sig, the P225 was chosen over the 226 to accomodate smaller female hands. I'd say that's horse-shit, however, in the early 90's when male MP's carried the Browning, female MP's were still issued the .38 Special, so there could be truth to the story.

As for the P250, I've researched it a little more, and AFAIK at the moment it is only available as a 'compact' frame. I've played with other compact pistols, and I'm not a fan of having my pinky off of the grip. I haven't had the privilege of shooting it, so I'm not much help there. The P250 shares many similarities with the P228 and 229, however the latter seem to have the longer grips. I believe the P229 is used by the OPP, and countless tac teams (and US Navy Seals) use the Sig P226. The P229 is an excellent pistol, however the price per sale is going to be too high for the CF. I think in the end, what is really going to be putting a stopper to getting a decent modern handgun is having to shelve over the technology to Colt Canada. I can't see many companies wanting to go through with that, however, stranger things have happened.

In the end, I'm just a Sig Fan Boy and whatever the CF puts in my holster I'll use, but the firearm at home will always be a Sig

 

[NavyShooter]

I've played with Sigs, Glocks, CZ's, tried the occasional other pistol here and there.

I'll use whatever tool is put into the toolbox.

NS

 

[KevinB]

The USP is a brick -- the newer Hk guns are much better - but apparently the CF does not think it can properly test and lifecycle a gun so they want it adopted previosuly by NATO so they are out.

I really like the S&W M&P9, you technically dont need to fire the action to disassemble as there is a 'tool' -  but you can do it like a Glock.

 

[Good2Golf]

KevinB, which HK would be the best contender, would you figure then? I like solid...much nicer than a Glock for a polymer frame gun.

Cheers
G2G

 

[KevinB]

Frankly the Glock19 to me is probably the best bet.  It is definitley the cheaper option, at least half the Hk price if not 1/3rd.

The only new Hk I really have time with is the Hk45C, which I think is a great gun, but not worth 2x the price of the M&P45.  I think the Hk P30 is the most likley candidate from HK, but have maybe 250 rds thru it, so I dont think that enough to pass judgment on.


People need to remember that 99.99% of the time a Military Service Pistol will be carried around in a holster - bumped, thumped etc.  Unlike rental guns, or LE guns, these will also be subject to adverse environments for usage and carriage.

Unfortunately I think this is why the CF made the adopted by a NATO country for 2 years requirement.  However frankly I think thats not a great supporting criteria, 2 years is not long enough for the gun to show its warts.



I shoot a M&P these days - I like the Crimson Trace laser option in the backstrap - but honestly if I had one handgun to go forward with - it would be a Glock19.  I think there are better guns for many things, but I think the Glock is reliable, cheap, and simple - for a duty handgun it has a very solid track record.

 

[Dissident]

but honestly if I had one handgun to go forward with - it would be a Glock19.  I think there are better guns for many things, but I think the Glock is reliable, cheap, and simple - for a duty handgun it has a very solid track record.

It seems like such a simple choice to me. Yet here we are years later and still no closer to a replacement pistol.

Would a Glock be the best or coolest pistol to get? Dunno, probably not. But it is cheap, simple to operate and reliable.

 

[CombatDoc]

Although I was thinking Glock 17 with the slightly longer barrel, Glock 19 makes sense for a firearm that will be carried far, far more than it will ever be shot in a defence situation.  Too bad that one of the criteria is that takedown/stripping of the firearm must be done without pulling the trigger.  One might wonder if that was put in to exclude the Glock.  Best thing about the Glocks is their ultra reliability.

 

[JorgSlice]

For me a Glock always felt like I was holding and firing a toy and not a hand gun but you can't ignore the testimonials of the Glock over the years stating just how versatile and reliable it is.

Edit: But regardless of my opinion, the CF/PWGSC will select the service pistol that best fits their needs.

 

[Ostrozac]

Edit: But regardless of my opinion, the CF/PWGSC will select the service pistol that best fits their needs.

Isn't the elephant in the room the fact that Colt doesn't currently make a NATO style 9mm service pistol? And that Glock, Beretta, Sig, et al aren't necessarily keen to allow Colt Canada to start using their data and designs? Buying a few thousand Sig 226 or Glock 19 off the shelf might be much easier than convincing either company to allow them to be built in Kitchener.

 

[JorgSlice]

Isn't the elephant in the room the fact that Colt doesn't currently make a NATO style 9mm service pistol? And that Glock, Beretta, Sig, et al aren't necessarily keen to allow Colt Canada to start using their data and designs? Buying a few thousand Sig 226 or Glock 19 off the shelf might be much easier than convincing either company to allow them to be built in Kitchener.

Stimulating Canadian Economy.

I know it makes the whole procurement process that much more difficult, but at least it's creating jobs and allowing people to keep what jobs they have over at Colt. If PWGSC just decided to start buying Off-The-Shelf and stopped asking for products to be assembled in Canada, they'd have to shut down COLT or General Dynamics etc. There just wouldn't be enough work in order for it to be sensible to keep those factories/companies open and running.

 

[Redeye]

Stimulating Canadian Economy.

I know it makes the whole procurement process that much more difficult, but at least it's creating jobs and allowing people to keep what jobs they have over at Colt. If PWGSC just decided to start buying Off-The-Shelf and stopped asking for products to be assembled in Canada, they'd have to shut down COLT or General Dynamics etc. There just wouldn't be enough work in order for it to be sensible to keep those factories/companies open and running.

The entire pistol buy will hardly stimulate anything, and as a practical matter, isn't likely to happen with this requirement, because I simply can't see Colt designing something new.

Government's job is not to prop up businesses, and when they do so for military procurement reasons, there's no history of really good, enduring results anyhow.

 

[KevinB]

Here's a small tidbit of info when I worked for DoS we got a lot of G19's -- the .gov price at the time was around $221 for a G19, w/ night sights, and 5x15rd mags from Glock.  Now since the G19 has a pretty good record down here for Federal folks it was bought for, I'd argue that for economic reasons one could write a intelligent source source justification.
Someone however is clearly anti-Glock - probably because they believe troops are too stupid to clear the gun before pulling the trigger during disassembly. 


No company in their right mind will give Colt Canada their TDP, so that is just downright stupid including that or some type of economic set aside on a requirement this small.

  The CF has maybe a requirement for say 20k pistols? Maybe 30k with a warstock overage at the most.  Well that is a big city Police Dept down here -- say NYPD or LAPD.  Can you imagine what would happen if New York City asked Glock for their TDP?
 
Items the CF decide is significant military equipment, make sense to have the ability to source in country.  Part of the reason the Cdn Gov bought the GFM hammer forges for Diemaco as part of then Devtek-Heroux, and I assume why they allowed Colt Canada to maintain them in the plant.  There is a big difference between a pistol and carbine/rifle in terms of military necessity, and making a pistol in Canada is a non starter for economic reasons (not to say that Public Works won't try), due to the number that will be produced. 

 

[JorgSlice]

The entire pistol buy will hardly stimulate anything, and as a practical matter, isn't likely to happen with this requirement, because I simply can't see Colt designing something new.

Government's job is not to prop up businesses, and when they do so for military procurement reasons, there's no history of really good, enduring results anyhow.

Here's a small tidbit of info when I worked for DoS we got a lot of G19's -- the .gov price at the time was around $221 for a G19, w/ night sights, and 5x15rd mags from Glock.  Now since the G19 has a pretty good record down here for Federal folks it was bought for, I'd argue that for economic reasons one could write a intelligent source source justification.
Someone however is clearly anti-Glock - probably because they believe troops are too stupid to clear the gun before pulling the trigger during disassembly. 


No company in their right mind will give Colt Canada their TDP, so that is just downright stupid including that or some type of economic set aside on a requirement this small.

  The CF has maybe a requirement for say 20k pistols? Maybe 30k with a warstock overage at the most.  Well that is a big city Police Dept down here -- say NYPD or LAPD.  Can you imagine what would happen if New York City asked Glock for their TDP?
 
Items the CF decide is significant military equipment, make sense to have the ability to source in country.  Part of the reason the Cdn Gov bought the GFM hammer forges for Diemaco as part of then Devtek-Heroux, and I assume why they allowed Colt Canada to maintain them in the plant.  There is a big difference between a pistol and carbine/rifle in terms of military necessity, and making a pistol in Canada is a non starter for economic reasons (not to say that Public Works won't try), due to the number that will be produced. 

True, but why then would they send out a bulletin to purchase equipment from a European or USA company/supplier and demand that they must allow it to be assembled in Canada, by a Canadian manufacturer like COLT? Does it have something to do with OPSEC?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I love my Sigs (5 of them) However I shudder to think of their fates in the hands of the well intentioned solider/officer. Maintaining the anodized coating on the frame wear points is critical to their longevity and someone who drops $1,000 on a gun will take care of them. But for the reservist who has to clean their equipment in a hurry at the end of ex will take shortcuts using stuff that will wear the finish. Also the grip screw bushings are a real bitch, and even worse on the 229. It does not take much to ruin them.

The 2022 is the only Sig I would consider for general issue. Much more forgiving of abuse than it’s alloy cousins.

 

[KevinB]

True, but why then would they send out a bulletin to purchase equipment from a European or USA company/supplier and demand that they must allow it to be assembled in Canada, by a Canadian manufacturer like COLT? Does it have something to do with OPSEC?

No, but I think the Good Idea Fairie's retarded sister is involved.