Army Should Have Gone With Glock....

[cmshoot]

Not certain but I believe a safety was required as well.

I didn’t list all the requirements......they’re quite extensive. I wanted to list the parts that made the requirement “modular” and rule out the Glock.

 

[Bryan]

I didn’t list all the requirements......they’re quite extensive. I wanted to list the parts that made the requirement “modular” and rule out the Glock.

10-4

 

[MRH]

Not certain but I believe a safety was required as well.

The submission from Glock did include a safety.

 

[Please Delete]

yup, it had a safety.

 

[ReservoirDawg10]

Glock fanbois just can't leg it go. You'd think the Army slapped y'alls mothers.

 

[Bear44]

Glock fanbois just can't leg it go. You'd think the Army slapped y'alls mothers.

We just can't figure out why the DOD is willing to spend three times as much for a less reliable weapon.

 

[ReservoirDawg10]

We just can't figure out why the DOD is willing to spend three times as much for a less reliable weapon.

Maybe because nobody at Glock can read simple contract requirements? Maybe because Glocks aren't all that they are cracked up to be by their owners?

And, where did you get that 3x number? Pulling random stuff out of dark places again?

 

[ARCman47]

OK. Elmer.

Go back where you came from.

 

[Bear44]

Maybe because nobody at Glock can read simple contract requirements? Maybe because Glocks aren't all that they are cracked up to be by their owners?

And, where did you get that 3x number? Pulling random stuff out of dark places again?

See post 16 for the numbers. Read the article and do the math.

Maybe some of those requirements are ridiculous. It's supposed to be a handgun, not a Rubik's Cube.

 

[Old_School]

Did anyone note the requirement that the new pistol be able to fire jacketed hollow points?

Here's an article explaining why:

https://loadoutroom.com/thearmsguide/u-s-army-adopts-hollow-point-ammo-m-17-m-18/

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk