June 14, 2019, 10:17 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 8, 2013
Location: Littleton, Colorado
Posts: 1,121
|
Sig M17 / 18
You know what they say about opinions, "they are like ...and every body has one". This holds true with the Sig M17. I'm not an expert on the subject but I will say the M17 looks like a military pistol, unlike its predecessor.
During the lengthy procurement process, and with a list of requirements by the Army a mile long, the NRA reported that Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley became frustrated with the time involved. He said, "You give me $17 million on the credit card, I'll call Cabela's tonight, and I'll outfit every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine with a pistol, and I'll get a discount on it for bulk buys". I guess four star generals can say things like that. |
June 17, 2019, 09:57 AM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
The Beretta 92FS/M9 saw wider military adoption than the M17 is likely to ever see. |
|
June 17, 2019, 11:32 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,212
|
I'm with Fishbed on this one. The Beretta 92 series has seen use by various nations in both military and police usage. It's been a relatively solid design for decades, drawing its lineage from the Walther P38. It did have its issues, but so have some M17s. I don't think the M17 is a bad pistol, and I don't think the Beretta was either. In US inventory it's well at the end of its life and often not very well maintained.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk |
June 17, 2019, 02:18 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 10,809
|
FWIW we did the right thing going to 9mm in 1985. But I thought, and still think, the Sig 226 was the better option. But I've owned and shot enough Beretta's to trust the pistol to work and to be reliable. I just think it is a bigger/heavier gun than it needs to be and I don't like DA/SA designs. It served well, but it was time to upgrade.
I like the M17 quite well,enough to buy one. But honestly the military would have saved a ton of money just buying a bunch of G17 and G19 pistols off the shelf. The testing had already been done.
__________________
"If you're still doing things the same way you were doing them 10 years ago, you're doing it wrong" Winston Churchill |
June 17, 2019, 04:23 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 2,199
|
I like the trigger on the M17/18 better than the DA/SA of the M9. Also, I absolutely prefer the frame mounted safety than the slide mounting of the Beretta.
As far as durability, I guess we'll have to wait a decade or so to really know. |
June 21, 2019, 11:09 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 8, 2013
Location: Littleton, Colorado
Posts: 1,121
|
Fishbed77,
It doesn't matter what the color is, it looks more like a military handgun than the Beretta - opinions. |
June 24, 2019, 06:20 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 11, 2016
Posts: 1,089
|
M&P has "military" right in the name, so they clearly should've won!
|
June 24, 2019, 09:29 AM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
|
|
June 24, 2019, 10:53 AM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2010
Location: Central Georgia
Posts: 1,863
|
General Milley was correct. The procurement for the M17/M18 was a travesty and tremendous waste of tax payer dollars.
The modularity of the P320 will not filter down to the end user. PVT Joe will use whatever pistol in whatever configuration he is issues. Armorers and Company Commander will drag out all the different frames for quarterly inventory and then they will be squirreled away until the next inventory. Guys in SOF are already using pretty much what they want and that comes from a different budget than normal procurement. And it's basically like General Milley said; buy COTS guns and roll with them. DOD should have just made the M-11A1 standard issue and been done with it. Or bought new Berettas. Which would have saved money in regards to loads of ancillary equipment.
__________________
NRA Life Member Read my blog! "The answer to any caliber debate is going to be .38 Super, 10mm, .357 Sig or .41 Magnum!" |
June 24, 2019, 04:19 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Posts: 277
|
The Beretta M9 doesn't LOOK like a military pistol? It's probably the coolest looking handgun ever made. It's a big all metal handgun. Looks and feels pretty military to me.
The M17 on the other hand looks like some ████ Taurus or Bersa would make. A cheap plastic piece of Tupperware. Now it might be a better handgun, for whatever miniscule military tactical advantage that might provide in a war in say Korea, but it doesn't LOOK any more military to me. |
June 24, 2019, 04:51 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
The M11-A1 is just a civilian commercial 9mm P229 with some aesthetic changes and a name to make it sound like an adopted pistol (it isn't). It's not the same thing as the actual adopted M11 (P228) pistol. If you are worried that the M17 is waste of money (don't get me wrong - it is), the M11-A1 would be an even greater waste. |
|
June 28, 2019, 01:16 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 8, 2013
Location: Littleton, Colorado
Posts: 1,121
|
hogwiley,
The coolest looking handgun ever is the Colt1911A1. |
June 29, 2019, 12:48 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2017
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 277
|
Quote:
In regard to size and magazines, the SIG M17/M18 seemed like a slick choice to me: one frame, common set of magazines, two barrel/slide options.
__________________
"To me it doesn't matter if your hopes are dreams are shattered." -- Noel Gallagher |
|
June 29, 2019, 12:59 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,212
|
I don't believe they would have saved money, and I say this as someone that has owned multiple P320s, sold them, and stuck with Glocks. There was going to be a competition. Military procurement almost always involves a competition. Some people see that as a waste, but it really isn't. You want to evaluate multiple options to be sure what you're getting works as you demand and that you're not missing something better about a competitor. In addition, one person just picking one option by himself leaves you open to both personal bias from that person and potentially outside influence as well. SIG's bid was well below Glock's and while the second battery of testing wasn't completed, from the first battery in terms of reliability they performed essentially equally. I think the M17 will be fine in the end and there are other programs on which the money saved could be spent for greater return.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk Last edited by TunnelRat; June 29, 2019 at 01:49 PM. |
June 29, 2019, 01:47 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 3,626
|
Um...the modular design is for parts/replacements.
The benefit of the Kel Tec design of taking out all the important parts, to put into a non busted grip makes sense to service active platforms. Slides, mags, different grip sizes...that's missing the point. Broken frame on a M9 is significant. A broken grip is replaced by removing the modular FCU and putting it into a $20 grip replacement. Chassis/FCU is easier to work around than an complicated built grip. For a weapons platform, is this obvious. |
June 30, 2019, 12:16 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 10, 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 444
|
I rented an M17 yesterday and found it to be extremely accurate. I like the trigger and shot it better than my G17. Think it will prove to be an excellent weapon. Time will tell. The only thing I don’t like about the pistol is the lack of more options in terms of optics.
|
July 1, 2019, 12:23 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 23, 2016
Location: West of the Atlantic
Posts: 418
|
Since this thread seems to be mostly opinion based, I'll have I go...
In regard to the OPs observation about appearance: It seems to me the m17/18 look exactly like what every civilian military fanboy wants it to look like, high testosterone/bad to the bone... mass produced to the least common denominator. Seriously, I feel like the past several years, Sig has marketed themselves to every "bruh" who will throw on a Don't Tread on Me Tee shirt and jack up his steeply financed Rubicon. The M17/18 doesn't seem like a deviation to me. Not that I don't see the purpose to its many, modular features. But when you choose the lowest bidder, you still get what you pay for. Saying the modularity makes replacing parts easier is kind of like saying Vortex is great because of their warranty. A 320 isn't a 226/229 just because it's parts swap out like legos, and a Vortex isn't a Leupold just because they'll fix it when it breaks.
__________________
Matthew "All men are ignorant. The topics of our ignorance may vary, but the nature of the world is that no man may know everything." ~ R Jordan |
July 1, 2019, 12:56 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
|
Quote:
https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...points-stupid/ Sometimes the lower bid is a better deal. Especially when you get what ya want. The M9 will continue to be used for quite some time as well. Glocks will also be used. tipoc
__________________
1. All guns are always loaded. 2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. 3. Keep your finger off the trigger till you are ready to shoot. 4. Identify your target and know what is beyond it. |
|
July 1, 2019, 01:21 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 23, 2016
Location: West of the Atlantic
Posts: 418
|
Valid points... and I don't think the Sig is a bad choice, just not the best choice.
My original comments really are just my opinion. I am fully aware of my biases.
__________________
Matthew "All men are ignorant. The topics of our ignorance may vary, but the nature of the world is that no man may know everything." ~ R Jordan |
July 1, 2019, 02:47 PM | #20 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Now whether the solicitation was justified, or the requirements were sound, is of course open to debate. |
|||
July 4, 2019, 03:38 PM | #21 |
Member
Join Date: April 16, 2014
Location: Rural Texas
Posts: 96
|
I am with jmr40 when he said “But honestly the military would have saved a ton of money just buying a bunch of G17 and G19 pistols off the shelf. The testing had already been done.”
Unfortunately, the government doesn’t always behave in rational ways. |
|
|