I thought "does it work" should be #1 on the list
This is a discussion on Sig dropped from ATF evaluation within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I thought some might find it interesting that ATF found the Sig to be unreliable. Here's the link: http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/4023393.htm The interesting part to me was ...
I thought some might find it interesting that ATF found the Sig to be unreliable. Here's the link:
The interesting part to me was Sig's response:
Maybe it's just me, but reliability is THE most important.Sig Sauer also contends that ATF placed too great an emphasis upon reliability in determining which offers should continue to phase III. In this regard, Sig Sauer argues that reliability was only one of a number of elements to be considered in the live-fire assessment, and notes that reliability was not identified as having any more importance than the other elements.
I thought "does it work" should be #1 on the list
First, I'll admit that I carry a Sig Sauer, so I'm sure I'm more than a little prejudiced. However, I also recently added a Glock to my carry rotation and am very happy with it as well. Both guns have been extremely reliable. The primary Sig I carry has over 15,000 rounds down range, the Glock only perhaps 1000 or so. That said, I believe Sig was referring to the "reliability" portion of the testing done for the contract- not the overall importance of reliability in a carry handgun.
Glock already owns the law enforcement marketplace, but I've heard (no cite available) that S&W has been slowly chipping away at it. I also believe Sig has, or had, contracts with several Federal agencies, so I believe each of the handguns is completely reliable and capable of meeting the "requirements" (except perhaps, in the pricing area)
I must agree that if Sig had far more failures, it should weigh heavily against them. I also believe Sigs are far more reliable than they were in the tests. And finally, I wonder if cost had any bearing on the testing. Say what you will, but I believe if an agency or department, or any organization, decides they want a specific product - competitive testing won't get in the way of their choice. Just my opinion, of course.
Am I reading that right where the ATF evaluators are rating the Smith higher than the Glock in reliability and overall general assesment ??? If so there may be some fanboys that are going to be mighty upset. God Bless
From what I hear, the new 250's are not as reliable as the tried and true 226, 228, 229 line up. I pretty much just carry my Glocks. But my 228 just melts into my hand.
Police Defensive Tactics, Firearms, Carbine Rifle and Taser Instructor
NRA Life Member
It is better to have your gun and not need it, than to need it and not have it!
You cannot choose the conditions for a gunfight, so train in all conditions!
Since the testing was polymer handguns this was of course the P250 that was being tested. I've read a lot of conflicting reports all over the web about the platform so I can't say I'm surprised.
I'd like to know what caused the 45 shooter induced failures though. That seems high. Limp wristing is what comes to mind but not from experienced shooters, unless the P250 is very fussy. Riding the slide lock maybe?
Very interesting post.
With millions of $ on the line, Sig had no option but to protest. But the stats weren't even close.
The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.
Sig: 13 of which were considered to be gun-induced and 45 shooter-induced
S&W: 16 shooter‑induced stoppages
Glock: 7 shooter-induced stoppages
There were no gun-induced stoppages recorded for the Smith & Wesson or Glock guns.
I figure if a Sig is good enough for Special Agent Gibbs ... it's good enough for me!
Gun Free Zones are totally effective, and 100% safe ... (wait for it) ... (wait for it) ... until a bad guy with a gun shows up! Then suddenly, you have an uncontested Kill Zone of defensless sheep, patiently awaiting their turn for the slaughter.
Reliability has to come first. If the SIGs were haveing problems, even operator induced, it has to be considered as a factor. Who's to say that same induced failure won't happen again in the field?
I own a Glock 30, a great gun, extremely reliable, but it's not a gun that I love. Maybe it's the poly, and maybe I'd feel the same with any poly gun. I don't know.
If the S&W rises to the top, I'd have no problem with the ATF adopting it. It's a good gun, and I'm sure the costs would be comparable, much less than the SIGs.
Retired USAF E-8. Official forum curmudgeon.
Lighten up and enjoy life because:
Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... Buffalo Springfield - For What It's Worth
And I always thought being a factory rep for Sig, handling government business would be a cool job... not as it relates to this deal, I'll bet. I can just see the Sig conference room filled with folks from different departments discussing this situation - finger pointin' gone crazy!
The title suprised me a bit, until I read that they were testing a 250 and not a Sig classic. Sig has yet to produce a really good poly gun. And looking at the charts, the rankings are Glock, S&W and then the Sig. Hardly a shocker there.
"Just blame Sixto"
I reserve the right to make fun, point and laugh etc.
Exactly what sixto said....Glock has their share for a reason. The haters can scream low cost, marketing whatever. But the truth is they just work. I love my 228, and most any Sig Classic I have shot, but my Glock get the bulk of carry duties.
Friends don't let friends be MALL NINJAS.
I am just as nice as anyone lets me be and can be just as mean as anyone makes me. - Quoted from Terryger, New member to our forum.