Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Breaking Down The US Army’s Sub Compact Weapon Program

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • beanz2
    replied
    Originally posted by bigbearbear
    Such a pity. When I finally get to a free State, the FN PS90 is going to be one of the very first gun I'm going to buy.
    When I got out, the APC9 was the second gun I bought.


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • bigbearbear
    replied
    Originally posted by Quiet
    The contract had a 9x19mm caliber requirement.
    Such a pity. When I finally get to a free State, the FN PS90 is going to be one of the very first gun I'm going to buy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Quiet
    replied
    Originally posted by bigbearbear
    I was hoping they'll do something more awesome and select the FN P90.
    The contract had a 9x19mm caliber requirement.

    Leave a comment:


  • bigbearbear
    replied
    I was hoping they'll do something more awesome and select the FN P90.

    Leave a comment:


  • Quiet
    replied
    AFAIK...
    No. Because this is a limited issued weapon system and not intended as a general/standard issue weapon system.

    Leave a comment:


  • beanz2
    replied
    Yayy for B&T. Does the Army contract require a US manufacturing plant? Those Swiss parts aren’t cheap.

    I’d love to swap in the AR grip lowers.


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • bellts
    replied
    Cool... looks like a nerf gun.

    Leave a comment:


  • Quiet
    replied
    necrothreading to announce the winner...

    And the winner is... B&T.

    The Army contract for the Sub Compact Weapon was awarded, on 04-01-19, to B&T.

    The B&T APC9K will be issued to US Army HRP Personal Security Details.
    Which means only "plainclothes" security details, assigned to the Secretary of the Army and other High Risk Personnel, will be using it.

    Initial contract is for 350 units (weapon, magazines, sling, etc) and with an option to acquire 650 more.


    B&T APC9K
    Last edited by Quiet; 04-08-2019, 5:09 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • sigstroker
    replied
    Is the gas in the face thing a requirement? The silencer requirements I've seen in the past call for high sound reduction performance, which sorta guarantees gas in the face. The military doesn't much care about soldier comfort. SIG is certainly capable of making a monocore silencer which in noisier but with less backpressure. Witness that "muzzle brake" they tried to get past the ATF a few years ago.

    Leave a comment:


  • osis32
    replied
    All I can say is **** Sig.

    Leave a comment:


  • JTROKS
    replied
    As anyone seen the requirements? I’m thinking suppressed mode will be on the list. If Sig can build a suppressor that would lessen gas hitting the operator’s face then it’s a sure ball.

    Leave a comment:


  • BajaJames83
    replied
    Love my MPX bit this will be a good trial

    Leave a comment:


  • BarrettM99
    replied
    I have a feeling SIG has the deck stacked in its favor since they’re already supplying the MHS pistol.

    I hope one of the others win. But I don’t think that will happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • beanz2
    replied
    Go B&T!

    Leave a comment:


  • mlevans66
    replied
    Originally posted by Yodaman
    Go Sig!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Booo sig! Hisss Hissss!!!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
UA-8071174-1