Home Main Category General Firearms

Photos Of Glock's Entry Into the Army MHS Competition

13»

Replies

  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,646 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Who gives a crap what Big Army uses for a handgun? If you aren't the end user.........sit back and watch the Clown Show.


    I find myself far too frequently being an unwilling participant in the Clown Show...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast, and speed is the economy of motion" - Scott Jedlinski
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,186 Senior Member
    I find myself far too frequently being an unwilling participant in the Clown Show...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    I feel your pain.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    Jeeper wrote: »

    There is nobody here who would be happy purchasing a firearm that they knew was produced at $150 price point. Heck, you guys make fun of High Point, Taurus, etc for just that very thing.

    Luis

    CPJ is right about the cost of producing our new Sig pistol. Polymer frames cost between just over one dollar to well under three dollars to produce depending on
    size, and that goes for everybody from H&K to Taurus. The steel chassis inserts are worth at most a couple of bucks, and that includes installation. The only parts worth a damn are the barrel (maybe), slide (some) and the trigger group - total cost is right about where CPJ called it. And it is NO DIFFERENT for H&K, Sig, Walther, S&W, Ruger, Taurus or any other.

    So, why do some tactical Tupperware guns cost so much more than others? Easy - the gun market is highly superstitious, buyers are chock full of pre-conceived notions regarding perceived quality, reputation, and performance. And that makes buyers suckers.

    Modern manufacturing techniques have progressed so far in the last 10 years that entry-level rifles from Savage, Thompson-Center, Mossberg, Ruger, and others, often selling for under $300, perform with the accuracy and reliability that before could only be found at two or three times that price. It's the same with handguns. In fact, nowadays, the only differences to be found between the guns mass produced by regular brands, and the semi-custom guns made by premium gunmakers are in fit, finish, and embellishments such as high grade wood, engraving, tritium sights, and so forth. Don't expect more than a marginal, if any, increase in way of reliability, accuracy, or endurance.
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 10,861 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    To the last part of your post...Economy of scale. When you make many of one thing, the cost per item is less, and you make your money on volume. Cost isn't an absolute indicator of quality.
    I'd be shocked if there is over $30 worth of material in that gun. There's nothing hand fitted. Material goes in the machine, parts come out. An unskilled worker assembles it, a skilled worker checks it.

    Material is one small factor of the final cost. The cost to design it, support it, labor, support people, the overhead of the factory, lights, water, air-conditioning, environmental scrubbers, disposal of waste material, cost of sale (and yes, sales does cost a lot), shipping, packaging, and it goes on and on and on....

    Raw materials mean a lot in the final product, but somehow Glock and SIG come out with a product that is excellent from a barrel of polymer pellets and a few bars of cold rolled steel while Taurus makes absolute dog squeeze from the same thing.
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,646 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    That's a whole buttload of assumptions and assertions about the cost structure and profitability on the SIG offer. Do you have any internal insight to back that up that you can share? I'm pretty sure SIG stands to make a profit on the deal and also on the potential market share they will take from Glock when a bunch of other agencies and PDs say "me too" and start putting in orders for the same gun, which is exactly what happened to Beretta when they won.


    It's already happened. TX DPS and
    DOHS announced a switch to a P320 variant.

    If I ever actually get issued one, I'll buy one.
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast, and speed is the economy of motion" - Scott Jedlinski
  • TugarTugar Senior Member Posts: 2,155 Senior Member
    Sig also know they won't make a ton on the military side, but will on the other adoptees. Law enforcement, normal guys, and mall ninjas will grease that wheel plenty. The M9 is pretty popular, as is the ubiquitous 1911A1.
    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
    Winston Churchill
  • LMLarsenLMLarsen Senior Member Posts: 8,337 Senior Member
    bullsi1911 wrote: »
    Material is one small factor of the final cost. The cost to design it, support it, labor, support people, the overhead of the factory, lights, water, air-conditioning, environmental scrubbers, disposal of waste material, cost of sale (and yes, sales does cost a lot), shipping, packaging, and it goes on and on and on....

    Raw materials mean a lot in the final product, but somehow Glock and SIG come out with a product that is excellent from a barrel of polymer pellets and a few bars of cold rolled steel while Taurus makes absolute dog squeeze from the same thing.

    Absolutely spot-on. Reducing the issue to an oversimplified comparison of raw material costs is just ignorant.
    “A gun is a tool, no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.”

    NRA Endowment Member
  • BigDanSBigDanS Senior Member Posts: 6,973 Senior Member
    Yep, Sig is going to make a ton on the civilian side.

    What we do in the armed forces becomes the norm in society.

    Military required men to shave - and it became the society norm
    Military used wrist watches - and it became the society norm
    Military used the 1911A1 - and it became the society norm
    Military used the M16 - and the AR-15 became the society norm
    Military issued the M9 - and it became popular in society

    What men and women will use in volume in the military, will over the next 10 years, become what they will want at home.

    D
    "A patriot is mocked, scorned and hated; yet when his cause succeeds, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain
    Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 10,364 Senior Member
    In addition to the cost of the firearm, there is shipping. Unlike what we see in movies and TV, weapons are shipped just like any other commodity.
    Because they will be shipped in quantity, booking will go through Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC), to Depots, then different Units, the money is spread out. First Sig, then shipping companies like UPS, Landstar, etc., then those large shipments will be broken down to Unit levels and dispersed to different locations. The process will make money for Sig, Transportation Companies, Depot personnel, small Military Transportation Offices like me and then the end user or Military Member gets a new side arm. Bottom line is Americans working and new sidearm for our Military, which I for one think they have needed for a long time.
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,009 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Who gives a crap what Big Army uses for a handgun? If you aren't the end user.........sit back and watch the Clown Show.

    If you want to read a really depressing story, pick up a copy of Misfire by William H. Hallahan. It covers the Clown Show from the time the Springfield & Harper's Ferry Arsenals were set into motion by George Washington to when the book was published in 1994. If you want a tale of corruption, pork-barreling, obstruction of progress by unions and others, butting heads and egos, look no further than U.S. Ordnance. It's worth noting that some of the most successful military firearms in history were designed by Americans and sold abroad - largely out of frustration in dealing with the War Department. Maxim, Rolling Block, Peabody (Martini), Lee Enfield - all American in origin.

    The "System" held back breechloaders that could have been had from the 1820's, and they and repeaters were only seen in the Civil War due to Herculean efforts to skirt that system. I think the only unbridled successes Ordnance had were the 1911 and the Garand - where simple and logical trials were held pitting the options against each other and certain logistical points were called into play (the Garand was almost NOT a .30-06). One could argue that the Browning M1917 water-cooled MG was a success. . .aside from the fact that John had the patents for that one around 1900, and Ordnance couldn't be bothered with the idea until they were suddenly looking down the barrels of a couple hundred thousand German Maxims. That the U.S. went to war with that untested gun and the untested BAR (in a hurry, without enough of them) is a story of how John Browning saved this country's ass - not how U.S. Ordnance had its poop in a group.

    So what we're looking at with this pistol is a continuation of how seemingly everything gets considered EXCEPT how to provide the best tool for the job, and it's being done on our dime, the end product being deployed with this country's kids, and it seems to be provided by a foreign company - probably because our government has been really good at stifling engineering talent in the weapon industry. We should all give a crap - more about the process than the pistol.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement