Home Main Category General Firearms

Army Drops Smith & Wesson from Pistol Competition

Big ChiefBig Chief Senior MemberPosts: 32,995 Senior Member
http://kitup.military.com/2016/09/army-drops-smith-wesson-pistol-competition.html?ESRC=army-a_160928.nl

"As far as we know, the Army is still evaluating striker-fired pistols from Glock, Sig Sauer, Beretta and FN Herstal, according to a source familiar with the competition."
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!

Replies

  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    I know Ruger dropped out and they had one tough/good shootin full size 9mm entered.

    Don't kid yourself and think Politics won't play a role in the selection either.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • Uncle FesterUncle Fester Senior Member Posts: 1,373 Senior Member
    At the end if the day, the military tries to issue the low cost product to troops.
  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 11,156 Senior Member
    At the end if the day, the military tries to issue the low cost product to troops.

    Yeah, but any manufacturer that does not understand that they will make a LOT more sales to civilians and police departments by being adopted by the army is pretty dumb. The manufacturers will cut the price down to, or below, cost so that they can get all the much higher margin sales from the civilian and LEO sales. Lowest price does not mean much in this case

    How many police departments back in the 80s adopted the Beretta because the army did? I know the LAPD was saddled with that gun for a long time.
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,495 Senior Member
    :that: How many folks tout the Glock as being good due to its wide-spread military and LE use? How many civilian sales are due to that?
    Overkill is underrated.
  • big elkbig elk Member Posts: 111 Member
    Why is the U.S. Army not using high quality American guns keeping our people working and our tax money in our country? I guess cheap slave labor does lower the cost of manufacturing. Are we not shipping enough manufacturing over seas causing higher unemployment here?
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 23,670 Senior Member
    big elk wrote: »
    Why is the U.S. Army not using high quality American guns keeping our people working and our tax money in our country?
    WORD.

    This, X 10,000,000,000,000,000,...

    If, for no other reason, just on the off chance that we get into a dustup with the foreign country our arms are made in...
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,495 Senior Member
    big elk wrote: »
    Why is the U.S. Army not using high quality American guns keeping our people working and our tax money in our country? I guess cheap slave labor does lower the cost of manufacturing. Are we not shipping enough manufacturing over seas causing higher unemployment here?
    US military contracts generally specify that the firearms have to be made in US plants. FN has one in South Carolina, Beretta had or had one in Maryland and now one in Tennessee. Of course the state governments usually compete for the plants to move there - usually by waiving or greatly reducing the taxes the companies will pay, with the idea that the plants will stay in the state when the tax deal expires. Of course those plants then move to another state with another favorable tax plan. Don't worry, though. US gun makers do the same things.

    Why doesn't the military use firearms from American companies? They cost too much. And people want the military to buy at the lowest cost per unit.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,743 Senior Member
    big elk wrote: »
    Why is the U.S. Army not using high quality American guns keeping our people working and our tax money in our country? I guess cheap slave labor does lower the cost of manufacturing. Are we not shipping enough manufacturing over seas causing higher unemployment here?

    S&W, I hear, are Walther made. May be assembled here, like Glocks, maybe not. Face it, we're not making a lot of acceptable guns here in the US that will stand up.

    Were it me, I'd go Glock and never look bock.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • Uncle FesterUncle Fester Senior Member Posts: 1,373 Senior Member
    big elk wrote: »
    Why is the U.S. Army not using high quality American guns keeping our people working and our tax money in our country? I guess cheap slave labor does lower the cost of manufacturing. Are we not shipping enough manufacturing over seas causing higher unemployment here?

    Glocks and Berettas are made in the USA and have been for some time.

    Frankly, guns are an area where we are arguably in contention to be low cost producer in the Western world. Virtually all the foreign guns sold in the US fall into a few categories:
    1) extremely high quality - high priced - think Italian shotguns
    2) Cheap, acceptable quality, low cost guns from places like Turkey
    3) guns invented in places like Germany

    Guns like modern Rugers aren't getting offshored.
  • john9001john9001 Senior Member Posts: 668 Senior Member
    US military contracts generally specify that the firearms have to be made in US plants. FN has one in South Carolina, Beretta had or had one in Maryland and now one in Tennessee. Of course the state governments usually compete for the plants to move there - usually by waiving or greatly reducing the taxes the companies will pay, with the idea that the plants will stay in the state when the tax deal expires. Of course those plants then move to another state with another favorable tax plan. Don't worry, though. US gun makers do the same things.

    Why doesn't the military use firearms from American companies? They cost too much. And people want the military to buy at the lowest cost per unit.

    you mean like $400 hammers ?
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,743 Senior Member
    Glocks, as I said earlier, are made in Austria. The parts are shipped to an assembly point in Marietta, GA. I went to a Glock Armorer's School there. The plant isn't much larger than a large restaurant.

    I don't know about Beretta, but they have a US contract so I guess they are. Kahrs are made in the US, and so are Rugers, the company who has never made a great auto. I'm sure there are others, but US labor costs are HIGH, which is why businesses are moving to Mexico.

    Of my two better grade shotgun, one is made here in the US, CT shotgun MC. It's a good shotgun, but nothing like a high-grade shotgun. The other is made in France and the thing that keeps it from being a high grade gun is a lack of engraving and a fancy stock.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    john9001 wrote: »
    you mean like $400 hammers ?


    Believe it or not, there is a very good explanation as to why those hammers cost 400.00. Learn it and then come back and post with the grownups.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,611 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    Believe it or not, there is a very good explanation as to why those hammers cost 400.00. Learn it and then come back and post with the grownups.


    For my own understanding; are you saying that hammers (or whatever) should cost ridiculous amounts, or just that there is a good explanation? For myself, I couldn't find any examples of $400 hammers, only a somewhat more reasonable $48 model that may or may not actually be worth the money charged.

    Just looking for clarification.
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    coolgunguy wrote: »
    For my own understanding; are you saying that hammers (or whatever) should cost ridiculous amounts, or just that there is a good explanation? For myself, I couldn't find any examples of $400 hammers, only a somewhat more reasonable $48 model that may or may not actually be worth the money charged.

    Just looking for clarification.


    I used to flip out about all the rediculous costs of government parts and hardware until I worked in the aircraft industry and learned why. The government requires an extreme level of testing of everything that they buy and it costs a huge amount of money to send those hammers to an independent lab to have them tested and certified. They'll take that hammer and put it in a fixture that will slam it on a hard surface with a specific amount of force at a specific amount of speed for an insane amount of time, sometimes weeks. They'll monitor the temp during that time and after the cycle is complete, they'll measure all the dimensions and weigh the thing to see if any metal was lost. All of these sometimes crazy standards are set by the government and contractors meet them to get the contracts. That doesn't mean that they'll eat the cost of all that testing. That gets added to the price of the hammer.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • DanChamberlainDanChamberlain Senior Member Posts: 3,395 Senior Member
    They call them "hammers," when in essence, they're not. They cannot be used as hammers by anyone other than the person working on a particular aircraft, in particular location on the air frame. So, what you have is a technology, created for a specific task in which there may only be a couple hundred in existence. The designers cost, the tooling to create the piece costs, the manufacturing process costs, and only a couple hundred will be made.

    People who have no idea what they're talking about, will comment on the $400 hammer as if it's an absurd expenditure. Like the $800 toilet seat, or the $1000 coffee maker. When one B-1 Bomber costs half a billion dollars, the $400 hammer seems to be a minor thing.

    The Request for Proposal concerning the new handgun was written with a specific set of parameters and you can bet they already had a product in mind when it was written. Everyone else is an also ran.
    It's a source of great pride for me, that when my name is googled, one finds book titles and not mug shots. Daniel C. Chamberlain
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,495 Senior Member
    Another thing about costs... sometimes a contractor gets lazy. Say you have a toolset with wrenches, screwdrivers, ratchets and sockets, and maybe a hammer. Whole thing costs... $1600 because you have some really specialized wrenches and sockets. Contractor may just split the cost 4 ways and you get each part for $400 each. Including the hammer.

    Expensive toilet seat might be for a transport aircraft. I doubt those things are bought at the Home Despot.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Posts: 5,742 Senior Member
    Everyone here makes good points on $400 hammers etc.

    You don't want to know the monetary value of a single tool kit for a UH-60 Blackhawk. I can't imagine the ones for the far more complicated and less numerous aircraft in inventory.


    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
  • Farm Boy DeuceFarm Boy Deuce Senior Member Posts: 6,083 Senior Member
    One area I remember seeing lots of specialty tools was the O2N2 plants on the ship I was on. The entire floor was aluminum diamond plate and EVERY tool was brass. Hammers,open end/ box end wrenches, spanner wrenches for hose fittings, even adjustable wrenches. I don't know what they cost but I am sure the price was way up there.
    I am afraid we forget sometime that the basic and simple things brings us the most pleasure.
    Dad 5-31-13
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 8,149 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    My son was just talking to me about tool kits for the F-35. Holy crap!!!

    I'm guessing at LEAST $100

    :tooth:
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,495 Senior Member
    Read up on the SR-71 Blackbird and how they had to maintain those. The titanium in the tools made things difficult. They had to wash the welded areas with distilled water, as chlorinated water induced corrosion. Tools couldn't have cadmium plating.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    F-4's and other 60's era aircraft were the last ones that we could use conventional tools on. The aircraft designed in the 70's started using alloys that reacted with the cadmium plating on some tools. Sadly, the early tools that were approved and contracted were of horrible quality. Back in the 70's when we transitioned from F-4's to F-15's, we were working on the most modern, state of the art aircraft and having to use some of the crappiest tools that I'd ever handled.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,495 Senior Member
    Well, that's also part of the problem... transitioning to new tools with new alloys and techniques has a LOT of problems. What seems like a simple "this for that" transition isn't necessarily so. You wind up having to re-engineer what should be simple tools.

    But not everyone understands that.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    Well, that's also part of the problem... transitioning to new tools with new alloys and techniques has a LOT of problems. What seems like a simple "this for that" transition isn't necessarily so. You wind up having to re-engineer what should be simple tools.

    But not everyone understands that.


    There's that, and then there's the politician that made a deciding vote to approve the program with the stipulation that certain vendors are used to produce materials required by the program. These vendors may be owned by someone who is related to or associated with the politician, or that may have donated to some foundation that the politician may be affiliated with.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    US military contracts generally specify that the firearms have to be made in US plants. FN has one in South Carolina, Beretta had or had one in Maryland and now one in Tennessee. Of course the state governments usually compete for the plants to move there - usually by waiving or greatly reducing the taxes the companies will pay, with the idea that the plants will stay in the state when the tax deal expires. Of course those plants then move to another state with another favorable tax plan. Don't worry, though. US gun makers do the same things.

    Why doesn't the military use firearms from American companies? They cost too much. And people want the military to buy at the lowest cost per unit.

    But still a lot of the revenue from the sales will exit this country. I agree with Big Elk on this. They shouldn't even offer contracts to foreign interests. S&W, Colt, Springfield, etc, should be offered the business. I doubt that Germany or Italy either one buy crapola from us.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    That would be the 1oz bottle of defogger for the helmet visor? :cool2:

    The stuff we used on the canopies was Rainex in a blue bottle but it probably cost 100 times as much as the stuff you buy at the auto parts store.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • Uncle FesterUncle Fester Senior Member Posts: 1,373 Senior Member
    Read up on the SR-71 Blackbird and how they had to maintain those. The titanium in the tools made things difficult. They had to wash the welded areas with distilled water, as chlorinated water induced corrosion. Tools couldn't have cadmium plating.

    When the Blackbird took off with a full load of fuel, most of it leaked out as it climbed toward altitude. Thus, It immediately had to hit the tanker for a refill before accelerating to Fast as . At full speed, the metal expanded because of the heat and it stopped leaking fuel.

    Expensive yes. Worth every penny. They were faster than advertised btw. Dad flew the tankers in the 70's.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,495 Senior Member
    Actually, SRs didn't take off with a full fuel load. They took off with just enough to get them airborne and heated up. They never could develop a fuel tank sealant that handled the heat, so as you pointed out they just let the expanding fuel tank metal seal it up.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • Uncle FesterUncle Fester Senior Member Posts: 1,373 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    The stuff we used on the canopies was Rainex in a blue bottle but it probably cost 100 times as much as the stuff you buy at the auto parts store.

    My brother in law claimed his sub used Rainex on the periscope.
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