Full Version: US Military's Joint Combat Pistol program
It never said the I/O port has to be exposed to said elements, did it?
What about something like just putting the exposed "pin" surface (assuming they make it a flat strip or similar, not an actual physical pin) beneath a grip or otherwise inside the weapon (not quite on the surface, essentially), but still easily accessible by the weapon being broken down?
Any help at all?
Any help at all?
| QUOTE (Critias) |
| What about something like just putting the exposed "pin" surface (assuming they make it a flat strip or similar, not an actual physical pin) beneath a grip or otherwise inside the weapon (not quite on the surface, essentially), but still easily accessible by the weapon being broken down? Any help at all? |
Exactly what I'm saying, crit.
Why not put it on the underside of the grip, with a plastic cover that you pop off?
Well, yeah. You just posted while I was typing, is all.
That might be helpful. Ideally, you don't want to have to break it down to access it, but if that's what it takes...
Other thing -- when it's "shut", is it air and water-tight? If not, it solves the problem of sand, dirt, etc, but not so much water and humidity.
(Honestly, I'm not a big fan of removable covers -- in my book, anything that moves is a failure waiting to happen -- but I suppose that because you have to break down the weapon for cleaning anyway, it's no additional burden in this case. Not being a firearms expert, I had not initially considered that)
Other thing -- when it's "shut", is it air and water-tight? If not, it solves the problem of sand, dirt, etc, but not so much water and humidity.
(Honestly, I'm not a big fan of removable covers -- in my book, anything that moves is a failure waiting to happen -- but I suppose that because you have to break down the weapon for cleaning anyway, it's no additional burden in this case. Not being a firearms expert, I had not initially considered that)
Another thing I suppose you could do is put a small inductor in the device, and transfer power to it on one frequency and data off on another.
That would solve the problem of being exposed, and if you make the inductor small, the thing should be undetectable except at extraordinarily short ranges (you'd practically have to be touching the guy holding it to detect it).
As a bonus, it's a solid state, non-switching device, so it's almost failure proof if you don't do something stupid like short it.
That would solve the problem of being exposed, and if you make the inductor small, the thing should be undetectable except at extraordinarily short ranges (you'd practically have to be touching the guy holding it to detect it).
As a bonus, it's a solid state, non-switching device, so it's almost failure proof if you don't do something stupid like short it.
| QUOTE (Vaevictis) |
| (Honestly, I'm not a big fan of removable covers -- in my book, anything that moves is a failure waiting to happen -- but I suppose that because you have to break down the weapon for cleaning anyway, it's no additional burden in this case. Not being a firearms expert, I had not initially considered that) |
Well, yeah, but I'm not so much thinking of necessarily having to completely strip the weapon down, as just... remove a magazine, or even just lock the slide back, or something.
I know on my Glock there's a big freakin' bag of empty right in the rear of the grip -- you can even buy a "plug" for $2-3 bucks just to close it up -- that could (from the sounds of things) hold most of this stuff, and with a plug in place could be completely covered/sealed.
A magnetic strip (if that's what we're talking about, for the inductor pad) or something could maybe just be on the inside of the magwell, or inside of the slide, or something, I'm thinking. Still not outside the weapon, but quite easily accessible without necessarily having to open/close some otherwise completely useless flap. Lock the slide back, remove a magazine (and, well, the weapon's gonna be empty before anyone wants to inspect it, anyways, right?), and there's all sorts of interior surface space there that might be utilized. I guess it would depend on what sort of damage would happen to that interface pad (for lack of a better term) from being exposed to the smoke, grit, etc, on the inside of the gun -- would it be better or worse than the elements outside?
Crit - bag of empty? I don't think I follow. You mean to say they left a void space on the rear of the grip that's exposed to the outside?
Woulden't that damage ergonomics?
Woulden't that damage ergonomics?
If I were at home instead of sneaking on from work, I could find some pics for you -- there is essentially a big hole, the length of the grip, just behind the magwell in every Glock. Maybe big enough to stick your finger most of the way into, it's all a part of the ergonomics (the rounded off rear end of the grip that swells out, for lack of a better term, to fit into the curvature of your palm). And, yes, it's exposed (from the bottom of the grip) to the elements, unless you purchase a plug for it.
More than detailing the gaping maw of the rear of a Glock, though, my point is that it would seem to me there's plenty of unused internal surface material on your average handgun ("average" in my case being only my Glock, the one handgun I've actually spent a good deal of time with in recent years), that's readily available without any sort of extensive disassembly of the handgun in question.
More than detailing the gaping maw of the rear of a Glock, though, my point is that it would seem to me there's plenty of unused internal surface material on your average handgun ("average" in my case being only my Glock, the one handgun I've actually spent a good deal of time with in recent years), that's readily available without any sort of extensive disassembly of the handgun in question.
| QUOTE |
| ugh, why do they have to specify that it requires a microsoft windows software for the download of the shot counter data? |
| QUOTE |
| But what's going to happen when the thing hits 5,000 rounds? Is a light going to turn on? Is it going to start playing the Star Spangled Banner? |
It says MS, not necessarily Windows. With your wireless link to the xbox 360, xbox live is all setup to record everything from rounds fired to insurgents shot.
Killtacular.
PS. NATO gets PS3. Speaking of NATO, didn't the US adopt the 9mm for uniformity? Have they given up on that?
Making a mechanical shot counter could be difficult because of the operations involved in doing a function check after cleaning the weapon. Also, where I was stuck in Kuwait, everyone with a weapon had to clear their weapons at the door to any building. These guys were clearing the weapons doxens of times a day. To the point we were haveing to repair safeties on the handguns. (Berettas)
What just occurred to me, is use a sound powered system. The sound of the round goes off triggers the switch. Something like that can be self-contained, with no effect on the mechanism. You can stick it in any open space.
I would put the access for the device somewhere the user would never need to look. For a handgun similar to the M9, put it under the side panels of the grip. No access port for the user to play with and break or lose. You have to remove the panels to access it at all.
What just occurred to me, is use a sound powered system. The sound of the round goes off triggers the switch. Something like that can be self-contained, with no effect on the mechanism. You can stick it in any open space.
I would put the access for the device somewhere the user would never need to look. For a handgun similar to the M9, put it under the side panels of the grip. No access port for the user to play with and break or lose. You have to remove the panels to access it at all.
Ed: the first time someone lets loose from a SAW next to you, suddenly your armorer is asking how you fired a bajillion rounds out of your .45 pistol. And where he can get the mod kit to turn his into a belt-fed machine pistol.
It's pretty trivial to detect the difference between a round fired at a distance of under an inch and one fired at a foot or two, sound-wise.
~J
~J
Yeah, your detector would not just measure decibels, but frequency. You would get even better response if your microphone was listening to sound conducted through the frame itself.
Well... Okay, fair enough. Still, I don't like the idea of relying on a sonic sensor.
data reading, close range induction coil or something like that. put the in a part of the grip (im guessing there should be enough room given the size of your avarage rfid tag).
just strap a read around the grip and presto...
a bit like a smartlink
as for the sensor itself. i wonder if one can have it detect both a hammer strike and a movement of the slide. but not so much movement as when you clear the chamber after a dud or similar. that is if there is a diffrence between the two
ie, it detects a hammer strike, then a slide movement within x amount of time. any more time used and its a dud or similar.
just strap a read around the grip and presto...
a bit like a smartlink
as for the sensor itself. i wonder if one can have it detect both a hammer strike and a movement of the slide. but not so much movement as when you clear the chamber after a dud or similar. that is if there is a diffrence between the two
ie, it detects a hammer strike, then a slide movement within x amount of time. any more time used and its a dud or similar.
| QUOTE (raygun) |
| Mostly because I'd forgotten that there was a P220R. That might work too, though I'm not sure that the aluminum receiver would live up to the threshold 20,000 round service life. |
I like aluminum frames, ted nugent has an M9 with 100,000 rounds through it and only the locking block needed a replacement once. but I have little doubt GI Joe's M9 is treated a little rougher. Maybe a little sand grabs to the lube on the rails and sands down the frame. If they would just get rid of those checkmate mags and get Mecgar's instead...
anyway about the P220ST, I'd like to see them try to slim down the dimensions, the steel frame was made as thick as the aluminum frame model and the result is a lot of extra sport-oriented weight. There's got to be other more subtle ways of increasing frame life, for instance hardchrome the rails. http://www.trippresearch.com/tech/hardchro.../hardchrome.htm
The Browning BDM had a very skeltonized frame that worked well with it's grips, I'll have to find some pictures. If SIG would steal some tricks from the BDM it might be possible to come up with comfortable grip on a double stack .45, maybe something like thin aluminum grips with checkered surface and stippled rubber coatings. Most double stack .45s remind me of the horrible grip on a mac-10, it might be impossible to satisfy both the comfort and capacity objectives.
anyway about the P220ST, I'd like to see them try to slim down the dimensions, the steel frame was made as thick as the aluminum frame model and the result is a lot of extra sport-oriented weight. There's got to be other more subtle ways of increasing frame life, for instance hardchrome the rails. http://www.trippresearch.com/tech/hardchro.../hardchrome.htm
The Browning BDM had a very skeltonized frame that worked well with it's grips, I'll have to find some pictures. If SIG would steal some tricks from the BDM it might be possible to come up with comfortable grip on a double stack .45, maybe something like thin aluminum grips with checkered surface and stippled rubber coatings. Most double stack .45s remind me of the horrible grip on a mac-10, it might be impossible to satisfy both the comfort and capacity objectives.
| QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685) |
| Of course, why not just issue our troops SMGs for an occupation role? Hmmmmmmm? Why not something simple and durable that's stood the test of time? |
Submachine guns seem passe' in an era of the G36C, SIG 552, HK 53, Colt Commando, Micro-Tavor, etc. but an .45ACP PDW might be interesting. Make it real compact, something like the KRISS with it's innovative hacksaw handle that reduces felt recoil, combined with H&K MP7 mini-g36 gas system, then give it a Calico style helix mag or FN P90 style mag with bottom ejection, that would be interesting and it would look like something from Masamune Shirow comic books.
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,1463..._KRISS,,00.html
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,1463..._KRISS,,00.html
WHAAAAT?!
The King of Shine is wasting his time drawing weapons when he could be drawing more hentai? OUTRAGEOUS! I WILL NOT stand for it! Give me my gun!
The King of Shine is wasting his time drawing weapons when he could be drawing more hentai? OUTRAGEOUS! I WILL NOT stand for it! Give me my gun!
| QUOTE (Critias @ Nov 24 2005, 01:15 PM) |
| More than detailing the gaping maw of the rear of a Glock, though, my point is that it would seem to me there's plenty of unused internal surface material on your average handgun ("average" in my case being only my Glock, the one handgun I've actually spent a good deal of time with in recent years), that's readily available without any sort of extensive disassembly of the handgun in question. |
Unfortunately, your Glock is kind of odd that way, being that it is one of a relative few striker-fired combat pistols out there. Most other handguns, using a more conventional hammer-based firing system, tend to put the hammer strut and mainspring right in that area, thus there isn't much free space there.
Also, if that space is free, it's likely to be used for the "exchangeable backstrap" objective in the JSP specification.
Not to say that there couldn't be space made for something like this on either kind of pistol. Unfortunately, I still fail to see the point of it (beyond the "oh, isn't that neat" factor), nor am I impressed with the idea of relegating things like firearms to the digital realm for the purposes of saving money on maintenance (assuming everything works right). It strikes me as particularly fucking stupid. I know I'm probably pissing into the wind saying this in an internet forum, but some things just don't need to be digital, guys. Track the serial numbers, read the manual, take the fucking gun apart and use your friggin' eyeballs. It works great. What can be gained by a shot counter is trivial at best.
Maybe I'm dense... Can someone explain to me EXACTLY what an exchangable backstrap means? It SOUNDS like a replacable thing you use to hold the gun to your wrist.
It's the back of the pistol grip. Changing its size allows you to better fit various sizes of hands. One of the 92/M9's biggest criticisms was its fairly ungainly ergonomics in the hands of anyone less than 6' tall.
That's a good thing, isen't it? (Especially since most people are less than six feet.)
It is, to some degree, but it's arguable that it's a much better thing in weapons designed for civilians or law enforcement, simply because the conditions of use are much harsher when you fight on a daily basis. Of course, it's a pretty good idea if executed properly, but that is a very tenuous thing when it comes to government contracts.
| QUOTE (Raygun) |
| Unfortunately, your Glock is kind of odd that way, being that it is one of a relative few striker-fired combat pistols out there. Most other handguns, using a more conventional hammer-based firing system, tend to put the hammer strut and mainspring right in that area, thus there isn't much free space there. Also, if that space is free, it's likely to be used for the "exachangeable backstrap" objective in the JSP specification. Not to say that there couldn't be space made for something like this on eithe kind of pistol. Unfortunately, I still fail to see the point of it (beyond the "oh, isn't that neat" factor), nor am I impressed with the idea of relegating things like firearms to the digital realm for the purposes of saving money on maintenance (assuming everything works right). It strikes me as particularly fucking stupid. I know I'm probably pissing into the wind saying this in an internet forum, but some things just don't need to be digital, guys. Track the serial numbers, read the manual, take the fucking gun apart and use your friggin' eyeballs. It works great. What can be gained by a shot counter is trivial at best. |
Military planners have a certain vision for the future that keeps projects like the XM29 and V22 Osprey afloat despite reason and experience, so it shall be with the electronic shot counter widget.
Glock is starting to use that mystery space for their new internal gun lock. What is the mystery space for? legislation like guns locks and user verification .
The skeletonized frame of a SIG or Makarov which leaves the mainspring exposed is plenty of room for a interchangable backstrap system, striker fired isn't needed for interchangable backstrap.
thinking of pistols with interchangable backstraps
Walther P99 - striker fired
SIG PRO - hammer fired
S&W M&P - striker fired
H&K P3000 - hammer fired
FN FNP/ Browning PRO - hammer fired
| QUOTE |
| It's the back of the pistol grip. Changing its size allows you to better fit various sizes of hands. One of the 92/M9's biggest criticisms was its fairly ungainly ergonomics in the hands of anyone less than 6' tall. |
okay I'm 6' tall but this reminds me of a post on another forum I frequent.
http://www.berettaforum.net/cgi-bin/ubbcgi...0725;p=1#000011
http://www.berettaforum.net/cgi-bin/ubbcgi...0725;p=1#000011
| QUOTE (Mastrogiacomo) |
| If you're concerned about how your wife will like the grip, this is something she should try. I'm probably not much different in size from her, 5'2" and 120lbs and I don't have a problem with the full size 92FS or compacts. I did enjoy the Vertec grip too as stated so if this gun will be used by the both you, you should both be handling this in the shop before you buy. She may find the compact "chunky." I didn't but everyone's grip preference will vary. |
Okay, here's a question...
Instead of a customized backstrap, coulden't you design the guns to accept a variety of slightly-different grips to accomodate different shooters?
Instead of a customized backstrap, coulden't you design the guns to accept a variety of slightly-different grips to accomodate different shooters?
| QUOTE (otomik @ Nov 24 2005, 10:22 PM) |
| The skeletonized frame of a SIG or Makarov which leaves the mainspring exposed is plenty of room for a interchangable backstrap system, striker fired isn't needed for interchangable backstrap. |
Didn't mean to suggest mutual exclusion, I just phrased it poorly. Should have said "if there is enough free space in that area, it's likely to be used for the 'exchangeable backstrap' objective in the JSP specification."
| QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685) |
| Instead of a customized backstrap, coulden't you design the guns to accept a variety of slightly-different grips to accomodate different shooters? |
Yeah. They've been doing that on Olympic competition pistols for years. In fact, the guy that pretty much pioneered it, Cesare Morini, is the same guy who designed the grip and exchangable backstrap system for the Walther P99 (which started all this business).
The SIGpro is set up more like that than the others. It's not just the backstrap that is exchangeable on that one, but the backstrap and side panels as well, as a single unit.
So why not just do that, then? And save the void space for this insane shot counter?
Because it doesn't save space for anything. It actually takes up more space.
Well, that would be a problem, then.
Could you engineer the gun so that the whole grip (not just the thing on the outside of where you put the gun, everything that encases the mag well and trigger guard) can be interchangable?
Could you engineer the gun so that the whole grip (not just the thing on the outside of where you put the gun, everything that encases the mag well and trigger guard) can be interchangable?
| QUOTE (ShadowDragon8685) |
| Well, that would be a problem, then. Could you engineer the gun so that the whole grip (not just the thing on the outside of where you put the gun, everything that encases the mag well and trigger guard) can be interchangable? |
yeah, Kel-Tec pistols, available in many colors, the hellokitty imac of pistols
No really, don't just drop it out of hand.
I know it sounds like it probably woulden't work - stresses of firing not lending themselves well to structural supports like snap-on snap-off...
But could it work?
I know it sounds like it probably woulden't work - stresses of firing not lending themselves well to structural supports like snap-on snap-off...
But could it work?
I think you're going the wrong way with this, ShadowDragon. They need to make it as easy (and inexpensive) to manufacture as possible, and the bigger you make these interchangable pieces, the more complicated and expensive things get, considering that they would need to buy a bunch of different ones for these users. What they want is something a simple as possible that alters the circumference of the grip. Using just a relatively small portion of the backstrap is all that is necessary to affect that.
This depends very heavily on the design of the firearm as you're dealing with very small amounts of space here, but I think it would probably be possible to build the shot counter electronics either into the side panels of the grip frame or into the dust cover (ahead of the trigger guard), or both if necessary. With such limited functionality, it really doesn't need to take up a lot of space. That leaves the backstrap interchangeable.
Now, for an update on my opinion on the matter: On a military gun, I think both the shot counter and exchangeable backstraps are trivial and unnecessary. In a police type environment, fine. In a military environment, the gun needs to be as simple and robust as possible.
This depends very heavily on the design of the firearm as you're dealing with very small amounts of space here, but I think it would probably be possible to build the shot counter electronics either into the side panels of the grip frame or into the dust cover (ahead of the trigger guard), or both if necessary. With such limited functionality, it really doesn't need to take up a lot of space. That leaves the backstrap interchangeable.
Now, for an update on my opinion on the matter: On a military gun, I think both the shot counter and exchangeable backstraps are trivial and unnecessary. In a police type environment, fine. In a military environment, the gun needs to be as simple and robust as possible.
Re: Your opinion.
You're probably right, but this is the United States Army you're talking about. Have you ever known them to settle for something with fifteen widgets when they could cram twenty up the ass of their contractors and hope to make 'em puke out a working gun?
Anyways, my money is on somehow incorporating it into the side-panels of the grip. Hell, if they can put the guts of a cell phone into that space, they ought to be able to cram in a shot counter.
You're probably right, but this is the United States Army you're talking about. Have you ever known them to settle for something with fifteen widgets when they could cram twenty up the ass of their contractors and hope to make 'em puke out a working gun?
Anyways, my money is on somehow incorporating it into the side-panels of the grip. Hell, if they can put the guts of a cell phone into that space, they ought to be able to cram in a shot counter.
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| Dude, he was being serious. ~J |
hmm, why do that make me think of the guns in cp2020?
maybe because they talk about them being molded plastic available in all kinds of fashionable colors?
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) | ||
hmm, why do that make me think of the guns in cp2020? maybe because they talk about them being molded plastic available in all kinds of fashionable colors? |
Hmm. HK is developing a .45 ACP version of the P2000, apparently. I wonder what for? Check it. Looks like that one fits the bill nicely. If Beretta gets a .45 ACP version of the Px4 going, they might have a chance, too. Wait... otomik, any reason why you're being so quiet about this? A polymer-framed 92 in .45 ACP with exchangeable grips? That's a pretty big deal...
| QUOTE (Raygun) |
| Hmm. HK is developing a .45 ACP version of the P2000, apparently. I wonder what for? Check it. Looks like that one fits the bill nicely. If Beretta gets a .45 ACP version of the Px4 going, they might have a chance, too. Wait... otomik, any reason why you're being so quiet about this? A polymer-framed 92 in .45 ACP with exchangeable grips? That's a pretty big deal... |
I mentioned it on another thread here, yeah PX4 and and 90TWO are possibilities but they're in 9mm and .40 only at this point. If god told the Beretta family to make a .45, they'd have to think about it and you might see it in 20 years. Every other major company has created a .45 as soon as they really entered the american market.
I bitch and moan about it more here http://www.berettaforum.net/cgi-bin/ubbcgi...0306;p=1#000016
but more importantly I question their faith in the strength of the locking block, some people have experimented with .357SIG with good results and it works well from a Brig slide 96 but they've never offered it. If this is going be Berettas first foray into a locking block .45 it's got to get it right the first time because the contract stipulates M1 ball and a high pressure hollowpoint round. I wonder if it's about the strength of the frame or the strength of the locking block, they do have a Steel Beretta 92 (with frame mounted safety!)
also on the 90TWO I wish they put the safety on the frame or made that an option, that would be good. I will buy a 92 Stock someday, that thing is gorgeous
http://www.berettaworld.com/index.asp?url=...D53%26did%3D271
damn, take a look at Elvis' Beretta there, I need some personalized grips like that.
S&W made some hideous looking P99 .45s with changable backtraps, I really hope smith and wesson doesn't cry foul because they think they're fucking entitled as an american company. I mean they discontinued the 4506, that was a great gun and would have been nice to see in the JCP.
what in the name of god is this
edit: gah. click on 'agents' and select... any of them. and then explain. explain as you have never explained before.
edit: gah. click on 'agents' and select... any of them. and then explain. explain as you have never explained before.
!!
Blatent use of sex-appeal?
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| what in the name of god is this edit: gah. click on 'agents' and select... any of them. and then explain. explain as you have never explained before. |
that website I linked, Beretta World is not owned/related to the company, it's just some fan's website. It's probably just some amateur photographer practicing making pr0n. But I wouldn't mind a sexy calender put out by a gun company, sexy calenders are very popular in italy, Tanfoglio's put one out in the past.
hmm, guns and girls, all a man now needs is beer, and lot of it
| QUOTE (otomik @ Nov 25 2005, 02:00 PM) |
| I mentioned it on another thread here, yeah PX4 and and 90TWO are possibilities but they're in 9mm and .40 only at this point. |
Ah. The barrel profile in that picture initially looked to be bigger than the 9/40 barrel profile, but looking at them comparatively, you're right. I guess I got a little too excited about the prospect of an open top .45 ACP.
| QUOTE |
| If god told the Beretta family to make a .45, they'd have to think about it and you might see it in 20 years. Every other major company has created a .45 as soon as they really entered the american market. |
You'd think that with the 8000 Cougar having a .45 ACP model and the Px4 being heavily based upon it, as well as the potential for them losing incumbency and a very large contact, it would be enough to light a fire under their asses. The Px4 already has exchangable backstraps, a lanyard loop, an M1913 light mount, etc... All it really needs is to be .45 ACP.
| QUOTE |
| If this is going be Berettas first foray into a locking block .45 it's got to get it right the first time because the contract stipulates M1 ball and a high pressure hollowpoint round. I wonder if it's about the strength of the frame or the strength of the locking block, |
Wouldn't doubt it. They would need to make room in that area for the fatter cartridge (which with an obviously new frame and slide, is another thing that had me going in that picture). I don't see why it couldn't be done, so long as they make a frame and slide with a little more room in the locking area. If you can make it work at ~35k psi with the .40 S&W, you can do it at ~22k psi with .45 ACP +P. Sure seems like they don't want to do that, though.
| QUOTE |
| they do have a Steel Beretta 92 (with frame mounted safety!) also on the 90TWO I wish they put the safety on the frame or made that an option, that would be good. |
A big plus in my book (and a JCP objective). Too bad it doesn't work as a decocker, though. I wonder if they can do that without infringing on Taurus' patent (haha!).
| QUOTE |
| I will buy a 92 Stock someday, that thing is gorgeous http://www.berettaworld.com/index.asp?url=...D53%26did%3D271 damn, take a look at Elvis' Beretta there, I need some personalized grips like that. |
One of the two with the gold bits and pearl inlayed grips? That's pretty Elvis, alright.
| QUOTE |
| S&W made some hideous looking P99 .45s with changable backtraps, I really hope smith and wesson doesn't cry foul because they think they're fucking entitled as an american company. |
Crying foul seems to be par for the course in these kinds of competitions anymore. I'm sure someone will at some point. If S&W has a pistol that can meet specs, more power to them, I say. However, they would receive some favoritism for being an American company. I remember reading recently (during the XM8 debachle) that that's actually a law somewhere, though I don't recall where.
| QUOTE |
| I mean they discontinued the 4506, that was a great gun and would have been nice to see in the JCP. |
But for the magazine safety... Of course, that would have to go for JCP anyway.
| QUOTE (Raygun) | ||
Ah. The barrel profile in that picture initially looked to be bigger than the 9/40 barrel profile, but looking at them comparatively, you're right. I guess I got a little too excited about the prospect of an open top .45 ACP. |
I believe some Beretta reps were quoted as saying that the 9x19mm and .40S&W Px4s would launch the line, and if successful enough, a .45ACP variant would follow (rumored at 12 + 1, no less). I can't verify that, but it doesn't strike mas as impossible. Especially now with this contract coming up.
| QUOTE (Raygun) | ||
Crying foul seems to be par for the course in these kinds of competitions anymore. I'm sure someone will at some point. If S&W has a pistol that can meet specs, more power to them, I say. However, they would receive some favoritism for being an American company. I remember reading recently (during the XM8 debachle) that that's actually a law somewhere, though I don't recall where. |
Honestly, I can't help but bring up Robinson again. Beretta's got huge sway, especially since they're already supplying the military's pistols. At the very worst, I can't see them at a disadvantage.
| QUOTE (Arethusa) |
| I believe some Beretta reps were quoted as saying that the 9x19mm and .40S&W Px4s would launch the line, and if successful enough, a .45ACP variant would follow (rumored at 12 + 1, no less). I can't verify that, but it doesn't strike mas as impossible. Especially now with this contract coming up. |
Me either. They said the same thing about the Cx4, the "x4" supposedly meaning available chamberings in 9x19mm, .357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP. But a .45 ACP version of the 92 is another story entirely.
| QUOTE |
| Honestly, I can't help but bring up Robinson again. |
That's not the same. IIRC, the law in question says that if two products perform identically and one is made by an American company, the American company gets the contract. Robinson didn't even get that opportunity. The official "no BFAs shipped" reason was bullshit, but I have my suspicions that Robinson really got the shaft because of a lack of manufacturing capacity (not to mention the whole EGLM thing). It doesn't matter how good of a product you have, if there's no way you can manufacture at the rate forecasted, you aren't going to be taken very seriously. Beretta's got no problems there.
| QUOTE |
| Beretta's got huge sway, especially since they're already supplying the military's pistols. At the very worst, I can't see them at a disadvantage. |
Not having a pistol ready is a pretty big one. Seems like everyone else has been gearing up for this over the last three months, which is another thing that had me going with the 90Two. I see everyone with a contender but them. Doesn't mean they don't have one, obviously. Maybe I just haven't dug deep enough yet or they're just being particularly sneaky about it.
I should have clarified; I didn't mean that in response to the law (which I am not familiar with, but does not surprise me). Specifically, I just don't see being an American company to be that much of an advantage when it comes to military small arms contracts, these days, and I think Beretta has a potentially strong competitor with the Px4 if they decide (or have decided, and simply kept it under wraps) to use it as a base for a JCP bid.
Also, in regards to Robinson and the XCR thing, I personally felt that given the intended use of the weapon, concerns about manufacturing capability were more or less manufactured to cover up political pressure from FNH. Maybe that was insubstantiated conspiracy nuttery. I'm not in a position to say; but it did strike me as quite plausible.
Also, in regards to Robinson and the XCR thing, I personally felt that given the intended use of the weapon, concerns about manufacturing capability were more or less manufactured to cover up political pressure from FNH. Maybe that was insubstantiated conspiracy nuttery. I'm not in a position to say; but it did strike me as quite plausible.
| QUOTE (Arethusa) |
| I should have clarified; I didn't mean that in response to the law (which I am not familiar with, but does not surprise me). Specifically, I just don't see being an American company to be that much of an advantage when it comes to military small arms contracts, these days, |
Other than it putting the vast majority of that money directly back into the US economy, I don't either, especially considering that any company involved must have manufacturing capabilities for the contracted items on US soil. (For example, the Beretta factory in Maryland, SIG Arms in New Hampshire, FNMI in South Carolina, HK setting up shop in Georgia, etc...)
| QUOTE |
| and I think Beretta has a potentially strong competitor with the Px4 if they decide (or have decided, and simply kept it under wraps) to use it as a base for a JCP bid. |
I agree. But I also think that in the interest of keeping maintenance and training as close to the M9 as possible, they might be going another route with that. That's their trump card, really.
| QUOTE |
| Also, in regards to Robinson and the XCR thing, I personally felt that given the intended use of the weapon, concerns about manufacturing capability were more or less manufactured to cover up political pressure from FNH. Maybe that was insubstantiated conspiracy nuttery. I'm not in a position to say; but it did strike me as quite plausible. |
I suppose it is plausible. The addition of the EGLM to the specs could be considered to point in that direction (ooo! shiny object!). FN already had a system like that in the F2000, whereas Robinson had a rifle and that's pretty much it (and nowhere near the resources of FN to develop an EGLM). But even if SCAR specs did stick to the rifle only, I really don't think FN had reason to be that worried about it.
| QUOTE (Raygun @ Nov 26 2005, 05:17 AM) |
| They said the same thing about the Cx4, the "x4" supposedly meaning available chamberings in 9x19mm, .357 SIG, .40 S&W and .45 ACP. But a .45 ACP version of the 92 is another story entirely. |
The .40 PX4 isn't even available yet, just 9mm. funny to name a weapon for how many calibers it's available in when making them available in a variety of calibers isn't priority. I'm also glad they aren't discontinuing the Cougars in favor of the PX4 entirely, word is production is being shifted to turkey and it will be under another name in Beretta Holdings. I think the Benelli or Stoeger brands would be most likely but I'm not sure which companies have factories in Turkey. Turkey has put out a lot of quality products lately at a competitive price.
SIG's innability to get the lowest bid last time during the M9 contract may determine the fate of the JCP. Viewed from this perspective other viable competitors come to the fore, such as Glock, CZ, Taurus, Bersa, and a pet favorite of mine Zastava Arms of Serbia. The Zastava CZ99 and CZ999 has lot of interesting features including a button that switches the gun from DAO to DA/SA, that kind of commonality will help keep costs down, and their controls are fully ambidextrous and innovative (add a 1911 style ambi frame safety and every users favored mode of operation is accomodated).
and another thing if they use the same mainspring for the DA/SA as the DAO then we are in for a very sweet trigger, probably one with a 8lb DA and 4lb SA.
| QUOTE |
| 3.4.2. Trigger Pull: All DA/SA pistols shall have a consistent trigger pull of eight to ten [8-10] pounds on Double Action, and a consistent trigger pull of four to six [4-6] pounds on Single Action and all DAO pistols shall have a trigger pull of five to eight [5-8] pounds (T). All pistols shall have a trigger pull that is consistent within one [1] pound from average pull (T). When pressure is applied to the JCP trigger and then released, the trigger shall reset to its forward-most position, even if the pistol is not fired (T). The operator shall be capable of pulling the trigger, without shifting the firing grip as will be tested in section 3.6.3. |
| QUOTE |
| A big plus in my book (and a JCP objective). Too bad it doesn't work as a decocker, though. I wonder if they can do that without infringing on Taurus' patent (haha!). |
I've said it before, I like having a decocker but I don't think that decocker is well thought out, Beretta still wins.
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/TaurusPT92.htm
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/TaurusPT92.htm
| QUOTE |
| in the stress of a deadly force situation, one might apply enough force disengaging the safety to inadvertently decock the pistol such that the first shot has to be double-action or the pistol recocked before firing. |
absolutely correct. that's why I think the CZ99 has it so right when they combined the decocker and slide release into one button, that way the controls are the familiar 1911 type (but with a decocker also and ambidextrous).
go Glock!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.