18+ Content Warning

By clicking Enter, you confirm you are 18 years of age or older and agree to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws.

Notice: Any content or member activity - including anything you may buy, sell, transfer, or discuss - must comply with current and upcoming laws.

Members are encouraged to stay informed: California Firearm Laws: 2026 Outlook & 2025 Recap . Responsibility for compliance rests solely with the individual member.

caguns.net

Welcome to CAguns.net!
Join our growing community where you can ask questions, share knowledge, or browse our classifieds section.

Sign up for a free account today and unlock full access! Once registered, you can search, post, and take advantage of exclusive features unavailable to guests.

A note on why more of the site now requires an account: automated scrapers and AI systems have been crawling our forums and classifieds at a scale. Requiring sign-in for those sections is the most effective tool we have. It takes a minute to register, it's free, and it keeps what happens here between actual members.

New to California gun ownership or trying to keep up with the changing laws? Check out our sister site CA2A.com — free courses, plain-English legal updates, and step-by-step guides built for California owners.

Advanced features are available only to registered members. Register today!

News Why the Army didn’t finish testing the Sig Sauer P320 during the XM17 competition

Latest news

USMC06RET

Well-known member
Messages
800


Full Article
(excerpt)

....In 2015, the Army released the Request for Proposals and started testing the 12 submitted pistols the following year. After phase one testing, the SIG Sauer and Glock submissions were the only ones that made it past the down select. Phase two destructive testing began, but was stopped at 12,500 rounds, half of the 25,000-round required service life. Moreover, destructive testing called for the pistols to fire up to 35,000 rounds to test reliability.

Glock protested the Army’s premature selection of the Sig Sauer submission and asked that testing resume. An investigation by the Government Accountability Office found that “Sig Sauer’s full-sized handgun had a higher stoppage rate than Glock’s handgun, and there may have been other problems with the weapon’s accuracy.”

The investigation also noted that the Army redacted the results of Sig’s compact handgun. Sig submitted two handgun frames in three different grip sizes with a swappable trigger unit, while Glock submitted one handgun with interchangeable backstraps to meet the Army’s modularity requirements.

In the end, Glock’s protest was denied.

“[T]here is no correlating superior performance factor for Glock, as compared to Sig Sauer’s, to support paying that premium. Consequently, I cannot justify paying a price premium of 37% for the Glock submission, even as a second award,” wrote Susan Poling in the GAO report. She did note the investigation uncovered “evaluation errors” by the Army, but could not justify paying more for the Glock.

The short of it is that Sig Sauer’s price to the government was so low that the Army felt that it had a good enough pistol at a great price. So, testing was stopped and did not resume.

Formally adopted as the full-size XM17 and compact XM18, the Sig underwent Product Verification Testing in FY17, which found that the gun could discharge when dropped. An Engineering Change Proposal by Sig Sauer corrected this with lightweight components in the trigger group mechanism. ...

MORE
 
James Reeves made a video covering this very topic on his personal youtube channel.

Great video, excellent history lesson, very thorough. I usually prefer to read such stories but this guy was very engaging.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom