NSW SEALS ADOPT GLOCK 19 REPLACING SIG P226 MK25

[RugersGR8]

Since this item is not new, I did a search on the OAS forums and didn't find anything to indicate that this info had been previously posted. If it has been, I apologize for the duplication.



NSW SEALS ADOPT GLOCK 19 REPLACING SIG P226 MK25
Denny Ducet
Published on Dec 12, 2015

&


Are the SEALS Stupid To Switch to Glock 19?
nutnfancy
Published on Jan 30, 2016

 

[HMCS(FMF)Ret.]

Why would anyone want a Glock over a Sig? Other than cost. Weight....really?

 

[Fyrtwuck]

I have both the 19 and the 226, although, not the coveted "Navy" 226.

The 226 is heavier than the 19.
Round capacity is the same.
The 19 is smaller.
The DA/SA trigger on the 226 takes some getting used to, but it can be done.
As an individual, customer support for the Glock is much easier than Sig. I'm sure the gov will jump ahead of the line with a contract.
The Glock was designed so that any part that malfunctioned could be just pulled out and replaced by anyone. Only a 3/32" punch is needed. I can't do that with any of my Sigs.

If they wanted to have a smaller size with the same capacity, why didn't they just move over to the Sig M-11? Both the 19 and the M-11 are really close in size with the same round capacity. Weight will differ.

I'm surprised that if they were going to go with Glock, why not the 17? More rounds and not much weight increase.

 

[POKE1911]

I could be wrong but I think Glocks business model is to slash bid prices to government entities and make up the margin selling to the private sector. They can "sell" on the fact that they are used by LEO and now apparently the Navy Seals. Honestly, with as many of those things as they produce they have to make a huge profit margin. Just a 100% guess but I would imagine that Glock's net cost delivered to a distributor is under $150 could be way off but knowing what some other things cost, I believe that I am on the conservative side.

 

[120 Acres]

I could be wrong but I think Glocks business model is to slash bid prices to government entities and make up the margin selling to the private sector. They can "sell" on the fact that they are used by LEO and now apparently the Navy Seals. Honestly, with as many of those things as they produce they have to make a huge profit margin. Just a 100% guess but I would imagine that Glock's net cost delivered to a distributor is under $150 could be way off but knowing what some other things cost, I believe that I am on the conservative side.

That would be my guess as well, I mean, look at Leupold.

 

[OKdane]

Glocks are inexpensive, reliable and easily serviceable. I don't see a problem.

 

[JD8]

Why would anyone want a Glock over a Sig? Other than cost. Weight....really?

Doubles as a grenade in a pinch?

 

[NikatKimber]

I have both the 19 and the 226, although, not the coveted "Navy" 226.

The 226 is heavier than the 19.
Round capacity is the same.
The 19 is smaller.
The DA/SA trigger on the 226 takes some getting used to, but it can be done.
As an individual, customer support for the Glock is much easier than Sig. I'm sure the gov will jump ahead of the line with a contract.
The Glock was designed so that any part that malfunctioned could be just pulled out and replaced by anyone. Only a 3/32" punch is needed. I can't do that with any of my Sigs.

If they wanted to have a smaller size with the same capacity, why didn't they just move over to the Sig M-11? Both the 19 and the M-11 are really close in size with the same round capacity. Weight will differ.

I'm surprised that if they were going to go with Glock, why not the 17? More rounds and not much weight increase.

I have a 19 and a P228. I love my P228, but I carry the Glock.

Your last question was the first thing that came to my mind as well.

 

[druryj]

Why would anyone want a Glock over a Sig? Other than cost. Weight....really?

Not saying that Sigs aren't fine weapons, but speaking as a former Recon Marine who spent a lot of time in rubber boats, the surf zone, and underwater, the Glock is the weapon I would choose for that environment. It makes sense to me that the SEALS went with it.

 

[HMCS(FMF)Ret.]

Not saying that Sigs aren't fine weapons, but speaking as a former Recon Marine who spent a lot of time in rubber boats, the surf zone, and underwater, the Glock is the weapon I would choose for that environment. It makes sense to me that the SEALS went with it.

Ughhhh. I'm just a Glock hater. I have to admit though I'd take a Glock over the Beretta that I carried any day of the week. I still hate Glock's though, and in a crappy situation I'd take a Sig over a Glock all day long.