I understand your point and it does have merit, but my question is whether you really want the least familiar shooters evaluating guns for an entire agency? If the new shooters (assuming they are 'green' shooters) don't have solid fundamentals and the problems being experienced are actually shooter errors and not mechanical problems, you could be complicating the evaluation process and potentially drawing the wrong conclusion. Could a FTF/FTE noted really be a limp wristing problem, or maybe the rookie shooter is simply riding the slide? These would seem less problematic variables to consider with experienced shooters. Just like I wouldn't expect an inexperienced driver to articulate the nuances of an understeer/oversteer condition with the same insight as a professional driver, I think more meaningful information would be gleaned from a pool of seasoned shooter evaluating a new platform than one where the testers were still struggling to grasp the basics of shooting.
Texas DPS ditches M&P and returns to SIG
- Thread starter Badkarma 1
- Start date
I understand your point and it does have merit, but my question is whether you really want the least familiar shooters evaluating guns for an entire agency? If the new shooters (assuming they are 'green' shooters) don't have solid fundamentals and the problems being experienced are actually shooter errors and not mechanical problems, you could be complicating the evaluation process and potentially drawing the wrong conclusion. Could a FTF/FTE noted really be a limp wristing problem, or maybe the rookie shooter is simply riding the slide? These would seem less problematic variables to consider with experienced shooters. Just like I wouldn't expect an inexperienced driver to articulate the nuances of an understeer/oversteer condition with the same insight as a professional driver, I think more meaningful information would be gleaned from a pool of seasoned shooter evaluating a new platform than one where the testers were still struggling to grasp the basics of shooting.
I don't know the politics or contract stuff about this. I do know that my son is in the current DPS class and was involved in the initial recruits (approx. 60) who trained on the M&P for 5-6 days shooting about 500 rounds each per day plus the qualifying rounds. My son reported NO problems on his weapon except for the sights being "off target" (the instructors verified that is was not shooter error and had the sights adjusted that evening). My son, who has not had extensive firearms training at the PD level scored 285 on his qualification. He told me that while he didn't experience any malfunctions other recruits were having FTE's FTF's.
The next day or so after the qualifications were complete, they were told about the issues and were given the Sigs to re-qualify the next day. He scored a 295 with the sig and had NO practice with it before qualifying.
While he liked his experience with the M&P, he said he loves the Sig.
He couldn't tell me anything about the questions people seem to be having with DPS's decision to go with the Sig for the time being. He only knows what everyone else knows. After all, being a recruit, he just does what he is told to the best of his ability. BTW, I'm proud of him and the profession he is choosing.
The next day or so after the qualifications were complete, they were told about the issues and were given the Sigs to re-qualify the next day. He scored a 295 with the sig and had NO practice with it before qualifying.
While he liked his experience with the M&P, he said he loves the Sig.
He couldn't tell me anything about the questions people seem to be having with DPS's decision to go with the Sig for the time being. He only knows what everyone else knows. After all, being a recruit, he just does what he is told to the best of his ability. BTW, I'm proud of him and the profession he is choosing.
Florida J Frame
US Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2008
- Messages
- 1,051
- Reaction score
- 816
I think having your most inexperienced shooters evaluate the gun is a good plan. A more experienced officer will naturally overcome minor shortcomings in the weapon where a novice will not. By switching back to the Sig platform it will quickly become evident if it was the gun or the shooter because the problems will either remain or be cured. In an organization that large, weapons must fit the lowest common denominator so all can be safe.
Two diametrically opposing viewpoints and both are meritorious. The key, however, is that nobody shoots as much as rookies in training. That's why they're a good test platform.
***GRJ***
Rastoff
US Veteran
No, I don't want a new shooter evaluating the new gun. Neither is that the point. I want the new shooters to shoot the gun with an experienced person evaluating what happens.
I see these as exactly the reason I want the new shooters to use the guns. If the "green" shooter can operate the gun and not have any trouble, then that's the gun I want to put in service.
I'm an experienced shooter. No matter how hard I try, I can't induce a malfunction in my M&Ps. I've only had two malfunctions with my M&Ps. One was an extractor problem that got fixed with a new extractor and the other was an improperly crimped round; hardly the gun's fault. Even so, I've seen other people have problems with type II malfunctions that are most likely attributable to the shooter. Sometimes those problems won't surface with an experienced shooter. That's why I see value in having the newbies shoot them.
Problems in shooting form can be fixed through training. Even so, everyone will has the potential to have problems while under stress. So, I'd want the gun with the least potential for problems.
Fair point. Thanks for offering your perspective.
Okay, I think I better understand your point as well. Though, I'm still not clear as to the extent of the problem. Bullonee added some good insider info about his son in this test group (thx for that!) and we've learned that the problems weren't experienced by all of the 60 shooters in his son's class. The ammo part of the equation still remains something a mystery. You have M&P guns shooting whatever 9mm training ammo they happen to be using vs. the .357Sig ammo, which we know there are far fewer choices to pick from. Is there a possibility that 9mm training ammo was problematic and the .357Sig ammo was the same stuff they've been using for a while now? I obviously don't know, but I do think it may be a variable worth considering here, as are the bad batches of M&P 9mm magazine followers that S&W put in their more recent release mags.
Doug M.
Member
*
FWIW, that list is from an officer whose agency has had those problems, and when he says they have gone through at least a second issue and the officers on his squad are all on their third, that's a big deal and pretty direct observation.
That is not consistent with the reputation of which I am aware from some pretty hard shooters, but it is his experience, in his department, and thus cannot be discounted lightly. There are a lot of folks on this forum and elsewhere that swear by 1076s and 4566s, but I was issued both and saw pretty bad problems (such as being broken when the box was opened
).I did see reference to problems with the new M&Ps at DPS having problems with mags dropping out without the release being pressed, which is a big fat hairy deal. If this is even in part related to S&W switching mag sources without doing appropriate QC reviews, shame on them.
silversport
Member
If you want a large control group to find out ANY weaknesses in a new pistol platform...recruits would be a good group to find it (them)...evaluations would be done by higher ups with far more experience...it's how I'd do it...
Bill
Bill
Rastoff
US Veteran
I think it's important to understand that the rookie user is just a tool. The actual evaluation needs to be done by an experienced individual(s).
I work in the test and evaluation world. We design, build, install and maintain data collection systems for test aircraft. After a new install, we commonly get someone who isn't familiar with the system to operate it. Just because that person has trouble, doesn't mean we change it. We evaluate the problem they had and see if it can be easily overcome or if the system is really not built right. Making a maneuver at 25K feet is not the time to have trouble with some piece of data collection system. The same goes for a police officer. In a gun fight is not the time to discover the gun has feeding issues if not gripped tightly.
I work in the test and evaluation world. We design, build, install and maintain data collection systems for test aircraft. After a new install, we commonly get someone who isn't familiar with the system to operate it. Just because that person has trouble, doesn't mean we change it. We evaluate the problem they had and see if it can be easily overcome or if the system is really not built right. Making a maneuver at 25K feet is not the time to have trouble with some piece of data collection system. The same goes for a police officer. In a gun fight is not the time to discover the gun has feeding issues if not gripped tightly.
Arik
Member
Sig has had their share of problems too and some departments dropped them in favor of other platforms. Most departments usually rotate between the 4 main manufacturers. Sig, Glock, Smith and HK.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Rastoff
US Veteran
The problem with the SIG Sauer guns is that you have to be a right hand shooter.
Eugene 9mm
Member
That makes at least 150,000 rounds fired, split between 60 pistols, 2,500 each. One would hope that any problems encountered with shooting technique would be resolved by the instructors before placing the blame on the gun.
Presumably the Sig worked fine for everyone, or they'd be reporting more problems. It does seem like S&W had a bad bunch of something in there, and it may have cost them a massive contract.
I would be interested to know if they're firing the same ammo in practise as they will use on duty. It would seem to make sense.
I haven't had a single problem with my M&P9, but I haven't shot anything like 2,500 rounds through it yet, or even through all my handguns combined. I've only had one FTF in all my shooting centerfire ammo, and that was with cheap steel-cased Tulammo ammo in a Glock 17.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Brother, you need to get to the range more!
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,020
- Reaction score
- 7,101
Sounds more like a temporary suspension than a rejection to me. When the FBI had trouble with the 1076, they temporarily issued their previous weapons, SIG 226s, I think. Los Angeles Sheriff's Department had an issue, pulled the M&P temporarily, then went ahead, and there have been no further reports of problems. I would be surprised if S&W doesn't get this squared away.
M&PmikeC
Member
do any of you work for S&W or are we all here just handgun M&P nuts...
silversport
Member
As a SouthPaw who has owned and carried SIGs since 1987, I have to disagree with that...
Bill
Budnjax
Absent Comrade
departments don't select on basis of "best gun"
As someone who ran a large police supply business I can assure you that many, if not most, law enforcement agencies don't buy firearms based on what is best for their troops. Generally, it's what's the best deal for the purchasing authorities, department, city or county that's buying the guns. Does anyone really believe that the M-16 was the best semi-auto rifle available or that the M92 Beretta was the best semi-auto pistol that could be had? A lot of such purchase agreements are made in back rooms or at resort weekend retreats where the purchasers are wined and dined and made "offers they can't refuse." In my experience, most cops don't really care about guns that much, just enough to qualify by shooting at bullseye targets in broad daylight and many officers can go through a whole career without ever pulling a pistol out of it's holster except to clean it or qualify with it twice a year. It's just another tool, like their flashlight or duty belt....some don't even like guns.
As someone who ran a large police supply business I can assure you that many, if not most, law enforcement agencies don't buy firearms based on what is best for their troops. Generally, it's what's the best deal for the purchasing authorities, department, city or county that's buying the guns. Does anyone really believe that the M-16 was the best semi-auto rifle available or that the M92 Beretta was the best semi-auto pistol that could be had? A lot of such purchase agreements are made in back rooms or at resort weekend retreats where the purchasers are wined and dined and made "offers they can't refuse." In my experience, most cops don't really care about guns that much, just enough to qualify by shooting at bullseye targets in broad daylight and many officers can go through a whole career without ever pulling a pistol out of it's holster except to clean it or qualify with it twice a year. It's just another tool, like their flashlight or duty belt....some don't even like guns.
Brother, you need to get to the range more!
Ain't that the truth. That's about what I shoot in a slow month. Oh and BTW I haven't experienced any problems with my M&P9 and I go through more ammo in a year then most officers go through in a career.
Concerning the ammo: My son said that they were shooting their duty ammo in the M&P's and I assume the Sig's as well. I didn't ask and he didn't tell me what brand the ammo was and I forgot the grain. It was either 130 something or 140 something HP's. I'll talk to him this weekend and find out.
Similar threads
- Locked
Expired/Withdrawn
SIG SAUER P320/P250 magazines or trade for S&W, Ruger mags
