M&P loses to Glock

[smith46wesson]

By now most people know that Glock obtained the FBI contract. Has anyone heard what specifically Smith & Wesson submitted, since the current M&P offerings did not meet the bid specifications?

 

[kbm6893]

Glock had an unfair advantage. No change to training to agents and I bet the holsters would work with the new guns. The Glock does nothing better than the M&P. Mass produced polymer striker fired gun is what they both are. I bet Glock gave a sweetheart deal too. They surely have a history of nearly giving guns away to get big contracts.

 

[Watchdog]

Glock had an unfair advantage...I bet Glock gave a sweetheart deal too...They surely have a history of nearly giving guns away to get big contracts.

I've heard this a good bit about Glock over the years. And I'm thinking, "So what?" It's marketing. If competitors can't do better than Glock's offers or bids on a contract, whose fault is that? Can't hardly blame Glock for going after the business, no matter what you may think of their product(s).

 

[Holmes375]

As an armed citizen I've never felt the need or desire to carry the same pistol as the FBI or any large police department. Their criteria and mine differ noticeably.

The Glock won out because it ticks all the necessary boxes and does so at a lower cost to change than the competitors. Simple as that and the Glock will serve them well.

For me as an individual the M&P accomplishes the same mission.

 

[petepeterson]

Glock had an unfair advantage. No change to training to agents and I bet the holsters would work with the new guns. The Glock does nothing better than the M&P. Mass produced polymer striker fired gun is what they both are. I bet Glock gave a sweetheart deal too. They surely have a history of nearly giving guns away to get big contracts.

The Glock does do something better than the Smith-

It fits the existing training and holsters better. If it was your money, what would you do?

(It is your money, BTW...)

 

[first-model]

I love my M&P dearly, and it's still the most accurate target gun I own. But I can understand this decision. Free training and not having to purchase new holsters is *very much* an advantage, and it's an entirely fair one. If Glock has done one thing right, it's to maintain backward compatibility like this.

As an aside, I'm resentful of how guarded S&W is with their armorer training. I think this is part of why Glock continues to lead in this space; people who take a personal interest in the armorer training will have a natural inclination to favor those guns in selection processes. I don't know if this was a factor here.

I own two Glocks and I don't particularly love shooting them, but they always go bang when I want them to, and they don't go bang when I don't want them to. We can fault them for being as ugly as sin, but they get the job done.

Mike

 

[Mister X]

As an armed citizen I've never felt the need or desire to carry the same pistol as the FBI or any large police department. Their criteria and mine differ noticeably.

I wouldn't make my choice of weapon decisions based on what the FBI or anyone else uses(obviously so since I most often carry a revolver), but I also don't think the fact that a large percentage of military and police worldwide use Glocks and have done so for many years should be ignored. To me, that does tell me lot.

Folks on threads such as this one and many like it on other forums say they care less what the FBI chose, but they obviously do since their statements show disappointment that their gun wasn't picked as if it was their child not making the basketball team at school. Guns are tools. It shouldn't be personal. Pick the best tool for the job based on relevant factors. I own Glocks and S&W revolvers because I think they are the most practical tools for the job of personal defense. I have no emotional attachment to them or brand loyalty. If I deem another gun from another manufacturer is a better choice, I'd switch.

 

[Absalom]

Everybody posting here should probably make sure to first read the Glock-FBI thread in the Lounge so this doesn't turn into a re-hash.

As pertains to the M&P, there's nothing to say that it "lost" to the Glock.

For reasons, many of which have already been mentioned, such as accessories, parts, training, armorer support, etc., the most compelling and cost-effective choice would always be to upgrade to a newer version of a proven model you already have in service, rather than switch over to a new manufacturer with the need to switch over all accompanying logistics, too.

There would have to have been significant issues with the currently issued FBI Glocks or the M&P would have to offer some dramatically better capabilities than the Glock at a very attractive price to outweigh the disadvantages of a vendor change. To my knowledge, neither is the case, so this decision is the logical one from both the FBI's and the taxpayers' point of view, but really says nothing negative about the M&P.

 

[Rudy40]

sorry to say but they made the right choice.

 

[TexasRaider]

As an armed citizen I've never felt the need or desire to carry the same pistol as the FBI or any large police department. Their criteria and mine differ noticeably.

The Glock won out because it ticks all the necessary boxes and does so at a lower cost to change than the competitors. Simple as that and the Glock will serve them well.

For me as an individual the M&P accomplishes the same mission.

Agreed to a point.

Being in Police work for 25 years, I"ve seen how some manufactures "win" contracts. It's like watching sausage and laws being made...you really don't want to. The "best" pistol is essentially just a mythical beast; most large scale manufacturers make very reliable pistols these days and most can past the usual battery of tests. Sig, Glock, H&K, etc, they're all pretty much going to work for a daily carry basis. As result, the winning pick is often chosen for, ahem...."other" reasons.

Where some manufacturers "win" these contracts is with behind the scenes manipulations like gifts and sweetners....I won't use the word bribe because one can hardly ever prove that, but I've seen some pretty ugly things happen ethics wise that puts one platform ahead of the other. And I know factually some chief FI's have taken advantage of those goodies to get a big company a contract. Glock and S&W have been notorious for reaching out to those who get to make 'the pick' on a very personal level with, shall we say, beneficial add-ons that don't appear in the contract? Some I know for a fact have happened, some I've been told of by others that witnessed it, some I've seen the fallout of a career ending in disgrace and threat of prosecution when they got caught. And yes, it was those two mentioned above. Glock probably just out bid S&W, on a variety of levels, to get their way.

And I agree that just because the FBI says it's their newset, latest, greatest go-to pistol hardly makes it relevant. In fact, the last agency I give any credence to when it comes to firearms, ammunition or gunfighting is the FBI. If you love the way Obamacare looks after the sick, the way Amtrack runs trains, the way the Post Office delivers mail or the way the VA takes care of vets, then yeah, take the FBI's advice on firearms. Heck, I don't even trust local state, county or city depts. when it comes to decisions about my personal carry gun.

Admittedly however, I did start carrying a Sig P226 back in the late 1980's because of the research put out by the Navy Seals on the torturous, exhaustive testing they did on 9mm's at that time. They had nearly unlimited funds and resources, and could have anything pistol in the world they wanted - they ended up with the P226. In that case, I made an exception and took the lead from an organization's pick and was willing to believe what I'd read because the Seals weren't selling anyone anything and hardly needed folks to "oooh" and "aahhh" at their pistol choices. Frankly, I just don't believe they were on the same level as some LEO admin. They'd use what darn well worked for them and anyone who disagreed could go pound sand. Maybe I was naive, but I trusted them more than I did some state police Lt. freewheeling his own picks or some Feeb suit getting courted by a vendor.

Besides, the last 20+ years of torturing Sig P226's myself and shooting the living shot out of them has proven that the Seals were correct..the P226 is a brilliant weapon. But I would never have bought that Sig, or any other pistol for that matter, because the FBI, DEA, ATF, LAPD, NYPD or anyone else said so.

 

[Arik]

the way the Post Office delivers mail, then yeah, take the FBI's advice on firearms. Heck, I don't even trust local state, county or city depts. when it comes to decisions about my personal carry gun.

By the numbers? Then yea

509 million — number of mailpieces processed and delivered each day
21.2 million — average number of mailpieces processed each hour
353,000— average number of mailpieces processed each minute
5,890 — average number of mailpieces processed each second
206 million — pieces of First-Class Mail processed and delivered.

509 million per day x 6 days a week. Yea I'd say they do a great job.

And for the sake of this topic. ...yes I would look at what the FBI is buying. They may well be a gov agency but they sure test to snot out of their equipment. Responsible for the innovation of modern ammo. Again....if it wasn't for their testing and their standards we may not have the type of self defense ammo we have today. Responsible for 2 new calibers that spawned a third you like so much. I'd say they are in the forefront of firearms technology. Are they inventing this in their labs? No of course not. But they are big enough to ask for and receive.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[OldGoat]

Glock selection by FBI

Like it has been said in testimony: At this point, what difference does it make? Given the Director's curious comments today, the Glock selection makes no difference. Just another bump in the road of life. Regards, Ed

 

[Watchdog]

Everybody posting here should probably make sure to first read the Glock-FBI thread in the Lounge so this doesn't turn into a re-hash.

You sure it's in The Lounge? I did a search, and a three-page scroll-through and couldn't find it. Probably just as well, though, cause pretty much everything said regarding Glocks/FBI/law enforcement turns into a rehash of stuff that's been said so much that even Google can't keep up with it.

As pertains to the M&P, there's nothing to say that it "lost" to the Glock.

Exactly. But by putting it into a contest or competition type of scenario, it gives all of us the opportunity to talk trash about one or the other brands. All of which is, of course, recycled trash talk...and yes, that includes my own comments on the subject.

I can't wait to see all the comments whenever the military gets around to choosing its new service pistol and ammo. Gun forums across the entire Internet will probably crash and burn.

 

[kbm6893]

The Glock does do something better than the Smith-

It fits the existing training and holsters better. If it was your money, what would you do?

(It is your money, BTW...)

Exactly my point. The decision was about saving money and time, not necessarily about the better product. Is the Glock a ***? Course not, and I don't think the government is gonna put something so awful into the hands of its agents. I'm just saying that he Glock won the bid simply for price and convenience, not because it's a superior product.

Look at the Checkmate M9 mags that the government bought about a million of to save a few nickels per mag. They were a disaster. Family of deployed soldiers were sending their loved ones factory mags. Same thing.

As for the "bribe thing", how many top executives work for big companies after they retire? Plenty.

 

[Fastbolt]

When I first read the proposal and solicitation, and saw the requirements for red & blue training guns ... of the type already designed by Glock and in-use ... I figured the agency was inclined to more or less require some refinements in the Glock model line up, rather than an entirely new weapon.

The ability to use existing holsters, related gear and armorer support is an obvious benefit not to be discounted, as well.

I (obviously) couldn't get any comments out of casual questions when discussing things with a couple guys at the factory (they've become really good at keeping things close to their vests in recent years ), but it wouldn't at all surprise me to be told the company would be much more interested in a military or DHS contract at some point. Those would be very large contracts, unlike the FBI and related smaller agencies who could piggy-back off the new FBI contract.

At the end of the day it didn't seem to be a matter of who "won" based upon the "better" firearm, but who was "awarded" the contract, and how its selection befitted the FBI. It made sense for the FBI to remain with Glock, although they've been regular customers of both SIG and S&W in the past (and might again, at some point in the future).

No biggie.

 

[JamesArthur60]

Politics, it's all politics, not the quality of the firearm in question. What amazed me is why the 9mm? Remember the Miami shootout in the 80's…hello FBI. Many Metro PD's have stepped up to the 40 caliber or 45. Didn't the Navy SEALS switch to Glocks?

 

[Watchdog]

Politics, it's all politics...

How so?

 

[Absalom]

You sure it's in The Lounge? I did a search, and a three-page scroll-through and couldn't find it. .....

Sorry. It's actually in "Firearms and Knives - Other Brands". And it's still running as I write... .

http://smith-wessonforum.com/firear...1-fbi-selects-new-pistol-go-its-9mm-ammo.html

What sets the thread a bit apart is that we have our very own recently retired FBI agent participating who actually KNOWS stuff, a great rarity in these discussions.

 

[gen3guy]

I make it a point to carry an F.B.I. approved sidearm on a regular basis. Currently its a 3" S&W Model 13. So what if I'm 30 years behind.

 

[shawn mccarver]

By now most people know that Glock obtained the FBI contract. Has anyone heard what specifically Smith & Wesson submitted, since the current M&P offerings did not meet the bid specifications?

Why do you think M&P did not meet the RFP specifications? Out of the box, the M&P and the M&P Longslide fit perfectly into the specs. Neither Glock nor M&P met all criteria, but M&P was arguably closer, off the shelf.