• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Will 2021 see a new pistol buy?

Will the CAF's new pistol be a:

  • the new US service pistol, the Sig Sauer P320 (M17/M18)?

    Votes: 7 43.8%
  • the British version of the Glock 17?

    Votes: 3 18.8%
  • a Beretta APX?

    Votes: 1 6.3%
  • a Canadian designed Black Creek Labs PX17?

    Votes: 3 18.8%
  • a Norinco?

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • something else?

    Votes: 2 12.5%

  • Total voters
    16
  • Poll closed .

Booter

Full Member
Reaction score
686
Points
810
RFPs etc aside- what does the experience here see as the “bring” for an army pistol? Is it performance? Durability? Simplicity?

Like what’s the unique thing that a military pistol has to have?
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,688
Points
1,140
Thanks for your response. I'll take it that there is no discussion of adopting a new calibre.

I was looking at Annex C, s. 3.1.4: "Calibre Conversion Kits must be available to permit changing the calibre of the C22 FF pistol from 9 x 19 mm to .40 calibre without having to replace the trigger mechanism." (From the 1 Feb 2021 version. It may have been a draft published with the NPP.)
The NPP I quoted was from Feb 2022. There is no 3.1.4 in Annex C any longer.
Still leaves me wondering how it made through to the final draft, but I'm guessing it snuck its way into the first draft because someone cribbed from the US Army procurement docs.
Plagiarism is the most common form of staff work. If anyone thinks that every parade instruction I wrote as RSM or every Op O/Ex Instr I later wrote as an Ops O was an original composition, they are deluded. I copied over the shoulders of giants. :cool:
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,240
Points
1,140
RFPs etc aside- what does the experience here see as the “bring” for an army pistol? Is it performance? Durability? Simplicity?

Like what’s the unique thing that a military pistol has to have?
Look at a Glock ;)

I don't know how the CAF Pistol is weighted currently, I checked out a while back of caring.

My personal thoughts.
KPP's
Striker Fired (no external hammer)
No External Safety
No Mag Safety
Ambidextrous (mag release, and slide release)
Grip/Frame Texture to provide solid purchase in all environments
Grip/Frame adjustable to accommodate the 5th-9th percentile (hand size)
15+ round capacity standard mag - with 22-24rd capacity magazines available.
S/N marked on Frame, Barrel and Slide (parts controllability)
25,000 rd life span for major component parts (slide, frame, barrel)
Night Sights (at least tritium front)
MRDS Capable
Simmunition Slide Available
1913 rail for WML in front of trigger guard
Trigger guard large enough to safely manipulate trigger with NBCW Glove
Slide Grasping Grooves, Mag Release, and Slide Release all able to be manipulated with NBCW Gloves
Trigger Pull of 4.5-6.5Lbs
Firing Pin Drop Safety
IR Reducing Coating on all external metal surfaces.
2" at 25m accuracy from fixed rest

OAL, OAW, and OAH negotiable - but around the size of a Glock 19.


There are about 6-7 pistols on the market today that could meet that.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,847
Points
1,160
Thanks for your response. I'll take it that there is no discussion of adopting a new calibre.

I was looking at Annex C, s. 3.1.4: "Calibre Conversion Kits must be available to permit changing the calibre of the C22 FF pistol from 9 x 19 mm to .40 calibre without having to replace the trigger mechanism." (From the 1 Feb 2021 version. It may have been a draft published with the NPP.)

I have no issue with requirements which eliminate potential contenders. The issue arises when there is no reasonable explanation for the requirement, or for the importance accorded to it (e.g., the 'must haves' vs. the really nice to haves" vs. "nice, if I don't have to pay extra for it"). If s. 3.1.4 was deleted from the actual RFP, or turned into a scored requirement (if there was some potential for adoption), that would seem appropriate. Still leaves me wondering how it made through to the final draft, but I'm guessing it snuck its way into the first draft because someone cribbed from the US Army procurement docs.
Far better to have .22 sub cal kits for the pistol
 

Booter

Full Member
Reaction score
686
Points
810
You’ve sent me down a reading rabbit hole with the striker fired preference. Did you put the external hammer in parenthesis because you see an advantage to not having that?

I’m going to say that it’s a simplicity and form thing? Like in kit and gloves an external hammer is an extra thing that can make an issue?

I’ve used both. I’m very much laid back on some of this stuff. You hand me a browning I’ll just sort out myself on the firearm. Rather than wish it was something else. Then I meet a minutiae guy and I learn some fascinating stuff.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,688
Points
1,140
You’ve sent me down a reading rabbit hole with the striker fired preference. Did you put the external hammer in parenthesis because you see an advantage to not having that?

I’m going to say that it’s a simplicity and form thing? Like in kit and gloves an external hammer is an extra thing that can make an issue?

I’ve used both. I’m very much laid back on some of this stuff. You hand me a browning I’ll just sort out myself on the firearm. Rather than wish it was something else. Then I meet a minutiae guy and I learn some fascinating stuff.
You've come to the right place. This forum is far more civilized than most gun forums, which are populated by folks who, while enthusiastic, don't do this for a living.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,240
Points
1,140
You’ve sent me down a reading rabbit hole with the striker fired preference. Did you put the external hammer in parenthesis because you see an advantage to not having that?

I’m going to say that it’s a simplicity and form thing? Like in kit and gloves an external hammer is an extra thing that can make an issue?

I’ve used both. I’m very much laid back on some of this stuff. You hand me a browning I’ll just sort out myself on the firearm. Rather than wish it was something else. Then I meet a minutiae guy and I learn some fascinating stuff.
Striker guns usually do better in environmental conditions (sand/dust, snow/ice etc) than external hammer guns.
- there aren't a lot of internal hammer guns out there - so I just types Striker.

Don't get me wrong I love hammer guns I have a LAV custom 1911, a Novak BHP, and getting a Staccato P.
I just don't think they are the best option for a Duty gun (outside a dedicate HR unit - that had no green side role)

Military Personnel are expected to be able to function in many environments - the CRBN glove requirement is fairly standard requirement for most weapons - it's bulky and awkward - and is pretty much the "best" think to test - as the assumption is that one won't try to use a firearm with stupid arctic mitts - and use a small anti-contact glove underneath when ones does need to manipulate a weapon in the extreme cold.

Far better to have .22 sub cal kits for the pistol
Most don't work worth a crap - 9mm ball is relatively dirt cheap - and I honestly don't see the training value of a .22LR pistol for a duty gun as the recoil is significantly different - plus any range that will allow .22LR will allow 9mm (and honestly more will allow 9mm with EFMJ - as there is no exposed lead).

If I had my druthers - everyone would learn on the pistol first - as shooting a pistol is harder than a rifle (trigger weight, compared to overall weapon weight) - and the barrel length/size makes safety that much more important -- if you can shoot a pistol well and safely - then you can handle a carbine/rifle no problem.
 

Ostrozac

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
306
Points
930
Far better to have .22 sub cal kits for the pistol
That ship sailed 25 odd years ago when we binned the vast inventory of indoor ranges that were only rated for 22.* With the move to the great outdoors, there’s no particular reason to shoot 22. And 9mm ammo is something we are actually capable of procuring.

*Apparently they were about as healthy as eating lead-based paint.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,847
Points
1,160
Ask the sheriffs in BC that, apparently 50 rds every 18 months was enough. During the ammo shortage everyone was scrambling for 9mm. I find the Sig kit works quite well and allows me to teach basic hand gun skills to newbies with less issues and costs.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,240
Points
1,140
Ask the sheriffs in BC that, apparently 50 rds every 18 months was enough. During the ammo shortage everyone was scrambling for 9mm. I find the Sig kit works quite well and allows me to teach basic hand gun skills to newbies with less issues and costs.
That is simply incompetence at the SO level.
Government Ammo Contracts (even small Municipal ones) shouldn't have been affected at all, my local SO is pretty small (under 100) and never had an issue getting the 500rds/deputy every 6 months.
 

Booter

Full Member
Reaction score
686
Points
810
Ask the sheriffs in BC that, apparently 50 rds every 18 months was enough. During the ammo shortage everyone was scrambling for 9mm. I find the Sig kit works quite well and allows me to teach basic hand gun skills to newbies with less issues and costs.
That’s a for sure across lots of agencies- quals are 18 rounds, 1 practice, move everyone through the qual, extra rounds for retraining- too many failures make it easier,

Its frustrating isn’t it Colin lol
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,688
Points
1,140
The CAF PWT 1 to 3 is 110 rounds. Most users don't fire all three PWTs. Canadian LE qualification standards generally require 32 to 50 tounds annually.
 

Booter

Full Member
Reaction score
686
Points
810
Last year our qual was 18? Something very close. I didn’t do the math while I was LOing but it was just over a mag

Brihard may know better I’m curious now. And if he had the update this year he may know this years as well

Three years ago it was 8 rounds? Something in that area

“modernization”

2018 I built a program while
On loan to a rail police agency, it was two mags.

I don’t doubt your number - I’m sure your correct. I just see a trend towards the lighter side
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,847
Points
1,160
I took a Sheriff buddy to a "Skills and Drills night in Abbotsford gun club run by an IPSC instructor. My friend said ; "I just shot more in one night, than in 4 years as a Sheriff" We each went through 300rds of pistol ammo that night. I tell people I can shoot pistol despite my army training. Most soldiers know so little about their firearms, but then think they do know a lot.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,688
Points
1,140
Last year our qual was 18? Something very close. I didn’t do the math while I was LOing but it was just over a mag

Brihard may know better I’m curious now. And if he had the update this year he may know this years as well

Three years ago it was 8 rounds? Something in that area

“modernization”

2018 I built a program while
On loan to a rail police agency, it was two mags.

I don’t doubt your number - I’m sure your correct. I just see a trend towards the lighter side
My agency's qualification is 50 rounds for recruits and 32 for officers in the field. I'd heard Brihard's agency had dropped their round count significantly for one year as a result of COVID just to try keeping everyone current.
 

Booter

Full Member
Reaction score
686
Points
810
My agency's qualification is 50 rounds for recruits and 32 for officers in the field. I'd heard Brihard's agency had dropped their round count significantly for one year as a result of COVID just to try keeping everyone current.
- it was part of the modernization where they were theoretically moving towards having three blocks of pistol skills that added on each other and culminated, but it never actually materialized,

The current course of fire is well under a mag if I’m doing the math in my head- but there is a skills portion where they shoot as well, a couple dozen rounds but it’s not pass fail

I’m getting married this week so I don’t have access to my FG’s to refer to actual rounds,

Is your agency course of fire something you’d put here? Just the stages?
 

Booter

Full Member
Reaction score
686
Points
810
I guess the question that brings it back
On topic is- what does the army need in a pistol qual as well? The
Pistol serving a different role for most green Carrys 🤔

My messages are a little powered by champagne 🤫
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,240
Points
1,140
Geez I thought my old departments 48 rd qual x2 a year was light...
30 rds day time (50yd max, to contact min) , 18 a night (25 yd max to contact min) - with lights from car and handheld or WML)
We have State Minimums - and departments are free to exceed the state min.

I think there should be portion of something like the old FAMS TPS for close range shooting - with uniformed personnel not needing to draw from concealment -- having shot the TPS from concealment it isn't an easy CoF, it's even tougher if you are wearing casual civilian clothes not a business suit.
and the FBI 2019 CoF

For a CAF member (or ERT LEO's) I am partial to the RedBackOne Operator Readiness Test - it combines pistol and carbine.
I've shot it with Jason, both day in gas mask, and at night under NOD's and it is no joke.
 

Booter

Full Member
Reaction score
686
Points
810
Geez I thought my old departments 48 rd qual x2 a year was light...
30 rds day time (50yd max, to contact min) , 18 a night (25 yd max to contact min) - with lights from car and handheld or WML)
We have State Minimums - and departments are free to exceed the state min.

I think there should be portion of something like the old FAMS TPS for close range shooting - with uniformed personnel not needing to draw from concealment -- having shot the TPS from concealment it isn't an easy CoF, it's even tougher if you are wearing casual civilian clothes not a business suit.
and the FBI 2019 CoF

For a CAF member (or ERT LEO's) I am partial to the RedBackOne Operator Readiness Test - it combines pistol and carbine.
I've shot it with Jason, both day in gas mask, and at night under NOD's and it is no joke.
This is awesome thanks. I may run the boys through this on some downtime I have coming up. We re running a massive combined units scenario.

The qual being “light” doesn’t mean that they don’t shoot. It’s the few rounds for the qual but they also have skills sessions- that aren’t pass/fail REALLY. Like shooting on the move or turns etc.

People are passing their quals though- and that’s something that wasn’t happening a few years ago.

What I have observed, and this is three agencies that use the old RCMP course of fire that needed reliable shooting at 25m.

Officers brought up under the new standards, with no 25m, look at shooting at 25m and beyond they think it’s not doable consistently. We do exposures at 25m, 35m, 50m I’ve demo’d reliable hits at 100 and 120 but it’s just not mentally there.

I think perhaps we were trying to strike a balance between skills and marksmanship and we missed it slightly. But we re tweaking it.

And to give us some credit- I did a municipal police services carbine quals and created a package for a rail agency and they were lagging behind us, awesome people, and they put in work, but it was an eye opener as someone who would rag on my own agency

I’ve worked with some godly shooters in this outfit. I’m only reliable and it’s through practice I maintain myself- but it’s not like we don’t have a ton of institutional knowledge and a few people on loan from even more talented places,

So I keep the faith.

Now going back to CAP years ago- I remember the pistol qual being quite poor. I would suggest it was more akin to a famil than a skills adoption. And the Navy Sig qual was not much better (at the time)

Is their, in common army, tiers of pistol shooting quals? I would think it would get the least attention in most cases
 
Top