GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-08-2006, 06:54   #1
dberry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: indiana
Posts: 471
Ruger P95?

I heard that the army purchased some Ruger P95's.Any of you soldiers use them?
__________________
peace through superior firepower!
dberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2006, 16:54   #2
gsr
Senior Member
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Utah
Posts: 261
I believe these were purchased for transfer to foriegn militaries, just as the Smith & Wesson Sigmas were obtianed for the Afgan Army. Who the Rugers are for, I don't know. I do expect that they will perform well for whoever gets them.
gsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2006, 20:10   #3
bharney
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1
rugers

My Army Times had an article about this.

The Armored Command bought Ruger 9MM autopistols
for issue to the tankers.

Don't remember any more details, but will try and find them.
bharney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2006, 19:36   #4
meeko
Senior Member
 
meeko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 636
Re: rugers

Quote:
Originally posted by bharney
My Army Times had an article about this.

The Armored Command bought Ruger 9MM autopistols
for issue to the tankers.

Don't remember any more details, but will try and find them.

Sorry to burst your bubble but these P95's are for other countries GOV contracts. tankers and all others are stuck with the Beretta unless authorized other weapon systems.
meeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2006, 10:36   #5
Hal9mm
Senior Member
 
Hal9mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,304
and i thought it couldnt get any worse than the m9
Hal9mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2006, 04:14   #6
RENEA
Black Rifle guy
 
RENEA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Iraq
Posts: 3,908
Could these Rugers be for contract guards working at Army bases? I've seen them at Ft.Myer and Ft.Hood.
__________________
Black Rifle Club #L2A2
H&K Fan Club #64
Walther Fan Club #38
SKS Carbiner's Club #1949
Kalashnikov Klub #1977
RENEA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2006, 08:23   #7
meeko
Senior Member
 
meeko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally posted by RENEA
Could these Rugers be for contract guards working at Army bases? I've seen them at Ft.Myer and Ft.Hood.
While I won't say 100% I am a shift supervisor in the ANG Security Forces and we were going through the contractor security phase as well. As a supervisor I was able to read over the contract to prepare on what looked like a set in semi firm jello on things to come. The way the legalities were drawn up the contractors would have been armed with M9's and M 16's/M 4's. It mentioned we could support an already issued weapons system easier. The Guard Bureau decided not to go with them (contractors)at the last minute at least on the Air side.

DOD police are issued M 9's but that is a different entity than contractors.
meeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2006, 05:51   #8
bharen
Senior Member
 
bharen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 331
The Army doesn't supply weapons to contractors. The contracted company is responsible for providing any weapons stipulated in the contract. Most DoD contract security companies go with Berettas because their biggest recruiting pool tends to be ex-military. The familiarity with the Beretta platform is already in-place and makes weapons training and qualification that much easier.

The P95s, last I heard, were purchased to put into the hands of US servicemembers. It appears that the Beretta M9's are being 'consumed' at such an alarming rate that the DoD needed to make sure it had an authorized substitute available and ready for issue if we run short of M9s.

The P95 is big, ugly, chunky, accurate and relable as a brick. I would not be surprised if the service life of the P95 ends up far exceeding that of the M9. Personally I'd have no problem carrying one into combat.
__________________
"At the end of the day the Glock is what it is - an extremely well designed and executed, accurate and utterly reliable combat pistol that is not a 1911. And for many folks that is the unforgivable sin."
bharen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2006, 09:05   #9
meeko
Senior Member
 
meeko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally posted by bharen
The P95s, last I heard, were purchased to put into the hands of US servicemembers. It appears that the Beretta M9's are being 'consumed' at such an alarming rate that the DoD needed to make sure it had an authorized substitute available and ready for issue if we run short of M9s.

The P95 is big, ugly, chunky, accurate and relable as a brick. I would not be surprised if the service life of the P95 ends up far exceeding that of the M9. Personally I'd have no problem carrying one into combat.
bharen I'm afraid you heard wrong. The military IS NOT REPLACING the M9 anytime soon. The military purchaced a few Rugers along with S&W Sigmas and a couple other brands for distribution to forign goverments. Like the new one in Afganistan. The military just recently reordered 50 some odd thousand M9's. For the military to replace a stadard issue firearm a full scale evaluation would be conducted. This would inclued all reputible companies that manufactured small arms to be allowed time submit X number of samples for the selection process. If not the GOV would be sued agian and they would have another selction process (like what happened in the mid 80's). Also all compaines would be given what specifications the military wanted on their service pistol.

Even if the military decided today they wanted to change the general issue sidearm you are talking another 8-15 years before that would happen. Specs issues, comanies turn in test models, GOV tries out models ang the longest they make a decision.
meeko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2006, 17:54   #10
dac1204
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 834
Quote:
Originally posted by meeko
bharen I'm afraid you heard wrong. The military IS NOT REPLACING the M9 anytime soon. The military purchaced a few Rugers along with S&W Sigmas and a couple other brands for distribution to forign goverments. Like the new one in Afganistan. The military just recently reordered 50 some odd thousand M9's. For the military to replace a stadard issue firearm a full scale evaluation would be conducted. This would inclued all reputible companies that manufactured small arms to be allowed time submit X number of samples for the selection process. If not the GOV would be sued agian and they would have another selction process (like what happened in the mid 80's). Also all compaines would be given what specifications the military wanted on their service pistol.

Even if the military decided today they wanted to change the general issue sidearm you are talking another 8-15 years before that would happen. Specs issues, comanies turn in test models, GOV tries out models ang the longest they make a decision.
I'm afraid you read wrong he never said they were REPLACING the M9 he said they were being "consumed" and incase they run short they can have a back up.
dac1204 is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:54.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 649
129 Members
520 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31