Previous Post
Next Post

The Swiss Army has announced (via Glock) that their Special Forces will no longer be carrying the SIG P220 or SIG Pro pistols. Following an evaluation process involving three independent elements of the Swiss Army, the mountain nation’s spec ops unit selected the Gen4 Glock 17 and Gen4 Glock 26, including the Force-on-Force training models. The Swiss chose theĀ Glock because of the pistols’ . . . wait for it . . . reliability and durability. I wonder if that ruffled the feathers of any purists in the land of the Alps?

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Recently, Belgian Police picked the M&P over their homegrown FN pistols……

    The cynic in me believes cost per unit is as important as performance in these large agency adoptions.

  2. Well, the result of any firearms selection process will be *claimed* to be on the basis of “reliability and durability”. It might be true, it might not.

    Couple other possible reasons:

    1. Cheaper cost.
    2. Always good to throw some contracts to the competition, so your preferred supplier stays honest.
    3. Bureaucracy – sometimes groupthink can kick up some random results.

    But Glocks are great, can’t really go wrong with them. Sig still has plenty of spec-ops teams using their guns for their PR materials, so I wouldn’t really worry about them.

  3. Having some experience with government procurement procedures, I’d say the everyone’s cynical side is probably dead on. If they know who they want to give the contract to, (based on price, the good ‘ol boy system, or whatever) then they will make sure to score the RFP criteria accordingly. Criteria like “reliability and durability” is just subjective enough that they can skew the results where they want without being too obviously blatant.

  4. By the way, Glocks have always used the slogan “Glock Perfection” as a sort of motto. Which makes me wonder: if they were “perfect” back when I bought my first one on June 6, 1992, then why are they on the fourth generation of design?

  5. I find it interesting, to say the least. A distant relative happens to be my favorite custom knife maker: Fred Perrin. He also makes the knives that the Swiss Special Forces use, I have one-his Military Bowie. They all come with a universal kydex sheath, you just add on what clip or loop attachment that suits you. Funny that they are now going to the Glock. I own a 22, a 27, a 26 and a 30. Great minds must think alike! I still might favor a good 1911, though. But I am sure that capacity was a strong issue as well. I think that our military doesn’t trust our average troop with a pistol with no true safety. I’m sorry, but a safety on a trigger may as well not be there.

  6. I wonder what they are going to do with all of those 220’s? It would be nice to import a few hundred.

  7. Too large of a grip for women cops and soldiers? Only nine rounds of .45 ACP vs a lot more in the Glocks — and maybe a thousand free guns. If you know whet you are doing you can’t go wrong with either.

  8. I also have some experience with Government Procurement and review process after retiring from DCMA (Look it up!) after 40+ years, with some of that time being embedded with the troops in the “Southwest Asia” area. The most important driver in all these contracts is the amount of money available and the number of whatever item the services say they need. The sad part is most of the DoD procurement employees have never seen, held, or otherwise (with some exceptions) had to depend on a weapon to sustain their life, and they probably never will. And, this includes the systems they manage. But, these civilian employees know the Federal accounting system from top to bottom. And if you are very good AND save as much money as possible, you may qualify for promotions and cash awards. The point of all this is the driver on Government procurement is to get as much material as possible for a VERY fixed sum of money. If the Swiss troops needed X number of pistols and there was even a tiny difference in the price of the SIG and the Glock, with both being excellent weapons, guess who will get the contract. That is how it works in the US, and I have no doubt it works the same in Switzerland. The fact that the Swiss bought Glocks is no endorsement of the excellence of the Glock, it is just acknowledgement that Glock is cheaper and will suffice for what the Swiss forces require in an individual sidearm. Both pistols have a reputation as a reliable service pistol, especially with hardball service rounds. And, with most of the major parts except the slide and it’s internals, made out of plastic (which is what “polymer” is) it is easily “demilled” and disposed of when it is at its service life end. as there is almost no “Arsenal Rebuild” in any nation’s army these days. After a set number of rounds, the weapons are destroyed and sold a scrap. Period. As far as pistols in about all the (8-9?) different countries I was exposed to in Iraq, most experienced boots-on-the-ground troops (and their officers) regard any pistol as a weighty object they have been ordered to carry in addition to the rest of their gear. Most prefer something with 30 rounds and full auto capability, or even better, something that is belt fed with some steel plates shielding the operator of this belt fed slug dispenser. The SIGs they have in inventory at present are probably nearing the end of their service life, and when the procurement was advertised, Glock came in with the lowest price per piece.

  9. Carried a lot of different handguns over the year’s. Still have glocks, Springfield, para and sigs. Carry my P220 everywhere i go now. Second is my glock 35 if im open carrying. Second concealed glock 19. Love my P220. Combat glock 35. 15 rds 40 caliber 5.3 in barrel very accurate but not as the P220


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here