First the “pistol brace” (AKA THE GREATEST SBR LOOPHOLE known to mankind) now this “muzzle device”:
Probably talking to the ATF like “I’m Sig Sauer bitch… enjoy yo’ self“.
How long until that gets approved and some other company or Sig even, sells the convenient (1:56) “slip on cover” for it, which miraculously attenuates the report of fired rounds. Priceless… When that happens it will be a celebration. I’ll bring the cake. Anyway they are suing the ATF right now because they say it was inaccurately deemed a silencer. Imagine that.
Damn short stroke gas pistons are ill. DAT BUTTSTOCK amirite?
Thoughts?
Comments
15 responses to “Sig Sauer Is A Habitual Line Stepper”
OSS suppressors work on the same premise. The muzzle device (the baffle stack) isn’t classified as a silencer until the tube is affixed around it.
Yea? That’s cool I’ll have to look it up thanks!
Sig is getting a lot of points these days.
According to The Bang Switch, BATFE turned SIG Sauer down, but now the latter file a civil suit against the former.
I love this.
Tyler nailed it. OSS has set the standard for Sig to win in court.
Sig is a shining example of how companies and business entities within the firearms industry should be conducting themselves.
Instead, most companies retool their machines to make micro-cap magazines and AR abominations to be compliant with incoming bans.
They make me proud of borrowing a Sauer.
I no longer see this configuration listed on their website. Was there a back down?
1) Are there any “operators” that still use 9mm sub guns? I thought short barrel 5.56 was the new standard?
2) Do you really need a locked breech, rotating bolt for a 9mm? What happened to good old blowback? Or delayed blowback? Or anything simpler, that requires fewer moving parts?
AR is the standard and it’s a big seller right now. Why reinvent the wheel (again) when you can use 90% of the same parts and tooling?
Why reinvent the wheel? If we didn’t continue updating technology then we wouldn’t get anywhere. The whole “Don’t fix it if it’s not broken” adage would leave us still using Thomson for combat and driving VW Beatles.
Blowback requires a heavier bolt and therefore makes recoil harder to control, 5.56 preforms horribly out of short barrels and doesn’t offer quite the same usefulness in close quarters that 9mm does.
Here is my thought process (as a civilian) on something like this. I go to the gun store to buy a rifle for target shooting and home defense. It is legally required to have a 16 inch barrel and be 26 inches long (at least). On the one hand I have a .223/5.56, on the other is a 9mm. Which do I choose.
The No. 1 issue for me a that point is price. Why should I pay as much for a 9mm as a .223? Same money for less performance. The advantage of shooing a 9mm out of a rifle is that, as a low power cartridge, it doesn’t need to be a locked breech and therefore could be made simpler and cheaper. I am a big fan of the Marlin Camp Carbine, the Ruger PC9 (which I wish they would bring back using SR9 Mags), and the Kel Tec SUB 2000. Those ran the gamut from 1/2 to 2/3 the price of an AR. Not to mention they used the same mags as pistols I already have.
Buying a 9mm rifle that costs as much as an AR and uses it’s own proprietary magazines seems like a total waste of money to me.
And BTW, while bullet performance with FMJ is weak for both .223 and 9mm, out of a 10 inch barrel, .223 still outperforms 9mm.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/223rifle.html
I want one of these so fuckin bad… I wasn’t really a sig fan till recently, they’ve been pushing some serious boundries and kickin ass at it