• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Navy SEALs chose Glock 19 as their new sidearm

Reptile

NES Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
28,001
Likes
20,272
Feedback: 123 / 0 / 0
Dec 7, 2020
After a few decades, Navy SEAL operators will get a new sidearm. Navy SEALs chose Glock 19 as the replacement for their favorite Sig Sauer P226. The decision was made in 2016 and so far, the Glock 19 was introduced as the new service weapons of the SEAL Teams. They slowly phased out the Sig P226 over the last few years.

Why the Navy SEALs shifting from SiG to Glock after so long?
There are a number of factors why Navy SEALs chose Glock 19 as their new service weapon. First and foremost, you have aging guns that needed to be replaced, and there are bids that go out. I am sure Glock offered the Naval Special Warfare Command a great deal on the Glock package in order to get the SEAL contract. It wouldn’t surprise me if a Glock 19 cost 1/3 of what the SIG Sauer P226 costs the United States Navy.

For a long time, Sig Sauer P226 was reserved only for an elite few. At a certain time, it was considered as a gun that delivers the advanced features which made the P226 the official sidearm of the U.S. Navy SEALs.

 
But of course. ;)

probably would have gone P320 if they didn’t have drop trouble. G19 is decades-old reliability.
 
Hahahahahahah suck it glerk haters

Fwiw... special forces have had Glocks in field for quite a long time. I remember Mike Pannone talking bout him carrying one like 10 or 15 years ago?

Don't hate Glocks per se, just their triggers. Pulling a Glock trigger is like stepping on a huge cockroach. Squishes down quite a bit before it finally crunches and pops.
 
Don't hate Glocks per se, just their triggers. Pulling a Glock trigger is like stepping on a huge cockroach. Squishes down quite a bit before it finally crunches and pops.

If you pull the slack out of a factory non-mass glock trigger, it breaks nicely to me. Not 1911 or Sig SA nice, but pretty good.
 
I'm sure the dude that wrote this article totally woulda signed up, but knew he definitely woulda kicked the shit out of his RDC when they got in his face in bootcamp.

Why the 19 and not the 17? For that matter, why not the 34? Are they going to IWB carry? Jeezus H... NFW would I pick the 19 over the 17 for them.

I'd bet these days SF dudes of all sorts are CCWing pistols in civilian clothes on mission more so then standing around in uniform with drop holsters. The 19 makes perfect sense.
 
I need to teach you the ways of OC Customs

They can be improved for short money- polish contact points and swap in Wolff reduced springs and a 'minus' connector. After that, sometimes I forget how rotten are the triggers. Nature of the beast with striker fired. That said, 2 of my 3 CCW's are Glocks. Hell, one's even a 9mm so that I can get in touch with my feminine side. [laugh]

I'm sure the dude that wrote this article totally woulda signed up, but knew he definitely woulda kicked the shit out of his RDC when they got in his face in bootcamp.



I'd bet these days SF dudes of all sorts are CCWing pistols in civilian clothes on mission more so then standing around in uniform with drop holsters. The 19 makes perfect sense.

Maybe so, and that would make sense. My own personal assumption would be that their typical work day would be in uniform and involve quick in, quick out, and require overwhelming firepower to be on tap if needed. Maybe the stats show that pistols are only used in a worst case back up scenario and are almost never a factor in mission success.

Lol. Not exactly "Breaking a glass rod"... is it?

LOL, nope. I like to bust balls about Glocks but they are truly a simple and robust design that will always get the job done. Getting ready to hike a few miles in the wild and have a G20 on the hip.
 
Why would a couple hundred dollars difference in price even be a consideration for those who go into the most challenging military operations? Why are Seals carrying "aging guns"?

These folks put their lives on the line and should have nothing but the best at all times.
 
Maybe so, and that would make sense. My own personal assumption would be that their typical work day would be in uniform and involve quick in, quick out, and require overwhelming firepower to be on tap if needed. Maybe the stats show that pistols are only used in a worst case back up scenario and are almost never a factor in mission success.

Good point.

I was thinking the same.
 
Why would a couple hundred dollars difference in price even be a consideration for those who go into the most challenging military operations? Why are Seals carrying "aging guns"?

These folks put their lives on the line and should have nothing but the best at all times.

"Aging" might be a little subjective. I would assume that means a comparison of procurement date and expected service lifespan, and many of those pistols are still in quite good condition. Some may have seen more action than others. I read somewhere that the Seals expect at least 60k rounds before evaluating for replacement. It stands to reason that with enough range time, some of those pistols are at this threshold, hence "aging". But that doesn't mean they are junk now. Just ripe for the procurement officers to put in a replacement order.
 
Why the 19 and not the 17? For that matter, why not the 34? Are they going to IWB carry? Jeezus H... NFW would I pick the 19 over the 17 for them.
Its a hand size thing I'd assume i have catchers mitts and prefer a 17 however I can still shoot a 19 good enough to be combat accurate.

But from what I understand from people with small hands going up is harder... idk just conjecture
 
I'm very very interested to see how they look.

We'll know if all these Gucci glocks have any combat merit soon
 
Back
Top Bottom